Apple released this week Lion and within a few days 1 million people downloaded it. How nice is it to have a company which can make with one product in 3 days $30 million in revenue.
As I wrote in an earlier blog, it was easy to install Lion. But since then I got in many trouble and a lot of expenses. Lion is only $29 and I guess one reason why it is so cheap is that it is now 64bit and no Rosetta. Basically half of my programs got either deleted during install or did not work anymore. I had to buy a new transmit, a new version of parallels (Version 5 does not work with Lion). I had to install a flash beta version etc. People would be more frustrated if Lion would cost $100 and they would need to buy more apps. $29 is just the border line not to get pissed.
Safari as an example does not have flash anymore. Which I would really not care, because I don't like flash, but instead of not displaying the flash piece, the page loads and as soon it comes to the swf file, the page turns white. The Apple developer forum is full of complains.
I love a lot of the new features in Lion, but what the heck is natural scrolling? The standard setting for scrolling is "natural" (as Apple claims). This means when you move your hand down the page goes up, when you move your hand up the page moves down. This is natural when you have two wheels touching each other and one turns up then the other turns down, but guess what my hand is no wheel. And dear Apple developer, take your hand and try to turn a tire you will see that turning your hand down will make the tire turn down.
Folders are now without a scrollbar which irritated me. I first thought I lost files in a folder till i figured out I need to scroll. This is fine when looking at something in full screen, then we assume there might be more, but with a smaller window and no scrollbar, means not more content. But not for Apple.
I did spend another few hundreds to get adobe creative suit cs4 (to save money). Guess what CS3 got reinstalled because of Rosetta. CS4 does crash every other time. I just can't win.
Safari has now a download icon on top right. When you click on something to download it will not anymore open a download window, the only indicator that something is downloading is a blue bar in a mini small icon (at least with a 27 inch screen). Clicking on the download icon opens a bubble, but this bubble is empty, I was expecting to see exactly the download status or at least the files downloading or downloaded. I hope it is only a Safari bug.
To see how much space your hard drive has left is now involved with multiple clicks or you need to open info. Folders do not show anymore how much space is left.
Air drop, will drop from my radar. the idea behind airdrop is, that when two Lion devices are close to each other that they see each other and open a kind of shared volume. My wife has an older MacBook Pro from early 2008. This machine is too old to have air drop. And yes none of the iOS devices have yet neither airdrop.
Speaking older Apples, one good thing with the install was that we have now more hard drive space available on my wife's computer. In total 10GB, because Lion deleted all apps which needed Rosetta.
But Apple was friendly enough to leave the icons in the dock that we know what got deleted. However we don't know what other programs got deleted during install. I could not find a text document or something else to see what got deleted. Guys you can't do this. Inform the user or at least create a document.
Our MacBook Pro has not the multi touch mousepad, therefore it can not take advantage of all the features and Lion is even harder to use.
Apple moved a lot of things around and changed a lot. Lion sounds aggressive and the changes were as such.
When Apple presented Lion, they said that closing and open an app will be fast and the app will recognize what you had last open and will save all the time for you, that the user does not need to care where things get saved.
Unfortunate these features only work yet on Apple products like Safari, keynote etc.
However if you don't have an i5 processor and a SSD drive then you will not like it. A normal hard drive is just too slow and reopen an app takes time and it takes time till a page is loaded again. I closed Safari because a page did hang up. I had 12 tabs open and decided to close safari anyway and so I could get away from 12 tabs. Ten minutes later I opened safari again and guess what, it opened all 12 tabs. Grrrrrrrrrrrr. It is not always good to get to old status back.
LogMeIn has now problems with my computer (since the upgrade) I need to install the plugin every time when I use LogMeIn. It just can't remember that I already have the plugin.
Conclusion:
I love Lion on my iMac, especially new mail program, but I don't like that the OS is still a little in beta (I feel) and I don't like for sure that my wife's MacBook Pro is not powerful enough for Lion. The computer is clearly slower. But it is a 2.6Ghz dual core processor. It is still a power machine (I thought).
I liked that I could install Lion on both machines by paying only once, but I don't like that my wife's computer is now connected to my apple account and credit card. Pretty sure she will find it out soon. BTW this was the only way to buy Lion once and then to download it on her and my computer.
- Posted using BlogPress, please follow me on twitter @schlotz69
Showing posts with label flash. Show all posts
Showing posts with label flash. Show all posts
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Monday, July 18, 2011
Why Facebook is already dead
I give Facebook not more than three years and then it is just another myspace. I know this is a very strong statement but we have to face it.
The secret of Facebook had three big components.
1. It was limited to certain schools. Facebook opened it's portal school by school to officially control the growth and to ensure to keep the portal running. However more important was the factor that kids did want to join a network which they could not. It is similar like a night club. We all know the good clubs have bouncers and only let few people at any time in to keep a big crowd outside. This alone drives more people to the club. The human nature is pretty simple. We want to be a part of something others can't be. Especially for younger people under 25 (when they are still in the phase of having hundreds of "friends") there is nothing better than to tell everybody that they have been somewhere special. I can remember (as a teen) I was standing 2 hours in front of a club to get in. Finally it was time my friend could not get in because he had white socks. We run home, he changed and we tried it again. Only that we could tell our friends the next day, that we were at club xyz and how cool it was. Even if it was not cool, because it was too crowed.
Facebook was the same. We always asked others if they are on Facebook.
But today almost everybody is on Facebook and it is almost cooler bot to be on it.there is almost no li,oration to sign up for FB.
2. Facebook was advertisement free and clean.
A lot of people left myspace and joined Facebook, because it was much cleaner and easier to use. One click and your page is ready. At myspace we needed to spend an hour to get all things nicely set up, we had just too much options. And everybody had different colors and fonts, it was horrible. Facebook on the other hand was minimalistic and clean. No ads and easy to use.
Today companies can have Facebook pages and these pages are sometimes full of chaos. Privacy settings are so complicated that it needs hours of reading internet forums to understand how to set it right.
And then the layout is changing monthly. Suddenly we have at the right a selection of friends or notifications are moved to top navigation and so on. Missing one month to go on Facebook is like learning FB again.
Ads are everywhere. In status updates, in wall entries, on uploaded photos and of course on the right rail.
But worse, many ads are not instantly recognizable as ads. I understand that FB needs to generate revenue but from a company where the founder hated to have ads to a company which is starting to cannibalize the space with ads, it is a big change.
Facebook 2009
Facebook 2011
3. Apps and Games
Facebook understood very fast that an open API for app development is key factor to grow. This allows many new features developed free by others. The biggest hit in Facebook are the games. People like to play small and easy games. Before Facebook were many other places to play games but either you had to search for it, or were miserable in layout or did costs money ($10 a month the good games sites). With Facebook everything changed. You needed only to go to Facebook and could play tons of games from very silly like feeding your fish to see them grow to strategic games like chess. And then came Zynga and made all of us playing Farmville, poker etc.
The strategy went really well. However at a certain point there were too many role games an we got tons of notifications that somebody poked us or somebody needs help fro xyz. the whole start page was full of requests. Lucky wise they moved it away. Today it is almost not possible to find games we play only the ones which are promoted. I tried to find a travel map app, and I am sure there is one, but I got lost. And since Android and iPhone most of the games are available outside of Facebook. We started to play on our phone instead on Facebook. As great the idea of games was, Facebook missed mobile and allowed too much flash. They are changing it but it might be too late.
Facebook doubled since 2009 their members. FB had in May 2009 350 million members. Today FB has 750 million active members however in 2009 in average 10,000 people did deactivate their account on a daily basis. Today is is in average 100,000.
All this is of course not enough reason to believe that Facebook will die. Myspace, as bad as it was, would not have died, if there was no alternative. And till a few weeks ago there was no alternative to FB. Google finally started a social network which is ad free, no chaos, very clean and only open for invitations. Exact same methodology as Facebook once had, but with easier privacy settings. A small feature with big impact called circles. Granted Facebook has groups but much harder to work with than circles. But google has something more. The time for having just a social network as entry point is over. We want to go to one portal and do everything. This is exactly google. Going to google.com allows us to do many things and now to be social.
If you have a gmail account which most of us have then you have a nice navigation on top of the page when you are logged in.
And google does not need to have ads on google plus (their social network) because they have so much real estate on google search, YouTube, gmail etc. I am pretty sure google will hold off with ads till they destroyed Facebook.
Facebook will of course make more and more money through ads, but if more and more people go to google and the advertiser understand that advertising on Facebook is even more expensive than on google then the game is over.
Big difference between google and Facebook is that FB wants to keep the people on their website, and google does not keep the people on theirs. At the end advertisers will prefer a solution where the click of the ads will guide the user to an experience the advertiser controls 100%, which is not the idea from Facebook.
And then there is mobile. Google owns half of the mobile market and can easily get the users to mobile. Facebook is late with mobile and did not find yet a good solution.
If google starts to open google plus for 3rd party developers then good bye FB and hello google plus.
Mobile with social integration is the future. Trying to keep users within a social network is not the future. Social will be a part of everything and the company which offers the service wins over the company who controls a platform.
Facebook might be in 2012 too late for an IPO, but for sure it will get into our history books as the biggest billion dollar loser of the century.
The only chance FB has is to go very soon public and use the money to reinvent themselves. The good news is that a Mark Zuckerberg will win billions and regardless if FB dies or not, we will hear many years from him as one of the biggest investors like today the paypal mafia is famous.
- Posted using BlogPress, please follow me on twitter @schlotz69
The secret of Facebook had three big components.
1. It was limited to certain schools. Facebook opened it's portal school by school to officially control the growth and to ensure to keep the portal running. However more important was the factor that kids did want to join a network which they could not. It is similar like a night club. We all know the good clubs have bouncers and only let few people at any time in to keep a big crowd outside. This alone drives more people to the club. The human nature is pretty simple. We want to be a part of something others can't be. Especially for younger people under 25 (when they are still in the phase of having hundreds of "friends") there is nothing better than to tell everybody that they have been somewhere special. I can remember (as a teen) I was standing 2 hours in front of a club to get in. Finally it was time my friend could not get in because he had white socks. We run home, he changed and we tried it again. Only that we could tell our friends the next day, that we were at club xyz and how cool it was. Even if it was not cool, because it was too crowed.
Facebook was the same. We always asked others if they are on Facebook.
But today almost everybody is on Facebook and it is almost cooler bot to be on it.there is almost no li,oration to sign up for FB.
2. Facebook was advertisement free and clean.
A lot of people left myspace and joined Facebook, because it was much cleaner and easier to use. One click and your page is ready. At myspace we needed to spend an hour to get all things nicely set up, we had just too much options. And everybody had different colors and fonts, it was horrible. Facebook on the other hand was minimalistic and clean. No ads and easy to use.
Today companies can have Facebook pages and these pages are sometimes full of chaos. Privacy settings are so complicated that it needs hours of reading internet forums to understand how to set it right.
And then the layout is changing monthly. Suddenly we have at the right a selection of friends or notifications are moved to top navigation and so on. Missing one month to go on Facebook is like learning FB again.
Ads are everywhere. In status updates, in wall entries, on uploaded photos and of course on the right rail.
But worse, many ads are not instantly recognizable as ads. I understand that FB needs to generate revenue but from a company where the founder hated to have ads to a company which is starting to cannibalize the space with ads, it is a big change.
Facebook 2009
Facebook 2011
3. Apps and Games
Facebook understood very fast that an open API for app development is key factor to grow. This allows many new features developed free by others. The biggest hit in Facebook are the games. People like to play small and easy games. Before Facebook were many other places to play games but either you had to search for it, or were miserable in layout or did costs money ($10 a month the good games sites). With Facebook everything changed. You needed only to go to Facebook and could play tons of games from very silly like feeding your fish to see them grow to strategic games like chess. And then came Zynga and made all of us playing Farmville, poker etc.
The strategy went really well. However at a certain point there were too many role games an we got tons of notifications that somebody poked us or somebody needs help fro xyz. the whole start page was full of requests. Lucky wise they moved it away. Today it is almost not possible to find games we play only the ones which are promoted. I tried to find a travel map app, and I am sure there is one, but I got lost. And since Android and iPhone most of the games are available outside of Facebook. We started to play on our phone instead on Facebook. As great the idea of games was, Facebook missed mobile and allowed too much flash. They are changing it but it might be too late.
Facebook doubled since 2009 their members. FB had in May 2009 350 million members. Today FB has 750 million active members however in 2009 in average 10,000 people did deactivate their account on a daily basis. Today is is in average 100,000.
All this is of course not enough reason to believe that Facebook will die. Myspace, as bad as it was, would not have died, if there was no alternative. And till a few weeks ago there was no alternative to FB. Google finally started a social network which is ad free, no chaos, very clean and only open for invitations. Exact same methodology as Facebook once had, but with easier privacy settings. A small feature with big impact called circles. Granted Facebook has groups but much harder to work with than circles. But google has something more. The time for having just a social network as entry point is over. We want to go to one portal and do everything. This is exactly google. Going to google.com allows us to do many things and now to be social.
If you have a gmail account which most of us have then you have a nice navigation on top of the page when you are logged in.
And google does not need to have ads on google plus (their social network) because they have so much real estate on google search, YouTube, gmail etc. I am pretty sure google will hold off with ads till they destroyed Facebook.
Facebook will of course make more and more money through ads, but if more and more people go to google and the advertiser understand that advertising on Facebook is even more expensive than on google then the game is over.
Big difference between google and Facebook is that FB wants to keep the people on their website, and google does not keep the people on theirs. At the end advertisers will prefer a solution where the click of the ads will guide the user to an experience the advertiser controls 100%, which is not the idea from Facebook.
And then there is mobile. Google owns half of the mobile market and can easily get the users to mobile. Facebook is late with mobile and did not find yet a good solution.
If google starts to open google plus for 3rd party developers then good bye FB and hello google plus.
Mobile with social integration is the future. Trying to keep users within a social network is not the future. Social will be a part of everything and the company which offers the service wins over the company who controls a platform.
Facebook might be in 2012 too late for an IPO, but for sure it will get into our history books as the biggest billion dollar loser of the century.
The only chance FB has is to go very soon public and use the money to reinvent themselves. The good news is that a Mark Zuckerberg will win billions and regardless if FB dies or not, we will hear many years from him as one of the biggest investors like today the paypal mafia is famous.
- Posted using BlogPress, please follow me on twitter @schlotz69
Sunday, July 17, 2011
No jailbreakme.com anymore
For a few weeks users could jailbreak their iPhone or iPad over the internet without being connected to a computer. They only needed to go to jailbreakme.com and hit a button to start the process. JBM used for this a security hole at the iOS with PDFs. The the phone would download a PDF which had code to jailbreak the phone. It took only two weeks for Apple to (or a long time) to fix the problem with latest iOS update. If you installed the new update which you should, then you are not able anymore to jailbreak the phone through the internet. Jailbreakme took advantage of the security hole in a kind of positive way, however others would have been soon able to do bad things with your iPhone by sending spam emails with attached PDF.
I jail broke my iPad but I am happy Apple fixed the PDF issue.
Really interesting is that Adobe (who created PDF) is one of the biggest companies which are not able to develop secure software. PDF is not the only thing. Flash is as well from Adobe and we all know it can break your computer down (at least slow it down) and can even be easily used to hack in your computer.
I wonder how a company can get so big and not really care about security and function.
I think Apple does do good not to support flash anymore. Even if the competition to the iPad advertise all the time that their devices support flash. I tested the Playbook and Zoom and both failed with flash horrible.
Keeping flash off the device helps to build a better device. And when you watched the latest keynote in June you could see that Lion will not come with flash support. You need to install it like in good old times.
Adobe should concentrate on making better products instead of complaining about Apple.
- Posted using BlogPress, please follow me on twitter @schlotz69
I jail broke my iPad but I am happy Apple fixed the PDF issue.
Really interesting is that Adobe (who created PDF) is one of the biggest companies which are not able to develop secure software. PDF is not the only thing. Flash is as well from Adobe and we all know it can break your computer down (at least slow it down) and can even be easily used to hack in your computer.
I wonder how a company can get so big and not really care about security and function.
I think Apple does do good not to support flash anymore. Even if the competition to the iPad advertise all the time that their devices support flash. I tested the Playbook and Zoom and both failed with flash horrible.
Keeping flash off the device helps to build a better device. And when you watched the latest keynote in June you could see that Lion will not come with flash support. You need to install it like in good old times.
Adobe should concentrate on making better products instead of complaining about Apple.
- Posted using BlogPress, please follow me on twitter @schlotz69
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Flash on the iPad, there is an app for this - again
I am wondering why I am even writing about flash and iPad. Everybody knows there is no flash for the iPad, and there is no need neither in my opinion. I have the iPad now over a year and seldom thought I need flash. But I have as well to admit that I use my iPad different than my computer. I seldom surf websites, I mostly use my iPad for amazon, eBay, NYTimes (and other newspapers) and games. All these have iPad apps which I use. When I open websites then mostly they are without flash.
However there is one iPad app which claims to allow to play flash games and to surf on flash websites.
The app is iswifter and free for download on the app store (but not really free).
This is what the company says about them:
iSWiFTER is the industry's first cloud-based Flash game streaming service specifically built for mobile devices including smart phones and tablets, spanning mobile platforms such as Apple's iOS and Android. Low-cost servers in the cloud run abstraction software that intelligently converts browser-based Flash games to a form that is optimized for individual mobile devices, complete with multi-touch gesture support for game interaction, and accommodating different screen sizes. A client app connects to the gaming servers in the cloud to download streaming content live to the mobile device.
Here comes the reality. ISwifter is nothing more like a remote browsing through another computer like using LogMeIn to use your iPad to see your computer screen.
The difference is that you don't need to set up any connection you just start iswifter and after a while you see a web browser on your iPad.
ISwifter is free when you download it but only for 7 days after this it costs $2.99 for websites surfing with flash and $4.99 for flash games access.
The results of the browsing is poor. The resolution is just not good.
With iswifter:
With Safari on the iPad:
I could ignore that the image quality is not so good, but the speed and delay are horrible. And you can use the app only in landscape mode which is not my favorite display. I mostly hold it I'm portrait like a book.
I don't think any money is worth to spend on this app. I am not sure but I think the make of this paid app are the people who did before cloud browse which was free but not anymore available in the app store.
I believe the app will be soon not anymore available because the pay upgrade is against the Apple policy. It is not an in app payment which means Apple does not get a share.
It seems that some people still don't get that flash is not needed on the iPad. The consumer who is relying on flash games would either not buy an iPad or would move to games which are offered in the app store.
Moat of the websites have already an iPad friendly version (the big websites) which is flash free. Please save the money and use it for a newspaper or some music to download.
- Posted using BlogPress, please follow me on twitter @schlotz69
However there is one iPad app which claims to allow to play flash games and to surf on flash websites.
The app is iswifter and free for download on the app store (but not really free).
This is what the company says about them:
iSWiFTER is the industry's first cloud-based Flash game streaming service specifically built for mobile devices including smart phones and tablets, spanning mobile platforms such as Apple's iOS and Android. Low-cost servers in the cloud run abstraction software that intelligently converts browser-based Flash games to a form that is optimized for individual mobile devices, complete with multi-touch gesture support for game interaction, and accommodating different screen sizes. A client app connects to the gaming servers in the cloud to download streaming content live to the mobile device.
Here comes the reality. ISwifter is nothing more like a remote browsing through another computer like using LogMeIn to use your iPad to see your computer screen.
The difference is that you don't need to set up any connection you just start iswifter and after a while you see a web browser on your iPad.
ISwifter is free when you download it but only for 7 days after this it costs $2.99 for websites surfing with flash and $4.99 for flash games access.
The results of the browsing is poor. The resolution is just not good.
With iswifter:
With Safari on the iPad:
I could ignore that the image quality is not so good, but the speed and delay are horrible. And you can use the app only in landscape mode which is not my favorite display. I mostly hold it I'm portrait like a book.
I don't think any money is worth to spend on this app. I am not sure but I think the make of this paid app are the people who did before cloud browse which was free but not anymore available in the app store.
I believe the app will be soon not anymore available because the pay upgrade is against the Apple policy. It is not an in app payment which means Apple does not get a share.
It seems that some people still don't get that flash is not needed on the iPad. The consumer who is relying on flash games would either not buy an iPad or would move to games which are offered in the app store.
Moat of the websites have already an iPad friendly version (the big websites) which is flash free. Please save the money and use it for a newspaper or some music to download.
- Posted using BlogPress, please follow me on twitter @schlotz69
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Facebook pushes developer to avoid flash-why?
Facebook, the biggest social met work with over 600 million members did miss one of the most important development in the last 18 months. FB did miss the mobile train.
There is a Facebook app available for smart phones like the iPhone, but the functions are limited. Facebook could grow so extremely because of their open API approach which allowed developers all over the world to build plugins or apps for Facebook. This helped FB to get a lot of content and functions without spending money and research. The downside is, that most of the apps in Facebook are done in flash and flash is not available on many smart phones, and even if the smart phones have flash capability, the apps won't work well because they are designed for mouse and not touch.
Facebook wrote now an open letter to their developer community not to use flash anymore to change their existing flash apps into HTML (I don't say HTML5 anymore because since last week the HTML5 functions are now official a part of HTML).
I don't have the letter but I did find an interview about FB and HTML5 http://techcrunch.com/2011/01/25/facebook-2011/
Why is Facebook so eager to get away from flash?
As you know Facebook is big and wants to sell as much ads possible, however we should not forget that most users are spending over 50% of their FB time to play games like Farmville, Mafia Wars etc.
... But the most interesting thing Pleasants noted was that he recently heard (from his own source, apparently) that half of all users on Facebook now play social games. More impressively, 40% of total usage time on the service is spent on these games. That’s meaningful, of course, because “a huge amount the Internet is on Facebook,” Pleasants stated......
And Facebook announced that their official currency is FB credits, any in game purchase must be done with FB credits which gives FB 30%.
All these games are not accessible through FB mobile, therefore people spend less time on FB mobile, but worse, the game developers like Zynga did develop their games like Farmville as mobile version outside of Facebook.
This is pretty hard on FB, if all games will go to mobile outside from FB, because then FB could lose a lot of traffic, this means a lot of page views, which is more than a lot of ads impressions. And FB would not make money on the virtual goods sold through these mobile game versions.
It is almost ironic that a young company like FB which grew to number one website did miss the mobile trend. Should not all these smart young people at FB have known that mobile will come?
I guess Steve Jobs was smarter than anybody thought, when he announced his mobile devices will not support flash. Everybody thought it is vendetta against Adobe. But I believe he saw early enough in FB a competition to his app store and games. He got now many FB games with his anti flash move and instead paying money to FB the developers are now paying to Apple 30%. and if i would need to choose to whom i need to pay 30%, i would prefer to pay it to a company which is well established, generates real revenue and has real products.
If Facebook is not able to get the mobile part straight for the most used apps in their website, then FB will be in 24 months not anymore in the top 4 websites.
Facebook is big and has big potentials, but losing the top time spending on their site will cost a lot of money and I can tell you that more and more people will move their social activity to mobile. I hope for Facebook that it is not too late for them.
- Posted using BlogPress, please follow me on twitter @schlotz69
There is a Facebook app available for smart phones like the iPhone, but the functions are limited. Facebook could grow so extremely because of their open API approach which allowed developers all over the world to build plugins or apps for Facebook. This helped FB to get a lot of content and functions without spending money and research. The downside is, that most of the apps in Facebook are done in flash and flash is not available on many smart phones, and even if the smart phones have flash capability, the apps won't work well because they are designed for mouse and not touch.
Facebook wrote now an open letter to their developer community not to use flash anymore to change their existing flash apps into HTML (I don't say HTML5 anymore because since last week the HTML5 functions are now official a part of HTML).
I don't have the letter but I did find an interview about FB and HTML5 http://techcrunch.com/2011/01/25/facebook-2011/
Why is Facebook so eager to get away from flash?
As you know Facebook is big and wants to sell as much ads possible, however we should not forget that most users are spending over 50% of their FB time to play games like Farmville, Mafia Wars etc.
... But the most interesting thing Pleasants noted was that he recently heard (from his own source, apparently) that half of all users on Facebook now play social games. More impressively, 40% of total usage time on the service is spent on these games. That’s meaningful, of course, because “a huge amount the Internet is on Facebook,” Pleasants stated......
And Facebook announced that their official currency is FB credits, any in game purchase must be done with FB credits which gives FB 30%.
All these games are not accessible through FB mobile, therefore people spend less time on FB mobile, but worse, the game developers like Zynga did develop their games like Farmville as mobile version outside of Facebook.
This is pretty hard on FB, if all games will go to mobile outside from FB, because then FB could lose a lot of traffic, this means a lot of page views, which is more than a lot of ads impressions. And FB would not make money on the virtual goods sold through these mobile game versions.
It is almost ironic that a young company like FB which grew to number one website did miss the mobile trend. Should not all these smart young people at FB have known that mobile will come?
I guess Steve Jobs was smarter than anybody thought, when he announced his mobile devices will not support flash. Everybody thought it is vendetta against Adobe. But I believe he saw early enough in FB a competition to his app store and games. He got now many FB games with his anti flash move and instead paying money to FB the developers are now paying to Apple 30%. and if i would need to choose to whom i need to pay 30%, i would prefer to pay it to a company which is well established, generates real revenue and has real products.
If Facebook is not able to get the mobile part straight for the most used apps in their website, then FB will be in 24 months not anymore in the top 4 websites.
Facebook is big and has big potentials, but losing the top time spending on their site will cost a lot of money and I can tell you that more and more people will move their social activity to mobile. I hope for Facebook that it is not too late for them.
- Posted using BlogPress, please follow me on twitter @schlotz69
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Skyfire official press release why sold out.
Skyfire was only available for 5 hours and was for this time supposedly #1 sold application in the app store.
The demand was and is high to get a browser which supports flash. Now the browser is not really supporting flash but when you surf with skyfire a website which has some simple flash content like flash video then the request goes through skyfire server and before it will be pushed to your browser the server will render the flash as HTML 5. This is the none technical explanation. It seems the server requests were so high that their server could not keep up. Skyfire took the application down from Apple app store, avoid more traffic which can not be handled.
When I reported yesterday that skyfire does not woke then it could be only because their servers are over capacity. I don't know.
Either way everybody who paid $3 for seeing flash content is screwed right now because it won't work till skyfire fixes the issue (if they can).
Skyfire is saying we can befriend with Facebook to get info when the app is again available.
Maybe it was just a marketing trick to get as many downloads as possible to make some good money ANC to get millions of followers. Maybe it never worked on the iPhone, but they hoped by getting 500k downloads and 5 million people being friends in facebook to collect VC and money to build the real thing (i believe it worked and it is not a marketing trick).
What I liked that i reported yesterday that skyfire is already sold out and estimated the hours how long the app was in the store and it was exactly what others today reported.
Official Press Release: (courtesy of Engadget)
Skyfire Becomes Top Grossing iPhone App in App Store and Sells Out of Inventory in Five Hours
Historic demand forces mobile browser to halt new sales and expand server capacity within hours of availability
Mountain View - Skyfire, the first iPhone browser that plays video designed for Adobe Flash Player, is announcing that they have sold out of inventory within five hours of its public launch.
Skyfire for iPhone has been received with overwhelming enthusiasm -- far beyond internal projections. The result: the company is currently sold out of its first batch of Skyfire for the iPhone and is temporarily not accepting new purchases. The company is working to increase capacity and will be accepting new purchases from the Apple App StoreSM soon.
Skyfire is assuring users that the app's sold out status was a temporary measure taken by Skyfire, and was not the decision of Apple, Inc., which has approved the app.
The app, previously available in the Apple App StoreSM for $2.99, bridges one major gap between Apple and Adobe technologies, enabling consumers to view millions of previously unavailable videos designed for Flash Player on Apple iOS devices.
The company which became the top grossing app in iTunes today ahead of popular titles like Angry Birds, experienced overwhelming consumer demand for its browser within hours of going live. The company is no stranger to consumer demand of its products as its Android browser generated over one million downloads in its first few months.
"Skyfire has historically generated high demand for its browser products but nothing like this," states Skyfire CEO Jeffrey Glueck. "It was hard to predict consumer demand since this was our first paid app, but we were blown away by the demand and sales."
The company plans to open another batch of its iPhone application in the near future. It recommends interested customers follow the company on Twitter @skyfire or on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/GetSkyfire.iPhone for the new availability batch.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad.
Please visit my blog http://www.new-kid-on-the-blog.com
The demand was and is high to get a browser which supports flash. Now the browser is not really supporting flash but when you surf with skyfire a website which has some simple flash content like flash video then the request goes through skyfire server and before it will be pushed to your browser the server will render the flash as HTML 5. This is the none technical explanation. It seems the server requests were so high that their server could not keep up. Skyfire took the application down from Apple app store, avoid more traffic which can not be handled.
When I reported yesterday that skyfire does not woke then it could be only because their servers are over capacity. I don't know.
Either way everybody who paid $3 for seeing flash content is screwed right now because it won't work till skyfire fixes the issue (if they can).
Skyfire is saying we can befriend with Facebook to get info when the app is again available.
Maybe it was just a marketing trick to get as many downloads as possible to make some good money ANC to get millions of followers. Maybe it never worked on the iPhone, but they hoped by getting 500k downloads and 5 million people being friends in facebook to collect VC and money to build the real thing (i believe it worked and it is not a marketing trick).
What I liked that i reported yesterday that skyfire is already sold out and estimated the hours how long the app was in the store and it was exactly what others today reported.
Official Press Release: (courtesy of Engadget)
Skyfire Becomes Top Grossing iPhone App in App Store and Sells Out of Inventory in Five Hours
Historic demand forces mobile browser to halt new sales and expand server capacity within hours of availability
Mountain View - Skyfire, the first iPhone browser that plays video designed for Adobe Flash Player, is announcing that they have sold out of inventory within five hours of its public launch.
Skyfire for iPhone has been received with overwhelming enthusiasm -- far beyond internal projections. The result: the company is currently sold out of its first batch of Skyfire for the iPhone and is temporarily not accepting new purchases. The company is working to increase capacity and will be accepting new purchases from the Apple App StoreSM soon.
Skyfire is assuring users that the app's sold out status was a temporary measure taken by Skyfire, and was not the decision of Apple, Inc., which has approved the app.
The app, previously available in the Apple App StoreSM for $2.99, bridges one major gap between Apple and Adobe technologies, enabling consumers to view millions of previously unavailable videos designed for Flash Player on Apple iOS devices.
The company which became the top grossing app in iTunes today ahead of popular titles like Angry Birds, experienced overwhelming consumer demand for its browser within hours of going live. The company is no stranger to consumer demand of its products as its Android browser generated over one million downloads in its first few months.
"Skyfire has historically generated high demand for its browser products but nothing like this," states Skyfire CEO Jeffrey Glueck. "It was hard to predict consumer demand since this was our first paid app, but we were blown away by the demand and sales."
The company plans to open another batch of its iPhone application in the near future. It recommends interested customers follow the company on Twitter @skyfire or on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/GetSkyfire.iPhone for the new availability batch.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad.
Please visit my blog http://www.new-kid-on-the-blog.com
Monday, November 1, 2010
HTML 5 or Flash?
I hear this question all the time and i believe it is the wrong question. We should always ask for best user experience before we ask us other questions.
Let us face, most of us don't like Flash, many of us can't say why, but we know we don't like it.
A few reasons why I don't like flash is that i am a Mac user and flash does crash my browsers very often. Flash pages do take sometimes too long to load, i just don't like the fancy load circle. A flash page has many times so many things going on that i don't know what i should do as an user, to navigate through the page. And I can't just right click and download a picture when I like it.
All these reasons don't have really to do with flash itself. It is the way designers are using flash. Many times a flash could load instantly without a waiting circle and then load all other parts. However many times designers tend to build one big flash instead of many small flash pieces which get called through the main flash.
As a project manager I don't like flash because any changes in the flash means recompiling the flash to swf and upload it again to the live server. Only flash designer can do updates and it takes forever to make a small text change.
But this is as well just a matter how the flash is developed. A lot of developers are using now for content in the flash XML. Which makes updates of images and content much easier without recompiling the flash piece.
So what is then the problem with flash, maybe too many users can't see flash because the browser does not support flash?
Not really, only a very low percentage of users do have web browsers which can't load flash.
Maybe the problem is SEO. Any content which is within a swf file are not searchable by google or bing. But this is not the reason neither. Flash pages can have no script text for search engines. It is a little bit more work but helps a lot.
HTML 5 is great, it works on any device, if the device supports flash or not.
However when we look at browser statistics then we see that 60% of users are using IE 8 or less which does not support HTML 5 and 22% are using FireFox 3.5 or less which means only partly HTML 5 support. This gives us a 18% chance that we reach consumers with HTML 5 supported browsers. This is a clear win for flash (right now).
Below are stats what HTML 5 support really means(Thank you Deep Blue Sky Blog)
Safari 4.0:
FireFox 3.5:
Google Chrome:
Opera 10:
Internet Explorer 6,7 and 8:
I want to talk a little more about websites and flash or not flash before i will talk about HTML 5.
As a company we should never have full flash pages only because it is cool. We should think when flash does make sense and when it is not necessary. Even without HTML 5, we can already utilize javacript (jquery) and DHTML to get cool effects.
I see many times jpg pictures in flash, even static images, why using flash just to show a slideshow?
Flash is great for vector graphics motions like comic book style, or to embed none Internet fonts. Flash is great that it looks on all browsers the same, but we can do this as well with CSS and proper html encoding. Flash is easy drag and drop to develop (sorry flash gurus, but most of the flash i see is not very complex).
Hover and mouse over can be done without flash. Please think twice before building something in flash, try to think if it can be done without flash. In 7 out of 10 flash pages I see, i know it can be done without flash.
And why again not flash? Faster to load, easier to change, better SEO experience, less crashes and it would work on the iPad.
IPad, the right moment to talk about HTML 5. HTML 5 will come standard and even Microsoft is saying they will go with HTML 5 and silverlight will be only be used in the future for mobile windows 7 app development.
But till then HTML 5 is only important for websites viewed on mobile devices. Many mobile devices don't support flash or only flash light. But just making a website in HTML 5 to support mobile devices is not the answer.
All but the iPad (or other big screen mobile devices) have too small screens that a regular page does not make sense. Plus these mobile devices have mostly touchscreen and for sure no mouse, this means many special effects we are used on PC websites don't work (like on mouse over). Even if your device would support flash the user experience would be bad if and user tries to navigate through a flash page which has mouse typical effects.
When we make the decision to support mobile devices, we need to have an alternative mobile page not a standard page without flash.
And this costs money, there are right now many different screen sizes we have to take in consideration when building a mobile page. We need as well to think what are the navigation interfaces, keyboard, touch screen, buttons etc.
As i mention in many reports, try to know your audience. Understand what device they use to get to your website. And don't look at your browser statistics. If your mobile web experience is bad, the users don't come back to the page with mobile devices. The web statistics might say that only 2.5% of your users are accessing the page through their smart phone, but if you don't have a smart phone version of your website then the % does not get higher. Who wants to navigate twice to a broken page or a page with bad mobile experience. The good part is, that most internet agencies don't have mobile versions of their site neither. See Nick Jones research
Don't ask your co workers anymore if HTML 5 or flash for your next relaunch or brand page. Ask how can we ensure each of our targeted user has the best user experience. Examples:
if you offer QR codes on your product packages then you need to have a mobile page.
If you sell something for an audience which does not surf the Internet mobile, then there is no need for a mobile page.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad.
Please visit my blog http://www.new-kid-on-the-blog.com
Let us face, most of us don't like Flash, many of us can't say why, but we know we don't like it.
A few reasons why I don't like flash is that i am a Mac user and flash does crash my browsers very often. Flash pages do take sometimes too long to load, i just don't like the fancy load circle. A flash page has many times so many things going on that i don't know what i should do as an user, to navigate through the page. And I can't just right click and download a picture when I like it.
All these reasons don't have really to do with flash itself. It is the way designers are using flash. Many times a flash could load instantly without a waiting circle and then load all other parts. However many times designers tend to build one big flash instead of many small flash pieces which get called through the main flash.
As a project manager I don't like flash because any changes in the flash means recompiling the flash to swf and upload it again to the live server. Only flash designer can do updates and it takes forever to make a small text change.
But this is as well just a matter how the flash is developed. A lot of developers are using now for content in the flash XML. Which makes updates of images and content much easier without recompiling the flash piece.
So what is then the problem with flash, maybe too many users can't see flash because the browser does not support flash?
Not really, only a very low percentage of users do have web browsers which can't load flash.
Maybe the problem is SEO. Any content which is within a swf file are not searchable by google or bing. But this is not the reason neither. Flash pages can have no script text for search engines. It is a little bit more work but helps a lot.
HTML 5 is great, it works on any device, if the device supports flash or not.
However when we look at browser statistics then we see that 60% of users are using IE 8 or less which does not support HTML 5 and 22% are using FireFox 3.5 or less which means only partly HTML 5 support. This gives us a 18% chance that we reach consumers with HTML 5 supported browsers. This is a clear win for flash (right now).
Below are stats what HTML 5 support really means(Thank you Deep Blue Sky Blog)
Safari 4.0:
FireFox 3.5:
Google Chrome:
Opera 10:
Internet Explorer 6,7 and 8:
I want to talk a little more about websites and flash or not flash before i will talk about HTML 5.
As a company we should never have full flash pages only because it is cool. We should think when flash does make sense and when it is not necessary. Even without HTML 5, we can already utilize javacript (jquery) and DHTML to get cool effects.
I see many times jpg pictures in flash, even static images, why using flash just to show a slideshow?
Flash is great for vector graphics motions like comic book style, or to embed none Internet fonts. Flash is great that it looks on all browsers the same, but we can do this as well with CSS and proper html encoding. Flash is easy drag and drop to develop (sorry flash gurus, but most of the flash i see is not very complex).
Hover and mouse over can be done without flash. Please think twice before building something in flash, try to think if it can be done without flash. In 7 out of 10 flash pages I see, i know it can be done without flash.
And why again not flash? Faster to load, easier to change, better SEO experience, less crashes and it would work on the iPad.
IPad, the right moment to talk about HTML 5. HTML 5 will come standard and even Microsoft is saying they will go with HTML 5 and silverlight will be only be used in the future for mobile windows 7 app development.
But till then HTML 5 is only important for websites viewed on mobile devices. Many mobile devices don't support flash or only flash light. But just making a website in HTML 5 to support mobile devices is not the answer.
All but the iPad (or other big screen mobile devices) have too small screens that a regular page does not make sense. Plus these mobile devices have mostly touchscreen and for sure no mouse, this means many special effects we are used on PC websites don't work (like on mouse over). Even if your device would support flash the user experience would be bad if and user tries to navigate through a flash page which has mouse typical effects.
When we make the decision to support mobile devices, we need to have an alternative mobile page not a standard page without flash.
And this costs money, there are right now many different screen sizes we have to take in consideration when building a mobile page. We need as well to think what are the navigation interfaces, keyboard, touch screen, buttons etc.
As i mention in many reports, try to know your audience. Understand what device they use to get to your website. And don't look at your browser statistics. If your mobile web experience is bad, the users don't come back to the page with mobile devices. The web statistics might say that only 2.5% of your users are accessing the page through their smart phone, but if you don't have a smart phone version of your website then the % does not get higher. Who wants to navigate twice to a broken page or a page with bad mobile experience. The good part is, that most internet agencies don't have mobile versions of their site neither. See Nick Jones research
Don't ask your co workers anymore if HTML 5 or flash for your next relaunch or brand page. Ask how can we ensure each of our targeted user has the best user experience. Examples:
if you offer QR codes on your product packages then you need to have a mobile page.
If you sell something for an audience which does not surf the Internet mobile, then there is no need for a mobile page.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad.
Please visit my blog http://www.new-kid-on-the-blog.com
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Is flash already dead?
A few months ago i wrote in a blog that i believe Apple can change the landscape in terms of flash. When Apple announced that their iPad will not have flash most critics said this will be a big problem for the ipad.
This was six months ago, and critics have been wrong. Something else happened, many websites did switch to HTML video faster than expected. First of course the xxx websites. Then hulu (which first said they would never. 7 of 10 top 500 companies are now embedding their videos using html 5.
Most of the times these companies have both versions flash and html 5 player because Firefox and IE are not supporting HTML 5 very well.
Video is one thing, but there are much more flash executions than video. Even these parts are going away. Mostly because of the big rise of mobile devices like iPhone and iPad.
The CIO of Starbucks does bring it to the point.
Gillett (CIO Starbucks) said that iDevices from Apple are used more in its stores than any others. How important is that? Well, Gillett wanted to use Flash on the social network, but there wasn’t any way he could because of Steve Jobs’ refusal to support Flash.
It does not matter if we like flash or not, Apple has enough influence to drive companies not to use flash. I personally like it because I have never been a fan of flash and think it is slow needs too much memory, many times poor developed and brings my browsers to crash. As a kind of of a tekkie I prefer plain text, and some images.
Apple is now pushing the envelop further by not anymore shipping flash plugins with their desktops and notebooks.
Androids supposedly do have flash support, however many websites will still not work perfect on a Android if they use flash. The reason is the sites are developed for desktops with mouse. Mobile devices don't have a mouse, they have a touch screen. Things like mouse over are not working.
And of course screen size is smaller, the layout of the page needed to be changed. This helped html 5 tremendous. Companies needed to build mobile versions and therefor they decided not to use flash anymore.
Apple has a page which shows iPad compatible websites, this page did not get updated since a few month. There is no need because more and more websites are compatible.
Amazing that a company which is not market leader can push a new standard forward.
I always did wonder why flash got so big, and after talking with many designers, I understand why. Flash gives designers the ability to be creative at will and bind this creativity into something which can move has sound etc without the need to understand coding or HTML. Many things which are done in flash could have bend done with JavaScript or jquery, Divs and pure HTML.
Hover this would limit the designer because they would need to work with a developer together. But both types are speaking such a different language that this seems for many designers not an alternative.
With flash, a designer can do everything, pretty fast (even no action script or flex knowledge necessary). Just designing moving objects around and export as swf. They then send the swf and a piece of code to the developer to paste the code into the HTM page. Ready and done.
Not using flash means thinking a lot more before designing and be limited by coding knowledge. The project would go twice or three time longer.
Designers will change and woke more on HTML, and this great.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad.
Please visit my blog http://www.new-kid-on-the-blog.com
This was six months ago, and critics have been wrong. Something else happened, many websites did switch to HTML video faster than expected. First of course the xxx websites. Then hulu (which first said they would never. 7 of 10 top 500 companies are now embedding their videos using html 5.
Most of the times these companies have both versions flash and html 5 player because Firefox and IE are not supporting HTML 5 very well.
Video is one thing, but there are much more flash executions than video. Even these parts are going away. Mostly because of the big rise of mobile devices like iPhone and iPad.
The CIO of Starbucks does bring it to the point.
Gillett (CIO Starbucks) said that iDevices from Apple are used more in its stores than any others. How important is that? Well, Gillett wanted to use Flash on the social network, but there wasn’t any way he could because of Steve Jobs’ refusal to support Flash.
It does not matter if we like flash or not, Apple has enough influence to drive companies not to use flash. I personally like it because I have never been a fan of flash and think it is slow needs too much memory, many times poor developed and brings my browsers to crash. As a kind of of a tekkie I prefer plain text, and some images.
Apple is now pushing the envelop further by not anymore shipping flash plugins with their desktops and notebooks.
Androids supposedly do have flash support, however many websites will still not work perfect on a Android if they use flash. The reason is the sites are developed for desktops with mouse. Mobile devices don't have a mouse, they have a touch screen. Things like mouse over are not working.
And of course screen size is smaller, the layout of the page needed to be changed. This helped html 5 tremendous. Companies needed to build mobile versions and therefor they decided not to use flash anymore.
Apple has a page which shows iPad compatible websites, this page did not get updated since a few month. There is no need because more and more websites are compatible.
Amazing that a company which is not market leader can push a new standard forward.
I always did wonder why flash got so big, and after talking with many designers, I understand why. Flash gives designers the ability to be creative at will and bind this creativity into something which can move has sound etc without the need to understand coding or HTML. Many things which are done in flash could have bend done with JavaScript or jquery, Divs and pure HTML.
Hover this would limit the designer because they would need to work with a developer together. But both types are speaking such a different language that this seems for many designers not an alternative.
With flash, a designer can do everything, pretty fast (even no action script or flex knowledge necessary). Just designing moving objects around and export as swf. They then send the swf and a piece of code to the developer to paste the code into the HTM page. Ready and done.
Not using flash means thinking a lot more before designing and be limited by coding knowledge. The project would go twice or three time longer.
Designers will change and woke more on HTML, and this great.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad.
Please visit my blog http://www.new-kid-on-the-blog.com
Monday, September 13, 2010
Flash somehow coming back to iPhone and iPad
Apple did change their iOs third party developer guidelines. Still it does not allow flash in their apps, but it does not restrict anymore original flash developed apps to export to iOS native app.
Others tools are now as well allowed to build iPhone apps. This has partly to do with a deal Apple and Microsoft did, that allows Microsoft to offer tools to develop for the iPhone platform.
Another reason is that the iOS is losing ground against android platform, because more and more developers are moving to the open source android.
I am pretty sure we will see Adobe to either acquire a company which allows flash developer to export their apps for iOS or to reactivate their attempt to build into flash an iOS export.
Another positive side effect of the guideline changes is the possibility that soon silverlight is coming to the iPhone.
Silverlight is the Microsoft version of flash, much more slim, stable and more flexible as flash but not as much common. Most of the browsers have already flash plugin from the beginning installed but not silverlight. This would boost silverlight and helps Microsoft to gain more ground.
The guideline changes are an important step for Apple to grow their application pool (which did not grow much the last few months). Another effect with the guideline changes is that Apple will not be so strict anymore with their approval process. However sexual critical content will still not be allowed.
I am not a big fan of flash and i don't think it is a wise idea to allow flash developed apps and then converted to iOS to run on the iPhone. With step we will see too many developers using flash instead of using the native much more better SDk and code from Apple. We might see more apps, but as well more applications with bugs.
- Posted using My iPad
Others tools are now as well allowed to build iPhone apps. This has partly to do with a deal Apple and Microsoft did, that allows Microsoft to offer tools to develop for the iPhone platform.
Another reason is that the iOS is losing ground against android platform, because more and more developers are moving to the open source android.
I am pretty sure we will see Adobe to either acquire a company which allows flash developer to export their apps for iOS or to reactivate their attempt to build into flash an iOS export.
Another positive side effect of the guideline changes is the possibility that soon silverlight is coming to the iPhone.
Silverlight is the Microsoft version of flash, much more slim, stable and more flexible as flash but not as much common. Most of the browsers have already flash plugin from the beginning installed but not silverlight. This would boost silverlight and helps Microsoft to gain more ground.
The guideline changes are an important step for Apple to grow their application pool (which did not grow much the last few months). Another effect with the guideline changes is that Apple will not be so strict anymore with their approval process. However sexual critical content will still not be allowed.
I am not a big fan of flash and i don't think it is a wise idea to allow flash developed apps and then converted to iOS to run on the iPhone. With step we will see too many developers using flash instead of using the native much more better SDk and code from Apple. We might see more apps, but as well more applications with bugs.
- Posted using My iPad
Location:W Laurel St,Tampa,United States
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Google is showing off
If you use today google in the USA or UK and you are not using the safari browser, you will see a funny google dot logo which is floating around when you shake the browser ( move your browser window around by clicking in browser bar and then move the mouse) or if you go with your mouse close to the logo, like two magnets with same charge.
A lot of people are guessing if this logo related to google birthday. Usually Google does change their logo for certain holidays.
I don't know, but I know that google is showing off how JavaScript, jquery and some HTML5 can be used to do something cool (not on Safari there it is the normal logo)
I love this, it tells us we don't need flash to build motions. And really cool is that it works just fine on IE 8. On google chrome it looks even much more impressive, almost like 3D, same at Firefox, the dots are getting bigger to give this effect.
Well done google. I usually use bing and I did not know about it, if my coworker would not have told me.
BTW there is so much discussion about this logo going on, that when you google for "google dot logo", you will find 248 news and over 4 million search results about this topic.
And for Tuesday September 7th, number 12 in top search results was google logo.
Unbelievable how much impact such small change can have.
I am just wondering why this logo is not showing on Safari, is this a sign?
Correction:
Safari is displaying the google dots as well if you have the latest safari version on Mac or Windows. But does not work with iPad or older Safari versions on Windows.
- Posted using My iPad
A lot of people are guessing if this logo related to google birthday. Usually Google does change their logo for certain holidays.
I don't know, but I know that google is showing off how JavaScript, jquery and some HTML5 can be used to do something cool (not on Safari there it is the normal logo)
I love this, it tells us we don't need flash to build motions. And really cool is that it works just fine on IE 8. On google chrome it looks even much more impressive, almost like 3D, same at Firefox, the dots are getting bigger to give this effect.
Well done google. I usually use bing and I did not know about it, if my coworker would not have told me.
BTW there is so much discussion about this logo going on, that when you google for "google dot logo", you will find 248 news and over 4 million search results about this topic.
And for Tuesday September 7th, number 12 in top search results was google logo.
Unbelievable how much impact such small change can have.
I am just wondering why this logo is not showing on Safari, is this a sign?
Correction:
Safari is displaying the google dots as well if you have the latest safari version on Mac or Windows. But does not work with iPad or older Safari versions on Windows.
- Posted using My iPad
Location:W Laurel St,Tampa,United States
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Europe and XXX sites are ahead of American websites
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)