Category Archives: Tech

Windows on Your Phone

Posted by Marc on

Back in February 2010, Microsoft announced their latest foray into the burgeoning smartphone market, Windows Phone 7 – or WP7. In a market that was being defined by two of its biggest competitors – Apple and Google, it was glaring how late Microsoft was in bringing a competitive device to market.

Yes, late. They weren’t absent.

WP7 is not Microsoft’s first attempt at the smartphone market. Even before the iPhone was a concept, the Redmond company has been making software for smartphones – Windows Mobile. For those who are old enough to remember, and geeky enough to own or try one, you’ll probably agree with me that Windows Mobile was a great platform… at that time. It ran on well-built good looking devices that had color screens. Users could run pocket versions of Outlook, Word, and Excel. Heck, there were even a few programs you could run on them. Y’know, apps. And yes, some of these had phone features. Aside from Palm and RIM, there didn’t seem to be any other players in that market.

Unfortunately, both Microsoft, Palm and RIM sat on their laurels. By the time they realized that the market had moved, their wares were as relevant as the mimeograph today.

So, what does Microsoft bring to the smartphone wars?

At first, I wanted to do a review of the Samsung Focus loaded with the latest update of WP7 – Mango. (Again, thanks to Rogers Wireless for providing me with a test unit.) I had written a few words but I didn’t see the value of another WP7 smartphone review. There are tons out there. I figured it would make more sense to highlight the merits of WP7 and why it is important in the current smartphone market landscape.

Let’s be clear. WP7 back in 2010, as a version 1.0 product, was not bad. Yes, it had a lot of shortcomings compared to iOS 4 and Android 2.x, but it put a lot on the table that it could not be simply ignored.

Off the bat, the Metro interface heralded to the world that another interface style was possible. WP7 didn’t copy the icon-based interfaces of Apple, Google, RIM, and other players in the smartphone market. It’s tile-based interface was simple, clever, informative, and very responsive. I liked it a lot. It had class!

WP7 also integrated well with other Microsoft products. It’s ready integration to MS Office, XBox Live, and Microsoft Live made it a modern connectivity device for both work and play.

WP7 phones also made it standard to have a dedicated hardware camera shutter button that could launch the camera app from its lock screen. Finally, people could use their phone as cameras without having to fiddle with unlocking it and launching the camera app.

Could it be that Microsoft actually understands what it takes to be successful in the smartphone market? Perhaps. It seems to understand enough that it knows that it doesn’t know everything. Knowing this, they partnered with Nokia – another ‘legacy’ smartphone player who’ve lost their way – to push WP7 to the world. With Microsoft bringing the software, cloud services, and integration, and Nokia bringing hardware design, manufacturing, and distribution, suddenly WP7 becomes a pretty well rounded platform.

Sure, WP7 has several disadvantages – being late in the game, not enough app developer support, not enough carrier interest, and not enough end customer recognition and knowledge. Individually, each are difficult to address. Collectively, these are fatal. However, between Microsoft and Nokia, it’s possible that they have the wits and muscle to overcome these.

I’m hopeful this partnership will rise to the occasion of challenging the market leaders. Choice is always good for the consumer. Even better is innovation driven by competition. I believe that with Microsoft, Apple and Google in the arena, consumers will benefit from devices, technologies and services that will truly improve their lives. With these three players vying for your attention, money and loyalty, affordable ubiquitous computing becomes one step closer to reality. I believe this is the true value of WP7 now. It adds to the fuel of the current smartphone wars.

Would I recommend a WP7 to a friend or family member? Probably not. It’s still too early in its life to be hassle-free and universally supportable. Also, there’s the question of apps. There is simply not enough quality apps yet.

So where does this leave us?

Writing off Microsoft is reckless. Do so at your peril. For all of its faults, it cannot be said that they are quitters. If you look at its history, Microsoft has built its successful products on the corpses of their failures. This Borg-like attitude towards market dominance has allowed Microsoft to be embedded in many aspects of today’s technology. WP7 benefits from this. All the experience behind Windows Mobile, Danger, and the aborted Kin phones make WP7 more than a viable platform. It has all the ingredients to make it successful. Now, it’s up to the Redmond-folk to bake it properly.

RIM and the Blackberrry: An Epilogue

Posted by Marc on

It’s been a couple of weeks since my review of the Blackberry Torch 9860. Looking back, I can say that I still like that device. I’ve since seen another recent model – a Bold 9900. It’s a beautifully crafted device – nice steel frame, a thin profile without sharp edges, and a wide face with comfortable physical keys. The 9900 is another testament that RIM knows hardware.

The past couple of weeks has also seen another onslaught of bad news for the company too. It’s looking at writing off half a billion dollars due to it’s slow-selling (or non-selling) Blackberry Playbook. This contributed to a horrible 3rd quarter result for the year. And to add insult to injury, the Amazon Kindle Fire – a device built on the same hardware as the Playbook – is selling like crazy for a third of what RIM initially wanted to sell it’s Playbook.

In this third article of the series, I’ll focus on my putting together my humble advice to the folks at Waterloo.

You make excellent hardware. Now focus on a few of them and make them even better. It seems that you want to be everything to everyone. This strategy doesn’t work. Looking at the current hardware portfolio, there’s too many Bolds, Torches, Curves, Tours and Styles. There are touchscreen only models, keyboard models with touchscreen, folding form factors, small form factors, and some iteration of the above. Of these, only a select few are good devices. The rest seem to be there just so that you can be in a market segment. This is not sustainable. You should focus somehow. For example, divide the market into the high-end and mid-range. Then for each market, offer a touchscreen only device and a classic Blackberry form factor with a keyboard and touchscreen. Having only so many devices in your stable allows you to develop a product more maturely. Devote the research, development and engineering into a few devices so that they are great and not just adequate.

Develop a software platform that is revolutionary, light and extensible. A sluggish OS that is difficult to build on is definitely a non-starter. You’re a pioneer in creating wireless communication technology that did a lot with less. Surely, you can extend this to your latest OS as well. The QNX acquisition puts you in a good position. Can you build your future on it?

On a similar note, consider licensing the Blackberry OS to other hardware manufacturers. This opens up the possibility of having another company make a revolutionary handset that is still called a Blackberry. It could increase your user base and licensing income.

Finally, lure developers at all cost. Pay them if you have to. In the current and future markets, software and their corresponding services will define the adoption and use of mobile devices. If your platform cannot tap into the widest range of software and services, you become irrelevant.

Well, that’s it – my two cents. Whadya think?

Good luck my friend! I hope we can still have another chat next year.

The Blackberry Torch 9860 Review

Posted by Marc on

I couldn’t stand it. It bugged me like crazy. For all the latest advancements in smartphone technology, people are still using Blackberries! Why?! Haven’t all the pronouncements of the Blackberry’s imminent demise chased most, if not all, Blackberry users towards iPhones and Android phones? Hmmm… I guess not. And apparently, 70 million Blackberry users have their reasons.

Curious as to what allure ‘Crackberries’ have when so many alternatives are available, I reached out to Rogers Wireless. I presented my case to them and they were more than willing to help me out. I mentioned I’m an iPhone user so they lent me a Blackberry Torch 9860 – one of RIM’s latest all-touchscreen phones – to test for 2 weeks. I’m about a week into this trial, and I’m pretty surprised about what I discovered.

The Blackberry Torch 9860 is an impressive device – both physically and functionally. Its physical design is modern and practical. Together with the Blackberry 7 OS, it makes for a worthy competitor in today’s very competitive smartphone market.

The first thing that struck me was the physical design. RIM was smart to design the Torch 9860 to be a pleasure to hold in your hands. It’s just the right size and it’s shaped so that the least number of edges come in contact with your hands.

The “right size” comes from being able to be held naturally and used comfortably with just one hand. By not putting a gargantuan screen on the 9860, it’s possible to position your thumb on most of the screen. This makes one-handed operation possible. Try doing this on an Android device with 4.5″ screen or bigger and you’ll see what I mean. What it lacks in size, it makes up for screen quality. Colors are bright but not oversaturated. Blacks are deep and give good contrast. Text and images are sharp. Tiny text on the screen is readable. Even though it doesn’t have the iPhone’s Retina Display resolution, you’d be hard pressed to tell the difference in everyday use.

The 9860′s waterfall shape on the top and bottom and the rounded sides provided a very comfortable way to grip the phone whether it’s in portrait or landscape orientation. I like this design touch so much since the iPhone has edges all over. When using the iPhone naked, it only takes a minute or two before my fingers or palm feel the edges “poking”. I didn’t experience this with the 9860. Its design indicates that someone in Waterloo remembered that people’s hands come in contact with the phone.

The physical buttons serve their purpose well. They are sized well, clearly marked and provide good feedback. They’re backlit too so you can identify them in the dark. Although some will argue that a true smartphone can do with less physical buttons, it must be understood that a good number of Blackberries do not have touchscreens (eg. older models and most current Curve models). The availability of the physical buttons and the optical mouse are necessary for these Blackberries. And since this becomes a least common denominator for a Blackberry device, even the most high-end models have them. All Blackberry apps utilize the optical mouse for navigation and the Blackberry key for contextual functions. Personally, I didn’t mind having them on the Torch 9860. They serve a purpose and do not detract from its aesthetics.

Probably the biggest surprises for me regarding the physical design is the 9860′s antennae. On my regular commute between Mississauga and Toronto, I normally get blind spots or very weak signals on my iPhone 4. I just assumed that something was wrong with the network. The 9860 proved me wrong. The device picked up and held on to cellular signals very well. I’m not talking about just having the “bars” on the display tell me it has a reception. I’m talking about actual phone usage – be it voice or data. When the iPhone has given up retaining a weak signal, the Torch 9860 held on to it. That’s got to be critically important for a lot of people.

On the software side, again RIM shows that it knows what smartphones need.

First off, RIM’s OS includes a sound profile setting that’s easily accessible. You want to set it to normal? Loud? Medium? Vibrate only? Silent? No problem! There’s an icon just below the header you can tap and select a profile with. Cell phones back in the 90′s had this, why doesn’t the iPhone? And no, a sound on/off switch doesn’t count!

Another feature I loved is the SureType keyboard. This made it possible to use the device single-handedly for messaging. A full keyboard doesn’t work for one-handed use because it’s difficult to hit exactly the right key with just one hand. RIM provides the SureType keyboard so that the device gives you a bigger keyboard ‘key’ to hit. Even though each key has two characters assigned to it, it’s not a problem. The software attempts to figure out what word you want to spell. Genius! For Android, you can get 3rd party apps to do something similar. And even then, it’d pretty useless if you can’t hold the device on one hand.

As for how the Blackberry screen is organized, I can’t say that I’m completely sold on their system. Blackberries give you panels that include all, favorites, frequently used, downloaded apps, and media. You can’t add more panels, but you can hide one or more of them. You can resize the panel to show only one row, some rows, or occupy most of the screen. I think if you don’t have a lot of apps, it works fine. If you have more than a dozen apps and use a lot of them frequently, it shows its design shortcomings.

If you use or plan to use a lot of 3rd party apps, it’s worthwhile to check if the Blackberry App World has what you need before you jump in. For me, I found the apps I use on the iPhone 80% of the time in the App World. Facebook, Twitter, Yelp, my local train service’s app, and an equivalent Google Reader client were all available for Blackberry. Glaringly missing were Skype, the Kindle Reader and IMDB. After some research, it seems that Skype is available but only to Verizon. The Kindle Reader is only available for BB 6 OS for now. IMDB, well, is just not there. For me, the unavailability of Skype could be a deal breaker. For some, maybe not. Let’s just say I’m not giving the Blackberry an A+ on this front. Perhaps a B.

One app that I didn’t get to try but should be mentioned as being unique to the Blackberry is BBM, or Blackberry Messenger. As I understand it, this is the Blackberry user’s “secret handshake” into the Blackberry society. If a lot of your friends and family are Blackberry users, this will should weigh heavily on your decision to get or continue with a Blackberry. There are no BBM apps for any other platforms.

As a service platform, the Blackberry’s benefits seem to be more evident to the enterprise client base than the consumer client base. As you may or may not know, RIM centralizes all internet traffic to and from its Blackberry devices. It does this to do two things – to compress the data and to encrypt it. Compressing the data means that you use less of your network’s resources to send and receive data on your phone. This may be important if you have a limited data plan. Encryption provides you a layer of security that means your data communication cannot be intercepted by other parties. Either of these services may be important to you in varying degrees. The number of iPhone and Android users suggest that a lot of people aren’t aware of these two technologies or just don’t care.

The downside to this service is that it causes a single point of failure. Unless you’ve been hiding under a rock the past month, you would’ve heard of the Blackberry service outage. RIM’s servers failed and virtually all of RIM’s customers were cut off. E-mail, BBM, and internet services were unavailable to Blackberry users for a better part of four days. This is something unheard of on other platforms. The only way this would happen to iPhone and Android users is if your carrier’s network went down or you were cut off from the internet altogether.

My final thoughts. The 9860 is a great smartphone. It’s feature rich and very useable. Despite the shortcomings of Blackberry as a platform, the 9860 demonstrates that RIM is still in the smartphone game. As a phone and a messaging device, it’s first rate. As a web surfing device, it’s on par with the best. As a platform for apps, it has quite a lot to do.

If your needs involve messaging, social networking, and occasional use of 3rd party apps, the 9860 is as good a choice as any device. What it will not give you is Apple’s walled garden approach of hardware-software-books-music-movies integration. Neither will it allow you the satisfaction of rooting and loading custom ROMs that Android offers. If these don’t concern you, then the 9860 is waiting for you to try it and love it.

RIM and the Blackberry: Prologue

Posted by Marc on

Full disclosure. I’m an Apple fan and an owner of several Apple products over the past years – computers, phones, and tablets.

Now that that’s out of the way, let me tell you a story. Over the past couple of years, we’ve seen Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android come crashing into the mobile phone / smartphone space like a marauding hoard. Left in their wake are the once powerful phone manufacturers scrambling to redefine their business as they realize that what’s left of their products, technology, and marketing are nothing more than smoldering embers. Most of the survivors realized that smartphones are the future. Sony-Ericcson, Motorola, and Samsung embraced Android. Nokia got into bed with Microsoft.

Up in Waterloo, Ontario, (that’s in Canada for those not in the know) one major player didn’t seem to get the memo that the future was with Apple or Google. Research in Motion, or RIM, maker of the Blackberry, soldiered on with their Blackberry. And why not? They had a wonderful and unique product – a two-way messaging device that doubles as a phone. Brilliant! No one else had anything similar in one device. At one point, it seemed that they thought that Blackberries would always be special because enterprise customers would always buy Blackberries, would never look elsewhere and that that would be enough for them. Then something happened. Enterprise customers decided that they would no longer always buy Blackberries. It turns out that enterprise users are also people and not just accounts, and people wanted to have devices that were fun. Aside from e-mail, to-do lists and calendars, people wanted music, videos, web surfing, social networking and apps. And so it was that the folks in Waterloo got up and smelled the coffee.

RIM has been playing catch up since. Their efforts are commendable – more modern browsers, improved trackpads and keyboards, sharper screens, different form factors, an app market and even a tablet that’s running software that they didn’t make. Unfortunately, the public – or more likely the media – have not picked up their pompoms to cheer RIM on. And why would they? Just as they’re trying to put their act together, RIM keeps dropping the ball – a tablet that didn’t have native e-mail, a worldwide system outage (with some aftershocks since), and a seemingly lost marketing department that doesn’t know what the company and its products are all about. Just last week (as of this writing), their stock plunged below book value. Surely, it’s just a matter of time when RIM will join the likes of Nortel – a patent carcass waiting to be picked.

But wait! About 20 years ago, another technology company was in the same boat. They were a pioneering company that invented the first personal computers that people could buy and easily use. They also put together the first personal computers that had a mouse and a graphical interface. They had people pointing and clicking at windows and folders when their competition had customers hunting and pecking at command lines. Times were good, but then they lost their way. They kicked out their founder and started dropping the ball – too many products with little differentiation, licensing their OS to other manufacturers who beat them on performance, warming up yesterday’s technology and calling it innovation, and forgetting what made them special. In the ten years after unceremoniously removing their founder, the company was half a step from death’s door. Ring a bell? Yes? No? This is Apple’s story before Steve Jobs returned. And we all know what happened next right. With Steve’s leadership, he slashed and burned what he found after his return and drove his company to success like a mad man.

So, RIM is not in a unique situation. The question is what are they going to do about it? Apple has shown that a complete turnaroud can be done if someone (or some people) are innovative and driven enough. Does RIM have enough brains and guts to become a market innovator and leader once again?

Oh! And one more thing :) RIM and Apple have another similarity that no other company has in the smartphone / tablet business. These two companies own their hardware, software and service business. Some people say that this is one key factor to Apple’s success. Can RIM leverage this well enough to effect the same result?

Over the next couple of days, I’ll be living with a Blackberry 9860 from Rogers Wireless – a touchscreen device in line with current smartphone style. It runs RIM’s latest smartphone operating system, the Blackberry OS7. What I’ll be doing is determining as objectively as possible if the Blackberry is competitive to Android and iOS. I’ll ascertain where it excels and falters. I’ll attempt to prove or disprove the media eulogy that RIM has gone way beyond its best-by date. Hopefully, I’ll be able to come up with some suggestions on how I think the Blackberry can leapfrog the competition as well.

What’s my stuff doing on the cloud?

Posted by Marc on

Unless you’ve been hiding under the technological rock the past couple of years, you would’ve heard of the term cloud computing, or simply, the cloud. Yes, sadly, it’s another everyday word usurped by techies – akin to bug and spam.

Cloud computing is not a product. It’s a concept. It means that the data and data processing that you’re doing on your device is actually happening somewhere else. It’s a concept similar to computing in the days of mainframes and dumb terminals. Say what?!

Okay, imagine that you’re on your couch at home. You’re on your tablet looking at your Facebook news feed. You see an interesting post from your friend – a nice sunset in the Maldives where he’s spending the summer. You reply to this post with a picture of a rainy day outside your window. This simple interaction between you and your friend was made possible by cloud computing.

You see, the device that you’re using – regardless of whether it’s a PC, smartphone, or tablet – has been relegated as a “client”. This is where you do a lot of your e-mailing, instant messaging, and social networking. The client that we use gives us an interface – a window to look at, buttons to click, boxes to type in, and colors and design that appeal to us.

What is not not apparent is that a lot of other things happen in the background. Things happen in machines we call “servers”. In the Facebook example above, the user will see the Facebook app on their phone or tablet, or will go to the Facebook site on their browsers. What users will almost never think of is that all of the information that we see, the messages that we send, and pictures that we post are actually sitting in or going to another machine that is out there – a machine that is invisible to us. We don’t know where the machine is, how it connects to us, and who keeps it running. These servers are responsible for our e-mails, status updates and pictures being stored and made available to people who we want to share them with. Without these servers, none of the activities we do in Facebook amount to anything. These servers are essentially the cloud.

I’m not aware at what point the client-server computing model was referred to as cloud computing. I have noticed, because of the work that I do as a systems analyst, that in presentations where computer system landscapes are shown, that the internet is often depicted as a cloud. Connected devices such as PCs, notebooks, servers, smartphones, and tables all connect to the internet – the cloud. Because of this, I can understand why the internet and the servers connected to it is called cloud computing. For most of us, we don’t really think of the servers and everything else that comprises the internet that the servers connect to. What’s important for most of us is the service that we use and the device we use to gain access to these services. Everything else is out there – out of sight, out of mind. Everything else is in the cloud.

4G Fools Gold

Posted by Marc on

The promise of 4G data (as of this writing, at least) is like the promise of fools gold. Manufacturers and carriers tease and tempt consumers with handsets and networks offering high-speed 4G data connections. I understand the allure. 3G was all the rage for the past couple of years. It brought a marked improvement from the previous generation 2G technology. And so, if the improvement from 2 to 3 was revolutionary, then surely the jump from 3 to 4 must be as dramatic as well. But is it really?

The ITU defines 4G data as a system that allows highly mobile devices such as phones and tablets to communicate at 100 Mbps (megabits per second) and fixed devices at 1 Gbps (gigabits per second). By those standards, 4G is truly a great leap forward from the current 3G standard that only offers a maximum throughput of 7.2 Mbps. Technologies such as LTE-Advanced and WiMax2 integrated into our phones and tablets would enable us to enjoy 4G.

And this is where the promise falls apart. For most consumers, the technology used in products is something quite obscure. We don’t normally bother to ask how this 4G data is delivered to our devices. We just take the marketers’ promise at face value. If the cellphone company says I’m buying a 4G product that works on their network, it’s 4G. Upon closer inspection of the current offerings for most (if not all) carriers and manufacturers though, we’ll find that none of them are offering 4G – at least not as the ITU originally defined 4G to be. Check the specs of current products and you’ll see that the radio technology behind most (again, if not all) of them is either HSPA+, WiMax, or LTE. HSPA+ has a current maximum theoretical throughput of 21 Mbps, WiMax’ is 40 Mbps and LTE’s is 42 Mbps. None of these come close to the ITU’s original definition. At best, these are what have been nicknamed as “3.5G” technologies

So, why are we being offered products and networks branded as 4G? Well, it seems that an increment of .5G or half a G isn’t really cool marketing. And if people are presented with a half increment such as in 3.5G, wouldn’t they ask “What happened to the other half? Shouldn’t I just wait for the other half when it comes along?”

“That’s too much trouble” some marketing genius thinks. “4 is better than 3. No questions asked.” And so it was that 3.5G was rounded UP to 4G. Wait! But surely, the ITU would not allow this. Surely the ITU would put its foot down and say “No, you can’t lie to people and sell non-4G products as 4G.”

Here’s where I have to be very careful. It seems that the ITU had a change of heart after some carriers started their marketing campaign of 4G services. For some reason, they suddenly decided that technologies that were faster than the original 3G, but not quite delivering what they originally defined as 4G, can now be called 4G. Hmmm… okay. There must be some compelling argument to do so. I just don’t know what it is.

I’m not saying that what the carriers and manufacturers are offering are bad products and services. I admit that 3.5G would be very useful in a lot of applications. I just find it quite insulting when I’m being sold something that’s not the “real deal”. You could argue that since the ITU has allowed it, current offerings are in fact 4G products and services. But this was after their change of heart.

Remember when health inspectors in Japan raised what is the acceptable amount of exposure to radiation when they realized that peoples’ exposures were so much higher than they expected? Go figure.

Choice: Boon or Bane

Posted by Marc on

Choice, depending on who you ask and what you’re choosing from, is either great or horrible. For every choice, it’s possible to have too many options to choose from, or too little.

Restaurant make a fine example of choice. On one extreme, you have restaurants that have menus that rival “War and Peace”. You come in, you’re hungry, and yet you can’t decide on what to order. On the other end, you’ll have specialty places where you can only order, say, burgers. Want something else? There’s fries. Anything else? Yes, the restaurant next door.

I see the Android vs iOS rivalry in this same light. On one hand, you have Android who have a multitude of devices from several manufacturers. You have a choice of designs, screen sizes, camera image sizes, processors, memory, storage, “skins”, keyboards, etc. On the other hand, you have Apple. You have three devices – iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad. After making a decision on which device you need, the only other choice to make is black or white, and 16, 32, or 64 GB of storage. Want more choices? Go back to the other hand.

As consumers of these products, it’s so easy to say that choice is always good. But is it really?

When shopping in an Apple store, the only question you have to ask yourself is – Do I need a portable media player? A smartphone? Or a tablet? That’s it. This is basically your burger and fries type of situation.

Shopping for an Android phone is like ordering in a restaurant that has a two volume menu. Where do you start? Screen size? Do I need a 3.5″, 4.0″, 4.3″ or 4.5″ screen? What type? LCD? SuperLCD? AMOLED? Which one is better? Which one is sharper? Which one has better colors? What about the processors? Do I get a single-core? Dual-core? Or wait for the quad-core? What do more cores mean for a smartphone? Will I be able to tell the difference? Which brand do I buy? Motorola? Samsung? LG? HTC? Who makes better phones? Who has better service. So many things to consider!!! And this is just scratching the surface. Does a person really have to answer all these questions to get a smartphone? Tablets? Same checklist.

Oddly enough, because of the sheer number of form factors, screen resolutions, and software versions that you can get from Android, you encounter more limitations in some aspects as compared to Apple devices. The best example of this perhaps is the selection of cases for Android devices. The number of cases available for iPhones easily eclipses the number available for any one Android phone. Another example is functionality available in some apps. Since software is supposed to work closely with the hardware, the number of hardware combinations in Android devices causes disparity in available functionality. For example, Skype video only works for some devices, not all.

Again, this is not to say that one platform is better than the other. If you’re perfectly comfortable working through the hardware-software combination of Android, then the choices available makes it a perfect platform to commit to. If, on the other hand, you’re fine working in Cupertino’s walled garden, Apple is more than happy to coddle you.

So, there you have it. Choice. Good or bad? Your call.

I’m a Mac and a PC

Posted by Marc on

Okay, I was fully aware that I was going to get some puzzled reactions when I posted that I was migrating data from my Mac to our home PC. At the back of my mind, I may even have welcomed it. So, why am I doing this?

First off, it’s a matter of convenience. Our home PC sits there permanently on our home-office nook. At the press of a button, it powers up and within a minute or so, I’m ready to use it. My MacBook is usually kept in my bag in the second bedroom. I have to unpack it and look for a place to settle in to before I can use it. Then, I have to consider that Jinn the Westie is able to jump onto our sofa – which is where I’d probably settle in to – and will almost certainly poke his nose and try to see what I’m doing with it.

Let’s be clear, convenience does not mean that using a PC is easier than using a Mac. There are plenty of pros and cons in using either platform – none of which I’ll be getting into here.

My second point is, having said that, for a lot of people, it doesn’t really matter if you use a Mac or a Windows PC at home. Unless you have one or more applications that only run on either platform, you can use either. Why is that? It’s because it most probably means that you’re using the machine to run a browser. Yes, that means that a majority of the time, you’re surfing the web on Firefox, Chrome, Safari, Opera, or another browser. Think about it – a lot of the things we do on our home PC can be done on a browser. Name it – Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, GMail (and all of its other services), Dropbox, etc. Yup, these web services don’t really care what platform you’re on.

I will miss having the full integration between iPhoto and my iDevices. iPhoto is Mac only. The Faces and Events groupings will not come across to the iDevices when synched with a PC. That’s the price I’m paying for convenience. I can live with it, sure. I’m no Apple fanboy. Now, let me scratch that Apple tattoo at the back of my neck ;)

Android and iOS: System Software Updates

Posted by Marc on

iPad_Galaxy Player

System software provides the functional foundation to iOS and Android devices. The ability to install apps, manage device preferences, conserve power, cut and paste text, install apps, connect to the internet, use GPS, etc. are functions of the system software. Because of this, it is important to be able to get and install the latest version of the system software on your device.

System software for iOS and Android are made available to users quite differently. This is the focus of this blog in my Android and iOS series.

iOS devices get their updates directly from Apple. On an annual basis, a new version of iOS is announced and within a month or so, released to users. All you need to do then is plug in your iOS device to your Mac or PC and you’ll be notified of the new iOS version. You can then choose to download and install it on your device. After the installation, the device reboots, restores your settings and user data, and voila! The iPhone or iPad is running the new iOS.

Android is a little different. If you have a Nexus device (i.e. the Nexus One or the Nexus S), the update process is similar to how it’s explained for iOS. One difference being that the device doesn’t need to plugged into a PC for the update.

If you have any other Android device, the story is dramatically different. For these devices, any update is subject to the device manufacturer and the carrier’s willingness to make the updates available. In the sunshine and blue skies scenario, you can update the device in the same way as the Nexus devices. However, if either of these parties decide that it is not in their interest or it is not “possible” to update a device, then no further update will be made available for that device.

Let’s discuss the latter scenario. Say you have a Samsung Captivate from AT&T running Android 2.2. Google releases a new version of Android – let’s say Android 4. You would expect that you should be able to go to your About Device > System Update menu and pull the update to your device, right? Unfortunately, no. Two things need to happen first. Samsung, the device manufacturer, needs to get this update from Google. They then need to adapt, customize, and test it for the Captivate. Once this is done, Samsung makes the adapted and customized software available to AT&T, your carrier. AT&T then applies another round of customization and testing to this software. When they are satisfied with it, they’ll release it. It is only then that you’ll be able to pull it to your device.

Straightforward enough right? Sure, except that neither Samsung nor AT&T are obliged to work on an update for your device. Yes, they will fix the software if there is a defect in it. However, if the purpose of the update is to enhance the features of your device, either party can decide not to do this. When this happens, you have to satisfy yourself with using Android 2.2 on your device.

Why would this happen? Why can’t they do what Apple is doing with iOS?

Simply put, it’s because Apple controls every aspect of iOS and devices that run them. The carriers are not even allowed to put their own customization on iPhones they sell – even if it’s locked to their network.

Android, on the other hand is open. Google provides the operating system – Android, Samsung licenses it and makes the Captivate to run on it, and then AT&T buys the Captivate from Samsung. You then buy the Captivate from AT&T. And here is where the ‘gotcha’ lies. AT&T is in the business of providing you with voice and/or data services. Selling you the Captivate is just a means to allow you to your their service. So, unless AT&T genuinely cares about your experience with the Captivate, they are not obliged to provide an update to the system software that came with the Captivate. Put another way, when you bought the Captivate from AT&T with features A, B, and C, you agreed that you’re happy and willing to pay for the device with those features. When feature D and E becomes available with Android 4, neither Samsung nor AT&T is obliged to update your device with Android 4. They’ve already fulfilled their obligation to provide you with features A, B, and C.

So, why is Apple any different? It goes back to the fact that they control virtually all aspects of the iOS experience. It’s in their interest to make sure as many devices are on the latest version of iOS because after you’ve bought the device, they also want you to buy music, videos, books and apps. For these to work properly on a device, they need to make sure your device has the ability to play music and video, display books, and download and install apps. Why? Because they take a hefty commission from the sales of these items bought from their stores.

Going back to the Samsung Captivate sold by AT&T, none of them have interests in you being able to buy music, video, books, and apps. AT&T already has you paying for their service and Samsung has already sold you the device. They don’t make money off of your succeeding purchases.

Now, take Samsung and replace it with any Android device manufacturer. Do the same with AT&T and replace it with any carrier. The same story applies.

Having said this, Apple is still a business. It will not support all devices in their latest iOS update. They push it as far as they can, and then they drop it. The original iPhone which was released with iOS version 1.0 reached version 3.1 before not being able to receive further updates – about 2 years worth of updates. Succeeding iPhones follow the same update longevity.

Android’s update longevity varies. Rogers, in Canada, for example, sold the HTC Dream with Android 1.5. The device never received an official update. The outcry from customers who bought this was so bad that it became a PR fiasco. It was so bad that Rogers offered a slightly better HTC Magic for free to those who bought the HTC Dream provided that they renew their contracts.

Does this mean that you should stay clear of Android? Of course, not. This just means that if you’re thinking of going for an Android device, do your research and set realistic expectations. Find out which manufacturer and carrier have good track records for updates. When you find a good combination, determine the longevity of their updates for previous and current devices. With that, set your expectations accordingly and enjoy your new Android.

Android and iOS: A Beginner’s Guide

Posted by Marc on

iPad_Galaxy Player

If you’re in the market for a new smartphone or tablet computer, you’re probably trying to choose between the iPhone/iPad or an Android-powered device. You’re gonna spend a few hundred dollars (or its equivalent) for your new device and you want to get the most value for your money. So, how do you decide?

Personally, the bottom line for me is this – the device you should get is the one that fits YOUR lifestyle. Don’t get swayed by the fancy ads, your cool officemate, or famous celebrities. They are using one of these devices because they chose to for one reason or another. So, similarly, you should be able to say “I’m using a <your choice> because <your reasons>.”

If you’re just in it for the bling factor, then any of these devices will do. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder… and presumably the circle of people you move in. Just about any of these phones can look good naked or covered in a case. So, just figure out which device makes your eyes sparkle and gets the most gawks, and there you have your device.

If you want a smartphone that just “works” and you’re not into hacking your device, the iPhone / iPad may be best for you. (I’ll call these iDevices going forward.) The sheer number of apps available for the iDevices almost always guarantees that an iDevice will be able to do what you want it to do. Also, Apple’s app vetting process also almost always guarantees that you won’t be installing malware on your device. Have questions and you don’t have a geek on speed dial? You can always go to your local Apple Store and ask a Genius to help you out. Your mileage may vary, but they are generally very knowledgable.

There are two caveats with the iDevices. First, Apple puts a premium price on its iPhones. (iPads are priced competitively.) If you’re on a tight budget, this may not be an option. Secondly, Apple currently makes the iDevices with 3G radios compatible with certain carriers. If your carrier’s technology is not compatible with this, you cannot use an iDevice on their network.

If you’ve decided that the iDevices aren’t to your liking, or you can’t get one for some other reason, then you’re looking at an Android.

Android is not just one device. It’s an operating system (OS) for mobile devices much like Windows is an OS for PCs. Manufacturers such as Motorola, HTC, Asus, and Samsung make devices that run on Android. This means that you have much more choice of devices to choose from. Also, almost every cell phone company that have smartphones on their list include one or more devices running on Android.

In its basic function, an Android device behaves similar to an iDevice. Where Android takes it to the next level is in it’s ability to be customized. And by customizing, Android doesn’t stop at wallpapers.

Widgets – small apps that function on the home screen – is great for quick access to information and functions. For example, weather widgets display weather information on the screen after the screen is activated and unlocked. You don’t have to open the app. What’s great is that you can have more than one widget on screen. So, you can, for example, have your weather widget with an email widget (showing you your most recent email), and Facebook widget (showing you the most recent posts) on a single screen. That’s a lot of information just by unlocking the screen! On an iDevice, you have to run the weather app first to get the same information. You want to see your email and Facebook updates? Yes, you got it, you’ve got to go to each app.

Then there are the keyboards. Keyboards may not seem to be the most exciting aspect of a smartphone customization… until you start typing out messages and emails… and lots of them. Several options are available on Android. One of the most interesting ones is Swype. On Swype, instead of tapping letters, you just swipe your fingers over the letters of the word you’re trying to spell. The keyboard then offers possible words that could be spelled with the letters you’ve swiped. It is very convenient. Other keyboards are available that provide different shortcuts, layouts, and word prediction. On iDevices, you get one keyboard – the one Apple included in iOS.

Launchers and custom ROMs take Android customization to another level. Essentially, it allows you to change some of the most basic functions, and hence, the behaviour, of your device. There’s a lot more to this, of course. I won’t go into this in detail in this post as this requires a little bit more than what I wanted to cover here. iDevices can be jailbroken so that they can perform more things than what Apple meant it to do, but launchers and custom ROMs can’t be installed after jailbreaking.

I hope this helps shed some light into the differences between these two platforms for those who are confused. This is by no means a comprehensive comparison, but I hope it’s a start. I’ll be writing some follow-up blogs dealing with specific aspects of the smartphone and how each platform performs.

Until the next one, hope you enjoyed this and found it helpful.

Cheers!