Untitled-(My experience with iOS)

As you guys may know...I finally have an iOS device to toy around with, dissect the system and learn things. (Haven't had an iOS device since my 2nd gen iPod touch) Sadly its been entirely too long since I've been a multi device, multi os owner and having this iPhone has reminded me of how fun it is. The best thing about having the phone, which I always, always promote when it comes to having multiple devices. Is the fact that its still a phone, now my actual sprint number isn't on it, and I basically use it feeding off of my androids hotspot, but with Google's services the phone still possesses the ability to make calls via the hangouts app. I'll get into that more later in the article though.

First off, the iOS ecosystem. Placed on top of the retina display the iOS 7 system is actually quite beautiful. I remember when I first laid eyes on it and I disagreed with the color schemes (mainly because I like darker colors in general) but the lighter theme of iOS 7 is actually clean. It would be pretty cool to change the options without jail breaking? But for the most part it honestly is easy on the eyes. Having 2 devices. One being android, and the other being iOS definitely has its upsides. With the majority of cult iOS users making such a big deal out of the whole, green bubble, blue bubble appearance in their texts having the iMessage option is very fun tbh. Using iOS in general gives a sense of exclusivity that you truly don't receive with android. Honestly its just the fact that iOS is close sources, and you'll only receive these experiences on an apple branded device. Where on android you have multiple options to experience the system, with multiple customizations.

Now let me speak on the problems that truly arise when using iOS. First off the lack of accessible flash memory is such a drag. If you wanted to pull music, or videos that I've saved within a 3rd party cloud like dropbox I can only stream them within the dropbox app. I can't save and play them in the default media apps on the device. Which is a drag. Second is the caching system? Or lack thereof I mean. There are certain apps that cache and you go "eh" then there are certain apps you'd wish cached data. For example Google play music. (Since I have my subscription to there streaming service there wasn't a huge need for iTunes radio)...The app doesn't cache data, unless you store the track you're playing, where on android you have both options to either cache or store the tracks. It becomes a bit bothersome because that means all tracks will always stream and use data, unless of course you store them. But, if you're only on an 8gb iPhone...well thats self explanatory... Now iTunes radio, there's no large need to dive into it. It operates like your favorite radio streaming services I.E. Pandora, and spotify. With the abilities to of course purchase the tracks as they play if you like... There is one thing that iTunes radio does that I like, it keeps a record of past songs you've listened to. So say you had it playing, maybe through some speakers and weren't near your phone when it played, just open up your history scroll to the song you missed and purchase it, if you want to of course. I'm a music junky so honestly I use a couple of different apps and then open up Google play music and sync the tracks within my library.

Keep in mind that this is just a run of the mill iPhone 4 so sadly I couldn't test siri. We'll bypass that for now. Let's move on to iMessage. I finally understand the hype between the whole, blue and green bubble fiasco. There is a true sense of exclusivity within the iMessage community and them not texting anyone who doesn't show up blue. Its refreshing to be apart of the cult honestly. Thing is, at times iMessage seems slow, as far as sending photos and videos (once again it may just be the fact I am on an iPhone 4). When compared to other messaging services such as bbm and Google hangouts, which of course are now both cross platform. It seems to be a full cult following at this point. Google hangouts offers video chat just as iMessage does with facetime. Speaking of Facetime it truly does offer unrivaled video clarity, I mean I've used oovoo, hangouts, Skype, fringer and a few other video services but Facetime? Definitely tops them all. Even though it also has its buffering and connection issues at times, which once again may be because I'm on an older iPhone.

There are things that are great with iOS, but there are also things that are stressful. Screen size, lack of ram just to name a couple. The thing that I can commend iOS on is the development of their once exclusive apps, or apps that originally began on iOS. Those apps are of the highest development and most stable. I honestly love twitter for iOS its 10x better than twitter for android (even though I don't use Twitter for android). Instagram is lovely, vine runs smooth. In general social apps on iOS are great where some apps on android aren't as great, unless you venture into third party development where apps are lovely. Now, when it comes to 3rd party app development on iOS, most apps need to be purchased. This is such a drawback because a lot of the apps that you would need to pay for on iOS, can most likely be found for free on android. And not even in the play store but also on developer websites such as xda developers. I understand the reasons to use iOS, I also now understand why people would prefer it over android. There is a true sense of stability with close sourced systems that you cannot receive with open source. Would I ever switch to iOS? Of course not, only if I were forced to by a company. I enjoy using iOS though it is a fun system and I look forward to jail breaking it soon.

The race of the SOCs

As you guys know I spend a lot of time scraping my favorite tech news sites. As I do this I also read up on rumors, announcements and I even try to keep an eye on sales statistics. Most of the time I get caught up in rants on twitter that would be better suited as an article on the blog...which I once again repeated this action yesterday, when discussing 64 bit processing that is. Here's the thing, as we humans evolve? Our desires evolve. As our desires evolve? We begin to demand more. As we begin to demand more? These demands have a direct impact on the technology we use. Our technology is evolving alongside of us as the human race and as it evolves we need ways to process the evolution. Enter stronger, quicker and more efficient processors, mainly mobile processors also known as SOCs ( system on a chip)

As we travel further and further into this endless digital age our processors continue to evolve alongside us, the more we desire and the more they deliver. Now of course this comes with a price. More data consumption...With the consumption of data we need stronger processors and of course a processor needs to become better at every level of the chip. Enter the new wave of processing (well not so new as much as it is new to mobile style chips) 64 bit processing. With chips growing the way they are the old 32 bit is nearing the end of its life span. 32 bit processing only supports between 2-4gb of ram whereas for the foreseeable future 64 bit has limitless ram support. Not only is the ram support limitless but this also means it can support better graphics within the chips, more cores and less energy consumption.

Now...Apple was the first to bring 64 bit processing to a device even though for then iOS ecosystem I truly don't see a need for for it. IOS as a system has a small imprint. Where android and even windows phone 8 and rt run on devices with higher RAM availability...albeit with the introduction of android KitKat the need for extra ram had been eliminated. Kitkat can now run on devices with 512mb of ram which was a beautiful move for the operating system. With the future of 64 bit processing android can really blow the competition out of the water... and with the long standing development of everything that is windows 64 bit processing definitely has a home for years to come.

Now I'm interested to see how 64 bit processing will help the development of all these systems, especially with the imminent introduction of Ubuntu mobile, which is looking to become a great alternative to all systems available currently. Ubuntu has even announced that meizu will be one of the first companies to have a device launching with Ubuntu mobile, that being their current flagship the MX3. I'm pretty certain in the first year of existence Ubuntu mobile will ace many troubles, the good thing is that Ubuntu has a solid backing as an alternative home system so I'm sure those who love Ubuntu at home are already waiting for it to become mobile since its supposed to seamlessly transition, something like the original atrix and the Motorola lapdock. Once again something that would've definitely been successful in this time of evolving processors but was ahead of its time.

All in all with the needs of humans and families, and the evolution of data and processors. The sky is STILL the limit in terms of technology and of course the new wave of 64 bit mobile processing is proving just that.

Xbox one vs PS4

Well well well...I just read an article that stated the Titanfall Xbox one bundle (which isn't even 2 weeks old) has already received a price cut of $50. Let's put it in perspective shall we? The Xbox one as a standalone system is $500. Interesting enough thats how much the bundle was when introduced just 12 days ago, which means you basically receive what will probably be game of the year for free. I'm going to break it down a little further, the Xbox one already comes with the kinect (ps4 doesn't come with its camera peripheral, its sold separate which cuts its base price) and at that time it was also coming with the copy if Titanfall, with the price cut. Not only is it closer to the ps4 in price but its definitely going to compete now.

You all may be thinking why is this important? Mainly because the rumor went around a few months back stating that Microsoft would release a kinect-less version of the Xbox one, which would mean the kinect would then become a standalone peripheral and the one would have an entry level console and the full console. Or as it was in the last generation, the "arcade" and the "elite" with the kinect sold separately. Which of course was great. Now when I look at this I question Sony's "move" and its camera functionality, I haven't been keeping up on gaming so much as I used to but, I've rarely heard anything about the move and what it does for gaming, socializing and whatever other possibilities there are to incorporate...whereas the kinect on the one has completely been overhauled from what it was on the 360. I mean, you can Skype while gaming, Skype while watching TV so that it feels as if your friend is right there with you. Now let's not forget that the current gen of gaming is only about 4 months old so these are just the introductory abilities of the new gen of kinect.

Now on the flip side...the PlayStation move? I can't remember too much about it. I guess Sony wants to focus more on the initial wave of gaming and everything the ps4 has to offer prior to throwing out the wave of "gimmicks" the move camera and controller can offer. Which if you don't know the move controller and camera operates closer to how the Wii does, whereas the kinect is totally controlled by your voice and body movement. What I'm writing now is just a few opinions as I'll dig up some Info on the move and its future plans. As of right now the ps4 has been outselling the one, which of course makes sense as it WAS $100 less, but now bundling Titanfall with only a $50 difference in the price tag? I'm certain Microsoft will be smiling when their earnings reports come out around the summer.

Lenovos acquisition of Motorola. What does it mean for Google? Motorola? Lenovo? And us the consumer?

If you don't know by now (even after me touching base on twitter a few hours back), Google sold its holdings of Motorola to the large tech giant overseas known by the name of Lenovo. A few years back when Google purchased Motorola, they were definitely on their last legs, move forward a couple of years and they have somewhat returned to dominance. "So If they have returned to dominance what's the reasoning behind Google selling them?"... great question, Google realized they had too much on their plate to try to hold onto a company solely for the reason of pumping out devices for whatever reason they needed. They felt it was better to focus in android, and everything else already on the plate and pass off Motorola onto a company it will definitely benefit...*Enters Lenovo*

I will not lie to you, when I first heard of the sale I was upset with Google, mainly because I had this idea that with Motorola they would make some Sort of super phone (somewhat a pure high end successor to the nexus series)...While under Google Motorola did release the moto x and moto g, with mid range specs but pretty high performance, but it still wasn't the 100% successor to the nexus line as I had hoped. Those 2 devices had revived the company altogether though while launching after a refreshed line of RAZR devices as well. Motorola placed a lot on the X and G and if I'm correct it took them out of their funk...The X surpassed pre order numbers and was also on back order for a while, which was a beautiful thing for Motorola (and Google as well). 

I'm going to bypass the small numbers as far as the sell of Motorola and pinpoint the most important numbers...Motorola was purchased by Google a few years back for 12.5 billion and sold to lenovo for under 3 billion..."But isn't that a loss of profit?" Yes on paper its a loss, when you just look at the acquisition by Google, and then the resell. The thing is as google purchased Motorola they sold off all subsidiaries that didn't directly improve Google as a brand. Meaning they made a bit of that 12.5 billion back immediately. Ok? Let's fast forward to 2014 where lenovo purchases Motorola...As lenovo purchases Motorola, Google is allowed to keep patents that supposedly total 5.5 billion... Basically Google breaks even with the sell/resell (in the short term) but with the patents they were allowed to retain, will be able to further profit in the future... its genius.

"Well why didn't Lenovo purchase the patents?" Why would they need to? Lenovo is a well established smartphone/tablet/ computer company all their own, the really don't need patents carrying over from a rival company. Lenovo has been making moves all their own and the acquisition of Motorola is the largest move they could make. Now let's touch on how this helps us the consumer. "Well James there are already so many companies to choose from when shopping for a device", as true as this is, there are so? Any companies overseas that make great devices that aren't subsidized in america...Lenovo being one of those companies. Yes, they have tablets in america but thats it, as far as phones being offered under a carrier? They do not have that yet...well until now. The acquisition of Motorola connects them now to all major us carriers. Not only will Motorola benefit from this, but lenovo will, and also us the consumers. Lenovo has a phone, I believe its called the K1, beautiful high end device. That may not hit american shores, but with the combined efforts of the moto r&d and lenovos r&d? The pairing definitely will make a splash by the end of the year.

To wrap things up...Lenovo purchased a company right in the greatest moment it could be purchased, not only that? But it grabbed them when a bombardment of new SOCs will be landing in the next quarter...the snapdragon 801 is up to bat, not to mention the 805 and 810 have both been announced already. MediaTek has also announced their octocore chip which will support lte (the first to it if it lands before anyone else) not to mention Samsung still pumps out its exynos line (which I would put money on is pushing an octocore chip with 64 bit processing and lte...we shall see) I'm excited to see what this pairing will do. Especially with HTC pumping out a few new devices. Samsung may need to keep its eyes open or they may be passed up.