“iBooks list view”

The iPad ad shows the iBooks app has already gained a list-view button.

I found it funny and weird when people, earlier this week, debated the propriety of iBooks’ physical-metaphor view and how poorly it would scale to a well-furnished library — because I had never doubted for a second that there would be a way to switch to list view.

C’mon, they make UI mistakes sometimes, but not that bad.

“iPad mute switch magicked into a ’screen rotation lock’ overnight, a flurry of other tidbits emerge”

One of the quirkier details is that what was previously known as the mute switch on the iPad – similar to the one on the iPhone – is now known as the "screen rotation lock" on Apple’s website.

Every iPhone user will shout that it’s awesome, but there’s something very wrong about having the same switch perform two completely different tasks on two sister devices. Also, the iPad is gonna get push notifications (presumably), so it does have a use for a mute switch.

At least that means the OS is gonna support orientation locking and we might get a software switch on the iPhone (which still needs that functionality much more than the iPad ever will).

“Apple’s New Stance On ‘Cookie Cutter’ Apps: Add More Features Or Perish”

Between the developers I spoke to, the consensus was this: Apple doesn’t appear to be opposed to ‘app generators’ and templates per se, but in the last month or so it has started cracking down on basic applications that are little more than RSS feeds or glorified business cards. In short, Apple doesn’t want people using native applications for things that a basic web app could accomplish.

Nevermind the part about pulling the rug from yet another bunch of iPhone-based businesses, as it’s par for the course by now, but this particular rule is bullshit. Some sites have dedicated readers who want to have a shortcut or two on their Springboard — and most users don’t know, or want to know, about manually adding a shortcut from within Safari. They just want to click a link and download an app, because Apple has spent the last year emphasizing that “there’s an app for that.”

I understand, and support, the desire to remove those apps from App Store listings — but not banning them altogether.

If Apple wants to approve everything that can be installed on an iPhone (for security’s sake, let’s say) and doesn’t want to pollute the App Store, here’s a novel idea: just approve the apps in such a way that they don’t appear in listings and search but are only accessible by using the direct URL. Or are they also trying to cut down the in-house testers’ workload?

Ambilight for <video>

I can’t believe this works.

Of course, it doubles or triples the amount of CPU power it takes for my Mac mini to play a video (haven’t even tried on the old iMac), and it’s not very pleasant to watch (do real Ambilight TVs lag so much?), but it’s a nice tech demo for HTML 5.