512 Pixels

Apple PR:

“Jerry joined Apple’s Board in 1997 when most doubted the company’s future. He has been a pillar of financial and business expertise and insight on our Board for over a dozen years,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “It’s been a privilege to know and work with Jerry, and I’m going to miss him a lot.”

It’s rare that Apple ever looks back, especially to the late 1990s, when the company was in pretty bad shape. Most people — including me — hadn’t really ever heard much about York or his contributions to the company, but it would seem he was instrumental in bringing Apple back from the brink.

I didn’t know he was from Memphis. That’s pretty cool, too.

Jason Snell, in his defense of the 3G-equipped iPad:

Let’s face it: One of the things that stinks about the American cellular industry is that it’s been built around a subsidy-and-contract business model. When you buy a phone, it’s generally discounted in exchange for your agreement to pay a monthly fee for a couple of years. Non-subsidized devices generally still pay high prices for service, and it’s still a pain to cancel. The iPad’s 3G service has none of these drawbacks: It can be set to auto-cancel and requires no commitment.

[…]

My point isn’t that the iPad with Wi-Fi and 3G is for everyone. It’s that a lot of people may commit to a Wi-Fi only iPad without considering the flexibility of the iPad’s 3G system and the great deal Apple has extracted from AT&T. For an up-front commitment of $130—the cost difference between the Wi-Fi and 3G models—you give yourself the freedom to buy 3G data whenever you need it, without any of the typical cellular encumbrances. That’s pretty cool, and it’s worth considering when you’re deciding which iPad you want to buy.

When the iPad was first announced, I heard several complaints about the 3G-equipped models being more expensive. Several of these complaints included this argument:

No way the 3G chip costs Apple $130.

That’s true, but Snell nails the real reason for the extra cost. The $130 is painful up-front, but the flexibility is very, very cool and quite innovative. And it wouldn’t be possible in today’s cellular market without it.

Amazon just released an application that gives Kindle users the ability read their content on the Mac. This adds the Mac to a long list of otehr devices taht can be used to access Amazon’s Kindle services.

More importantly, it is another step in what they company has slowly been doing over the last year — turning the Kindle from a device into a service. It’s gone from a device-only service to something that doesn’t Kindle to use it. The Mac, Windows and mobile applications can be used directly with each other, without any Kindle hardware in the middle.

Apple is where Amazon was a year ago with their eBook strategy. The iBookstore is merely a feature of the iPad, and the iPad alone. Even there, it’s not the primary function of the device, as it’s not even installed by default. And as it stands right now, there’s no other way to use this service — no iPhone, Mac or web browser can get to the store or view downloaded content.

I see this panning out in one of two ways: a free-standing iBooks app for the Mac (and eventually other platforms) that syncs with the iPad in a very similar way Amazon uses Whispersync, or an “iBooks” enviroment that would function within iTunes. I hope it’s the former — iTunes already is a great poster child for software bloat.

Either way, while Amazon’s device isn’t as sexy as the iPad, their service is far superior to what Apple is offering. Apple’s iBook service will do well with iPad owners, but if Apple really wants to go after the Kindle, they have quite a bit of ground to cover.

Mary Thompson:

I remember how much I used the iPhone when I had it (ALL THE TIME). It was convenient and I never had to think. If someone asked me a question I could Google the answer in a few seconds. Instead of forcing myself to remember things I could just store them on the phone. There was no reason to use my brain because the iPhone was available to me at all times. There was also the constant urge to be online reading/updating/playing/learning things.

Since getting rid of my iPhone I’ve been a lot better about ignoring my phone. I don’t have constant internet access so I’m not constantly checking my email or updating Twitter of my Facebook status. I’m not obsessed with what’s going on online when I should be focused on what I’m doing in the real world. I feel like I’m free from the need to check everything. I feel like I’m much better at being in the room and with people. I’ve rid myself of the extremely bad habit of playing with my iPhone when I’m with people and I think I’m better for it.

David Smith:

The world in which open source software was born is very different from the world we’re heading to. Less than a decade ago, a major concern of the computing world was that much of the capability and innovation was locked up in closed software held by major corporations, like Microsoft. Open-source software addressed that. But look where innovation lies today: companies like Google (and few others) –built on the backs of open-source technology, mind you – can now perform tasks that not long ago were the realm of science fiction. Today, you can speak a question into a tiny handheld gadget, and find out where to get good pizza. But think for a moment how Google can do this reliably and quickly: it’s their data. They’ve amassed a massive, proprietary database of search queries, written text, and voice samples that allow the Google Voice Search app on the iPhone (and algorithms in Google’s cloud servers) to distinguish “pizza” (said in on a noisy street in a Jersey accent) from “piece of” or the city “Pisa”. Tim was careful to point out: it’s not the closed algorithms that make this work. Peter Norvig from Google has said it himself: Google doesn’t have better algorithms than everyone else. They just have more data.

Tim Oreily’s thoughts on the subject are worth a read. This is the fundamental topic the computer industry has to face in the next few years.

Harry Haydon of The Sun:

Star Wars fan Chris Jarvis, 31, was told he would have to leave if he did not take it down.

Chris is a member of the International Church of Jediism - based on the sci-fi films - whose doctrine states that followers should be allowed to wear hoods.

But when he protested, security escorted him from his local branch in Southend, Essex.

He filled out a complaint form - and received a formal letter from the JobCentre Plus branch’s boss just three days later.

Ars Techinca’s Chris Foresman:

In recent years the US has begun to lag in education for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), and a number of efforts are underway to address this issue. We know that giving kids hands-on experience is one of the best ways to spark and keep their interest in STEM-related fields, and to this end, high schoolers all over the country are getting an opportunity to learn and apply STEM knowledge by participating in the annual Rube Goldberg Machine Contest.

I love seeing science being applied in schools in engaging ways. I also love this.

Sharon Chan of the Seattle Times:

Paul Rey, user experience manager for Bing, said his team intensively researched what kind of blue to use for search results. They sent various users flights of blue shades, including different hues and different saturations.

The blue color used for links in Bing’s predecessor, Live Search, was more pale. “Live Search was a faint blue that was like, ‘Hey … here are your results,’ ” Rey said. “It lacked confidence.”

Based on user feedback, the team estimated the best blue color could generate $80 million to $90 million in ad sales.

Nine out of the latest 20 stories on Macworld’s front page aren’t related to Apple.

Most of those nine are cross-posted from other IDG sites. I understand that Macword is a sister publication of non-Apple sites, but I think the ratio is a little bit off. Even more annoying is seeing the same items in Macworld’s and PCWorld’s RSS feeds. I’ve unsubscribed to both.

Don’t get me wrong — I really like Macworld’s Apple coverage. I just wish their site wasn’t bogged down with stories about Twitter and Google.

Jesus Diaz of Gizmodo:

74 days after the iPhone was introduced at $600 a pop (six hundred dollars), one million were sold. The Droid, at $200: 1.05 million. The Nexus One? An estimated 135,000 units. By any measure, that’s a total sales flop.

That sure does suck. I think several forces are at play: T-Mobile being the initial carrier, the support issues that plagued the device its first few weeks on the market and the lack of retail presence. (Apple is one of the only companies that can sell thousands of devices without anyone seeing it first. The iPad is the most recent example, but the first iPhone was only available for people to look at and touch when it went on sale in 2007.)

The Nexus One is now headed to AT&T and Verizon, so it will be interesting to see how big of a factor the T-Mobile thing is. It’s a shame, really. The Nexus One is a pretty nice device.

While they still have a long way to go, it’s nice to see Microsoft start to move in the right direction with their browser.

Background

I am no stranger to the iPhone. I was working as a Mac Genius In-Training when the original iPhone was released. I got my first iPhone 6 weeks after they were released. A year later, I upgraded to the 3G when it was released, and then again to the 3GS last summer. I’ve spent more money than I care to think about in third-party apps. So why did I give it up? Well…

Growing Tired

After owning the 3GS for several months, I started to grow tired of the whole experience. The 3GS is no doubt the best iteration of Apple’s hardware, but it looks and feels like the models before it.

More importantly, the iPhone OS seems … stagnant. OS 3 and OS 1 have more in common than they differ from each other. Even with the addition of push notifications and third-party apps, the iPhone OS hasn’t evolved that much.

On a slightly different front, I was also tired of the endless Update/Jailbreak cycle that I — like many others — had fallen into. Keeping my iPhone the way I wanted to was becoming a hassle.

After almost 3 years, I was ready for a change.

Why the Droid?

When I purchased it in January, the Motorola Droid was the top dog when it came to Android devices. The Nexus One had been announced, but just for T-Mobile, which I wasn’t thrilled about. Don’t get me wrong, the Nexus One is a slick phone, but until it shows up on Verizon, the Droid is their best handset.

My dad has the HTC Hero on Cellular South, and after spending some time with it, I wasn’t a big fan of HTC’s Sense UI. On an older device like the Hero, it seems to slow down over time, and it holds up updates from being pushed out to customers. I’m pretty set against owning a skinned Android device.

When Motorola and Verizon started marketing the Droid, they aimed squarely at geeks. It worked. This phone isn’t pretty, light or sexy. It’s rough, dark and chunky. It’s the phone that Batman would use, without a doubt. I like the hardware keyboard and the design. The Nexus One may be hot, but the Droid looks like it could beat up any other phone on the market.

Why not WebOS?

When I bought my phone, WebOS devices were only on Sprint. I looked at the Palm Pre and I liked what I saw software-wise. While they aren’t a ton of apps out there for WebOS, the core apps I needed were. Palm has a killer mobile OS. The way it multitasks and integrates multiple cloud services is very slick, and it looks downright beautiful.

Sadly, their hardware is lackluster. The Pre is far better than the Pixi, but it still feels cheap and rather breakable.

Now that the Pre Plus is on Verizon, it is a harder choice, but I the Droid still wins in my book. Now, if Palm ever releases a device that is closer to an iPhone, hardware-wise, it would be hard for me to ignore it.

AT&T vs. Verizon

I know that comparing one cellular network to another is a tricky thing to do. And while the general censuses is that Verizon’s network is better and more robust that AT&T’s, I have to agree. While Verizon’s 3G doesn’t seem as fast as AT&T’s (of course, that might be due to differences between the iPhone 3GS and the Droid), I get better coverage with Verizon in the places I visit in the course of a normal day.

As AT&T has highlighted in their ads, Verizon’s network is like AT&T’s older EDGE network, in that browsing isn’t possible while on the phone. I had gotten used to being on the phone and looking information up online with my iPhone 3G and 3GS, and I miss it on the Droid.

Verizon’s plans are usually a little bit more expensive than AT&T’s, but I love the flexibility they offer. I can go online and add or remove features from my plan, without adding time to my contract.

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly

The flexibility of Android is amazing. It’s really what drew me to the platform more than anything. Don’t like the software keyboard? You can replace it. Don’t like the home screen? Use another program to arrange your icons. Every nook and cranny of the OS can be tinkered with.

Of course, when people compare the iPhone to Android, two things are always mentioned: the openness of Android, and the ability to run apps in the background.

Indeed, the ability to run 3rd party apps is great, but comes with a price. I’ve found it’s pretty easy to blow up my Droid while playing with system-level applications.

It’s the same story when it comes to running applications in the background. It’s nice when I want it, but things can get out of hand. But the ability to run PDANet, listen to music and check email at the same time is pretty slick.

But that’s the beauty of Android: the developers leave it up the end user. If I want to burn through my battery in three hours by having 14 apps running at once, I can. It’s up to me — and that’s very appealing.

I do suffer iPhone withdraws from time to time. Android is rough. It does some things in weird, awkward ways. For example, copy and paste simply sucks on the Droid. Text-correcting is painful without sliding open the keyboard and using the D-Pad. The apps aren’t as polished, and there aren’t as many apps. And don’t even get my started on the awful, awful camera on this thing. It’s useless.

Fragmentation is a huge problem with Android. Right now, the Droid is the #2 phone in the Android universe, so I don’t run into issues. But as my phone ages, I expect to be left out of more and more features. Hopefully the rumor that all phones will get upgraded to 2.1 will ease these concerns. The update has been due “soon” for the Droid for months now.

In Closing

Despite the issues, I love my Droid. I like that I don’t carry the same phone 90% of people my age carry. I like exploring the Internet for third-party apps I can install without jailbreaking my phone. I like that PDANet is available on the App Market — no shady business required. The notification system is quietly brilliant. All-in-all, Android is a very capable platform with a bright future. While time will tell what I do when my current contract ends, for now, I’m really happy with the Droid.