The iPad simulator included in the SDK does not include mobile Safari, however twitter user yassiryaha managed to figure out the browser's user agent string, probably by applying a UIWebView within a test app and tracing out the value. User agent strings, for those who don't know, are effectively an identification to the page being loaded to say what browser is loading it, it's security level, and other useful information for developers to serve up their content as best as possible for the content consumer's platform.

The user agent string for the iPad, and why it matters, is after the break.

NOTE: Edited after reader Andrew provided more accurate - and more consistent - information.

The iPad's user agent string:

Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_5_8; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.3 Safari/531.9

Edited: Mozilla/5.0(iPad; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.21.10 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.4 Mobile/7B314 Safari/531.21.10

I've left my argument below so as to not mislead my readers - I made a leap of faith and followed a random twitter users post on the topic without doing the due diligence to verify that data, and that was both dumb and wrong! The reality is that, assuming reader Andrew is correct, the iPad represents itself in line with how the iphone and iPod Touch differentiate themselves by specifying different device strings. This makes more sense - but the argument below is still somewhat relevant in that we do have a new class of devices to case for. On tomy somewhat now invalid argument!

remainder of original post:

This is intriguing and presents an interesting new issue for web developers. Why? Take a look at OSX's Safari user agent strings. The user agent string for the iPad represents itself exactly the same as the desktop version of Safari does. I can see why Apple would do this. The iPad is meant to be a full web experience device. But there's a problem with that argument. This isn't the desktop version of Safari. While they are both webkit based, it is inevitable that considerations will want to be made for the glorified Safari mobile browser in the iPad, and using the user agent string to identify that and case for it just wont be possible unless Apple modifies that string identifier before release.

It's not so much that this matters for development as much as that it sets a precedent for future slate browsers. Apple has said here that slate browsers, even if they are larger versions of existing mobile browsers, should identify as a desktop browser. What about plugins? Flash is the biggest issue to contend with there, but modern flash embed techniques all account for displaying default content when the plugin is unavailable, so proper implementation of graceful degradation techniques can overcome that issue. Interestingly enough, this is exactly how Apple recommends iPhone OS developers case for iPad vs. iPhone vs. iPod Touch hardware, via method availability, since Objective C returns graceful nils. So is that the precedent Apple is setting here for web development as well? Perhaps. And maybe this will all be null and void by the time the OS 4.0 SDK and the iPad land in March. As with all things Apple launch related, time will tell. One thing you can count on is that Apple put a lot of thought into this decision, and for right or wrong, if the iPad succeeds, the precedent will be set.

WordPress 2 - CMS management
Free, app store link

If you have a wordpress blog, whether hosted on your own domain or at wordpress directly, you simply need this app. The reality is that if you aren't jotting down ideas already on your mobile device, you should be. And if you aren't doing it in this app, you should be. Create posts and add media/tags/categories, approve comments, edit pages...and undoubtedly more planned for the future. You will be more productive and be more involved with your content with this app. And best of all,  its free, first party, and very stable.

CPanel - host management
$3.99, app store link

This one is still a bit early and lacking in overall features, but the potential is there for a great app. If your hosting is cPanel based, you can manage subdomains, see data quotas and usage, manage email addresses, and more. It's still a bit sparse, I don't open this one too often. But the promise of new features makes this one to look at.

Analytics - Google Analytics data viewer
$5.99, app store link

Google Analytics is becoming a defacto standard for analytics. If this isn't your primary metric, odds are good that it is at least a secondary. This third party app is worth every penny of $5.99, and they are still adding features. They just added multiple login capability, so you can see all of your GA data quickly, easily, and most importantly, formatted well for your mobile device.

Pinch Media Watcher - Pinch Media Analytics data viewer
$2.99, app store link

If you develop mobile apps, you probably know Pinch Media already, who recently merged with Flurry. This third party app allows you on the go access to your app analytics data. Good stuff.

FTPOnTheGo - FTP Client
$6.99, app store link

Some may balk at $6.99 for an app. But what did you pay for your desktop FTP client? FTPOnTheGo does a lot for $7 dollars, and the ability to view and edit (text editing only) any file on your server is a must have.

MobileMe iDisk - Cloud storage client
Free, app store link

For mobileme users, this one is a no brainer. You could argue this has nothing to do with web maintenance, but that all depends how (and if) you use the content on iDisk, so I included it in this list.

Echofon - Twitter client
Free, app store link

My blog spits out tweets to my posts behind the scenes. I always check that they were formatted correctly, and if I'm mobile when I post, a twitter client is essential. I'm torn between Echofon and TweetDeck. Either one will do the job well.

LinkedIn - LinkedIn client
Free, app store link

Same goes for LinkedIn, my status is tied to Twitter. So, as above, blog post==tweet==linkedIn status. Gotta be able to verify.

GoDaddy.com Mobile - domain management
Free, app store link

If you register through goDaddy, rejoice - they are fleshing out their domain management app, and it is comforting to know (especially if you own multiple domains, I'm at 20 currently) that you can access your info whenever, wherever.

There are more apps out there to do similar tasks, many are dependent on a users particular needs and the services they use. Peruse the app store, and be sure to use appropriate keywords. You may be surprised what pops up that will allow you instant access to something you just didn't have before.

What apps are you using? Drop recommendations in the comments.

This offering from Lenovo is likely to be the first of a new trend of convertible capacitive touch Windows 7 netbooks, bridging the gap between the new slate form factor (engadget) and the recent but well established netbook form factor. Windows Touch, the new multi-touch UI built into Windows 7, has been hampered thus far due to minimal hardware support and a non existent touch application sofware library. Hardware appears to be on track for a big year in 2010, but, as with all new and useful hardware technologies, it's useless without solid software to justify it. Hopefully the beta app store announced by Intel for Atom based devices pans out and provides a consolidated place for these new Touch devices to thrive.

If the rumours about the forthcoming Apple tablet device hold true and it runs the iPhone OS rather than full blown OS X, these PC devices will fill a nice niche of their own, blending a mix of full OS flexibility with mobile app convenience. A compromise for most, but something that many business users will lean toward when 'apps' don't always cut it.

]]> http://www.jeffdepascale.com/index.php/mobile/bing-app-launched/feed/ 1 http://www.jeffdepascale.com/index.php/mobile/nuance-removes-contact-upload-requiremen/ http://www.jeffdepascale.com/index.php/mobile/nuance-removes-contact-upload-requiremen/#comments Wed, 16 Dec 2009 02:40:29 +0000 Jeff dePascale http://www.jeffdepascale.com/?p=379 Nuance has reacted quickly to the initial negative response towards the required upload of a user's contact names to their servers, releasing a 1.1 update to their Dragon Dictation app today that makes the upload optional, and allows existing users to remove their existing data from Nuance's servers if they had already opted in. The data upload is intended to improve the recognition of contact names by the speech to text algorithms, however the previous requirement of this upload of personal data was a frequent topic of concern in initial reviews of the app.

See my original review of the app here.

At the begin of 2009, Apple was the only real player in the mobile app market, and today there is no argument that the platform still holds the lead by a huge amount for quality, useful third party applications. But as we push further into 2010 and app stores for Android, Palm WebOS, and even Blackberry and WinMo gain market share, users considering jumping ship will face a similar plight for the first time. How many invested dollars in platform specific apps do I stand to lose by jumping platforms?

The cost of mobile apps and the .99 cent phenomenon
An interesting factor to consider is the actual cost for these apps. Amazingly, the iPhone App Store has somehow managed to make the one dollar purchase a new cultural standard. There are three unspoken rules for price point that near every app purchaser follows, whether conscious or not. If it doesn't offer incredibly deep functionality, it should probably be free. If it does offer something useful, it should be .99 cents and have incredible customer support to boot. If it costs more than that, it'd better either be something for a niche market or the latest 3D game from EA. Anything else will get low ranked into submission, and subsequently the .99 cent price point always seems to show up eventually. The interesting result of this is that the average user may have up to 50 apps loaded in their device, and have only paid in the neighborhood of 20 dollars, if even that. For these users, the cost involved with switching platforms is low enough that the cost barrier doesn't outweigh enough of the device cost to rule out the switch.

Higher cost apps
Low cost apps may ultimately be less of a concern, but what about higher cost apps? Navigation apps are an obvious first contender here, with dollar figures as high as $99 and up. But even if we disregard this app category, $5 apps add up very quickly. A mobile professional using a few more expensive apps can be looking at an app bill up to the $50-$100 range to get their existing applications onto their new device.

Free apps
Even free apps still pose issues. In the past, the worst part of getting a new device was re-entering all of your contacts into your shiny new device (on a monochrome screen, no less). Thankfully those days are generally over, thanks to desktop sync or carriers handling the move for you. But for the first time users may face a new transition nuisance in the form of setting up their apps all over again in their new device, if the app (or an equivalent one) even exists in the new platform's store. There's both learning curve considerations and the time required to re-enter all of your preferences and logins. It can be a full days venture or more depending on the apps in question.

Pulling the trigger
For most, the deciding factor will be cost, and it's likely a percentage. If a user is looking at $150 for a subsidized phone and then immediately face an additional initial outlay of $50 or more in app costs right from the get go, plus a day to get their device setup with those apps, it may be enough to make users think twice about the switch. I'd wager that if the total app cost is less than 30% of the device cost, it's negligible to the user. It's a phenomenon that we haven't truly experienced yet, with the exception of possibly legacy WinMo users who may have purchased software for the platform and jumped ship to the iPhone. But the percentages of users will grow exponentially this year as Apple faces what is likely to be a much larger platform and apps push than they've seen yet from Android and Palm. Inevitably a portion of users will consider the switch. What is unknown is whether those users will have the foresight to realize the app transition cost and, if so, if that will be enough for them to stay with their existing platform instead of jumping ship.

It's an interesting notion to think that perhaps Apple intended this all along, anticipating the competition that was guaranteed to emerge. Unlike on desktop OS's, mobile platforms don't follow the serial number registration paradigm. As such, it is near impossible for third party developers to even allow a free or low cost transition between platforms, as many desktop software providers do today. Time will tell whether platform agnosticism will begin to appear in third party app purchases,  but for the time being, as users continue to download and purchase more apps, they are effectively creating more vested interest in sticking to their existing platform, making the inevitable question of jumping platforms all that much harder to stomach.

So what do you think? What would be your threshold for switching platforms being simply too much to contend with? Sound off in the comments.

I'll leave the specs to the tech blogs, here's some links:

Engadget

Mashable

Gizmodo

Got all that? Good. So what does this all mean? Google's sudden announcement of sorts (of course, this is still all very unofficial) could signal an important shift in the way Google is marketing Android. Clearly, the real competition for Android is the Apple iPhone OS. Apple has always been a hardware manufacturer who also makes their own software and OS, however Google has always kept a hard line of being the exist opposite, focusing on data as a product. If Android is to succeed, part of that success will be to distance itself from the third party only precedent that Windows Mobile has already set, and adding a first party device could help to do just that. Even Microsoft has realized the value of a first party device with the often rumored pink phone.

Android is still a third party first platform, and although this may create some buzz for Android in Q1, this is still a third party phone from HTC with a Google logo on it. That does make it a gold standard Android device (with no third party skins and theoretically first priority ROM updates), but so is the Droid, so what is the justification for Google? If the no contract purchase rumor holds true, is this just Google making an attempt to try and shift the market away from subsidized devices? We'll have to wait and see, but since we've already effectively seen the ROM that will be in the device in the Droid (2.1), that really only leaves room for hardware surprises to capture market share. We'll likely see what cards Google has to play at CES in January.

The real time feed could cause far reaching benefits for all of Google's services over the next few months as the big G continues their roll out. It's a safe bet that as this technology matures in the coming months we'll see further improvements that are thanks to the accessibility of real time data.