There are millions of people who use iOS devices on a daily basis. Many of us take for granted the fact that we can easily articulate and communicate what we are thinking. Yet, there are those that cannot do so, at least not as easily. While technology may allow us to do many things on the go that we could easily do elsewhere, it can assist others in opening up an entirely new world. This video, by Apple, epitomizes that and brings to light what technology can do for a subset of the population.

It looks as though Stephen Colbert may get his own emoji with a future Emoji update.

A few weeks ago I wrote about the case of Apple versus the FBI. To quickly recap, The FBI wanted Apple to create a custom operating system for a phone that was used by one of the San Bernadino shooters. Apple was ordered to do this by a judge because the FBI "exhausted all possible routes" for breaking into the iPhone and could not do it without the assistance of Apple.

Last week, the FBI asked the court to put a stay on the order in order to investigate a way to break into the iPhone. Today, the FBI has requested to vacate the order compelling Apple to assist. Vacating an order does not mean that the FBI will not request the same assistance in the future. The request to vacate effectively means that the request never happened and nothing occurred.

The reasons for the FBI requesting this is most likely for a couple of reasons. The first being the they were able to access the information on the phone; which they were able to do so. The second reason is likely due to the likelihood of the FBI losing the case.

The third reason is released to the second. If they were to proceed and lose, it would set precedent and hamper any future, as well as existing, efforts.

What happens in the future is unknown. The order being vacated does not impact any other possible case. Apple and the FBI have both indicated that Congress needs to determine what the proper balance between customer security and the needs of law enforcement.

It is not the last that we have heard regarding government needing assistance with getting into an iPhone. This case, for now, is done.

Apple breaks up the year into three different parts of the year; Early, Mid, and Late. Each part is four months. Apple generally has one event in each of these parts. Apple has held their early 2016 event; dubbed "Let us loop you in".

Apple has unveiled a bunch of new products. Let us look at each of the announced products.

Apple TV

Last Fall Apple unveiled the 4th generation Apple TV. There is no new hardware, but there is the new release of tvOS 9.2. A few of the new features of tvOS 9.2 include: Folder Support, additional Siri dictation, including passwords, conference room display mode, bluetooth keyboard support, and now iCloud Photo Library with Live Photo support.

This is a nice upgrade that adds in some features that users had requested.

Apple Watch

Last year at the March event Apple provided details for the availability of the Apple Watch. Some may have anticipated that the Apple Watch would be a product that is released yearly. If you were hoping for that, Apple has dashed those hopes.

Apple has positioned the Watch as a fashion product. While they may not be able to release new hardware every season, they are able to provide new personalization options by releasing additional bands.

The Apple Watch now has a new type of band, the Nylon Band. The Nylon Band is available in seven different color combinations; Black, Gold and Red, Gold and Royal Blue, Pearl, Pink, Royal Blue, and Scuba Blue. These bands come in both 38mm and 42mm varieties and are $49 each.

Along with the new Nylon Bands, there are three additional Sport Band colors: Apricot, Royal Blue, and Yellow; Two Classic Buckle bands Red and Marine Blue. Two Modern Buckles, Blue Jay and Marigold.The last new bands are the leather loops, Storm Gray and White.

The last change to the Apple Watch is one that will temp more to purchase the Apple Watch, a price drop. The new price for the Apple Watch is $299 for the 38mm and $349 for the 42MM Sport versions.

iPad

While it may not have been the first tablet on the market, the iPad can be considered the one that put the idea of a tablet front and center in the mindshare of the public. Even though it is not at its peak and has fallen, it has not deterred Apple from continuing to innovate the iPad.

iPad Air 2

The iPad Air 2 received a single change, a $100 price drop. This means that the iPad Air 2 is now priced at $399 and $499 for the 16GB and 64GB models respectively. There is still the Wi-Fi + Cellular models available at $529 and $629 for the 16GB and 64GB model.

iPad Pro

Back in September Apple unveiled the 12.9-inch iPad Pro. Apple has now released the 9.7-inch iPad Pro. This is the spiritual successor of the 9.7-inch iPad Air 2, but is also very closely related to the larger 12.9-inch iPad Pro. The 9.7-inch iPad Pro is similar to the larger model. The 9.7-inch model supports the Apple Pencil and also has a Smart Connector. With a Smart Connector comes a new Smart Keyboard as well.

The 9.7-inch iPad Pro also has the same A9X Processor and M9 Co-processor as the larger iPad Pro. There are also the same four speakers within the 9.7-inch iPad Pro. This means that as you rotate the iPad Pro, the speakers are able to automatically adjust the sound.

This is about where the similarities between the iPad Pros end. There are some other improvements that have been made to the 9.7-inch iPad Pro. The 9.7-inch iPad Pro has a brand new display that Apple is calling True Tone. The display utilizes the same color gamut as the Late 2015 iMac, the DCI-P3. This means that the colors will be truer to life. This is not the only difference between the two iPads.

One of the features that many have question about the iPad is the camera. The camera on the 9.7-inch iPad is a vast improvement over the 12.9-inch iPad Pro's camera. The camera

The last difference is the colors. The 9.7-inch iPad Pro is available in four colors; Silver, Gold, Rose-Gold and Space Gray.

The 9.7-inch iPad Pro still comes in the 32GB and 128GB models. Along with this, it is also available in a 256GB model. This comes in both Wi-Fi and Wi-Fi + Cellular models. The price of the 9.7-inch iPad Pro is $599, $749, and $899 for the Wi-Fi models only. The Wi-Fi + Cellular models are $729, $879, and $1029 respectively.

12.9-inch iPad Pro

While the 9.7-inch iPad Pro was the primary iPad shown off, it was not the only one that got some additional options. While there are no change to the form-factor of the larger iPad, there are a couple of additions options.

The 12.9-inch iPad is now also available in 256GB models of both Wifi-only and Wifi + Cellular. Along with this, a clarification has been made that the 12.9-inch iPad Pro can now utilize the lightning to USB-C cable and the 29-watt USB C power adapter. This combination will allow for super-fast charging of a 12.9-inch iPad Pro.

This method is not possible with the 9.7-inch iPad. This is due to that product only having USB 2.0 controller.

iPhone

Apple's best selling product the iPhone continues to sell really well. Apple is known to not divulge the breakdown of models that are sold. Even so, Apple did mention that they sold 30 Million iPhone 5s phones last year. This is a lot of phones that were sold based on 2013 technology. There are many reasons why some might prefer a smaller form-factor phone. They could range from pocket size, better fit in one's hands, or even just as Apple stated, cost. While using an iPhone 5s would be able to use some of the latest software features, you cannot easily upgrade the hardware inside of the phone. Apple has provided a significant update to the 4-inch form factor. That update is named the iPhone SE.

iPhone SE

The iPhone SE the successor of the iPhone 5s, Apple's 4-inch iPhone. The iPhone SE has the same case as the iPhone 5s, except instead of glossy chamfers, they are matte. The outside of the phone looks the same as the iPhone 5s, except for the colors. The iPhone SE comes in the standard four colors, Gold, Rose Gold, Silver, and Space Gray.

The innards of the iPhone SE are the same of the iPhone 6s with an A9 processor and the M9 co-processor. Along with the processors, there is a secure enclave and first-generation Touch ID sensor. This is the same Touch-ID Sensor that has been in the iPhones, prior to the iPhone 6s and iPhone 6s Plus.

The rear camera is the same ƒ/2.2 aperture, Five‑element lens that is in the iPhone 6s and iPhone 6s Plus, minus the optical stabilization. Just like the iPhone 6s and iPhone 6s Plus you are able to record 4k video at 30 frames per second, 1080p at 30 or 60fps.

The only item not improved is the FaceTime camera. On the iPhone SE, it is still the same 1.2 Megapixel camera that was in the iPhone 5s. The likely reason for this is due to the lack of physical space within the physical case. There is one slight improvement, the addition of Retina Flash.

In case you are not aware, Retina Flash is the ability for the screen to light up to produce enough light that makes it easier to light up your face and surrounding area when taking a selfie.

The wireless connection on the iPhone SE has been upgraded to include 802.11AC. This means that the iPhone now supports 802.11A/B/G/N/AC. Unlike the iPhone 6s and iPhone 6s Plus, the iPhone SE does to include the MIMO technology.

The iPhone SE comes in two sizes, the 16GB version and a 64GB version. It comes in the same standard four colors, Gold, Rose Gold, Silver, and Space Gray.

You can order an iPhone SE today for $399 for the 16GB model and $499 for the 64GB model. The iPhone SE begins shipping on March 31st.

Final Thoughts

The events that Apple has held early in the year are not normally ones where brand new, completely unknown products from Apple are released, and this is the case with this year's event. Even so, Apple has released a solid set of updates.

The product with the least number of changes is the Apple TV, since it received only an upgrade to the software. The software is a minor upgrade, but provides a couple of key features that some users have been hoping would be added.

While the Apple Watch Hardware has remained unchanged, the addition of the new Nylon bands, as well as the new Sport bands and Modern Buckles will provide even more customization options for users. The reduction of the price for the Apple Watch may entice even more people to give the Apple Watch a try.

The release of the 4-inch iPhone SE continues to provide the smaller form-factor that many want and yet only minimally compromises on features, with the lack of 3D Touch and 2nd generation Touch ID sensor, being the only trade offs.

The new 9.7-inch iPad Pro is a great successor to the iPad Air 2. The 9.7-inch size is what most would consider the "standard" iPad size. The new True Tone screen will make an even better experience for iPad users. The addition of the Smart Connector and ability to use the Apple Pencil will allow the iPad to be even more of a PC replacement.

Well played Mr. President, well played indeed.

https://www.facebook.com/abcnews/videos/10154186657713812/

YouTuber CGP Grey has created a video that puts some serious doubt on whether Transporters in Star Trek could actually work, but not necessarily for technical reasons. Well worth the watch. https://www.youtube.com/embed/nQHBAdShgYI

I have been gaming for quite a long time now. Since my teens I have primarily been focusing on playing First Person Shooters. The series that I tend to play include Call of Duty, Battlefield, Duke Nukem, and Wolfenstein, among others.

Along with the first person shooter genre, I have also played other genres of games. As I have written on this site and others, I have reviewed a few of the Lego-based video games, and will likely review another one in the future, once it is released. Beside these, I also enjoy puzzlers like Portal and Portal 2.

But I am not here to review a game within those categories, but instead, FireWatch. FireWatch is developed by Campo Santo and Panic Software.

Cost and Requirements

Firewatch is $19.99 and is available from Steam for PC and Macs, as well as for the Playstation 4. The requirements for the game include a Geforce 450 with 1GB of memory, 6GB of RAM and 4GB of storage space. On the Mac side it requires a 2011 Mac, running OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion or later, with a discrete graphics card with 1GB of RAM. The discrete graphics card is a requirement.

I bought the game for the Playstation 4, because I knew that my 2011 iMac would not be able to handle the game due to the video card requirement. My 2015 MacBook Pro might have been able to handle it, but I do not normally play games on my MacBook Pro, so the Playstation 4 it was.

The Story

The game is a first person mystery game. You are Henry, and you have come out to Wyoming to get away from life. You are equipped with a very limited number of items, the primary one being a radio. On the other end of the radio is a woman named Delilah, who is your boss. Throughout the game, additional items are provided, but the best of all, none of them are weapons. I will not give away anything that happens.

It is not a long game, it took me approximately four hours to complete the game. I finished the story, but did not inspect every single area possible. You can explore many different areas of the game. Since there are no weapons, it makes the game a bit simpler and appealing to a broader range of users.

Visuals

The game is very visually appealing. The graphics are stunning and I love the scenery and the views. The game takes place at different times throughout the day, so you can see different scenes. Ones that include sunrise, daylight, sunset and even at night. The variety of times that you play, works very well with the story and only enhances and heightens the emotionality of the game.

Issues

While playing the game there were several times that I experienced stuttering audio. It was not that there was stuttering, but the stuttering made the audio completely un-listenable. I had subtitles on, so I was able to follow along. Given that the game is only about three weeks old, I'm sure the issue will be fixed, but it still made it difficult to hear the game. That was it in terms of issues. Only the audio was an issue.

Final Thoughts

Even though Firewatch is a short game, it is a fantastic game. From the moment that you start the game until the end, the game plays on your emotions. If you do not feel something while playing the game, it may be best to re-evaluate your life. The game goes very deep. I do not think a game has really made me think this much since I played The Last of Us. I finished the game about two hours ago and I am already thinking that I need to replay the game.

The one thing I would like to see is the game become available for the Xbox One. It is my preferred platform, but even playing on the Playstation 4, it was a great game. If it ever does become available for the Xbox One, I will likely end up buying it there too.

If you enjoy games that make you think, I would absolutely recommend getting Firewatch. It will be well worth the price. If I had to sum it up in six words: "Buy it and play it today."

Apple has filed its motion to dismiss the court order that would compel Apple to write custom software to allow the FBI to bypass the security mechanisms on an iPhone 5c that possibly contains data from one of the perpetrators of the December 2015 shootings in San Bernadino, California.

This case is very complex and has many aspects to it. I will not try to ascertain every issue surrounding the case, but will try to point out the ones that I think are relevant.

The Facts

Below are the facts, as far as I can ascertain, about the case. If there are some that are relevant that I have omitted, or if some of these are not correct, please let me know.

• The Courts have ordered Apple to comply with an order that compels Apple, under the All Writs Act of 1789, to assist the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) with defeating the security on the iPhone 5c in question in order to obtain the information on the device.
• The assistance being asked includes writing software that has never been written, nor would Apple willingly write.
• The iPhone 5c in question is owned by the San Bernadino County Public Health Department (SBCPHD).
• The iCloud password was changed by the SBCPHD at the request of the FBI.
• Apple suggested to the FBI to bring the iPhone to a known network (as in the SBCPHD wireless or the suspect's home network), to allow the iPhone to perform an iCloud Backup.
• Apple wanted to work with the FBI and asked the FBI to keep the request under seal. The FBI refused and made it public; thereby forcing the issue into the open.

Some of the FBI and Department of Justice (DOJ) Arguments

• This is a one-off case.
• This falls under the All Writs Act of 1789.
• Complying does not require much effort on Apple's part.

Some of Apple's Arguments

• This is not a one-off case.
• Would be an undue burden.
• Violates the First and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution.

The Motion to Vacate the Order

I read through the 65 page motion and a few passages really stuck out to me.

In addition, compelling Apple to create software in this case will set a dangerous precedent for conscripting Apple and other technology companies to develop technology to do the government’s bidding in untold future criminal investigations. If the government can invoke the All Writs Act to compel Apple to create a special operating system that undermines important security measures on the iPhone, it could argue in future cases that the courts should compel Apple to create a version to track the location of suspects, or secretly use the iPhone’s microphone and camera to record sound and video.

Having just finished re-listening to George Orwell's book, and the movie based on the book, 1984, if Apple is compelled to comply, we will very soon be entering into 1984 territory.

"As Apple has explained, the technical assistance sought here requires vastly more than simply pressing a “few buttons."

This is referencing the previous instances where Apple was asked to comply with bypassing the passcode for older iPhones running older versions of iOS. With these versions of iOS, the passcode on these devices could more easily be bypassed without much effort from Apple. What would equate to "pressing a few buttons".

But compelling minimal assistance to surveil or apprehend a criminal (as in most of the cases the government cites), or demanding testimony or production of things that already exist (akin to exercising subpoena power), is vastly different, and significantly less intrusive, than conscripting a private company to create something entirely new and dangerous. There is simply no parallel or precedent for it.

What the FBI is asking for is something that has never been done, nor has any company ever been compelled to do previously.

Under well-settled law, computer code is treated as speech within the meaning of the First Amendment...The Supreme Court has made clear that where, as here, the government seeks to compel speech, such action triggers First Amendment protections.

Apple is arguing, as far as I understand it, that since computer code is considered free speech, Apple cannot be compelled to create computer code, which is their first amendment right not to do.

Lastly, it will have to be signed with Apple’s cryptographic key verifying that it is Apple-authorized software. Absent Apple’s proper cryptographic signature, this device will not load GovtOS...Apple would not agree to sign GovtOS voluntarily because it is not software that Apple wants created, deployed or released.

This is similar to the one above. The only way for iPhones to be able to load software onto an iPhone is with Apple's cryptographic key used to sign software. Without this signature the software will not load onto an iPhone.

The virtual world is not like the physical world. When you destroy something in the physical world, the effort to recreate it is roughly equivalent to the effort required to create it in the first place. When you create something in the virtual world, the process of creating an exact and perfect copy is as easy as a computer key stroke because the underlying code is persistent.

This argument is one of Apple's primary concerns. If this was a "one off" creation, as the FBI states, Apple could destroy the software. Unfortunately, it's not that easy. Apple would likely be required to retain the code, along with all of the accompanying documentation to be able to indicate in a court how it went about creating the software. This would require them to have documentation about this as well, meaning that Apple could not simply "destroy" the software after its use.

The All Writs Act, first enacted in 1789 and on which the government bases its entire case, “does not give the district court a roving commission” to conscript and commandeer Apple in this manner...In fact, no court has ever authorized what the government now seeks, no law supports such unlimited and sweeping use of the judicial process, and the Constitution forbids it.

Apple is arguing that the use of the All Writs Act does not apply in this case because it would give the FBI and other law enforcement agencies the ability to do whatever they want, whenever they want.

In addressing the twin needs of law enforcement and privacy, Congress, through the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), specified when a company has an obligation to assist the government with decryption of communications, and made clear that a company has no obligation to do so where, as here, the company does not retain a copy of the decryption key. 47 U.S.C. § 1002(b)(3). Congress, keenly aware of and focusing on the specific area of dispute here, thus opted not to provide authority to compel companies like Apple to assist law enforcement with respect to data stored on a smartphone they designed and manufactured.

Since Apple does not retain the decryption key, it is not able to meet the requirements. The decryption key is derived from a Unique Identifier (UID) that is created during the fabrication process, and the user's passcode. Apple never knows the UID, and without this, it is nearly impossible to break the encryption without the passcode.

The last one, is just a funny one.

Indeed, as the Supreme Court has recognized, “[t]he term ‘cell phone’ is itself misleading shorthand;...these devices are in fact minicomputers” that “could just as easily be called cameras, video players, rolodexes, calendars, tape recorders, libraries, diaries, albums, televisions, maps, or newspapers.” Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473, 2488–89 (2014) (observing that equating the “data stored on a cell phone” to “physical items” “is like saying a ride on horseback is materially indistinguishable from a flight to the moon”).

It is a good analogy. A "Cell Phone" these days are being used as a phone less and less. The functions are well beyond this these days. The comparison is quite accurate.

My Thoughts

Before I read Apple's arguments, I decided that I was on the side of privacy and security. After reading Apple's arguments I stand by this opinion even more. I think Apple makes a compelling case against having to follow this order. What the FBI is asking Apple to do, Apple does not want to do. It goes against their core principles of privacy and security for their customers. Furthermore, it goes against what the Supreme Court has already ruled is permissible under the All Writs Act of 1789.

As Apple has argued, it is not up to the federal government agencies to be given carte blanche to use any method that they want to gain access. Congress has already written the laws to restrict what law enforcement agencies are able to do.

This fight is long from over and will not be settled anytime soon. It is entirely possible that it will make its way to the Supreme Court. We shall see. It is likely that there will be future posts regarding this case in the future.

Update February 29th, 2016

I wrote a majority of this story last week when Apple responded, but had not been able to post it until now. Today has brought an interesting change. In a similar case to the one in San Bernadino, there has been a ruling by Magistrate Judge James Orenstein. The case involved the government used the argument of the All Writs Act of 1789 to compel Apple to bypass the passcode on an Apple iPhone. This one was for a case involving drugs.

Judge Ornstein has denied the government's motion. His introduction states:

The government seeks an order requiring Apple, Inc. ("Apple") to bypass the passcode security on an Apple device. It asserts that such an order will assist in the execution of a search warrant previously issued by this court, and that the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) (the "AWA"), empowers the court to grant such relief. Docket Entry ("DE") 1 (Application). For the reasons set forth below, I conclude that under the circumstances of this case, the government has failed to establish either that the AWA permits the relief it seeks or that, even if such an order is authorized, the discretionary factors I must consider weigh in favor of granting the motion. More specifically, the established rules for interpreting a statute's text constrain me to reject the government's interpretation that the AWA empowers a court to grant any relief not outright prohibited by law. Under a more appropriate understanding of the AWA's function as a source of residual authority to issue orders that are "agreeable to the usages and principles of law," 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), the relief the government seeks is unavailable because Congress has considered legislation that would achieve the same result but has not adopted it. In addition, applicable case law requires me to consider three factors in deciding whether to issue an order under the AWA: the closeness of Apple's relationship to the underlying criminal conduct and government investigation; the burden the requested order would impose on Apple; and the necessity of imposing such a burden on Apple. As explained below, after reviewing the facts in the record and the parties' arguments, I conclude that none of those factors justifies imposing on Apple the obligation to assist the government's investigation against its will. I therefore deny the motion.

This ruling likely means that the case will be appealed, Even so, this ruling will likely bolster Apple's case in San Bernadino.

There is also this footnote from the Judge:

In considering the burden the requested relief would impose on Apple, it is entirely appropriate to take into account the extent to which the compromise of privacy and data security that Apple promises its customers affects not only its financial bottom line, but also its decisions about the kind of corporation it aspires to be. The fact that the government or a judge might disapprove Apple’s preference to safeguard data security and customer privacy over the stated needs of a law enforcement agency is of no moment: in the absence of any other legal constraint, that choice is Apple’s to make, and I must take into account the fact that an order compelling Apple to abandon that choice would impose a cognizable burden on the corporation that is wholly distinct from any direct or indirect financial cost of compliance.

The judge is absolutely correct in this. This is the type of Judge that we need not just on the lower courts, but also on the Supreme Court.

To read the full ruling, you can go here. It is a full 50 pages for the response.

Undoubtedly you have heard the term "podcasts". Depending on your geek level, you may have not heard of them until late in 2014 with the release of the popular podcast Serial. Even though they may not have become super popular with most users, podcasts have been around well before then, for more than a decade now to be exact. Podcasts got their biggest bump, prior to Serial, when Apple added Podcast support to iTunes with version 4.9 in June of 2005.

Anybody can create a podcast and have it submitted to the iTunes Podcast Directory. Given the size and breadth of podcast types available in iTunes, many 3rd party podcast applications will use the iTunes Store to verify a podcast.

Previously, when a podcast creator wanted to submit a new podcast to the iTunes Podcast Directory, they had to use a form to submit their Podcast URL to Apple. Apple would crawl the feed and validate it, and if everything looked alright your podcast would go live.

The submission process was quite simple, but what happened if you changed hosting providers? You would have to do a manual redirect from your old feed to your new one. Once the redirect was in place, the iTunes Store would pick up the new feed and be updated. While this was as good method, it was not the best.

Podcasts Connect

To create a better experience, Apple has created a new portal for podcast creators called Podcasts Connect. Podcasts Connect allows for better management of existing podcasts as well as adding new podcasts.

With the Podcasts Connect site, to add a new podcast, you login with your Apple ID. Click on the "+" button in the upper left. You will be presented with one field to add your podcast, the RSS Feed. Enter in the RSS feed and click on "Validate". Once you have clicked on the "Validate" button, many checks will be done on the feed.

These include, but are not limited to, checking the artwork, verify the RSS feed itself is valid, that episodes can be downloaded, a category for your podcast exists, whether or not an explicit tag is provided, and whether the podcast feed already exists.

If any of these items are not present, or if the feed has been submitted already, the validation will provide you with information about issues to rectify. An example is below.

If your feed passes all of the checks, you will be presented with a preview page, similar to the one below, and the status of the podcast will change to "Prepared for Submission".

After you have double-checked everything on the page to verify that it is correct, you can click on the "Submit" button in the upper right it will submit the podcast for review. Once it is approved, you will receive an email stating such and it will be available in the iTunes Podcast Directory.

Editing an existing Podcast

There are times that you, as a podcast owner, may end up needing to change the feed for your podcast. It could be because you are switching hosting providers, or it could be because your podcast has become quite popular and need to create caching for podcast feeds. With Podcast Connect you are able to edit the RSS feed. To do this perform the following

1. Login to Podcast Connect.
2. Locate the podcast you wish to edit.
3. Click on the cover for the podcast.
4. In the URL field, put in the updated RSS feed.
5. Click on "Save".

On this page you will also notice a couple of features. The first is the "Last Refresh" time. This is good for determining when your podcast was last updated by Apple. There are also a few other features. You can refresh the feed. When you click on this, you will receive a message similar to the one below:

You can view the Podcast in iTunes, so you can see how it appears to others.

You can also hide the podcast from the directory. It is not 100% clear whether or not the feed will continue to refresh if hidden. It is presumed that it will.

The last option is to delete the podcast. This option will be best used if you no longer want to list your podcast in the iTunes Podcast Directory.

Possibile Future Features

Even though this is a great step forward forward in allowing easier management for podcast owners. I do think this step could bring some additional options in the future. One of the features that could easily be added would be the ability to charge for podcasts. Within iTunes it shows as "Free". Yet, by adding a couple of options to the page, it may be possible to have a subscription model for a podcast. While I do not think many would take advantage of an option like this, it might be possible. Yet, knowing Apple it may not be very likely to happen anytime soon.

Final Thoughts

The addition of Podcasts Connect will make it easier to add and modify Podcasts. While many of the more tech-focused podcast owners would be able to create redirects easily. However, for the majority of non-technical podcast owners will now be able to make changes quite easily. I hope to see more portals like this from Apple that will make things easier for other types of users.

Last week Apple's CEO Time Cook published a letter regarding Apple's stance on refusing to follow a judge's order. This created uproar within the technology community; and rightfully so given the ramifications that this case will have on future generations.

This morning Apple has published a Frequently Asked Questions page regarding their letter.

I recommend that everybody go and read it. It embodies why I signed the Petition that asks the White House to stop attempting to compel companies to create backdoors in their products.