Yagan Kiely

Everyone has been going on about MobileRSS ripping (blatantly) off Reeder of which I partly agree with NibiruTech’s argument. That’s all well documented but I found another (however, less well known than MobileRSS) that in my opinion also blatantly rips of Reeder, namely Geetouch’s Readerrific (Twitterrific anyone?) and shows up on the iPad as News Reader (for some reason or another that escapes me). You can see a gallery here which includes screens of MobileRSS for comparison. Unlike MobileRSS which doesn’t copy the feed/folder view Readerrific/News Reader does.

When I first heard of the story I’d only just downloaded Readerrific and innocently (I only read the stories in passing) that they were talking about that. I only discovered that is was MobileRSS when I bought that later on it’s 99¢ sale.

Updated November 2

Apple Devices

I thought I may as well provide a list of my technology/gadgets I own.

Apple:

MacBook Pro, Late 2008 15″ (2.4Ghz, 4gb RAM, 320gb HD)

MacBook Air, Late 2010 13″ (1.86Ghz, 4gb RAM, 128gb SSD)

iPhone 4, Black (32gb)

iPad 3G + WiFi (64gb)

iPod Nano 3rd Generation (8gb) (more…)

This is worth mentioning on: FaceTime wouldn’t let me sign in until I tethered my iPhone on 3G. Then once signed in it worked over WiFi. I don’t know, but for a thing that’s supposed to only work on WiFi and certainly not 3G, it thus far fails quite hard at that mandate.

I’ve always noticed since I got my iPad that the ‘Top Apps’ (both paid and free) are often more productive than the Top Apps of the iPhone and I decided to write them down to compare. Keeping in mind didn’t stick strictly to the apps’ own genres but generalised and re-categorised them to suite; this isn’t scientific after all, so I doubt it matter too much.

iPhone v. iPad

The most obvious thing is the equality between Productive apps and Games for the iPad and the disparity in the iPhone. This should mean a combination of two things:

1. The iPad is treated very differently than the iPhone (screen size etc.);
2. and the iPad is bought by a different demographic than the iPhone.

The iPhone is on a plan and is more likely to be bought by/for children in conjunction with the iPad’s larger screen real estate being more suited to more professional needs.

Interesting all the same.

This post is about what instruments I use and how I use them with regard to creates processes (predominately composition).

Starting fat a similar topic to one from my previous post: I believe technology is an asset that can be employed as an aid, althoughI have still yet for find a good enough reason to use technology within my compositions. Much of my setup involves extensive use of technology – MacBook Pro, iPod, iPad, iPhone and an A3 printer/scanner – but I do still use more traditional items such as a small notepad, blank manuscript and what comes out of the printer.

(more…)

Two small thoughts regarding the future of the two iPods. Given how portable the iPad is and how much I associate it with online activities, I know that I wouldn’t get the same amount of use out of it if it was merely the WiFi version. With this in mind, would an iPod Touch with 3G capabilities work? Not phone, just the data. It would make it much more useful out and about, but if like the iPad, should not accrue too much of an extra cost.

Regarding the iPod Classic should, it, in addition to ridding itself of a HDD and gaining a SSD, should be given the capabilities of an external hard drive; most people’s entire iTunes could fit on it. It could actually be used as the library.

Just two thoughts…