In general, I agree, though I might have a charger on my night stand or by my couch or at the entry door. It really doesn't have to be fast if it's a daily update. The USB cable would be necessary for video or lots of audio file updates, but if it's just calendars, contacts and maybe a few audio tracks, WiFi would do the job pretty well.
I agree. Most of the times I synch there is actually not very much data that needs to be transferred. A couple of podcasts perhaps, and calendar, but apart from that, it's rare that speed would be a problem.
That you would actually defend choosing a crap app because it fits your ideals, instead of an implementation that works the way it's supposed to.
I'm curious about that, what part of it was crap? I didn't see anything significant in the video. It looked a lot like wired syncing, without the wire.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Well, remember, every time you do a sync, it also does a system backup.
The desktop side part does address it, it offers a way to turn that off. That part was shown in the video. It doesn't look like it disables it if you do a wired connection, but I suppose that should be addressed because an occasional backup should be done. That said, most people don't back up, even a weekly backup is far better than what most people do for themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie
Nope. This is why sophisticated users prefer Android. No bullshit.
Indubitably. Chateu de Droid '09 was the best vintage. '10 was a tad too 'oak-y'.
Wow, did we all buy our iPhones or are we just renting them from Apple? Even if I rented a laptop, I'd still have the freedom to put software on it.
You can put what you like on your iPhone, Apple are not stopping you.
Apple are just refusing to put software in THIER store (not your store).
There are many alternative phones out there, you are free to choose.
Just as Apple don't have to PCs or Windows in their Retail Stores, they don't have to sell software they don't like in the App Store. How simple is that?
Bingo. This is one the main reasons I am willing to pay for MobileMe. And this is a good reason for them to consider massively dropping the price or making it free. This eliminates the need for what most people would want/use wireless syncing for.
Precisely why I didn't really see the point of wireless synching. Hell, the backup iTunes does of my iPhone takes almost 5 minutes every time I sync and I get impatient with that. Doing it wirelessly would take forever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
True, but not everyone wants to have a MobileMe account, but would still like to be able to do that quickly.
Perhaps like Tulkas said, they'll reduce the price or even make it free in the near future. IMO, MobileMe is a must have for any iPhone owner.
Nope. This is why sophisticated users prefer Android. No bullshit.
I am gonna print this one and save it for some rainy days
Sophisticated ?
Sophisticated as in fine amateurs of aesthetically beautiful and innovative industrial design, high quality customer friendly software, operating system, ecosystem ? No wait, those sophisticated persons buy Apple products...
You must be rather referring to sophisticated evening kernel rebuilders, anti-viruses power admins, poor application lovers running on barely good enough OS on cheap hardware ?
I like the concept of an option to wireless synch from your computer(s) to your mobile devices.
However there are some concerns:
1) security
2) speed
3) reliability
4) IP protection
Can this be done in such a way to provide secure access to both my computer(s) and mobile devices?
Is any sensitive information (calendars, contacts and data, for example), secure from being intercepted, and even worse, modified?
While most won't care about a few .mp3 files, there are other, more valuable files... Are they secure?
The speed of current WiFi makes this, largely, impractical for anything but a few mp3 files while within 300 feet of your computer.
I've got lots of videos and some big content files that I need to regularly synch-- especially during the grandkids soccer season... WiFi synch isn't practical for these.
The user will tend to use this as a "convenience", forgoing backup and a full synch, just to get (synch) a few photos or songs... That's a good thing, IMO (although you could just connect and be done with it).
Having forgone backups (tradeoff for speed), what happens when the device crashes, as others have mentioned? What will the user need to do to restore the device and recover its content?
As most know:
-- the worst time to design a backup/recovery procedure is right after a failure
-- a reliable backup procedure needs to be done automatically and/or manually on a fixed (cast in stone) schedule
-- if ya' ain't got backups, ya' ain't got recovery
A large part of the appeal of Apple's mobile devices is access to 3rd-party content: movies; music videos; songs/albums; apps, etc. I suspect that the owners of this content would not be pleased if it is being bounced around the airwaves without any control or protection. Sitting at my home computer, I can see at least 6 networks of neighbors...
I have iPhone/iPads apps I am working on. At some stage in their development, they get installed on on my mobile devices. I definitely do not want my IP floating, unfettered, amongst the neighbors.
I believe the only way (if any way) 3rd parties would permit their content to be synched over WiFi, is if the capability was provided and guaranteed by Apple.
OK, all that said....
I believe that:
-- content can be secured using encryption.
-- WiFi speeds will improve in the near future.
-- backup and reliability programs and procedures can be developed for mobile devices
-- IP content can be encrypted and tied to specific devices
-- Apple will need to provide this and take responsibility for it
In the not-too-distant future, I see someone buying, say, an iPad, as the first and only computing device in the household (cable TV/Internet router aside).
This will come with a free MobileMe account tied to the device.
They will plug their new iPad in for electrical charging, and (if the cloud is available) it will "find" their MobileMe account for content charging (new purchases or updates).
Cameras and other devices will connect to the iPad to add personal content (they already do).
In this world, the iPad will [mostly] be untethered from any computer... it can be tethered, but, doesn't need to be.
When the cloud is accessible, synchs and partial backups (interruptible and restartable) will take place... automatically.
So, Yeah, I like the idea... But it depends on how its done, and who takes responsibility for it being done right!
Truth be told I would bet good money apple rejected this because its probably a feature they intend to introduce themselves on an upcoming release.
Kinda lame, but thruth be told, if any of us were in charge of apple we'd probably do the same thing.
I totally agree with them disabling palm from syncing with iTunes though. If palm wants to create there own music store they are more then welcome too, they cant just piggy back off apple's success though.
Well, remember, every time you do a sync, it also does a system backup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
... The desktop side part does address it, it offers a way to turn that off. That part was shown in the video. ...
Another potential problem that would end up falling on Apple's shoulders. Users turn off backups, never do one again, have a problem with their iPhone, can't restore it properly, Angry phone calls to Apple support ensue...
Remember, when people have system problems resulting from 3rd party utilities like this, they don't usually turn to the 3rd party to help them out, nor do they become angry with the 3rd party if they can't be helped. Whether that's rational or not, that's the way people behave, and it's entirely reasonable for Apple to prevent these sort of situations from occurring by not approving apps that could lead to them.
Because if Apple did it, it would be done properly!
That's what people with grudges against Apple don't understand: Apple has given us reason to trust that when they implement a feature, they'll implement it well.
It's like with copy-and-paste: Apple was not the first to implement it in a phone, but they arguably did it the best. I'm sure plenty of people wanted the ability but also didn't want to settle with half-baked implementations of it. Does that make us blind Apple fanboys? No, it means we're patient enough to wait for it to be done well.
I'm kind of torn on this one. On the one hand it's just wrong to reject an app that they admit "technically doesn't break the rules," (if that part is true), but on the other, based on people who've seen the demo, it seems like a crappy app with limited utility.
I would argue against what is said above that Apple mostly just allows wireless syncing with Time Capsule or a TM drive because it's "trickle" data and therefore the bandwidth doesn't matter as much because it's just tiny updates every 15 minutes or so rather than gigabytes of songs and music.
On the other other hand though, my Apple TV will wirelessly sync huge HD movies in almost no time at all, so wireless syncing of even a 32 Gig iPhone wouldn't be *that* painful. It would certainly be nice to be able to leave my iPhone anywhere in my house and not have to run to the sync cradle in the morning before work because the phone had intelligently taken the opportunity to wirelessly sync while everyone was sleeping.
I think the trouble is that while we can all probably find an example of a time when wireless syncing would be handy, as an overall solution for syncing for the average user it's not going to work. By that I mean if it was available, the average user would try to use it, have problems with it, have it fail a lot, and might subsequently come to the conclusion that their phone sucks or Apple sucks etc.
It's the fact that the iPhone is marketed to and used by those pesky "average users" again that's likely the problem again.
I too was thinking about the Apple TV sync when reading this thread. It would work just fine. Something tells me Steve is worried about the sync eating up the battery life or something. While you could sync while charging away from your Mac in the house, my main problem would be that I don't leave my computer on when I am not using it. While it would be nice to have, I guess I really don't need it.
What would provide value is being able to sync these devices with a time capsule or some other always on device. Requiring a computer with iTunes to activate your iPad is just lame! Don't get me wrong... Love the iPad, but didn't get why I couldn't use it out of the box. At some point these things need to stop being accessories.
I can understand both sides. Wifi syncing would be great convenience, however there really are security and stability concerns if something was to go wrong during syncing over the air. A shame but understandable they'd reject it. Hopefully he'll do well on Cydia and maybe in the future it'll be more feasible to have this as a shipping feature.
It's also suspicious that the guy went *straight* to Cydia the next day. Almost as if the rejection was expected and the application to the app store just done for cred or for publicity.
Is any sensitive information (calendars, contacts and data, for example), secure from being intercepted, and even worse, modified?
While most won't care about a few .mp3 files, there are other, more valuable files... Are they secure?
Why are people suddenly so concerned that security is an issue here? Do you worry when you're writing confidential emails over wifi? Wifi transfers can easily be secure, that's a fact.
I don't understand how he managed to such an app without breaking any rules.
I mean, the sync is deep down in the system, isn't it? So how did he manage to fool the system and make it work, because the way I understand it, the sync is the same as when done over the usb cable?
That's how I feel too. For security reasons alone, there should have been clear rules about this type of app.
Given that the app allows access to data you can sync, if you were on a shared access point, how is Apple supposed to know that the app isn't so insecure that simply typing in a URL would give you full access to the device's data?
While this is a cool utility to have and one I'd quite like, it's not a huge deal to lose the feature and I'd rather be assured the phone has some amount of security on public wifi access points.
Comments
In general, I agree, though I might have a charger on my night stand or by my couch or at the entry door. It really doesn't have to be fast if it's a daily update. The USB cable would be necessary for video or lots of audio file updates, but if it's just calendars, contacts and maybe a few audio tracks, WiFi would do the job pretty well.
I agree. Most of the times I synch there is actually not very much data that needs to be transferred. A couple of podcasts perhaps, and calendar, but apart from that, it's rare that speed would be a problem.
That you would actually defend choosing a crap app because it fits your ideals, instead of an implementation that works the way it's supposed to.
I'm curious about that, what part of it was crap? I didn't see anything significant in the video. It looked a lot like wired syncing, without the wire.
Well, remember, every time you do a sync, it also does a system backup.
The desktop side part does address it, it offers a way to turn that off. That part was shown in the video. It doesn't look like it disables it if you do a wired connection, but I suppose that should be addressed because an occasional backup should be done. That said, most people don't back up, even a weekly backup is far better than what most people do for themselves.
Nope. This is why sophisticated users prefer Android. No bullshit.
Indubitably. Chateu de Droid '09 was the best vintage. '10 was a tad too 'oak-y'.
Or was that the wrong kind of sophisticated?
Wow, did we all buy our iPhones or are we just renting them from Apple? Even if I rented a laptop, I'd still have the freedom to put software on it.
Yeah you own your iPhone. You don't own the App Store. They can decide what they want to put in there.
Since you own your iPhone, you have the right to jailbreak if you want.
Wow, did we all buy our iPhones or are we just renting them from Apple? Even if I rented a laptop, I'd still have the freedom to put software on it.
You can put what you like on your iPhone, Apple are not stopping you.
Apple are just refusing to put software in THIER store (not your store).
There are many alternative phones out there, you are free to choose.
Just as Apple don't have to PCs or Windows in their Retail Stores, they don't have to sell software they don't like in the App Store. How simple is that?
Bingo. This is one the main reasons I am willing to pay for MobileMe. And this is a good reason for them to consider massively dropping the price or making it free. This eliminates the need for what most people would want/use wireless syncing for.
Precisely why I didn't really see the point of wireless synching. Hell, the backup iTunes does of my iPhone takes almost 5 minutes every time I sync and I get impatient with that. Doing it wirelessly would take forever.
True, but not everyone wants to have a MobileMe account, but would still like to be able to do that quickly.
Perhaps like Tulkas said, they'll reduce the price or even make it free in the near future. IMO, MobileMe is a must have for any iPhone owner.
Nope. This is why sophisticated users prefer Android. No bullshit.
I am gonna print this one and save it for some rainy days
Sophisticated ?
Sophisticated as in fine amateurs of aesthetically beautiful and innovative industrial design, high quality customer friendly software, operating system, ecosystem ? No wait, those sophisticated persons buy Apple products...
You must be rather referring to sophisticated evening kernel rebuilders, anti-viruses power admins, poor application lovers running on barely good enough OS on cheap hardware ?
Every single post booing Apple for what must be another draconian attack, are childish at best, pathetically uninformed at worst.
Until of course, Apple comes out with the functionality built in, then you'll love it.
I would rather be "pathetically uninformed" than a blind Apple Fan Boy.
However there are some concerns:
1) security
2) speed
3) reliability
4) IP protection
Can this be done in such a way to provide secure access to both my computer(s) and mobile devices?
Is any sensitive information (calendars, contacts and data, for example), secure from being intercepted, and even worse, modified?
While most won't care about a few .mp3 files, there are other, more valuable files... Are they secure?
The speed of current WiFi makes this, largely, impractical for anything but a few mp3 files while within 300 feet of your computer.
I've got lots of videos and some big content files that I need to regularly synch-- especially during the grandkids soccer season... WiFi synch isn't practical for these.
The user will tend to use this as a "convenience", forgoing backup and a full synch, just to get (synch) a few photos or songs... That's a good thing, IMO (although you could just connect and be done with it).
Having forgone backups (tradeoff for speed), what happens when the device crashes, as others have mentioned? What will the user need to do to restore the device and recover its content?
As most know:
-- the worst time to design a backup/recovery procedure is right after a failure
-- a reliable backup procedure needs to be done automatically and/or manually on a fixed (cast in stone) schedule
-- if ya' ain't got backups, ya' ain't got recovery
A large part of the appeal of Apple's mobile devices is access to 3rd-party content: movies; music videos; songs/albums; apps, etc. I suspect that the owners of this content would not be pleased if it is being bounced around the airwaves without any control or protection. Sitting at my home computer, I can see at least 6 networks of neighbors...
I have iPhone/iPads apps I am working on. At some stage in their development, they get installed on on my mobile devices. I definitely do not want my IP floating, unfettered, amongst the neighbors.
I believe the only way (if any way) 3rd parties would permit their content to be synched over WiFi, is if the capability was provided and guaranteed by Apple.
OK, all that said....
I believe that:
-- content can be secured using encryption.
-- WiFi speeds will improve in the near future.
-- backup and reliability programs and procedures can be developed for mobile devices
-- IP content can be encrypted and tied to specific devices
-- Apple will need to provide this and take responsibility for it
In the not-too-distant future, I see someone buying, say, an iPad, as the first and only computing device in the household (cable TV/Internet router aside).
This will come with a free MobileMe account tied to the device.
They will plug their new iPad in for electrical charging, and (if the cloud is available) it will "find" their MobileMe account for content charging (new purchases or updates).
Cameras and other devices will connect to the iPad to add personal content (they already do).
In this world, the iPad will [mostly] be untethered from any computer... it can be tethered, but, doesn't need to be.
When the cloud is accessible, synchs and partial backups (interruptible and restartable) will take place... automatically.
So, Yeah, I like the idea... But it depends on how its done, and who takes responsibility for it being done right!
.
Kinda lame, but thruth be told, if any of us were in charge of apple we'd probably do the same thing.
I totally agree with them disabling palm from syncing with iTunes though. If palm wants to create there own music store they are more then welcome too, they cant just piggy back off apple's success though.
Until of course, Apple comes out with the functionality built in, then you'll love it.
I would rather be "pathetically uninformed" than a blind Apple Fan Boy.
Because if Apple did it, it would be done properly!
Well, remember, every time you do a sync, it also does a system backup.
... The desktop side part does address it, it offers a way to turn that off. That part was shown in the video. ...
Another potential problem that would end up falling on Apple's shoulders. Users turn off backups, never do one again, have a problem with their iPhone, can't restore it properly, Angry phone calls to Apple support ensue...
Remember, when people have system problems resulting from 3rd party utilities like this, they don't usually turn to the 3rd party to help them out, nor do they become angry with the 3rd party if they can't be helped. Whether that's rational or not, that's the way people behave, and it's entirely reasonable for Apple to prevent these sort of situations from occurring by not approving apps that could lead to them.
Because if Apple did it, it would be done properly!
That's what people with grudges against Apple don't understand: Apple has given us reason to trust that when they implement a feature, they'll implement it well.
It's like with copy-and-paste: Apple was not the first to implement it in a phone, but they arguably did it the best. I'm sure plenty of people wanted the ability but also didn't want to settle with half-baked implementations of it. Does that make us blind Apple fanboys? No, it means we're patient enough to wait for it to be done well.
I'm kind of torn on this one. On the one hand it's just wrong to reject an app that they admit "technically doesn't break the rules," (if that part is true), but on the other, based on people who've seen the demo, it seems like a crappy app with limited utility.
I would argue against what is said above that Apple mostly just allows wireless syncing with Time Capsule or a TM drive because it's "trickle" data and therefore the bandwidth doesn't matter as much because it's just tiny updates every 15 minutes or so rather than gigabytes of songs and music.
On the other other hand though, my Apple TV will wirelessly sync huge HD movies in almost no time at all, so wireless syncing of even a 32 Gig iPhone wouldn't be *that* painful. It would certainly be nice to be able to leave my iPhone anywhere in my house and not have to run to the sync cradle in the morning before work because the phone had intelligently taken the opportunity to wirelessly sync while everyone was sleeping.
I think the trouble is that while we can all probably find an example of a time when wireless syncing would be handy, as an overall solution for syncing for the average user it's not going to work. By that I mean if it was available, the average user would try to use it, have problems with it, have it fail a lot, and might subsequently come to the conclusion that their phone sucks or Apple sucks etc.
It's the fact that the iPhone is marketed to and used by those pesky "average users" again that's likely the problem again.
I too was thinking about the Apple TV sync when reading this thread. It would work just fine. Something tells me Steve is worried about the sync eating up the battery life or something. While you could sync while charging away from your Mac in the house, my main problem would be that I don't leave my computer on when I am not using it. While it would be nice to have, I guess I really don't need it.
What would provide value is being able to sync these devices with a time capsule or some other always on device. Requiring a computer with iTunes to activate your iPad is just lame! Don't get me wrong... Love the iPad, but didn't get why I couldn't use it out of the box. At some point these things need to stop being accessories.
It's also suspicious that the guy went *straight* to Cydia the next day. Almost as if the rejection was expected and the application to the app store just done for cred or for publicity.
I would have too.
Apple isn't the only one entitled to make a buck.
Is any sensitive information (calendars, contacts and data, for example), secure from being intercepted, and even worse, modified?
While most won't care about a few .mp3 files, there are other, more valuable files... Are they secure?
Why are people suddenly so concerned that security is an issue here? Do you worry when you're writing confidential emails over wifi? Wifi transfers can easily be secure, that's a fact.
If you think Android is open, you're wrong!
Already taken care of.
I don't understand how he managed to such an app without breaking any rules.
I mean, the sync is deep down in the system, isn't it? So how did he manage to fool the system and make it work, because the way I understand it, the sync is the same as when done over the usb cable?
That's how I feel too. For security reasons alone, there should have been clear rules about this type of app.
Given that the app allows access to data you can sync, if you were on a shared access point, how is Apple supposed to know that the app isn't so insecure that simply typing in a URL would give you full access to the device's data?
While this is a cool utility to have and one I'd quite like, it's not a huge deal to lose the feature and I'd rather be assured the phone has some amount of security on public wifi access points.
I can see Apples concerns over security in this app as it probably would be able to be synced to others iPODs as well with a little bit of hacking.