Software. It doesn't matter if it's for a Mac or for an iPhone. There are certain qualities we just love, that make an app really stand out to us. As a rough approximation, we call it "Attention to Detail" but there's a lot more going on than just looking at tiny details. It's about understanding the user, what he or she wants from the app and needs it to do and how the realities of being humans with weak eyes, large fingers, and bad memory affect the way software gets designed. I asked my TUAW colleagues to share their thoughts on what makes a good app.

Brett Terpstra loves apps that are designed with a unique look but that use familiar controls. As a design philosophy, his ideal applications are both easy to use and fun to look at. Delicious, if you will. Cookie-cutter app elements may be great for prototyping an application's infrastructure but to him an app that really stands out has a unique visual voice.

He really loves Tweetie 2's ability to refresh your Twitter stream by scrolling to the top (with a tap on the title bar, of course), then pulling down and letting go. It's non-standard, but so intuitive that it should be. That's the kind of attention to detail that makes him feel warm inside.

For me, it's all about putting yourself into the mindset of the user. Were features put in place because they need to be there or because the developer thought it would be cool? Is the developer really understanding how real people might use the app? Take the iPhone. Is there a switch that lets you disable autorotation when you're using a game while lying on a couch or in bed? Because that's how real users use real games. And if the developer hasn't thought about details like this, they haven't hit that design sweet spot of matching real world needs against programming limitations.

Chris Rawson loves well-designed icons. They should give you some indication of what the app does, so you can launch it with barely a glance. Want to use multi-touch controls? Make sure those controls are intuitive and that they provide an innovative use of the technology. In his opinion, Convertbot is a great example.

Remembering already-set preferences is another hobbyhorse. Take iPhone apps that connect with the Mac over Wi-Fi for example. A brain-dead simple initial setup should be followed by only needing to push a single button (if that) to connect on all subsequent connections. And as for a finishing touch, he feels that well-polished graphics shouldn't look like something squeezed out over a single afternoon by someone with no artistic skill whatsoever.

Well designed, easy to follow instructions are key for David Winograd. In the best of all possible worlds those instructions should even include user interaction, whether via Q&A or by modeling, to make sure the key points get through to the user. In his opinion, Irene's Spirit has the best tutorial he's ever seen in an iPhone app. If the app were as good as the tutorial, the world would probably implode.

These are just a few key points from our team. Add yours to the comments below. What are the key elements that make an application, whether for Mac or iPhone or any other platform, shine for you?

People have had their chances to put their grubby hands on those "incredible" iMacs that got released a few weeks ago, and the results are in. And they're great, apparently. First up, MacRumors has a collection of a few sets of benchmarks on the new machines, and the Core i7 processor (a $200 upgrade from the still very powerful Core i5) especially kicks up the speed to a place where it's competing with even the Mac Pro. In fact, in the second comparison, when pitted up against the single CPU Mac Pro, the iMac is virtually identical. Not only is it slightly cheaper depending on options, but you get that nice monitor for free.

Electronista has a much more qualitative analysis, but they still love the new machine. Their "biggest" problem (aside from the usual complaints about the glossy screen and a lack of easy-to-reach ports) seems to be just the size of it. The 27" iMac is a big machine no matter how thin it gets. But they agree: with the i7 in there and all of the extra options, the iMac is a monster, matching up to the Mac Pros sitting in the lower atmosphere.

Good stuff. I'm not personally in the market for a new computer, but man -- if I was ready to spend $2000 on a quality machine, it's tough to consider anything else a better purchase than the new iMac.

UPDATE: Chart graphic is from Timon Royer, we regret the omission.

iPhone developer Dan B. wanted to know if Apple would reject his application based on the name he wanted to use for his app.

So he did what you'd expect a sane developer to do. He wrote Apple. He used one of his technical support incidents to speak with the Apple Developer Technical Support teams and waited for them to reply.

They were quite prompt in answering, redirecting his question to the iPhone App Review Team.

Thank you for contacting Apple Developer Technical Support. We provide support for code-level questions on hardware & software development, and are unable to help you with your app naming question.

Please contact the iPhone App Review Team for assistance. You can contact them directly at [address redacted].

While you were initially charged a technical support incident for this request, we have assigned a replacement incident back to your account.

I hope this information is helpful to you.

So Dan contacted the App Review team. And they wrote back too.

Thank you for contacting the iPhone Developer Program. This email address is for inquiries regarding status of application submissions.

Apple is not able to provide pre-approval to developers for proposed application submissions.

We ask that you please review the Program License Agreement details against the specific application you wish to develop and submit any applications for App Store consideration in line with the application submission processes for the program.

If your application does in fact get rejected by the app review team, then we will notify you on what appropriate corrections/changes should be made.

So what's a developer to do? It seems like the only way to vet an application (let alone an application name) is to submit it and see whether Apple rejects it or not. If the name is used in the application art, you might have to redesign your screens. If the application idea is not okay, you might end up throwing away all your development costs because Apple would not give a preapproval before starting serious development.

Dan's problem reflects a wider problem with Apple's App Store black box. Developers should be able to pay for support incidents for exactly this kind of situation. It appears that Apple does offer this high level of consultation to partners and other companies that they work with (even to the point of having Phil Schiller call Google directly to discuss the progress for the Google Voice app review). Shouldn't they offer a similar kind of service to smaller developers?

Have you been able to get these kinds of answers out of Apple? If so, how did you approach the matter? Let us know in the comments...

I love singing along to my iPod. Not well, mind you, but loudly with lots of enthusiasm. I assure you my children love this exactly as much as you'd expect. So I was excited to test out Lyrics+ from SchroederDev. Lyrics+ helps find and display lyrics on your iPhone or iPod.

Although there are many Mac-based solutions that add lyrics to your iTunes library, Lyrics+ provides a simpler to use solution. You launch the app, choose "now playing song..." and *boom* the lyrics are right there for you. Or mostly there. Because there are significant breaks in their library of lyric coverage. For example, lyrics for the London Revival of Roger and Hammerstein's Oklahoma (yes, starring Wolverine) were completely MIA, as were those for the Drowsy Chaperone. Billy Joel's Ain't No Crime was also a no-show but Matt Wertz and Dixie Chicks lyrics were on offer.

Lyrics+ depends on several lyrics databases including LyricWiki.org. But for a $1.99 app (currently on sale for half price), were you expecting Gracenote Lyric Service? That kind of data base access could be offered affordably by major players like AT&T and Apple but for independent developers, Lyrics+ is about as good as you're going to get.

I found the app easy to use and fun, although I wish it would automatically update when the currently playing song changed. (I believe there are callback hooks and notifications in the Music Player frameworks that let you know when this occurs like MPMusicPlayerControllerNowPlayingItemDidChangeNotification.)

The interface is really basic. You can pick a song from your library, search by the currently playing song, and search by artist/song. Stability was just so-so. The application crashed several times during playback but it was easy enough to re-launch, and get back to the lyrics page and pick up with the currently playing song.

In the end, I really do like Lyrics+ despite its relatively limited feature set. Is it worth the two bucks (or one, during the current sale)? I'd say yes. With just a few taps, you can peek at the lyrics of the song that's currently playing and sing along to your heart's content and your children's dispepsia.

Name: Lyrics+ (iTunes link)
Developer: Bruce Schroeder
Platform: iPhone or iPod touch
Price: $1.99 (Sale: $0.99)

Lots of developers are saying that they can't sell their apps at $9.99 in the App Store, but Major League Baseball is apparently the exception -- the $9.99 At Bat app is not only gaining accolades from users, but it's selling like nachos at the ballpark, too: with 130,000 copies sold so far this year, MLB is about to break a million dollars in revenue, even after Apple takes its cut.

Pretty impressive for a pricey app. Of course, that's chump change when you consider exactly what MLB is dealing with -- the app integrates the Gameday Audio service, which sells for $14.99 on its own, and baseball's television and video content makes much, much more than a million dollars. The iPhone revenue, big as it is, is just a drop in the bucket for MLB, really.

But nevertheless, the MLB app stands out as proof that, even if you have to include exclusive live audio content from major sporting events around the country, it is possible to make an app that people will happily pay $9.99 for. Stands to reason that if developers can make their app at least as functional and useful as At Bat, they too can make a million dollars.

I enjoy Consumer Reports magazine, even though sometimes the camera and electronics reviews drive me crazy. The ratings seem sometimes arbitrary, and don't always take what I think are the 'right' features into account and don't weigh those features the same way I would. Nevertheless, I find their reviews useful and another data point to throw in when I'm about to make a purchase.

Some months, ago, Consumer Reports launched an iPhone/ iPod touch app, and updated it again recently. The app, appropriately called Consumer Reports, [App Store link] is free, and has a lot of interesting info, but you don't really get links to the wealth of data back at the magazine. Even if you are a subscriber, you can't log in from the app and see magazine content.

You do get a lot of worthwhile news about consumer products, leaning heavily toward Electronics, Cars and products or services for the Home. You also get videos that are sometimes interesting, sometimes bizarre. I didn't make it all the way through the toilet paper tests.

There is some up to date reporting on topics of interest to consumers, like retailer bankruptcies, and what I would call 'tip' articles, like how to shoot a panoramic photo or tips on buying a Netbook.

There is a bit of Mac coverage, most recently a test to see if the MacBook Pro really lasted for 8 hours running on batteries. It didn't in the CR test.

Strangely, the app doesn't have any kind of search function, so if you are looking for just news about Mac laptops, for example, you're out of luck.

I still find the app full of beneficial news, and I give it a browse a couple of times a week. I wonder how Consumer Reports would rate this app? 'Recommended', 'predicted reliability good', but 'could be much better with a few changes'. On the app store users gave it an average rating of 2 stars out of 5. A bit harsh, perhaps. It's generally downgraded because there is no access to the magazine content.

Also interesting is that CR has not been a great fan of the iPhone, complaining, for example, about call quality when it first came out, but they did feel compelled to do this iPhone app. Funny old world.

Here are some screen captures:

Several years ago, I had a simple but wonderful checkbook app for my Palm. It was nothing more than money in and money out with some simple categorization (food, clothing, automotive, etc.). In other words, an electric alternative to a checkbook. Since I don't really write checks anymore, I no longer carry a register around. Plus, that old Palm is dead and gone (having accidentally spent one night in my rainy front yard), so I need an alternative.

We've reviewed mobile financial apps before, like Pennies and Mint. Cory and Mike got to play with those, but I was lucky enough to nab Cha-Ching Touch for review.

The Good

First things first. It's pretty. Every screen and icon is nice to look at and easy to navigate, even the Get Smart-style vault that requires a passcode at launch (note that this is off by default).

To get started, create an account. Choose either Checking, Savings, Credit, Online, Loan or Cash. Each is represented by a unique icon which is a nice little touch. From there, enter an account number and associated URL if applicable.

In this modern age of information, it's easier than ever to see what people think of a product, whether it be a new lawnmower, a console game, or an App Store app. But it's also easier than ever to try and tweak public opinion, and while there are many official avenues that will accept anonymous opinions, there aren't so many that will help you weed out the legit from the not-so-much.

App Store reviews have been controversial from the beginning -- while they can be helpful for buyers, you often have no idea just who's leaving comments or what their real agenda is. Njection, the makers of Nmobile (which we played with a while ago) are having a huge problem with what they're calling "sockpuppet" reviews on the App Store.

Someone (they believe this person is in cahoots with their competitor) is posting bad reviews on their app and trying to trash them and their product elsewhere (including in a comment here on TUAW). And unfortunately, as they say, they don't really have much recourse against this behavior -- they've appealed to Apple, who've replied that they'll leave comments up, unless they're offensive or extremely false. Apple's own guidelines for reviewing apps asks that the reviewers deal with apps on their own merit rather than attacking competitors, but that seems to be more of a recommendation than a firm rule.

Njection says the comments have kept consumers from trying out their apps, though it seems difficult to actually track how many people haven't tried your app (and why). It'll be interesting to see if Apple makes other changes to the review system if this sort of thing rears its ugly head more often. At this point, it seems devs just have to deal with it by doing damage control when necessary and making their app good enough that "sockpuppeting" doesn't strongly affect public opinion.

Josh Anon's $9.99 FlipBook [App Store link] offers a well-designed animation building tool. Like other flip book drawing products, it lets you create movement frame by frame. What makes FlipBook stand out from the crowd of iPhone drawing tools is its fine attention to interface details and the addition of the flipbook.tv sharing site for the animations you create.

Read on for TUAW's take on this new AppStore offering, and see the gallery below for some screenshots of the delightful interface.

While most people are waiting in line for their soon-to-be new friend, pal and everyday communications device, the world's top tech reviewers have already been playing with the long awaited device. Below is a summary of their findings along with links to their full reviews of the iPhone 3G.

Walt Mossberg (Wall Street Journal)

• Pros: Faster cell network data speeds, GPS
• Cons: Weaker battery life due to 3G/GPS
• Bottom Line: If you don't already have an iPhone and can live with the weaker battery life, then you should go ahead and buy; otherwise wait out for the 2.0 firmware update (hmm... I think I've heard this advice somewhere else)
  

David Pogue (New York Times)

• Pros: You can talk and access 3G data network simultaneously, cheaper, improved audio quality
  
• Cons: 3G isn't wide-spread, AT&T pricing,
  
• Bottom Line: "iPhone 3G is a nice upgrade," 2.0 firmware update will make your original iPhone in most ways similar to the iPhone 3G
  

Edward Baig (USA Today)

• Pros: Faster data network, cheaper, GPS, Visual Voicemail
  
• Cons: Slow EDGE speeds when not in 3G area, no video, no memory expansion
  
• Bottom Line: "The Sequel, is worth the wait," he also shows a side-by-side comparison between EDGE and 3G speeds
  

As an interesting note: David Pogue says that the iPhone's GPS antenna is too small to provide you with turn-by-turn directions in Google Maps -- this is something that Apple has failed to note until now.

Dear Developers,

Until Apple introduces ad-hoc distribution, should you want to have TUAW test your software, start by contacting us at our tips line with general information about your software.

One of us will write back to you with a test unit device identifier. You will need to provision that device for Development and then send us a copy of the mobile provision and a zipped Release version of your iPhone application (not a Distribution version).

Other welcome items include:

• Pricing information and system requirements
• Website URL for the software
• A basic press pack
• Corporate/PR contact information for TUAW
• General contact information for our readers

We love you all,

Auntie TUAW

Blogger Shawn Blanc has written another one of his thorough reviews. This time, it's the new MacBook Pro.

The interesting thing is that he's using it to replace his Mac Pro. Most tech professionals have a primary machine (often a desktop) and a secondary (usually a laptop). After living with this setup for some time, Shawn noticed that the laptop had become his main machine:

"I don't need the Mac Pro. The loss in horsepower is negligible for what I do, and the gain in simplicity cannot be expressed with words. I'm selling the tower and going back to being a one-computer consumer, and connoisseur of fine laptops."

The same thing eventually happened to me. My MacBook Pro is the machine I use most often, and my iMac is the machine I use to sync my iPhone, make iTunes purchases and upload photos. Other than that, it pretty much just sits around.

Shawn goes on to describe setup, migration of his older data and (much, much) more. The whole thing is written in Shawn's comprehensive and readable style. Check it out.

Ah, it is that magical time after an Apple announcement: the big media reviews are starting to roll in. As you might be aware Apple loans out new hardware to technology journalists to put through their paces. The MacBook Air, being a new product, was delivered to a few tech heavy hitters (with the slightly less heavy hitters having to wait a little longer to get their review unit. And no, TUAW doesn't get any review units from Apple) sometime last week, and have been subjected to lots of prodding. The first few reviews are up, and they all pretty much say the same thing: the MacBook Air is really thin, and a great machine so long as you don't need the ports it doesn't have. The good news seems to be that Apple's estimate of 5 hours of battery life doesn't seem to be too far off.

Read 'em' for yourself:

• Edward Baig's review in USA Today
• Steven Levy's review in Newsweek
• Walt Mossberg's review in The Wall Street Journal

Our friends at Engadget just received their review unit, and have confirmed what we suspected: the external SuperDrive will not work with other Macs. They also list what you can and can't do with Remote Disc.

And finally, the groovy folks at Gearlog have received their review unit and kindly posted unboxing pictures. Who doesn't like a good set of unboxing pictures?

Those unstoppable cats over at iLounge (whom I am convinced are using genetically modified oompa loompas) have gone and reviewed themselves an Apple Bluetooth Headset. For $129, you get a pretty darn sleek headset that one-ups the competition by including only a single button for control (or perhaps that's 'one-downing' the competition...), a Dual Dock for charging both the iPhone and headset and a travel charger that can handle the same job. iLounge's verdict? Well, it's a mixed bag. The headset doesn't blaze any trails in the places it matters, such as audio quality or battery life, nor is it as functional as many would expect from a typical bluetooth headset (it doesn't even have on-board volume buttons; that's controlled from the iPhone). However, the headset's performance does rank in at around average, and the included accessories are certainly a leap beyond the rest. The headset also features some unique integration with the iPhone in that charging both via the dock or cable will display the headset's battery level right alongside the iPhone's. Also, to some people's surprise, the headset (just like most bluetooth headsets) can be paired with a Mac for audio chats with the likes of iChat and Skype.

All that said, it seems like Apple's Bluetooth Headset will be a good buy for the general customer who can make use of the rich set of extras that come with it. Personally, I'm counting my pennies for one of those Jawbone headsets with the crazy noise cancellation technology. In my opinion, every bluetooth headset on the market sucks. Period. I've tested a very hefty portion of them from the bottom of the barrel to the premium $100+ models (return policies are a beautiful thing), and they're all terrible because both the caller and myself sound horrible to each other, especially when there's anything louder than a pin dropping in the background. Given Apple's tendency to try and solve some of the major problems plaguing a particular technology or industry (i.e. - Visual Voicemail), I'm surprised they didn't at least try for something like the Jawbone with the Bluetooth Headset.

But I digress - if you're on the Apple Bluetooth Headset fence, iLounge's review might be able to help you out with the decision. Check it out.

With all the mostly glowing and semi-glowing reviews starting to come in about the iPhone, I thought it might be interesting to read and provide to you a little counter perspective. Not that reading this article at Suckbusters gave me much reason to doubt my love for all-things iPhone, but its still nice to hear opposing viewpoints -- especially those that actually make a bit of sense and some good arguments.

In the article, author David Platt outlines three key reasons for his prediction that the iPhone "is going to be a bigger marketing flop than Waterworld and Ishtar combined." If you know those movies, that's saying quite a bit. That said, what are his three key reasons? For starters, he complains that the designers of the iPhone have ignored the simplicity and ease of use demonstrated by the iPod and have instead designed a device that is not simple or easy to use.

Second, he feels the iPhone "crams" too many features into a single unit which when used in combination will require "far more dedication than a user is willing to invest and remember." This, he says, "condemns the iPhone to a tiny niche at best." Lastly, Platt laments the iPhone's touch screen and lack of "tactile feedback" which will force users to look at the screen at all times while using it -- something, he says, they will "detest."

Some valid points to be sure and perhaps worthy of consideration. But does any of it change your opinion about the iPhone? Or is it still the shiny, touch-screened soon-to-be love of your life it always was?