Archive for September 9, 2019

Monday, September 9, 2019

What I Want From the 2019 iPhones

  1. A shape that’s more comfortable to hold. I don’t care whether it’s rounded like the original iPhone/3G/3GS or more square like the iPhone 4/5/5s/SE. But the iPhone 6 and later just don’t feel good in hand without a case.

  2. A more grippy texture. Again, I want to go back to not needing a case.

  3. An antenna that’s better at picking up weak signals.

  4. iPhone 8 size or smaller, at least as an option, without compromising the core specs.

  5. LCD screen, unless they can fix the weird scrolling glitches with OLED ones.

  6. Touch ID alongside Face ID.

  7. Optical zoom for the rear camera.

  8. A better front-facing camera.

  9. Battery life at least as good as the iPhone XR’s.

  10. USB-C—I think. If they’re going to switch, do it now, and update the AirPods, too.

Update (2019-09-10): See also: Michael Rockwell and Fred Wilson (Hacker News).

Apple Apps in App Store Search Results

Joe Rossignol:

Apple recently adjusted its App Store search algorithm so that fewer of its own apps appear at the top of search results, senior executives Phil Schiller and Eddy Cue confirmed in an interview with The New York Times.


Mr. Schiller and Mr. Cue said the algorithm had been working properly. They simply decided to handicap themselves to help other developers.

“We make mistakes all the time,” Mr. Cue said.

“We’re happy to admit when we do,” Mr. Schiller said. “This wasn’t a mistake.”


Even after the change, analytics firm Sensor Tower found Apple apps ranked first in the App Store for over 700 search terms, even when the Apple apps were less relevant and less popular than ones from its competitors.

Jack Nicas and Keith Collins (Hacker News, AppleInsider):

Before Apple Music arrived in the App Store, Spotify was for years the first result in searches for “music.” Shortly after Apple Music was added to the store in June 2016, it took the top spot. By then, Spotify had fallen to fourth place. In Feb. 2018, Apple apps suddenly appeared in the top six results for “music”. By the end of 2018, there were eight, some of which were unrelated to music. At this point, Spotify was the 23rd result.


When multiple Apple apps packed the search results, such as in searches for “music,” the Apple executives attributed the results to a feature of the App Store search engine that sometimes grouped apps by maker. They tweaked that feature in July so Apple apps would no longer look as if they were receiving special treatment. Many Apple apps dropped as a result.


An Apple spokeswoman said the company could not verify the data because it did not keep a record of historical search results.


“I find it hard to believe that organically there are certain Apple apps that rank better than higher-reviewed, more downloaded competitors,” said Todd Dunham, chief executive of the ASO Project, which consults app makers on how to rank higher in the results.


The search algorithm in the App Store was built by a small team of engineers in Cupertino, Calif., some of whom said in a separate interview arranged by Apple that they hadn’t noticed for months that Apple was dominating search results for music and other categories.

Search is one of the biggest problems with the App Store. Why does it have such a small team? How can they improve it without keeping historical results or having automated checking for things like this?

See also: David Heinemeier Hansson.


Update (2019-09-10): David Barnard:

Given how crude the search algorithm is, I don’t think @pschiller and @cue are lying about Apple’s apps making it to the top organically.


And this chart makes a ton of sense when you realize that iOS 10 is when Apple started allowing system apps to be deleted. From that point on Apple released more and more of their system apps on the App Store which created a feedback loop of momentum.


Here’s an example of just how bad search has been on the App Store and how blatantly developers have been manipulating with complete impunity[…]


Apple might not be lying about manipulating search themselves, but it’s 100X more embarrassing that they have allowed one of the most important experiences on their $50B/yr platform to be so broken and easy to manipulate for more than a decade.

See also: Jason Fried and Hacker News.

Update (2019-09-13): John Gruber:

Barnard’s whole thread is worth reading, and I found myself nodding along in agreement. Basically, The Times’s results are much better explained by the theory that App Store search sucks than the theory that Apple has been gaming results to harm competitors.


The fact that Apple made both Schiller and Cue available to The Times shows how seriously they take accusations of anti-competitive behavior. Let’s hope they start taking accusations of incompetent stewardship of App Store search just as seriously.

DOJ Asks Apple to Identify Users of Gun Scope App

Mikey Campbell (MacRumors):

Detailed in an application for a court order filed on Thursday, the DOJ seeks names, phone numbers, IP addresses and other personal data of iOS and Android users who downloaded the Obsidian 4 app, reports Forbes.

The app, developed by American Technologies Network Corp, enables owners to connect to and control rifle scopes manufactured by the same company, specifically models in the ATN X-Sight 4K and ThOR 4 product lines. With Obsidian 4, users can connect to a compatible scope via Wi-Fi and stream live video, review images and movies stored on the scope’s microSD card and adjust hardware settings.


The DOJ is issuing the order to assist in an Immigration and Customs Enforcement investigation of illegal exports of ATN scopes.

It will be interesting to see how Apple responds, because this is not a case where it can say that it’s being asked to hack its own devices. The requested data is likely already easily accessible on its servers. And it’s not from a particular known suspect like Syed Farook; rather, this is a fishing expedition. It could also set a precedent for other types of apps that other governments want information about.


Twitter Is Finally Working on Search for DMs

Jon Fingas:

Twitter isn’t just launching a deluge of tests -- it just announced that a few sought-after features in the pipeline. Most notably, it’s developing a long-overdue search for direct messages. Although there aren’t many specifics at this point, it’s reasonable to say this will spare you from digging through a conversation to find a crucial message from days ago. The social network added that it’s “re-energizing” its work on DMs, so this is really just the highlight of a larger strategy.

Via John Gruber:

The lack of any search at all for Twitter DMs makes iMessage search seem useful.

At least you can somewhat search DMs from the Web interface or from a mail client, if you have notifications enabled. And you can search iMessage archives using EagleFiler. But, yeah, both of these new types of messaging have, for many years, had a worse search experience than e-mail and the forms of chat that preceded them.

Update (2019-10-04): Juli Clover:

Twitter today announced that its Direct Message (DM) search feature is now available to all users, allowing anyone to search through the DMs they’ve received.