Jim Dalrymple wrote on The Loop about iPad sales.

Why iPhone and iPad sales are not the same:

I’ve maintained in all of my conversations about iPad sales that consumers treat the iPad more like a computer and less like the commodity device that sees iPhone sales continue to rise.

I’ve seen many people that were not eligible for an iPhone upgrade spend the full price of an upgrade, just to get the newest version. iPhone has a level of excitement surrounding it that very few other products have. It’s a combination of hardware and a new iOS that piques the interest of millions of users.

So far, with the exception of its initial release, the iPad hasn’t had the same excitement surrounding new versions.

In some situations, the iPad is enough of a computer for many users. Younger kids and seniors are two groups that come to mind right away. These groups would probably not have purchased a traditional computer, but have taken to the iPad for some computer-related tasks, such as Web surfing and email. Of course, there are exceptions, but for the most part, that seems to hold true.

The other group of people that purchased the iPad are those that use them to complement their computers and phones, especially when it’s more convenient than using a computer. You can see people in coffee shops, parks, airports, and thousands of other places, using an iPad, everyday.

The great thing for consumers is that the iPad is built so well, people don’t feel the need to upgrade them as often. Apple also ensures the new iOS is compatible with a couple of generations of iPads and developers often do the same with their apps.

When you consider the iPad is either a first device for one segment of the market that isn’t doing high-end computing, or a complement to other devices for another segment, the need to upgrade quickly is low.

People treat their iPad purchases like they treat their computer purchases. They expect these devices to last longer and do more than an iPhone. In a lot of ways, it’s a bizarre thought because of the similarities of the devices, but I believe this is what’s happening.

Simply put, the buying cycle for an iPad is a lot longer than it is for an iPhone.

Personally, I have owned the iPad 2 and iPad 3. The only factor that pushed me to upgrade was for the Retina display. Since then, I haven’t found an incentive to push me to upgrading from the iPad 3. It is good enough and runs the latest iOS and apps. The new form factor of the iPad Air and iPad Air 2 is tempting, but it is not a major factor for me.

For some, the smaller size of the iPad Mini is a compelling reason to make the switch. My girlfriend prefers to use the iPad Mini when she’s out simply because it is more portable and lighter. But when we are at home, she still picks up the iPad because of the larger screen.

Instead of comparing the iPad with the iPhone, we should compare it with tablet competitors:

What would concern me is if consumers were buying a competitor’s product instead of the iPad. That doesn’t appear to be happening. Samsung hasn’t been doing great lately and Amazon doesn’t release any numbers, so we don’t know for sure how they’re doing (although all indications are not as well as Apple).

In fact, when you look at surveys about consumer’s intent to purchase, the iPad leads over the competitors. There seems to be no direct reason, i.e. a trouble with the product, that would tell me there is a problem with the iPad.

John Gruber on Firefox finally being available on iOS.

That it took them until 2014 to bend to practicality — iOS has been growing in popularity worldwide ever since it debuted, and Apple was never going to allow them to use their own rendering engine in an iOS app — epitomizes everything wrong with Mozilla as an organization. I’m all for idealism, but Mozilla has been idealistic to a fault. (Exhibit A: their stance against H.264 video.)

So what made Mozilla change their minds? Mozilla VP Jonathan Nightingale tweeted:

http://twitter.com/lsblakk/status/539843892300898304

Safari has been shipped with iOS since the first iPhone and Chrome has been iOS since June 2012. Firefox is very late to the party. Even lesser known third party browsers have been out for some time. Dolphin Browser, one of the more popular third party browser, has been out since 2011.

The release of iOS 8 and OS X Yosemite this year brought the Apple ecosystem closer together. My workflow has evolved through the past year and my app usage has changed as a result. Here are my top ten apps of 2014 in no particular order. The platforms that I use them are listed in the brackets.

1. Slack (iOS/Mac/Web)

Matt and I used to communicate via messaging apps such as iMessage, Facebook Messenger and Google Hangouts. It was a mess and keeping track of the different topics was a nightmare. We decided to give Slack a go and it has transformed our communications.

By being able to segregate our conversations into different channels, it helps us easily follow the multiple topics. One feature I really like is the ability to view a list of link shared in a channel. This is important since we are constantly dumping links for each other to consume.

2. VSCO Cam (iOS/Mac)

This is the only camera app you will ever need. I have tried hundreds of camera apps ever since I got my first iPhone back in 2009. The only app that I felt came close was Hipstamatic. I used Hipstamatic a lot but found the skeumorphism too distracting. When I tried VSCO Cam, I was sold and it was not long before I ditched Hipstamatic and most of my camera apps.

3. Instagram (iPhone)

This is the only social network app that gets a space on my home screen. I won’t count VSCO Cam as one. This is an interesting shift in how I engage social media, especially since I deleted Facebook from my phone.

I find Instagram posts requiring me to be less invested. Look at a photo, scroll to the next. Tap to like or comment if I have something to say. As opposed to seeing links on my Facebook news feed and getting sucked in when I open the link. In this sense, Facebook Paper allows me to browse my news feed in a manner more akin to Instagram. The ability to easily share from Facebook Paper to Pocket helped keep me from going down the rabbit hole, since I can save to Pocket instead of reading it the link there and then.

4. PhotoDesk (Mac)

The best app for browsing Instagram on Mac OS X. PhotoDesk, formerly InstaDesk, is a powerful Instagram client. It supports multiple accounts, allows you to sort your feed, lets you like many images with one click, and lists your favourite users and informs you if there are new photos from your favourite users. Power users will appreciate the ability to create comment templates for canned responses.

5. 1Password (iOS/Mac)

The many hacking incidents and password leaks in 2014 show that password security is something not to be taken lightly. The best way to avoid multiple compromises would be to avoid reusing passwords. This is where password managers help make your life easier and your passwords more secure. I have not tried the other alternative password manager. However, my experience with 1Password has been fantastic.

The app can create a unique password for each service and website you use. Since you don’t have to remember the password, you can generate passwords with high entropy. You don’t key in the password as 1Password inserts the password for you, thus circumventing the risk of key loggers.

6. Mail (iOS/Mac)

I used to rely on Sparrow for emails. However, since its demise after bring bought over by Google, I have been searching for a replacement. I tried Mailbox on iOS and it has proven to be useful for powering through my unread items. Airmail is a worthy successor to Sparrow on the Mac. However, due to bugs with Airmail, I switched back to the default Mail app.

The Mail app has improved tremendously since the last time I tried it back on OS X Lion. In fact, it has comfortably become the only email app that I use. The only thing I miss is the ability to sort through Gmail tabs, but the lack of such a feature does not stop me from using it.

7. Reeder (iOS/Mac)

Ever since Reeder was released on iOS, I have been using it to browse my RSS feeds. When Google Reader was closed down by Google, Reeder did not work until it was updated to support other feed syndicators. During that period, I tried options such as Feedly and Digg Reader, but I didn’t like them. When Reeder 2 for iOS was launched, it immediately became the only RSS feed reader on my iPhone and iPad. Reeder 2 for Mac was released a year later, an agonising wait during which I had to rely on other apps.

8. Pocket (iOS/Mac/Web)

Pocket has become such an integral part of my content consumption workflow, and a big aid in improving my productivity and reducing distractions. I save articles and videos to Pocket, instead of opening them to read and end up being distracted. Content from all sources are funnelled into Pocket, be it from emails, Reeder or links my friends share.

9. IFTTT (iOS/Web)

Automation takes repetitive tasks out of our hands and frees up time. IFTTT plays an important role in sharing content across platforms, such as automatically posting my Instagram photo on Twitter as an image.

10. MarsEdit (Mac)

This entry was drafted in MarsEdit. If you are a blogger, or create content for a blogging system, you should consider MarsEdit. It has transformed the way I blog and spurred me on to blog more frequently. I really like how I get live preview of my entries alongside the editor. The preview is configured to pull CSS from my sites so I get to see exactly how the articles would look like as I type. Markdown support is a plus.

John Gruber wrote a very good piece on Yahoo’s decline.

I would argue that Yahoo lost its way early. Yahoo was an amazing, awesome resource when it first appeared, as a directory to cool websites. Arguably, the directory to cool websites. It was hard to find the good stuff on the early web, and Yahoo created a map. Their whole reason for being was to serve as a starting point that sent you elsewhere.

Then came portals. The portal strategy was the opposite of the directory strategy — it was about keeping people on Yahoo’s site, instead of sending them elsewhere. It was lucrative for a while, but ran its course. And it turned out that the web quickly became too large, far too large, for a human-curated directory to map more than a fraction of it. The only way to index the web was algorithmically, as a search engine. And one search engine stood head and shoulders above all others: Google.

Yahoo reportedly had an opportunity to buy Google in 2002 for $5 billion. Yahoo, under the leadership of CEO Terry Semel, declined. And that was the end of Yahoo. We all know hindsight is 20/20. There are all sorts of acquisitions that could have been made. But I would argue that acquiring Google in 2002 (if not earlier) was something Yahoo absolutely should have known they needed to do. The portal strategy had played itself out. All they were left with was their original purpose, serving as a starting page for finding what you were looking for on the web.

Buying Google in 2002, at whatever cost, was the only way for Yahoo to return to those roots. Google wasn’t just something shiny and new — it was the best solution to date (even now) to the problem Yahoo was originally created to solve. In a broad sense, buying Google would have been to Yahoo what buying NeXT was to Apple in 1997: an acquisition that returned the parent company to its roots, with superior industry-leading technology and outstanding talent.

This highlights the importance of having a leader who understands the essence of a company, not just what the company does on the surface. Whichever Marissa Mayer might be, it is probably too late to turn things around.

John Gruber wrote about NYT’s ironic dismissal of the relevance of algebra.

Michael Cieply, reporting for the NYT:

“The Interview” generated roughly $15 million in online sales and rentals during its first four days of availability, Sony Pictures said on Sunday.

Sony did not say how much of that total represented $6 digital rentals versus$15 sales. The studio said there were about two million transactions over all.

Gruber:

Apparently, algebra is necessary for New York Times reporters and editors, because if they had a basic grasp of it, they’d understand that Sony revealed the exact split between $6 rentals and$15 sales: 1.67 million rentals ($10 million), 0.33 million sales ($5 million).

Ina Fried wrote on Re/code about Android hardware profits tanking in 2014.

While Android continued to gain market share in the global smartphone market, it saw a significant drop on another key metric: Profits.

Analyst Chetan Sharma estimates that global profits in the Android hardware market for 2014 were down by half from the prior year — the first year that there has been any significant drop.

A lot of that is due to the big drop in profits at Samsung, the largest player in the Android market. China’s Xiaomi gained significant market share, but is only modestly profitable thanks to its slim margins. Meanwhile, other players like Sony and Motorola lost money in their Android-based mobile businesses.

The race to the bottom continues.