TDL Live and a Special Thanks

Here's this week's TDL Live. Originally airing before our "Welcome to Macintosh" documentary event, there's a live skype interview with the filmmakers in the second half of the show. We also cover the post-Macworld news. Enjoy, and don't forget, you can subscribe to the show as well:

Google Drops From Most Trusted Company List, Apple Joins

Google, the "do no evil" behemoth has dropped off the Ponemon Institute/ TRUSTe privacy trust survey. New to the survey this year? Why it's our friends in Cupertino. Apple made its debut all the way at #8. Also new to the list? Facebook. American Express comes in at #1. Facebook was lucky to make it in before this month's virus started to make it's way through the site.

I can't think of anything Apple has done differently in the last year to warrant the sudden jump. Brand recognition? Is there something else I'm missing?

Apple and Google On A Collision Course

It wasn't that long ago that Google and Apple looked like a dream team. We even considered a fantasy merger of the two back in July. How quickly times have changed.

Now it's iPhone vs. Android, Chrome vs. Safari, and perhaps, Apple mobile search vs. Google search. There are some interesting parallels between this situation and the early days of the Microsoft/Apple rivalry. Microsoft was a key software provider for Apple, while also ramping up its own competing OS for IBM PCs and compatibles.

So where will this end? Can Google and Apple work together against Microsoft as a common enemy, or are we seeing the rivalry of the next decade? Will the next generation of Apple users look back on Google vs. Apple in the same way many of us remember Microsoft vs. Apple? It's not entirely unbelievable to see a path in which Microsoft's influence (continues to) declines to a point of an also-ran. Look at the market gains of Firefox, and to a lesser extent, Safari. Look at the move to online applications, and the increasing marginalization of the desktop OS. Yes, these trends could affect Apple as well, but Apple has a booming hardware business Microsoft can't rely on.

With the recent delay/rejection of Apple's voice search app for the iPhone, we might be seeing this new clash of titans coming far sooner than we thought.

What do you think? Is the ultimate showdown of "Do No Evil," and "Think Different" right around the corner?

Apple and Microsoft Workers: Not That Different Politically

Microsoft and Apple. Diametrically opposed forces, right? Each camp has haters and believers. You know, come to think of it, it's not all that different from the presidential campaign; for many people, if you're not on their side, then clearly you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Interestingly enough though, when it comes to individual campaigns donations, they aren't all that far apart. (And, there's an even bigger surprise) According to data gathered from fundrace, opensecrets.org, and the fec, roughly 68% of individual campaign contributions from Microsoft employees went to Democratic candidates, with 32% going to Republican candidates. Over at Apple, 83% went to Democrats, and 17% to Republicans. Depending on where you stand, those may or may not be surprising numbers.

Here's the interesting fact though: Both Microsoft and Apple make the list of the top 20 corporations with the highest number of individual contributions to... Ron Paul.

Microsoft comes in at #5, just below google, and Apple is at #19, just above Intel. Besides Microsoft, Apple, and Google, the list is essentially a who's who of defense contractors, and government/military agencies.

Now the disclaimers: bear in mind these are self-identified employees of these companies. As a result, compiling data on Apple in particular, is difficult because some people list the employer as Apple, others as Apple, Inc., Apple Computer, etc. Exploring these numbers creates a rabbit hole from which you could literally spend a month. Getting an exact count is tricky, as are the options in parsing the data: total amount of money vs. total # of contributors, etc split by candidate, pre- convention/post-convention. We will leave that to the more savvy number runners among us.

Still, its interesting to see that despite how different their philosophies are in design and programming, most politically active employees at both companies could sit down and talk about politics in agreement.

The Coolest Phone OS Ever. (Assuming You've Never Seen An iPhone)

Below behold the wonder of Google's Android operating system in action. It's as if the google engineers have been working on this in a cave for three years, and then are amazed with what they've created: Move your finger to switch screens! There's an accelerometer! Google Maps! You can check your mail! Sorry guys and gals, we've seen all this before.

Google Chrome First Impressions

If you have a PC you're probably using FireFox because Internet Explorer is garbage.  Google asks if there is room for another browser . . . enter Chrome.  The name is questionable, but the product is great.  Chrome is based on both the Webkit platform (same as Safari) and the Gecko platform (same as FireFox).  I'm not entirely sure what they've taken from each of those browsers, but the speed is astonishing.  It loads pages noticeably faster than the aforementioned browsers.

I think that's really the best way to benchmark a browser . . . does it load pages noticeably faster.  I don't really care if a browser loads a page faster if it's not noticeable, and Chrome is noticeable when loading almost all pages and for this reason it wins the default browser award on my day job PC (I know, I'm not proud of it, but they didn't really give me a choice).

Google Chrome is a tab based browser with a one search and URL box for all things web approach.  The browser supports multiple tabs and a crash proof architecture.  A tab might crash, but Chrome isolates that problem closes the tab, but your browsing session isn't totally destroyed.

For those of you who look at source code, I think you'll find the view source option quite well done.

When will Chrome come to the Mac, I don't know but I did sign up to be notified of it's release. If it's as fast as the PC version I can't wait for it's introduction.

TDL Live This week: (9/1-9/8)

No, we weren't going to let a holiday stop us from bringing you the latest Apple news and rumors. If you missed the live show last night, here's your chance to get caught up:

Latest Google-killer a dud

I don't know which is more fruitless: trying to create an iPod/iPhone "killer", or a Google "killer." Today marked the public launch of cuil.com (pronounced cool. Quick tip: if you have to tell people you're cool, you're not.) Cuil is a search engine created by former Google employees. Don't get too excited about this being the next big thing though.

Putting cuil through its paces, reveals an engine far less than ready for prime time. We tested using search terms near and dear to our heart. First, "the digital lifestyle". Our site does not appear in the first "page" of results. I use quotes on page because rather than present the results in a traditional site name/description list, cuil shows a small paragraph of info from the site. The end result being that you have to click through several pages to see as many default results as Google. This wouldn't be a problem if the top results were actually what you're looking for.

Next we tried a search for "Apple news rumors". While we love our friends at macrumors.com. I'm not sure that having 8 of the top ten results point to different subsections of one site helps anyone. Long ago, Google perfected the "more results from this site" option. Cuil should do the same. They intend to make it easier to find information, rather than websites, but in our quick tests, cuil did neither.

Don't get me wrong, there's still plenty of room for improvement in the world of search. As you know, our site thrives on Apple news and rumors, but other than this post, is rare that we actually use those words in posts. Once someone creates an algorithm that can look at a posting on a MacBook Touch, and know that's an Apple rumor, we'll be getting somewhere. Chances are, Google will figure this out long before someone else. Trying to beat them at this point is like setting out to create a "Kleenex killer." Google = search. Period.

July Apple Fantasy Merger: Google

(Each month we weigh the pros and cons of a particular potential merger for Apple. Please note the "fantasy" part of this speculation: Many times the mergers mentioned couldn't or wouldn't be realistically possible. But put all that aside and enjoy this month's edition of Fantasy Merger.)

Last month, we talked about the wonders that would come from an Apple/Nintendo merger. This month, we dare you to dream of iTunes libraries searchable by lyrics, AdWord supported iWeb documents, and web-based OS X. Yes friends, imagine if you will, an Apple/Google merger. Clearly this month's merger leans more toward the fantasy side than others.

Rather than the advantages for each company, the real question is, what would happen to the rest of the tech industry? Would the Dept. of Justice allow such a merger between an internet powerhouse, and a hardware manufacturer? Could the two companies combined maintain Apple's legendary secrecy while also maintaining Google's "do no evil" philosophy? And what would happen to Microsoft? Beyond spending billions of dollars to oppose the merger, what would become of them in a world in which the "most advanced" operating system would be available to all?

Of course both companies are doing fine on their own thanks, and would have little interest in the other beyond their working partnership now. Still, once a month, we stop to wonder, what if...

Counterpoint: .mac isn't all bad

Adam's post on .mac has certainly stirred up the Apple community. While I think he made several valid points about questionable aspects of .mac, I think it's only fair to offer a different look. First, as a point of disclosure, I should admit I'm not the biggest .mac either. I've had my .mac email address since the days .mac was a free service, and I still feel that's the best strategy for Apple. That said, it's not a complete waste either.

Adam is correct in saying that you can re-create most/all the included .mac features with free programs and services. However, we're Mac users: we're used to, and probably in some cases, prefer to pay more for someone taking the hard worked out of things for us. The value in Mac OS X, for example, comes largely from the simplicity it offers compared to Windows. .Mac, bundles several services that people may not want to take the time to configure on their own. Some people (many, perhaps?) don't want to spend the time setting up a gmail account, then hop to godaddy for a hosting plan, and off to another site for remote desktop management. I believe there's an argument to be made for the .mac integration of iWeb, iPhoto, etc. Yes, most of these functions can be duplicated with other solutions, often for free. Flickr, for example to share your photos rather than .mac/iPhoto.

It's not so much a matter of whether .mac is worth it, as much as is it worth it to you. Apple could do a lot to make .mac more attractive to a larger portion of the Apple community. But as it is, it certainly has value to some. As Google, for one, continues to integrate different services together online for free, Apple will be forced (hopefully!) to keep pace, or innovate with .mac. That's perhaps the major flaw of .mac: it's a service that once was innovative, and offered features that couldn't even really be benchmarked against other services. Since then, the rest of the web has caught up, and passed .mac, at least in the "bang for the buck" category. .mac isn't worthless, it's just not a wise choice for as wise of a market as it could be.