Coffee lover, e-reader aficionado, and Instapaper developer Marco Arment put together what he describes as an informal survey of the current library landscape, including iPad and iBooks, Amazon’s Kindle and Kindle app, the Nook color, and Kobo.

If you’re going to primarily read periodicals, get the iPad. If you’re going to read books, all of these platforms look like safe options.

Check out his comparison charts for books, magazines, and newspapers. It’s not so much his results, which he cautions you take with a grain of salt, but the method he recommends for finding which device or app ecosystem is best for you that’s compelling.

Source: Marco.org

Marco Arment, creator of the popular Instapaper app for the iPhone and iPad, noticed an problem related to changes made in iOS 5 tied to iCloud backups.

A common scenario: an Instapaper customer is stocking up an iPad for a long flight. She syncs a bunch of movies and podcasts, downloads some magazines, and buys a few new games, leaving very little free space. Right before boarding, she remembers to download the newest issue of The Economist. (I think highly of my customers.) This causes free space to fall below the threshold that triggers the cleaner, which — in the background, unbeknownst to her — deletes everything that was saved in Instapaper. Later in the flight, with no internet connectivity, she goes to launch Instapaper and finds it completely empty.

(Last week, almost this exact scenario happened to one of my customers.)

Apps like eBook readers, podcast clients, offline mapping programs and even Apple’s own iBooks app (as long as Apple is following its own rules) would have its cached data wiped clean if ever the device runs low on space.

Hit the link below for Arment’s detailed explanation of the problem.

Source: Marco Arment

Developer Marco Arment, whose Instapaper app he believes is a good bellwether of iOS adoption, didn’t see a spike with the Verizon iPhone launch — leading him to believe many early Verizon iPhone buyers had previous iOS devices. Now we have heard Verizon iPhone sales were less than expected. Unlike cyclical AT&T iPhone releases, however, many potential customers are likely still on existing contracts and will wait until their next upgrade to switch over to the Verizon iPhone. That’s a slow, steady pace as opposed to the previous mad June rushes.

Here on TiPb we’ve seen a pretty large influx of BlackBerry users and a fair amount of Android converts, but even if they didn’t own an iPhone before they could have had an iPod touch or iPad to get their hands into the iOS platform.

So let’s ask! Is Verizon iPhone your first iOS device? Vote in the poll up top and tell us which iOS device(s) you previously owned in the comments below. If you did have an iOS device before, did you just load it up with your existing app or did you go on another app shopping spree?

[Marco.org]

The most common words used uniquely in 1-star and 5-star App Store reviews, according to Instapaper and Tumblr developer Marco Arment who wrote a script to collect the data:

5-star: awesome, worth, thanks, amazing, simple, perfect, price, everything, ever, must, ipod, before, found, store, never, recommend, done, take, always, touch

1-star: waste, money, crashes, tried, useless, nothing, paid, open, deleted, downloaded, didn’t, says, stupid, anything, actually, account, bought, apple, already

His analysis is well worth the read.

[Marco.org]

Developer Marco Arment has posted some preview pictures for the coming soon-as-possible iPad version of his terrific Instapaper Pro app, and provided some interesting commentary into the design and thinking behind the rapid release plan.

If you’re not familiar with Instapaper, it’s a software/services combo that lets you quickly mark interesting articles you come across to “read later” either via a bookmarklet in your browser or via embedded support in other apps like NetNewsWire or Tweetie. You can then go to the Instapaper website or open the Instapaper Free [Free - iTunes link] or Instapaper Pro [$4.99 - iTunes link] app on your iPhone or iPod touch (and soon iPad) and enjoy those articles in a highly read-optimized form. Geek candy, to be sure.

As to the iPad-specific version, Arment says the pixel-doubled iPhone version on the iPad was not acceptable (something we’ve heard before). From there:

Once I nailed down a few definite iPad-friendly features, I realized that I could port all of them to the iPhone version of Instapaper Pro. And if I did that, all of my customers (and I) could use these great new features now.

[...]I’ll experiment with more radical interface changes in the future, once I’ve had time to actually use the iPad for a while and figure out what really works on it, what doesn’t, and what the hardware can handle.

And on the time-frame:

I’m doing my best to make the day-one submission deadline. Even if the first version ships with a few edge-case bugs, I’d rather have that on my iPad for a couple of weeks than no Instapaper at all, and many customers have told me that they feel the same way.

If you’re already a user, the great news is that Arment is releasing a universal binary, meaning you won’t have to buy Instapaper Pro again just for the iPad — you get both in one.

Give the whole article a read, it’s a great behind-the-scenes peak at iPad development, and then let us know what you think.

Previously we linked to Daring Fireball’s John Gruber, who felt Apple was going to redefine the experience of personal computing with their (perhaps) upcoming iTablet/iSlate, and now Marco Arment of Tumblr and Instapaper, and John Siracusa of Ars Technica share their thoughts as well.

Arment starts off laying out the pros and cons of the iPhone and MacBook form factors and functions, and the struggle other devices have had trying to fill the in-between with a tablet. As to Apple’s take:

I see two possible outcomes: either Apple has come up with a radical new input method for this form-factor that will overcome the fundamental problems that made every other similar device suck, or the Tablet isn’t this form-factor.

(Sure, there’s a third possibility: that Apple is repeating the mistakes of similar products and making their own JooJoo or Foleo. But that’s too unlikely — and stupid — for me to take seriously.)

He predicts the first, a radical new input method.

Siracusa sticks to what is either already known (not much) or can be inferred by the realities of available technology, Apple’s huge iTunes customer base, massive iPhone developer pool, and established relationships with content providers.

The Apple tablet will have a color, video-capable touchscreen, about 10 inches diagonal. It will have flash storage, WiFi networking, and few ports and hardware buttons. There will be a software keyboard. Its operating system will be based on the same core as Mac OS X and iPhone OS, and its GUI API will be an evolution of Cocoa Touch. The platform will (eventually) be open to third-party developers. You will be able to buy media and applications right on the device using your existing iTunes account. Some of that media will be new territory for Apple: print media like magazines, newspapers, and books.

His “good bets” include a custom PA Semi chipset, and iTunes LP-like format and SDK for print media content. His “wildcard” is whether or not the first version with have 3G. Either way, he sees no surprises in hardware, but reminds us that software has far fewer limitations.

Take a read of both and let us know if either changes what you expect Apple to do with the iTablet (when and if they release it).

Instapaper and Tumblr developer Marco Arment riffs on the NYT‘s article on Palm webOS’ trouble wooing developers, and it’s predictably good stuff.

His major point is that with its huge install base (which topped 50 million iPhones and iPod touches months ago), it makes more financial sense to develop for Apple’s platform, rather than Google’s Android or Palm’s webOS which might have on 5% to 10% as many devices on the market.

Giving developers an app store is the easy part. The hard part is bringing us enough customers. The iPhone is so good that it built up a huge installed base without any third-party apps, but no Android or webOS devices can say that yet.

Arment points out that the iPod touch makes a huge difference as well, giving developers a similar device to work on without the need for an expensive cell phone contract. He also echoes Fake Steve’s comments on different hardware complicating development, though he thinks if Android popularity continues to grow, the platform might justify the investment one day.

Is Apple’s iTunes App Store broken, a combination of developers racing to the bottom and users getting conditioned — and feeling entitled — to pay less than what an app is worth? Or, are some developers not yet savvy enough in terms of planning and marketing to take advantage of the App Store business model?

Since we covered Ramp Champ this morning, it’s timely to cover both the thoughts of the developer, Gedeon Maheux, and a response from Tumblr and Instapaper developer Marco Arment that are currently surrounding it.

The crux of Maheux’s post, Losing iReligion, is that the App Store is broken, that it’s too hard to gain visibility, and that if you miss the immediate exposure-on-landing of hitting a top list or featured spot, you’re doomed to obscurity.

In order for a developer to continue to produce, they must make money. It’s a pretty simple concept and one that tends to get lost in the excitement to write for the iPhone. It’s difficult for me to justify spending 20-50 hours designing and creating new 99¢ levels for Ramp Champ when I could be spending that time on paid client work instead. I would much rather be coming up with the sequel to Space Swarm than drawing my 200th version of a magnifying glass icon. But I’d also like to have some assurances from Apple about reducing the length of the App Store approval process, having the ability to respond to factually incorrect iTunes reviews, not be limited to 100 beta testers, or that large, prominent developers won’t always get preferential treatment. In short, I’d like to know things will be fixed and I don’t mean merely posting a page of marketing text in iTunes Connect.

Arment, argues that there are The two App Stores. The first is superficial, geared to Top Lists and $0.99 apps that are basically disposable by both users and their developers alike. These make quick money and then disappear. The second are the profound apps, which flourish only from user word-of-mouth and online coverage, and while they don’t get the initial boom, they have a longer tail before it comes to bust. He further argues that it’s when developers mistake one App Store for the others, and miss-target their efforts, that frustration occurs.

The Iconfactory’s apps are able to compete strongly when people choose apps based on research, reviews, or feature comparisons. But that’s not how App Store A’s customers operate. Whether Ramp Champ is a better game than Skee-Ball is irrelevant to them because they’ll never take the time to find out.

Anyone interested in development and why we get the apps we do (and the ones we don’t) should take the time to read both posts (linked above). Then come back and let us know what you think. Are there two App Stores? Which one do you shop at? And why?

What would a Verizon iPhone be like? We ask because almost everyone in the US wants the iPhone on Verizon (or so our comments, tweets, and email tell us). But how often do we stop and think about what that device might actually be?

Developer Marco Arment has done just that, but instead of a wondrous network dream, he’s giving us a lockdown nightmare:

• Verizon to demand 30-50% commission on all on-device App Store sales, and all iTunes media sales.
• If not a complete replacement of the App Store with Verizon’s own application market.
• Removal of key applications to force users to pay for premium Verizon services (like V-Cast in lieu of Maps)
• Removal of WiFi and lockdown of GPS (okay, we added that for old times sake — but it’s happened with BlackBerry and Windows Mobile)
• Ugly Verizon branding plastered all over the iPhone.

Arment theorizes this is why we haven’t seen it happen yet:

I bet Apple did go to them this past spring to attempt to get a Verizon iPhone off the ground, and I bet Apple’s reps left the discussions, thinking, “These guys are nuts.”

Fact or FUD? It will be interesting to see, based on yesterday’s Android “openness” announcement, if Verizon really has changed its ways, or if users who want the iPhone on Verizon would ultimately get an iPhone they didn’t want.

Oh, bitter, poetic irony.

Let us know what you think, best case and worst.