The Apple and the Fall

My latest article is now live at ministrytech.com.

The recent developments with the FBI demanding that Apple help them gain access to the iPhone of a terrorist has really got a lot of people thinking.  Terrorists are deplorable and we should do all we can to capture them and prevent acts of terrorism from occurring.  But what does it mean to do all we can to prevent all acts of terrorism from occurring?  While everyone agrees terrorists must be stopped there is great debate over how we stop them.  Do the ends justify the means?

I see both sides of this issue.  On the one hand Apple (and other tech companies) have done their best as of late to convince their customers that their data is safe – thank you Mr. Snowden.  They have worked hard to make sure when we use their devices that our personal information, our private communications, and everything else that makes up our data is secure and only accessible to the owner of the data.  In the analog world this would be the safety deposit box in a steel vault at the bank.  It is designed to keep everyone out except those who have access privileges.

On the other hand, the government is charged with keeping the people safe and wants to do everything possible to prosecute acts of terrorism and prevent future acts from occurring.  To do that they have the ability to obtain warrants and gain access to personal property and information to help solve and prevent crime.  In the analog days this would be getting a warrant and forcing the bank to open the steel vault and then open the safety deposit box.

But what happens when all of this becomes digital?  What happens when the steel vault is an encryption algorithm and the safety deposit box is an iPhone and the individual holding the key is deceased after committing a horrible crime impacting many innocent lives?

In the analog world, we could easily figure out a way to get into the vault and safety deposit box.  It might take a while but it can be done – as evidenced by several recent high profile thefts from thieves breaking into super secure vaults to steal money and jewelry.  In the digital world though it isn’t as easy.  We can’t just drill through yards of concrete or blow the door off.  There is no concrete and there is no door.

Because of the divide between the digital world and analog world the government is now asking, through the FBI, that Apple provide a way into the phone.  Apple is refusing.  The government needs Apple because the tools of the analog world won’t work here.  They need the creator of the device to help them access it.

If this situation has done nothing else, it has pointed out how out –of-date our laws and legal system are to handle these situations.  The law the government is using as their reason why Apple should help them is the All Writs Act from 1789, signed into law by George Washington.  While this law was amended in 1948 and 1949 (still well before the digital age) there is a great deal of question as to its application based on a Supreme Court case in 1977 where the government wanted help tracing phone calls.

The amount of misinformation and misunderstanding about this event is amazing.  While on the surface the request may appear simple enough, the consequences are tremendous.  Should Apple, or any tech company for that matter, have to create and then secure a backdoor into their software?  I know many are debating the semantics of the request but the bottom line is they are asking for something that doesn’t exists and would have to be destroyed or protected after it was created.

This reminds me of another time in our history when the US government needed technology and science to help them bring a World War to an end.  The Manhattan Project ran from 1942-1946 and was tasked with creating a super weapon to help end World War II.  The weapon did not exist but was possible in theory.  If they succeeded the consequences would change the path of the planet but success came with a price.  Yes, the war was brought to a quick conclusion without having to invade Japan, simultaneously saving thousands of lives and putting millions more in jeopardy.  As a result, the US and its allies have spent every day since trying to prevent nuclear weapons from falling into the wrong hands.  The world would also come to the brink of nuclear destruction as a result of the Cold War that followed.

Apple is being asked to create special access to bypass the security on an iPhone that doesn’t exist today.  If they create it, and it leaks out then what?  Those “bad actors” would certainly get in line to get access to the ability to gain access to phones around the world.  Just like the Manhattan Project the results of creating such a tool could change the course of the planet.

But what does all of this mean to us?  The nation is clearly divided on this issue and I find myself agreeing with people I rarely agree with and on the opposite side from those with which I would typically align.

First, the solution to terrorism is not hacking an iPhone, the solution is Jesus Christ.  Only by believing and trusting in Him can people change and “bad actors” can become citizens of heaven.  Second, Romans 13:1-7 provides a view of how Christians should relate to their government.  Does that mean if this case reaches the Supreme Court and a ruling is rendered that we must abide by it?  Third, God calls all of us to participate in our government and to be good citizens.  That includes voting, paying taxes, and taking part in discussions with our government officials – including discussions about balancing our security with our privacy.

Ben Franklin said, "Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."  While this quote has been ripped out of context I think the principle he is referring to applies to what we are facing now.  Each one of us has to decide.  I know many who would happily give up some privacy in order to be more secure.  I know many who abhor that idea.  Whatever you believe, I hope that you will take this opportunity to get involved.  Our government is going to have to figure this out and they will need our help to do it.  Politicians are not software engineers and encryption specialists and engineers and encryption specialists are not politicians.  Pray for our elected officials and participate in the privilege that is our democracy.  

Will Apple Watch Save Wearable Technology?

I admit that I’m an early adopter for technology.  I like to get the new stuff and play with it right away.  I know that the next version will probably be better, have less bugs, and look cooler but I can’t wait for version 2.  Then I’d feel behind the curve and have to catch up. 

That’s one of the reasons I bought an Apple Watch.  I have been watching wearable technology evolve and while excited by it I was not impressed with what it could do.  I know some corporations are buying the Apple Watch for their executives but I’m curious what impact if any the Apple Watch and wearable tech.

Before the Apple Watch, wearable tech was relegated to health and fitness applications with a secondary focus on telling time.  Have you tried to change the time on some of the fitness-based devices?  It is almost as if they forgot that while being worn on the wrist to monitor your heartbeat it could also double as a watch.

Smart watches have also been around for a while but nothing as integrated as the Apple Watch promised.  Big companies have been working on these devices for years but nothing had really taken off.  There wasn’t an “Ah-ha!” moment where everyone realized that they couldn’t live without a wearable technology device.

I bought my Apple Watch the day they were released but I didn’t order it at midnight, I waited until after I had a try on appointment.  I wanted to touch and feel the bands and compare the sizes of the watch.  While some wearable technology devices are relatively inexpensive and the same price as normal watches the Apple Watch is not.  It is an investment – and an investment with a ton of choices and options.  Not only do you have to decide if wearable tech is right for you but once you do decide you have another round of decisions regarding features, construction, and style.

I’m glad I stopped to try one on.  I was able to pick the band I like and determine the size that worked best for me.  I ended up with a 42mm stainless steel watch with a black sports band.  I picked the 42mm size, as it was comparable to the size watch I was already wearing.  I chose the sports band because of its leather like feel and its multipurpose applications.  It works well if you are working out and very active but it also works well if you want to dress it up.  Granted I would like to have a Milanese loop or even a link band but at Apple’s prices, I figured multi purposing the sports band was a much better use of money.

I admit that I struggled between the aluminum Sport version and the stainless steel Watch version.  Not only is the case made out of different material but the glass surface of the watch is different.  The Sport version uses Ion glass while the Watch version uses the Sapphire glass.  For me the decision was easy, I needed the Sapphire glass.  I’m left handed and I wear my watch on my left wrist.  As such whatever device I wear is prone to a lot of abuse as 99% of what I do is done with my left hand.  The Ion glass is more subject to scratching then the Sapphire glass and I needed as much scratch resistance as possible.  Remember though that the Ion glass is more shatter resistant than the Sapphire glass.  That’s why it is on the Sports version of the watch as you may scratch it up but if you fall down running; your watch should survive whereas the Sapphire glass is more prone to shatter.  For me I needed the scratch resistance over shatter proof so I went with the Watch edition.  Let’s just say I don’t do that much running.  In addition, I like that stainless steel shine vs the dullness of the aluminum Sport watch.

Now that I decided what type of watch to get, I had to order it and wait for it.  It took Apple 5 weeks to deliver my watch.  It is hard to tell if that is because they were selling so many or if that is because they had so few.  No sales numbers have been officially released but my guess is they had too few.

As an early adopter, I’m often asked about my Watch.  The novelty has definitely worn off when people say I’m the first person they’ve seen board an airplane using my watch as my boarding pass, or buy groceries or gas and use my watch to pay.  I’m often asked if others should get one.  That is difficult to answer because wearable tech and the Apple Watch are lacking universal appeal.  The “Ah-ha!” moment I mentioned earlier.

One easy way to tell if you need an Apple Watch is to look at your wrist now.  Go ahead; I’ll wait, look at your wrist.  Are you wearing a watch?  Do you wear a watch?  Do you wear it all the time?  Many times I’m asked if I think someone should buy a watch and when I inquire why they don’t have a watch on they tell me they don’t wear a watch.  The Apple Watch is far too expensive not to wear.  I wear mine all the time but if you don’t like have a watch on or don’t wear one a lot save yourself some money and don’t’ buy an Apple Watch, or any other wearable tech for that matter.

Otherwise, whether or not to buy an Apple Watch really depends on how you live your life.  While the Apple Watch is great for me, I don’t think it is great for everyone, yet.  I’m not sure what corporate America is using it for.  Right now it is just too immature and lacking necessary applications.

For me the Apple Watch could not come soon enough.  I don’t care that much about the health statistics or being able to tell how far I’ve walked in a day or how fast my heart is beating.  I care a lot about having an accurate timepiece – I travel a lot and love how the Apple Watch helps me manage time zones.  I also care about easier connectivity.  I get a ton of texts and other communications.  Getting all of that on my wrist is a huge time saver for me.  I no longer have to pull my iPhone 6 out of my pocket several hundred times a day, now I can just glance at my wrist.

As I mentioned the Apple Watch is great for traveling. Not only does it manage time zones well but I also keep a hand free.  To board the plane now I just scan my watch, keeping one hand free while the other hand pulls my carry-on.  If my flight is delayed or the gate changes I know by looking at my wrist after the Watch taps me without having to dig out my phone.  The Apple Watch functions as an easier to access extension of my iPhone screen.

I also really like the complications.  Complications doesn’t refer to how difficult the watch is to operate but rather is a traditional watchmaker’s term.  Complications refer to the other functions of a watch beyond telling time.  Things like showing you the phases of the moon or the date are watch complications as they complicate the mechanism necessary to tell time.  The Apple Watch provides several great complications that provide data when you glance at the watch.  I had several complications on my previous watch and enjoy having them digitally on my Apple Watch.

Again, this works great for me but it may not be worth the expense for everyone until there is more universal appeal.  Wearable technology in general is still in its infancy.  As it matures, the appeal will become great and the Apple Watch will become more than a heartbeat monitor that is an extension of your iPhone screen.  It will be able to do more and more independently making its appeal boarder.  

The next version of the Apple Watch software, Watch OS 2 was a great improvement but also brought about a few bugs.  Many good things are happening there but I think we are several more hardware and software versions away from the “Ah-ha!” moment where everyone says they need some sort of wearable device to better their everyday life.

For me, the Apple Watch has already become a valuable tool.  Whether or not the Apple Watch or any other wearable technology is a needed and valuable tool for you for now depends on how you live your life.

iCloud Exemplifies Technology Short Comings

I’m a firm believer that technology should be designed to make our lives better and easier, not more complicated.  With the release if iCloud last week I’ve been working hard to figure out how it can help improve my personal use of technology but also be used in our enterprise.

Anytime I can use technology to automatically keep all my access point current then I consider it a win.  For example, we have an Exchange server, which allows me to keep my email, contacts, calendar, and tasks updated and automatically synced between all my access devices.  For me that is an iPhone, iPad, laptop, and desktop.

One issue has been bookmarks.  I like to keep my bookmarks synced between my devices so if I need to remote into an appliance on the network I can do that easily without having to remember an IP address.  I used to do this using Live Mesh however that only did my laptop and my desktop.  Live Mesh also failed when we started redirecting profiles for Windows 7 users, which included Favorites.  Live Mesh is not able to sync a redirected folder or any network based folder so it broke and stopped working.

I was hoping iCloud would be the solution to my problem but it isn’t, as iCloud also can’t sync to files on a network, which would include any folders you redirect.

I think this is a major failure of technology companies.  The argument is probably that these features are for home users to keep things in sync and not for those of us who use technology both at home and at work.  How short sighted can you get?  I’m sure I’m not the only person on the planet who thinks using iCloud to keep my bookmarks in sync between multiple devices, including those on an enterprise network they may have redirected folders and network based storage is a good idea.  Why cut your market share in half here when from a purely technology perspective how hard can it be?

My work around to being able to use iCloud at work was to ask our IT guy (me) to exempt my profile from redirecting the Favorites folder.  That allowed iCloud to work and work beautifully – much better even than Live Mesh ever did.  Live Mesh would replicate files but you lost icons and sorts.  iCloud perfectly mirrors what you have including custom sorts and icons.  I was able to exempt my policy through a little GPO magic which would allow me, if I was so included, to provide this same service for others who might want to sync their Favorites between their work machine, home machine, and iDevices.

I also did an extensive internet search to see if anyone else was having this issue and to my knowledge, I’m the first person to post that:

1.  iCloud will not work with redirected folder.  Period.
2.  iCloud syncs better than Live Mesh.
3.  GPO can be used to allow users to work around this limitation while still maintaining a backup of their Favorites using roaming profiles.

Maybe the genius’ at Microsoft or Apple will catch wind of this and figure out a way to open up their sync applications to work both on and off corporate networks thus helping even more people to enjoy their products.  Why make technology harder than it has to be.