Verifone Rips Off Square with Sail Reader

/

I’ve written in the past about Verifone’s malevolent tendencies toward my favorite payment processor, Square. Now, Verifone has come out with their own card reader that works with iOS and Android devices via the headphone jack, and they call it Sail.

This thing looks like they took Square’s handsome reader and added a giant dingus on the back. I carry my Square reader in the little coin pocket of my jeans. I have no idea where I would carry this turd from Verifone. Also, their screenshots of their digital receipts look almost identical to Square’s.

It looks like the percentage per transaction is the same as Square’s, but Verifone also offers a lower 1.95% if you pay $10/month. Maybe that will be attractive to some folks. I wonder if Verifone still requires a merchant account? Square never has.

All in all, this move tells me that Square has been eating a significant portion of Verifone’s lunch, and Verifone is scared that it will go a little hungry.

¶ The 7-inch Apple "Tablet"

/

There has been a lot of buzz lately about a 7-inch Apple tablet — specifically a 7.85-inch tablet — supposedly in the works in Cupertino.

I’ve been thinking about such a tablet for a while now, and wondered whether such a thing, if brought to market, would be labeled as part of the iPad family. To me, it makes far more sense to move the iPod touch product line up to this mid-range screen size.

Odi Kosmatos crunched some numbers and discovered that the difference between 7-inches and 7.85-inches is everything:

Perhaps you’ve read these Steve Jobs quotes before, they go something like this:

“The 7-inch form factor is not a good size for tablet applications” and “7-inch tablets should come with sandpaper, so that users can file down their fingers so they can use them.“

Note the words in bold.

Every rumor and theory about a smaller iPad I have seen seems to claim it will be 7.85″ with a 1024×768 screen. If that were the case, Steve Jobs would be right on the money with the above quotes. A 7.85″ 1024×768 display would be appropriate if the smaller tablet were designed to run iPad applications, because these applications could run unscaled on the device, at a 1:1 pixel ratio. However, the PPI of that 7.85″ screen would be 163. But the size of the user interface elements on iPad applications are tailored for a 132 PPI screen. If squeezed into 163 PPI, every button and control would become smaller, harder to accurately touch. Hence the need for sandpaper.

The same argument applies if the 7.85″ tablet had a retina display with the same resolution as the new iPad’s 2048×1536. It would have 326 PPI, but the UI elements of retina iPad applications are designed for 264 PPI. Sandpaper required.

But consider if the new tablet had a 7″ screen. What’s so special about 7″? A couple of very interesting things.

A 7″ diagonal screen (7.08″ to be exact) just happens to be the exact size of two by two iPod touch retina displays. That’s a 4″ x 6″ display surface. An iPod touch screen has 326 PPI. The 7″ screen would also have 326 PPI just like iPhones and iPods. This would yield a resolution of 1920 x 1280. This resolution would be able to run current retina iPhone applications pixel perfect using the traditional 4:1 pixel scaling, like retina displays do with non-retina apps.

What’s so special about that? By running iPhone applications on a larger screen, as opposed to running iPad applications on a smaller screen, you don’t need the sandpaper anymore. Heck, if you have fat fingers, you’ll rejoice. Larger touch targets are just easier to hit, but still look amazing, especially text, which will be drawn using the full 1920 x 1280 resolution. Anyone that finds the iPod touch or iPhone screen slightly cramped would love it, and could continue to enjoy amazing apps like iMovie, iPhoto, and other apps designed for iPhone.

I have no doubt a 7.85-inch tablet-like device exists in Apple’s labs. I also have no doubt a 7.08-inch device exists. Of course Apple plays around with different approaches to products. I’m sure Apple has both a larger iPod and a smaller iPad, and they are testing which is best.

Everyone has focused on the smaller iPad because the iPad is the new hotness. I am much more interested in what a larger iPod would bring to the mid-range.

Here’s how I see it:

  • The iPhone needs to fit in your hand and your pocket comfortably, hence its 3.5-inch screen.
  • The iPod touch, to date, has been modeled after the iPhone. This is mainly due to transitioning from the old iPod classic size and to simplify software design. Apps made for the iPhone work on the iPod touch. Simple.
  • The iPad is great, and its large screen, while not as portable as some would like, is comparable to a glossy magazine in both size and quality. Its keyboard is very comfortable in landscape, and in portrait, if you split the keyboard.
  • There seems to be plenty of people that want something larger than an iPhone but not as large as an iPad.

That last bullet point is where I see the opportunity for the iPod to move to. I think iPad apps would feel cramped. But if iPhone/iPod interfaces could be scaled up at retina resolution to a 7-inch screen, I think that would satisfy most people desiring a mid-range screen. Thumb-typing would still be comfortable. Text and pictures would be sharp. Developers wouldn’t need to rewrite the book again. And, most of all, the iPod line would be given new life.

When the first iPad was announced, it was derided by many as being “just a big iPod touch”. That clearly has not been the case, because software differentiated it. But does that mean there isn’t a market for an actual “big iPod touch”? I think a 7-inch retina display iPod would grab the corner of the market that Amazon is currently aiming at with the Kindle Fire. It isn’t a full-featured tablet, like an iPad. It isn’t a full telecommunication device, like an iPhone. But it is the best of both worlds for certain people — the people who want a little more screen than an iPhone but want more pocketability than an iPad.

For instance, my three-year-old son uses a second-generation iPod touch filled with kid games, educational apps, children’s books, and Pixar movies. He usually uses it for an hour or two after his nap, and he loves it. But, boy, does he look at my iPad with envious eyes. He loves the larger screen. I do not love him toting around an iPad that is as big as his entire torso.

A 7-inch iPod would be fantastic for him. It’s the perfect size for a young child. I imagine there are many adults who would enjoy it as well.

All-in-all, if Apple is planning to bring a device with a screen in the 7-inch ballpark to market, I think I’d rather see the iPod touch grow up a little, rather than the iPad get squeezed into a smaller screen.

¶ iPad Neue

/

The New iPad. Plain and simple. To the point. This is not a name that is inappropriate, as iPad HD would have implied — HD doesn’t do the chief quality of the new device justice. This is also not a name implying succession, as iPad 3 would have.

No, this name has a distinct purpose. Not to merely be the next in an already established lineage, but to set a new standard for the forthcoming lineage. The New iPad.

There is — usually — a lot of thought that goes into a name. My wife and I, when she was pregnant with our son, chose a name with purpose. We wanted him to know that great care and meticulous detail was put into his name. I hope the meaning of his name serves as a guide for him throughout his life.

Many people have been complaining about the name Apple chose for the latest iPad yesterday — that it is simply “iPad” or, if you will, “the new iPad”. Well, much like my wife and I thought long and hard about the character and message we wanted our son’s name to impress upon him as he ages, I have to believe the people at Apple took the same care with naming something so dear to their hearts. Why do I think this? It’s what Tim Cook said in his closing at yesterday’s event (strong emphasis is mine):

“Only Apple could deliver this kind of innovation, in such a beautiful, integrated, and easy-to-use way. It’s what we love to do. It’s what we stand for. And across the year, you’re going to see a lot more of this kind of innovation. We are just getting started.”

These people are not just software and hardware engineers. No, they are artists, and aluminum, silicon, glass, bits, and pixels are the vehicle through which they express their craft.

The new iPad improves upon the past in the field of vision, and it does this primarily in two ways. The improved optics of the camera, putting on par with the iPhone, and the Retina display. It can capture what you see, and show it to you in a way that will move you to wonderment.

Everything else the new iPad brings — super-fast mobile data, faster graphics, more efficient Bluetooth, — that’s all on the inside. It’s impressive to some, but many will not think of these things.

What we see is what we will remember. This is the new foundation Apple will build upon.

¶ iPad 3 Event Predictions for Fun and Profit

/

Some quick and dirty educated guesses for tomorrow’s event:

  • A new iPad with a retina display. Probably will have a lot of other neat stuff, but I’m stopping at retina display because that is the only thing I am truly positive about.
  • iPhoto for iPad. Heck, maybe for iPhone and iPod, too. It’s the missing piece to complement iMovie and GarageBand.
  • iOS 5.1 with easier access to the camera from the lock screen, plus other goodies.
  • A new Apple TV set-top box that does 1080p, still at $99.
  • Not sure on this, but I’d love to see an Apple universal remote with a touchscreen that could control all my home entertainment crap.

I think it is quite a modest list, and I’m feeling pretty confident on everything but the remote. See you all tomorrow.

¶ The Disappearing Home Button Caper

/

As is natural with Apple press invitations for events, folks like to look for hidden meaning in them. Many have noticed that yesterday’s invitation for next week’s iPad event doesn’t show a home button on the iPad’s bezel.

And people have lost their minds over it.

My Twitter timeline has been filled with people thinking Apple is going to kill off the home button next week. Conversing with some folks, I’ve heard that the multitouch gestures that can be enabled in Settings on an iPad running iOS 5 were the beta test for getting rid of the home button.

So many seem to think Apple will either rely on gestures, or introduce a capacitive home button. One even suggested that there may be a capacitive home button on each side, so the iPad will become orientation agnostic.

I have some arguments for why I think Apple will not be saying goodbye to the home button as we know it.

The Argument Against Gestures-Only

iOS 5 introduced the ability to turn on multitouch gestures to control quickly changing between apps, revealing or hiding the multitask bar, and closing an app. These are all accomplished by swiping four or five fingers right or left, up, down, and doing a full hand pinch, respectively.

I can’t remember if the multitouch gestures are enabled by default or not on iOS 5, but let’s say they are, since they would have to be if the iPad dropped a home button of any sort. How many people do you think actually know they exist? I seriously doubt my mom knows about them. I am certain my father-in-law doesn’t. And you know why? They aren’t obvious.

The home button is right there, on the front of the device, beckoning to be pushed. It doesn’t take much to figure out its primary function — closing an app and taking you home. The button even has the rounded square outline of an app on it.

Don’t get me wrong, I love the gestures to switch apps and close an app quickly without having to tap the home button. I use them all the time. But you know what else I use all the time on my Mac? Keyboard shortcuts.

Complex multitouch gestures are the keyboard shortcuts of an iPad.

Not to mention that complex gestures involving four or five fingers would really suck if you were missing a couple fingers. And if you take a stroll through the accessibility settings on OS X or iOS, you’ll quickly realize that Apple greatly caters to folks with disabilities.

Also, if Apple exiles the home button from the iPad, it would make sense to do the same with the next iPhone. How in the world would you easily achieve a complex gesture on a 3.5-inch screen in order to go home? And how would you do that with one hand?

The Argument Against a Capacitive Home Button

This is where the people vouching for a capacitive home button come in. The home button is still there, it’s just not a moving part, and may be nearly invisible to the eye until you touch the target area.

Apple tried doing capacitive buttons on the iPod back in 2003. The third-generation iPod was fully capacitive. I had one. It was okay. It was awful trying to do anything while in the car, say, trying to pause the music. You don’t want to take your eyes off the road, so you fumble your hand on the iPod, and before you know it you’ve gone forward three tracks instead of pausing it because there wasn’t tactile feedback.

This was solved with the click-wheel, which has remained unchanged throughout the years on any iPod that didn’t go touchscreen, or the iPod shuffle, which never had a click-wheel.

Maybe a capacitive home button would work with today’s devices. It is only one button that more or less performs one primary function, and its secondary functions could be replicated easily.

But what about accidentally turning on the screen? I wake my iPhone by tapping the home button far more than I do my clicking the sleep/wake button. If the home button went capacitive, wouldn’t the screen on an iPhone activate in pockets? You can control a touchscreen through your t-shirt with your finger, so why couldn’t a capacitive home button activate against your leg through your pocket?

The solution would be to remove the ability of the home button to activate the screen. That’d be awful.

I definitely think the home button could use some work. It doesn’t feel like it was designed to withstand so many clicks for a couple years or more.

I don’t think the solution lies with making the home button touch sensitive nor removing it entirely for non-obvious complex gestures.

I think the home button is here to stay for some time.

¶ When Alliance Becomes Reliance

/

When the iPhone was released, there was a lot of love between Apple and Google. They were like Batman and Robin, a dynamic duo.

Needless to say, since Google started down the path of Android, the alliance has been broken. And now, Apple has developed a reliance on Google for some of its core iOS apps — namely Maps and YouTube.

Of the two of those, Maps is the most prominent. To say iOS would be at a disadvantage without Google Maps would be an understatement. But what is the alternative? Form an uneasy alliance (and another reliance) on Microsoft’s Bing? I don’t think so.

Apple has acquired a couple mapping companies over the past few years. And we’ve seen a trend of Apple pulling things it considers essential a little closer under the umbrella. For instance, designing its own A4 and A5 chips, and iCloud, which is surely pulling some folks off of syncing their data through Google.

And then there are things that are inessential. When a service isn’t essential, Apple seems to have no problem integrating with other services that do something very well. Take the YouTube app, for instance. Sure, it is built-in, but that doesn’t mean it is permanent. That app could easily disappear entirely, be renamed and refocused on Vimeo, or be rolled into the Videos app and offer users a choice of YouTube or Vimeo. It isn’t like Google couldn’t roll out their own YouTube app or just direct people to their mobile site.

We saw more evidence of the breakdown of Apple’s reliance on Google with the OS X Mountain Lion developer preview. As I saw of Daring Fireball, Pocket-lint talked to Apple about the new Share Sheet:

Most interesting of the three is the inclusion of Vimeo over YouTube, a choice that is bound to give the professional video-sharing site a boost in awareness and audience numbers, but also leave users wondering why no Google support from day one?

When asked why there was no YouTube support at the moment in the developer preview, Apple told Pocket-lint: “We have Vimeo, and we don’t have YouTube.”

If you ask me, Vimeo has a much better experience anyway.

It is clear to me that Apple is slowly excising Google’s prominence from their two operating systems. I am confident one of the main features of iOS 6 will be an overhauled Maps app that no longer relies on Google. I expect Maps to become developed fully in-house by Apple.

Mountain Lion is embracing Vimeo over YouTube, and it wouldn’t surprise me if iOS went that way, too.

The alliance ended years ago. Soon, the reliance will be over.

¶ Lion, Refined

/

I awoke this morning, reached for my iPhone, and began my ritual of reading some recent tweets to get oriented with the day’s early news. I saw a tweet by Jason Snell that announced he had a hands-on first look of OS X Mountain Lion, coming this summer.

I honestly thought it was a joke, at first. I tapped the link, expecting a Rick Astley video on YouTube, but was met with a very thorough and official looking article at Macworld complete with official looking screenshots. So I got up and went across the hall to my Mac, opened it, and fired up Apple’s site.

Yep, it’s official. OS X Mountain Lion is real. And it’s coming this summer.

iOS-ification, Refined

Apple is a company of habits. And one that is plain to see is their habit of big change, then iterate. Think of the iPhone 3G, then the iteration of the 3GS; the iPhone 4, then the iteration of the iPhone 4S. On the Mac, we can look back at OS X Leopard, which brought big changes, then Snow Leopard, which refined those new technologies; and then Lion, which was, again, a big change, and now Mountain Lion, which is a refinement of those changes.

When we got a sneak peek of Lion in October of 2010, Apple said they were bringing the best of iOS “back to the Mac”. And what we saw was the beginning of the iOS-ification of OS X. We saw things like the Mac App Store, Launchpad, Full-screen Apps, FaceTime, and a slew of new gestures come to the Mac, and they had an iOS scent to them.

Where Snow Leopard gave polish to Leopard’s underlying foundational technologies and some tweaks to newer UI, Mountain Lion is refining and polish the “back to the Mac” features introduced in Lion.

Where Lion brought us some of the way to having many of iOS’s concepts on the Mac, Mountain Lion is bringing us a lot closer.

iCloud

iCloud didn’t make its appearance on Lion until the 10.7.2 update. At that time it usurped MobileMe and took over the syncing functions of email, calendars, contacts, bookmarks, notes, and reminders. But its implementation has felt a little lacking. Documents in the Cloud are present in the backend, but there isn’t a user interface for it. Some apps are rolling their own for now.

Mountain Lion fixes that. Documents in the Cloud are now a new section of the Open/Save Dialog. Click the On This Mac button, and you get the traditional Finder-based file system. Click the iCloud button, and the dialog changes to the same linen and iOS-folder look that you can find in Apple’s iOS iWork apps.

iCloud is also featured prominently when set up a new Mac, or create a new user account. Sign in right at the beginning to pull down Store credentials, contacts, calendars, reminders, notes, email, etc.

Messages

One of my favorite features of iOS 5 is iMessage, which is integrated into Messages, which used to just handle SMS/MMS. iMessage allows iOS users to communicate with other iOS users via text, pictures, or videos, free of charge.

By far, the best part of iMessage is being able to start a conversation on my iPad while at home, and pick right up with it on my iPhone if I need to head out the door, with all the context of the entire conversation present on both devices.

(The worst part is hearing notifications go off on multiple devices throughout the entire conversation).

In Mountain Lion, iChat has been rebranded as Messages and gains iMessage support. It’s awesome. How do I know? Because Apple has released Messages as a public beta for Lion users.

It really is nice to have it on the Mac, other than now I have three devices dinging at me for message notifications.

Notifications

Speaking of notifications, Apple is bringing Notification Center to the Mac in Mountain Lion. Swipe on the trackpad or click a new button in the menu bar to reveal the Notification Center. The desktop slides off toward the left a little to reveal it as a linen layer underneath the desktop. It looks just like it does in iOS 5.

The banner notifications appear over the desktop descending from the upper right, just like Growl does. And let’s be honest, Growl just got Sherlocked.

Notes, Reminders, Contacts, & Calendars

From an article I wrote last month:

I do, however, have one little annoyance about Notes and Reminders — the way they are integrated into the Mac. On iOS, Notes and Reminders get their own apps. On the Mac, they are relegated to being apps within an app. Notes and Reminders are shoehorned into Mail and iCal, respectively.

I would much rather Notes and Reminders have their own apps on the Mac, with similar interfaces to their iOS counterparts. Notes, on its own, could effectively replace the Stickies app on the Mac.

My problem with Notes and Reminders being integrated into other apps is consistency. A great example of consistency between the Mac, iPhone, and iPad is Twitterrific. The app offers the same experience across all three devices. The user never has to question how to do anything on each device. Learn once, apply everywhere.

This is another instance where Mountain Lion refines the iOS-ification that Lion heralded. Notes and Reminders will no longer be shoehorned into Mail and iCal, respectively. They’re getting their own apps that look a lot like their iOS counterparts, with a Mac flair.

Furthering the pursuit of consistency, Address Book and iCal are being renamed to Contacts and Calendars, respectively (and getting a couple usability tweaks in their skeuomorphic UIs).

Sharing

The share button that is prevalent in iOS is going to be more widely used in Mountain Lion. This button will collect appropriate services for sharing content, based on which app you’re using.

For instance, in Safari, you can share a link to Twitter. Twitter, by the way, is also now integrated in OS X like it is in iOS 5. So, when you share something to Twitter, you’ll see the Tweet Sheet.

Another way to share things is via AirPlay. Since my wife & I got an Apple TV last year, there have been a number of occasions where we wished we could mirror our Macs to the Apple TV.

Game Center

Also, Game Center is coming to the Mac, and will allow you to play, on your Mac, against users on other Macs and even iOS devices. I’m not a heavy gamer, so this doesn’t interest me much, but I know a few folks who will love it.

Gatekeeper

Gatekeeper is a new level of security to help protect against malware. It works by only allowing apps that fall within a certain security level to run. It has three levels of security that the user can choose from:

  • Mac App Store: Only apps from the Mac App Store can run. These are the safest apps because the developers are known to Apple and the apps are reviewed by Apple prior to being published to the store.

  • Mac App Store and identified developers: In addition to the Mac App Store, developers who do not want to distribute their apps on the store can obtain a free developer ID from Apple to cryptographically sign their apps.

    Apple’s Gatekeeper site states:

    A developer’s digital signature allows Gatekeeper to verify that their app is not known malware and that it hasn’t been tampered with.

    If an app is discovered to be malware, Apple can revoke that developer’s signature certificate and stop the spread of the malware.

  • Anywhere: This allows apps from anywhere — Mac App Store, signed, or unsigned — to run on a Mac. This is the current behavior in OS X Lion.

This seems to be causing quite a stir among some folks that don’t particularly like Apple. I’ve been seeing a lot of sentiments of “They’re locking down OS X!” and “I’m going to get my data ready to jump ship, just in case”.

I can understand the fear, but I don’t think these people really understand Apple. There are a lot of smart, technologically minded folks who seem to think Apple is going to slowly tighten their grasp on developers until only the walled city of the App Store is left. I’ve also heard the sentiment that once that happens, the Mac is doomed, because developers won’t stand to have 30% of the price of their app gobbled up by Apple.

I couldn’t disagree more with all of that.

The fact that Apple went to the effort to make Gatekeeper at all shows their commitment to indie software development. Albeit, they are committing to secure indie software development. Apple always thinks of its users first, then developers.

One of the most popular OS X software developers in the world, Wil Shipley, seems to think Gatekeeper is the way to go:

(Seriously, go read that article Wil wrote and linked to above).

Simply put, Apple always supports their way, and the standard way. On iOS, they support native, cocoa touch apps via the App Store, and they also fully support (and do the best job at it) web apps. In iBooks, they support their own iBooks format and fully support ePub and PDF. On the Mac, there is the Mac App Store and developer ID and — at the user’s discretion — the old way of unsigned apps.

I firmly believe that Apple’s effort to secure indie app development outside of the App Store indeed secures its existence. If Apple wanted to go Mac App Store only, I don’t think they’d take the “boil a frog” approach. I think they’d just do it, and if you don’t like it, well, so long and thanks for all the fish.

Does Apple prefer that developers go with the Mac App Store? You bet. I’m sure that 30% cut plays a part in the motivation. But I think running a super secure system plays a bigger part. And that in itself will drive the bottom line as more people buy Apple’s technology.

Is there a carrot enticing developers over to the Mac App Store? You bet. Only apps on the Mac App Store can access iCloud and Notification Center.

Is Apple going to shut down indie development outside of the App Store? I seriously doubt it. However, I could see Apple shutting down unsecured indie development on the Mac. Maybe the successor to Mountain Lion will take away that Anywhere option within Gatekeeper, which isn’t a bad thing.

And hey, maybe I’m reading too much into this, but that Gatekeeper icon has one gate closed, and one open. How appropriate.

I have to say, it was an extremely pleasant surprise to be truly surprised by Mountain Lion’s announcement. There wasn’t an inkling of it that I saw in the rumor mill. While the rumor mill can be quite fun, it gets tiring finding out about stuff beforehand and sullies the excitement of when Apple makes an announcement. It was great to see how Apple handled this announcement, which was very different from the past. Be sure to read John Gruber’s account of finding out about Mountain Lion.

I am honestly blown away with how fantastic Mountain Lion looks, and I am going to be one very impatient person until it launches this summer.

¶ A 4-Inch Screen

/

I was just looking at this article over at AppleInsider about a patent application from Apple regarding a touchscreen universal remote. There has been a lot of talk since the debut of Steve Jobs’ biography about Apple releasing an actual television set, rather than the current $99 Apple TV. So, in that sense, a universal TV remote would make sense, right? Heck, it even makes sense for the current form factor if you ask me. Right now I have to dig out a separate remote just to turn my TV on.

Now, there’s also been some talk about the next iPhone having a 4-inch screen, which I just don’t see happening. It would either diminish the crispness of the retina display, or, to keep the pixels per inch at retina quality, a new screen resolution would need to be introduced. This would be a nightmare for developers and designers, as they already have to support at least two resolutions for the iPhone. When Apple introduced the retina display, the increased the dimensions by exactly double. This makes it easier to design an interface.

What if the 4-inch screen rumor isn’t destined for the iPhone?

What if it is for a touchscreen universal remote that doesn’t run App Store apps?

Think about that.

¶ A Fistful of Dollars

/

Apple PR:

Apple® today announced financial results for its fiscal 2012 first quarter which spanned 14 weeks and ended December 31, 2011. The Company posted record quarterly revenue of $46.33 billion and record quarterly net profit of $13.06 billion, or $13.87 per diluted share. These results compare to revenue of $26.74 billion and net quarterly profit of $6 billion, or $6.43 per diluted share, in the year-ago quarter. Gross margin was 44.7 percent compared to 38.5 percent in the year-ago quarter. International sales accounted for 58 percent of the quarter’s revenue.

The Company sold 37.04 million iPhones in the quarter, representing 128 percent unit growth over the year-ago quarter. Apple sold 15.43 million iPads during the quarter, a 111 percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter. The Company sold 5.2 million Macs during the quarter, a 26 percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter. Apple sold 15.4 million iPods, a 21 percent unit decline from the year-ago quarter.

That’s insane.

This breaks previous company records for all of the following:

  • Revenue
  • Profit
  • iPhones sold
  • iPads sold
  • Macs sold

To say it was a great Christmas in Cupertino would be a gross understatement.

Here are some other tidbits to chew on from various sources.

From MacRumors:

  • Set new records for desktops and portables, up 26% year-over-year versus 0% growth for entire PC industry.
  • iPhone represented 124% year-over-year growth vs 40% growth for industry according to IDC.
  • iPad revenue up 99% year-over-year.
  • 1.5 million iPads are in use across educational institutions.
  • 315 million cumulative iOS device sales. 62 million in December quarter.
  • 85 million iCloud customers signed up.
  • $4 billion to developers cumulatively, $700 million in december quarter.
  • 1.1 million Macs sold vs 851,000 year-over-year.
  • 22,000 visitors per store per week.
  • $97.6 billion in cash and marketable securities.

I picked what I found especially interesting. Their list is much longer (and their graphs paint quite the picture). One more thing from MacRumors’ coverage that I want to point out is this bit from the Q&A:

Q: 4G and larger screens are growing in the market. Has popularity of larger screens on Android phones changed or impacted your view? And 4G, obviously some phones have battery life issues, but what do you think?

A: We just sold 37 million iPhones and could have sold more with the supply. There are a lot of people out there who like what we’re doing.

I still don’t think the rumored 4-inch screen, 4G-enabled iPhone is happening any time soon. First, the 3.5-inch is feels great in your hand, and fits well in most pockets (and certainly better than a larger phone). Second, Apple really cares about battery life, and 4G doesn’t seem up to par yet.

From Farhad Manjoo, via Daring Fireball:

Apple’s profits ($13 billion) exceeded Google’s entire revenue ($10.6 billion).

Surely Google is winning.

And, in related news, Tom Krazit, for PaidContent, via, again, Daring Fireball:

In the first quarter that Verizon Wireless was on board with Apple for an iPhone launch event, the company sold 4.2 million iPhones, accounting for more than half of the 7.7 million smartphones that its customers purchased in the fourth quarter.

That calculates out to 55%. 55% of all the smartphones Verizon sold last quarter were made by Apple. I still get the feeling that Verizon is a little resentful that they needed to carry the iPhone, and I bet that is a burr in their saddle. That number gives Apple a pretty big chip to throw down if they need to.

Also, clearly Google is winning.

MG Siegler:

Every single Android phone that Verizon sells — dozens of models — combined could not outsell the iPhone last quarter. When you consider that Verizon sells plenty of BlackBerrys (and a few Windows Phones here and there) as well, this is even more incredible.

[…]

The only thing not looking good about this post from June of last year is the incorrect assumption that it would take the iPhone 5 to reverse the Android surge. It “only” took the iPhone 4S.

“Only”.

¶ Thoughts on AT&T's Updated Data Plans

/

When I switched to AT&T in 2008 to get the iPhone 3G, the only data plan was a $30/month “unlimited” (read: 5GB) plan. In 2010, right when my wife and I were upgrading to the iPhone 4, AT&T tossed aside the “unlimited” plan, and replaced it with two new plans, as such:

  • DataPlus 200MB at $15/month
  • DataPro 2GB at $25/month

MacRumors reports AT&T has updated its data plans again, going into effect this Sunday, January 22nd. Here’s how the new plans shake out:

  • DataPlus 300MB at $20/month
  • DataPro 3GB at $30/month
  • DataPro 5GB at $50/month (includes mobile hotspot/tethering)

And for iPad 3G users:

  • 250MB for $15/month
  • 3GB for $30/month
  • 5GB for $50/month

Right now, my wife is on the 200MB/month plan and I am on the 2GB/month plan. My wife rarely goes over 100MB on her plan each month, but I know that is because she is conscious of her limit and actively tries not to use her iPhone unless she is on Wi-Fi. I usually hover around 300MB per month in my 3G usage. It would be more (much more) if I were not on Wi-Fi the majority of the time. So the 200MB plan has never been for me. Most months, looking at my history, I could get away with this new 300MB plan. But, in months where I travel, I easily go over 300MB, but rarely over 500MB.

I think I’ll stay on the 2GB plan, which is far more than I need. Maybe I’ll move my wife up to the 300MB, so she can relax a little when she’s off Wi-Fi.

A few things about these plans are churning in my mind, though:

  • The 300MB plan, like the 200MB plan before it, are complete rip-offs compared to the other plans. If $30 gets you 3GB, and $50 gets you 5GB, then doesn’t the math say that $20 should get you 2GB, instead of a piddly 300MB?
  • If there were a $15 plan for, say, 500MB, both my wife and I could have that, and I wouldn’t need to be paying for more data than I use.
  • 3GB is a lot of mobile data. My wife and I could share that and never use all of it in a month. Why do we not have family data plans yet? Hey, AT&T, how about you offer that. You could even call it DataFamily to fit into your nomenclature.
  • If AT&T won’t offer family data plans, they should at least offer rollover data. Rollover minutes have long been part of their marketing. With rollover data, my wife and I could both use the lower 300MB plan, and most months we would be filling the rollover bucket. During travel months, like December, we could dip into our little bucket of rollover worry free.

Come on, AT&T, do something for once that helps me save a couple bucks. I know that idea seems foreign to you, but it would help you out, too, because you’d keep my family as a customer, and I would tell others about how flexible your plans are.