The screen size looks wrong because the app is running in pillar box mode — it's only been compiled to run for 640x960 screens (i.e. iPhone 4S and older).
The keyboard is iOS 6 styled because the app hasn't been compiled for iOS 7.
>IMHO, feed reading should be integrated into the browser as a tab, not in the hands of commercial interests.
This is a really interesting idea. Has there been any talk in Chrome development about building a browser-side RSS reader? Google would still get all the information they get from Reader now but they'd be making the 'feature' exclusive to their browser. This coming not long after Apple removed their feed managing ability in the web browser, meaning they could get a load of Chrome converts on OS X just from that.
It'd be really interesting to see what happened if browser-side RSS became "the thing" again. Although, as julien pointed out, doing it browser-side doesn't necessarily mean your RSS isn't in the hands of a commercial interest.
There is none — the title is misleading linkbait. The article only mentions Apple twice, and even then it doesn't explain what "Apple's poisonous touch" has to do with GNOME 3 being almost universally disliked — or as the title puts it, "killed" (which is also completely untrue).
The only technical limitation I can think of is the one which exists server-side. Siri has been having troubles from time-to-time with just iPhone 4S owners polling it. Imagine if all iPhone 4 (and even 3GS) owners were trying to use it too.
For some reason I didn't even consider that you could control it via normal text input, but you're obviously right as that's what Siri will eventually use after the voice-recognition software is used. This totally widens the possible market then, you're right.
I think the main bottleneck at the moment though (and why Siri was limited to the iPhone 4S even though the 4 and 3GS run it perfectly) is due to server load. They simply don't have the infrastructure to handle all the requests.
It wouldn't be competing directly with Google though, would it? Siri offers a limited range of functions (currently, though this will inevitably widen as Apple makes more modules (and possibly opens it up to third parties)) whereas Google indexes (almost) everything on the web and searches by text.
I agree though: due to its nature of remotely processing input, Siri could become a search engine accessed via a web browser assuming the computer has a mic (which most current Macs — especially the biggest-sellers, MacBooks — do). It would become a single interface for accessing dozens of services — like Wolfram Alpha and Yelp — and tapping petabytes of information.
As much as I love what you said, I hate to break it to you that t_hero.png is actually named due to the fact it's the "Hero" graphic. This just refers to the fact that it's the main splash image of the page.[1]
You can see the hero image which was in use before the announcement of Steve's passing here[2] — look at the filename.
>I hope that iOS 5's OTA updates we could get to the point where iOS versions older than a few months are considered obsolete.
While a very nice idea, I'm not convinced it much will change due to old hardware being incompatible with new versions of iOS. It's rarely the x.y versions which are the barriers to progress, but the x.0 versions.
As a designer (and soon-to-be programmer) I totally agree that iteration is key. Iteration is so important to producing a polished product with the best possible aesthetics and experience.
However, I really do not agree that the right approach is to not think about the best possible design beforehand. Ramming your fingers in there and fumbling around blindly is a terrible idea. Think beforehand about the best possible solution and then repair and iterate on that.
It's for people who want to lend their Mac to a friend, but don't want them having access to all their already-signed in accounts, to applications like Mail, and all your files. I suppose places with public-usage Macs could also use this to keep clientele restricted to just using the web.
Also, seeing as this boots from the Recovery partition, it means that, should your Lion install go belly-up, you've still got internet access, which I think is brilliant.
I dunno, the headline is "Apple copies rejected app" not "Apple copies rejected app icon".
Seems to me that people either don't know how the App Store and its requirements work, or they're just want to be outraged at Apple.
Edit: It seems to me that even people commenting here in HN don't realise that the App Store guidelines don't allow for an app to take this kind of access.
The icons are similar (despite how shitty an icon it is), but it won't actually be used anywhere other than apple.com/iOS5 as far as I know; for example it's not even in the Settings app on iOS 5.
Plus people are forgetting that this icon is just what Apple have used for years as their WiFi/AirPort.
If anything, the developer copied — or at the very least, took a lot of inspiration from — Apple's icons for his app's icon.
The keyboard is iOS 6 styled because the app hasn't been compiled for iOS 7.
Nothing out of the ordinary here.