Lukas Mathis on the iPad for content creation

Handpicked

After a long time without updates, finally Lukas Mathis has resurfaced (slight pun intended) with a long, informative and thoughtful article on his switch from an iPad to a Microsoft Surface Pro 2: Windows 8 and the Microsoft Surface. If you’re thinking about doing a similar switch, or if you don’t have a tablet yet and are considering what Microsoft is offering, then Mathis’s piece is a must-read. 

The only part where I don’t fully agree with Mathis’s observations regarding the iPad as a creation device is this passage:

To be sure, it’s absolutely possible to use iPads productively. In fact, Apple blogs love to point to examples of people who do use iPads to produce things. And yes, these people exist. There are artists who draw on iPads, and musicians who make music on iPads, and writers who write novels on iPads, and movie makers who cut their movies on iPads. But the fact that you have to point to these people, the fact that there are articles about these people, shows that they’re unusual. An artist drawing a painting on an iPad is a novelty.

If it was normal for people to use their iPads for creative tasks, there would not be newspaper articles about people using their iPads for creative tasks. The iPad will have arrived as a productivity device when news sites stop reporting about people who use iPads for productivity. So in the end, all of these links to articles about people who use their iPads to create things only seem to support the notion that this is not how most people use their iPads.

I don’t see it this way. My impression is that all the articles showing people being productive with their iPads in a way or another (drawing, writing, making music, etc.) are often contributions in response to certain prejudiced opinions that have been circulating since the introduction of the iPad. The most prominent and persistent of such opinions is — guess what — that the iPad is great at content consumption but poor at content creation. 

I’ve often found that there are some people who just parrot other people’s prejudices about the iPad, repeating the ‘great at content consumption, but sucks at content creation’ mantra without even being iPad users. And then, that there are iPad users who honestly think the iPad is not suitable for creating content simply because they don’t know about a lot of great iOS apps that can really transform the iPad into a pretty versatile production / creation device. (Some examples: Paper by FiftyThree, Procreate, Autodesk Sketchbook Pro, for drawing sketching painting; for writing, the amount of text editors available is dizzying — I use Daedalus Touch, iA Writer, Phraseology and I’m trying WriteRight lately, although one truly versatile tool is Editorial; and these examples are just a speck of the tip of the iceberg — I’m not even venturing in the Business or Productivity categories…)

I think that having articles and stories showcasing how creative people can be with their iPads is a good way to help people discover such apps and use cases. I’ve personally met quite a number of ‘regular,’ non-tech-savvy iPhone/iPad users who mostly use the built-in iOS apps and install very few third-party apps. What they end up installing is for the most part the result of advice from friends or family members. Some people are simply overwhelmed by the choices provided by the App Store, to the point that they rarely dive into it. 

Mathis continues:

[…] I think it’s somewhat unusual to find iPad owners who do use their iPads for content creation on a regular basis. Even when you just look at very basic creative tasks — say, responding to email, rather than just reading email — most people seem to prefer PCs over iPads.

Maybe, but it’s not what I’ve been seeing around me where I live. Some people do prefer using Bluetooth keyboards connected to their iPads over the virtual iOS keyboard, that much I can confirm. I’ve seen people preferring Macs and PCs when they need to deal with more complex tasks requiring bigger screens and a certain spatial arrangement of various apps they need to keep an eye on while working on others. In that case, the good old personal computer, in my opinion, wins over any tablet, not just the iPad.

I very much agree with Mathis when he says: 

Not having any kind of window management or split-screen view makes the iPad much easier to use, but it also means you can’t look at an email and at a Pages document at the same time. Preventing apps from interacting with each other cuts down on complexity, but it also means that it is difficult or sometimes even impossible to use multiple apps in conjunction on the same task.

This is currently my biggest problem with the iPad, and the main reason I couldn’t use it as a complete Mac replacement, like some adventurous iPad power users have been able to do. As I wrote in A week with the iPad-as-laptop setup:

Writing on the iPad with this setup was way more enjoyable when I didn’t need to leave an application. Writing the draft of a fragment of my novel on iA Writer was great. Writing an entire short story for my Minigrooves series was great. Taking some extended notes in Simplenote, writing a post for my blog using Posts, writing a few long emails in Mail… all very pleasant experiences. So, I’m not saying it was all terrible.

But then again, I don’t think a tablet — at least in its current form — is a viable personal computer replacement: most complex workflows are more seamless on a computer, because there’s more inter-app integration. A tablet, however, can be a very capable device for impromptu, light-to-moderate work sessions, and my personal experience with my iPad 3 reflects this. I’m not using it as intensely as my MacBook Pro for productivity, but I’m certainly not limiting my iPad use to browsing the Web, doing email, watching videos and listening to music.

The rest of Mathis’s article is a very detailed and enjoyable write-up of his experience with a Microsoft Surface Pro 2. I have very little to add because my experience with the Surface is extremely limited (I wrote to Microsoft time ago, asking for a unit to review, but I guess my request was just a drop in an ocean of other requests). My first impression when I tried one briefly was that I struggled to view it as a tablet, as it felt more like a thin, ultra-portable laptop — maybe because the Surface seems to be relying heavily on its keyboard and favouring a landscape orientation. I really tried to use it in different positions, in portrait orientation, without keyboard, on my lap (the store clerk looked astonished and with a You’re holding it wrong! expression on his face), and the user experience was rather awkward. Software-wise, I can’t say I found Windows to be as intuitive as iOS, since I had to guess in too many places of the user interface to find my way around. But as I said, I spent too little time with a Surface to meaningfully discuss its merits, drawbacks, and its usability in general. The UI examples made by Mathis did leave me a bit perplexed, though, and tend to corroborate the initial impression I had — that the Surface UI looks unnecessarily complicated or convoluted in places where it could definitely use more immediacy and unambiguity.

Google detoxing: DuckDuckGo as main search engine

Software

DuckDuckGo

At the end of my WhatsFace piece, I wrote:

I am no Google fan, either. I’ve been using some of Google’s products over the years because I actually liked Google ten years ago or so. Lately, not so much. So, again acting on principle, I’m currently getting rid of quite a number of secondary Gmail accounts I’ve opened (mainly to subscribe to other services, apps, mailing lists).

[…]

For my search needs, I’m using DuckDuckGo more and more often, and I think it’s a great alternative. (Read this interesting article if you want to know more about it: Inside DuckDuckGo, Google’s Tiniest, Fiercest Competitor).

At the start of this week, I decided to fully embrace DuckDuckGo, and use it as main search engine all the time, not just every now and then. I really like how DuckDuckGo handles privacy. From the aforementioned article:

When you do a search from DuckDuckGo’s website or one of its mobile apps, it doesn’t know who you are. There are no user accounts. Your IP address isn’t logged by default. The site doesn’t use search cookies to keep track of what you do over time or where else you go online. It doesn’t save your search history. When you click on a link in DuckDuckGo’s results, those websites won’t see which search terms you used. The company even has its own Tor exit relay, allowing Tor users to search DuckDuckGo with less of a performance lag.

I’m quite satisfied with DuckDuckGo. Searching is fast, the search interface is fully customisable, and I’ve not really been missing Google search so far. I like the Cloud Save feature a lot: it allows you to save your settings anonymously across devices: you just set a passphrase and off you go.

Setting DuckDuckGo as primary search engine in Safari

Google search is easily integrated in all browsers, and Safari’s only choices in Preferences > General are Google, Yahoo and Bing. There are a few solutions to make searching in DuckDuckGo easier than visiting its main webpage every time you want to search for something. The first, less intrusive way is to install its official Safari extension (download it from this support page — note that DuckDuckGo provides extensions and add-ons for many other browsers, see the left sidebar in that page). Once installed, the extension adds a new button on Safari’s toolbar, and when you click on it, you’ll see this popover:

DuckDuckGo ext

It’s very useful because it provides you with quick access to various search options. However, after so much time performing searches directly in the address bar/search bar, I often found myself accidentally searching on Google, so I looked for an alternative to integrate DuckDuckGo with Safari more deeply. At the bottom of the same support page suggested above, there are a few different methods to achieve such goal. The one I’ve chosen, which seems rather straightforward, is to install the Safari Keyword Search extension by Arne Martin Aurlien. As you can read on the extension’s page, Safari Keyword Search is a simple extension for Safari 5.1 and above that can change the default Safari search engine and enables keyword searching from the address bar. To access its preferences, you Ctrl-click (or right-click) on any webpage and select Keyword Search settings from the contextual menu. The following settings page will appear:

Safari keyword search

You simply select the highlighted keyword option (d) and set it as default, so that you won’t have to type d [search term] in the address bar every time you want to search with DuckDuckGo. After you save your preferences, you’ll just enter your search terms in Safari’s address bar as usual, and you’ll get the results in DuckDuckGo.

On iOS

I usually perform a lot of Web searches on my Macs more than on my iOS devices, so for now my solution has been to install the official DuckDuckGo iOS app (iTunes link), and to set Yahoo as default search engine in Mobile Safari’s settings. (If you have Launch Center Pro, you can set up an action to search text in DuckDuckGo’s iOS app, since it’s supported.) Apparently, the only way for now to integrate DuckDuckGo in Safari on iOS is to have a jailbroken device. Instructions are provided at this support page.

Power button behaviour

Briefly

Power button dialog new

Before Mac OS X 10.9 Mavericks, pressing the power button on a Mac triggered this dialog box. A very easy-to-remember shortcut for a very useful dialog box. In Mavericks, Apple changed the behaviour of the power button, in a really arbitrary fashion. From a usability standpoint, I think it’s generally a bad idea to suddenly change a shortcut that has remained unchanged for years. This power button shortcut has existed — if I remember correctly — since Mac OS 8. Long-time Mac users have it in their muscle memory. 

In Mavericks, or more specifically, in Mac OS X 10.9.0 and 10.9.1, the new behaviour works like this: tapping the power button once puts the Mac to sleep. Tapping the power button again wakes the Mac up. If you want to access the familiar Shut Down dialog box, you have to press the power button for 1.5 seconds (according to this Apple Support article, which hasn’t been updated yet). If you hold down the power button for at least 5 seconds, you’ll force the Mac to turn off.

Again, I didn’t see the practical side of this change. Some people may have found it handy, but I really think it was unnecessary. In more than one occasion I accidentally put my MacBook Pro to sleep when I was actually trying to quickly access the Restart option from that dialog box.

The recent 10.9.2 update changes the power button behaviour again. Now, if you just tap the power button, nothing happens. If you press it for a couple of seconds, you put the Mac to sleep, and if you want to access the Shut Down dialog box, you have to press Ctrl-power button. This is getting confusing and ridiculous, a textbook case of ‘Don’t fix what is not broken.’

Mail Shield

Briefly

No, it’s not a new email client for OS X or iOS. It’s something better: a future[1] company based in Switzerland providing a completely secure email service. They have launched a campaign on Indiegogo and aim to raise $45,000 by the end of April 2014.

You should follow the link and read what they’re offering in detail. Here are the bits that I’ve found essential (emphasis theirs):

We will provide you with an e‑mail address with the strongest privacy protection on the World: no one will be able to read your emails (including us), but you.

[…]

We will use servers physically placed in Switzerland and under our own direct control: no cloud computing, no outsourcing. We will only make use of open source software: no backdoors for corporations and governments.

[…]

We will employ cryptography everywhere — when receiving, sending, and storing email, as well as on our website, including e‑commerce pages and webmail.

If you want to, we will encrypt your whole mailbox. This means that no one will be able to read your emails including us.

They offer a wide range of account options, from a basic email account that’ll cost you $15/year (100MB email storage) to a $99/year Business account where you can bring your domain to Mail Shield and the company will offer infinite aliases and SMTP service, plus 1GB of email storage. There are more expensive options if you want full encryption of your mailbox. 

I personally know one of the engineers involved in this project and I can guarantee these are serious people. At the time of writing they have raised about $300. Please consider supporting Mail Shield or at least spread the word. I want this project to succeed.

 


 

  • 1. ‘Future’ because the company (MailShield SA) will be incorporated if the campaign is successful.

 

WhatsFace

Tech Life

Really, I did not want to talk about this. I always try to offer balanced points of view, and I always try to avoid being impulsive with my observations, but when it comes to Facebook I have discovered that I simply can’t do that. So, why am I writing this? Because a few people have asked me what I think about Facebook’s multi-billion-dollar acquisition of WhatsApp. And well, let’s be frank, there’s nothing to think — it’s all just disgusting to me.

If you want to learn about this Facebook-WhatsApp affair analysed under a strategic perspective, you must read Ben Thompson’s The Social Conglomerate. I mean, go read it now, because if you don’t, you won’t understand the freshest layer of hate I have for Facebook.

Marco Arment, in linking to Ben Thompson’s aforementioned piece, makes a personal remark about the whole situation. I quote him fully, because I feel exactly the same:

It’s interesting that so much coverage of the WhatsApp acquisition by Facebook has used the same word: conglomerate.

Our industry has reached a chilling point where the biggest players are so big, with so much cash, so much to lose, and effectively zero regulation, that they can simply buy anyone who threatens their dominance. 

I’ll add another little element to the mix: a few contacts and acquaintances of mine — some of them quite heavy Facebook users — have told me how appalled they are by this latest Facebook acquisition; they’ve asked me something along the lines of How can Facebook get away with things like this? Where do they find all that money!?

In part thanks to folks like you,” I replied, “who have unconditionally put your social activity in their hands. That’s how.”

One would think that, before this realisation, people like these acquaintances of mine would start reconsidering their use of Facebook. But no. There is an initial conflicted pause in their expressions, then they start mounting the ‘excuse tower.’ You know, it’s not easy quitting Facebook — my second cousin once removed is on Facebook and it’s the only way I can stay in touch with him… Or: If I delete my account, I fear I’ll stay out of the loop — all my friends use Facebook to organise outings and gatherings, blah blah blah…

You get the idea — they feel as if there were no alternatives to Facebook. They feel they’re in too deep and that there’s no easy way out. To me, their excuses sound a bit like the excuses you hear in a police drama from people who want to leave certain organised crime associations but fear for their life if they do so. If I leave the gang, I’m a dead man, you know? Also, I used to be an Apple evangelist in the 1990s, and these excuses represent, in a way, a déjà vu for me — just like when I was trying to explain to people and clients that the personal computing experience didn’t start and end with Windows and Microsoft. Many were unwilling to switch to the Mac because the majority of their contacts and acquaintances had Windows boxes (and above all, Windows software they could ‘pass’ among themselves, if you get my drift), or because using Windows software was ‘the only way’ to do something and there wasn’t as much software for the Mac, and so on and so forth.

Humour and memories aside, I know people who have been basically ostracised by their Facebook-using friends for their not being on Facebook as well. I say this is not how friends act, and if you’re not using Facebook and you found yourself in a similar situation you should have a word with such ‘friends’ before considering dropping them.

There are alternatives to Facebook, there are other ways of staying in touch with people. Those I like most are perhaps too ‘old school’ for some people’s tastes, since they involve email, phone calls, and a certain amount of ‘friction’ and dedication that some people dislike because it’s not convenient enough or tailored enough to their busy schedule, so they tend to prefer the path of least resistance and the convenience Facebook offers. Facebook knows that, and counts on that.

What Facebook is doing is creating a sort of ‘social lock-in’ around you, extending its reach by acquiring companies like Instagram and WhatsApp. You’re free to let that happen, but don’t come to me all bothered and appalled when Facebook throws billions of dollars to the next social-related company it acquires. 

I’ve always declared that “I’m not on Facebook,” and it’s not a pose. I just don’t want to be a part of Facebook’s social monopoly. I just don’t want a giant like Facebook to shape my social interactions. I don’t want to help Facebook get richer and richer in exchange of its freebies and its convenience. If Facebook buys a company whose apps or services I’m using, I stop using them (like I did with Instagram — and since I never was a WhatsApp user, no problem there). Yes, I’m acting on principle, and yes, I believe more people should follow suit. Read Ben Thompson’s excellent piece I mentioned at the beginning. Realise what Facebook is doing. And if that doesn’t leave a bitter taste in your mouth, I don’t know what to tell you.

A final aside

I am no Google fan, either. I’ve been using some of Google’s products over the years because I actually liked Google ten years ago or so. Lately, not so much. So, again acting on principle, I’m currently getting rid of quite a number of secondary Gmail accounts I’ve opened (mainly to subscribe to other services, apps, mailing lists). The difficult part in all this is to track down every third-party account I subscribed to using a particular Gmail account, and edit it to point to a different, non-Google email account. That’s why this de-Googlification process may take a while. (“And is that worth all the inconvenience?” you’ll ask. Well, sometimes acting on principles means taking the steep path uphill, but it is ultimately rewarding.) 

For my search needs, I’m using DuckDuckGo more and more often, and I think it’s a great alternative. (Read this interesting article if you want to know more about it: Inside DuckDuckGo, Google’s Tiniest, Fiercest Competitor). On Google+, my account is basically a placeholder, and when I delete my primary Gmail account, it’ll go away too.

Getting rid of these tech giants is difficult and can be inconvenient, since they’re getting progressively more pervasive and intrusive, but it’s not impossible, in my opinion.