My question is, why would you ignore an obvious, growing sector of the mobile market?  Yes, I understand that right now, Apple has the store that has on numerous occasions made people millions for simple applications.  However, that doesn’t mean that the Android Marketplace or Windows Phone 7 Marketplace will not make you any money.

We have developers who are making it a public point to not write applications for non-iPhone devices.  Which to mean, from a business standpoint is a poor decision.  I have no problems with writing the iPhone app first and getting it to market.  People think iPhone when they think mobile app, so I get that you have to have an iPhone app to have mobile exposure.  I understand this, I really do.  But to say, well I see this other mobile OS (Android) is gaining market share, but I’m going to ignore it and only focus on the iPhone.

The only time that people seem to look at mobile application alternatives is when their app gets dumped from the iPhone App Store.  You see it all the time, “Our app was removed for no reason” and while Steve Jobs has recently made it a point to say why most apps are removed, rejected from the store, we all know there are apps that shouldn’t have been rejected (Google Voice App anyone?).  But again, this is the only time that people start looking at alternative avenues for mobile development.  Wouldn’t a smart business plan be to have your app on as many platforms as possible?  I know that I’d want to maximize my revenue streams, but some people seem to be okay with ignoring anything that isn’t the iPhone.

What are your thoughts on this?  I’d really like to hear why some are choosing to ignore Android and Windows Phone 7 for their apps.  Because to me it just seems like poor business.  But hey, I could be wrong.

It’s Twitter, it’s Facebook, it’s BOTH

The first thing I noticed when I fired up Seesmic for the first time was that it handled Twitter and Facebook.  Initial thoughts included “well if this can do Facebook too, well I might be able to move Facebook off my front screen too” and while the Facebook implementation isn’t 100 percent, it is definitely good enough that I can use it 98% of the time.

Seesmic for iPhone also handles Twitter searches and lists.  It has a nice interface that allows for separation of the various lists and networks that doesn’t come off as cluttered (the way TweetDeck for iPhone did for me).  With Seesmic, I’m able to switch between my Twitter timeline, Facebook news feed, and various lists/searches.

Navigation

One of the cooler things I like about Seesmic is that to navigate between Twitter, Facebook, Ping.FM, and various Twitter lists and searches is that I simply have to swipe left/right depending on where I am in my “tabs” (or tiles).  However this means that the Twitter for iPhone feature that allows you to swipe a tweet is gone (this was one of my favorite features of Twitter for iPhone).  Even though it means I lose a feature, this one feature makes Seesmic extremely efficient.  I can jump between accounts and lists with the greatest of ease.  When I pick up my iPhone to check Twitter, I’m almost always going to check Facebook too, now I can do it in one app and with just a small swipe of the finger.

I have to say though that I do find myself missing the Twitter for iPhone tweet swipe shortcut for replying and favoriting tweets.  On Seesmic this is at least 2 screen presses, and while that might not seem like much, coming from the official Twitter app it just feels clunky.  However, I understand the reason this can’t be done in Seesmic and do not overly fault them for it.  They mad an UI decision and theirs works and is quite efficient, just in a different way and for a different purpose.

Overall

Overall, I think I’ll probably keep Seesmic on my front screen for a good while longer than originally anticipated.  That’s saying something because I’ve tried a lot of iPhone Twitter apps and not a single one was able to dethrone Tweetie (as it was known at the time).  I still thing Twitter for iPhone is a fantastic product and if you’re looking for a good Twitter app, you’d be hard pressed to find one better.  I wouldn’t say that, in the end, Seesmic is better than Twitter for iPhone but it does have certain features for a “power user” that can clear some icons off the front screen.  If you use both Twitter and Facebook with extreme regularity then you need to be taking a hard look at Seesmic for iPhone.

Yes it’s Fragmentation

In the strictest definition of the word, the Android world is fragmented.  You have a lot of devices all running different versions of the Android OS.  Though Google and the OEMs have worked hard to lower the amount of fragmentation, it’s still there.  If you want your app to cover as many devices as possible, you have to (currently) code for Android 1.6.  With the recent announcement of 2.2, this seems like a poor call.  Newer versions of Android have new functionality that would be beneficial to older phones.  Specifically the ability to save apps onto the microSD card and keep it out of the onboard memory.

There is something to be said about the fact that Android is being developed at a fast rate that it’s hard for manufacturers to keep up.  Not only is the underlying Android OS being developed at a rapid pace, but each manufacturer has it’s own variation of the OS.  HTC has their Sense UI, Motorola has their MotoBLUR technology, and so on.  Due to this, it takes longer for these manufacturers to release the updated OS versions because they have to put their own touches on the new version before they can push it out.  In some cases they’ve decided not to do this.

The other issue is that a lot of the older Android 1.x devices had limited onboard ROM spaces, which makes updating to the newer OS even more complicated.  So while this kind of fragmentation exists and it could be viewed as a bad thing, it’s not always.

No, it’s Not Fragmentation

Why is it not a bad thing?  Because it’s constant improvement of the underlying operating system of the phone.  Sure you might be on an older device that can’t update, but that means that they next Android phone you get is going to be better than the one you currently have.  Before iPhone and Android, such a thing was unheard of.  Mobile phone makers didn’t really worry about updating their mobile OS too much, because they didn’t have too.  Now with Android, their finding that they need to stay bleeding edge to compete because people are starting to understand the game better.

Part of the reason for Android’s fast growth is Google’s understanding that they had to play catch up a little.  I’m not one-sided here, when Android 1.0 came out it paled compared to the recently released iPhone OS 2.0.  But Google didn’t rest and quickly pushed out new versions.  Apple releases their iPhone OS once a year, currently Android is on 2 releases a year.  They surpasses Apple this year (sorry fanboys, but it’s true).  Android has had multitasking from day 1, we have over the air updates, and now over the air syncing.  Also, the latest Android OS ran circles around both the iPad and the iPhone (with javascript no less, so it wasn’t even a native app).  Most of what’s in iPhone OS 4.0 has been in Android for a while (heck even the multi-tasking is done in a similar manner).

One important thing to not overlook (again) is that Google is making manufacturers think about things like future software updates, and companies like HTC and Motorola are starting to get hip to the game of continual updates of the operating system.  They might be slow on the delivery now, but with time we’ll see more releases and less lag.  Before Apple and Android, this was unheard of.  Manufacturers ignored the mobile OS because most people would just buy a new phone.  Google is making manufacturers think about the mobile OS in the same way that Apple made the carriers think about data.  After the iPhone data plans became something of a commodity, you got unlimited data at a set price.  Now equipment makers are going to have think about their devices as something that last longer than that 2 year contract interval.  Sure the geeks are still going to upgrade regularly, but the average joe isn’t going to care (they might not care about OS updates, but if their phone tells them there’s an update to install they’ll probably install it).

Google has said that they will eventually slow down the rate of Android releases in fight to alleviate the fragmentation.  They understand it’s an issue, but they also know they need to keep improving their OS in order to hold the lead they now have over Apple.

The Current State of Things

The image below was posted on the Android Police website back in January (I tried to find a new infographic but was unable to do so).

Click to Enlarge

As you can see, the fragmentation is slowly dissipating.  Many of the older 1.5 phones don’t have enough onboard memory to hold the new 2.x versions of Android.  This is a hardware issue, not a software issue.  Many of the remaining phones have seem recent announcements about upgrades to 2.x versions.  By the end of the year, I predict that we’ll start seeing less phones that are not able to update to newer versions.

Also, there is an active community of Android developers who are working to get the newer versions of the operating system to be loadable on older phones.  Of course this isn’t for the faint of heart and does require some hackery.  But the ability is there.

Things to Consider

The issue of fragmentation is a two sided problem.  It’s not just Google’s rapid development of the Android operating system but the manufacturers struggling to keep up.  Some would argue (rightfully so) that this is where Apple’s success comes from.  They couple their hardware and software so tightly together that they can really hone in on the perfection side of things.  However, this is partially what has caused them to be surpassed by Android in both functionality soon number of available devices.

I’m not going to argue that the iPhone is subpar, it’s not.  The iPhone is a superb device in a many aspects.  Android has some nice devices out as well (see the Nexus One or the HTC EVO).  But Apple isn’t the only game in the market anymore and Android, regardless of it’s fragmentation, is proving to be a good competitor.  And competition is good.  But I feel that we lose site of the advantages of the rapid development cycle, because there are advantages.  Apple fanboys would like us to forget those however (and the Google fanboys would like to forget that Apple really does have a tendency to bring its “A” game).

All in all, the competition is a good thing.  We’ll be seeing things improve on both ends and I truly believe that Android device makers will shorten the lag between new OS announcements and getting the updates to the phones.  They’ll have to if they want to remain competitive.

About a month and half back, I purchased a netbook.  Being my first netbook purchase I did a lot of research before deciding on what to get.  In the end, I went with the ASUS Eee PC 1005PE-PU27 (amazon affiliate link) model.  The reason I chose this model was because of it’s highly rated battery life (14 hours).  Now, I knew that I wasn’t going to be able to get the full 14 hours, but I figured if I could get between 8 and 10 hours then I was doing good.

The iPad Elephant

I bought this netbook instead of getting an iPad.  Why?  Well for one thing, my primary use case for the netbook was programming related conferences (Houston Open Spaces, Austin Code Camp, and Houston Techfest).  The idea was to have a computer that I could

1. Something that I could actually code on should the situation call for it
2. Take notes nicely on.  I have enough experience with the iPad touch screen to know that if I was taking notes on it, it’d get messy.

Since the main use case for buying this machine was to use it at programming conferences, the ability to actually code on it was paramount.  The iPad has a nice screen and some nice apps, but a full computing replacement it is not.  And while the netbook isn’t exactly a desktop (or even laptop) replacement, for my primary use case it was the more preferable option.

Initial Impressions and Hardware Overview

First off, the box this thing came in was small (or smaller than I expected).  After getting it out and plugging it in (I usually ignore the whole “fully charge before use”), I booted it up.  This particular model came with Windows 7 Starter edition (it was the first thing to go).  Using Windows 7 Starter on this netbook seemed be fairly smooth.  However I wasn’t doing anything overly intensive so your mileage may vary.  And I only used Windows 7 Starter to update the system’s BIOS in preparation for installing Ubuntu Netbook Remix.

The screen screen on this thing is nice, bright, and quite shiny.  It lights up well and is viewable in just about every situation I’ve encountered thus far.  The chiclet keyboard (separated keys, like a MacBook or Sony laptop) is perfect and my hands rarely feel cramped on keyboard.  It took some time to get used to this new keyboard, but it wasn’t long before I was typing at above average speeds.  Some people have noted that the right handed SHIFT key is smaller,  this is a non-issue for me as I have a habit of using the left handed SHIFT key in about 99.9999% of my typing.

The trackpad supports some limited multitouch activities but I didn’t get a chance to use them under Windows 7 and they don’t appear to work on Linux (if they do I haven’t figured it out just yet and it hasn’t been high priority).  The only issue with the trackpad is the same as it is with most trackpads, if it doesn’t turn off while typing you can start typing in random places (sometimes without realizing it).  Not huge issue but it can be annoying.

Speedwise, this thing works well for what I need.  No, it’s not a powerhouse, and I didn’t buy it to be a portable desktop (or a laptop replacement).  My primary concern was battery life, and that is what the Atom processors are mainly built to help with (energy consumption).  I should note, that you won’t be watching any HD video on this thing.  At least not without skipping in the video.  But for my DVD rips, it works just fine.

Ubuntu Netbook Remix

After doing the previously mentioned BIOS update, I quickly installed Ubuntu Netbook Remix 10.04 (in beta at the time).  The installation went off without a hitch and I was able to get most of my usual apps installed without too much issue.  Most things worked out of the box (excepted the previously mentioned multi-touch on the trackpad).  Skype did take some figuring out, but there are instructions to get it working flawlessly.

The overall experience with Ubuntu Netbook Remix has been favorable.  I was able to do 2 presentations using my netbook at the Alt.NET Houston Open Spaces conference without a hiccup and many people seemed to be happy with the overall look and feel it as I was giving the presentations.

When it comes to battery life, I have not seen the 14 hours that this thing advertises, however I’m averaging around 8-10 depending on usage and how it’s being used.  So I’m quite happy since the idea was to get as close to 8-ish hours of use as possible.  I should note that those hours are using Ubuntu with some minor modifications to the power management.  Since I didn’t use the Windows 7 install I can’t comment on it’s battery performance.

Final Thoughts

In the end, I’m quite happy with my purchase.  The purpose of the device was to get some computing power with extended battery life.    The device has handled itself well through multiple usage scenarios (my wife used it at the hospital while she was there with our son for almost 5 weeks).  While you won’t be doing any hardcore gaming on this machine is perfect for casual coding, document editing, web browsing, and chatting.  Plus the thing is light enough that its easy to transport around all day and not feel that I’m gonna throw my back out.

As I was listening and occasionally watching the Google I/O Keynote for today, where the focus was on Android and the newly announced Google TV, I realized that Google is eventually going to beat Apple when it comes to innovating.   I saw on Twitter where someone said “Apple is getting Microsoft-ed by Google” and there’s a lot of truth in that statement.

Be Open and Push Open

One thing that was repeated over and over at both keynotes for Google I/O was “we’re opening this up to you” or “we’re releasing this as an open source project” and other similar quotes.  Google is all about doing their work in the open, this brings in people that can build things and build upon their work.  You never know what your users will do if you let them and in many cases they will surprise you if given half a chance.  Google’s message has been about being open, allowing more people to work on and build on their work to the betterment of the product.

Apple is the exact opposite.  They tightly lock their software and hardware together to create computing appliances.  They ensure you can only develop a certain way and only develop certain things for their products.  If they don’t like your work, they reject it.  Sometimes they do it without giving you a reason.  This is not always a bad thing though, Apple products have  a tendency to “just work” in a way that other computer companies would love.  But it is widely known that Apple and Google have different ideas on computing and openness.

Moving Things Forward

When Apple TV came out people liked it.  It was the first product to bring downloaded content to a TV screen without a lot of hacking or trial and error.  However as many geeks will tell you, it is severely lacking.  You can’t bring in your own media, and watching stuff that falls outside the iTunes wall is pretty much impossible.

Google announced Google TV which brings the web to your television.  Instead of dumbing down the web for TV, you are given a full internet experience.  Built on the Android platform Google TV can use Android apps, which means that developers can write applications that target Google TV.  Meaning that Google TV is expandable and customizable, all while giving you a nice mixture of the web and TV.  While the initial demo of Google TV doesn’t look overly impressive, I have little doubt that Google will maintain their “release early, update often” methodology on it and in time we’ll see Google TV grow into something awesome.

GoogleTV is the perfect example of how Google is innovating.  They’re working on bringing to the TV what Apple tried to do but in a way that is more open and customizable.  If you look at the most recent Apple product, the iPad, you might notice that it’s basically a larger iPod Touch.  Google TV is what Apple TV wishes it could be and that says a lot about the kind of work Google is doing.

Google Will Beat Apple (Eventually)

I think that long term (in other words, not in the immediate future but probably 7-10 years from now), Google will have replaced Apple as the most innovative tech company.  I realize that I’m saying this as Apple’s own developer conference (WWDC) is weeks away, but Google really brought their A game over the last few days.  Even with the demo failures they showed that they are interested in moving things forward and changing the way we think about technology.  Their dedication to being open, using open standards, and creating new open products is proof in the pudding.  Apple may have it’s fan boys, but I’ll stick with Google.

When you connect to a public wireless network, especially one that is unprotected (read unencrypted), anything you send and receive is viewable by anyone with the proper tools and/or software.  This means that anyone, be it a person or an business entity can see what you’re sending across the open network. This is why when you do connect to such networks, it is a good idea to not do anything like connect to your bank or do anything you wouldn’t want others to potentially know about.  It doesn’t mean that someone is definitely watching your data fly across their screen, but you should act like someone is.

As users, it is our responsibility to ensure your data’s protected, not anyone else’s.  We are the one’s that must take the precautions, because once it’s on the network it’s out there for others to see.  You don’t want someone seeing your private conversations over an open wireless network?  Encrypt the conversation, there are plenty of tools that help you to encrypt your data.  There are ways to set up virtual private networks (VPN) at your home so you can connect securely to that and then do what you’d like because it’s all coming through your encrypted connection to your home’s network.  There are tools for encrypting your email (Thunderbird comes with the plugin installed by default).

Again, as user’s it is our responsibility to ensure our data is protected.  So the privacy groups need to stop pointing fingers and instead work on educating the end user about this.  If the privacy groups spent as much time educating as they did finger pointing, people would be more aware of the situation and know what steps they can take to protect their data both at home and abroad.

All video codecs are covered by patents. A patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other “open source” codecs now. Unfortunately, just because something is open source, it doesn’t mean or guarantee that it doesn’t infringe on others patents. An open standard is different from being royalty free or open source.

You’ll notice that Steve Jobs says that all video codecs are covered by patents.  However this is just not true.  Theora is patent free and was designed as such.  The Theora codec is similar to the Vorbis codec for audio in that it is designed and written to be patent & royalty free.  Anyone can implement it and use it without having to pay some governing body.

The thing about H.264 is that, while it might be an open standard (in otherwords anyone can write an implementation based on the published standard) it is not in fact royalty free.  The governing body (MPEG LA) has said that H.264 will remain royalty free for web video through 2015.  This means that come January 1, 2016, they could start asking for cash.  And not everyone is going to be able to pay for the right to use it.

Video Codecs, What are They?

Before I go further I want to spend a few lines talking about video codecs. What a video codec is, is an algorithm for encoding a video signal. Different video codecs exist and serve different purposes. The thing about H.264 is that it allows someone to encode higher quality video at smaller file sizes (which is a very good thing). Apple has adopted H.264 as its video codec of choice, also Blu-Ray uses H.264 as it’s codec for encoding movies to the platform. So H.264 is a really good codec and has been adopted by the those in industries who use video, and understandably so. The idea of any codec is to get the highest possible quality into the smallest file.

The argument for which video codec to use for HTML5 is between H.264 and Theora. Theora is a video encoding codec that is free, open source, and royalty free (no one has to pay to use it or implement it). The argument that Steve Jobs is making is that even though Theora is open source and royalty free, it infringes on patents held by others.

The Issue of Software Patents

Lets get this out of the way.  Patents are, at their core, a good idea.  A company invents something, they patent it.  In return for making the idea public knowledge they get exclusive use of the idea for a pre-determined period of time.  During that time anyone using the invention has to license it from the company that holds the patent.  This is a good thing as it makes ideas public and still allows the company to retain some exclusive use of it.  It shows other people what can be done and to some degree encourages innovation, because if you can see how someone did something it might lead to other ideas.

Software patents however are a horrible idea.  The idea that you can patent a way to do something is a little more confining and limits innovation.  If I need to write an algorithm that takes two numbers and returns to me the largest of the 2 numbers, I might do something like

    int ReturnLargerNumber(int a, int b) {
        if(a > b )
            return a;

        return b;
    }

Now, someone later might come along and do something different but similar (as there aren’t a ton of ways to write this kind of code). If I had a patent on returning a larger number then I could sue anyone who implements it, no matter how similar or different. Keep in mind that this is a really lame example but it should demonstrate the idea that patenting an implementation is a bad idea. This is the heart of the software patent issue. If someone came along and had a better way to return the larger of two numbers, I could sue them thus holding back a better solution to the problem.

This all comes down to the idea that there is more than one way to do something.  What Steve Jobs would like us to believe is that there is no possible way that Theora could achieve the same level of compression and quality as H.264 unless it infringes on the patents involved in H.264, thus doing things exactly the same way.  Again, such a argument is good for his business but doesn’t exactly promote an “open web” that he seems to be so vocal about.

When it comes to writing software there is almost always more than one way to achieve the same goal. You can give 5 programmers the same problem and the same tools to solve it and chances are you’ll get 5 different solutions. You might get a couple that are similar but they’ll still be different. So when while Theora might serve the same purpose as H.264, it doesn’t mean they achieve their goals in the same way.

I feel that I should also note that, in most cases where a company has accused an open source project of infringing on patents, the company making the accusations has been unable to prove so in court. In most cases (read: almost all) the accusing company was making false claims in hopes of spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt (or FUD).

The Case of Open and Royalty Free

In the end this whole thing comes down to the idea of an open web. Steve Jobs says he wants an open web but then says that he won’t use Theora because of possible patent issues. It would make more sense for him to put some time into ensuring Theora and Vorbis don’t infringe on any patents by releasing patches and pushing their use if he truly wanted an open web.

The H.264 video codec requires a license to use, the same way the Mp3 codec requires a license to use.  While the Theora and Vorbis codecs do not require such licenses, companies like Apple don’t like to use them because they have their hands in other codecs (H.264 or AAC in Apple’s case).  

Apple created WebKit (the rendering engine of the Safari web browser) by forking an existing open source project called KHTML and fixing the issues they saw with it. They then in turn released WebKit as an open source project. Why not do something similar with Theora and Vorbis? He’s already done it once, why not do it again. If he was really about an open web, this would be done already.

It makes sense to look into things that are open sourced and royalty free when it comes to internet standards, because not everyone can pay license fees if they want to be completely compatible. And if we rely on open standards and royalty free codecs, then everyone can enjoy the same (or at least very similar) user experience on the web. As it stands right now, only Safari and Chrome implement H.264 for HTML5. Mozilla implements Theora (open source company is always going to implement an open source solution over a licensed solution). Chrome actually includes support for both.

As long as people disagree on what to implement it is going to give web users an inconsistent experience and to me, that’s the largest part of this problem. The idea of standards is to ensure an consistent experience across implementations and if people can’t agree on what goes into a standard programmers are stuck having to do more work to ensure that consistent experience.

Steve Jobs is a Business Man

To begin with, Steve Jobs is a business man.  A very good one too.  He is the master of the keynote and an expert marketer.  He knows how to announce, release, and talk about his products and competitors.  He’s very articulate and excellent at getting his ideas across.  Because of this, a lot of what he says is taken as fact, and many don’t look at things more deeply than his word and repeat his thoughts.

Steve Jobs is also king of telling people when they need something and when they don’t.  A great example is 3G.  When the first iPhone was released someone asked him about 3G and he said “Edge is good enough, people don’t really need 3G” and then one year later, he announces the iPhone 3G with 3G connectivity.  He’s done this on more than one occasion (just on the iPhone: multi-tasking, flush earphone jack, native application development, etc).  So when Jobs says that we need to move away from Flash, people listen.  The problem is, that when you talk about his little diatribe against Flash, it’s filled with half truths on both Flash and H.264 (and competing video codecs).  You can read one flash developer’s break down of those half truths.

The point here is that Steve Jobs is going to point out things that will only help his business long term.  Flash is destructive to his iPhone app business so he’s blocking it and giving his reasons.  Now granted he is posting his reasons to the public which not every CEO would do.  And he is attacking Flash and fighting for open standards and getting people to talk about and become aware of those standards, so that is a very good thing.

Video on the Web

I agree that Flash has problems that need to be addressed.  But I will also admit that most video on the web is displayed in a flash player.  The reasons for this are mainly due to the need to lock video down and protect the stream.  The current HTML5 video implementation does not have a way for people to protect the video stream, this is why you don’t see companies like Hulu or Netflix utilizing HTML5 for their streaming videos.  Those kinds of things need some form of DRM to prevent the leeching/downloading of the stream.

Also, the issue of H.264 versus Theora when it comes to which video codec to use for online video is filled with lots of nice half truths and misinformation as well (from all sides).  But one main difference is that H.264 is not free as Mr. Jobs would like you to believe.  Also the issue of patents and that Theora infringes on others’ patents is a slippery slope that has yet to be actually proven.  For further reading on the issue of H.264 and Theora I advise reading the following articles:

• Ogg Versus The World: Don’t Fall for Open Source FUD
• I’ Been to Ubuntu: Lead OGG Dev Responds to Job’s Jabs
• Microsoft Fires Back at Critics of its HTML5 Strategy

There’s lots of things some people would like to keep from the public to push their own agendas (on both the Apple/Microsoft and Open Source sides of the argument).  So I would advise becoming educated before simply repeating what’s said by anyone.

Conclusions

I’d like to conclude by saying that I think that getting people to talk about open standards and open technologies is a good thing and for that I think Steve Jobs is doing a great thing.  However, I wish he’d not put so many half truths into his writings about doing so.  By not talking about the whole picture he’s doing more harm than good (for the general public, not his business).  In the end, H.264 will probably win the codec war for HTML5.  I’d rather Theora take the crown, but so many people are scared due to possible patent issues (which again, have yet to be proven).  The patent issues are a different argument which I’ll write about later this week.

I’d be more than happy if we could move away from the requirement of Flash to do video on the web, I’m all for moving to open standards and open protocols to get things done.  So if nothing else, Steve Jobs should be commended for taking the stand to move towards that general direction, even if some of statements aren’t 100% correct.

So if you’re looking for some nice gEdit color themes, check out mig’s repository.

Click for full size

]]> http://www.mkoby.com/2010/02/13/gedit-color-themes/feed/ 3 http://www.mkoby.com/2010/01/05/the-apple-tablet-internet-hype/ http://www.mkoby.com/2010/01/05/the-apple-tablet-internet-hype/#comments Tue, 05 Jan 2010 18:55:56 +0000 Michael Koby http://www.mkoby.com/?p=1449 Over the past 2 weeks or so the tech news websites have been all the rage about two things: Google’s Nexus One and Apple’s tablet computer.  The Nexus One exists, people have seen it, handled it, taken pictures of it, written reviews on it.  Apple’s tablet however continues to be nothing more than rumor.

Sure, there’s lots of evidence that it might exist.  Apple themselves filed for a patent for a table like device years ago.  But the problem is, people seem to be dead sure it’s coming out.  Just like they were dead sure at MacWorld last year, and in January 2009 before that.  Ever since the iPhone people have been “predicting” the Apple tablet.  However, since the month has flipped to January there has been tons more coverage on the device.  A device that doesn’t actually exist yet.  There’s been so much coverage that even the Wall Street Journal has written on it, stating dates for both an announcement and shipping.

Apple has a reputation for causing excitement in their products, even those that don’t definitely exist yet.  Like I said, the rumored Apple tablet has been rumored since the introduction of the iPhone.  But there in lies the problem.  It’s a rumor.  Still is.  Until someone can grab a picture of the blasted thing, it is nothing more than a figment of our imagination.  And this is where I find issue.  Sure, sites like Engadget feed on product rumors.  That’s their proverbial bread and butter.  But when the Wall Street Journal, Wired, and other non-blog oriented news outlets start feeding the rumor mill, I take issue.  When I read a blog, it’s a blog.  Regardless if it’s a popular one, there is always the chance that what they’re reporting is based solely on conjecture, rumor, or just word of mouth.  In other words, I expect that it could turn out to be a hoax, misinformation, or something else erroneous (that doesn’t mean that everything these sites discuss lacks proof, evidence, and actual fact).  But when a site like the Wall Street Journal, something that is considered a “reputable” news source,  starts playing along to me it brings it more into reality.  It means that more people will read it, it means more people will think its true.

When you compare the Nexus One hype to the Apple tablet hype the main difference is that the Nexus One exists.  We’ve see it.  Google employees have spoken out about it.  People outside Google have touched it, played with it.  The Apple tablet is still nothing more than a patent application, and some non-Apple photoshopped mockups.  See the difference?

Now, do I think the Apple tablet exists?  Yes, I think somewhere within Apple’s walls, there is a tablet.  There might even be a prototype, and they might have already shipped build plans off to China to have them built.  But, as with anything Apple, nothing is certain until Steve Jobs gets on a stage and says “Hey, here it is” because until then it’s not real.  Apple has pulled entire product announcements before, so it’s always helpful to keep that in mind as we dream of new Apple devices.

Before I go any further, if you don’t know what OpenOffice is, you should definitely check it out.  It is a fully functional office software suite that can (for the most part) completely replace Microsoft Office on your computer.  If you don’t have Microsoft Office on your computer, OpenOffice will work about 98% of the time for most people’s needs.  If you don’t want to install software on your computer at all, you can look at Google Docs.  It should be noted that you will need Java to run OpenOffice, if you’re browsing the internet regularly there is a good chance you already have Java installed.  

Setting OpenOffice to Save Microsoft Formats

Whenever I tell someone about OpenOffice and/or set it up for them to use on their computer I always do one thing for them.  I set OpenOffice to automatically save in the Microsoft Office formats (.doc, .xls, and .ppt).  Below are the steps you can take to set this up yourself.

To begin, you’ll need to open OpenOffice’s word processor.  Your screen should have a window that looks very similar to this:

Click to Enlarge

1. Click on Tools in the menu bar and then select Options


Click to Enlarge

2. Once the options dialog has come up, select the “General” options under the “Load/Save” options list


Click to Enlarge

3. Towards the bottom, you’ll see a section for “Default file format and ODF settings” under this you will see two drop down boxes; one labeled “Document type” and the other, directly to the right labeled “Always save as”.  This is what we’re going to change.  Since we were in the word processor, the “Text Document” should already be selected under “Document type” and the “Always save as” will be set to “ODF Text Document”.  We will change “ODF Text Document” to “Microsoft Word 97/2000/XP”


Click to Enlarge

4. Once that’s done, we’ll change the “Document type” to “Spreadsheet”


Click to Enlarge

5. Once the document type is set to “Spreadsheet” we can change the “Always save as” dropdown to “Microsoft Excel 97/2000/XP”


Click to Enlarge

6. Finally repeat steps 4 & 5 but change “Document type” to “Presentation” and “Always save as” to “Microsoft Powerpoint 97/2000/XP”


Click to Enlarge

7. Once all 3 file types have been changed to save as the Microsoft formats, you can click “Ok” at the bottom of the dialog.

There you go.  All your files will save in their Microsoft Office file format equivalent.

Personal Thoughts on File Formats

While performing these steps will in fact allow you use OpenOffice in a more Office compatible way, I want to note that I feel this is the wrong approach.  My personal opinion on this matter is that we should be encouraging the acceptance and use of more open standards.  The file format used by default in OpenOffice is the “Open Document Format” (wikipedia link).  This format is open sourced which means that it can be utilized by anyone willing to implement it into their software.

I think that pushing for people to use open file formats, in the long run, will make things easier since making things compatible would be easier.

A Google Phone

To begin with, lets all acknowledge that Google bringing out it’s own device should have been expected from the start.  They have a solid, recognizable brand that people like.  Also, it makes sense for them to have a device completely labeled as their own.  It’s a smart move, especially since Android is in direct competition with the iPhone.  Google bring out a device that, in a way, shows others how to fully utilize the Android platform is good marketing for Android and will result in better Android devices.  Google has some smart people working for them, so it would be safe to say that they could do a lot with their own software to really bring out a showcase device for the platform.

So before going any further, you must first accept the fact that the Google phone exists.  If the Nexus One is actually this phone remains to be seen, as it could simply be a new top-of-the-line HTC device that Google gave to their employees to test new Android features.

Making it Work

Google has to consider a couple of things, in order to make a Google phone succeed.  First and foremost is carrier openness.  They need to at least sell it on each GSM carrier here in the states (T-Mobile and AT&T).  This is of course assuming they don’t sell it unlocked directly to customers.  But to maximize their reach they need to have a version that works across as many 3G networks as possible.

Secondly is price.  If Google sells the phone directly to the consumer in a unlocked fashion (works on T-Mobile or AT&T), they will need to self-subsidize (taking a huge loss) to bring the phone down to a price that most people are willing to pay.  People like the $99/$199/$299 prices of the iPhone.  If the iPhone was sold at it’s unsubsidized price ($500) it wouldn’t sell nearly as many units.  People (here in the US, at least) don’t really want to drop $500-$600 for a mobile phone, even if it means having no carrier contract.  So if Google wants to sell directly to the consumer, they’ll have to find a way to bring the price down.  If they go through a carrier, this becomes less of an issue as the carrier will subsidize the phone in turn bring the price down.

Why the Google Phone is Important

Google needs a device that’s completely their own.  Yes, this phone is an HTC device, but if Google had large amounts of input then it could be considered a Google phone (like the first Zune which was still a Microsoft device but made by Toshiba).  But in the long run, Google needs to be showing people exactly what can be done with the Android platform.  Because lets face it, while some of the Android devices we’ve seen so far are pretty cool they lack some of the “nice-ness” of the iPhone.  Google could create their own device, if for nothing else than to be a showcase for others.

Also, if Google takes steps towards self-subsidizing to bring people to the phone (and thus the platform), that’s important because it will bring the device into more people’s hands.  While I don’t think the Google Phone will beat the iPhone initially, Google has a good enough brand and good will with customers that they could give it a serious run for those iPhone dollars.

In the end, a Google phone will probably do nothing more than 1) showcase the Android platform and 2) give us an idea of what Google thinks a cell phone should be.  One thing that I haven’t seen discussed however is Google’s recent acquisition of Gizmo5, the voice over IP (VOIP) company.  Combined with Google Voice, there is some serious new ideas on how voice service could be handled on mobile devices in the future.  However, until Google says “yes this is the Google Phone” we’re probably just looking at a new Android device that Google is testing new features on.  But we can hope.

However, the other day when I was using Gowalla on my iPhone to check in at a place I was at (local business close to my home), I noticed something when Gowalla pulled up the locations I was close to.  What I noticed was an entry labeled “[PERSON'S] House”  (I have omitted the person’s name to protect their privacy at  least a little).  Who in their right mind thought that it was okay to add a personal’s physical residence (where they live) to a social network like this?  This is a huge invasion of privacy on that person’s part.  And if the person who’s house it is, said it was okay, why would they do that?  There are lots of crazies in the world why would you give everyone pinpoint accuracy to where you live.  It’s just not a smart move at all.

I understand that the younger generation has lived in a world of Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and other social networks.  Things like this just weren’t around when I was in my teens (no, I had to use IRC and newsgroups and the web was still young).  Granted, I’m not going to sit here and tell you that everyone on the internet is a child pornographer, perv, or creep.  But people like that do exist and while we have these social networks, one should still exhibit some discretion when they post information to the public internet.  Especially on networks that revolve around location.

To be fair, I do participate in location based social networks (Gowalla fan/user here), but I’m very particular about where I check in at.  Also, when using Tweetie 2’s (iPhone Twitter app) new geo-tagging feature, I turn it off when I’m at home.  I don’t need that level of privacy broken.  Sure, you could probably find the area I live in quite easily based on tweets, pictures, and other miscellaneous info I’ve posted around the internet.  But exact address, nope sorry (unless I’ve designated you allowed to on Facebook which if that’s the case you probably already know it anyway).  But I won’t geo-tag a tweet from home, that’s too much information the internet does not need to have cached somewhere.

People, I implore you, use common sense when using location based social networks.  Don’t put people’s personal residences in to the database and sure as heck don’t allow others to do it (even with consent).  It’s just not a good idea and too much potential bad can come from it.

If you look at my home screen you’ll notice that with exception of a single row most of the apps on my home screen are either the default app, or an app that improves upon exisiting default apps. For example, the Evernote app replaces both the default Notes and Voice Memo apps. Also the Weather Channel app replaces the default Weather app.  You’ll notice that my bottom 4 apps remain unchanged except for the fact that I have jailbroken my device so that I could install the updated version of GV Mobile, giving me a Google Voice app on my phone.  I’ll continue to use this app until Google brings out their nice web app or Apple approves the official iPhone Google Voice app.  The GV Mobile app has replaced the Phone app on my bottom row.

Some of the none default apps you see are:  Tweetie 2, which is hands down the best Twitter app on the iPhone. It doesn’t crash and it’s feature set is fairly complete. Not to mention some of the user interface and user experience touches that really improve it’s usability over other Twitter iPhone apps.  For those that might try to convince me otherwise, I have tried most of more popular Twitter apps for the iPhone.

There’s the Facebook app which really needs zero explaination. The BeeJive IM app which I use to maintain instant msging presence (this is also how I communicate with the wife while on the go). I use the Gowalla app to checkin at places I visit. I prefer Gowalla to FourSquare.  There is also a Safari bookmark to the Houston area traffic map which is a must when driving around Houston at any given time.  And finally there is the Toodledo app which I use to manage my todo list. It syncs with the Toodledo website allowing me to have my todo list anywhere I’m at.

Apps that are not on my main page that I use frequently include the USA Today app for news, Shoutcast and Pandora for streaming music, and the game I’m currently playing is Fling.  Also, I use Wikipanion, which is a great Wikipedia app for the iPhone and essentially turns the iPhone into the Hitchhiker’s Guide.

So there you have it.  My FirstAnd20.  What’s yours?

When it comes to online content, streaming movies through services like Vudu, and Netflix’s “Watch it Now” the content makers are doing one of the best jobs of shotting themselves in the foot, and doing it with the up-most of consistency.

YouTube’s New Policy

Let’s look at the recent YouTube development first.  This announcement pretty much comes on the heals of YouTube releasing 1080p (full HD) video on its site.  Which means if I’m using something to stream YouTube to my HD television, I can get some streams in nice full HD, which makes it really nice to watch on my television.  To a degree it makes sense.  Especially if content makers are going to use YouTube to release content, they’ll definitely want a cut of the financial pie so Google has to take steps to ensure they somehow derive revenue from this.  But not everything on YouTube is put up by Hollywood and there in lies the problem.  There should be no issue with me streaming non-Hollywood content to my TV on an unapproved device.  There’s a simple solution for this, YouTube could simply have a second API that you have to pay to get access to, leaving them with 1 public API and 1 private API.  They’re already monitoring video uploads for copyrighted content and they take those takedown notices very seriously so there should be nothing stopping them from segregating what’s available to different APIs.

Hulu Blocks Boxee

Hulu actually has an argument.  The point of Hulu is to watch TV shows on your computer and having to watch ads.  Since the content on Hulu is provided by Hollywood, they can to some degree control how it’s viewed.  It makes sense that these content makers would rather you watch TV shows on air or on a DVR where they can bombard you with commercials rather than having you watch it on your computer via Hulu where the number of commercials is limited.  In the end though, the lack of being able to stream Hulu to my television is going to cost them viewers and with their recent announcement to start charging soon, Hulu is going to die faster than initially planned, unless they can ink deals with hardware makers and find their way onto things like Blu-Ray players (like Netflix).

Vudu & Netflix “Watch it Now”

Finally, something that makes zero sense.  Movie studios purposefully hold back video from providers like Vudu and Netflix.  Example, on Vudu if I want to rent the HDX version (near Blu-Ray quality video) on my LG Blu-Ray player, on many movies I have to wait a month after the movie is available to purchase.  These studios do the same thing with Netflix’s “Watch Instantly” for newer movies.  In fact, the Netflix instant watch feature is loaded with movies and television shows that are either old, B grade, or even just flat out unwatchable.  Yes, there are some good titles available but they are generally the exception rather than the rule.

The logic behind this is that I won’t go and buy it if I can rent it for cheap.  Which is completely the wrong thought process because really, if I’m iffy on a movie, I won’t buy it period.  However, if I can rent it or see it cheaply (say Vudu streaming rental or Netflix “Watch it Now”) I’m more likely to buy it if I enjoy the flick.  In fact I have purchased several movies due to seeing them using “old-fashioned” Netflix (you know, where you actually get a DVD in the mail).

Conclusion

All these companies are doing the same basic thing.  They are limiting how we can watch content.  They are dictating how we are allowed to watching something rather than letting the market tell them how we want to watch content.

They think that if they can control how we watch content they can in turn control how we buy it.  And this is just backwards.  Let the market figure out how it wants to watch content and then do that.  Because long term, how the average consumer actually consumes content will change.

While people will argue the merits of this OS up and down over the next year, and when it’s finally released (by the 2010 holiday season), I wanted to point out a few things I found both good and bad about the ideas presented at the announcement.

Some things to like about it are:

1. Very fast boot up
2. Cloud based storage (your data can’t be “lost” because its not on the machine)
3. Secure, the OS (since it’s a browser) doesn’t trust anything. And it does a check on boot up to ensure that hash keys match against google servers, if they don’t then the machine is basically wiped and reinstalled on the fly.

Some things to NOT like:

1. No native apps. While not a big deal long term this might affect people’s initial opinion/adoption at first
2. Will require new hardware designed with this OS in mind. You can’t download and install it to a current machine. (You can apparently can currently install to a Asus Eee PC, but it requires some hacking).
3. Requires an internet connection. They didn’t go over the “offline mode” in great detail at the event, but the release is 1 year off and google has offline tools (Google Gears), which will probably come in to play here.

Overall, I think that this will be pretty nifty if still very niche.  I think that there’s a good chance that this won’t succeed like Google would like.  But I think that the fact that they are making efforts in moving the web forward (something very important to them) is a good thing.  Chrome OS is innovative even if it might not be overly functional.  But what we saw yesterday was an early preview and they did say many things will change between now and the official release.  I for one am interested in at least giving it a go to see what it’s going to be like.

If you want to get an idea of what this OS will be like, download Google Chrome and run it full screen on your computer and don’t run ANY desktop applications.  Or you can pick up a VMWare or VirtualBox image at Gdgt.

iPhone Changes the Game

Lets start at the beginning, when the iPhone came out it drastically changed out the consumer market thought about phones, smartphones specifically.  Before the iPhone, smartphones were the Treo, BlackBerry, and Windows Mobile.  They weren’t really for the consumer market and general consumers largely ignored them in favor of phones like the Motorola RAZR and other small cell phones.  The iPhone was a revolution.  It made smartphones interesting to the average person.  ”You mean I can have my email, internet, and cool apps with my phone? Sweet!” is probably what normal people started to think and those RAZRs started to look less cool, even if they were thin.

So the iPhone changed the smartphone world.  It turned it upside down.  All of sudden it wasn’t just enough to be functional, it had to be at least a little flashy too, it had to be fairly easy to use, and it definitely couldn’t be bulky.

Enter Android

Google, never to be out of a market for very long released it’s Android mobile operating system soon after the iPhone’s release.  One could argue that Google was planning this move long before the iPhone was announced.  But it was everything the iPhone wasn’t with a little bit of what the iPhone was.  It could have the flash and usability of the iPhone but with the openness of the Linux operating system.

That’s what Android represents.  Openness.  The ability to completely customize the user experience for the device, the ability to dig into the internals and make it work well with your hardware.  It means that developers can develop applications for it regardless of platform.  But there’s a downside.  With Google releasing an OS it relinquishes the control on the hardware the operating system can go on.  This is why the iPhone works as well as it does.  Apple doesn’t just control the software, but the hardware too.  Apple works to ensure that their software runs well on their hardware.  They limit the points of failure because they control both elements completely.  But that doesn’t mean Android is destined for failure.

Hello Moto.. I Mean Droid

Motorola has taken a different approach with Android that HTC and others haven’t yet.  They’ve really worked to control the software on their hardware.  They’ve proven (quite well I might add) that if you really work with Android on your hardware, you can bring a really nice device to the market.  Does it beat the iPhone? No, it doesn’t but it does show that Android is a nice contender and that Apple and Microsoft need to worry.

What Motorola has done is something similar to Apple in that they’re releasing solid hardware and taking serious control of the software that goes on that hardware.  Rather than spending money on R&D to write their own mobile OS, they are spending time ensuring that Android runs well on their hardware.  This is going to save them money in the long run because Android is a complete OS that’s ready to go. Motorola just has to worry about tweaking it to run on their hardware.  And because of the openness of Android, they can really control the software just like Apple does.  Motorola proved with the RAZR that they can design nice, flashy, consumer friendly hardware, it was the software that was never perfect.

In the End

When it’s all said and done, the Droid doesn’t beat the iPhone.  It’s a nice device though, regardless of what the iPhone fanboys say on the internet.  Motorola has proven that Android is a force to be reckoned with.  No, Android still isn’t all the way there, but with each successive release it comes with notable improvements and Google isn’t looking to put Android to rest.  Motorola itself has bet the farm on Android, almost literally (there isn’t an ACTUAL farm).  I would keep an eye on Android devices over the next few years, Apple’s got some competition and they would be doing themselves a disservice if they didn’t try to keep the iPhone relevant and moving forward.  Yes Apple, you changed the game, but you can’t rest on that forever,  you have to keep moving forward.  Android’s getting there and Google has shown that they’re serious, and Motorola has shown Android can be a nice mobile operating system.

What is Boxee

Boxee is a piece of downloadable software that runs on Linux, Windows, and Mac OSX.  Boxee allows you to watch videos off your network, and gives you easy access to videos from online sources like Revision3, ABC, other video sources online.  It’s designed with the use of a remote in mind and is based on the popular XBMC (XBox Media Center) project.

The Goods

Boxee is very easy to use.  I was able to get it installed (on Linux), was quickly able to point it at my network shares containing videos and music files.  It index my videos, grabbing information about them from various online places (like TheTVDB and IMDB).  It comes with some nice default installed plugins and applications, my favorite among those is the Pandora application which is quite nice.  The fact that Boxee automatically downloads video information and reviews for various albums it finds is quite nice and means that a new user needs to spend no time on organizing their collection with things like NFO files and thumbnails.

Navigation through the application is nice, simple, and if you’re using a remote it is easy.  When browsing movies or TV shows you can see nice thumbnails for the movie or TV show.  You also can see summaries for those movies and television show episodes.  They also grab reviews and ratings so you have a good idea of what you’re getting ready to watch or listen to.

The plugins are extremely nice and if you are willing to add third party application repositories, you can really fill out your Boxee experience with a large amount of content from all of the internet.  Things from CBS, Revision3, Cartoon Network, even MIT’s Open Courseware.  There’s lots of content here and as Boxee grows in popularity, the amount of plugins will continue to grow.

The Bad

While Boxee might be based on XBMC, it pulls some of it’s best features out.  For one thing if you’ve set up your video collection and have it all ready for XBMC with fanart, NFO files, and thumbnails: Boxee doesn’t use these files at all.  So when Boxee starts loading up your movies it ignores the NFO file and will on many occasions find info for the wrong movie.  For example, my wife purchased the current Rob Zombie remake of “Halloween” but Boxee insists on showing the poster and info for the original film from 1978, even after telling Boxee that it is the recent remake.  It doesn’t use DVD order for TV shows (example, Firefly).  It also completely ignores some movies (like in my case “1408″).  And the recommended “naming conventions” are just about worthless.

Why on earth would you gut XBMC and take out one of it’s best features.  Considering that XBMC was designed for exactly the kind of thing Boxee wants to do, to have Boxee turn off or rip out such an important piece seems like a poor decision.

Another thing that seems to be missing is XBMC’s ability to skin the interface.  There are some really nice skins for XBMC (see Aeon).  I guess one reason to not allow skinning is to control the UI completely and on some level I get that, but the kind of people that would use an alpha product are the kind of people that want to customize.  I would personally love an Aeon like skin, it really impresses when showing off.  This isn’t really a deal killer, just kind of a “nice to have” because customizing the experience is kind of nice.

Overall

In the end, Boxee offers a lot, and the fact that it’s in alpha means that one can kind of forgive some of these things that I consider drastic oversights.  Hopefully the beta (due next month) will resolve some of these issues.  I think as the product grows and matures it has the possibility to bring something nice to the area of HTPC software.  However, if XBMC gets a nice Pandora app/plug-in, I’ll probably switch back to using that full time as I’m more familiar with it and like it’s skinning abilities.

If you’ve never used Hulu before, here’s the basic premise.  Shows from the major networks (ABC, Fox, CBS, NBC, etc) can be watched in both standard and high definition via the Hulu website.  The catch is there are some small (less than 30 second) commercials inserted through out the show.  The commercials are shorter than those you’d watch on regular TV and less frequent.  Giving people a nice way to catch the shows they missed the night before, and give TV people a way to make money.  The idea behind Hulu was to eliminate the need for people to illegally download shows through things like BitTorrent.  The good news is, it mostly worked.  Yes, people still download torrents, but Hulu as an idea worked quite well.  People, in general, were willing to put up with the short commercials in trade for the ability to watch their favorite shows online when they wanted.

However, announcing that you’re going to start charging people without a lot details is a bad idea.  If you are going to remove the commercials and charge your users, then you might have an argument.  However, if you’re going to charge me money and make me sit through commercials, then I’ll have a serious problem (and so will most Hulu users).  It is a bad move to start charging for something people have come to expect to be free, and then on top of that still subject them to the commercials.

It is important to note that Hulu hasn’t announced how a subscription service will work or what it will look like so we will all just have to wait and see.  Personally Hulu’s content providers need to wake up and realize that they’ll send people back to torrents and other illegal means of getting their favorite shows if they back a bad subscription model.  They already lost favor when they made Hulu block things like Boxee, so they really don’t need to earn themselves anymore bad ire.

So I tried to make use of Foursquare.  Whenever I went somewhere I’d try to check in.  This is where the problems started.  The Foursquare iPhone app, is horrible.  It doesn’t do one of the things it should do, search for locations based on your current GPS or cell signal location.  If I’m in my home town of Katy and do a search for Jason’s Deli (because that’s where I am with my family), it should find the Jason’s Deli on Mason Road.  Nope, it pulls up the Jason’s Deli location that’s in downtown Houston, 27 miles away from where I’m at.  In internet meme terms, this is known as “FAIL” (ie broken).

Enter Gowalla.  Gowalla is similar to Foursquare in that it is a location based social network with a game element.  You can get points for visiting certain places and there are “trips” you can take that involve checking in at multiple locations.  Successfully completing a trip earns you points.

But Gowalla does something that Foursquare can’t seem to do (at least for me).  When I go to check in, it pulls up surrounding spots based on my GPS or cell signal location.  In other words, it actually uses my location to determine where I might be.  I have found one bug (but I haven’t check to see if its fixed in the latest version).  That bug is if I check in from inside a building (no GPS signal), if the cell tower it’s getting my location from is not on top of the building I’m in, then it won’ t let me check in, it tells me that I’m not actually at that location.  While I understand what the point of this is, there should be some leeway to say if you’re within a certain radius, allow the check in.

But that’s not all that Gowalla handles better.  If you try to check in at a place that isn’t in their list, you can add a new place to the GPS coordinates for where you are at.  In Foursquare, you need to have the address of where you are at (very annoying).  You simply type the name of the place, assign it a category and it adds the location to Gowalla’s database and then you can check in there.

In the end, I have chosen to go with Gowalla over Foursquare.  There are some elements of Foursquare that are fun and it definitely is more fun for people that go out all the time.  But the lack of ability to check in based on my location and needing to know the address to add a new place is a huge hindrance for me.  Gowalla suits my lifestyle a lot better and to me their iPhone app is just flat out better.  Foursquare is riding Dodgeball coat tails (the same people are behind both services), but it needs to get its act together when it comes to its iPhone app because for a location based service it kind of stinks.

My Gowalla Profile: mkoby