Pixelwits

While listening to Accidental Tech Podcast #134, I couldn't help but think of the old metaphor of three blind men trying to describe an elephant-- John, Marco, and Casey each weighed in on their opinions of the iPad Pro, conceded that it may be a good product but was "not for me" in each case, all the while circling just around the edge of seeing this product at face value. I feel like John can see the true potential, but his own use cases preclude him from seeing the "elephant" and he knows it.  

I cannot wait to buy the iPad Pro. If I have the money at ship date, I will buy it sight unseen. I will probably get a "New Apple TV" someday and I love the minor increments of the iPhone 6S, but those things can wait. I NEED the iPad Pro.  

I am not a professional artist. I am a hobbyist. I am also not a professional programmer. I have made some money in the App Store and I still work on games in my spare time, but I don't do it for a living. I'm just a common IT security goon.  

Fortunately I have had the pleasure of playing with a Surface Pro for the past six months or more. It is a great device, and I am looking forward to seeing what else is in store from Microsoft. That said, my dream device (up until last week) was a Cintiq. With a $2000+ entry point, this was a pipe dream akin to me browsing at the Ferrari dealership.  

I have gone back and forth from drawing on my Surface Pro and my IPad (with a Wacom Stylus). Both have their pros and cons. Drawing on the Surface is great because I can paint in Photoshop. While there are many great contenders for king of the PC Painting spot (Autodesk's Sketchbook Pro and Manga Studio both have their supporters) it seems like Photoshop is still king. Pretty strange given how poorly they have focused on digital painting and how high the learning curve is. When you watch a pro using Photoshop with a stylus/keyboard combination, though, you quickly get the picture. It's a lot like AutoCAD or Blender or Maya or any other sufficiently mature creative app. The more time you invest, the faster you can work. The problem with the Surface, though, is the stylus. Sure, it's pressure sensitive. The v2 that I have is Wacom under the hood, and as an amateur it is perfectly serviceable. The difference between the Surface Pro and the Cintiq, however, is massive.  

The Cintiq offers incredibly low latency and tilt sensitivity. These mean more to a digital artist than you might imagine. The other major difference is in pressure adjustability and surface friction. The Surface stylus feels like plastic on glass. This is fine for drawing basic shapes or marking up documents. The Cintiq is actually easy to mistake for a real ink pen, or a pencil, or a paintbrush. Like the first time you saw a Retina screen, you probably need to touch one of these to get an idea of the difference.  

Drawing on the iPad 3 with a pressure sensitive stylus is great, too. The software from Autodesk and Adobe is downright amazing, although limited compared to Photoshop. The real problem, though, is that even though the rubber tip on the stylus is good and the pressure is fantastic, it still feels like drawing with a whiteboard marker. Just like the Surface, it feels more like a fun toy and less like a real artist's toolset. 

How do I know Apple have found this sweet spot? I don't. But I would put money on it. I laughed last week when Marco implied before the event that he was "worried" about Apple because he thought they were just trying to cram more features into the iPad to boost sales of a declining product. This is clearly not the case. They are running a marathon, or "skating to where the puck is headed" as Gruber might say. If you want to know why Apple is releasing the Pencil now, only with the IPad Pro, think about this question first: why is the Pencil an iPad accessory? If digital painters love Photoshop so much, why didn't they put this new touch technology into the MacBook? You might say it's just a matter of time, and that it is destined to be in all their computers eventually. I don't think so, though. Just like multitouch isn't for MacBooks, I'm not sure that the stylus is either. Sure, it would work. Almost certainly it would work better than multitouch in a notebook. But Apple more than anyone knows that just being able TO do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do something. That "everything to everyone" mentality leads to compromised products like the Surface. 

  I don't have an Apple Watch. Not yet, anyway. I certainly can see the value, however. Like most dads with a big family, I don't make tech purchases lightly. As much as the Apple watch impresses, it's still a luxury. Until the market shifts enough to lower the price, increase the functionality, or allow me to win one as a door prize at a tech conference, I will keep carrying on as I have. All that said, when the time is right I will not hesitate. I am confident in the Apple Watch as a product, and here is why:

I'm one of those weirdos that carries two phones. I have for a long time, partly because I like to keep my work and personal lives separate, but also partly because I love both iOS and Android. I have had a new iPhone every couple of years since the 3GS, and I have had an HTC One M7 (that I loved as much as my beloved iPhone) and a Nexus 5 (which is ok too.) As much as they have played tug-of-war for my attention, I generally have found that keep going back to the iPhone as my main device. This is even more true since I got the 6+, which with iOS 8 has addressed pretty much all of my concerns about the platform. 

I have also been lucky enough to have received both an Android Wear watch and a Pebble. Both were given to me pre-loved by a couple of very generous nerdy friends that knew I would appreciate the chance to try out a wearable. While I have had my eye on both sports bands like the FitBit and smart watches for quite some time, I had yet to find a real driver to get one. The motion tracking in the 6+ combined with alerts from my Bluetooth earbuds have filled both of my main drivers for a wearable. This has left me in the unique position of evaluating a wearable mainly as a timepiece, with alerts such as message notifications being secondary. 

In this regard, both the Pebble and Android Wear are perfectly serviceable, at least at first glance. The colour screen and advanced features of the Android Wear have made it my go-to device, even given the comparatively limited battery life. There is a funny issue with the LG G-watch, though: if for some reason my Nexus 5 goes completely flat (which happens more than I care to admit when I compare it to my iPhone 6+) it doesn't take more than half a day for the LG watch to start drifting wildly as a timepiece. And I am not talking about a few seconds per day— the LG watch, left without a tether to an Android phone, will be as much as half an hour wrong after only a few short hours. 

  I don't have an Apple Watch. Not yet, anyway. I certainly can see the value, however. Like most dads with a big family, I don't make tech purchases lightly. As much as the Apple watch impresses, it's still a luxury. Until the market shifts enough to lower the price, increase the functionality, or allow me to win one as a door prize at a tech conference, I will keep carrying on as I have. All that said, when the time is right I will not hesitate. I am confident in the Apple Watch as a product, and here is why:

I'm one of those weirdos that carries two phones. I have for a long time, partly because I like to keep my work and personal lives separate, but also partly because I love both iOS and Android. I have had a new iPhone every couple of years since the 3GS, and I have had an HTC One M7 (that I loved as much as my beloved iPhone) and a Nexus 5 (which is ok too.) As much as they have played tug-of-war for my attention, I generally have found that keep going back to the iPhone as my main device. This is even more true since I got the 6+, which with iOS 8 has addressed pretty much all of my concerns about the platform. 

I have also been lucky enough to have received both an Android Wear watch and a Pebble. Both were given to me pre-loved by a couple of very generous nerdy friends that knew I would appreciate the chance to try out a wearable. While I have had my eye on both sports bands like the FitBit and smart watches for quite some time, I had yet to find a real driver to get one. The motion tracking in the 6+ combined with alerts from my Bluetooth earbuds have filled both of my main drivers for a wearable. This has left me in the unique position of evaluating a wearable mainly as a timepiece, with alerts such as message notifications being secondary. 

In this regard, both the Pebble and Android Wear are perfectly serviceable, at least at first glance. The colour screen and advanced features of the Android Wear have made it my go-to device, even given the comparatively limited battery life. There is a funny issue with the LG G-watch, though: if for some reason my Nexus 5 goes completely flat (which happens more than I care to admit when I compare it to my iPhone 6+) it doesn't take more than half a day for the LG watch to start drifting wildly as a timepiece. And I am not talking about a few seconds per day— the LG watch, left without a tether to an Android phone, will be as much as half an hour wrong after only a few short hours. 

Tony Sly, vocalist and guitarist for No Use for a Name, died on July 31, 2012. While I often revisit the music of my favorite artists from my teenage years, there are very few that have not only stuck with me year after year, but have also grown along with me. In the three years before his death, Tony Sly supplemented the traditionally punk-oriented albums of NUFAN with a series of acoustic material, the first two of which were re-workings of earlier material with his friend Joey Cape (Lagwagon). He followed these up with two full-length acoustic albums of original songs. 

Tony became a father in 2004, the same year I had my first son Wil. I suspect that it was this parallel change in his life that made his music so important to me, particularly these later albums. His earlier work tended to focus on social and emotional issues that always rang true to me, certainly. These two acoustic albums, however, were almost entirely about family: the struggles of being away on tour, his feelings for his wife, and his love for his children. I was lucky enough to see No Use for a Name several times over the years, but I will always regret missing the chance to see one of Tony Sly's solo shows. 

The song Keira was was written for his second daughter, who was born in 2008. Like many of his songs it is bittersweet, particularly with the hindsight of his death. It is a short, simple love song and a lullaby for his little girl, and it hits me hard every time I listen to it.

It is funny how often we don't feel the true weight of how much someone means to us until they are gone. Throughout the month of July, I will be listening to all of Tony's music quite a lot, and I am going to share some of my favorites as I go. These posts may be more self-indulgent than usual, and if this isn't your cup of tea you can overlook it. I hope that by sharing, maybe someone else will get as much out of his songs as I have.

Tony Sly - Keira

YouTube: https://youtu.be/onWOzRDiuDE

iTunes: http://itunes.apple.com/album/keira/id347434968?i=347435176&uo=5

Google Play: https://play.google.com/music/preview/T63btjg2tl6arfeiyua2j4o3m44

There has been no shortage of commentary on Apple's newly-unveiled music service or the WWDC keynote that accompanied its launch (perhaps the most amusing of which was Merlin and Dan's coverage on episode 224 of Back to Work — http://5by5.tv/b2w/224). The consensus seems to be that the service is largely Apple's repackaging of the Beats Music service that was won in their acquisition of the headset manufacturer, and that the keynote was a misstep in Apple's usually on-point delivery. 

On the whole, I agree with much of the Internet buzz:

-The Apple Music service seems like a thin veneer on the previous Beats Music offering, and to date they have shown very little that distinguishes it from other, more experienced players like Spotify or Pandora. 

- The keynote seemed rushed, sparse on news, and poorly rehearsed— in short, it was sorely out of place as the "One More Thing" topic of a WWDC keynote.

-If one were to speculate, it wouldn't be hard to imagine a different keynote entirely— one that was focused on a different announcement such as a new HomeKit-centric Apple TV or similarly weighty breakthrough product. 

While these observations are certainly astute, I think that they paint an incomplete picture at best. Apple has a long way to go if it wants to rule the musical roost again the way it did during "Peak iTunes", certainly. However, i think that many pundits are missing the proverbial forest.

Here is a short list of why I think Apple Music stands a better chance than most people are currently allowing:

-Beats Music (and thus Apple Music) are still the new kids on the block, but Apple has an advantage that the long-term players like Spotify could only dream of: reach. Just being the default music client on every iPhone, iPad and Mac could easily turn a late start into a monstrous lead overnight. 

-Apple have something else that players like Spotify have long struggled with, namely a healthy relationship with the music industry. Well, healthy may not be exactly the right word, but they do have a history of paying the record industry for sales. They have also started drafting key players like Dre and Iovine for their massive hitting power. 

-Apple are one-upping Spotify at every turn. Longer trial period, cheaper subscription, better family plan, broader catalog, more listening options. 

-Apple have cash. Lots of cash. How does this help, you say? Well it sure as hell cant hurt. 

Now, to the real conspiracy theory stuff. 

Maybe Apple Music isn't just another Spotify competitor. Maybe Apple Music is a play on the entire music industry. 

For some time now, I have been struggling to make sense of the ongoing debate about streaming royalties. It seems that there are a couple of conflicting narratives that keep popping up. One side of the story is that artists make practically nothing from streaming services, in spite of massive popularity and significant play counts. In response, Spotify has claimed that they pay artists approximately 70% of total revenue, over $2 billion in total. 

So if both statements are true, there is only one simple answer I can see, and that is the fact that record companies are receiving a fraction of the net sales they used to, but they are still paying artists the same stingy percentages that they did back in the CDs-and-LPs era. If my suspicions are correct, this is an unsustainable model for everyone. 

Record labels have historically served an important purpose.  Labels put up important advances for artists to make great music. They scout talent and promote records to radio stations and music television. They pay to produce and distribute physical media, and they leverage great economies of scale.  Andy Ihnatko and Alex Lindsay make great points about this on MacBreak Weekly 460. 

That's all well and good, but it's a very 1990s way of thinking. While record advances may still be critical for some artists on the top end of the scale to produce amazing records, this doesn't pan out quite as well on the low end in this modern era of Pro Tools and GarageBand. While these tools can't replace skilled producers and engineers, they have turned artists that embrace a DIY ethic into über musicians. 

Radio promotions are still important, particularly to artists that want to break the top forty. How long this will stay true, however, remains to be seen. And the more users that replace their top-forty countdown with Internet streaming radio, the less influence this radio model will have. For this reason, I think punters that have trivialised Apple's new radio offering are perhaps undervaluing the power of a well-curated, shared music experience like radio. 

Lastly, that leaves physical distribution. Anyone that can't see that Apple is already light years ahead on this one should just stop reading now and go back to listening to their CDs. 

So where does all of this lead? Maybe Apple are trying to do what they did for developers when the opened the App Store. Maybe they are trying to make an equitable marketplace that can allow artists to sell direct if it suits them, or facilitate the role of a record label while it's still a useful role to have. Ultimately, though, I wouldn't be surprised if the whole market turned into a place where artists can upload their own music, and if it suits them they can pay a firm to manage promotions or engineering or production a la carte. It may not turn the music industry completely on its head, but I wouldn't be surprised if they came close. 

When I think about that odd keynote with this frame of reference, it makes me think that maybe the reason Apple chose to close with Apple Music wasn't simply because the "real keynote" fell through and it was all they had. While I still think that this keynote was "plan B", I think Apple spent a long time trying to show off Apple Music because they have a better idea of where it is going than any of us possibly could from the outside. Instead of thinking less of the service because of the strange presentation, I'm going to be watching more closely. I don't think Apple would give us "one more thing" unless they were confident that some day we will all collectively look back and say, "Oh, I get it now."

FYI: for more information on what Apple Music is and isn't, you can't do better than Serenity Caldwell's piece on iMore: 

I have considered creating some game assets to post on the Unity marketplace. Here is the first step in that direction; I made a character for an RPG or similar game. I started with a simple walk cycle in four directions. In the future I will expand this to include an attack animation at least. I will also make some resources that are targeted more towards a 2D sidescroller with things like jump and death animations. 

I am really curious about what response I will get, if any. I can't imagine he demand will be too high for anything as niche as this, but I know I would have been interested in some simple, ready-to-build assets for past projects. I am going to try to mix things up a bit with a variety of styles and subjects. I am also planning to offer some basic assets for free as well as some paid bundles.