Logic has been a big box of sound toys for some time, but I think what decides whether you really build a working relationship with software like Logic is whether you like editing in it. And that makes Logic Studio 9 worth a new look – and a must-upgrade for fans of the tool. Its combination of subtle tweaks to the editing interface, the ability to edit inside takes, the incredible Flex Time for squishing around audio like Play-Doh, and easy conversion to sampler tracks makes it really fun to edit audio in Logic. You can read the full, detailed review I wrote for Macworld:

Logic Studio: Music workstation suite adds flexible audio, improved editing and live performance, simulated amps and effects [Macworld.com]

The amps and such are fun, but to me the other banner feature in Logic 9 is the vastly improved MainStage, which adds backing tracks, ReWire hosting, and other features that could make it more powerful for live performance. Apparently MainStage has crept into some big-name live shows; I’m going to work on getting more reports from the field. (Meanwhile, I’m trying to figure out how I can rework my own live set so it requires less software, but that’s me.)

Oh, and one little improvement I didn’t fit in the review: there are some amazing special effect convolution impulses Apple threw in with Space Designer, which should give you more fodder for sound design experimentation.

The record industry may be dying, the planetary economy failing, and music technology elusively complex to most average musicians, yet competition in the DAW space just continues to heat up. I find it amusing that some claim Apple’s aggressive pricing is only possible because they sell hardware. I’d buy that, except for some of Apple’s own competitors. Digidesign will add a pretty powerful version of Pro Tools to a hardware bundle. Cakewalk’s SONAR, once a little more bare-bones in the extras department than Logic, now offers a lot of the same sorts of goodies to Windows users in its own (underrated, I think) DAW. And Reaper is a powerful, cross-platform option that costs just US$60, even for most commercial work (now that they’ve made the individual license more open). In fact, various tools are so good that I think it’s really hard to give people advice. Personal taste is more likely to dictate which you prefer, because the ineffable feeling of using these tools – as similar as they may look on paper – is very different. If I ever work out a good way to describe that in words – which does happen to be my job, whether I’m up to it or not – I’ll let you know.

Any tool you’re using is a tool that matters. And I know we have a number of readers using Logic. Later this week, I’m planning a Logic Q&A to fit some of the technical revelations that didn’t fit in the review, so feel free to ask more questions or comment however you like on the Macworld review.

Chris Breen at Macworld does exceptional, tough reviews of consumer sound software. He’s tackled GarageBand ‘09 in depth in a review published this week at Macworld.com. If you’re a beginning user, this review is for you – and if not, Chris will help you understand what that perspective is like for countless typical Mac users:

Unless you have an active interest in producing podcasts or creating a musical score, it’s likely you’ve opened GarageBand once and then never bothered with it again. Of all the programs that make up the iLife suite, none is more overlooked than this application. And, given its original focus, that’s not too surprising. Making music requires a skill not common in the general population of computer users.

Review: GarageBand ’09 | Macworld

I’ve gotten to spend some time with this review as the tech editor for the story, and testing GarageBand along with it, I definitely agree. The new lessons are really terrific – they won’t teach you to play, necessarily, but they’re polished, and they can whet musicians’ appetite for additional training options and real music lessons. The guitar effects sound terrific. The UI has been improved in subtle but significant ways that make things easier to find.

The one real disadvantage of the new version is that these terrific-sounding guitar effects don’t support MIDI control. They do support automation, but you can’t control them with anything other than the mouse.

To me, that means you may actually struggle to find a reason to get this upgrade on its own – which would be a problem, except that you’re either getting the new release with a new Mac or are also getting major upgrades to iPhoto and iMovie. So, okay — there’s your reason. And for people with an older version wanting to get into something simple, I’d still easily recommend GarageBand.

If it’s video lessons that interest you, though, Chris has done a complete overview of video instructions options on the Mac. If you do get GarageBand 09, I think you’re likely to hunger for more than Apple currently offers, making this a useful resource. And if GarageBand 09 doesn’t interest you, this gives you some other choices for computer-assisted music learning.

Learn to play an instrument | Macworld

Incidentally, it’s too bad Apple doesn’t offer a way for musicians to build their own lessons in GarageBand; I think that’d be a big hit.

All of that said, I do think Apple is doing a whole lot to make music software more accessible to the first-time user. The fact that GarageBand is just there on a new Mac, and that steps in 09 make sure that if you click the icon you get something friendly and musical, really is significant.

Using the new GarageBand? Do let us know what you think of it.

Speaking of audio editors for the Mac, Adobe has its own wave-editing tool for Mac and Windows. Soundbooth is different from other entries in the field, in that its aim is really to woo a wide audience and not just those of us who work with sound regularly. Got a Flash project and need to make some quick sound effect adjustments? Making a swooshing noise for After Effects? Transcribing notes from a workshop session? Soundbooth CS4 is aimed at you.

Now, you can buy Soundbooth on its own for US$199 list, though I expect almost no one would. (For one thing, if you’re spending your hard-earned dollars on an audio editor, you’re likely to choose one of its rivals, like Adobe’s own superior Audition for Windows.) More likely, you’ll get Soundbooth as part of Adobe’s creative suite.

I actually quite like Soundbooth; because it was built from the ground up, it has a clean, elegant interface, and some unique features. Unfortunately, CS4 was not the step forward I hoped it would be for this fledgling tool. You can read a review by Mac guru Christopher Breen in Macworld; I know that review up and down as I was its tech editor.

Review: Adobe Soundbooth CS4 [Macworld]

Basic sound editor adopts more-advanced features

The problem I have with CS4 is that while adding multitrack capabilities make sense, the implementation just doesn’t seem finished. Many of the options in the wave editing view don’t work in multitrack view, including some you’d expect to work with multiple tracks visible, like adjusting effects, markers, and slicing up chunks of a waveform. (In every other program I’ve ever seen, those are mixing functions.) Apple Soundtrack Pro, Sony SoundForge, and Adobe’s own Audition all seamlessly allow multitrack edit working methods. I have a feeling we’ll just see this addressed in CS5, but Adobe, if you can manage a point-5 release of Soundbooth that fixes this, I’ll be the first to applaud.

Note that you can simply choose to stick to the Editor view and not bother with multitrack, which is what I’ve taken to doing. But needless to say, if Adobe wants audio newcomers to be comfortable with Soundbooth, these kind of idiosyncrasies won’t help.

It’s also a bit odd that Adobe allows non-destructive saves exclusively, rather than letting you “flatten” changes when you want to make them permanent.

Now, in my own Peak review, I complained about the lack of multitrack functions and non-destructive editing. Soundbooth CS4 demonstrates that it’s better to add these features late than add them half-baked, so BIAS, I’m willing to wait. But part of the reason I’m being a stickler on those issues is that I know it’s possible to add these to an audio tool successfully.

That said, I’m actually really happy to have Soundbooth around on my hard drive as an additional audio utility, alongside these other tools. I’ve got a stack of interviews to transcribe, so I’m eager to try that feature. Expect a report back (plus, hopefully, some published interviews with musicians) once I’m done.

The simple truth is, while Soundbooth doesn’t stand so well on its own, as an integrated part of Creative Suite, it’s fantastic. Let’s assume this is just an off release and the third version restores some of the fresh promise of the first.

For one last Macworld review, see my take for Macworld.com on Apple’s Soundtrack Pro – now, sadly, only available in Final Cut Studio and Logic Studio, not on its own (though the latter can be a nice option).

Soundtrack Pro 2.0.1: Improved editing and new features help you sync audio with video

“Peak” is a long-standing name in audio editing on the Mac. I recently got to review its latest iteration, Peak Pro 6, for Macworld and Macworld.com.

Macworld Review: Peak Pro 6
Sample editor and audio suite tweaked for pros, sound designers, and podcasters

I still believe audio editors are valuable tools, especially for anyone who spends a significant amount of their time on sound design – whether that’s sound effects or building the perfect drum kit. Peak is an unusual tool, in a way, in that it remains a stereo waveform editor only, whereas most of its competitors have added multitrack compatibility. On the other hand, Peak also bundles an unusually rich set of tools in the box, which explains the higher price of the full-blown Pro versions.

Here’s my breakdown for Macworld:

Pros
Attractive bundle; seamless podcast export; powerful playlist assembly and export; envelopes; deep plug-in routing; fantastic cross-synthesis sonic powers.

Cons
Multi-window UI can be clunky to use; still no real multi-channel or surround support; lacks more full-featured, non-destructive editing; no spectrum view.

I do want to call particular attention to a couple of points:

You can get Peak cheaply if you want a deal. Unbundled, more basic versions run under a hundred bucks, and as noted in comments, you may even snag a deal on an upgrade.

Peak Pro is fundamentally a bundle. The full-blown version may indeed cause some sticker shock, but it’s really about the bundled software – if you want that software, it could be well worth it.

Vbox and cross-synthesis really rock. This is the feature that makes me really, really glad I got to stick Peak Pro on my MacBook. As pictured at top, the combination allows you to route plug-ins in interesting ways and then create routings that are impossible in most other hosts. (Add batch processing, and this gets very interesting, indeed. I’m going to try it on a stack of audio files – I’ll post samples soon.)

All products involve tradeoffs, so as always I try to do my best to characterize the tradeoffs I see. (“This is the perfect tool for everything” is the job of the marketing department.) I’m still particularly fond of the Windows-only Sound Forge (now made by Sony), but Peak remains a strong entry on the Mac. It’s also worth checking out Peak’s nearest rival, Audiofile Engineering’s Wave Editor, which has been developing by leaps and bounds. The Peak / Wave Editor competition could be an interesting one; they take very different approaches to the problem.

As always, I’m happy to hear what readers and users think.

Bias Inc.

We routinely talk about how the interface paradigm of a computer — screen, QWERTY, trackpad – isn’t optimal for music. But how many of you have, in a pinch, done a live laptop set with just your computer, and found some way to make it work? The Stanford University Laptop Orchestra, set to play this year’s Macworld, natch, is making the most of what it has:

“We tilt the notebook and use its built-in accelerometer to expressively control sound. We use the trackpad as a kind of violin bow,” explains Ge Wang, SLOrk’s founder. ”You can make some wild, diverse music with the MacBook.”

And why not? Designing expressive interfaces can pay off in something that’s satisfying, absolutely. But however you decide to play, a lot of it comes down to how you approach an object compositionally and musically. So, there’s two ways to look at this: on one level, it’s a novelty, and while to most of us seeing people playing behind Apple logos is nothing new, I’m sure Apple enjoys seeing a swarm of their machines. But on another, the real point is that the Stanford orchestra is getting the most mileage out of the machine. Trackpad? Check. Accelerometer? Keyboard? (Why stop there – Apple Remote? Webcam?) You’ve got quite a lot on the laptop itself to use.

We’ve looked at laptop orchestras before, but here’s still more:

Stanford Laptop Orchestra (SLOrk): Musical Macs [Story for Apple Pro by Dustin Driver]

SLOrk

Via: Stanford’s MacBook orchestra exposed [distorted-loop.com] and Macworld maestro Paul Kent’s Twitter.

Previously:

Laptop Orchestras Proliferate, from Princeton to Moscow

How to Record Laptop Performances – And Make Them Sound Live (linking to a story on the topic I wrote for Keyboard Magazine)

And for the mother of modern laptop orchestras, recently winning a MacArthur Foundation grant, see PLOrk at Princeton

My review of Apple’s Logic Studio (including Logic Pro 8) is now live at Macworld.com (it’ll also be in the January 2008 print issue).

Summary:

Pros: Single-window view speeds editing and setup; MainStage program ideal for playing instruments and effects live; powerful, easy-to-access editing and take management tools; bundles Soundtrack Pro but halves the price; no more dongle; can sync with others via .Mac or Bonjour.

Cons: Some MIDI features are still obscure; MainStage doesn’t integrate with Logic or ReWire.

Or, to put it more simply: take away a dongle, slash the price, and make Logic easier to use, and you’ve got a winner.

Logic Studio: All-in-one music creation package is easier to use, more playable

I do hope competitors are taking a notice of what the Logic team at Apple has done with the interface. Logic 8’s ease of use wasn’t about reducing functionality — even the modular Environment is still there, and a lot of people still find it useful. Nor is it an aesthetic-only “reskinning.” Bringing everything into a single edit window and simplifying track creation and preset management really does make existing tools more useful. There have been attempts to that in the other DAWs, but this to me is the most successful, at least among traditional programs in this category. (Ableton Live is different enough that it’s almost an unfair comparison, but it also demonstrates why bringing editing into a single window can boost efficiency.)

It’s a really strong release, but readers of this site may be equally interested in what I felt like were the weak points in Logic 8. MainStage to me is much less useful as a performance tool because of its inability to integrate directly with Logic itself or other programs (Ableton Live, Reason) via ReWire. Maybe you don’t need a complex performance setup, but I suspect even beginning users may still want basic Logic backing tracks. It’ll be interesting to see if this gets addressed in a future version. In the meantime, there’s still a big window of opportunity for creating live performance setups in Ableton Live (further facilitated by Live’s new drum racks and time signature support), or instrument/effects racks in KORE 2, both of which we hope to get our hands on here soon.

And the other shortcoming for me has to be the fact that MIDI editing in Logic 8 still feels like MIDI editing in Logic 5. Basic tasks like quantizing a track or adding an arpeggiator just aren’t as easy in Logic as in some of its competitors. Contrast the rich MIDI editing tools that were further enhanced in SONAR 7. Cakewalk wants to talk about audio mastering and 64-bit, but what we heard from readers here was that good old bread-and-butter MIDI actually got you more excited, because it’s what you use day in and day out. On the other hand, SONAR’s interface looks even more cluttered next to the elegant new single-edit window in Logic, to say nothing of the fact that a lot of people are happy with Ableton Live as a DAW. But that couldn’t make me any happier: the race is on.

The big picture: I think the great days of music creation software are back. Competition is thick, you’ve got real choice in platform (Windows, Mac, and yes, even Linux via Ardour), and software is focusing on how you work creatively as a musician rather than a me-too feature contest.

Now that the review is up, I look forward to hearing what you think of my take. Software this deep really is a subjective thing, and there’s no space to cover the endless technical details. So sound off.

Soundtrack Pro 2 from Apple offers some major new improvements over the first release of the “Pro” audio editor from Apple. Multichannel editing now works properly, with the ability to nudge by frames and move clip envelopes together with clips, and there are some brilliant new features for conforming audio projects to video and a “Lift and Stamp” tool for applying audio attributes from one clip (including matching EQ and copying effects) to another.

Macworld.com has just published my complete review of the software:

Pros: Vastly improved multichannel editing and file import and export; Conform feature makes Final Cut integration more elegant; efficient surround panning; improved recording; convenient Lift and Stamp audio.

Cons: Automation requires AppleScript; rigid and sometimes sluggish interface; available only as part of the Final Cut Studio suite.

Soundtrack Pro 2: Improved editing and new features help you sync audio with video

Soundtrack vs. Final Cut Studio vs. Logic

The bad news, of course, is that the only way to get Soundtrack Pro 2 is to either buy Final Cut Studio or upgrade to the whole Final Cut Studio. Worse, as we’ve commented here before, existing Soundtrack Pro users had to upgrade to Final Cut Studio just to get Intel compatibility. Not surprisingly, this issues comes up in comments even at Macworld.com (and I’ve certainly heard it repeatedly from readers here).

Apple’s made their decision, though, and on some level I definitely understand it. The reality is that this market isn’t terribly big. Apple indicated when they made the decision to discontinue Soundtrack Pro as a standalone product that response had been lackluster. And I’ve heard from waveform software developers that it really isn’t a big market. Lots of people do need to edit audio at some point, but they’re often intimidated by the tools out there, or just don’t make the leap of investing in a dedicated tool. I do think it’s too bad Intel users didn’t have a better upgrade path, of course.

Mac users are hardly high-and-dry when it comes to audio editing. There are other standalone wave editors from which to choose, like the old standby Peak and newer entries like the Audiofile Wave Editor and Adobe’s Soundbooth CS3, which has just started to ship.

Before anyone worries any more about this issues, though, I think the real question is when some of these features will show up in Logic. I have no idea what Apple will do with their next version of Logic, but it’s a pretty safe guess to figure some of Soundtrack Pro’s features will show up in Logic. (I don’t think there will be a bundled copy of Soundtrack in Logic, but if they copy some of the functionality, you might not want it.)

For those of you who do use Final Cut Studio, of course, and cross between the visual and sound worlds (as we do), Soundtrack Pro is well worth a look. The integration and value is greatly expanded in this version for people who do want Soundtrack as a part of Final Cut Studio. Be sure to check out the Final Cut Pro and Color reviews by my Macworld colleagues, or my Motion review. Complaints welcome here.

What About Audio Post?

I’m curious to hear what some of our post production readers think of the new audio post features. To me, it’s a little soon to tell how things like the new conform feature will work in actual production environments, especially since we’ve debated here on CDM over features the size of King Kong (in movieland) or Doctor Who (in TVland). Those of you working in post, do share … though, naturally, the integration here assumes you’re starting out with workflows in Final Cut Pro to begin with, and are willing to do audio conform outside Pro Tools.

MacBook Pro knows the way to Santa Rosa

One thing I was a little unclear on in my previous story is what matters in Santa Rosa, Intel’s latest architecture platform. (They didn’t call it Core 3 Duo, but then, consistent branding and Intel don’t generally go together.) As with Core 2 Duo over Core Duo, we’re getting incremental performance enhancements relative to the previous generation. Each step is relatively small, but they start to add up — hence, Apple quotes 50% gains over the original Core Duo. (And that’s why they dumped PowerPC, which in the mobile space was starting to practically paddle backwards.)

The key differences as far as raw performance: faster front-side bus (800MHz instead of 667), which for audio is a big deal, faster clock speeds on the models themselves at the same price, and fast RAM, plus a faster GPU for GPU-related tasks. (And, um, any day now we’ll start to see audio on the GPU — it’s tough to program, and GPUs are only now becoming the norm, and CPU cycles are getting cheaper, but it will happen.)

Also, none of this was meant to say “eBay your MacBook Pro.” PowerBook G4, maybe, but the first-gen MacBook Pro is still a terrific audio machine, with a GPU that’s no slouch. My main laptop right now is a first-gen MacBook (no Pro), and it blazes through everything I throw at it.

E-MU was once a beloved moniker in the music gear business. Now owned by Creative Labs, they’ve made a new name for themselves with software versions of their sound modules and value-priced keyboards and interfaces — but Mac users haven’t been invited to the party. So I was surprised when I heard Mac users coming back excited about E-MU gear on the Macworld floor.

It seems E-MU is releasing Universal Mac driver support for their full keyboard line and external USB audio interfaces, both of which were previously Windows-only and lacked cross-platform class-compliant compatibility. (PCMCIA and PCI interfaces are evidently no-go, but all the rest of their hardware is). They’re certainly worth a look on the Mac now. The keyboards aren’t terribly pretty, but they have a great action for the price and include aftertouch. Mike Gallant loved them at Keyboard. (See PDF of his review) And the audio interfaces have been a good buy, too.

Now the big question is what happens to E-MU’s software; the software bundle is a big part of what makes these a value. An E-MU rep on the floor said, while there’s no official date yet, the popular Proteus sound modules are on their way. I haven’t used these since they were hardware modules, so I like the idea.

The driver download page is a little spotty for now, but will hopefully improve:

E-MU Public Preview, Drivers

E-MU Home Page

On the Windows side, incidentally, Creative has a great relationship with Microsoft, so it’s little surprise they’re out in front with support of 64-bit — both XP and Vista. Any E-MU owners / fans out there? Give us a holler.

Apple’s iPhone prototype is a beautiful culmination of user interface design and industrial/product design. But the core of the product really is its multi-touch interface, which should gratify readers of this site. Almost from the moment this site was founded, you’ve advocated the possibilities of touch and multi-touch interfaces. CDM first covered the JazzMutant Lemur (later distributed by Max/MSP powerhouse Cycling ‘74) in November 2004, and readers of CDM were pouring over the interface possibilities of multi-touch as revealed in Apple’s patents back in February, along with experimental, projected multi-touch interfaces and even Windows multi-touch.

Musicians, after all, understand the importance of physical interfaces — it’s the essence of musical performance, and anyone who works with MIDI is intimate with the process of translating gestures into numbers.

So now the iPhone is (almost) here. It’s a brilliant design that, unlike my Windows Mobile-based UT Starcom VX6700, seems to actually understand what a phone is.

With months left until release, a lot could change. But, while I’m very excited about the iPhone’s design, two major questions concern me:

1. Will Apple lock down the iPhone, blocking Flash, Java, custom widgets, and open development from its new platform?

2. Could Apple’s multi-touch patents actually stifle growth of new, interactive displays?

While a lot of CDMers looked at iPhone and thought “that’d make a nifty music controller”, a possibility that now seems more remote, these questions of course have much deeper implications. So, with everyone else to ooh and ahh over Apple’s as-yet-unreleased phone (check out the hilarious faux unboxing), I get the chance to play skeptic.

The Closed iPhone

I ask this as a question, but so far, it looks as though Apple has already decided the iPhone will be an entirely closed box — no development. In fact, the real question perhaps should be, “Will the Mac community and technology press scream bloody murder until Apple opens the iPhone to third-party development?”

Apple Corporate Communications says, simply, there has been no formal announcement on development. But the few journalists with access to higher-level Apple executives and Jobs himself tell a different story. David Pogue’s iPhone FAQ says, simply, no. No third-party development. No widget development. No user-installable apps. No Flash. No Java. If you can write apps with HTML and JavaScript, then you’re set. Otherwise, you’re out of luck.

An update to that FAQ says even more, and illustrates why I find this upsetting.

Jobs on Java: “Java’s not worth building in. Nobody uses Java anymore. It’s this big heavyweight ball and chain.” Okay, now there I’ll have a tough time arguing — for Web applets, most Java developers will even agree the runtime loads too slowly. But –

Jobs on Flash — it’s a “maybe”, but read this: “Yeah, YouTube—of course. But you don’t need to have Flash to show YouTube. All you need to do is deal with YouTube. And plus, we could get ‘em to up their video resolution at the same time, by using h.264 instead of the old codec.”

And this, of course, is the Bad Apple. The whole point of the Web is independent publishing and standard formats. That’s what gives us the freedom to run this site, what gives many of you the freedom to begin distributing music and videos you’ve created independent from large, corporate gatekeepers. Apple is instead using their tight control over devices to make themselves the gatekeeper — we’ll deal with YouTube and make them do what we want, rather than build in a player that would let you see 100% of the Web on our communicator device. (Incidentally, Flash is a player, not a codec per se, so just switching to H.264 is not an improvement in “quality.” And Flash Player gives you additional flexibility that QuickTime and H.264 do not.)

Some Apple fans I talked to at Macworld last week thought this whole issue wasn’t even worth discussing — some because they’re so excited about iPhone, others because of a strange, resigned attitude to something they thought they couldn’t change. Yet iPhone is not iPod: it’s really a portable computer. Apple touted technologies that are developer tools, from OS X app development to Core Animation (the animation API upcoming in Leopard). It’s not just that you can develop for other devices and not the iPhone — it’s that the iPhone is the first portable device a lot of people would actually want to develop for. If Apple really is turning their back on open development, they’re turning their back on what made the Mac great. OS X with iApps and the pro apps pales in comparison to Macs running third-party software. It might just be one utility that makes the difference.

“But it’s just a phone.” Well, I have two arguments to that. The first is, it only takes one user-installable app to make a difference. For the server admins at Macworld Expo, Terminal and ssh topped the discussion list. For a student, it might be German-language flash cards. The point is, who owns your device — you, or Apple? (ssh utilities and flash card apps are both available on Palm and Windows Mobile, I might add.) My Windows phone is a clunky beast. But I now have PuTTY on it, so I can keep an eye on CDM’s servers.

The second argument is, take a look at other phones. Jaymis from the CDM staff just bought a Nokia 6233. (He’s in Australia, so the iPhone may be a long time coming.) The iPhone will work only on Cingular, and — unless you pay $1/minute or more — only in the US until it gets regional launches. Jaymis’ Nokia 6233 works anywhere in the world, on any GSM plan. It supports Adobe’s Flash Lite player. It supports Java. It’ll run the mobile version of the open source art programming tool Processing. You can connect it to a computer and use it as a modem, or directly access its SMS facility. It has an open SDK — actually, typically two SDKs for developers, one from the carrier, and one from the manufacturer. It’ll sync your contacts from Mac — and Windows, too. I could go on, but for a cheap, available-now, “legacy” phone, the 6233 has lots that the iPhone lacks. Not everyone needs all of these features, but anyone might need any one of them, particularly if someone else develops an app they need. And it seems with Mac OS X at its core, the iPhone could have the openness of this device, but allow developers to create Mac-like, elegant applications that people will actually use.

It’s hard to say at this point what Apple will actually do by June; most developers I talked to at Macworld held out hope Apple will unveil open development at WWDC, despite the on-the-record statements by Apple’s CEO to the contrary. But if it’s not a done deal, that seems to me all the more reason to start complaining now.

Music Apps with Flash?

I’ll close this discussion with one positive note: Jobs, when interviewed, didn’t rule out the possibility of Adobe Flash on the iPhone. Aside from giving you 100% of the Web instead of a fraction (a goal Jobs himself set for iPhone), Flash would offer some interesting niche applications. It would allow us a door by which you could write music applications, either self-contained ones that use the headphone-out jack, or tools that turn the multi-touch screen into a controller for music software. That may only appeal to readers here, but it would be cool, and we will be watching — especially after the Nintendo DS and Wii have recently been converted into music tools. And beyond our niche, it suggests just how much opens up when you don’t close the box.

Multi-Touch Patents

It’s, of course, Apple’s prerogative to close their phone if they want to. But the other area of concern is Apple’s patent claims for multi-touch interfaces. Back in the Macworld Speaker’s Lounge, a couple of us were joking that Apple now owned all gestures. (One hand gesture comes to mind if that’s the case.)

A couple of moments in the keynote were a little disturbing. Jobs claimed Apple “invented” multi-touch interfaces (or implied as much; he may have meant the specific technological implementation in iPhone). He also promised to aggressively defend Apple’s patents.

Before we fly off the handle with this, though, I’m not sure, to be honest, what that means. Apple may mean they’ll defend their patents, having just protected iPod from litigation by Creative Labs. Or, it could mean that Apple will go after other companies using these types of gestures and multi-touch interfaces, neither of which Apple invented. (The Lemur multimedia interface, shown here, comes to mind — and it supports much more sophisticated multi-touch and gestural input than the iPhone.)

I hope that Apple doesn’t become the bad guys of gestural intellectual property. I think, though, it’s more likely that they do intend to play defense rather than legal offense. I bring up this issue in part to see if readers here, who time and again prove themselves far better-educated than I am on a host of issues, know something I don’t. (Very likely.)

This much is certain: as multi-touch interfaces spread, there will be some nasty intellectual property fights involving someone. I can hardly wait.