Playboy’s New Format Shows the Power of Platforms and it Should Scare Us All

So, Playboy has decided to give up the “N” and become “Safe-for-Work."

I mean, not really.  I still wouldn’t recommend you go there on your company computer.  It’s just that now the magazine is following Maxim’s success by going a little less risqué in their published pics.

*Sigh*

When Hugh Hefner set out in the 1950’s to create a men’s magazine, he also set out to change American cultural views on nudity and sexuality.  The company is claiming that this part of the mission is done because, well, internet porn.  So since the thrill is gone, they don’t feel that nudity adds to the magazine’s draw.

It’s true that Playboy’s numbers are down and that the re-branding of their website to "safe-for-work" made a tremendous impact on visits.  But to me, this is all pointing towards Playboy having failed their mission, not succeeded.

I’ve been a Playboy subscriber since 2007.  And what I’ve come to appreciate about the brand was that they were very much sex positive in all their work.  The internet, generally, is not.  So while Playboy may be trying to spin this as “nudity is everywhere, mission accomplished” what I see is a lot of poorly produced, poorly conceptualized, and often negative sexual content to which Playboy offered an alternative. 

But what’s worse is that these changes are an admission from Playboy that our culture hasn’t changed at all.  Most of this is driven by the need to be “shareable” in the social media world.  Apple, Facebook, Instagram, Vine, Periscope, and (to the least extent, but still very much so) Twitter don’t play well with “pornography” and make sharing difficult or impossible.  Playboy is a media company and media companies clearly have to play in the social space to be relevant.  This has become so true that now, that the oldest, most widely known brand in adult entertainment is giving up the “adult” stuff to stay alive.

That says a lot- and to me something very scary- about the state of these “platforms” and they power they wield.  This wasn’t coercion and it wasn’t some backroom meeting by all the big players to force Playboy to change it’s ways.  In some sense, that would be more sinister, but less frightening.  Instead, this is just the result of group-think amongst the biggest players in an evolving media game.  Where attention and dollars are filtered through sites and apps that, without even trying, can compel an iconic brand into giving up a 60 year old legacy to survive.

I’m not mad at Playboy and I’ll keep my subscription.  I really do read it for the articles.  But I’m worried about what this means for free-speech, free-ideas, and the future of media.  If we- the consumers- allow our support for a brand or writer or publication to be filtered only through someone’s “platform” then we are allowing that platform to shape the message.

But that’s just my opinion...

My Tweetbot 4 Review - Activity Tab is Worth the Price of Admission

Tweetbot 4 has been out for about a week or two now and I’ve switched over to it being my everyday Twitter client.

My Twitter needs are simple, but like all my needs, very particular.  Here’s what I’m looking for and how Tweetbot stacks up.

1. Universality; most importantly timeline sync.  I’ve tried “tweet marker” and never found it to be reliable enough.  I want my computer, iPhone, and iPad to all be synced flawlessly every time.  iCloud sync has proven to be quite good at this on my last client and Tweetbot nailed it as well.  Tweetbot’s advantage here is having a Mac client and not just iOS.  So huge win on my top feature.  But in addition, Tweetbot for both Mac and iOS are very well designed for their platforms with tons of great features.  I particularly love the “TweetDeck-style” columns on the Mac.  And the new iPad app makes great use of the screen space.  Tweetbot is right now the only Twitter client that I feel is great on every device I own.  Wonderfully, they also just added “badge sync” so if you clear the badge on your iPad, it’s gone on your iPhone.  Why can’t Apple just get that working across the system already??
2. Great design.  Tweetbot looks great, but more importantly, works like my brain does.  I never liked the “unified timeline” approach, despite it’s convince, because often I get a reply to a tweet from a while ago and so seeing that later never made sense.  I like the tabs at the bottom for quick access to things and their method for changing tabs is great.  All the features you want like auto-dark theme and such are available too.  I’m a big fan of having the text match size and font to the system- looks very nice and right at home.

But beyond being the best in these requirements, Tweetbot also wins for having done some fantastic features that I really love.

First up the easy one- adding Safari View Controller to open web links.  This is quickly becoming a must-have for me in any app that I use links in regularly.  Now that I’m deep into 1 Password, Pocket, and using an iOS content blocker, I’ve really got Safari running in a way that makes me happy.  Having all that work for me when I open links in apps is just amazingly good.  And Safari View Controller is easier on developers too, so win-win.  I LOVE Safari View Controller and hope all my apps get updated with it sooner than later (hint, hint- Feedly ;) 

Next, and most notably, the Activity Tab.

This is the feature that finally killed the native Twitter client for me.  The one thing that Twitter’s own app did best was showing “activity” but that crown has been passed.  Tweetbot’s Activity Tab alone is worth the price of admission to me.  Being able to quickly see who’s followed me, faved or retweeted me, and what tweets are getting noticed is awesome.  Yes, it’s a double-edged sword for those who are stats-obsessed, but for me who is just curious and often absent minded, this is amazing!  I’m in love with this feature.

Overall, Tweetbot 4 is a fantastic update and well worth your time and money.  I had switched away from Tweetbot about a year ago and this update has completely brought me back.  I plan to stay for the foreseeable future too, with the Tapbots team having perfected the Twitter client.

But that’s just my opinion...

(Author's Note - I have no affiliation with Tweetbot or Tapbots, nor was I given any compensation or consideration for this article.  I just wanted to give some praise to an app I really love and happily paid for myself.)

Linked - Google’s Attempts at “Transparency” Show Just How Creepy They Are

Linked- http://www.cultofandroid.com/76700/google-records-voice-search/

I get the technical reason for (at least temporarily) archiving these.  Voice recognition is a machine learning problem and it only gets better when humans help “train” it (i.e., listen to recordings the machine didn’t get right and try to correct manually.)

But the fact that they tie it to your user ID is unacceptable.  And showing me that in the name of “transparency” is nice, but doesn’t forgive the fact that they’re keeping data that way.  Now a data breach means all that can be traced back to you with some work.  They’re making it too easy for, at the extremes, the NSA or other government activity or determined hackers.

This is just one more example of how Google doesn’t take user privacy seriously.  Their attitude remains- “This is your cost of doing business with us.  We’ll start showing you just how deep the rabbit hole goes, but we’re not changing how we do things."

That cost is too high for me. Apple has already made clear that they randomize their data and delete it after 2 years.  And I’m happily sticking with DuckDuckGo.com (which keeps getting better and has replaced Google for me so well I don’t even notice).

The Universal App Pricing Problem (that Apple TV will make worse)

Tweetbot 4 is out and is a fantastic app that any Twitter power user should consider.  But if Tapbots didn't have it rough enough with the v3 paid upgrade, I think v4 is going to give people just as much heartburn when the introductory sale is over.

As of today (10/13/15) you can get Tweetbot 4 for $4.99 as a universal app.  It's the same price that Tweetbot 3 was selling for.  But that's 50% off; meaning it's about to go to $9.99.

Now, Tapbots have never been shy about how they feel in regards to app pricing.  Upgrades in particular are a problem.  But I think there's another one lurking that is only going to get bigger as Apple TV comes into play; and that's Universal Apps.

Quick review- "Universal Apps" are designed to run on both iPhone and iPad natively.  Essentially, it's two apps in one.  Apple has also announced that Apple TV will support Universal Apps as well; so if you buy a game, for example, you can download to all three of those devices and only have to pay the one price.  It's convenient for sure, but it begs the question- why pay for versions of an app you can't use?

Tweetbot 4 costs twice what Tweetbot 3 did.  Part of that pricing justification is that you're getting both an iPad and iPhone version of the app.  Previously, those were purchased separately at $4.99 (iPhone) and $2.99 (iPad).

So what now for the users who only have an iPhone?  They pay $9.99 for an app that used to be $4.99 and who's price jump is largely due to having an included iPad version?  Doesn't seem like a great value proposition.  

A Universal App's appeal is great for those that have all the included devices.  For others, it's a higher price for features they can't even access.  

Once again, developers and users are going to find themselves at odds.  Developers will rightly want to be compensated for the work needed to make apps universally compatible.  Users, by contrast, will either A) want a lower, bundled price and one purchase to work everywhere or B) to not have to pay for versions they can't use.

So what's the solution?

Well, in my very un-technical opinion, I would think perhaps bitcode could provide an answer.  Apple's new way of allowing developers to download only needed assets by device type- if paired with a more nuanced pricing model- could do the trick.

What if instead of listing the price, the App Store button simply said "Buy?"  This remains a clear indicator that the app is not free.  However, now by tapping on the "Buy" button, you're given multiple prices - iPhone Only, iPad Only, Apple TV Only (depending which device you're buying from), or Universal- each with it's own price.  Apple could use Apple ID info to limit the list only to devices you have registered (i.e., if you don't own an iPad, you won't see that option).  And bitcode means you could buy just one and not all versions anyway.  Now, what if you buy and iPad someday and want to download the app from your "Purchased" tab?  Again, you get a choice; instead of the "cloud" icon, you see the "+Get" button.  Pressing here brings up the option to pay the difference and get the native version of the app; similar to "complete my purchase."

This would allow developers to get paid proportionate to the work they do, and keep prices low for single device users.

And Apple will never do it.  It adds too much complexity to the experience.

But they're going to have to do something.  And soon- because if Universal Apps are coming to Apple TV, the race to the bottom pricing can't continue.  Developers need to be able to charge for upgrades or device specific versions.  Bitcode to me seems like a great tool to make it happen.  But it all hinges on Apple having the guts to add a little complexity for users along the way.

Give us a chance, Apple.  I'll be we can prove we're smart enough.