monkeys on typewriters

Since I have yet to do the obligatory “What I Think of Leopard Before it Comes Out” post, I figured I’d focus on Apple’s big, giant feature list. (I also figured I’d do it after Leopard comes out because, 1) I’m lazy and 2) I have yet to get my grubby paws on it.) In my opinion, the features that will be most important in the end will be the features listed under these sections:

• Graphics & Media
• Instruments
• Networking
• Security
• System
• Unix
• Xcode 3

You’ll notice that these are categories that, even if an average user cared about them, they probably wouldn’t be able to understand what the new features are, exactly. All these categories focus on developers and enhancing their ability to make great applications.

The bottom line is this: Apple can spend only a finite amount of time working on its OS. If they spend a larger portion of that time working on improving developer tools, it will mean that more developers will commit time to creating more, better Mac applications that will increase the value of the platform well beyond what Apple could ever do on its own.

If you follow this line of thought through to conclusion, you may think that Apple should spend all of its time on developer tools, which would make some people (i.e. me) rather happy. However, the average Joe user wouldn’t understand why he doesn’t get any new features right away. And the reporters would all say that there’s “really nothing new”.

The key for Apple is to look for the hallowed middle ground between end user features and developer goodies.

I’ve been wanting to write about the iPhone for a long time now. I’ve wanted to say that it’s unannounced, and everyone needs to calm down, sit back and enjoy the show keynote. Getting everyone’s hopes up well beyond what is reasonable to expect will only leave people disappointed. Fortunately, I don’t have to say all that (even though I did anyway). Macworld editor Peter Cohen did the job for me.

At this point, I almost hope that Apple doesn’t announce an iPhone at MWSF. That would really make TUAW, the entire Apple rumor network, and a few news sites (ahem CNET) look really stupid. On the other hand it would cause a few (albeit, dumb) analysts to say that Apple is missing a deadline on the iPhone, or something like that. (Of course that would only earn them a well-earned Daring Fireball Jackass of the Week stamp.) My point is this: any self-respecting “news” site that talks about an unannounced product needs to state that it’s a rumor very clearly. That CNET article didn’t even mention the word “rumor”; TUAW’s been reporting it like it’s a given; and the rumor sites… well let’s not even go there.

</rant>

Fair warning: This is a geeky post.

In a widget, the way you generate random numbers is through a JavaScript function called Math.random(). Random numbers are useful for lots of things: We use them in Old Faithful (has to do with refreshing the image), Uncle Sam (generating random quotes), and MadLibs (auto-generating random words).

However in Dashboard, the Math.random() function doesn’t truly generate random numbers. Each time you close and reopen a widget it gives you the same sequence of numbers. Here they are. (Note that these numbers have been multiplied by 1,000,000,000 and rounded there, for readability.)

• 7826
• 131537788
• 755605322
• 458650132
• 532767237
• 218959186
• 47044616
• 678864717
• 679296406
• 934692896

To prove my point, I’ve created a quick-and-really-dirty widget to demo this. Here it is: RandomDemo.zip. This widget will show you the first 10 random numbers. You’ll notice that the first time you run it, it has these exact numbers in the same order.

If you close the widget and re-open it (Note close and re-open; a simple Cmd + R refresh won’t do), you’ll get the same exact sequence of numbers. That’s the problem. Dashboard’s Math.random() gives you the same numbers each time you open it in a new widget. This is especially a problem for widgets that do stuff like generate random passwords, because everyone sees the same password. However, it’s also annoying to us because everyone sees the same Uncle Sam quote and MadLibs auto-generated output each time they re-open the widget.

We have found a way to work around this bug, but it’s messy, annoying, and it would be much, much simpler if Apple just fixed the Math.random() function in Dashboard. So please, Apple: Fix it, will ya?

The new iTunes 7 Icon is, if you haven’t noticed, different from the iTunes 6 icon. On the whole I like it. The blue looks nice and I like the effect on the CD. However, I don’t think I’ll ever get used to it. Why? Green.

Let’s just say that over the years I’ve become used to the iTunes icon being green. This is nice because I often have to switch over to iTunes real fast to take a call or something. I usually do this by using Cmd + Tab and finding the green icon. In the past, I’ve been able to do this pretty much without thinking.

iTunes used to be one of the few green icons there were. Looking at my Dock, the only other green icon I have is TextWrangler, and that’s kind of a blueish-green.

Now, whenever I want to pause iTunes, I activate Cmd + Tab, then sit there for a second looking for, and not finding the green icon. I have to consciously go into my brain and remember that the icon is now blue. It’s not that the it doesn’t stand out, it’s that I’m so used to it being green.

What’s the solution? There really isn’t one. Switching the icon back to green would just mess with my brain even more. Moral of the story: One you have an icon, don’t change its color!

The My Dream App contest is, for want of a better word, interesting. It gives users an even bigger voice, which is always (well, almost always) good. However, I’m a little concerned about this scenario: 10 years down the road, someone develops an application that just so happens to be a replica of one of the ideas listed in the My Dream App Forums without knowing it. Then the person who posted that idea sues the developer and uses the forum post as proof.

However, that’s not what this post is about. For My Dream App, they got some pretty big name judges; most notably Steve Wozniak, but also Ken Case (The Omni Group), Scott McNulty (TUAW), Merlin Mann (43 Folders), Brent Simmons (NetNewsWire), Cabel Sasser (Panic), and Allan Odgaard (TextMate), just to name a few (and that’s only the first two rounds).

However, despite all the big name judges, all they really do is comment on the application proposals. Shouldn’t these judges be doing something more tangible than simply telling us what they’re thinking? If it were me, I would split the voting in some way. Maybe have the judge’s decisions count for half and the user’s count for half. Maybe the judges decide every other round. Maybe the judges and the users both get to eliminate 3 every round. Something.

Just my $0.02.

Update: Wow. Now I feel stupid. I only looked at the judges commenting on one of the posts. Turns out there are many more big name people involved. To name one, John Gruber of Daring Fireball. None of this changes my main point, though.