Apple Tweaks In-App Purchasing To Prevent Accidental Purchases

Bad news for any shady iOS developers out there: if you were sneakin’ In-App Purchase opportunities into the first 15 minutes of your game in hopes that lil’ ones might accidentally buy it, your evil-genius plan has been foiled.

For those who haven’t been keepin’ up on the ruckus: soon after Apple introduced In-App Purchase for iOS, someone figured out that users could make In-App Purchases without entering their iTunes password ifsaid In-App Purchase was made within 15 minutes of purchasing the app. That’s a marvelous idea, in theory — no one likes entering their password multiple times.

The problem? Parents would buy games, hand’em over to their kid, and come back to find that pint-size had unknowingly bought up all sorts of virtual goodies (friggin’ Smurfberries!) with real world cash. With the release of iOS 4.3, this should no longer happen.

As of yesterday’s software update, Apple will require your password be entered a second time before In-App Purchases can be made. Once that’s done, In-App Purchases can be made sans-password for up to 15 minutes. As long as you keep Junior’s prying eyes away from your password and don’t go out of your way to enable In-App Purchases, there shouldn’t be any more surprise charges for $99 boxes of virtual food for your kid’s virtual cat.

Or you could, you know, tell your kid to not buy these things. If they’re too young to understand that, they probably shouldn’t be using $500+ slabs of glass completely unsupervised anyway.

(Update: We’ve updated this post for clarification. We originally implied that a password was required for EVERY In-App Purchase, which isn’t the case. You’ll be asked for your password a second time to enable In-App Purchases, at which point you’ll be able to buy In-App content for 15 minutes without reentering your password. You can also disable In-App Purchases all together under Settings >> General >> Restrictions)

BlackBerry Protect moving to wider beta, ready to secure your stuff

After a limited beta last year, RIM's BlackBerry Protect service has been opened to a wider test audience with tweaks based on feedback collected in the first round. As you might recall, Protect is a fairly standard-issue suite of security features to put your mind at ease in the event your phone meets its maker or the hands of a thief, including location capability, a remote alarm, wireless backup, and -- of course -- the doomsday remote wipe option. It's available in North America and parts of Latin America for the moment through App World's Test Center, though RIM promises to open it to additional regions "in the next couple of months."

Six reasons iPad 2 will become a huge success for Apple

Since last Wednesday's announcement of the iPad 2, we've heard a lot of tech bloggers stating that they think the newest Apple tablet is going to be a flop. Well, maybe not exactly a failure, but not as successful as the original iPad was.

I think the naysayers are completely out to lunch, and it's not just because I am a rabid fan of Apple products. Follow along as I go through my reasoning as to why the iPad 2 is going to be a resounding success for Apple.

Newer is better (or at least that's the perception)

Unlike the innovators and early adopters who write for tech blogs, there are a lot of people who don't buy the first round of anything; instead, they wait until the second edition becomes available. I heard this a lot from people who were gazing at my iPad with lust in their eyes: "I really want to get one, but I'm going to wait until the second generation comes out."

For those who waited, they now have their chance to get an iPad that is demonstrably better than the first model. It has cameras, it has a dual-core processor, and it has graphics capabilities that are much better than what came with the first-generation iPad. Those people who waited are still in the "early majority" of consumers, so they'll still appear to be ahead of the curve in terms of being technological leaders to their friends.

I think we'll see a lot of people who were on the fence about buying an iPad suddenly deciding to pick up an iPad 2. The features of the newer tablet address many of the complaints that the tech press had about the original iPad, and for a number of people, those features will take down the last barrier to making a purchase decision. Even if the iPad 2's specs aren't a huge step forward over the original iPad, for many people the perception is that "newer is better," and that perception is all it takes for someone to make a purchasing decision.

Click or tap on that read more link to see the rest of this post.

Many networks are better than one

When the original iPad hit the stores last year, it was available only in the United States, and for a while it was Wi-Fi only. When the Wi-Fi + 3G model finally made it to market, it was only available on the AT&T network. For a lot of people on the Verizon network the iPad wasn't an option, as they didn't want to get a Wi-Fi version with a MiFi tacked on.

With the iPad 2, we'll see availability of GSM and CDMA models (as well as the Wi-Fi only version) immediately. Better network coverage by two American mobile carriers will make for less indecision on the part of potential buyers. As noted in the next section of this post, there will also be faster worldwide availability of the iPad 2, most of those devices connecting to GSM-based networks around the globe.

Greater Retail Availability

Last April during the launch of the iPad, there was one place you could buy one: at an Apple Store in the United States. As time went by, availability grew dramatically. AT&T Stores started carrying the iPad, then Verizon was selling them with mobile Wi-Fi hotspots. Best Buy had 'em, along with Target, Walmart and Sam's Club. The iPad is now sold in a huge number of countries worldwide, and the iPad 2 will only see a two-week delay before it starts appearing in overseas markets.

More instant availability in stores is going to make the iPad 2 even more of an impulse buy for people who were considering the original iPad but decided to wait.

FaceTime (almost) everywhere

Although I've heard other tech bloggers pooh-poohing the impact of FaceTime on the iPad, I think that it's going to make the new device even more popular that the original. FaceTime has made it very easy for anyone with a Mac, iPhone, and now an iPad to easily make face-to-face video calls.

So why will FaceTime on the iPad be so compelling? It's the size of the screen. Sure, those Apple iPhone 4 ads last year tugged at the heartstrings and made video calling look like something that all the cool kids were doing. In reality the 3.5" screen of an iPhone 4 doesn't have the impact of the iPad 2's 9.7" screen, even if it does have almost the same number of pixels.

Rather than having the family huddle around an iPhone 4 screen to make a FaceTime call to Dad in Afghanistan, they can now use an iPad 2 to make the call and everyone can see the screen. FaceTime's ease of use compared to other solutions (i.e., Skype, Google chat, and other video chat options) and the new portability of the application on a large-screen device like the iPad 2 are sure to make it a selling point for many potential tablet buyers.

Competition? What competition?

Earlier today, Apple stock blogger "Sammy the Walrus IV" provided an enlightening analysis over at Business Insider about the iPad's market share. While Steve Jobs noted during his talk on Wednesday that "Many have said (iPad) is the most successful consumer product ever launched. Over 90% market share and our competitors were flummoxed," a lot of people were wondering where that number came from. After all, Strategic Analytics had showed the iPad's market share to be around 75% and dropping rapidly.

I won't go through the details here, as Sammy provides a logical argument in his post, but if you look at actual devices sold and not just shipped, Apple's market share does appear to be over 90%. Now, there is a certain percentage of the population that wouldn't buy an Apple product even if it was the only available product in its class, but a lot of people want to go with the market leader. Why? Just because they know that they're making a solid and safe purchasing decision.

During CES 2011, we heard about over a hundred new tablet devices that are expected to hit the market this year. Given the number of manufacturers who are going to be creating "me too" Android tablets, the noise and confusion in that part of the market is going to be tremendous. Sure, a few larger players like Samsung and HTC may pick up market share percentage points here and there, but faced with the overwhelming variety of devices that are going to be coming out, it seems likely that the average consumer will go with the iPad 2 because it's a safe decision.

Apps make the device

Robert Scoble made a good point in a post on March 2nd: "No apps, no sale." For the iPad and iPad 2, there are already 65,000 apps available. As he points out, the highly-touted (and over-advertised) Motorola Xoom has a whopping total of 16 apps, and most of those are smartphone versions that are stretched to fit the larger screen rather than apps that have been specifically designed for the big screen. As we all found out last April, stretched apps look like crap.

As for the other platforms, HP's TouchPad and BlackBerry's PlayBook, there are no apps right now. Zip. Neither of those devices are even shipping right now. Scoble also points out that in terms of hardware specs, most of these devices are remarkably similar to the iPad 2. So what does the iPad 2 have that the others don't? A huge variety and depth of apps.

Conclusion

I'm sure that this post will generate a lot of comments. There will be those who agree with my points and believe that the iPad 2 is going to do even better than the original, and then there will be those who think that the rising tide of Android devices is going to knock Apple out of the tablet business altogether.

Whatever your feelings, we'd like to hear them in the comments. Just one thing: please respect your fellow commenters and don't make personal attacks.

Google now adding web-based in-app payments, probably some time in May

It's not enough that you'll soon be able to make in-app purchases on Android, Google wants to give you an outlet for your app spending online as well. The search giant is hard at work turning last year's acquisition of Jambool and its Social Gold software into a web-based in-app payments platform it can call its own. Jambool's proprietors have word that Google's system is now in beta, which has led it to close new signups for the Social Gold offering, ahead of halting payment processing entirely on May 31st. That should serve as a pretty reliable guide for when to expect Google to flip the switch on its in-app purchasing service, which we're hearing will include some level of integration with Google Checkout and Google accounts. As TechCrunch points out, the next Google I/O gathering is scheduled for May 10th -- sounds about the right time for us to be introduced to this new, app-based way for separating us from our hard-earned cash.

The App That Biting: Google Pulls 21 Dodgy Apps From Android Market

Given that collectively we are approaching 1 billion mobile apps on the market, it’s a surprise that you don’t hear about problems like this more often: Google (NSDQ: GOOG) has pulled 21 “counterfeit” apps from the Android Market that were given the name and appearance of popular Android apps, but actually contained malware that collected user information and potentially more. The news follows reports yesterday about Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) App Store users getting their accounts hacked, potentially through the use of iffy gift cards.

The news about the 21 apps was originally uncovered by an Android user called Lompolo on Reddit. The blog Android Police notes that Google pulled the 21 offending apps within five minutes of being notified aobut them, and is also pulling them remotely from users’ devices.

What was the issue? Apparently a publisher called Myournet posted 21 apps on Android, with some of them copying apps that are already popular downloads. The titles included Falling Down, Super Guitar Solo (pictured), Scientific Calculator and Photo Editor, as well as several titles with racier names to lure in the punters: collectively, Lompolo notes that the apps were downloaded between 50,000 and 200,000 times over the course of four days.

The apps were mocked up to look like their original counterparts, except that they also contained “‘rageagainstthecage’ root exploit” code to collect information such as device IMEIs, user IDs and country and language information. The code seems to be able to extract other details, although it’s not yet clear what.

The problem seems to be that while Google has pulled the apps, it may not be able to extract the code that would have gone onto the devices through those apps.

We have contacted Google to ask whether it has an official response to this story and will update the post as we learn more.

This is not the first instance of malware or hacking around apps—earlier this week we noticed reports of people complaining of unauthorised app purchases on their iTunes accounts—a problem thought to be connected to certain gift cards. As the app market matures, there will likely be more cases coming up like these. For what it’s worth, such cases do seem to be a vote in favor of smaller and more closed systems.

inPulse Bluetooth smartwatch getting Facebook Places check-in app for Android

Ever since Allerta released an SDK for its well-hyped inPulse smartwatch, it was only a matter of time before we start seeing more practical applications that take this Bluetooth peripheral beyond the BlackBerry ecosystem. For instance, the latest example comes from the inPulse's very own Lead Designer Eric Migicovsky, who happens to be a fan of Facebook Places and possibly an Android convert. Rather than having to pull out his Nexus One for every check-in, Migicovsky can now use his simple app on his inPulse to grab a list of nearby locations off the phone, and then check in with just a click of a button. Pretty neat, eh? For those interested, you can grab the project code off inPulse's website and get programming.

National Magazine Awarding To Include Magazine Apps This Year

It’s an honor just to be nominated, the saying goes, and less than a year after major publishers rolled out magazine apps, tablet-based periodicals are among the finalists for the second annual National Magazine Awards for Digital Media—aka the “Digital Ellies”—this year. The finalists, which were announced this morning, also include a number of digital-only pubs, includingSlate, The Daily Beast, Salon and Epicurious.

“This is only the second year for the National Magazine Awards for Digital Media, and we’re already seeing major innovations in magazine media,”  said Sid Holt, CEO of the American Society of Magazine Editors, which governs the awards. “Take iPad apps, for example—this is the first time a National Magazine Award will be given to a magazine published on a tablet. Apps are the most talked-about change, but the quality of the journalism on magazine websites is setting new standards of excellence, too.”

Still, as Slate founding editor Michael Kinsley put it last year, the awards for digital are an extension of the general print awards and thus, “separate, but equal.”

Be that as it may, roughly 100 publications submitted entries in the 12 Digital Ellies categories.  Of the 39 titles that received one or more of the 60 total nominations were nine online-only publications: Chow; CNET; The Daily Beast; Epicurious; LIFE.com; Salon; Slate; Tablet; and Yale Environment 360.

Publications that received multiple nominations were National Geographic (4); Slate (4); The Daily Beast (3); Foreign Policy (3); New York (3); The New York Times (NYSE: NYT) Magazine (3); Sports Illustrated (NYSE: TWX) (3); The Chronicle of Higher Education (2); Epicurious (2); Fast Company (2); The New Yorker (2); and Tablet (2). The awards will be held March 16 in New York. For a look at the expanded list of finalists, including links to nominated content here.

Local Discovery App Where Taps Bumping For Some Social Mojo

Location-based discovery apps: there seem to be one born every minute. Unsurprisingly, some of the more established among them are now looking to add more social enhancements to set themselves apart from the rest. Today,Where, Inc. is announcing a new service where users can share new finds with friends, or physically touch Android or iPhone devices together to share places with those who are new acquaintances, using the sharing app Bump.

The app Where, which currently has about 4 million users, was already providing recommendations of places to users, based on what they searched for, viewed and saved in their profiles. Now the company is launching a new service called Perfect Places, in which users will be able to share those finds with their friends. “We use Facebook as the social layer,” Dan Gilmartin, VP of marketing for Where, told us in an email.

After places are shared, Gilmartin says Where looks for synergies between friends’ profiles, and then makes suggestions of where to go next based on those similarities.

One interesting tweak is that when two users who are not already friends on Facebook decide to go somewhere together and want a suggestion, they can literally knock their phones together to share their own Where profiles, to come up with suggestions on the fly, using Bump’s sharing technology.

Gilmartin says that the relationship with Bump is not a commercial one; Where is using Bump’s API for the new social service.

This could come in handy for work meetings—although it would be better if user profiles could be bumped virtually, since you usually plan where you will meet before you see each other); or, probably more likely, for people meeting for the first time and deciding on the fly to go somewhere else together.

This is not the first time that Where has tried to innovate beyond basic location-based recommendations; last year the company launched its own hyperlocal mobile advertising network, looping in local advertising networks that traditionally do not send ads to mobile, to provide location-based promotions and offers to match up with Where’s location-based recommendations on restaurants, bars and activities.

Could this service drive more usage, and set Where apart from the rest of the location pack? It seems like so many other services such as Yelp, Facebook Places, Gowalla and Foursquare are all closing in on the same ideas—social, location, checking in, offers—but in the end, all of these will only be as relevant as the number of people using them.

In addition the Android and iOS versions launched today, Where says the service will be extended to other major OS platforms “within the month.”

Lonely Planet launching audio walking tours in London

This is a cool new feature in travel apps that I'd like to see a lot more of: Lonely Planet has released some walking audio tours as apps on the App Store. Unfortunately, all of the tours so far are just based in London, but the apps will walk you around some of London's most interesting areas, including Covent Garden and the West End, bringing along audio reviews and insight from Lonely Planet's editors and experts. The apps will work offline (for tourists traveling abroad), but they're also location aware, so you can get the audio read out to you when you're in the right place as well.

I love this idea -- I am a big fan of walking tours, and I think there's a lot of potential still unexplored in terms of connecting up information with users of connected smartphones. We've seen some interesting AR applications already along these lines, but I'd like to see even more ways to use your iPhone to really explore and learn more about the world around you. Hopefully Lonely Planet will get these tours rolling elsewhere soon.

Right now, the apps are US$1.99, half off the usual price, for a launch sale.

Windows Phone 7 Connector for Mac OS goes gold, hits the Mac App Store

It's been available since October in beta form, but Microsoft has just turned its Windows Phone 7 Connector product to a shiny shade of gold, giving Mac owners a solid (if not Zune-free) option for hooking up their Windows Phones without firing up Boot Camp. We're told there aren't any new features in the latest build worth noting, so you'll get the same options as before: media synchronization, iTunes compatibility, and support for Windows Phone firmware updates. A full Zune client would be choice, of course -- but we'll take it. And you can take it, too: it's now in the Mac App Store.

Analysis: Why Apple’s New Subscription Policy Will End Up Hurting Apple, Too

Yesterday Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) announced its intention to tighten its hold on the payment for and the delivery of content through its successful iTunes platform. (I’ll leave off the I-told-you-so; oops, too late.) Apple will require that all content experiences that can be paid for in an Apple app must be purchasable inside the app, with Apple collecting its 30% fee. The app can no longer direct you to a browser or some other means for completing a transaction. Crucially, the in-app purchase offer must be extended at the same price as the same offer made elsewhere. Though the announcement of the subscription model was the triggering event, the policy extends to all paid content.

I do not believe this is where Apple will stop – I personally expect them to eventually deny the delivery of content paid for outside of the app without some kind of convenience charge. But my personal expectations are irrelevant here, because what Apple has done already is sufficient to make providers of content aggressively invest in alternative means to reach the market, especially for their subscription-based content.

Subscription content services are the lifeblood of the content economy. A full 63% of the money consumers spend on content of all types comes through a renewable subscription. (I’ll be publishing that data from a survey of 4,000 U.S. online adults as part of a bigger analysis next month.) Most of that subscription revenue goes to pay-TV providers, but 17% of it goes to newspaper and magazine publishers, including their online or app content experiences.

The economics of subscription content are simple enough: Keep your costs as low as possible to maintain an active base of subscriptions against which future content and distribution investments can be justified (and against which ads can be sold, if applicable). Subscriber certainty fuels the business; subscriber uncertainty undermines it. This is why one-off content businesses like movies and books are so dicey and blockbuster- or bestseller-dependent, because without the guarantee that the same million or so people who read or watched you last month will do so again next month, content investments are hard to justify.

Certainly Apple knew this when it responded to magazine publishers like Conde Nast that requested a subscription model for iPad content to stem the dropoff in interest its iPad magazine editions were experiencing. Apple has the industry over a barrel in this regard and you can’t fault the company for exploiting its advantage for economic gain. In this light, a 5% tax on content providers would seem like a fair exchange: Apple offers access to desirable customers and deserves a facilitation fee for making the delivery of the content possible (even if it doesn’t technically bear the cost of the delivery, the consumer does, paying a premium to own the device and funding the connectivity, either via 3G or wifi).

However, you can fault the company for choosing not to anticipate that seeking a 30% toll would bring any subscription model of any type to its knees. Remember, subscription content is priced as low as it can be to drive interest while paying off reasonable costs. Taking a 30% toll amounts to a massive increase in the cost basis of a content business that will kill it. There is not a subscription business alive that can bear that additional cost without passing the cost along to subscribers, even if the content is unique, which most content is not.

But a content provider can’t pass the cost along only to Apple’s subscribers, which would seem the one solution Apple could offer that would make economic sense but which Apple has specifically proscribed. In other words, if your subscription costs $5 a month even if you never access it on an Apple device, it must be offered for $5 a month through the Apple device as well, but with Apple culling out $1.50. What’s a content provider to do – pass the 30% tax on to all users to ensure that they don’t get killed by the uptake on Apple devices only to see subscriptions dwindle? Or keep the price low across the board and desperately hope that no one takes advantage of the iPad app they spent months developing?

None of this is Apple’s fault; I staunchly defend Apple’s right to price its products and services any way it wants. But it is shortsighted. Because now Apple has given every publisher, producer, and distributor in the business a reason to actively pursue alternatives to the elegant apps that Apple had hitherto taught us to depend on. I don’t really have to encourage my clients to add urgency to their already furious Android app development efforts. But it will also lead to non-app content experiences as well, most of them developed in HTML5 – Steve Job’s own panacea for the future of content delivery.

Whether publishers can feel betrayed, as some have suggested, is a matter for psychologists and ethicists to ponder. Perhaps it’s healthy that the content industries were able to so quickly see that Apple isn’t really a savior for their businesses after all. At least now they can make decisions based on market facts rather than market hopes. And if the sour taste in their mouths is good for anything, let’s hope it motivates them to get out there and show everybody that they still have content experiences to offer, content experiences we want, content experiences worth paying for.

Redbox now having an app for Android, updated app for iPhone

Redbox quietly updated its official iPhone app to version 2.0.1 a few weeks ago and today announced a version for Android devices. It appears that the functionality and look is the same across both apps and should be familiar to any Redbox user, find nearby boxes, browse their contents and reserve discs on the go. There's also the ability to map a route to the nearest box is needed, and CNET notes the websites been upgraded to allow users to reserve up to 5 movies at once if necessary Check the gallery for screens from both or just head to iTunes or the Android Market to grab the one that fits you best.

Concerned Publishers Groups Say ‘Apple Is Not The Only Offer On The Table’

Publishers from across Europe will convene at a hotel at London’s Heathrow Airport on Thursday morning to discuss their response to Apple’s new content subscription terms.

The meeting has been scheduled for weeks. Many publishers expected Apple’s announcement on Monday.

“It is good that, after many weeks of confusing its partners, Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) has finally decided to clarify their offer to content publishers to sell subscriptions,” Grzegorz Piechota, president of the European board of the International Newsmedia Marketing Association trade umbrella, which has called the summit, tells paidContent:UK.

But Piechota’s members don’t appear unilaterally happy. “We still miss many details and, as it happens, the devil is sometimes in the details,” he says. “In its statement, it has not answered to other publishers’ concerns —about the transparency of the app admission process and about content censorship.

“Our main goal is to be able to provide our customers—readers, users, viewers, listeners - access to our content on any device or a platform they wish for a reasonable price. Our concern is that publishers keep a direct relationship with their customers so they can improve the product and services provided.

“Apple’s offer is not the only one on the table and apps are not the only way to access content on mobile devices. Publishers and their associations are looking at all the options available and talking to all technology and payment system providers. It is a pity Apple has refused to talk with the representatives of this roundtable.”

The meeting is being attended by over 50 representatives of European publishers and associations including the Online Publishers Association, International Federation of the Periodical Press), World Association of Newspapers, the European Federation of Magazine Publishers, the European Newspaper Publishers Association and the European Business Press Federation.

App Publishers Rebel Againsting Apple. Google Offers A Solution?

We’re starting to see some significant backlash over the new subscription charges announced by Apple. Now a source tells us that Google (NSDQ: GOOG) could try to use to destabilisation to its advantage…

According to one publisher that contacted mocoNews, Google plans to release the details of its own in-app billing service, possibly as soon as today. Like any company looking to gain more marketshare and revenue, Google looks like it wil undercut its competitor Apple (NSDQ: AAPL). The in-app subscription charge, according to the publisher, will offer users a 10:90 split.

If correct, this would make Google a much more alluring partner than Apple on revenue shares alone because Apple will be applying its usual 30:70 revenue share split to its subscription model. Some publishers, particularly those that aggregate others’ content into storefronts within the app, have been complaining about Apple’s offer because it will cut too far into their own margins.

We have reached out to Google for comment and to ask more questions about whether this will be a mandated subscription plan; whether publishers will be able to use something else; and—importantly—who will get to “own” the subscriber.

Other publishers are already starting to go on record with their complaints about Apple’s proposed charges. In the U.S. music provider Rhapsody is considering how it might take legal action against Apple against the new rules. According to the LA Times, Rhapsody says that the commission cuts too far into its own revenues because it already pays 60 percent to music publishers. Publishers in Europe are also taking the matters to their legal teams.

Google talked about in-app billing when it first launched its Honeycomb operating system for tablets earlier this month. Coincidentally, that also took place one day after Apple co-launched the new News Corp (NSDQ: NWS). iPad newspaper The Daily. It was at that launch that Apple first officially revealed its in-app subscription service.

iPad has received FAA certification as an electronic flight bag

Jeppesen, the company that produces most of the paper and electronic "Jepp charts" used by pilots for preflight planning and inflight navigation, announced late last week that jet charter operator Executive Jet Management has received authorization from the Federal Aviation Administration to use the Jeppesen Mobile TC App for iPad as an alternative to paper charts.

According to online aviation website AvStop, this authorization allows Executive Jet Management to use the app and iPad as the sole reference for electronic charts at all times during a flight. Jeppesen, Executive Jet Management, and local and national Electronic Flight Bag authorization authorities recently completed a three-month inflight evaluation of the iPad-based solution. During the evaluation, pilots for the charter operator logged more than 250 flight segments using the app.

The configuration that was authorized by the FAA is a Class 1 portable kneeboard electronic flight bag solution, meaning that the iPad needs to be secured and viewable during critical flight phases. The iPad tests even included a rapid decompression test to 51,000 feet in altitude and successful non-interference testing on the evaluation aircraft.

While the authorization is only for one jet charter operator, this could signal a move for rapid acceptance of the iPad in the cockpit by airlines.