Review: Casetify’s $70 Apple Watch Bands Can Be Customized With Any Design [iOS Blog]
Casetify, a company that makes customizable iPhone, iPad, and MacBook cases, has also begun selling Apple Watch bands, which can be printed with any design. Available for both the 38 and 42mm Apple Watches and in two finishes, bands can be customized with photographs or artwork or ordered from Casetify’s pre-designed artist collection.
Fit
Casetify’s Apple Watch bands are made from polycarbonate and are closest in nature to the Apple Watch Sport bands. I’ve been wearing a 38mm Casetify Apple Watch band for just over a week and while it is comfortable, the material of the band is not as soft, flexible, or as thin as the fluoroelastomer the Apple Watch Sport bands are constructed from.
Bands come in two sizes, one for each watch. The 38mm band fits wrists sized 140 to 200mm, while the 42mm band fits wrists sized 150 to 210mm. The underside of each band is ridged, with the Casetify logo printed on each side.
At about an eighth of an inch thick, Casetify’s bands seem to be approximately a third thicker than the Apple Watch Sport (there’s maybe about a millimeter of difference between the two). That’s not a huge thickness disparity, but it is noticeable when wearing the Casetify band after wearing a Sport band, especially on a small wrist.
Read more 
Facebook makes it easier for iPhone users to find links
Facebook’s about to make it easier for you to find and share links while you’re on the move. The social network has updated its iPhone application with a new feature that lets users search for articles, videos and other web content using keywords. As pictured above, typing a couple of words about what you’re looking will bring up a list of related links — which can then be viewed and shared with your Facebook friends, directly from the app. For now, the feature is only available to people who have an iPhone, but it wouldn’t be a surprise to see this on Facebook’s Android app in the near future.
Filed under: Cellphones, Internet, Software, Mobile, Facebook
Source: Facebook
Disney Launches ‘Disney GIF’ Keyboard on iOS for Easy GIF Sharing [iOS Blog]
Disney today announced the launch of its own GIF app, called Disney GIF, that will act as a keyboard extension and allow users to share a huge back catalogue of Disney- and Pixar-themed GIFs in Message, email, and various social networks (via TechCrunch). With today’s launch, the app includes over 200 GIFs, with the company promising more to be added as time goes by.
GIFs ready at launch include moments from films like Frozen, The Lion King, and the newly-released Pixar feature Inside Out. The app will also feature content from studios owned under the Disney corporate umbrella, with GIFs from movies like Star Wars and even ABC shows like Scandal and Once Upon a Time.
Perhaps taking a cue from the emotion-based Inside Out, the app lets users browse by emotional status, film, or see what’s currently trending with users around the world. Although the app is free to download, anyone interested in more premium content from the popular film Frozen can put down $0.99 for one of two themed packs from the animated musical.
The move is an interesting one, especially considering the rejection of app developer Matt Cheetham’s app GIF Finder earlier in the year, due to the fact that it “includes content or features that resemble various well-known, third-party marks, including Disney characters.” Although the app’s rejection was “largely due” to other entertainment properties, Disney’s desire to be included in the meme- and GIF-generating world, and still own complete control over the output, makes the debut of Disney GIF more understandable.
Disney GIF can be downloaded from the App Store for free. [Direct Link]
Apple Obtains Touch ID-Related Patents From Biometric Security Firm Privaris
Apple has been working to acquire the intellectual property assets of Charlottesville, Virginia-based biometric security firm Privaris, according to CNN. Privaris recently transferred 26 of its 31 patents to the iPhone maker, including 4 patents in December 2012 and dozens more in October 2014.
The patents are primarily related to fingerprint and touchscreen technology that could lead to Touch ID improvements on future devices. Last February, well-informed KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo told investors that the next iPhone will have an improved Touch ID with reduced errors.
“For example, one of Privaris’ patents covers the ability to use a touchscreen and fingerprint reader at the same time. Another invention of Privaris’ could allow you to open a door with your iPhone by scanning your fingerprint and holding your phone up to a reader, similar to how you pay for items with Apple Pay.”
While the transferred patents have fueled acquisition rumors, the Privaris website has not been updated since 2010 and seemingly none of the company’s senior executives or other employees have updated their LinkedIn profiles with positions at Apple.
Accordingly, it is more likely that Privaris has scaled down or went out of business and Apple has acquired the company’s patent portfolio and other intellectual property. However, the operational status of the company cannot be confirmed.
Privaris, which reportedly raised $29 million in funding, developed a lineup of PlusID personal biometric devices to access computers, networks, websites, software, VPNs, secured printers and online apps.
The company has also offered several other products and services related to access control systems, fingerprint authentication, biometric computer security, biometric security software and access cards, all technologies that fall within the realm of Touch ID.
Galaxy S6 takes first place in real world speed test, beating out LG’s G4 and the iPhone 6
A new massive benchmark from Tom’s Guide has put six of the best performing smartphones on the market against each other to see which phone came out on top in a variety of situations. The tests measured everything from real-life performance and tasks you’d typically do on your smartphone every day, to gaming and other benchmarks. The test measured the Samsung Galaxy S6, LG G4, HTC One M9, Google Nexus 6, Asus Zenfone 2, and Apple iPhone 6, so there’s a very wide variety of hardware here.
What’s definitely going to be great news for Samsung, their Galaxy S6 finished in 1st place a vast majority of the benchmarks, including PDF loading times, gaming performance, WiFi speed, and a handful of benchmarks. This can probably be attributed to Samsung’s own zippy Exynos processor, their very fast memory modules, and the insanely fast flash storage they opted to use in the S6. Surprisingly, though, the LG G4 beats out the S6 in camera opening time. Considering how much Samsung mentioned the quick camera shortcut on the home button, you’d think that would have scored better in a benchmark. But hey. props to LG for pulling that off.
The G4 scored 1st in camera opening time, as well as a Basemark OSII Memory test. Interestingly, the G4 pretty typically beat out the Snapdragon 810 powered HTC One M9. Considering the G4 has a higher resolution and only a Snapdragon 808 processor, this is almost irrefutable proof that the 810 has some problems. The only benchmark that the M9 came out ahead in was a 3dMark benchmark.
Another note worth mentioning is how poorly the Nexus 6 runs compared to other devices. It held up fairly well in benchmarks, but in real world tests, it was pretty consistently dead last, beaten by the Zenfone 2 and HTC’s M9. Considering Nexus phone are supposed to run very fast, completely stock versions of Android, that’s more than a little disappointing.
source: Tom’s Guide
via: Android Authority
Come comment on this article: Galaxy S6 takes first place in real world speed test, beating out LG’s G4 and the iPhone 6
How a file format brought an industry to its knees
MP3. It’s the format that revolutionized the way music’s been consumed since the late ’90s. When Karlheinz Brandenburg, a German acoustics engineer, discovered that an audio file could be compressed down to one-twelfth of its original size without distortion, he created the file-shrinking technology. Stephen Witt’s debut book, How Music Got Free, traces all digital music piracy back to the invention of that format, which inadvertently made it possible for people to download and share music illegally. The book details the science and struggle behind the widely used audio technology. And his investigation uncovers the politics and the manipulative men who kept MP3 files from seeing the light of computer screens for years.
When the MP3 format became accessible, after a long corporate battle, it eventually led to the rise of music piracy and simultaneous demise of CDs. But Witt reveals more than just the technology that systematically tore the music industry to pieces. He narrows the story down to two men at opposite ends of the same spectrum: Doug Morris, one of the most powerful record label CEOs in the industry, who made rap music top the charts and eventually led the fight against piracy; and Dell Glover, a factory worker at a Universal Music CD-manufacturing unit in North Carolina, who leaked about 2,000 albums, made Eminem change his album release date and became one of the biggest pirates in the largest underground scene, Rabid Neurosis (RNS).
When pirated music found its way online in the ’90s and early 2000s, almost all of it came through RNS, which relied on Glover’s access to the CDs weeks before release. Tech-savvy teens spent hours scouring the internet and loved having access to music before it hit the record stores, even if that meant jeopardizing the careers of the very artists they worshiped. At the time, it became virtually impossible to not download the MP3 files or know someone who did.
Witt’s book is filled with nostalgic moments for a generation that grew up on piracy. But it’s also informative for people who skipped that phase completely. He draws parallels between the inventions, the decisions and the theft that led to the downfall of the booming music industry — an industry that never quite regained its glory. I caught up with the author to get the lowdown on his expansive work on digital piracy and his views on music streaming.
When and why did you get interested in music piracy?
I showed up at [the University of Chicago] in 1997 with a 2GB hard drive and by the end of the year, I filled it with pirated MP3s. This was really the first time in history that you could do it. Even a couple of years earlier the technology wasn’t there. Over the next decade, I was a serial media pirate. I just hoarded tons of stuff. I was on all the underground pirate networks. It was such a thoughtless action to go and take something from the internet; I never really thought about who might have put it up there in the first place. As I got older, around 2010-2011, I wondered where all this stuff came from. When I started investigating it, I found all this fascinating stuff that turned into this book.
The original iPod from 2001
Your book underscores the technology that led to music piracy and the corporate drama behind it. It was fascinating and frustrating to know that half a dozen German engineers sat on a gold mine but couldn’t share it with the world for years because their invention was systematically and viciously suppressed. Why was the music industry snubbing MP3 even though it was clearly a superior format to the MP2, which was widely accepted?
The music industry was [made up of] technophobes. When this information [about the MP3] first became available, they rejected it multiple times. The pirates [started] providing leaked compressed music through the internet and filling a vacuum that the music industry would not. The music corporations could’ve done that. They ended up being forced to do it much later anyway. But for a long time, they had to be dragged screaming into the modern era. Now I think anyone who owns a music company is thinking 20 years ahead about distribution. They’ve learned their lesson. But at the time they were totally clueless.
There’s a moment when Ricky Adar, an entrepreneur, asks Brandenburg, “Do you realize what you’ve done? You’ve killed the music industry.” Did the invention of the MP3 really destroy the industry or did it, in fact, push it to change and adopt a new way?
It was a bit of both. Adar was trying to push a service similar to what we call Spotify today. This was in 1995. He faced enormous resistance from the industry and at the time it wasn’t even clear such a thing was technologically possible. When he saw the MP3, it was the first time he saw a device that actually shrunk music, but made it listenable. Previous devices did it, but they sounded pretty crappy. Why did he say it killed the industry? I think once the stuff got out, it wouldn’t be copy protectable, people would start trading it online, which is exactly what happened. The profits would disappear because you could get it for free. It pushed the industry into the future, but even today they’re only operating at about half the size that they were at the peak of compact discs in 2000. Still, it’s not clear if they’re ever gonna recover. They actually shrunk last year, even with Spotify.
The music industry eventually fought back against piracy. They went after Napster for copyright infringement. The RIAA also sued Diamond Multimedia, the company that created the first-ever commercially successful MP3 player. What was going on with these lawsuits?
“Apple almost acted like a money launderer for the spoils of Napster.”
The judges ruled Napster was illegal, so the industry won that one. The legality of Napster wasn’t obvious at first. Now it’s clear that it was in violation of the law, but at the time there was no basis for ruling that. Simultaneously, there was a lawsuit against [Diamond] — the earliest version of the MP3 player. But the judges ended up ruling that the MP3 player was just a hard drive and they could not limit its sales. So the music industry lost that suit. When it happened there were all these music files everywhere and then [the lawsuit] made all these portable players available. Essentially, the music industry won the wrong lawsuit.
Daniel Ek, founder of Spotify
Napster had the potential to shrink the massive profits that the music industry was making from CD sales, but for a time it wasn’t impacting the sales at all. People couldn’t go anywhere with their downloaded files. But when the MP3 player won the lawsuit (RIAA vs. Diamond), it made digital piracy portable and even led to the launch of the iPod, right?
For sure. Apple came kind of late to this. iTunes debuted in 2001. The iPod came in [later that year]. It didn’t make an impact right away, but eventually people wanted to take all these files and make them portable. The iPod made that possible. So for a time it became the best-selling gadget ever. Apple’s retail store had the highest sales per square foot of any retail business in history and a lot of it was from these $200-300 iPods. Eventually they moved to iPhone, but you can trace these developments in the global market all the way to the earliest days of piracy. It’s like I say in the book, Apple almost acted like a money launderer for the spoils of Napster.
At one point in the book you say: “Controversy was temporary. Royalties were forever.” I couldn’t help but wonder how you perceive the aggressive shift from downloading to streaming services like Spotify and Tidal?
The stuff in the book is really nostalgia now. That era is closing and we’ve moved on to a new form. Instead of owning files, we license them from a large corporation; we’re at their mercy. The trade-off is that artists get paid and we get access to everything ever written instantly. It’s a pretty nice deal, but it limits the freedom of the user. What’s going on right now is that there’s more than half a dozen companies attempting to crack the music-streaming space. All of them are losing money and artists are making very little from these sites. But if they can get hundreds of millions of users to subscribe, it can work. They just have to make people willing to pay $120 a year. Half of Spotify’s subscribers are under the age of 27 and these are people who grew up with piracy, including me.
I wonder if there’s an all-powerful Doug Morris-type of the streaming world?
Daniel Ek — the CEO of Spotify. He’s Swedish and he founded the company in 2008 during the height of Pirate Bay frenzy. His entire mission statement for the company was to get people to pay for music again. Surprisingly enough, I would say he’s been successful in doing that. Spotify is not a sustainable business right now. It’s losing about $200 million a year and it’s paying its artists a pittance. It’s possible in the future it could evolve into a commercially viable model. It’s not there yet. But for consumers it’s been great.
If they can get their goal of 40 million [paid] subscribers, which is the size of the music industry right now, they might save everyone.
This interview has been condensed and edited.
[Images: Viking Press (top image); 37prime/Flickr (First gen iPod); Taylor Hill/FilmMagic (Daniel Ek, Spotify)]
Reserve Strap to Offer 30 Hours of Extra Apple Watch Battery Life, Launching in November [iOS Blog]
Reserve Strap this week released the official design specifications of its battery-charging Apple Watch band accessory, confirming a shipping date for the $249.99 strap to be November 3, 2015. Since its debut in early March, the Reserve Strap has gone through two design iterations, with developers Lane Musgrave and John Arrow attempting to get the look — and functionality — just right.
The strap’s finalized design comes in with a width of 25mm, a thickness of 3-9mm, and a total weight of 65g. The designers have also ditched the rubber and metallic combination design of the Reserve Strap’s second iteration with a uniform Thermoset Elastomer Silicone band that’s “as resistant to water as Apple Watch.” Coming in both 38mm and 42mm casing sizes, the Reserve Strap promises to fit wrists ranging in size from 130mm to 210mm.
The original Reserve Strap design (left), with the second design (middle) and the final one (right)
The design wasn’t the only aspect of the strap to be overhauled, however, with the strap’s developers noting a 167 percent increase in battery life, compared to the original design’s 125 percent boost. Essentially, if the Reserve Strap is fully charged (via included micro-USB cable), users can expect an additional 30 hours of battery life for their Apple Watch. So, as the company notes on its website, a fully-charged Apple Watch can now expect a grand total battery life of 48 hours if both devices are topped off.
The company goes into the specifics in the new blog post on what users can expect with a day-to-day usage of the Reserve Strap, detailed below. It should be mentioned that the strap’s access to the Apple Watch accessory port requires users to first remove the cover to the hidden port before using the Reserve Strap, a process detailed by creators Musgrave and Arrow in a how-to video on their YouTube channel.
How Reserve Strap Works
1. Reserve Strap will connect to the Apple Watch similar to Apple bands. It will slide in laterally then you’ll then push forward a small switch underneath the band to engage the accessory port connection to secure the Reserve Strap on the Watch.
2. At your discretion simply press the power button once to initiate charging. You can use the Watch as normal while it charges.
3. Once top-off charging is complete after 60-75 minutes, press the power button again to save the rest of Reserve Strap for another time. Or if you decide to leave Reserve Strap on, Apple Watch will use the Strap’s power to keep the Apple Watch at 100% power until the Reserve Strap is depleted.
4. Reserve Strap uses a minimal LED indicator to let you know how much charge you have left. When you turn the charge on or plug it in, the LED will glow either red, yellow or green indicating a high, medium, or low charge.
5. Recharging the Reserve Strap and Apple Watch is incredibly easy. You can leave your Strap on the Watch and simply plug it in via micro USB. This will charge the Apple Watch and Reserve Strap at the same time!
The Reserve Strap, which the developers promise fully complies with the Apple Watch Band Design Guidelines and “doesn’t violate either AppleCare warranty or Apple Terms & Conditions,” can be pre-ordered for $249.99 today from the company’s official website. The final design can be purchased in white, grey, or black, its creators noting that only those who pre-ordered are guaranteed a strap on the November 3 launch date.
Apple Watch Launches in The Netherlands, Sweden and Thailand on July 17
As the Apple Watch goes on sale in Italy, Mexico, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland and Taiwan today, Apple has quietly announced that The Netherlands, Sweden and Thailand will begin selling the wrist-worn device on July 17. As with other countries, the Apple Watch should be available through the Apple Store, Apple Online Store and possibly select Apple Authorized Resellers.
Apple has been slowly catching up on the Apple Watch backorders dating back to the April pre-order window, with most models now shipping in 1-2 weeks or less on the Apple Online Store and in-store reservations now available. The 42mm Space Black Apple Watch with Link Bracelet remains one of the more difficult models to obtain, with an estimated 2-3 weeks delivery date on the Apple Online Store.
(Thanks to everyone that tipped this!)
AppleCare+ for Apple Watch Now Covers Batteries That Retain Less Than 80% of Original Capacity
Apple has updated the terms of its AppleCare+ Protection Plan for Apple Watch to cover batteries that retain less than 80% of their original capacity within the extended warranty period, whereas it previously covered battery depletion of 50% or more from original capacity. The change applies to all models of the Apple Watch Sport, Apple Watch and Apple Watch Edition where sold.
Apple will replace Apple Watch batteries that do not live up to the 80% specification free of charge as long as the device is within its AppleCare+ coverage period. Otherwise, the iPhone maker charges $79 for out-of-warranty battery service for all Apple Watch batteries that retain less than 80% of their original capacity per Apple’s diagnostic testing, plus a $6.95 shipping charge if required.
The new battery terms of AppleCare+ for Apple Watch in the United States and Canada:
“If during the Plan Term, you submit a valid claim by notifying Apple that (i) a defect in materials and workmanship has arisen in the Covered Equipment, or (ii) the capacity of the Covered Equipment’s battery to hold an electrical charge is less than eighty percent (80%) of its original specifications, Apple will either (a) repair the defect at no charge, using new parts or parts that are equivalent to new in performance and reliability, or (b) exchange the Covered Equipment, with a replacement product that is new or equivalent to new in performance and reliability.”
Apple has designed the Apple Watch battery to retain up to 80% of its original capacity at 1000 complete charge cycles, which gives the watch’s battery a lifespan of about two-and-a-half to three years based on fully charging the wrist-worn device once per day. Apple Watch has all-day battery life of 18 hours on a single charge based on mixed usage, and lasts up to 72 hours in Power Reserve mode.
AppleCare+ extends an Apple Watch’s warranty coverage to two years from the date of purchase for the Sport and Watch, and three years for Edition, and provides accidental damage coverage for up to two incidents. Without AppleCare+, purchases of the Apple Watch Sport and the stainless steel Apple Watch are covered by a limited one-year warranty and 90 days of complimentary phone support.
AppleCare+ costs $49, $59 and $1,500 for the Apple Watch Sport, Apple Watch and Apple Watch Edition models respectively, while accidental damage coverage is subject to an additional service charge of $69 for Sport, $79 for Watch and $1,000 for Edition. Apple also sells AppleCare+ combo plans for Apple Watch and iPhone for $149 (Sport and iPhone), $169 (Watch and iPhone) and $1,600 (Edition and iPhone).
El Capitan beta has clues about new iMac, Bluetooth remote
Apple’s latest El Capitan beta for developers has a few Easter eggs hidden in its codes, which hint at possible new products on the way. 9to5Mac has unearthed some very telling references to future hardware, including one that adds support for an Apple-made 4,096 x 2,304 resolution display. Seeing as there’s already a 27-inch 5K iMac, that line of code might be meant for a 21.5-inch Retina iMac. Further references to Intel’s new Broadwell Iris graphics processor and four new AMD Radeon processors support that possibility, so cross your fingers if that’s the desktop computer you’ve always wanted.
There’s also a new file within the beta platform called “AppleBluetoothRemote.kext,” which, if it’s not glaringly obvious, suggests Cupertino is working on a Bluetooth remote control. According to 9to5Mac, the file’s contents indicate that the hardware will have a Bluetooth chip with Multi-touch trackpad support that can also connect to devices via infrared. Unfortunately, there’s nothing in the file that can confirm what the remote is for, but we’ll bet it’s the upcoming Apple TV’s companion. After all, The New York Times reported back in May that the company’s streaming device might come with a bigger, touchpad-integrated remote.
Source: 9to5mac
AIVAnet 