Drones and consumers

Briefly

You know how some people display a shift in their behaviour just by getting behind the wheel? They ‘become’ motorists, and they can lose perspective in certain situations, letting their stress manifest in attitudes they’d probably not display as pedestrians or cyclists. I believe that a similar thing happens with the consumers category. For the consumer, the first imperative is getting what he/she wants, and everything else, everyone else, is an obstacle, a nuisance. And, much like motorists, consumers too can lose perspective.

Since Jeff Bezos announced that Amazon will work towards the creation of an Amazon Prime Air service, where drones will deliver packages into customers’ hands “in 30 minutes or less”, one of the most fascinating things for me has been people’s reaction to the announcement, more than the idea of using drones as delivery vehicles.

Putting the feasibility of such project apart for a moment[1], I was a little taken aback by the number of people who have no problems with this idea; some of them are actually excited by the prospect. It’s not their fault, it’s the consumer hat they’re wearing.

Consumers seem to have no problems with Amazon drones crowding the sky in their cities: the important thing is that they get their stuff, pronto. 

In an era where privacy concerns are on the foreground more than ever, where people get (righteously) angry for being increasingly tracked online and offline, when they wear their consumer hat they seem to have no problems with Amazon drones programmed to know their exact location and show up at their door — er, window — to deliver the goods. (Who cares if a drone gets hacked and stuff like that, right?)

Consumers are excited by having their order in their hands “in 30 minutes or less” and they don’t even wonder how. The first thing I asked myself when I read that, was: how can an Amazon drone be 30 minutes away from any potential customer address? 

There are people who already go to local shops to browse, even asking for buying advice, then they don’t purchase anything and order the stuff online (then they mourn when small shops go out of business, trumped by giant retailers… like Amazon). Imagine the scene: a consumer browses a local bookshop for a particular book, he finds it and sees that it costs $20. He doesn’t buy it, he goes home, orders it on Amazon, pays $15 plus a certain surcharge for drone delivery, and he’s all happy because he believes he has saved money and, wow, the book has been delivered by drone in less than 30 minutes! Maybe he’ll even blog about it, gushing about how “we’re living in the future”. You think it’s a far-fetched scenario. I know at least two people who would do something like that. Without even realising the huge, inexcusable waste it all would be.

Maybe it’s true what some tech sites are saying, that Amazon drones have only been an effective publicity stunt and that Amazon Prime Air is a service that’ll never be. Whatever the case, for me it’s been a great insight into consumers’ reactions and loss of perspective. Somewhat predictable, but sad nonetheless. 

 


 

  • 1. A quote from this article on Inc.com: The thing is, Amazon Prime Air won’t be available for many years. Even Bezos said last night that the earliest Amazon Prime Air could be in service is 2015 because that’s the soonest the FAA could update its laws. But the Wall Street Journal reports that the FAA isn’t planning on beginning the certification of commercial drones until 2020.

 

Il nuovo ordine dei nerd

Mele e appunti

Circa un mese fa, il buon Fabrizio Rinaldi ha scritto un articolo molto sentito e provocatorio, dal titolo Pensieri di un morto di fama. Si tratta sostanzialmente di una riflessione sulla profondità e qualità di ciò che la ‘blogosfera tecnologica’ oggi ha da offrire. Profondità e qualità che tendono a scarseggiare sempre più. Attenzione però: non in generale (perché in quello smisurato oceano che è Internet si possono trovare parecchi angoli ricchi di contenuti realmente profondi e interessanti che vale la pena tenere sott’occhio), se mai profondità e qualità scarseggiano nei luoghi più in vista della suddetta blogosfera.

Scrive Fabrizio:

Se non ci fosse altro di cui parlare, probabilmente tutto questo chiacchiericcio inutile non mi meraviglierebbe più di tanto, ma oggi c’è ben altro di cui parlare: l’evoluzione tecnologica ci sta mettendo di fronte a sfide senza precedenti e non dovremmo, a mio avviso, ignorarle. Dietro al progresso e alle grandi aziende di cui cantiamo le lodi si stanno verificando processi complessi che dobbiamo osservare e analizzare prima che ci sfuggano di mano. Sono catastrofico? Non credo, decidetelo voi, tra un unboxing di 20 minuti di un telefono e un’accesa discussione sullo skeuomorfismo.

Questo mi sembra il nocciolo della questione, anche se vi invito a leggere tutto l’articolo per evitare discussioni decontestualizzate. Come potete vedere in fondo all’articolo, ebbi modo di rispondere subito con alcune micro-osservazioni espresse tramite Twitter. Anche se un po’ in ritardo, vorrei cogliere l’occasione per espanderle, per cui le riprendo qui.

1. Secondo me il problema di Internet è che sta nerdizzando la società e dando alle ‘cose da nerd’ un’attenzione a volte eccessiva. — Da quel che mi è dato vedere, sul Web la tecnologia è una delle tematiche più seguite, ma se mettiamo da parte i siti di notizie più generici, uno degli strati superiori più in vista è formato da personaggi che in sostanza sono riusciti a sfruttare alcune loro manie e ossessioni a proprio vantaggio e a diventare alcune fra le figure più lette e seguite. Grazie a una serie di circostanze favorevoli e a un’invidiabile tenacia, sono riusciti a riscrivere le regole di ‘ciò di cui è importante parlare’ e a creare un circolo virtuoso dove loro — geek, nerd, o come li vogliamo chiamare — ricevono appoggio e supporto da altri come loro (sia lettori/seguaci, sia blogger loro pari). 

Ecco dunque crearsi una sorta di élite di tecnofili che si sostengono vicendevolmente, a volte pure con indulgenza, e monopolizzano i dibattiti del momento. Di tanto in tanto, va detto, i botta-e-risposta che scaturiscono sono interessanti. In altre circostanze, i dibattiti vertono su argomenti che una persona ‘normale’ giudicherebbe un po’ sciocchi e insulsi. Ha senso sprecare fiumi di parole sulle sfumature pastello introdotte in iOS 7? Io credo di no, tanto più che difficilmente quelle discussioni portano a qualcosa di concreto. Ma a sentire questa élite di nerd l’attenzione ai dettagli è fondamentale, quindi dibattiti del genere hanno senso e ognuno può dare mostra delle proprie conoscenze iperspecifiche.

Il fenomeno che io chiamo di ‘nerdizzazione’ non è in sé completamente negativo. La figura del nerd non è più quella di una volta, il nerd non è più il grezzo prototipo di ‘ragazzo bruttino appassionato di computer, socialmente inetto e sfortunato con le donne’ che si vedeva in molti film commedia degli anni Ottanta e forse anche Novanta. Oggi il nerd è una figura più complessa e ricca di sfumature. Una volta, chiacchierando con amici, mi uscì questa espressione: Il nerd è colui che ha una visione del mondo in cui tutto è smontabile. E intendevo sia in senso fisico che figurato: al nerd piace vedere come funziona un determinato oggetto, vuole smontarlo e analizzarlo. Lo stesso vale in ambito astratto: lo si vede nelle recensioni di un prodotto, nelle recensioni di un film, in come — per citare ancora Fabrizio Rinaldi — “smontiamo e distruggiamo collettivamente l’ultima puntata di The Walking Dead”.

L’evoluzione del nerd, come dicevo, non ha portato necessariamente a qualcosa di negativo — il problema sono gli effetti collaterali. Cerco di spiegarmi con un esempio banale. Immagino sia capitato a tutti di conoscere qualcuno (un compagno di scuola, l’amico di un amico, un proprio parente, ecc.) con qualche hobby particolare: il collezionista di tappi di bottiglia (per dirne una, gli esempi sono infiniti), l’appassionato di modellini, quello bravo a creare figure con l’origami, quello che è diventato un’enciclopedia vivente di Star Trek, eccetera eccetera. Non so voi, ma nel mio circolo di conoscenze tutte queste figure venivano trattate con divertita sufficienza: Antonio… sì è simpatico… Un po’ — ehm — ossessivo però. Se pensiamo alla gente che seguiamo sul Web, in molti appartenenti di quell’élite di tecnofili di cui sopra riconosceremo delle caratteristiche simili. Il nerd del tardo 2013, come accennavo prima, è riuscito a trasformare le sue ossessioni, le sue piccole manie, i suoi interessi iperspecifici in qualcosa di positivo, in qualcosa di accettato, in qualcosa di comune. E fin qui mi va anche bene, evviva la rivincita del nerd. 

Gli effetti collaterali cominciano a manifestarsi quando i tratti più ossessivi, gli interessi più particolari e circoscritti, vengono praticamente innalzati a virtù. Quante volte abbiamo incontrato consigli del tipo “Per fare in modo che il tuo sito venga letto e seguito e abbia successo devi concentrarti sulle tue passioni (= ossessioni) e sviscerarle continuamente, insistendo, scrivendo costantemente, ecc.” In altre parole, essere ossessivi oggi, in Internet, è cosa buona e giusta. Accade qualcosa di simile anche con l’inettitudine sociale: il nerd di una volta, poco capace di stare con gli altri, si rifugiava nei suoi gadget, nei suoi interessi. Oggi un sacco di persone fanno lo stesso, incollate agli schermi di smartphone e tablet anche in situazioni conviviali, e la cosa viene tollerata e considerata normale.

L’altro effetto collaterale è direttamente collegato al discorso che facevo all’inizio: l’élite di tecnofili è riuscita a riscrivere le regole di ‘ciò di cui è importante parlare’, e di cosa è importante parlare? Ma di tutte queste piccole passioni, ossessioni, interessi iperspecifici da nerd, ovvio. Articoli interminabili su come fare il caffè con una certa macchina o con un determinato metodo, prove comparative di cinque tastiere meccaniche con osservazioni sul suono dei tasti di ciascuna che farebbero impallidire un audiofilo, disquisizioni sulle proporzioni geometriche delle icone di iOS 7 che a confronto Infinite Jest di David Foster Wallace sembra un Bignami.[1]

Non nego che alcune di queste cose siano in effetti interessanti (e a differenza di Fabrizio, personalmente trovo molto interessanti le lunghe recensioni di Mac OS X scritte da John Siracusa, perché mi permettono di espandere le conoscenze di qualcosa che mi interessa da vicino), come non nego di aver scritto io stesso articoli di questo tenore in passato. Quel che mi sembra assurdo, in tutta onestà, è l’importanza, è l’attenzione che ricevono, a scapito di argomenti e problematiche che — facendo un passo indietro e usando il buonsenso — sarebbe forse più importante discutere. Ribadisco: non sto dicendo che oggi in Internet non di discute abbastanza dei massimi sistemi, perché con un po’ di ricerca si possono trovare siti e forum dove non si parla d’altro. Sto semplicemente notando come nei luoghi più frequentati della blogosfera tecnologica ultimamente sembra non si parli d’altro che dei minimi sistemi, per così dire. 

Di qui il secondo tweet che scrissi a Fabrizio: 

2. La blogosfera tecnologica sembra sempre più schiava delle regole dell’entertainment: concentriamoci sullo svago innanzitutto.

E il terzo:

3. Non dico che parlare di app, giochi e servizi cloud sia sbagliato, ma si crea un circolo vizioso dove il pubblico non vuole altro.

Forse quel concentriamoci sullo svago è impreciso e generico (del resto un tweet non lascia molto spazio alle spiegazioni), però è innegabile come moltissimi siti e blog di opinionisti tecnologici siano affetti da un certo tipo di feticismo per gadget e software. Capisco che in un certo senso è inevitabile, specie in quei casi dove il sito è espressamente dedicato alla presentazione di programmi e applicazioni. La parte che mi lascia un po’ esterrefatto è l’indiscusso trionfo di questi feticismi, di questa iperspecializzazione. Al punto che oggi non puoi dire di essere ‘appassionato di tipografia’, per esempio, se non hai un blog dove non parli d’altro, se non hai un blog con articoli in cui tratti nei minimi dettagli le 48 varianti dell’Helvetica, se non hai un blog in cui postare la notizia del rilascio di una nuova famiglia di caratteri sessanta secondi dopo il rilascio stesso.

Distaccarsi da questo modus operandi oggi significa praticamente rimanere nell’oscurità (all’interno della [blogo]sfera tecnologica, intendo dire). Parlare di tecnologia con un certo distacco significa essere ‘luddisti’ e ‘non essere al passo coi tempi’ e ‘aver paura del progresso’. Criticare il blogger famoso perché non ci si capacita di come il suo insulso blog possa avere il successo che ha significa per forza ‘essere gelosi’ di quel successo e scatenare una discussione in cui tutti si concentrano sulla tua ‘gelosia’ e a nessuno viene il dubbio che magari quel tal blogger famoso scrive davvero un blog poco sostanzioso, in fondo. 

Come riassumevo nel quarto tweet a Fabrizio:

4. È in un certo senso la vittoria dell’iperspecializzazione, in cui un ambito iperspecifico travolge e rende noiosi i fondamentali.

Fabrizio è stato criticato perché in molti, da quel che mi è sembrato di capire, hanno interpretato la sua posizione come quella di uno che sbotta: Piantiamola di scrivere sciocchezze e di parlare di sciocchezze e iniziamo a occuparci di cose serie e molto più importanti! Per come la vedo io, Fabrizio dice anche questo, ma in realtà credo che lui voglia più che altro evidenziare la progressiva distorsione che si sta manifestando agli alti vertici della blogosfera tecnologica. Forse non si tratta tanto di smettere di scrivere e di parlare di sciocchezze (il Web è grande e ognuno ha diritto di parlare di quel che vuole fin nei più minuti dettagli, e ognuno ha diritto di seguire chi vuole e di aiutare chi vuole a vivere del proprio blog), ma di ridimensionare l’eccessiva importanza che diamo a certe discussioni e tematiche in ambito tecnologico, o per lo meno di riconoscere apertamente certe cose per quelle che sono — problemi da Primo Mondo — e certi personaggi per quel che sono — nerd affetti da disturbi ossessivi-compulsivi e da tunnel vision, una visione un po’ ristretta della realtà.

 


 

  • 1. Tutte cose scritte da persone che poi chiedono consigli su Twitter su come cambiare i pannolini o che tipo di lampadine comprare per il salotto.

 

A week with the iPad-as-laptop setup

Tech Life

iPad as lightweight laptop

Recently I had to fly to Italy to visit my parents for a small family emergency, and I decided to bring with me just my iPad 3, an improvised stand (which is actually a bookstand), and the Apple Wireless Keyboard that’s usually connected to my G4 Cube. My workload was moderate at the time, nevertheless I wanted to really give a try to the ‘iPad as laptop’ setup. In the past, especially when the long-standing ‘consumption vs. creation’ debate was raging, I already tried to use my iPad as a lightweight working machine, but the results were rather underwhelming. My first impressions at the time were that, while the iPad can be used to do some work, I found it awkward to do the kind of work I do. As I explained in My moderate scepticism about the Post-PC era, the two main reasons it was hard for me to work on the iPad were the cramped workspace (I simply need a larger screen real estate than what the iPad provides) and the spatial arrangement:

Apart from certain iOS text editors/word processors with an integrated Web browser, working on the iPad means uni-tasking. While this is a great concept in theory […] in practice I feel a kind of constraint which I usually don’t feel when I’m working on the Mac. When I do translation work, in particular, I simply need to have the main screen split at least in two areas, one with the original document, the other with my translation. These two areas may be just two windows inside the same application or, more often, two separate documents open in different applications. Arranging such workspace on a Mac is trivial. On an iPad, not so much. […] In other words, I still very much need an interface with multiple overlapping windows, because while it’s not ‘multitasking’ in a machine sense, it’s just that kind of ‘human multitasking’ where you need to keep an eye on multiple elements appearing simultaneously on a (big) screen.

I wanted to give this setup another try because this time I had the opportunity to perform a more in-depth test by using a physical external keyboard, rather than the iPad’s virtual one. 

The wireless keyboard and usability considerations

The Apple Wireless Keyboard turned out to be both a relief and a source of (moderate) frustration. A relief, because during iMessage sessions with my wife back home and for word processing tasks, having an external keyboard meant having a bit more breathing room on the screen. The frustration came essentially from the generally poor key mapping and user-interaction obscurity.

If Apple bothered more to increase compatibility between iOS and an input device the company itself produces, using the iPad as a lightweight laptop would be a better, more fulfilling experience overall. For instance, why not have the Enter key (or a combination such as Option-Enter or Command-Enter) work the same way it works on the Mac, where it can be used as confirmation in dialog boxes? When using Messages on the iPad, I could write my messages on the physical keyboard, but had to reach the screen and tap on Send every damn time. Having full keyboard support in instances like this could be a time-saver. It’s just natural to hit Enter as confirmation (‘send message’) and I often found myself pausing to remember I had to split the action of writing (hands on keyboard) from the action of sending (hand on screen to interact via touch).

But the best keyboard shortcut Apple could implement when using an Apple keyboard with iOS devices is, in my opinion, Command-Tab to activate the multitasking interface. I believe that, by now, every Mac user’s muscle memory has Command-Tab ingrained as a means to quickly switch between different active apps (and — correct me if I’m wrong — even Windows users have a similar shortcut memorised). I certainly have: while working on the iPad I can’t enumerate the number of times my fingers instinctively hit Command-Tab to switch from, say, iA Writer, to Mail or Safari. Having to reach the Home button and double click it every time became rapidly a pain and another unwanted interruption of the workflow.

As for the user-interaction obscurity I was mentioning before, I had to discover certain key mappings by blindly trying out different keys. This way I found that the Eject key shows/hides the virtual keyboard, and — more importantly for those like me who use different international keyboards — that Command-Space switches from one keyboard layout to the other (and here I thought it could be used to quickly invoke Spotlight, like it does on Macs…). I guess that if you really want to use an external wireless keyboard with the iPad, you’ll find that dedicated third-party products may be better than Apple’s offerings, which — let me reiterate — is a bit of a paradox.

So, a week with just the iPad, how was it?

I know there are people out there who have been able to actually replace their laptop with an iPad as their main work machine. After a week of moderate-to-intense usage, especially with the aid of an external keyboard, I certainly understand the appeal more than I did a few months back. The iPad + keyboard + stand is a very compact and lightweight setup (even lighter if you have an iPad Air). What I’ve learnt with my recent experience is that you definitely can do more on an iPad than just basic consumption-oriented stuff like reading news, watching movies/videos, browsing the Web, looking at photos, and so on. If your work doesn’t require you to constantly jump between different applications and doesn’t require you to have different windows open at the same time and to keep an eye on a part of the interface (an app in background, for example) while working on another, then using an iPad with this kind of setup is certainly feasible. But I wouldn’t venture to say it’s a pleasure or a particularly enjoyable experience overall. 

I work essentially with text, so I should be an ideal candidate to prove that one can just work from an iPad leaving the Mac behind. However, as I wrote in that article I mentioned at the beginning, for my translation work I need a bigger screen and the freedom of spatial arrangement that only a Mac allows. A typical translation workflow for me involves having at least one browser open at all times, an application to handle PDF files, two different text editors, an FTP client to send/retrieve files, sometimes a separate offline technical dictionary or glossary, and sometimes (if the client so requires) a proprietary software to input my translation/localisation directly. As you can imagine, such workspace needs a certain number of open windows and a healthy amount of app switching. Even working with good iOS replacements of all these pieces of software would result in a slower, more awkward workflow. 

During my iPad-only week I translated a couple of articles, and while I managed to complete the task, the experience was far from seamless. I found Daedalus Touch to be a decent tool for the job: by putting the original document and the new document with my translation in the same virtual stack of documents, I could switch from document A to document B and back with just a swipe, but often I had to reposition the original document because the app didn’t remember which paragraph I was working on. Another useful feature in Daedalus has been the integrated browser, so I could look up words in online dictionaries without switching to another app. So, as I said, I could complete the task and do the job. Was it comfortable or enjoyable? Not really.

(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.)

The iPad is a fantastic and very capable device, and can definitely be used to do some work. I think it’s awesome that some people — Federico Viticci comes to mind — have been able to switch to an iPad as their main machine for work and leisure. I can understand how liberating it may feel. I believe that Apple could turn the iPad into an even more independent device if iOS had a better support for external keyboards, especially Apple’s wireless keyboards, borrowing some major shortcuts and paradigms from OS X to make for a more frictionless experience during long sessions with an external keyboard. 

For me, the iPad is a great ’emergency’ device, meaning I can adjust to it as being my only device for work in extreme cases; but the most fitting role of the iPad in my devices’ ecosystem is exactly where Steve Jobs meant for it to be when he introduced it in 2010 — filling the gap between the smartphone and the laptop. To close with a metaphor, the iPad can fight alone just fine, but it fights best as my MacBook Pro’s trusty sidekick.

In-app purchases: a matter of perception

Software

In recent times, the number of ‘free’ iOS apps featuring In-app purchases I’ve encountered has definitely increased. Many of them are games, but it’s not uncommon to find utility, productivity or even photo apps as well. Apparently, this is happening because the so-called freemium model is having success and more people are downloading more apps. The reasoning behind this model is not entirely wrong: since it’s still not possible to offer demo or trial versions of an app in the App Store, the ‘free with In-app purchases’ workaround gives developers a way to make people try their software with limited functionality (limits greatly vary for each app), and the In-app purchases are a way to unlock parts of the app or to add expansions that make it even more useful or versatile.

How such method is implemented is another story. (I’m about to make some examples, but first, a disclaimer: I have picked these apps simply because they help me make a point; I’ve picked them among the latest offerings on the App Store, and there’s nothing personal behind my choices. I’m just illustrating a trend, not pointing fingers for the sake of pointing fingers.)

Let me be clear: current buying trends may favour the freemium model, but I dislike it, and I generally prefer apps that make me pay up front without having to buy one or more extra building blocks to achieve full functionality. This is particularly true with games. (More about this later.)

Usually, non-game apps with In-app purchases tend to be reasonable with what you can do with the app in its basic form before you feel compelled to unlock more features via an In-app purchase. Sometimes you even feel the app meets your needs without having to purchase a single extra. Sometimes In-app purchases have so low a price that you just buy without hesitation (typical example: €0.89 to get rid of ads). 

A recent example of what I think is a well-balanced app with regard to functionality in its basic form before one starts feeling it’s time to make the In-app purchase, is Curator, an iPad app that lets you “Collect and see your thoughts regardless of whether they are websites, text or images.” Your ‘visual notes’ are organised in tiled boards and the app lets you create up to five boards before you need to make a $6.99/€5.99 In-app purchase to have unlimited boards. Five boards may seem a very tight limit, but unless you have a multitude of ideas and projects to organise, you’ll see that Curator gives you enough room to realise whether you really need the In-app purchase.

When In-app purchases are reasonably and thoughtfully implemented, I really don’t mind the freemium model that much. Why is that? As the title of this article goes, it’s a matter of perception. Especially with games, where the In-app purchase situation is getting out of hand, in my opinion. I’ll be blunt: there are some games in the App Store with an In-app purchase system that seems to be designed to rip people off. I’ve often sided with developers and, as a power user, I do understand the amount of work necessary to develop a complex application or a high-quality game. Those of you who have been reading my blog for a while know that I’ve always endorsed paying for software, so I’m not complaining about In-app purchases because I just want to enjoy something for free. But the ways certain games drive you to make In-app purchases in order to advance or unlock features that are necessary to complete the experience, well, make the developers behind them look like scam artists.

So, when I land on an iOS game info sheet on the App Store either after following a recommendation, or because I notice a featured game that looks interesting, and the game is labelled ‘free’ but ‘Offers In-App Purchases’, I immediately scroll down to the In-App Purchases section of the info sheet and examine them. It’s fairly easy to sense whether they’re designed to make you waste your money or not. If that’s the case, I’ll just ignore the game (or the app) and will look for a similar game or app which makes me pay in advance but doesn’t involve In-app purchases. 

I know, I may end up spending more money this way, and I may risk paying, say, €4.99 up front for an app that turns out to be not that useful (or a game that ultimately disappoints), but to me that feels like money better spent. To me, that app or game feels ‘more honest’ than something that’s basically unusable or not enjoyable without spending a little fortune in In-app purchases. Take two very recent games that have been very prominently featured in the App Store: Oceanhorn and Clumsy Ninja. Oceanhorn is $8.99/€7.99 up front and doesn’t involve In-app purchases. Clumsy Ninja is free, but take a look at the In-app purchases:

#alttext#

(Not shown, a tenth In-app purchase, Cart of Coins, that costs €26.99.)

Now, which of the two I’m more likely to purchase? (And what about you?) I have no doubt that the guys who developed Clumsy Ninja are great developers, and that Clumsy Ninja is a fun, innovative game. But that In-app purchase structure completely changes whatever positive impression I may have of the game. (By the way, my wife downloaded it on her iPad 2, and the game is really fun and runs quite well even on that hardware. But it also becomes repetitive rather quickly unless you start making In-app purchases to advance in the training of that cute ninja.)

And it’s a pity, really, because games like Clumsy Ninja are really well done and deserve to be purchased, but not with such In-app purchase schemes that inevitably end up tainting the overall experience.[1]

 


 

  • 1. Let me reiterate: I’ve chosen Oceanhorn and Clumsy Ninja as fresh examples of different approaches. There are many other games in the App Store like them. To make another example: I bought Device 6 without hesitation, and avoided Real Racing 3 for the same reasons I avoided Clumsy Ninja.

 

The Flux+Flap iPad case

Briefly

#alttext#

Apologies for the animated GIF, but it’s probably the best way to convey what I love most about this iPad case. 

The Flux+Flap iPad case is another Kickstarter project which got my attention, and something I’m seriously considering for my iPad 3. At the time of writing, the project has already met and surpassed its $35,000 goal with 34 days to go, so it will be funded on December 26. (The estimated delivery is April 2014.)

I urge you to take a good look at the project’s page and especially at the introductory video, which shows exactly how the Flux+Flap works. The case is made of high-grade thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) and durable polycarbonate, which ensures great durability. In short, here’s what I like about it:

  • It lets you prop the iPad at virtually any angle and, more importantly, makes sure the iPad remains firmly positioned at the angle of your choice, thanks to its PositionPlus™ system of magnets.
  • It doesn’t force you to use your iPad in a horizontal orientation, like a lot of other iPad cases out there. As you can see in the video, you can change orientation on the fly and the Flux+Flap case still does its thing.
  • You can easily remove the flap when you don’t need it, making for a less awkward handling of the iPad when a cover’s flap would only get in your way.
  •