512 Pixels

It seems like Cult of Mac’s tip worked on my iPhone 4, but it might just be the placebo effect clouding my judgement.

Jonathan S. Geller at BGR:

For starters, we can now confidently say that Apple’s next iPhone will launch in the fall next year, around the same time that this year’s iPhone 4S launched. We have also learned that Apple is planning to use a rubber or plastic material — similar to the material used in the company’s bumper cases — that will be built into the new iPhone case.

The site also says this phone would sport an iPad–2 like back case and a 4-inch screen.

Oh, and they’ve got “iOS 6” and “iPhone 6” as tags on the story. Someone shoot me now.

Come on, TUAW. You can do better than this.

When Steve Jobs unveiled the original iPhone in 2007, it blew every other phone out of the water.

However, some complained that the device lacked 3G connectivity, leaving EDGE and Wi-Fi as the only two options for data connections.

Apple executives said that the power required to use 3G didn’t make the technology worth it. Here’s Steve Jobs, speaking at the O2 iPhone release:

The 3G chipsets that are available to semiconductors work reasonably well except for power. They are real power hogs. So as you know, the handset battery life used to be 5–6 hours for GSM, but when we got to 3G they got cut in half. Most 3G phones have battery lives of 2–3 hours (of talk time).

In 2008, Apple shipped the iPhone 3G. Here’s how the battery life stacked up ¹ between the two models:

iPhone (original)iPhone 3G
(on Edge)iPhone 3G
(on 3G)_Talk Time:_8 hours10 hours5 hours_Standby Time:_250 hours300 hours300 hours_Internet Use:_6 hours(not given)5 hours_Video Playback:_7 hours7 hours7 hours_Audio Playback:_24 hours24 hours24 hours

It seems that Apple attempted to balance out 3G’s hit on battery life by improving 2G battery life, and including the option to disable 3G on demand.² Even so, it’s clear that 3G did take a significant chunk of talk time away while in use.

Fast forward three years, and some people are clamoring for Apple to include 4G³ in the next iPhone (Heck, some wanted it with the release of the iPhone 4S this fall.), but I’m not convinced Apple is going to do so — for the exact same reason it held out on 3G connectivity.

Battery life is important.

In fact, I’d argue that great battery life is one of the features that continues to set Apple’s hardware apart. Here’s Shawn Blanc in his review of the Galaxy Nexus:

If you’re on a road trip and want to use the 4G LTE network to provide you with driving directions, your drive had better be shorter than 4 hours because even when plugged into a car charger, the battery will not last.

That’s just pathetic.

Apple doesn’t do pathetic; it would rather wait something out until the performance is right for an excellent customer experience.

I don’t have any problem with that.

A Brief Footnote Concerning a Possible Solution

I was discussing this the other evening with a friend of mine who has owned several Android phones over the years. He isn’t upgrading from his Motorola Droid X yet because of this battery issue.

A solution he suggested — and that I quite like — is smart 4G. Such a system would use 3G (or even EDGE) to pull data in the background, and only step up to 4G when downloading a large file or streaming video. That way, the user isn’t having to deal with battery issues all day, every day, but still gets the crazy speeds 4G can offer.

Still, I think this solution is probably too complex for Apple to want to include it in an iPhone, but it is an interesting compromise to think about.

If you have some time off this week, watch these videos.

Mikey Campbell at AppleInsider:

A study by retail analysis firm RichRelevance released on Friday notes that iOS devices accounted for the bulk of all online non-desktop sales in 2011, holding just over 92 percent of the market, reports Market Watch.

Wayne, in the interview:

I’m a footnote in someone else’s story.

After the crazy stuff that happened with Netflix this year, why didn’t Reed Hastings lose his job, not just some money?

This afternoon, between Christmas events, we put Josiah down for a nap. As we weren’t home, he had problems falling asleep, so I went to lay down next to him for a bit.

Resting there, I realized today was Josiah’s fourth Christmas. When he was first diagnosed with brain cancer in May 2009, we didn’t know if he’d make it that Christmas, let alone one three and a half years later.

The best present I got this year was to watch him sleep peacefully this afternoon. Merry Christmas, little buddy.

I’m generally not a fan of using an app that re-works a website to be more “mobile-friendly.”

Wikipanion is the exception. It makes browsing Wikipedia articles easy and fast from any iOS device. Since I co-host the world’s most popular Wikipedia-related podcast, you know I’ve played with numerous apps in this category

(While I’ll be looking at the iPad app in this review, the iPhone app is just as useful and well-designed. Note that Wikipanion is not an universal app as of this writing.)

When the app is launched, focus is placed in the search field. The app auto-fills article names after a moment:

One an article is selected, the app can show the page’s contents in the sidebar (or pop-over, in portrait mode). With a simple tap, the app scrolls to that section of the article:

The app also can be used to find related content. This is a great way to get lost on Wikipedia. This view also shows links to find articles based on your current location, or to go to the home page or a random article:

Wikipanion also can save bookmarks and store your browsing history, which can be helpful if you get lost down the rabbit hole.

The app is free, with a premium version (dubbed Wikipanion Plus) that adds a queue feature, offline access for saved articles and the ability to use the app to browse other MediaWiki-powered wikis. The Plus version is $4.99.

Go check out this app. In the months Myke and I have been doing Ungeniused, it has become a very useful tool. It really is that good.

Drew Coffman, weighing in on the curation thing:

I’m thinking the term “curator” shouldn’t be thrown out just yet. What we know as digital curation is such a unique beast that no other word seems to really fit. Traditional curators are often degree-holding specialists trusted with their materials. Translating this idea to the digital world places emphasis on content that I find very good for web culture. It shows that people place real value in the things they love. However, I think there is a requirement for those who use the term - one must provide some unique context or information when displaying their prized possessions. I have a hard time taking digital “curators” seriously when all they do is throw links together. The why is so important to me when it comes to art.

I hadn’t thought about the shift from the traditional to the digital when I wrote my piece, but I think Coffman is right — whatever the term we all land on, there should be requirements attached to it.

J. Eddie Smith:

If you find yourself staring at a problem on a screen—of any size—without taking any action for more than five minutes or so, pen and paper might be your ticket out.

I like this.