My First Impressions of the Messages Beta

I’m hearing tons of complaints about the new Messages Beta for Mac released on Thursday. But my experience with it has been great so far.

My favorite feature: the way Messages handles multiple alerts on different devices. This is one of those things that is just about impossible to make perfect, but I think what Apple has done here is clever, and probably the least annoying way to handle it.

The problem? I have an iPhone, an iPad, and three different Macs I use on a regular basis. (A desktop at home, a desktop at work, and my Air for cafe/travel use.) I have Messages running on all of these machines at once. So what happens when I get a new message from someone? Well, I get an alert on my iPhone, my iPad, and all three of my Macs. Considering I have at least three of these devices within arm’s reach most of the time, that means I get three different alerts showing up in my face, and two others on the other machines that I’ll have to address later. All for the same message.

The wrong way to handle this would have been to force me to dismiss this alert on all five machines manually, or worse, to try and “guess’ on which machine I want the alert to appear. (While that approach sounds good, in practice, it would probably guess wrong more often than not.)

Apple took a better middle road and had the alert go off on all machines, but as soon as I acknowledge the alert on any one of my machines, it goes away on all five. So I only have to dismiss or reply to the message once, and all my other machines get updated. My iPhone and iPad take the alert badge off the Messages icon and remove it from Notifications center. The Macs do the same. I’ve read the message once on one machine, but all the others still have the message, so I can still reply on whichever machine I like later.

How can you complain about that?

Now sure, it doesn’t always work perfectly. I’ve had to dismiss a message on two of the five machines a few times. But it gets it right most of the time.

If it doesn’t work this way for you, there’s probably something wrong with your configuration. Make sure all your devices are set to the same Apple id, and your iPhone is set up to get messages from your email, not just your phone number.

This works so much better than the way Apple has historically handled Calendar Alerts. I can only hope they apply this same logic to those soon.

And as far as the noise goes, if you don’t want multiple devices beeping at you, do what I do. Mute all your devices except the iPhone. For me, the iPhone is the one device I’m guaranteed to have on me at all times. So that’s the one that becomes the official attention grabber. When I’m working on my Mac, I hear the iPhone SMS sound go off, but I can check the message using my Mac.

My iPad is also always set to silent. I don’t even have my iPad vibrate on new alerts, as, again, all of those will go off on my iPhone, which is always with me. Problem solved.

Google and Safari Privacy Settings

Google explains how and why Safari privacy settings were circumvented:

In response, Google says the WSJ report is off-base when it comes to what Google is doing with its advertising cookies on these devices. Google says it was using a known bit of Safari functionality to provide features that were only enabled when users signed into Google using their browser. Google used this functionality to provide personalized ads and the ability to +1 items for signed-in Google users.

Google then pins the problem on Safari; the statement says the browser “contained functionality that then enabled other Google advertising cookies to be set on the browser.” The search giant said it didn’t expect this to happen and is now “removing these advertising cookies from Safari browsers.” Google insists that the original cookie enablement was done anonymously and no personal data was collected.

 

(Via TUAW – The Unofficial Apple Weblog)

If this incident had happened in isolation, I’d probably be more inclined to trust Google’s explanation. But with all the other happenings around Google and it’s behavior lately, it’s hard to take anything they say at face value anymore.

That’s what you get when you hold yourself to an elite standard and then drop that standard when it becomes inconvenient.

TUAW forgets what BETA means

Messages is a good idea, but is not ready for prime time:

Messages, like the rest of Mountain Lion, is the logical next step in Apple developing its instant message programs and making them available across a lot of its devices. But like last year’s FaceTime beta, there are a lot of bugs to be worked out, and I wish Apple had taken a cue from Adium in designing Messages. If you do plan to stick with the program, Erica will be offering some tips and tricks on making it useful.

(Via TUAW – The Unofficial Apple Weblog)

Um, it’s a BETA. That, by definition, means it’s not ready for prime time.

Has Google’s bastardization of this term really convinced even the technically literate folks at TUAW that beta just means version 1.0? I hope not.

I realize that historically Apple has not released betas very often to the public. (The more I read articles like this, the more I realize why.) But since Apple seems to be trending towards releasing betas a little more often nowadays, I think it may be time we all re-evaluate the true definition of the term.

I hate headlines like this

Apple factory inspectors put positive spin on Foxconn conditions, but watchdogs are skeptical | The Verge: “Apple factory inspectors put positive spin on Foxconn conditions, but watchdogs are skeptical”

(Via The Verge)

They aren’t Apple factories, and they aren’t Apple inspectors. This headline seems to imply at least one, if not both.

Now, I have my doubts about the FLA after reading many articles recently. Seems like there’s a good chance they are sugar coating conditions over there at least a bit. They could very well be a “public relations mouthpiece” for the industries it claims to be watching. It certainly wouldn’t surprise me.

And the article itself is actually presented in a pretty balanced way.

But I HATE headlines like that. Especially from a group like the Verge that is claiming to be so “fair” in its reporting. The headline is all most people ever read; if you can’t get the facts straight there, how can you hope that I’m going to trust you?

Apple Stepping Over the Line a Bit on This One

Apple forcing Pegatron to stop production of MacBook Air lookalike Zenbook:

Pegatron stands to suffer a lot if it loses Apple contracts. Not only does the company assemble iPhones for Apple, but they’re also rumored to be producing the next-generation iPads that are expected to ship next month.

(Via TUAW – The Unofficial Apple Weblog)

There’s no question in my mind that these new Wintel notebooks are a complete and shameless ripoff of the MacBook Air. And if Apple were to go to the courts to defend its designs in a trademark/copyright infringement case, I’d be behind that. No reason other PC makers should benefit from Jony Ive’s industrial design expertise.

But threatening to leave your contracted suppliers/manufacturers for building these products has a bad smell to it. This is over stepping the line I think. It’s a bully tactic that could easily be interpreted as stifling competition. Apple cedes the high ground by going this route, if indeed, this story is true.

Part of the problem when you’re the top dog after many decades of getting the shaft is that you live in constant fear of losing that top dog status and getting shafted again. Apple’s position on top is so obviously secure from where I’m standing, but Tim Cook has a lot more to lose if I’m wrong about that than I do. So I get where the fear comes from.

Still, I think Apple should let these obvious knockoff products die in the market. It’s not like they’re going to sell particularly well, because they lack the one critical feature of any successful knockoff: price. They’re not any cheaper than the real thing, so why would anyone buy one?

Since it’s obvious to most of the world that these things are shameless wannabes, why not let them hit the market and fail miserably, prove to other companies that you can’t beat Apple by aping it’s every move anymore. Or take the issue up in court, if you must. What’s one more case amongst the hundreds Apple already has going?

That way, you go after the company that created the knockoff, not the middleman who just builds it for him, and most importantly, you don’t get seen as a bully playing hardball with manufacturers to suppress competition.

It’s a fine line between pulling a contract because someone helps another company build a copycat product, and pulling the contract because someone builds any competitor’s product.