She has the Best. Job. Ever. EVER.

There's nothing I can add to this. Go read.

That jacket was tangible proof that there was no magic in the world. Here was this thing that I could hold and smell and feel and it seemed like so much a part of Mike. It still smelled like cigarettes and mischief. It was the king’s armor and it was mine. It was also undeniable proof that if Mike was mortal, I was somehow less than mortal. I was downright fragile.

Everyone wants longer battery life. They want it for their computer. They want it for their phone. They want it for their Apple Watch.

I get it.

I want longer battery life too. I want to be able to use my gadgets without worrying about charging them. There are a few major problems, though.

Battery life isn't free

One of the most common arguments goes something like this:

If Apple just made the iPhone a little bit thicker, the battery would be so much better! It would be a better device! The sun would shine year round and it would rain kittens!

Well, it goes something like that.

Here's the thing: battery life is never free, and I'm not talking about money. Besides the thickness that you say you don't mind¹, it adds weight. Weight is the enemy of mobile devices.² I want, we all want, lighter devices. Adding battery capacity without a significant technological advance adds weight. No one wants a heavier phone. The iPhone 6 Plus is already very heavy.

The Kindle Effect

There are effectively two useful battery categories:

All day
Kindle

All day battery is subjective, and certainly isn't a universal definition. But it means that for general use, the battery lasts a day. Then you charge it at night.

At the other end, you have Kindle battery life. Kindles³ have legendary battery life. You have to charge them every few weeks, maybe every month. Essentially, you don't have to think about it.

In the middle lies the mystic 3 or 4 day battery life that so many people seem to want. Here's the problem with that:

• Day 1. Use your phone. Don't charge it at night.
• Day 2: Use your phone. Don't charge it at night.
• Day 3: Use your phone. Forget to charge it at night.
• Day 4: Phone dies at 10 AM unexpectedly.

The battery lasts long enough that charging nightly is no longer a primary concern, but also long enough that it's easy to forget. It doesn't last Kindle long, where charging barely matters.

So, do you still want an extremely thick, extremely heavy phone that you will probably forget to charge? None for me, thanks.

Yeah, no.

This is never an appropriate way to start a sentence. This is even more true if you have started your last eleven sentences the same way. Are you agreeing or disagreeing with me? I have no idea. I stopped listening because you aren't making sense.

Stop it.

I hate subscription pricing for software. Hate. Hate. Hate.

I like to buy things. I like to pay $X and own a thing. That thing could be a phone, a refrigerator, or an application. Yes, an application. I want to pay a certain amount of money and own that application.

Before you get all angry and defensive, please re-read the above paragraph and note what I didn't say. I didn't say that I expect updates indefinitely. I didn't say that I expect the application to work on future devices. I don't. I just want to pay and be done.

I get why subscription pricing is good for developers. They get $Y per month indefinitely, instead of $X up front. Over time, $Y / mo surely adds up to much more than $X one time.

There's also an added measure of anti-piracy built in, since the software needs to regular phone home to make sure there's an active subscription.¹

What I don't get, is why subscription pricing is good for customers². What benefit do I get from paying a developer forever when I used to just pay once, and then again at upgrade time?

If your answer is "supporting developers" - I reject your answer. If $X up front isn't enough to make sense to the developer, then the developer isn't charging enough.

Charge a fair price for your software. Charge a fair price for your upgrades. Don't be a jerk to your customers.

In his iOS 9 wishes article, Federico gives his thoughts on a possible iPad multitasking mode:

Either Apple is saving a full-blown multitasking mode for an even larger iPad model, or they’re going to announce the new feature at WWDC as a limited mode for the current iPad Air 2 generation. In the second case, new landscape multitasking would allow you to dock a second app to either side of the screen to view information while you’re doing something else. You would be able to scroll and tap in the second app, but any further interaction (showing the keyboard, a camera view, picking a photo, etc.) would require the full app experience, out of the multitasking UI.

I think Federico is on point. A two-app on screen mode should only be available on iPad Air 2 and beyond. This theoretical mode will need the RAM and high-end performance to work well.

It should also be limited in functionality. Two full-fledged apps side by side on an iPad is a recipe for pain. Specific, limited functionality on the second app is key. Think Today Widget taken to the next level.

Minimal Mac has come to an end.

This is the final post on Minimal Mac. This project contains what I believe in when it comes to a mindful and intentional approach to technology. After nearly 2,500 posts, I have nothing more to add to what has already been said.

I still remember when Patrick had the idea and launched Minimal Mac. I've been subscribed since day one, and it's a shame to see the site go.

Mark Bernstein really doesn't understand sports. At all.

I think we really need to stop obsessing with pills. We accept all sorts of other kinds of sports medicine. We accept cheating: no one ever accused Ty Cobb of playing fair, and we’re not ignoring his records. It’s a game.

Sports work because there are rules. As the decades pass, we have become better at enforcing those rules. Ty Cobb wouldn't be able to pull off today the crap he pulled off in his day. Suspected spitballers, etc wouldn't survive today's scrutiny. And that's good.

Look. Sports don't matter. Sports don't change the world. They are simply adults getting paid insane money for playing a game. We watch them for entertainment, and for the stories that we build around games and careers.

In 50 years, when baseball fans sit around debating the greatest hitters in history, some names will pop up for sure. Ruth. Gherig. Aaron. Mays. Williams. ¹

Some names will come up only to be scorned. McGuire. Sosa. Bonds². Rodriguez.

The difference is obvious. The first group laid waste to the league (as far as we know) honestly. The second group has either admitted to cheating, was caught cheating, or suspected of cheating. There is not a reasonable person alive who thinks Barry Bonds was a better player than Babe Ruth, even if the numbers say he might be.

Alex Rodriguez had the talent to be the greatest shortstop who ever played baseball, and one of the best players, period. Instead, he took a shortcut, taking drugs that gave him an edge. He cheated. He got caught. And now that's all we think of when we hear his name. And in the world of sports, that's exactly as it should be.

Richard Anderson on the impending doom of the iPad¹:

Thin, light, and long battery life will only go so far unless someone has a reason to reach for their tablet over their personal computer.

Emphasis mine.

iOS + big screen.

That's the reason why I reach for my iPad over my iMac. Maybe you see iOS as a hindrance. I prefer it to OS X for many things. While working at my iMac, I often reach over for my iPad to do certain things quickly.

I'm not an analyst. I don't give a crap whether Apple sells 12 million iPads or 90 million iPads. As long as they sell enough so that they keep making new iPads, the rest isn't important to me.

Carl Holscher:

One google doc.

One domain name.

Providing updates to a city in crisis.

I'm far away from Baltimore now, but I grew up there. Stuff like won't solve the city's latest problems, but it will help keep people informed.