James was abducted, tortured, and murdered by two boys in 1993. Picture courtesy of Wikipedia.

Microsoft made a deeply offensive blunder today, this time with their own search engine Bing (a rival to Google), in their celebrity tracking service.  They listed the brutally murdered British toddler James Bulger (pictured) as one of the web’s top “movie stars, musicians, and other famous people” on their xRank celebrity-ranking page.

James was abducted from an English shopping mall in 1993 by two boys, who then tortured and murdered the 2-year-old. However, Microsoft’s Bing lists him as #1 hot celebrity, above nude model Katie Price (Jordan), rock band Queen, British boyband JLS, and singer Lady Gaga.

The high-profile case has appeared on all major TV networks and in all newspapers in Britain over the past few days, as one of his killers has been returned to prison — perhaps on child pornography charges, so say the rumours.

Microsoft’s service automatically aggregates all the searches people are performing for different names. It then assumes most of these people are celebrities. Their page doesn’t recognize “Bulger” as a name, but does recognize “James”.

Thus it reports the obscure 80′s and 90′s rock-band “James” as the current most popular celebrity search. However, their page clearly says that the #1 search was actually for  ”James Bulger” and “James Bulger Murder”. (see screenshot below)

Click for full picture

To add insult to injury, lower down on the page, pictures are clearly seen of the murdered 2-year-old’s mother doing a recent TV interview. (see picture)

Click for full-size

Microsoft describes it’s service as:

We count Bing web searches for movie stars, musicians, and other famous people. Then we compile our findings into an insightful ranking formula that tells you who the world is searching for most. The result is a cultural snapshot of who’s hot and who’s not!

It seems according to Microsoft’s Bing search engine, a kidnapped, tortured, and murdered 2-year old boy is “hot”. Clearly Microsoft needs to make changes to its Bing xRank service, before other child murder victims become listed as “hot” “movie stars, musicians, and other famous people”.

Rumours have recently pointed to Apple dumping Google for Bing as it’s main search partner for it’s iPod’s, iPhones, and the upcoming iPad. However, as this clearly shows, Microsoft still manages to walk into classic blunders.

Source: http://www.bing.com/xrank/ (retrieved Wednesday 10th March 2010 from within the geographic area of the United Kingdom)

Apple's iPad roll-out mapped. Click for full-size view.

Apple announced the iPad release dates today. Americans will, as expected, get their hands on the iPad first at the start of April, however the Canadians, French, British, Spanish, Germans, Swiss, Italians, Australians, and Japanese will have to wait until the end of April. As for other countries? “Later” is all the information Apple has.

Notice that all the countries getting iPads first are the countries with Apple retail stores! Coincidence? Perhaps not. Apple presumably has the biggest and best-equipped local offices in those countries. The only exceptions are China (which only has 1 store anyway) and Spain, which has no stores, but 4 stores are expected to open soon.

Countries with Apple retail stores (click to enlarge)

What may this mean? It may mean that, in future, you are more likely to see the latest Apple products in your country, if your country also has Apple stores.

Apps that make fart noises. An app that quacks like a duck. An app which shows a glowing red crystal. Yes, it’s the “limited functionality” parade. Apple sometimes rejects apps which they judge to have “limited functionality”, while allowing others which some would say are just as useless. Apple fans are often divided on the issue. Some argue that Apple has no right to decide what has “limited functionality” to the user, while others decry the mass of useless, cheap, poorly-written Apps in the store and would like Apple to reject more of them. What are the arguments, and which argument do you side with?

The argument AGAINST allowing  “limited” Apps

The App store is getting too full of rubbish. The signal-to-noise ratio of good apps to useless nonsense is getting worse. For example, a search in the iTunes store for the word “Fart” revealed 458 apps. That’s amazing, considering the cost involved in deploying an App in the store, and Apple’s review process. Remember also that the store is still growing – imagine how bad it will get in the future!

A ridiculous limited-functionality App which is currently on the store.

If things continue as they are, the ratio of useless-to-useful Apps will easily become 100 to 1. This means genuinely good Apps may become swallowed up and undiscovered, surrounded by all the nonsense and rubbish. Imagine how many great games lie undiscovered, sitting in the depths of the app store with no reviews and few downloads?

Legitimate and highly skilled developers may be robbed of a chance to make a living because their creations are shouted-down by terrible games coded by teenagers in their bedroom. Or, budding teenage geniuses making the next great game in their bedroom, may never see their creation discovered because of all the stupid apps released by their less-inspired peers.

Surely this situation has to change. Apple can — and should — vet all apps for their quality and usefulness. Wouldn’t it be great to browse a store full of good, useful, insightful, practical, and fun apps? Wouldn’t it be good to know that whatever App you buy, you are guaranteed at least some level of functionality, quality, and usefulness?

Of course it would. Apple should continue to reject the rubbish, limited apps — and if you ask me, should continue to narrow their acceptance criteria. Quality Apple devices should run quality software. Let’s not see the Apple experience diluted by a mass of poorly designed amateurish garbage.

The argument FOR allowing ALL “limited” Apps

If Apple banned all useless apps, we wouldn’t have the fart apps. Personally, I’d say hooray — but such apps have brought much joy to hundreds of thousands (millions?) of kids. Who am I to deny them that joy, just because I don’t like it?

Limited functionality is the eye of the beholder. Let’s imagine that I am miraculously appointed the gate keeper to the App store. I personally decide which Apps get accepted and rejected – and I will have zero tolerance of any Apps that almighty I judge as limited, useless, or rubbish.

I would, in effect, be dictator. Who would I be to decide what is “limited”,  ”useless” or “rubbish”? What appears as rubbish to me might be very good and useful to someone else. For example, the Tate Modern (the gigantic modern art space in London) recently released an App which is a virtual tour of a new art exhibit. Now, some people would say that exhibit is rubbish, and the App is rubbish too. However, who are you decide what art is “good” and what is not? Should the choice be taken away from me? Can’t I decide for myself what is good and what isn’t? Who can truly judge what artwork is good, and what is not? No one can. That’s partially the point.

Likewise, are not Apps creations also creations, a form of expression? Even things that blatantly are terrible can become popular. Have you heard of the Three Wolf Moon t-shirt? It’s a t-shirt design that was so awful that it became a running joke, and part of online popular culture. Now, if Amazon had decided to reject it from sale because it was terrible, and no-one would buy it, we would have lost a funny cultural icon. Who is to say that the recently banned App which makes your iPhone quack like a duck could not have become the next Three Wolf Moon?

What right does Apple have to make such judgements? Surely it is I, the consumer, who has the right to decide what I want on my own device. Sure, Apple keeps out the viruses, spyware, etc. — and that I accept (and am very grateful for). But to go further, and judge certain apps as useless, limited, or of poor-quality, can’t I decide that for myself?

My local bookstore does not only sell books it judges to be useful, or even good. There are some absolute stinkers for sale in my local bookstore. But it doesn’t matter. We, the customers buy what we want. Likewise in the local supermarket, the bosses of the store don’t only sell foods that they judge to taste good. If I ran a supermarket only stocked with foods I thought tasted good, then I wouldn’t sell Marmite, because I think it tastes horrible, but other people love it. Likewise I wouldn’t sell beer, because I feel it smells like urine, and prefer wine — but surely who am I to deny others what they like?

I say Let the people decide what’s rubbish and what isn’t. Apple can keep out the viruses and spyware, but leave the other judgements up to us.

Apple, and many other American corporations, sometimes indirectly employ children to make their goods. After public outcry or an audit, the practice is usually stopped — at least until it quietly starts again without anyone noticing. Recently Apple took action against some of it’s own Chinese suppliers for just that, as Apple isn’t the sort of corporation to tolerate that sort of thing. However, in a world where poor children are ruthlessly exploited, abused, and even murdered, because they have no place to go — could offering the poorest of the world’s children fair, part-time employment actually be a force for good?

Here is a comment posted to TUAW in response to the story about Apple taking action against some of it’s suppliers for employing 15 year olds (legally under-age):

I write this on my iPhone while currently living in China.

Most workers in Chinese factories around Shenzhen have moved from the rural countryside to find employment. I would bet money that these 15 year olds either have lost a parent due to illness, or the parent is too sick to work. So they moved to find a stable job to support their family.

Being 15 and choosing to work full-time to support your family shouldn’t be frowned upon, it’s easy for us to peer out of our first world luxury ivory towers and cast judgement.

These teenagers aren’t rounded up and forced to work at gun point, 15 year olds are in school or they are working to feed their families.

Major companies supply better working conditions than the other less savoury options for making ends meet.

Perhaps this person has a point. As children in the developing world are compelled or forced to earn money to feed their families (a sad reality for millions of children today), would you rather have them working on an assembly line, or as a prostitute? or involved with a gang?

Clearly, we would love every child to have the same opportunities afforded to middle-class Western children in their GAP t-shirts, eating their Big Macs, while texting on their phone about the American Idol result. However, that isn’t happening, and may not happen for centuries. The reality of 2010 is that millions of children are working as prostitutes, soldiers, and drug-dealers to feed their own bellies or those of their families. Many of these are also living on the streets.

This child in Africa lives on the street, and is seen here eating donated food out of a bowl on the floor, like an animal.

In that context, I ask you this: would it be so wrong for rich western companies to offer children a place to work, a place to earn skills, and a place to earn money? Assuming they are paid well, given good training, have reasonable (part-time) hours, and looked after?

Sure, it may feel weird to know your iPod was put together by a 12 year-old, but if that 12-year old was taken off the streets, given practical skills, and paid a fair wage, would it not be a kind of capitalist-style charity, that benefits both consumer and worker? Or would we prefer that the child remains on the streets, selling their bodies for enough cash to buy their next fix of drugs? Of course I’m sure you would prefer the kid was in school. But if the incompetent and corrupt government of said country doesn’t have any school places, then where else is the kid supposed to go? Currently, the answer is usually crime and/or prostitution.

I’m sorry, but I’d much prefer that they were given a job, training, and a fair wage for a fair number of hours worked.

I propose that corporations should deliberately open their factories in the poorest countries, and then be open to the part-time hiring and training of those under age 18 (exactly how young they should be hired is another subject of discussion entirely). Sure, it’s not as good as free college places, but it’s better than what they have now –- nothing –- and better than a free meal, which is here today and gone tomorrow.

Even in the recent history of the West, children were put to work. Sure, there was the exploitation — such as the children forced to work in the coal mines of Victorian Britain — but children have also been taught to work, work well, and benefitted from it! Millions were trained as apprentices, or learned to work on the farms, or learned trades, and given skills which set them up for life. There is no rule stating that all jobs for under-18s must be slavery and exploitation. Even in modern countries, such as Canada, you can legally work part-time at McDonalds at age 14 — and many such 14-year olds quite enjoy it.

There is absolutely no reason why American corporations cannot set up a system of employment for children in the developing world, where they are not exploited, but given opportunities with which their families and governments could never provide them.

And I’ll tell you one thing I know for sure: this would do a whole lot more good than those stupid “make poverty history” rubber wrist-bands. Remember those? Yes, they’re busy decomposing (slowly) in your local land-fill site. Meanwhile, the world’s poor children are still living on the streets and scavenging garbage dumps for something to eat.

You may have heard it said:

“Give a man a fish, he eats for a day; teach him to fish, and he eats for the rest of his life.”

Well, I say:

“Give a child in the developing world a meal, he eats for a day; treat him fairly and well with a small part-time job and relevant training, and he may have the skills to support himself for the rest of his life.”



The iPod touch. It’s that misfit cousin in the Apple family. Apple didn’t know how to market it. Pundits didn’t know why they were selling it. It was derided for being a cheaper, less-capable iPhone. Yet, despite this, Apple has sold a whopping 32 million of these little devices, and stats suggest it may actually outsell the iPhone in 2010! However, the iPod touch has more unexpected magic up it’s sleeves.

The Apple blog has all the full numbers and charts to prove that the iPod touch will indeed surpass the iPhone in 2010. Keep that in mind, because another snippet of data suggests that the iPod touch has another piece of magic up it’s sleeves. Back in January 2009, Admob (the online mobile advertising agency recently bought by Apple) published some stats showing that a whopping 46% of all iPod touch owners are under the age of 17.

For some pundits, this confirmed the “misfit cousin” reputation of the iPod touch. It added to the wide derision of the device for being a “phone-less smartphone”, mostly used by children for playing simple cheap or free games, who don’t buy much music, and have little purchasing power. ‘Who cares about the iPod touch, what does it matter?’ was the pervasive thought.

However, the pundits have largely over-looked one important fact: children grow up. Yes, when these children get their first jobs, and get their first mobiles (or “cell phone” for our American friends), would they want the latest Nokia, –– or the latest iPhone?

If 46% of the 32 million iPod touch users are under 17, that means nearly 15 million children may want iPhones when they grow up. Their using the iPod touch gives them a great idea of how the iPhone works (and arguably, may give them a taste for iMacs, Mac Books, and iPads). Now, that is the best ‘advertising’ money can buy. Also, do not forget that all of the Apps and games they have bought or grown to love will also be saved on their Apple iTunes account — not on some Palm Pre or Android application or account.

Further, with the iPod touch sales numbers accelerating, ever more children will want iPhones when they grow up. Apple doesn’t really market to child consumers. In fact, it has never really marketed to children. However, Apple has quite accidentally found itself selling one of the most popular children’s ‘toys’ in the world — and making a profit on every single one. Further, the iPod touch may become Apple’s inroad to the younger generation, building inside of them a fierce brand-loyalty – something other companies such as Dell or HP cannot do because they just sell generic plastic boxes. Even Microsoft with it’s XBox franchise can’t compete on the same grounds — XBoxes are far more expensive than your average iPod touch, and cannot be carried around and shown to the other kids on the school bus or in the playground.

The iPod touch –– our little family misfit –– has unintentionally turned Apple into one of the world’s most successful toy manufacturers and game publishers, while inculcating a fierce brand loyalty in millions of kids. The iPod touch has become Apple’s secret weapon in the battle for the next generation of consumers. 

You may think Apple stores are everywhere in the United States, but as our chart (below) shows, there are still nine states (plus the District of Columbia) without a single Apple store. California, meanwhile, basks in the sun with a whopping 46 stores – the equivalent of 1 store for every 800,000 citizens.

However, when it comes to the ratio of store to population, Hawaii has more Apple stores than any other place on Earth – with 1 store for every 430,000 inhabitants, that’s nearly twice as many stores compared to California.

Internationally, the United States is still in first place, with 221 stores and 1 store for every 1.4 million inhabitants. This is followed by the United Kingdom  with 26 stores, or 1 for every 2.2 million inhabitants.

China is, of course, dead last – with only 1 store among all 1.3 billion people. However, Apple has recently announced their intention to open 25 stores in China. If they do that, China will still have a store-to-population ratio of 1 store for every 52 million people! Perhaps the 25 are simply the first wave. Interestingly, to have the same ratio of stores-to-population as in the United States, Apple would have to open about 920 stores in that country (not including China’s additional territories of Hong Kong and Macau)! Of course, your average Chinese person isn’t as rich as your average American, at least not yet.

The statistics for Japan are perhaps the most surprising. At one time, Japan was the country with the second highest number of Apple stores – but no longer. While the UK and Canada have seen new stores opening, the number of Japanese stores has remained static for quite some time, currently having just 7. It is widely believed this is due to the slow growth of Apple’s marketshare in Japan, as Japanese people tend to be very loyal to their local brands (a similar situation is said to exist is South Korea, so don’t expect many stores opening there either).

This leaves Japanese Apple customers with very few Apple stores for Mac-related goods and services. To put it into perspective, in Japan there is 1 store for every 17.9 million inhabitants! Two entire regions of Japan, with a combined population of 11 million have no Apple stores at all – and the region of Kanto (the region containing Tokyo) has 1 Apple store for every 21 million inhabitants. Compare that to New York, USA, which has a store for every 1.3 million.

Here are the full details for all the stores worldwide – including the ratios to population:

Apple Retail Stores Around the World

Countries with Apple retail stores (click to enlarge)

Now let’s look at the distribution of Apple stores in the United States and Canada. If you just consider the number of stores in each state, it looks like everywhere outside of California, New York, Texas and Florida is a desert for Apple stores:

Click for full-size

The dark blue indicates more stores, lightest blue the least, and grey none. However, if we look at the ratio of stores-to-population, the picture changes dramatically:

Click for full-size

Darker blue = more stores per person. Thus, according to this map, it’s easy to see that there are effectively as many Apple stores in Colorado as in California. Just as many in Nebraska as in Florida. Just as many in Maine as in Texas. Of course, this hides the fact that less stores = more traveling distance, but when it comes to population served, Apple even has some very rural states well-covered.

We could reasonably guess from this data which states would benefit more from new Apple stores being built (such as Kentucky), and which would not (such as Colorado or Rhode Island).

A similar picture emerges in Canada. First, let’s just look at the number of Apple stores:

Click for full-size

From this map you would imagine that Ontario (the darkest blue province) is the best and most well-served province by Apple, with Quebec not far behind. However, viewing this as a ratio of store-to-population suggests otherwise:

Click for full-size

We can see that, in fact, Ontario is no better served than rural British Columbia, and Quebec is the worst-served province in Canada (apart from those without any Apple stores at all, of course).

Thus, despite Ontario and Quebec having the 1st and 2nd largest number of Apple stores in the country, it would not be surprising if Apple concentrated future store-openings in these two provinces, while ignoring the rest.

Check this blog in the future for more interesting maps all about Apple. Also check out the excellent ifoAppleStore site for more unofficial Apple retail info.

Click to view full-size

Apple’s American customers are used to buying music, music videos, audiobooks, TV shows, movies, as well as renting movies — all through the iTunes store. However, not every Apple customer can do this. In fact, most of the international iTunes stores have no music for sale whatsoever.

As this map shows (click it for a larger version), there are very few countries where iTunes sells music. Of the 90 iTunes stores around the world, only 23 sell music — i.e. 67 do not. The vast majority of iTunes stores only sell iPhone apps, distribute iTunes U downloads for free, and do nothing else — not even podcasts.

If you think 23 is a bit low for music sales, even fewer sell other items such as TV shows (6) and Movies (also 6). Music videos do slightly better, being sold by 15 of the international iTunes stores.

The most surprising thing is the lack of music sales in Asia — with Japan being the only country where music is sold via iTunes. Further, very few of the international iTunes sites are in the local language of the country, the vast majority being presented in English.

Clearly, even though iTunes is currently the world’s number 1 music retailer, there is much potential for further growth outside of the United States. With this much potential, it is unlikely that iTunes will be surpassed by a rival anytime soon.

The following chart is a breakdown of all the iTunes stores:

Click to view full size

For more Apple-related maps and charts, see the previous post on Apple’s online sites, retail stores, and languages.

Apple's official websites around the world

Countries with Apple retail stores (and rumoured to get stores)

The Apple tech blogs have been ripe with speculation about the massive, 500,000 square foot (46,500 square metre) datacentre Apple is building in rural North Carolina. Some have wondered whether this is confirmation that Apple will unveil a new “computing in the cloud” service, or other wild ideas. Here’s why Apple fans shouldn’t be getting their hopes up too much.

First of all, the only reason Apple is building this centre now, and in rural North Carolina, is because of a giant multi-million dollar tax-break. The local government created the tax-break scheme to encourage investment and the creation of jobs in the area. The window of opportunity to take advantage of this tax break is now. What does this mean?

It means that the new datacentre is not necessarily being built because Apple has immediate plans for some new service. On the contrary, it is just to take advantage of the tax-break. After all, most major datacentres are located near major cities, such as New York, Los Angeles, or San Francisco – not a rural part of the south. The reason for this is that large cities have greater and faster connectivity to the Internet. Thus, a large datacentre in such a location would be a poor choice for cloud computing, which, by it’s very nature, requires fast connections through fat pipes.

However, some have pointed out that the datacentre will be about five times the size of Apple’s current largest facility, over in California. Thus some jump to the conclusion that the building will be filled with five times as many servers, giving out five times as many data requests for some future and unannounced (but currently planned) new service from Apple. However, is this realistic? No.

These pundits are assuming that the building will be full of servers when it is completed — but why should it be? It is quite possible that the new centre will only be running at 50%, 40%, 30%, or even less of capacity. There is no rule saying Apple must fill all 500,000 square foot of space with working servers.

It’s much more likely that Apple has taken this opportunity of a tax-break to build a gigantic server farm, which will serve all their needs for the next 10 years. When it first opens, it will probably be less than half full — probably less than a quarter full. As time goes on, more servers will be installed.

This is entirely reasonable. If the iTunes store continues its growth, it is only logical that X number of servers will be required in X years time. This is especially so, considering the slow take-off of HD-quality movies sold or rented via iTunes. So, why not take the opportunity now, today, to use a tax-break to prepare for the increased demand?

Thus, the size of the centre is no basis to speculate about some new, unannounced “cloud computing” service, or any other fanciful idea. Further, the geographic location also makes that unlikely.

No, Apple is simply building a new datacentre in preparation for the future. Maybe at some point they will introduce some new, amazing, and incredible services over the cloud — but it would be foolish to take this as some sort of confirmation that such new services are imminent or even planned. The increased traffic Apple can reasonably expect to see over the next 10 years — simply from the iTunes store — could easily justify the construction of this new building.

Which countries have official Apple websites, official online Apple Stores, and which countries have Apple retail stores? If you love maps, and you love Apple, you’ll love this post. See more after the jump.

Click to see full-size version

This map (to the right) shows which countries have their own official Apple websites and online Apple stores.

A whopping 97 countries have an official Apple web presence of some kind. Only 88 have official sites. The other 9 only have official iPhone pages.

You may not have heard of these before, but for some countries their official Apple “website” only consists of a single page — advertising the iPhone, with contact details for local phone networks and dealers — no front page, no downloads section, no Mac pages, no iTunes pages, no support section, nothing. In fact, most aren’t even written in the local language. Perhaps this will change with the release of the iPad, as they may at least add another page for that device.

Much of the Latin America and Caribbean countries actually share the same official site. All the Spanish-speaking countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have one site, and all the English-speaking countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have another. However, Apple lists these countries separately in their “choose your country” page on apple.com, giving the feeling that they each have their own site.

Languages

Click for full-size chart

Apple uses 27 different languages across their official websites. The official sites of some countries are available in more than one language. For example, Belgium’s site is available in Dutch and French, Switzerland’s in German and French, Canada’s in English and French, Hong Kong’s in Simplified Chinese script and English.

Strangely, many sites are not available in the local language, but are presented in French or English instead. For example, Israel’s site is not in Hebrew or Arabic (the two official languages), but in English. The same goes for Egypt’s, which is in English, not Arabic. The sites for Mozambique and Guinea-Bissau are odd ones, as the official languages of both those countries is Portuguese, but the Apple site is in English — which is ironic considering all of Apple’s material has already been translated into Portuguese anyway for the Portuguese and Brazilian official websites.

It seems odd that on the one hand, in some countries Apple will produce their site in two local languages to reach as many customers as possible, yet in other countries they don’t even bother to translate it into the one local language. See our chart to the right for a full breakdown. Countries with the “wrong” language on their official Apple site have their language highlighted in red.

If Apple wants to reach as many people as possible, this situation will surely change in the future. Not everyone reads English — especially the older generations, who may be the very customers who will be new to Apple when they buy their first iPad.

The online Apple stores

A surprising number of countries have their own online Apple Store – 33, in fact. India and China also have their own, but Apple does not sell their goods via the site, but merely allows browsing of their products. Countries without an official online Apple store typically have a “where to buy” section, listing local resellers.

Some online Apple Stores, such as Denmark’s store, is actually written in English — even though the main website is in Danish.

Apple’s focus on the US is changing

Apple has been naturally US-centric for many years (as are many American corporations). This has changed and has to continue changing. At their last earnings call, it was revealed that 55% of Apple’s profits were generated outside of the United States. This will only grow larger over time.

Click to see the full-size version

Indeed, Apple is slowly expanding it’s retail stores outside of the United States. This map (to the right) shows which countries have official Apple retail stores, and which countries are rumored to get them soon. Currently there are retail stores in 10 countries.

Many of these countries (especially France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, and China) have very few stores, and the potential for expansion is enormous.

The expansion must continue

To provide a first-class service to as many customers as possible, Apple must continue to expand the number of countries with retail stores, and the number of languages in which they present their websites and support material. In a few decades, it’s quite possible that 75%, 80% or even 90% of Apple’s revenue will come from outside of the United States. Eastern Europe, China, India, Latin America, and even parts of Africa all have an emerging middle class. It may not be long before more iPhones and iPads are sold in China than in the United States — and those Chinese consumers will want local Apple stores with Apple Geniuses that speak the local language. The same goes for all other developing countries.

However, as of 2010, Apple seems to have covered most of the world with at least an official page. The countries with the largest markets which are still awaiting their own websites, could be listed as Pakistan, Cyprus, Serbia, and Ukraine. These all have sizable markets, and a growing middle-class.

Smaller countries and territories, such as Mauritius, Réunion, Slovenia, Lebanon, French Polynesia, New Caledonia, etc. also do not have websites yet. You may assume that this is due to their small populations. However, if Apple is willing to give a country as small as Macau (pop. 540,000) it’s own mini official website, why not countries like Cyprus (pop. 800,000)? After all, if Mali has it’s own website (GDP per capita: $656), why not New Celedonia (GDP per capita: $36,000)?

Only Apple knows, but perhaps much of it is to do with simply “getting around to it”. I sincerely hope that the number of languages does expand. Indeed, if Apple’s new iPad really is going to be the next computing revolution, they will need to expand it’s reach as far as possible – and that means hiring more translators, opening more online stores, and building more retail stores.

Recap

• Countries with official websites: 88
• Countries with an official iPhone page: 9
• Countries with official online Apple stores: 33 (+2 for browsing only)
• Languages used: 27
• Countries with retail stores: 10

A future article on Apple Appraisal will examine the international outreach of iTunes, the iPhone, and the App Store. Stay tuned!

You can subscribe to Apple Appraisal via RSS or by e-mail.

1,000: total number of all Apps available for Palm’s WebOS

“So Apple has unveiled its iPad,… doesn’t seem impressive at all… ugly…  a high priced, unnecessary trinket.” – Paul Thurrott, 27th January 2010

“But you know what? Whatever. I still want one.” – Paul Thurrott, 10th February 2010

Apple says its new iPad is “revolutionary”, and many pundits agree. If the iPad really does usher in a computing revolution, what can we hope to see in the future? Here are some possibilities, after the jump.

Possibility #1:Wireless Printing, and uh… wireless control of everything

As far as we know, when the iPad first ships it may not be capable of printing directly from the device. However, in the future, it’s reasonable to expect that wireless bluetooth printing is available (via Apple’s Bonjour wireless spec). From wherever you are, you can bring up a list of the nearest printers — and if you have the password — hit the print button.

Here’s an even more amazing thought: you’re at work, it’s your lunch break, you’re surfing the web on your iPad and see something you want to print out. Your boss doesn’t like you using the office printer for personal stuff, so after a few touches, you transmit the print command to your printer at home. Violá! When you get home, your print-out is waiting for you.

The year is 2015. Home automation is also pretty hot these days. Walk into any electronics showroom and you see the “iPad/iPhone compatible” and “Made for iPad/iPhone” logos everywhere. It’s on ovens, microwaves, TV sets, security systems, cars, lamps, — hell, even some fridges. You see, all these devices now have a cheap bluetooth chip inside. You can control them all through an interface on the iPad (or iPhone/iPod touch) screen — providing you download the manufacturer’s app from the App Store. You see, you can set your oven to alert you when the roast is done, using iPhone OS’s notifications system.

Some say that it’s a bit of gimmick, and indeed they’re probably right. But manufacturers are desperate to differentiate their product from that of their competitors. And if that means that your freezer will send you a notification to tell you it needs defrosting, then so be it.

Of course, the first to do this were the TV and DVR manufacturers. You could download a remote control App from the store, and control your home entertainment from there. It wasn’t long before others followed. Of course, all the expensive “home automation” systems were on board the iPad bandwagon almost immediately, but very few people have money for those sorts of systems.

Possibility #2: Finally — the paperless office!

Remember those episodes of Star Trek, where an officer comes into the captain’s ready-room, and hands the captain a small pad with a report on it? Yes, it was even called a Pad — a PADD, to be precise (which stood for Personal Access Display Device, apparently ).

Let me paint you a more down-to-earth picture: You are at work, you’ve finished a report using one of the office’s own iPads. In fact, you used Microsoft Excel iPad Edition. You get ready to print it out, but then you think — “Hey, why bother?” So you wander into the boss’s office, hand him the iPad and say, “here is the report you asked for, Sir”.

Your boss thanks you, and you leave the room, picking up another one of the office’s iPads from a near-by depository on the way back to your desk.

Meanwhile, the photocopier (yes, that old thing!) is gathering dust, and the printer next to it has six unopened packets of paper next to it. They’ve been there for weeks.

Possibility #3: The iPad becomes more ubiquitous than laptops and desktops

It’s smaller, it’s more handy, and most importantly — it’s much much cheaper. My son has entered middle school, and it’s about time he had his own computer for homework, etc., and it should be portable so he can take it to school. However, I don’t want him looking at pornography or accessing other material I don’t want him to look at yet. I also don’t want to buy him a big expensive laptop. If it’s lost or stolen, that’s a considerable loss. Also, “Netbooks” are, well, awful, and not much cheaper than an iPad.

So he gets his own iPad. It’s cheap, it’s easy for me to control what he has access to on it, and it’s easy for him to use. So all the kids are getting iPads now. In fact, the family has a few of them now. Me and my wife have the latest models, and I gave the old models to her parents. I also have one for work, which I take to the office, of course.

In fact, as the iPad has become more capable, it’s even possible to do things you never thought possible on it: things like graphic design and programming. Sure, you need more than one iPad at the same time, but it can be done. For example: With programming, typically you have two or three iPads on your desk at once. On one I have my code, which is what I’m typing into. On the other I have the App or webpage I’m busy programming displayed, while I constantly refresh it to see the changes I’ve made. The third one has the Objective-C reference manual open, which I keep picking up and referring to as I work.

When I’m using my copy of Pixelmator for iPad, I typically use two iPads. On one I have the main tools palette. On the other, the image displays. Optionally, I can have a third iPad, displaying the whole image full-screen, so while I’m zoomed in on a specific part using the 2nd iPad, I can easily see the changes in context on the third screen.

It’s not unusual for someone to walk in on me and see four or five iPads scattered around my desk. Other designers still use desktops, but I can’t stand using the old keyboard and mouse anymore. I feel more productive when I touch my creations.

Possibility #4: Other manufacturers race to copy the iPad

It was five years ago that Steve Jobs announced the iPad in San Francisco. Since that time, other manufacturers have raced to copy it — all with limited success. RIM recently started selling their Blackberry Tablet range, aimed at businesses. Google’s Chrome Tablet computers have been on sale for some time, although their functionality is limited. Microsoft took a few years to bring out their equivalent of Windows for the tablet. They decided to give it the catchy name, Microsoft Windows Phone Tablet 7 Series Home Premium Edition, or MWPT7SHPE for short, and it won’t be released until next year. Other manufacturers have also thrown their hat into the ring. For example, Samsung’s Bada Tablets have recently begun selling.

It seems that computing has returned to it’s old 1980′s roots — single manufacturers creating the entire experience, hardware and software combined, and it’s proving popular with consumers. In the western world, older persons with limited budgets as well as children and teenagers are those most likely to own pads, or tablets. An increasing percentage of the population sees absolutely no reason to own a desktop or a laptop computer.

In the developing world, tablets are becoming even more popular. While few can afford a full desktop system (or have anywhere to put it), many families are purchasing tablet computers. These families never had a phone line, but all have mobile phones, and they frequently insert their SIM cards into the tablets to gain Internet access.

In a few years, TIME magazine (one of the Apple iPad Book Store’s most popular subscriptions) will run a cover story, asking “Is the PC dead?” The article inside will quote these statistics, and conclude that, while the desktop computer will remain in use for highly technical tasks, such as programming or heavy-duty video editing, for future generations, the PC has lost it’s dominant position forever.

Possibility #5: Developer wars

Every kid knows that certain games are only released for certain game consoles. If you want game X, you must buy console Y. Unfortunately, that’s now becoming the case with computing. Developers are becoming increasingly divided among themselves. Some are Microsoft-aligned. Others Apple-aligned. Yet others Google-aligned. A small, but growing number, are Bada-aligned, and aligned to other ecosystems.

As each “camp” has it’s own programming language (such as Objective-C for Apple and C# for Microsoft), loyalty to each platform, manufacturer, and language is often fierce. Some developers will simply refuse to develop their apps for more than one platform, while others will adapt them for all except for the one they don’t like.

Luckily, things are not exactly the same as the games consoles in the 1990′s. Unlike at that time, today all these platforms are largely interoperable through the Internet. While only certain platforms can run certain apps, they can all access the same webpages, operate games developed in HTML5/CSS3/JavaScript, display the same images and video files, and play the same mp4 tracks. So it’s not all bad.

However, in this world. getting your application to the public depends on the almighty gate-keepers. This has had it’s benefits: there has been a massive reduction of viruses, trojans, and malware. On the other hand, others worry about the freedom to run and install whatever you wish. Other point out, however, that if you don’t like one manufacturer’s policy, you can always jump ship and buy a tablet from a manufacturer you do like.

Photo by shibuya86, via sxc.hu

There has been a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth recently over Apple’s decision to pull all pornographic Apps from the iTunes App Store. However, their decision is right for Apple’s customers, right for their developers, and right for their shareholders. Find out why after the jump.

Why it’s right for Apple’s customers

Since it’s launch, Apple has sold 75 million iPhone and iPod touch devices. Many of those, especially the iPod touches, have been bought by parents for their children. Others have been bought by educational authorities to give to students. Thus, a large percentage of Apple’s customers are children and their parents or teachers.

Upon browsing the App Store, many parents and teachers would be horrified to see numerous soft-core semi-pornographic apps. They may jump to the conclusion that such apps contain content much worse than they actually do (Apple never allowed any actual nudity). They may also not be aware of the parental controls built-in to the device.

Just seeing the apps listed there would be enough for some to refuse to buy iPhones or iPod touches for their children or students. By removing the apps entirely, Apple is giving their customers peace of mind, and showing them that Apple will never try to sell unsuitable sexual content to their children.

Customers who are adults and who haven’t had their parents keep the household Wi-Fi password secret from them, can still access all the smut they want through the Safari browser.

Why it’s right for Apple’s developers

Getting your App noticed in the App store is difficult enough, among all the garbage that is sold. There are fart apps, novelty apps, apps that do nothing, apps that are simply advertisements, apps that simply load RSS feeds, etc. A simple look at the “Free” section of the App store shows the plethora of tacky garbage currently available.

Indeed, the App store has quickly degenerated into a collection of largely poor-quality rubbish, most of which is coded by amateurs. Genuine developers with good ideas have to compete with the white noise of thousands of worthless concoctions.

By removing the soft porn apps, Apple has helped to clean up the store, and uplifted the whole atmosphere. Porn is, by it’s very nature, usually trashy, tacky, cheap, and worthless. Their presence helped drag the rest of the store down, along with expectations of App usefulness and quality.

I would argue that it’s much better for developers to sell their wares on a store with as little tacky rubbish as possible. Would you want your App listed next to some free, unsophisticated App, with “Boobs” in the title?

Of course, you may object and point out that, following this line of reasoning, Apple should ban all the rubbish Apps, such as the ones that make fart noises. Well, there is a small but crucial difference. Fart apps, and the like, are silly immature toys for children. Porn apps, however, are smutty and immature titillation for grown-ups. Kids toys are kids toys, no one really minds, it doesn’t drag everyone else down around it — but cheap porno smut? Not the same thing.

Why it’s right for Apple’s shareholders

What must also be considered is Apple’s profits and corporate image. By shunning porn apps from the store, Apple will avoid off-putting millions of parents and thousands of schools from buying their products.

Even if Apple were to create a special “Adult” section of the App store — controlled by the App ratings system — this would damage their corporate image. How so? Apple would then be allowing and controlling the sale of trashy soft core porn. In effect, Apple would become a porn publisher. That is not good for the corporation’s image, especially among the more religious population (such as the United States and Muslim nations) and those who hold to traditional values (such as in China and India).

Here’s a thought: remember that Apple’s CEO – Mr Steve Jobs – is also on the board of Disney. He is, in fact, Disney’s biggest shareholder. Thus, Apple and Disney’s biggest single shareholder is the same man. He even owned Pixar, which is now part of Disney and makes Disney’s biggest blockbusters. In effect, you could say that Mr Jobs is the new Walt Disney. Could you imagine Mr Walt Disney owning a company that distributes and sells soft-core porn? Hardly.

Conclusion

Whether you are a parent, education authority, developer, or Apple shareholder – the decision to shun all pornographic Apps from the iTunes App Store is the right one.