WPtouch is the best solution for WordPress blogs. It’s as simple as a plugin installation, and it is very decently polished.

It renders in “mobile” mode only for iPhone/iPod/Android clients. It has an option for those clients to still view the site in “normal” mode. It uses JQuery for various AJAX and visual effects. It just works and looks good while doing it, and I’ve recently installed it on this blog as well.

Many developers were frustrated–and many web developers had our curiosities pleasantly piqued–when Apple initially announced that “software” would be available for the iPhone in the form of Ajax web applications. Naturally, many of the disappointed folks were irritated because the web platform is something that they’re entirely unfamiliar with, probably having backgrounds in Objective C or something similar; probably a minority were disappointed because their target application legitimately could not be powered by HTML and Ajax.

That said, it is indeed a very thought-provoking concept: Using web technology as your application environment. As most web developers will attest to, there honestly isn’t that much that a typical application does that cannot be accomplished with web technology. With the advent of Ajax frameworks, applications built with web technology can have very similar responsiveness and dynamics of a “classic” application. Especially when you remove the burden of cross-browser compatibility, in the iPhone’s case.

But with the iPhone/iPod Touch scenario, it is irritating that the application has to reside in Safari and has to be loaded off the web. It almost feels as if Apple was trying to push something that wasn’t…quite…ready. Something like AIR!

AIR accomplishes everything that Apple was suggesting for the iPhone environment, but for the desktop. Use web technology, but write a “compiled”, stand-alone application that really doesn’t even have to use the web. Use HTML. Use Ajax. Use Flex and Flash. Have a nice encapsulated application on your desktop. Especially when you throw the Flash technology into the platform, it is now a very capable environment for a large variety of applications, without being constrained to the browser. Wouldn’t it be great if that same cross-platform environment, AIR, worked on the iPhone as well?

Oops, Flash technology isn’t currently supported by the iPhone. That is actually another source of contention. And the AIR environment does lose some of its punch without Flash and Flex, even though its HTML/Ajax implementation can do a very decent job with most typical applications.

Steve Jobs has made it clear that he likes the idea of web technology powering iPhone apps. Now, consider some of the facts. Apple announces the iPhone SDK will be released in February, and then fails to deliver. Meanwhile, Flash still isn’t found on the iPhone, and Adobe “invents the wheel” by getting web technology to drive native apps through its work with AIR. Is there a common theme with these events? Perhaps something like: Are Apple and Adobe working together to get the much-needed Flash technology onto the iPhone and, subsequently, releasing an SDK that uses AIR technology, with hooks into the iPhone system just like AIR currently has hooks into the Linux, Windows, and Mac OS X desktop operating systems?

It wouldn’t be the first time Apple has had to wait for its partners, or take the heat for them. For instance, Apple has clearly been taking a lot of heat for many factors of the iPhone that are clearly not in Apple’s interest, but in AT&T’s.

And this scenario would fit the circumstances around Adobe’s development of AIR. Adobe has been working on AIR since well before the iPhone was released, but AIR wasn’t officially released until February 25, 2008. Even if Apple and Adobe were working closely together, there just hasn’t been enough time for AIR to get released and hooks to be developed to provide iPhone-specific functionality in AIR. Adobe has understandably concerned itself with its own business first. With that done, attention can turn to Apple to support them in concluding their own business.

Of course, this prediction is a reflection of my own desires as much as it fits the circumstances. As a developer that uses Adobe technology including Flex and AIR, and an Apple enthusiast for more than 20 years, I would love to see things happen this way. Undoubtedly we will have a clearer idea of Apple’s iPhone development roadmap after this Thursday.

As if the thought of an “iPhone AIR” isn’t confusing enough.

“Just a second, let me double-check that we haven’t received another shipment,” says the Apple salesman. “It looks like we have one 16GB model left. Are you interested?”

“Give it to me!”

Sold. Woohoo!

The iPod is functional currently, but the most worrisome symptom is this very peculiar screen it displayed when trying to sync a few days ago:

I didn’t know what this screen meant, but after a search on Apple’s website, I discovered it is called a Disk Scan Icon. It means that something bad was happening with the hard drive, so the iPod went into a diagnostic mode. The progress bar never moved after 15 minutes, though, so I’m assuming the diagnostics crashed. After a reset, the iPod rebooted normally and worked fine after that.

Before this happened, a few weeks earlier, the iPod started crashing every time it would start a sync. Just a hard freeze. After some fiddling, I figured out that it would work if I plugged it directly into the cable instead of the dock. Once I got it running, I did an iPod restore through iTunes (which wipes out all songs and restores the iPod to its factory condition). Everything has worked fine since then, until the ominous screen above.

Maybe my iPod will die right on time for the release of a multitouch iPod.

Alex King is someone I respect and occasionally read, and he recently canceled his iPhone plan in line with TUAW’s instructions so that he could use his iPhone as the world’s coolest widescreen iPod and internet device–apparently the syncing and WiFi capability continue to function just fine with the phone components disabled.

My first reaction was how awesome that was. And more power to Alex for having the gumption to try it and for buying himself the coolest iPod ever. In the end, though, you’re paying $599 + $49 for first month of service = $650 minimum for an 8GB video iPod. The cool factor may be here now, even if the high price tag doesn’t deter you, but it may feel a bit more foolish when the heat and excitement of the iPhone cools and Apple brilliantly times the release of a 60GB widescreen multitouch iPod 3 months out from now, for a comparable $400-$600 price range because it lacks the complexity, price and hassle of the phone components. The price, the timeframe, the mere existence of said iPod are all pure fabrications to indulge my point (although “sources” do claim these things). It could happen. And it would make business sense.
Yes, there may be some phoneless iPhone owners grumbling in October.

“Look! Here is a ‘new’ iPod Shuffle that looks and operates just like the old iPod Shuffle, except it is orange. And here are 21 high resolution photos for you to look at the same old thing…in orange.”

One or two photos, fine. Oh cool, look, it’s orange. But 21 supersized photos. One term. Over-zealous.

Okay, I admit. I came into that article already agitated. Why? Because of irritating headlines like this: New Apple Products coming TOMORROW? I am so tired of headlines like these. Meanwhile, the article suggested the possibility of 8-core Mac Pros and other nonsense. Yeah, it just ended up being that amazing orange Shuffle. Here’s another term. Fiction.

There’s no professional prognostication going on there. It’s pure story-telling. Yeah, an 8-core Mac will undoubtedly come out someday. Yeah, Apple will eventually revamp their displays. But there is no news or scoop to back up your speculation.

I just wish the rumor runners would practice my final term for this rant. Discretion.

Apple is taking steps to correct the matter, and apparently it is an extremely small percentage (less than 1%) of affected iPods.

In the Information Week article “Apple Says Shipped iPods Carrying Computer Virus“, statements from both Apple and Microsoft are quoted. Allow me to translate and paraphrase.

Apple: “We’re sorry for shipping our iPod with a Windows virus. Gee, it’s too bad Windows is so bad with viruses.”

Microsoft: “Yeah, but you’re stupid for letting the virus get on your product, even if, erm, it doesn’t affect your own OS. Just watch it in the future, will ya?”

Playlist magazine posted a First Look of the Griffin iFM, and it looks promising.

Like most Griffin Technology devices, it is compact, performs well, and has a superior user interface compared to other products.

I never listen to the radio. Why would I care about one of these? Because when we go to assemblies or conventions, and the sound system transmits the speakers over a radio frequency, I can use this device to record the speaker with, effectively, a direct line in, with minimal background noise, because the iFM also support recording the radio frequency it is tuned into.

My dad actually tried this with an off-brand MP3 player that supported FM reception and recording, but unfortunately the reception was very poor. My hope is that the iFM will have better performance.

Read about it: HP Says It Will Stop Selling iPods.

Although this particular situation was not forecasted, it is not surprising. Apple never has been very generous when it stretches itself out to share its product lines with other companies. In other words, in the end, they either pull out of the deal, or they give the cooperating company the short end of the stick.

Unfortunately, this may be spawned by a “we don’t need them” kind of attitude; ironically enough, in this instance, that is probably true.

This is Apple’s best quarter. Ever. Read about it: Apple Tops Its Quarterly Earnings Record.

One thing that is very encouraging about this is to see that the iPod is not the hero that saved the ailing team here. The iPod had a significant share, as expected, but it was just a team player on Apple’s championship team.

Other key players: Mac OS X 10.4 and Mac sales. Sure, we like it when the team keeps winning, even when these players were on the bench, but now that they’re back in the game–and exercising a killer instinct–the game is so sweet to see.

Mac OS X 10.4 was the best-selling software release in the company’s history; Mac sales experienced a 35% increase over last year; iPod sales had a “record quarter” for the ninth time in a row. When all the key players score triple-doubles, the fans just go wild.

And the timing couldn’t be more perfect, since Apple’s sales my go into slight hibernation as the world awaits the first x86-based Mac. But that’s okay–Apple is ready.

Please read: Luxpro Corp. rips off iPod shuffle.

If the description doesn’t get the point across, a picture speaks a thousand words. The Super Shuffle appears practically identical to the iPod Shuffle, right down to the white ear buds, with the only difference being the product name and an extra switch on the back. What’s more, the Super Shuffle actually outperforms the iPod Shuffle in features.

Certainly imitation is the highest form of flattery, but there must be some execs at Apple that are fuming over this one.

Check it out at ExtremeiPod: New case means surf’s up for iPod.

I do remember when we last visited the ocean I was paranoid about taking the iPod with me as I strolled down the beach side in the shallow water, fearful of dropping it, and even when I was laying in the sand, worrying about getting sand in my precious gadget’s electronic parts. With an accessory like this, those worries are gone!

And believe it or not, that’s up from 64% a year ago. This level of dominance is comparable to the stranglehold that Microsoft has on the OS market.

Read about it at: iPod Market Share: 82%.

That sort of comparison puts the facts in an interesting light: Who thinks Microsoft will be losing its OS market share anytime soon? Come on, even the most die-hard Apple fans have to acknowledge that Microsoft can simply go on autopilot to maintain its share in the near future and that only its distant future can even begin to be questioned.

Granted, Microsoft’s dominance is in a market that is settled and mature, whereas the digital music market is volatile and still developing. Nevertheless, if Apple can hold on a little while longer, the naysayers will be at a loss as Apple’s relentless hold on the market grows increasingly apparent.

For the most part, I readily include myself in the group of people who are sick of hearing people complain about Microsoft. As if any of it is breaking news. Nevertheless, I was just flabbergasted by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer’s latest statement.

I read about it at MacWorld: Ballmer: ‘No way’ Apple will win digital media war. He said, “There is no way you can get there with Apple,” and proceeded to explain why Microsoft would beat Apple, Sony, and others in the digital media war.

Granted, I understand that there is big money in the digital media revolution, and leadership in this arena is important for any large computer/software company. But I am seriously growing tired of Microsoft chasing after the other children, trying to steal their toys because it has tired of its own. Among others, Microsoft has done this in the operating system, productivity suite, web browser, and game console arenas. You can even see Microsoft metaphorically dropping its toy in stagnant indifference as it stalks its latest target: For instance, Microsoft has let its operating system and web browser projects slip while it divides its focus yet again by pursuing the digital media crowd. Sure, Microsoft has vowed to work on improving these different systems as needed, but results have been scant. If you consider the Jealous Kid business strategy, it really is no amazing coincidence that Microsoft isn’t seeing significant results in improving the arenas that it has already comprehensively clinched (consider the operating system, web browser, or productivity suite arenas), whereas the arenas that it has not yet done so experienced amazing output (consider the XBox). This fact is further fueled by Microsoft’s renewed zeal to improve Internet Explorer, something in which Microsoft had expressed very little interest before IE’s market share began seriously dropping due to consumer discontent.

How very business-like; how very detrimental to the industry. Just like The Jealous Kid.

First, and least impressive (but still impressive nonetheless), is the release of Apple’s new iMac G5. Think about the evolution of the iMac. It changes processors and styles as frequently as Madonna’s music style changes, and just like Madonna, it seems to be successful every time it does so. From the original pod-like iMac G3, which was the catalyst to Apple’s renaissance, to the awesome LCD iMac G4, to the new, still flat, iMac G5, the iMac has experienced big changes, inside and out. The iMac G5 is no exception; like their website says, “Where did the computer go?” Indeed, now the entire computer is wrapped up in the monitor, making it practically a tablet made for the desktop. It is very reassuring to see that Apple’s innovation still exists in the Mac division.

Meanwhile, and more importantly, it is very encouraging to see that the iPod is actually helping Mac sales, especially iBook sales. How is that? Please take note of the USA Today article: Students crazy about iPod follow the music to Apple laptops. The article reports that many college campus stores have found that the success of the iPod has led many students to the Mac as their laptop of choice for the new school year. This brand recognition is exactly what we hope to see when a company so diverse in innovation as Apple has success in a new industry, even though we fear it will not happen. Because the potential is always there for the up-and-coming to kill the older, less exciting product line. So really all Apple fans can now rejoice as we see the brand recognition beginning to reap the dividends.

The snare that Apple still should astutely avoid is that of distraction and division from multiple focuses. It hurt Apple back in the day of the Newton MessagePad, but of course, that was without Apple’s wonderboy, Steve Jobs. Yet, Steve Jobs himself has acknowledged that his focus is sometimes split due to his heavy involvement with Pixar. Let’s hope Steve et al can multitask as well as Panther can. ;-D

I’m sure some people out there may have some of the same concerns and aren’t quite sure where to get the answers to these concerns, so I’d like to share some of my findings. One blog at MacWorld had just the authoritative source I wanted, and actually answers many of the concerns: How AirTunes Works. Let’s consider some of the concerns people have expressed to me.

1. The sound quality of AirTunes will be poor. Wireless audio is always poorer quality.

It is true that wireless audio is poorer quality than wired audio. However, AirTunes isn’t transmitting audio wirelessly. It is transmitting the audio data wirelessly, decodes it, and then transmits the high-quality audio via analog audio wire, or even an optical audio wire, to your stereo or receiver. This is an important point to understand. The AirPort Express with AirTunes is a network device, not a wireless audio receiver. Indeed, if you’ve ever looked at such devices (for instance, check out the RCA® Lyra™ Wireless Audio Sender/Receiver from Radio Shack), you’ll notice they always require two components: a transmitter and a receiver. The reason AirTunes only needs the one receiving component is because it is receiving data transmitted by an existing computer on an existing wireless network. No transmission of actual audio ever occurs.

2. You can only use the AirPort Express with AirTunes if you have an AirPort Base Station or a computer with AirPort Extreme.

This is simply incorrect. According to the article linked above, which refers to the words of Greg Joswiak, Apple’s Vice President of Hardware Product Marketing, AirTunes does not require any AirPort technology, although it naturally works with those devices. A non-Apple 802.11b or 802.11g access point will suffice.

Sometimes a person might develop this concern by means of a lack of understanding as to how networking functions. For instance, a person might suppose that a wireless laptop and a wireless AirTunes will communicate directly when transmitting data. Although this very well may be possible, according to my understanding, it is not necessary. In theory, even a computer that has a WIRED connection to a wireless access point (such as a wireless router) can then communicate with the AirTunes through it’s connection to the wireless router. That’s just how networking works. Wireless devices don’t talk directly to each other, they all talk to the router or access point, and thus can speak to each other “vicariously” through their mutual connection to the wireless router. This “theory” is further solidified by the fact that any non-Apple 802.11b or 802.11g access point will allow such functionality.

Thus, if I’ve got an iMac (with no wireless functionality) physically plugged into my home network, it should be able to transmit music to my AirTunes just as well as my 802.11g wireless Gateway laptop, which should do just as well as a AirPort-enabled PowerBook.

Especially considering how obsessed Apple has been over proprietorship lately, I took this concern seriously. I was very worried that Apple would attempt to make AirTunes compatible only with an AirPort access point, which would have been very disappointing. But that just isn’t so.

3. One concern that I do have–and it’s really more of a disappointment in a missing feature–is that this device doesn’t support streaming of video as well. Before you think to criticize me for asking too much, please recognize that a device like this is already in existence! Please take a look at Elgato Systems’ EyeHome. This device is all the audio functionality of the AirTunes and much more. Really, though, the two devices are apples and oranges. Whereas EyeHome also has a user interface over the television and also allows you to display pictures, video, and browse the web from your TV, it does not provide a wireless bridge or printer sharing like the AirPort Express does. In short, the devices are very different. But the EyeHome is proof that streaming video to a network device is certainly feasible, and Elgato says the EyeHome even works wirelessly (whether that be by an AirPort Express or any other wireless access point). So apparently 802.11 provides enough bandwidth to transmit video.

Now, you get me an AirPort Express with AirMedia, and you’ve really got my attention!