Explore the vast range of titles available.

This study develops a genetic phenomenological sociology of space from the phenomenology and phenomenological sociology of space. Based on relational ontology, it argues that social space is a social relationship in genesis. An Apple walk-in store and an Apple online store are examples to illustrate the essence of social space. Any Apple store as a social space represents a set of social relations. The genetic phenomenological sociology of space in both store types includes two parts: first, the social ontology of space, that is, ‘being-in-the-Apple-store’ or ‘being-in-the-Apple-online-store’; and second, the social epistemology of space, that is, the act of ‘encountering’ in either store. Examining the existence of space ontologically and the mode of existence epistemologically clarifies that the actual ‘meaning’ of social space, an Apple store or an Apple online store in this study, emerges through the act of encountering. Three characteristics of encountering are placelessness, ‘de-distancing,’ and mediation.

Mobile app developers are often obliged by regulatory frameworks to provide a privacy policy in natural comprehensible language to describe their apps’ privacy practices. However, prior research has revealed that: (1) not all app developers offer links to their privacy policies; and (2) even if they do offer such access, it is difficult to determine if it is a valid link to a (valid) policy. While many prior studies looked at this issue in Google Play Store, Apple App Store, and particularly the iOS store, is much less clear. In this paper, we conduct the first and the largest study to investigate the previous issues in the iOS app store ecosystem. First, we introduce an App Privacy Policy Extractor (APPE), a system that embraces and analyses the metadata of over two million apps to give insightful information about the distribution of the supposed privacy policies, and the content of the provided privacy policy links, store-wide. The result shows that only 58.5% of apps provide links to purported privacy policies, while 39.3% do not provide policy links at all. Our investigation of the provided links shows that only 38.4% of those links were directed to actual privacy policies, while 61.6% failed to lead to a privacy policy. Further, for research purposes we introduce the App Privacy Policy Corpus (APPC-451K); the largest app privacy policy corpus consisting of data relating to more than 451K verified privacy policies.

Objectives: The main objective of this work was to explore and characterize the current landscape of mobile applications available to treat mood disorders such as depression, bipolar disorder, and dysthymia. Methods: We developed a tool that makes both the Apple App Store and the Google Play Store searchable using keywords and that facilitates the extraction of basic app information of the search results. All app results were filtered using various inclusion and exclusion criteria. We characterized all resultant applications according to their technical details. Furthermore, we searched for scientific publications on each app’s website and PubMed, to understand whether any of the apps were supported by any type of scientific evidence on their acceptability, validation, use, effectiveness, etc. Results: Thirty apps were identified that fit the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The literature search yielded 27 publications related to the apps. However, these did not exclusively concern mood disorders. 6 were randomized studies and the rest included a protocol, pilot-, feasibility, case-, or qualitative studies, among others. The majority of studies were conducted on relatively small scales and 9 of the 27 studies did not explicitly study the effects of mobile application use on mental wellbeing. Conclusion: While there exists a wealth of mobile applications aimed at the treatment of mental health disorders, including mood disorders, this study showed that only a handful of these are backed by robust scientific evidence. This result uncovers a need for further clinically oriented and systematic validation and testing of such apps.

Objective Recently smartphones and tablets have spread in developed countries, and healthcare‐related apps are growing incredibly in different specialties. The aim of this study is to provide an up‐to‐date review of the current OtoHNS (otolaryngology–head and neck surgery) apps developed for patients. Methods This mobile applications review was conducted in September 2017. Relevant apps about OtoHNS were searched in the Apple Store and in the Google Play using various keywords. We included helpful apps for OtoHNS patients. Apps for medical students, physician (95 apps) and non‐English apps (6 apps) were excluded. Results At the end of our selection process, 216 apps have been included for mobile applications review. The number of apps published per year in OtoHNS has increased each year. The most common apps were about hearing, in particular 63 of 216 (29%) were hearing test; 75 of 216 (35%) for tinnitus treatment; 10 of 216 (5%) for sounds measurement around the patients; and 7 of 216 (3%) to treat vertigo. One hundred thirty‐seven of 216 (63%) apps were free of charge. Physicians were clearly involved in the app's development in only 73 of 216 (34%) apps. One hundred sixty‐three of 216 (75%) had no user ratings. Conclusions Apps are increasingly and easily accessible, although their use in clinical practice is not yet totally accepted. Our review showed that most apps have been created with no guidance from otolaryngologist. Further steps are needed to regulate apps’ development. Hoping an “App Board,” such as editorial board for scientific journal, to assess app quality, validity, and effectiveness before they can be fully incorporated into clinical practice and medical education. Level of Evidence N/A

Companies spend a significant part of their investment in order to create a Brand experience for the consumer. Besides large sums spent on the design of consumer goods, companies such as Apple are eager to create a brand experience by implementing a certain store design. Hence, these companies have a well-reasoned urge to protect such distinct store designs utilizing the current intellectual property system. In the tradition of the U.S. approach, where the get-up of a business venue can be protected by trade dress law, the most recent European Jurisprudence seems to tend towards the protection of such a get-up by trade mark law. As this could be good news for companies with a distinct store concept and design, this new approach also raises some concern: How will the protection of the get-up of a business venue affect competition? What are the measures to guarantee only distinct and non-functional store designs will find their way into the holy land of trade mark protection? This article analyzes and compares the current legal situation in the U.S. and the EU and discusses the available measures in place that will safeguard an undistorted competition.

Researchers have shown app evolution to continuously lead to app success from the developer perspective. However, few studies have explored app success from the user perspective, which limits our knowledge about the role that app evolution has in app success. Building on app evolution literature and the technology acceptance model (TAM), we investigate the influence that effectiveness of app evolution has on perceived app usefulness, perceived ease of use, and app continuance intention (a proxy for app success from the user perspective). We collected survey data from 299 app users on both the Google Play and Apple’s App Store platforms in the United States. Our findings indicate that effectiveness of strategic evolution and effectiveness of evolution speed directly affect perceived app usefulness, while effectiveness of operational evolution and effectiveness of evolution speed directly affect perceived app ease of use. In addition, perceived app usefulness and perceived app ease of use constitute two key factors that lead to app continuance intention. Perceived ease of use affects users’ app continuance intention both directly and indirectly through perceived app usefulness. This study enhances our knowledge about the relationship between effectiveness of app evolution and app continuance intention. Such knowledge has particular importance in helping small firms or startups with limited resources understand how to retain app users. We also discuss limitations and directions for future research.

Companies spend a significant part of their investment in order to create a Brand experience for the consumer. Besides large sums spent on the design of consumer goods, companies such as Apple are eager to create a brand experience by implementing a certain store design. Hence, these companies have a well-reasoned urge to protect such distinct store designs utilizing the current intellectual property system. In the tradition of the U.S. approach, where the get-up of a business venue can be protected by trade dress law, the most recent European Jurisprudence seems to tend towards the protection of such a get-up by trade mark law. As this could be good news for companies with a distinct store concept and design, this new approach also raises some concern: How will the protection of the get-up of a business venue affect competition? What are the measures to guarantee only distinct and non-functional store designs will find their way into the holy land of trade mark protection? This article analyzes and compares the current legal situation in the U.S. and the EU and discusses the available measures in place that will safeguard an undistorted competition.

Apple changed the communications landscape with its 2007 introduction of the iPhone. In little more than a decade, most Americans have become smartphone owners. With more than 200,000 applications (apps) for education available in the Apple App Store, we can infer that many smartphone owners use their devices to learn. Several surveys of medical students reveal that apps do indeed enhance clinical knowledge and provide comparable training with textbooks. We launched our first iOS app, the CTisus iQuiz, in 2010 in response to the growing number of portable devices, and with an intention to grow alongside technology. We now have 17 apps available for free on the App Store, and present tips here on how to successfully develop apps for radiology education. Furthermore, we detail the steps necessary to advertise a new app and use analytics to assess how the app is performing. Generating apps for radiology can play an important role in continuing education. As the medical and education fields are integrating increasingly with technology, it is essential that we use technology to reach and interact with its users. Creating iOS applications and using analytics to understand how they meet the goals of the developer can expand the reach of the medical and education communities and render information more accessible on mobile devices on a large scale.

This chapter analyses some of the different techniques some successful companies use for innovation activities. Even though there might be commonly used innovation tools or an innovation canvas, every company has their own business plan, organizational structure and culture for innovation. Apple created an innovation culture that gave people the opportunity to be creative. Facebook appears to have successfully managed open source innovation and developed strategic partnerships with application providers given the fact that it has more than 400,000 providers. IBM has implemented a set of tools, techniques, learnings, and methods to enable their project managers and set them up for success in this new environment. At Texas Instruments, the emphasis on culture not only benefited their innovation initiatives but also resulted in best practices that supported other initiatives.

This chapter provides a layout of specific recommendations to protect ourself from mobile port‐out scams. Working alongside the advancement of mobile technology, bad actors design malware and hide it in real‐looking apps in Google Play and the Apple App Store. Their primary objective is to steal our hard‐earned savings, monetize our identity, and use our data to their advantage. The chapter addresses the longstanding, controversial debate over which mobile device is more secure, and why it is important to understand when it comes to making the best decision to protect us and our information. Compared to Androids, Apple has a more controlled and secure methodology of app distribution in its store. The chapter discusses mobile device loss and theft as a significant concern for device users and the importance of locking down our mobile device security to protect us and our family's identity.