Phone home: iPhone 5 release date a first for Apple’s Cupertino campus

by Johnny Major

The biggest Apple product launch of the year is taking place in the smallest of locations. The iPhone 5 unveiling, which will come complete with the release date for the device which consumers have been asking about for months, is set to be a small-capacity affair on Apple’s own Cupertino campus, says Apple Insider. As Mashable points outs, while various Apple products (including the original iPod in 2001) have been launched at Apple headquarters over the years, this will mark the first instance in which Apple has done so with an iPhone. Pessimists will point to this as a sign that there is no iPhone 5 in 2011 and Apple is hosting a low-key event because it’s set to deliver the bad news that only an iPhone 4S will be available this year, with the 5 not surfacing until 2012. But the more basic explanation is that, upon having shifted the iPhone 5 launch back significantly in the calendar, Apple now finally has the 5 ready to go and isn’t willing to wait until one of its larger venues such as Moscone West or Yerba Buena is available. As has been pointed out, the expected timeframe for the iPhone 5 launch, on October 4th or 5th, places an Oracle conference taking up all three Moscone halls at that same time. Despite the naysayers, a growing mountain of evidence points to it being an iPhone 5, and not merely an iPhone 4S being unveiled in Cupertino next month…

Apple has known since at least April that the iPhone 5 would not see a summer release date, and tacitly admitted as much when it launched the white iPhone 4 at the end of April; if the iPhone 5 had been set for summer unveiling, Apple wouldn’t have bothered tinkering with the iPhone 4 lineup so late in the game. And yet Verizon has confirmed that at the time the Verizon iPhone 4 launched in March, it was under the impression that the iPhone 5 would in fact be a summer product. That narrows down the timeframe for when Apple realized the iPhone 5 would be pushed to the fall, and paints it clearly as having been a move made out of some kind of technical necessity and not part of a grand plan. Early component and manufacturing issues, or delays in the development of the iOS 5 operating system, are the most likely components. Either way, it’s clear that A) the iPhone 5 wasn’t originally supposed to be pushed back, and B) Apple has known for awhile that it would have to do so. In other words, if Apple were going to use the iPhone 4S as a mere substitute while pushing the iPhone 5 back to 2012, the 4S would already have come to market by now. Manufacturing the 4S, which is based on the existing iPhone 4, is trivial. The reason Apple waited this late in the calendar year to deliver the new iPhone is that it’s been buying the extra time it needed to finish the iPhone 5 (and iOS 5). In other words, if the iPhone 5 weren’t coming til next year, the iPhone 4S would already have been in your hands a month or two ago. But there’s other evidence pointing to an iPhone 5 release date in 2011, going beyond mere deductive logic…

Longtime Apple board member Al Gore, speaking this week at a conference on an unrelated manner, opted to plug “the new iPhones” coming next month. Plural, mind you. Gore was laying the groundwork for multiple new iPhone models coming to market in 2011. This was likely a planted comment aimed at assuring those growing restless that, yes, the new iPhone is indeed coming this year. And by saying “iPhones” instead of merely “iPhone” in the singular, Gore offered a de facto confirmation that an iPhone 5 and an iPhone 4S are on their way in October. Why Gore, and why now? Because he was the Apple representative who just happened to giving a speech this week, and the one who was in the easiest position to plant the remark.

So why an iPhone 4S at all? In the past Apple has kept the previous iPhone model around in the bargain bin once the new one arrives. That would be the existing iPhone 4 in this case. But the two current iPhone 4 models for AT&T and Verizon can only talk to one carrier each, and rather than add a third for Sprint’s network or force Sprint customers to go without a bargain option, a unified iPhone 4S allows a single low-price model to replace them all and work on all carriers. It also allows Apple to offer a new-ish iPhone on the low end rather than trying to sell the iPhone 4 (now fifteen months old) to customers who can’t afford the iPhone 5. And it puts the iPhone 4 antenna controversy to bed once and for all. But the preponderance of the evidence says that when Apple gathers the press next month for the iPhone unveiling, the small Cupertino room housing the event won’t be because Apple’s announcements are small. Rather it’ll be because, in Apple’s sudden haste to get the iPhone 5 unveiled and set up its release date now that the product is finally ready to go, it’s the largest room it could get its hands on. After all, the small number of journalists in the room won’t prevent the iPhone 5 from becoming the biggest consumer tech story of late 2011. Here’s more on the iPhone 5.

Updated 3:40pm PST with additional information on iPhone event history with additional sources

Castoff: Netflix spins off Qwikster as DVDs dry up, seeks merger

by Bill Palmer

Netflix is splitting itself in two, a self-divorce which has internet overlords Apple and Google salivating. Qwikster, the new name for the division of Netflix focused on DVD by mail subscriptions, will now operate separately from the Netflix mothership which now concerns itself exclusively with online digital movie delivery. The move explains this summer’s controversial pricing split in which ten dollars for both monthly services suddenly became eight dollars for each. And it points to a strategy on the part of Netflix which can only mean one thing: there’s a merger coming. The question now is less of whether Netflix will be acquired but more about just who will do the acquiring…

Companies only make moves like this if they’re preparing one or both of the company’s new divisions for sale. Qwikster still has a revenue model going forward, but it’s a gradually dying one; no one will want to acquire such dead weight in the interim. By spinning off Qwikster, Netflix turns itself into a more attractive acquisition candidate. Apple has long looked for a way to give the movie and TV portions of its iTunes Store the same kind of success it’s long enjoyed in digital music. Google, which already owns YouTube, hopes to build an Android content store on par with what Apple offers its iUsers. Both companies have been rumored to acquire Hulu. One problem: Hulu’s revenue model is a broken one, as the abundance of public service announcements embedded into recent TV show airings on Hulu.com in place of real paid ads demonstrates. Netflix, however, has figured out how to turn a profit. Or at least it did, until it suddenly figured out how to start alienating its users this summer…

But in hindsight, that move may have been necessary in order to set Netflix up for the kind of acquisition it’s apparently seeking. By spinning off Qwikster and leaving it to slowly die off on its own, Netflix has saved Apple or Google or whoever else might in the market from having to pay to acquire the DVD mail-in service, either of whom would immediately kill it off at a loss. The 3.2 seconds on which the Netflix execs spent coming up with the name “Qwikster” should make clear that they really don’t much care what happens with that side of the company going forward; this is about making a move to shore up the future of the Netflix online video concept. Interestingly, the move comes at an odd time for both Google and Apple in terms of acquisitions…

Google is currently being investigated by the U.S. government, testifying today for that matter, regarding the scope of its power over internet and mobile. It just acquired Motorola Mobility in an attempt to boost its Android platform. Can it get away with turning around and acquiring Netflix as well while being investigated? Apple also appears leery of being investigated itself, as it’s been conspicuously absent when it comes the Google hearings. The increasingly antithetical rival could show up and make a case for why Google should be limited or dismantled, but hasn’t done so. That points to Apple fearing that it might be the next target of government inquiry, and doesn’t want to unwittingly provide the government with any ammunition through its own testimony which could be used against it later. Then again, perhaps Apple can’t be bothered to show up and testify because it’s too busy talking with Netflix. The possibilities are endless, and far more companies than merely Apple and Google would have reasons to get their hands on Netflix as part of their own online store plans. But one thing is clear: by jettisoning its DVD service into the soon to be forgotten Qwikster, Netflix is up to something big – and likely about to become part of something bigger.

What Apple’s Tim Cook and Chili Peppers’ Klinghoffer have in common

by Bill Palmer

He’s been promoted within to take the place of an iconic visionary who’s just exited the building for the second time in a generation. I’m talking about new Apple CEO Tim Cook, who’s taken over for a retiring Steve Jobs. I’m also talking about new Red Hot Chili Peppers guitarist Josh Klinghoffer, who’s taken over lead guitar duties from John Frusciante. The last great tech company and the last great rock band are both, as of this past week, officially in new hands. And while Cook and Klinghoffer have likely never so much as met each other, they face similar challenges. There’s also the fact that the icon they’re replacing pointed to them as successor, which brings its own ups and downs.

Klinghoffer has been performing with the Chili Peppers for a couple years now, took over lead guitar duties for the recording of the band’s new album, and has effectively had the job for some time. But not until the band’s new album I’m With You debuted this week did fans get a true taste of what the Josh-era Chili Peppers are comprised of. Similarly, while Tim Cook joined Apple thirteen years ago and has been acting as interim CEO for most of this year, he wasn’t officially given the position on a permanent basis until this year. The first challenge for both: dealing with the fact that they’re not the guy they replaced…

It’s long been said that there is no Apple without Steve Jobs. Fortunately for fans of the company and users of its products, then, Jobs is remaining Apple’s chairman which ensures that it continues in the general path in which he’s been steering it since his return in the late nineties. While Apple continued to exist without any participation from Jobs for a dozen years in between, those years are considered to have paled in comparison to when he was at the helm. Similarly enough, John Frusciante returned to the Chili Peppers in the late nineties after having left years before. His two tours of duty in the band saw it achieve and then reclaim its greatest commercial and critical success, respectively. But what’s different in both situations is that while the icon left under rocky circumstances the first time around with no plan in place for a successor the first time around, the recent second exit has seen both men offer guidance as to who their successors should be…

In his resignation letter, Jobs made clear that he wanted Apple’s board to name Tim Cook as his replacement, and there was virtually no chance of that not happening. Before leaving RHCP, Frusciante brought in longtime collaborator Klinghoffer as a second guitarist during his final tour with the group. Both replacements, then, were more or less hand picked. Neither fully holds the reins of his new entity. Cook will answer to co-founder Jobs behind the scenes for as long as Jobs remains an active participant at Apple, and also answers to other longtime board members. Klinghoffer is the “new guy” in band steered by co-founders Anthony Keidis and Flea along with longtime drummer Chad Smith.

Both men have little time to leave their mark. Apple turns nearly its entire product line over within each calendar year, meaning that Jobs-era products will begin to be replaced with Cook-era products with regularity moving forward. Red Hot Chili Peppers just released their first new album in five years, and all the guitar work belongs to Klinghoffer, allowing fans of the band to instantly assess what they think of the new era. But whereas the first time Jobs and Frusciante left the building and were arbitrarily replaced with individuals who had no connection to the organization’s roots, the two men have been replaced this time by someone they’ve already put their stamp of approval on.

Obscure Apple TV goes mainstream with actual Apple-branded televisions

by Bill Palmer

 Apple’s lone television hardware product is so obscure that even most users of other Apple products aren’t aware it exists. Throughout its five or so years on the market, Apple TV has seen massive price reductions, impressive size reductions, a significantly evolved on-screen interface, and more. Yet it suffers from the same problem it did during its early days on the market: no one knows what the hell it does. That could change, however, if rumblings of Apple-branded television sets have any merit to them.

In actuality, AppleTV is a hardware bridge which allows the video content on your computer to find its way onto your existing TV set. Alternately, you can browse the iTunes Store directly from your television in order to rent or buy movies and TV shows. But by the time you finish explaining all of that, most people have stopped paying attention. It also suffers from the odd distinction of being a product you have to pay for so you can use it to pay for television episodes. Contrast that with a simple DVR from your cable or satellite company, which costs $10 a month and allows you to record TV episodes for free – a feature which Apple TV glaringly lacks.

But Apple’s big shot at changing all of this would come in the form of actual Apple-branded television sets. They’d come with “Apple TV” technology built in, but that’s not why people would buy them. They’d sell well because consumers have come to trust that an Apple product will be high quality, elegant, and easier to understand and use than the competition – even though it won’t come cheap.

But once Apple gets all these mainstream folks to buy an Apple television, they’ll quickly find that it has a mainline to the iTunes Store. Suddenly iTunes becomes the new Netflix, or at least a viable rival to it. And in an turnabout, Apple manages to get its diminutive little Apple TV product (and the recurring iTunes revenue which comes with it) by burying it within a giant HD television set.

Top five Apple cash acquisitions: Hulu, Adobe, Sprint, HTC, Samsung

by Timmy Falcon

Apple is sitting on enough cash on hand to buy several of its competitors and have enough left over to buy several small nations. No, really. Seventy-eight billion dollars in cash is an alarming amount of rainy-day savings, and while Steve Jobs says the company is saving it for when it really wants to put it to good use rather than frittering it away in the mean time, there are several ways in which Apple could put that moola to use right now which might benefit the company. From former friend Adobe, to future partner Sprint, to little-understood Hulu, to competitors HTC and Samsung, here’s a look at five companies Apple could acquire right now for cash, along with the pros and cons of each.

Hulu: This site streams free ad-supported episodes of popular TV shows and was created by the television studios in an attempt to weaken Apple’s power at the iTunes bargaining table.

Pros: It would eliminate a competitor which was specifically designed to harm it, and it would gain the favorable contracts the TV studios and networks gave Hulu back when they thought they were going to use it as a puppet. Apple could fold all of this into its existing iTunes TV efforts.

Cons: Hulu is little-understood outside of those who use it, and it’s having trouble finding advertisers. Apple would be buying a sinking ship in the hopes of scrapping it for parts. Here’s more on Apple buying Hulu.

Adobe: Apple and Adobe were best buds in the eighties, until the latter decided it would begin handicapping the Mac versions of its products like Photoshop to keep them dumbed down and “equal” to their Windows counterparts. Things got uglier recently when Adobe acquired the dying Flash technology as part of a larger merger, and inexplicably decided Flash is the future. Apple has since banned Flash from iPhone and iPad devices.

Pros: Apple could remove Flash from the Creative Suite and help cripple usage of Flash in future website development. Apple could also turn its own programmers loose on the Mac version of Creative Suite and turn it into the kind of amazing tool it would have been if Adobe hadn’t decided to kneecap it in order to avoid hurting Windows users’ feelings.

Cons: Apple would need to continue developing the Windows version of Creative Suite, or face the rise of a competing technology within that vacuum.

Sprint: Once AT&T finishes acquiring T-Mobile, Sprint will be the only U.S. carrier which doesn’t offer the iPhone now that Verizon also has the iPhone.

Pros: By acquiring Sprint, Apple could get the iPhone 5 onto the carrier on Apple’s terms. It could also transform Sprint into the kind of cellphone carrier which would be up to Apple’s usual standards, which otherwise does not exist in the United States.

Cons: Sprint will also soon be the only carrier without a 4G LTE network, so Apple would need to build one from scratch. Also, acquiring Sprint would royally tick off current iPhone 5 partners AT&T and Verizon, with the results being unpredictable.

HTC and Samsung: Both companies are faceless component manufacturing giants for hire. Both companies also make faceless Android based phones and tablets. Apple is also in the midst of suing both companies for having blatantly stolen iPhone and iPad technologies for use on their Android products.

Pros: Apple acquires one or both of these companies, and it suddenly has far more control over its own component supply chain. No more depending on the whim of a hated “partner” in order to get the next iPhone or iPad out the door on time.

Cons: Both Samsung and HTC have major business manufacturing and selling components to other phone and tablet companies, among other components. Apple would want no part of this and need to shut down and write off that side of either company’s business, which would represent a major loss to swallow. Not that Apple can’t afford it. Here’s more on the iPhone 5.

Apple iTunes streaming music rental service talk surfaces again, just won’t die

It’s not an over-generalization to say that Apple is the only significantly successful company in the history of digital music, and the rest are all either niches or failures. It’s also plain fact that Apple is the one to use a “you pay for it, you own it” music store model, while the failing/failed efforts have centered around some kind of music rental/streaming/subscription/cloud which no one outside the geekdom has any interest in or ever will. But because technology headlines are written by geeks, the “Apple is minutes away from launching a music rental service” headlines persist to this day.

The latest is from the NY Post, which claims that Apple is meeting with record labels as we speak to launch such a music rental service. These same rumors are floated by headline-writing geeks pretty much every time Apple is about to make a product announcement of any kind, and indeed even when Apple doesn’t have any press events on the horizon. Nevermind that there are no mainstream music rental services, because every company that tries such a model goes out of business; the geeks want Apple to launch one anyway. Nevermind that the only reason Apple acquired failed music streaming service Lala last year was because Lala approached Apple about a chump-change buyout, and Apple saw it as an easy way of hiring some digital music engineers; the geeks insisted that Apple bought failed Lala so it could launch its own failed music rental service.

Plenty of aspects of digital commerce are still open to debate as to which models will work and which ones won’t. However, digital music is not one of them. History has shown that the mainstream wants to own its music if it’s going to pay money for music at all, and that the public has no appetite or trust for pay-for music rental services. If anything, streaming music services like Pandora have been moderately successful because they’re free; it could be argued that the only reason MySpace still has any relevance in music (even after losing relevance as a social network) is that it offers free full-song streaming from major artists. But the fact that these services have to be free just to be popular is also the reason why they go out of business.

That still hasn’t stopped geek after geek from positing that because Apple is so popular right now, it and it alone could get away with launching a music rental service. Of course, the geeks’ argument here is essentially that even though music rentals are a concept that will never, ever be accepted by anyone but geeks, Apple should launch one anyway. Just for the geeks’ sake. Even though no one else would want it. Even though it would lose money. Even though those among the mainstream who did try it out, just because it was from Apple, would hate it and feel cheated once their music went poof after they stopped paying the monthly fee.

The seven year long saga in which geeks have begged for an iTunes music rental service and/or demanded one, while falsely claiming that one was coming in the hopes of it becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy, is eerily similar to the first seven years of the iMac era. While the public had no trouble accepting the iMac’s all-in-one design, geeks spent years having a collective meltdown over the fact that the monitor was built into the computer, and spent those same seven years embarrassing themselves by begging for (and falsely claiming the impending existence of) a headless iMac. Finally, Apple gave them what they’d been screaming for, just to shut them up and silence the needless bad press which was coming from “Mac geeks” who just couldn’t control themselves. And to the surprise of absolutely no one but the geeks, the “headless iMac” known as the Mac mini has been a poor seller which has had no effect on the market other than to confuse mainstream users.

It’s possible that, even with Apple having proven that music sales are the present and future of digital music, and even with the music rental model having been proven to be an abject failure, Apple might throw the geeks a bone – again – just to shut them up. Such a service would go absolutely nowhere in terms of mainstream success, but that’s never been relevant to the geeks, who have long wanted Apple to forsake needs and desires the other 99% of users for the sake of catering to them and solely them. After all, it’s the way in which nearly every other “consumer” technology company does business.

Apple must prevent Microsoft acquisition of Adobe at all costs

Microsoft is considering buying Adobe Systems, say the headlines. It’s an odd move, considering that Adobe’s twenty-first century innovation most closely resembles that of a rotting corpse; the company inexplicably thinks it can build the embarrassingly obsolete technology known as Flash into some kind of platform of the future, while the company’s near monopoly in creative pro software markets like Photoshop and Dreamweaver is the only reason it still exists. Microsoft has a nearly limitless amount of cash on hand, so buying Adobe (currently worth about fourteen billion on the open market) would be easy enough. But even Microsoft isn’t crazy enough to bet on Flash as being anything other than the bane of internet users everywhere, meaning that Microsoft is only after one thing: the creative pro market.

And it all makes sense: while Apple’s Macintosh marketshare has been growing significantly each quarter for the past several years, Windows still has majority marketshare in every single user category, except one. When it comes to creative professionals, Macs rule the market and always have. Even stodgy corporations with strict Windows-only policies elsewhere in the company still typically have a graphic design department full of nothing but Macs. But these users rely on Adobe products first and foremost, and the one surefire way to make them think twice about continuing to do their work on a Mac would be to cripple or even take away entirely their ability to use said Adobe products. Even as much as Adobe and Apple seem to hate each other these days, Adobe would never consider pulling the plug on the Mac versions of its core products, because the financial impact on Adobe would be nothing short of devastating. But if Adobe were to become a mere (financially) small subsidiary of Microsoft, ditching the Mac versions and throwing away sales to Mac users in the process wouldn’t be anything more than a rounding error in Microsoft’s bottom line.

Assuming Microsoft really is eyeing Adobe for the sake of trying to force the creative market onto Windows, rather than the insane notion of wanting to be the owner of the boat anchor known as Flash, Apple would do well to block the move at all costs – even if that means Apple buying Adobe itself. Based on market capitalization, Apple is nearly twenty times the size of Adobe, so a buyout would certainly be possible even though it wouldn’t likely be entirely in cash. Such a move would allow Apple to seize control over Adobe’s creative apps, perhaps even burying the Windows versions. With Apple consistently demonstrating a better understanding of software design than Adobe, apps like Photoshop would benefit from the polish of being in Apple’s hands, while Apple could finally kill off Flash (and win the adoration of internet users everywhere for being the one to put it out of its misery). On the other hand, there’s the question of whether killing off the Windows versions of Photoshop and Dreamweaver would be wise, as doing so would create a vacuum for competitors to thrive in when it comes to corporate environments in which creative professionals are being forced by policy to do their creative work on Windows PCs. As such, Apple might end up having to not only spread its resources thin to maintain the Mac versions of Adobe apps, but also invest resources in maintaining the Windows versions – a complete waste of time for Apple.

Still, Apple can’t allow Adobe’s creative apps to fall into the hands of rival Microsoft, even if the latter promised to continue development of the Mac versions (knowing Microsoft, they’d be crippled in one deniable manner or another). Although apps are looking like the future of computing, and desktop software is increasingly looking like the past, this is one instance in which Apple might have to invest in the past to protect itself in the present.

Verizon iPhone more palatable than Verizon Droid for everyone but geeks

Geeks, look away now. This is not what you want to hear. A Verizon iPhone would be massively more popular than the Verizon Droid, and it’s for precisely the reason geeks don’t want to hear about: the Droid, part of Google’s Android platform, is a product that’s for the geeks, by the geeks, and of the geeks, by design. Always has been, always will be. And despite the delusions of those geeks who live too deeply inside their own geek bubble see it, non-geeks outnumber geeks by a margin too high to count.

Despite the many angles of debate as to whether the iPhone or the Android is the “better” platform, the fundamental differences are inarguable: the iPhone is a curated platform whose priority is in making sure each of its features is intuitively usable by users of all levels, with an app store full of apps but nothing that shouldn’t be there. Android is an open source platform whose priority is in making things as theoretically “open” as possible, where features are judged by their quantity rather than quality or usability, and its app store is full of half finished hobbyist projects.

In other words, the Android is suited to technology geeks and gadget hobbyists, while the iPhone is suited to everyone else. So why has Verizon decided to go with something as mainstream-unsuitable as the Android OS for its own iPhone competitor? Because it’s all that’s available. Apple doesn’t license its iPhone OS to be used on random hardware, Microsoft’s mobile OS is a joke, the BlackBerry OS even more so, and so on. So Verizon ends up pushing a “mainstream smartphone” that’s based on an OS which, while competent strictly speaking, also happens to be the most specifically, intentionally anti-mainstream platform conceived since back when delusional geeks thought Linux would magically replace Windows and Mac on mainstream computers.

And yet the Verizon Droid has sold well. But don’t mistake sales for an acceptance of the platform. Verizon customers who refuse to switch to AT&T for any reason (millions upon millions of people fall into that category, for various reasons), but wish they could have an iPhone, end up looking at the Droid because, well, Verizon is pushing the Droid as the fake-iPhone that is available on Verizon – and some of them are actually giving it a try. But the overwhelming quantity of Verizon users who still want to know when a Verizon iPhone is coming (“Verizon iPhone” is a more popular Google search than “Verizon Droid” or “Verizon wireless” or even “Verizon”) makes it clear that plenty of Verizon customers are ignoring the Droid and waiting for the real thing, or plenty of Droid users are dissatisfied enough that they still want iPhone, or more likely, plenty of both.

The toughest thing for Verizon to swallow about a Verizon iPhone might not be admitting that they screwed up when they originally turned down the iPhone years ago, and it may not be having to put up with Apple’s insistence that the iPhone cellular experience, you know, not such. What Verizon might have the hardest time accepting is the fact that as soon as a Verizon iPhone launches, sales of the Verizon Droid will fall off a cliff, as at that point literally no one but the geeks will even consider buying one – and that’s got to sting, considering just how much time, effort, and money Verizon has sunk into promoting the Droid, which would immediately become a flop. But then again, just by virtue of the fact that the Droid is based on someone else’s operating system (Google’s) and an approximation of someone else’s phone model (Apple’s), there is the question of just how much Verizon DNA is really in the Droid anyway.

Bottom line, Apple obviously needs a Verizon iPhone in order to continue platform growth and to put the Droid era to bed. Verizon needs the iPhone just as much, because the Droid will never, ever be a suitable iPhone substitute for anyone but the geeks (who hate the iPhone’s populist nature anyway), and needs to have the iPhone in its stable by the time these first-time Droid buyers go to buy their next smartphone, which many of them have already decided won’t be another Droid.

Walk-through of Apple’s Game Center on iOS 4.1

Apple recently released their iOS 4.1 Software Update. This first major update brings new features such as Game Center, Ping (in iTunes), iTunes TV show rentals, HDR photography, and much more. In this article, we’ll take a closer look at Apple’s first major announcement — Game Center.

What is Game Center? It’s Apple implementation of social gaming on your iPhone (and later on your iPad). You can find your friends or even let Game Center auto-match you with players for various games. Game Center is one central place where you can track achievements and compare high scores on multiple games.

Installation. After installing and updating your iPhone or iPod Touch¹, a new icon will appear in the lower right of the first page. This will take you to Apple’s new Game Center. It’ll appear as an icon, just like any other app.

Signing Up. Click on it to get started. The first time, it’ll ask you to sign up for Game Center and to pick a username/password for your account. This account will be associated with your Apple ID. If you’re using a family iTunes account, you may want to sign up for another iTunes account just for the Game Center. (This is an easy process, the button is just at the bottom.)

Just like any new system, it’s a race to add all of your friends and most importantly, grab the username you want. So even if you don’t play many games, you might just want to sign up ASAP just to get your desire username!

Friend Requests. When someone requests to be your Game Center friend, fanfares sounds play and a message is displayed on your device (of course, you need to give permission to have push and sound on for Game Center). Clicking “Accept” adds the user as your friend but it doesn’t take you out of what you were doing, which I really like! Usually clicking on these sort of notifications will take me out of my current app and into another.

Playing Games. Now there’s only a handful of games that have been updated to run on Game Center. Be sure to update these apps first before trying to use Game Center. Some games include Farmville, WordsWorth, Flight Control, Real Racing, Pac-Mac, Cro-Mag Rally, Cocoto Kart Online, and a few more.

Be sure to be logged into Game Center and then launch your game of choice. You should see a sliding note on top of your app that says “Welcome back, USERNAME.” That lets your know that you’re logged in on Game Center. Now play the game just like you would. Depending on the game, you may have more options on game play as well as different types of achievements.

Game Center. Now that you played a few games², close them and launch Game Center. On the first screen, you will see your profile — your username, number of friends, games played, achievements, your status update, and your iTunes email account. At the bottom are 4 tabs — Me (current page), Friends, Games, and Requests.

The tab “Friends” lists all of your accepted friends. You are able to view their status (similar to Twitter or Facebook Status). If you drill down deeper, you can see their profiles, all the games they played, and the games you have in common. If you don’t have the games they play, you can click on the link and purchase the apps. That’s a clever way of selling apps! For the games you do have in common, another page displays that puts your scores and achievements head-to-head with theirs.

The tab “Games” lists all the games you played (that have Game Center). Clicking on them will show you the leaderboards, achievements available and which you have accomplished. There’s also a button at the bottom that says “Find Game Center Games.” Clicking on this will take you into the iTunes App Store where you can purchase apps with Game Center enabled.

Lastly, the tab “Requests” will lists all of your friend requests. The number of requests here will be the red badge number on your Game Center icon.

Overall, Game Center is a great idea for social gaming. Unfortunately, it’s still too early to really test out the system since only a few games have Game Center enabled. The idea of social gaming is not new. There are already some successful systems in placed like Plus+ and OpenFeint, so I’m interested in seeing how Game Center will affect them.

See Apple’s official website for more information about iOS 4.1 update and Game Center.

^1. Game Center only works on iPhone 3GS and higher, iPod Touch Gen 2 and higher.
^2. Only some games have been updated to run Game Center. Be sure to read the game developer’s notes.

iPhone and iPad no-Flash policy vindicated by crappiness of Droid 2 Flash player

The iPhone and iPad don’t have the ability to play Flash content because Flash is a crappy, outdated, buggy, unsafe, battery-chewing, processor-killing piece of crap – so says Apple CEO Steve Jobs, if not in those exact words, then essentially with that sentiment. Web content makers are already abandoning Flash in favor of twenty-first century technologies like HTML 5, and it’s telling that the most common complaint about not being able to display Flash on an iPhone comes when the user is attempting to load the notoriously outdated MySpace. And while Flash maker Adobe begs to differ as it enthusiastically pushes the idea that Flash will soon be thriving on every mobile device except the iPhone and iPad, there’s bad news for Adobe on that front: a leading self-identified “geek” journalist has just declared Flash to be a disaster on his non-iPhone. In the words of Laptop Magazine’s Avram Piltch, “After spending time playing with Flash Player 10.1 on the new Droid 2, the first Android 2.2 phone to come with the player pre-installed, I’m sad to admit that Steve Jobs was right. Adobe’s offering seems like it’s too little, too late.”

Meanwhile, the iPhone and iPad have more than two hundred thousand third-party apps available through the App Store, none of which require Flash. While leading geeks have been confidently predicting the demise of the iPhone due to its lack of Flash support since 2007, and making the same claims about the iPad’s demise since before the product even officially existed, it now appears that geek sentiment toward Flash is finally starting to change now that the Flash-enabled Droid has fallen victim to exactly what Steve Jobs warned would happen to the iPhone if Flash were enabled on it. Not that the geek world has ever been a relevant driving force (positive or negative) when it’s come to the mainstream fate of either the iPhone or the iPad (the last time the geeks predicted success for an Apple product, it was the ultimately weak-selling Mac mini), but one has to wonder if, with even the geeks now turning against Adobe’s continued Flash debacle, what strategy will the company now adopt? Will Adobe finally give up the ghost of Flash, or will its head of PR merely continue referring to tech journalists as twerps and comparing Steve Jobs to Josef Stalin? Time will tell.

Does Verizon iPhone matter? Verizon loses as many customers each month as AT&T

Why does the iPhone need to come to Verizon? Ask the most ardent Verizon supporters, and they’ll tell you that it’s because Verizon is nearly the perfect cellphone carrier, while the iPhone is currently only available on AT&T, which they’ll tell you is the toilet bowl of cellphone carriers. Verizon customers are in bliss with nary a dropped call, perfect customer service, and the guy from the television commercial literally follows them around to make sure they’ve got perfect reception at all times. AT&T, on the other hand, serves up nothing but dropped calls, dead spots, customer service hell, and customers hate AT&T so much they’ll bail out at the first opportunity that comes along.

One little problem, though: it turns out none of it’s true.

Because they don’t want their cellular experience to go from a perfect situation to a perfect nightmare, many Verizon customers say they refuse to buy an iPhone until it stops being an AT&T exclusive and comes to their beloved carrier. But according to hard data from CNN on the customer turnover rates of Verizon and AT&T, it turns out that both carriers are bleeding customers at nearly the exact same monthly rate: 1.27 percent for Verizon, 1.29 percent for AT&T. This doesn’t mean that either carrier is losing business overall, but rather this is the percentage of current customers they’re losing each month even as new customers sign on to make up for it. In other words, the percentage of AT&T customers who are so unhappy by the end of their contract (or paying a fee to bail out early) that they throw up their hands and decide to move elsewhere is nearly exactly the same percentage of Verizon customers who do the same. And what about Sprint and T-Mobile? They’re each losing about twice as high a percentage of their existing customer each base, according to the same statistics.

This begs the obvious question of whether the Verizon iPhone even needs to exist. After all, hard data shows that the reality of the two largest cellular networks is that they have about the same retention level, which can be roughly equivocated to customer satisfaction. After all, the most seemingly inarguable data regarding the happiness of a customer is whether that customer continues doing business with the company in the future. Verizon fans will claim that AT&T’s retention rate is being propped up by the fact that iPhone users are so happy with their iPhone that they’re not going to leave AT&T no matter how their carrier experience turns out, but this theory ignores the simple fact that the majority of AT&T customers aren’t iPhone users (think featureless flip-phones).

The truth in 2010 is the same truth going back to 2007: iPhone users aren’t having nearly as many problems with AT&T as Verizon fans seem to think iPhone users are having with AT&T. Is it wishful thinking or rationalization on the part of Verizon customers who haven’t yet had the guts to pull the trigger on an AT&T iPhone, and have in some cases settled for Verizon’s lame copycat Droid, which they now wish they weren’t stuck with? Or is it just a matter of Apple customers expecting nothing less than the near-perfection they’re used to, finding the same less-than-perfect results from AT&T that they’d get from any other carrier, and doing so much complaining about AT&T’s lack of perfection that Verizon customers are legitimately misinterpreting those gripes as being a bigger deal than they are?

Bottom line, though: none of that matters. No matter the how or the why of Verizon fans’ collective disconnect from reality, you can’t get around the fact that Verizon fans have convinced themselves that their carrier is perfect and AT&T is garbage. Apple has spent three years fighting that battle, and even continuing to win the battle in increments (longtime Verizon customers are jumping on the AT&T iPhone 4 bandwagon by the day). But it’s apparently not even a battle that AT&T, who seems to want to be hated by the public, wants to win. And Apple can’t change the perceptions (or misperceptions) of Verizon fanatics on its own. Put another way: knowing that a Verizon iPhone would be likely to add tens of millions of users to the iPhone platform within its first few months on the market, can an argument even be made as to why Apple shouldn’t open up the iPhone to the carrier?

Why Verizon? iPhone outselling Droid and all Moto phones combined

The iPhone needs Verizon compatibility in order to keep up with the rapidly ascending Droid and the rest of the Android platform, the claim goes. The iPhone’s AT&T exclusivity is causing Verizon customers, even if they would prefer the iPhone, to settle for an Android-based phone available from Verizon instead, the headlines proclaim. But the sales numbers say different. Not only is the iPhone outselling Motorola’s Droid line of phones according to the latest sales numbers, the iPhone is single-handedly outselling all of Motorola’s phones combined, says Apple Insider. In fact, the big picture numbers say that since the iPhone launched three years ago, Motorola’s total number of phones sold has plummeted, thus painting the current success of the Droid and Droid X as perhaps a mere anomaly for a company whose fortunes in the cellphone industry have been dwindling for years.

And before you go blaming Motorola’s misfortunes on the bad economy, the company is now selling a mere one-fifth as many cellphones as it was selling back when the iPhone first launched. With death-spiral numbers like that, it begs the question of just what Verizon was thinking when it chose a flagging partner like Motorola to build its flagship Droid line of phones. The move suggests Verizon was in a panic to come up with an iPhone competitor of any kind, even if that meant saddling up with a dying company like Motorola. It also strongly suggests that Verizon knew the Droid thing wouldn’t be a permanent one, more aimed at forcing Apple to bring the iPhone to the bargaining table under terms that favored Verizon more than they favored Apple itself.

While the Droid is far from the only Android-based phone on the market, Verizon has spent more than a year positioning the phone as its most visible flagship product. But even with all that effort, the iPhone is outselling the Droid and every other Motorola phone combined. It makes you wonder why Verizon isn’t pushing harder to get its hands on the iPhone than it is – or perhaps that’s exactly what’s going on behind the scenes.

iPhone 4 Bumper is far from the best free iPhone 4 case choice

Apple makes the phone you like, but it doesn’t mean Apple makes the case you want. There’s reason why the company is offering iPhone 4 users other options beyond its own “Bumper” case, and that’s because it’s not much of a case. Beatweek’s own in-house testing reveals the Bumper to be a mere three star product (out of five) with pros and cons that add up to a fairly mediocre product (full review here). While the Bumpers do a nice job of protecting the iPhone 4′s top, sides, and bottom, and come in a wide choice of colors, the product falls short when it comes to protecting any other aspect of the device – and it has to be removed in order to plug the iPhone 4 into most of the third party iPhone accessory cables you might come into contact (for instance, the cable from a third party car charger for your iPhone).

So what’s the top rated option among the other free cases being offered in Apple’s free iPhone 4 case program? The other cases come from Belkin, Griffin, Speck, and Incase, all known for making respectable accessories for iPhone and iPod products over the years. But our in house tests reveal the Speck PixelSkin HD (full review here, not to be confused with the “Speck PixelSkin” without the “HD” in its name) to be not only the highest rated iPhone 4 case we’ve tested among the freebie options, but also the highest iPhone 4 case period – so far, at least, as iPhone 4 cases from various vendors are arriving on the market and at our offices in rapid fashion.

Just because a product tests out the most strongly doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the most suitable for you, so as with all things, in the end it comes down to the judgment of each individual user (our reviews are to help you make educated choices, not to tell you what’s right for you). We’ve heard from iPhone 4 users who like their Bumper case just fine, so there’s no shame in going that route if it’s the one that appeals to you. But before you make your choice, be aware that there are a number of different cases from different vendors available through the free iPhone 4 case program. Happy shopping – it’s not every day you come across a slew of iPhone cases each with a zero dollar price tag.

iPhone 4 free case bonanza: the best and worst rated options

Apple is giving away free iPhone 4 cases to anyone who wants one, and the options include various cases from five companies, including Griffin, Belkin, Incase, Speck, and Apple itself. Rather than put you through a laundry list, we’ll save you some time and present you with the best and worst rated options available from the free iPhone case program – and the results might surprise you:

The top rated free iPhone 4 case – Speck PixelSkin HD: This also happens to be our top rated iPhone 4 case overall, and the only iPhone 4 case thus far to receive five stars out of five. Why? Beatweek senior editor Christine Chan sees the case as an upgrade over Speck’s standard PixelSkin, as it’s not as “rubbery” giving it a better feel and grip, and isn’t as likely to gather dust or lint based on her tests. The cut-outs are perfect, and the case is easy to put on and take off (full review).

The most avoidable free iPhone 4 case – Apple Bumpers: Surprised? You shouldn’t be. While many consider Apple to be the most talented maker of consumer technology products, the company has shown a consistent inability to produce accessories for its own products that connect with the public. Its leather iPod cases were awful. Its dockable Hi-Fi stereo system never caught on and was discontinued. The Bumper case has its own problems in that it doesn’t provide real protection, it’s too expensive for the kind of semi-case that it is, and most strangely, you can only use the low-profile sync cable that came with your iPhone 4; using almost any third party sync cable, which is particularly commonplace in settings like an automobile, requires removing the Bumper case entirely.

Speck PixelSkin HD Case for iPhone 4: review

Speck’s PixelSkin HD case for iPhone 4 is similar to the original PixelSkin case that I’ve previously reviewed, however, the blocks on the back of the case are smaller. It’s advertised as “18 dpi” as compared to the 4 dpi of the original PixelSkin. And if you had to choose between the two, the HD is the way to go. Here’s why.

Unlike the original PixelSkin, it’s not as ‘rubbery,’ so I haven’t noticed much of the stickiness that causes dust and dirt to get stuck on the case. The entire one-piece case has a matte finish on the rubber, combined with the shinier plastic that is in between the tiny block pattern on the back. These smaller blocks combined with the matte finish give the case an overall better grip and feel than the original version.

There is dust that seems to collect occasionally around the edges of the screen. However, the case is so easy to take off and put back on that this really isn’t a problem.

There are side and top button guards that add extra protection.The opening for the ring switch is also spacious enough for those with larger fingers to be able to reach in and toggle the switch easily without hassle. The bottom also leaves enough space for the device  to be compatible with older iPhone/iPod cables.

I would say that this is one of the best cases out in the market right now. This is also one of the free cases that Apple is offering for the iPhone 4 Case Program, and probably the best one offered. So either way, it’s definitely worth it.

Rating: 5 stars out of 5 • SpeckProducts.com

Verizon needs Verizon iPhone more than Apple, after Droid debacle

Three years of talking about a Verizon iPhone, and still nothing to show for it. What we have instead are two facts that are sharply at odds with each other: Verizon customers want a Verizon iPhone, if their continual cries of the past three years are to be believed. And Apple is selling such an overwhelming number of iPhones to the point of extended delays and backorders, even with the limitation of continued AT&T exclusivity, that there wouldn’t be enough iPhone 4 inventory to hypothetically share with Verizon customers anyway. Apple can likely get out of its exclusive AT&T deal any time it wants just to by writing a large enough check, but that still offers no clue as to just when it might finally happen. But if you heard a loud thud off in the distance this week, it was the hopes and aspirations of the competing Android platform, in which Verizon has invested heavily with its Droid and Droid X, coming crashing down into what will apparently soon be a mere pile of rubble. As reported by CNN this week, a Yankee Group study reveals that an astounding four out of five current Android users have no plans to buy another Android phone. And that’s game over.

While Google’s own Android-based Nexus One phone has been canceled due to lack of interest, Verizon’s Android-based Droid has been selling quite well (though not nearly as well the platform’s most overenthusiastic users would like you to believe). But it doesn’t matter how many units you’re selling or how many new customers you’re acquiring if eighty percent of them are so dissatisfied with the platform that they’re already plotting their escape. It’s too soon to predict how many of the Android escapees will end up landing on the iPhone, but what is clear is that most Verizon customers who bought a Droid did so because they wanted an iPhone but weren’t willing to switch to AT&T, and so they settled for the closest thing to an iPhone they could get their hands on. Apparently not close enough, however, as the Android has now been revealed to be the fastest-sinking technology platform since, well maybe, ever.

But if the situation is so obviously dire that external temperature takers can now figure out that most Android users are looking to bail out of the platform when they buy their next phone, then it’s a safe bet that Verizon has already known this for at least a little while. So even as the carrier is dumping inordinate amounts of money in launching its new Droid X phone (and selling plenty of them, to be fair), Verizon likely has its left eye focused on endings the longstanding impasse with Apple and getting its hands on the iPhone to ensure that all these dissatisfied Android users don’t also leave Verizon when they leave the Android platform. In other words, Verizon now needs a Verizon iPhone more than Apple needs a Verizon iPhone. After all, that same CNN report shows that four out of five iPhone users plan to remain with the iPhone, the exact opposite scenario being faced by makers of Android-based phones. The question then becomes what kind of concessions Verizon is willing to make in order to get its hands on the iPhone sooner rather than later. After all, unlike Apple, whose cellular presence lives and dies with the iPhone itself, Verizon’s primary priority is in ensuring that its current customers remain with the carrier; which particular phone they end up buying is secondary to the fact that they simply stay with Verizon.

Not only do we now know that the Android platform is a sinking ship, we also know that Verizon knows it, and perhaps most importantly, Apple now knows that Verizon knows it. The timetable for a Verizon iPhone is still anybody’s guess, but with most current Droid users presumably ending up with an iPhone when it’s all said and done, look for Verizon to try to make a Verizon iPhone happen as soon as possible – and with Apple’s known penchant for driving a hard bargain with potential partners, expect Verizon to be in a much weaker bargaining position than the Droid’s cheerleaders might expect. Here’s more on the Verizon iPhone.

Apple stock surges on earnings, shows iPhone 4 antenna flap is over

Apple’s stock price has spent the day up anywhere from five to fifteen dollars after yesterday’s strong earnings report from the company which showed strong growth across the Mac, iPhone, and iPad platforms (the latter being a given, of course, since it didn’t exist in the previous quarter). The willingness on the part of investors to go in even deeper with Apple, which has already surpassed Microsoft as the world’s largest technology company in terms of market cap size. And perhaps more importantly, it shows that investors no longer consider the “iPhone 4 antenna controversy” to be a concern, if they ever did in the first place.

Apple attempted to square away antenna talk on Friday with an event in which the company both proved on a statistical basis that there never an iPhone 4 antenna issue to begin with and offered to give away free iPhone 4 cases, both moves seemingly aimed at silencing journalists who’d spent weeks trying to create a story where there wasn’t one. Even as some tech journalists are still bizarrely writing articles all but begging their readers to return the iPhone 4 for a refund, Wall Street has sided with 99.45% of iPhone 4 who never claimed to have antenna issues, and more money is being invested into Apple stock accordingly.

Apple reports quarterly revenue up 60%, Mac sales up 33%

Apple has announced its revenue figures for the quarter that just ended on June 30th. The company says it made $15.7 billion in revenue during that span, which represents a sixty percent increase over the year ago quarter. The quarter included just the first seven days of sales of the new iPhone as well as the first few months of iPad sales. However the revenue increase was not merely the result of new product launches, as sales of Macintosh computers were up thirty-three percent over the year-ago quarter. According to Apple CEO Steve Jobs, “It was a phenomenal quarter that exceeded our expectations all around, including the most successful product launch in Apple’s history with iPhone 4,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “iPad is off to a terrific start, more people are buying Macs than ever before, and we have amazing new products still to come this year.”

Apple: 99.4% of iPhone 4 users have not reported antenna issues

In his press conference today, Apple CEO Steve Jobs revealed that fewer than one percent of all iPhone 4 users have logged a “problem” with their phone’s antenna according to Apple’s own internal AppleCare records. The statistic stands in sharp contrast with the headlines which have claimed that the iPhone 4 is “defective” or has an “antenna flaw” or other such phrasing. Jobs went on to demonstrate that the “issues” with the iPhone 4 antenna, in which gripping the phone in a particular manner slightly weakens the signal strength, are true of every smartphone on the market.

iPhone 4 press conference on Friday: antenna nonsense to be silenced?

Apple is holding an invite-only press conference on Friday which it says is related to iPhone 4. The move comes after weeks during which Apple has mostly remained quiet (perhaps too quiet) while geek tech journalists have libeled the living the snot out of the iPhone 4 over supposed antenna issues. Apple has not said what the event will consist of beyond the mere fact that it’s about iPhone 4, but one way or another Apple is likely looking to retake control of the dialog regarding the product. Even though the iPhone 4 continues to be the most successful product launch in Apple history according to the sales numbers (dwarfing iPad sales, for instance), an increasing number of potential iPhone 4 buyers have been worked up into a panic over the continual nonsense being published about the iPhone 4 antenna – and it’s now imperative that Apple find a way to drown the lies before they become accepted as the truth.

The choice of Friday for the event is curious, as Apple nearly always holds its press events on Tuesday or Wednesday, widely considered the most ideal days for the maximum amount of exposure. It could be that after the comical-if-it-weren’t-libel actions of Consumer Reports this week, in which the publication simultaneously claimed the iPhone 4 to be their top rated phone and yet completely unrecommendable, Apple feels that it needs to make a statement before this week is over. Thanks to Jim Dalrymple at Look Insight and @JinDenver on Twitter for the heads up.

Next Page »