Archive for the 'tech' Category

“Blessed be the mobile phone users…”

In a strange mix of religion and technology, the Times is reporting on the Anglican parish of St. Lawrence Jewry in London holding a public “blessing of the smartphones.”  Apparently picking up on the medieval “Plough Monday” tradition of blessing agricultural equipment,  the Rev. Canon David Parrott allowed iPhones, BlackBerrys and laptops to be place on the altar for a special blessing.

This was Church 2.0. Behind him, the altar resembled a counter at PC World. Upon it, laid out like holy relics, were four smart phones, one Apple laptop and one Dell…

…Then, after another hymn, came the blessing of the smart phones. The Lord Mayor of London offered his BlackBerry to Canon Parrott, which was received with due reverence and placed upon the altar.

Then the congregation held their phones in the air, and Canon Parrott addressed the Almighty. “By your blessing, may these phones and computers, symbols of all the technology and communication in our daily lives, be a reminder to us that you are a God who communicates with us and who speaks by your Word. Amen.”

Despite my affinity for both Church and tech, I find all of this a bit bizarre.

AT&T goes after Google Voice

For those who think AT&T had no blood on their hands regarding the Google Voice iPhone app, you might be right. That doesn’t mean they like the service though. Phonescoop is reporting that they have filed a complaint against Google for blocking certain numbers.

AT&T alleges that Google Voice blocks customers from calling certain numbers, thereby violating FCC regulations. AT&T likens the call-blocking to the call for net neutrality, and says that if phone companies need to all play by the same rules, then so do internet companies such as Google. Google Voice is a call-forwarding system that lets users give out one central phone number and have it ring other phone lines when called. It allows users to maintain some degree of privacy, as well as consolidate services. Google does block Voice customers from calling adult chat lines and some conference call systems due to the high fees levied by those services.

“The best camera is the one that’s with you.” [Updated]

[Updated on 2009-09-25 09:20]

I’m an aspiring amateur photographer.  I just recently put down my 35mm SLR and invested in my first digital SLR.  I’m not all that good yet, but I love taking pictures and capturing unique moments. I am quite inspired by people who see things in everyday life and envision them as intriguing images. With that in mind, I found my way to a set of photos by Chase Jarvis (h/t Daring Fireball).  These are pretty amazing pictures on their own.  What is even more amazing is that they were all taken using his iPhone.  Jarvis’s opinion is that “the best camera is the one that’s with you,” and that in almost all cases even a camera phone can result in amazing images.

Jarvis announced Tuesday that he has released a book of his iPhone photos, appropriately named The Best Camera Is The One That’s With You.  He has taken it a bit further by releasing “The Best Camera” iPhone app ($2.99, iTunes link) that allows for photo processing and sharing all within the same app.  Along with the app is an online community for sharing photos at www.thebestcamera.com.  This is a really interesting project, and I can’t wait to see how it develops.

For more info, watch the introduction by Jarvis in the video below.

UPDATE:  Reviews in the app store for the iPhone app are generally good, but the biggest complaint is a watermark on images uploaded to Facebook with the text “Uploaded from Chase Jarvis’ Best Camera.” Users are rightfully upset that their images from an app they paid for were being tagged this way. Apparently it was a mistake. TheBestCamera.com acknowledges it on their support page:

We have discovered a bug in the app that affects Facebook captions in two ways.
First, if you do not write a Facebook when uploading your image via the sharing page on Best Camera, your caption says “Uploaded from Chase Jarvis’ Best Camera”. This text was created as dummy text in the development of the app and and was not intended to act as your default caption.
Second, if you do enter a caption for Facebook and then share your image to BOTH Facebook and thebestcamera.com, your Facebook caption is being replaced by the default caption. The current work around is to upload your image to thebestcamera.com and Facebook separately, thus retaining the Facebook caption you’ve entered.

We have built a 1.01 release which will correct both of these problems and is currently in the approval process at the App Store. We’ll announce as soon as the new version is available.

Music publishers want more of your money

Imagine that: Someone in the record industry wants more money.  Shocking, I know.  According to cnet news, music publishers are the latest victims of the digital age.  Apparently, they make pennies on the dollar for tracks sold on iTunes and in other digital music stores.

To be fair, I don’t know the complete business model for digital music well enough to say whether music publishers are or are not getting screwed.  I do know if these folks are going to get paid more, it’s coming out of our pockets, and as the article points out, the outcry is just now starting to settle from Apple’s move a few months ago to implement the first iTunes Music Store price increase.

The kicker to me is that they want to come after other music “sources” in iTunes as well.  These include music in movies and TV shows, streaming radio, and even the 30-second previews for songs in the the store.  This just seems a bit greedy to me.

“In the U.S. while we do get paid a mechanical (licensing fee) from ITunes [sic], we are not getting any performance income from Apple yet,” David Renzer, chairman and CEO of Universal Music Publishing Group, said in interview late last month with entertainment-industry publication, Encore. “(On iTunes) you can stream radio, and you can preview (tracks), things that we should be getting paid performance income for.

“Also, if you download a film or TV show,” Renzer continued, “there’s no performance (payment) and typically there’s no mechanical (payment) either.”  (from cnet)

It might be true that they don’t get paid for these things, but I really don’t think they should come digging around the digital consumer for money.  Talk to the studios about the movie and TV show issue.  Talk to the radio stations about streaming radio.  As for the 30-second previews, just give it up.  We are already paying up to $1.29 per track.  Keep pushing this agenda and a lot of people will fall back on much cheaper ways to acquire music, TV shows, and movies, which result in zero royalties.

Oh, and they are so upset that they are going to ask congress to intercede.  Good thing congress doesn’t have anything on its plate right now.

The Google Voice iPhone app saga goes to the FCC [Updated]

USA Today is reporting (via MacRumors) that comments are being filed with the FCC regarding Apple’s rejection of the Google Voice app in the iPhone App Store.  Apparently, Apple is not the only company facing questions.  Google may have some questions to answer on the related subject of the crippled version of Skype on their Android operating system.

Why: Consumers who use Android, the Google-developed operating system for wireless devices, can’t use Skype, a leading Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service. A pioneer in free Internet calling, Skype allows you to talk as long as you want without draining cellphone minutes.

Android users get Skype Lite, a watered-down version of the original that routes calls over traditional phone networks — not the Internet. As a result, long-distance calls are still cheap or free, but cellphone minutes are gobbled up every time a Skype Lite call is made…

…Google’s explanation would seem to suggest that T-Mobile requested the block on Skype, but the carrier says that’s not the case. “T-Mobile has not asked Google to block that service,” says spokesman Joe Farren, referring to original Skype [sic]. – USA Today

In both of these cases, it is clear that neither the carriers nor OS providers want to take the blame.  Maybe the FCC can break this problem open and make progress, but as stated before, “consider me skeptical.”

UPDATE: Apple says it acted alone in rejecting the app.  Something still smells fishy here, but if this is the case, bad Apple!