Oh the Places You'll Go

I played foursquare.  I quit. I got annoyed with having to check in.  I probably would have kept up with it, had its point system not been so whack.

One thing that I never did...connect it to Facebook.  I have over 2,200 friends on Facebook. I didn't want all of them to see where I was at any given point.

I'm sure you are all well aware that now Facebook has their own Places feature.

I tried it out.  It's the exact same as foursquare without the whacked out point system. And you can't be a mayor of a place.

I want to like the idea of sharing with friends where I am. If I go somewhere cool (like the Grand Canyon or the Apple Store), I want to be able to easily tell people that I was there. But I definitely don't want it to be available to people who I don't know.

I considered two different things: De-friend people who I don't want to see my places. Or change my "places" settings to only the people I wanted to see it. Both of which are a considerable amount of work.

Facebook's mission is to make the world more open. We get that.  We even kind of like it.  Otherwise they wouldn't have 500 Million Users. It's been a great way to keep in touch with people who we haven't seen in awhile.  It's a MUCH more effective way to communicate than email lists.  It's a much more effective way to just casually keep up with one another.  Something that we didn't do before. It has done incredible things for networking for political campaigns.

But location, that's a big hump to get over.  Seriously, how many people do you know that went and unlisted their phone numbers and addresses?  How many of you had timers that you set when you left for a trip so that the radio would play and lights would come on during certain times of the day?

We Americans worry about people following us. That's why celebrities can't publicize their wedding. We lock our doors when we leave to throw out the trash.

Of course, there are some people that sharing my location with could be fun with.  My family, my close friends, oh wait...that's it.  That was the best part of foursquare-it was a new community who could only see your location if you were near them and they played too.  With Facebook places, anyone you let see them can see them. Even if they don't check in.  Even if they're not nearby.

So, for now, I'm doing a mix of the two.  I'm de-friending people who I don't know, I think might be sketchy, people who I shouldn't have friended in the first place, and others.  Sorry if you're one of these.  If you're reading this, you probably aren't.

But I'm going to try Places.  I like being an early adopter, so I'll give it a try.  If it seems to be too much work or annoying, it'll probably go the way of foursquare. Who knows, I might even pick up foursquare again too.  But I'm going to add people I trust with my location by name inside of Facebook privacy settings.  Both of these are going to be a lot of work, wish me luck.

Chances of you seeing my Places...are pretty small.

Once I get all of my friends back down to a manageable number, I'll reassess this location aware idea.  Maybe I'll make it available to my friends.  It's just not safe right now.

Anyone else thinking about this stuff?

-B

UPDATE: Forgot to include this video (Facebook's attempt at a FaceTime type video...I don't get emotional over knowing where a friend is though...)

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfX_ZQag1BM]

Flash For Android

Enough Said.

I’m the last person on earth who wanted to believe Steve Jobs when he told Walt Mossberg at D8 that “Flash has had its day.” I took it as nothing more than showmanship when Jobs shared his thoughts on Flash and wrote that “Flash is closed and proprietary, has major technical drawbacks, and doesn’t support touch based devices.” After spending time playing withFlash Player 10.1 on the new Droid 2, the first Android 2.2 phone to come with the player pre-installed, I’m sad to admit that Steve Jobs was right. Adobe’s offering seems like it’s too little, too late.

Cult of Verizon

Yeah, it's that time.  Verizon iPhone rumors are running around more crazy than usual and this may just be it this time. Even if you're not interested in Apple, Verizon, AT&T, or this tech stuff in general, I think you may still find this post interesting.  Read on.

Ever since the iPhone released in 2007, rumors have been abuzz about when the phone might go to what was considered (at that time) to be the nation's strongest and fastest growing network.

Fast forward three years and four iPhone models later...the phone is still on one carrier (although in many countries it has been and is on several).  Even after all that time, many many people (including myself) are still on AT&T and own an iPhone.  Even better, most of those users like the phone so much that their next phone...will be an iPhone.  Even after the "antenna gate" situation, the return rate for the iPhone 4 was staggeringly low.

I think it is clear and fair to say that most iPhone users like their experience on their phone so much that they'll wait in line for the next one. On. Day. One.

The truth is, iPhone users are experiencing what Mac users have been experiencing since the original Macintosh.  A cult atmosphere.

Those who were already members of "Cult of Mac", only got worse when the iPhone debuted.  Apple has, without question, a following of elitists who believe more in the product than many do in their own faith.

So, I began thinking...what would happen if the iPhone went to Verizon?  Are iPhone customers that in love with AT&T?  The obvious answer is no.

But you've got to think for a second...think of what AT&T did for Apple.  Before the iPhone, the carrier controlled everything on a cell phone.  They controlled who manufactured it, they controlled the software, they controlled the apps(though there were virtually none), and because of this, they controlled you.  Verizon was infamous for this.  Every Verizon handset was locked down more than any other handset in the world.

Apple wasn't interested in that.  In fact, Apple didn't even show AT&T the iPhone until the very last second.  Apple wanted to do whatever they wanted to the phone, they just wanted the carrier to...carry the network.  This was groundbreaking. AT&T took a risk to try something new with Apple.  Something that Verizon turned down.

What's the most important aspect of this? The logo.

Look all over an iPhone, you won't find an AT&T logo on the device.  NO CARRIER IN THE WHOLE WORLD gets to put their logo on Apple's device.  Apple did the same thing with the Intel's stickers.

Keep that in mind, but put it to the side for a second.

I kept thinking to myself, why don't I like the idea of a Verizon iPhone?  By almost all accounts, a Verizon iPhone would be a much better product.  Still, something about it didn't seem right to me.  Was it because of their old technology? Was it because the Droid commercials fought against the iPhone so strongly? Was it because they originally turned down the iPhone?  Was it because I just signed a two year agreement with AT&T to get the new iPhone? Was it because Google and Verizon seem to be best friends as of late (Steve has obviously not been in full support of Google recently)?

Then I realized why I didn't like the idea of a Verizon iPhone.  Users!  I didn't like Verizon for the same reason that Windows users didn't like me.  I hate the fact that they're always talking about how much better their service is.  PC users hate the fact that I'm always talking about how much better Apple is. Duh! And, if the best handset in the world were to go to the best carrier, their arrogance might get worse! OH NO! :-)

Get ready for this...Verizon is a cult.

Verizon has put more effort into their brand and name..."Can you hear me now?" than any other carrier.  AT&T and Sprint had a name for themselves already. They've been offering phone service under their names for a long time (though Verizon was formed from a split in AT&T a long time ago and Cingular was the name that AT&T was under during the first iPhone). T-Mobile came in from oversees and bought up some of the smaller GSM carriers.

Verizon focused on two things: 1)Making their network the largest and best and 2) Making everyone believe that it was.

Think about it, Verizon users are in love with...Verizon.  People who bought the Droid aren't necessarily in love with Android, although it does everything they need it to do.  They aren't in love with Motorola (the hardware manufacturer), they're in love with an iPhone competitor being on Verizon.  Even though their network data speeds are slower, their radio technology older and dying, Verizon came out with commercials that simply told people that they were the best.  They had great coverage and leveraged that to make everyone believe (because it was mostly true) that they were the best.

It was genius.

So, people are in love with Verizon.  They love their service. They put up with their phones.  For a long time, every Verizon handset had the same crappy software on it.  The phones were incredibly locked down. But because the customer believed Verizon to have the best coverage, they got the phone they had to.  After all, when you pick a cell phone carrier, wouldn't you pick the one with the best service?

Verizon is a cult.  Moreso than any other carrier in this nation.  Verizon people love their carrier like Apple people like their computer maker.

The question becomes, can two cults participate together?

Remember the logo?  Every Verizon phone has the Verizon logo on it. Verizon wants you to know first and foremost that that phone is on Verizon.  This is why the name "Droid" has almost become synonymous with Verizon. No Apple iPhone (worldwide) has a carrier logo on it.  Apple wants you to know, without a shadow of a doubt that that phone was made by Apple.

Once again, can these two work together?

I think, as silly as it sounds, that there should be some serious consideration given to the fact that Verizon wants their logo on every phone.  This would include the iPhone. I don't see Apple EVER allowing that.

Would that be enough to stop the deal?  I think that it's very possible. We will see come January.

For more info on a Verizon iPhone this coming January, see Daring Fireball.

-B

Beatles on iTunes?

It's well known fact that iTunes has changed the music industry. Some say for good, some say for bad, I say for...permanently. Other companies like Amazon and so on have followed suit, but iTunes remains the main reason that the industry's business model hurt.

To this day, it is amazing to me that places like Target and FYE can even attempt to still carry music at more than $10 an album. Very few people don't own an iPod or mp3 player, and NO ONE carries around a Walkman anymore.

Yoko Ono said in an interview with Reuters that it will be awhile until The Beatles catalog of songs will be found in the digital music scene. They(Ono, McCartney, Starr, Olivia Harrison) aren't "happy" with some of the thoughts and desires that Steve Jobs has for the catalog and it's distribution.

You cant buy Beatles music digitally.

Yet they still sell albums. Lots of them.

Perhaps The Beatles are one of the only groups that will be able to survive this digital transition.

I don't see Ke$ha sales performing the same way in the same situation.

Interesting...

Android sales overtake iPhone in the US vs.

With iPad, Apple is number 3 in the world for portable computers

How much of the Android thing is due to Verizon, and consumers hatred of AT&T?

and...

Many say that the iPad is not a portable computer. Why wouldn't it be?

ON ANDROID VS. IPHONE:

The trouble with this horse race, however, is that one horse’s progress is being measured in meters while the other is being measured in yards. The comparison between Android and the iPhone is meaningless. The true comparison is between Android and iOS, Apple’s mobile operating system. Android’s activation numbers are not device dependent. Apple’s shouldn’t be either.  If we are going to truly compare the two mobile OSs we need to include sales of iPads and iPod Touches. Add them into the mix and the data shows that Android is catching up but still isn’t close.

Here’s the math: I think we can all agree that Apple is selling iPhones at a rate of 4 million a month. Add the 1 million iPads/month Apple is selling and another 1.85 million/month as a guestimate for iPod Touch sales and you get … wait for it …  6.85 million iOS devices a month, or 42 percent more than Android. Apple doesn’t consistently provide iPod Touch numbers, but over the years it has provided enough data to make an educated guess.

Conclusion: iPod Touch sales have conservatively run about two-thirds of iPhone sales. If Apple sold 8.4 million iPhones last quarter, that means it sold 5.5 million iPod Touches, or 1.85 million a month.

Read More http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/07/letter-from-silicon-valley-doing-the-androidapple-math/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wired%2Findex+%28Wired%3A+Index+3+%28Top+Stories+2%29%29/#ixzz0vT1Z80gd

Ridiculous

A little over ten years ago people wondered if Apple, the creator and popularizer of the personal computer, would have to shut its doors.  Jobs says himself that when he returned to the company in 1996 that Apple was literally 90 days away from shutting down.  Even after Jobs returned, the future looked bleak. On Friday Apple opened another retail store in Philadelphia.  The writer of Daring Fireball, John Gruber, was there to check out the scenery.

Let's just say that this company isn't hurting anymore.  Look at this line:

[vimeo http://www.vimeo.com/13784781]

-B

Think Different

Anyone who knows me, knows that I am always incredibly inspired by Apple Inc. Moreover, I am inspired by their leadership under Steve Jobs. I spend more time than I should watching clips and videos of Steve's presentations and his explanations of how things are and should be.

There isn't much on YouTube regarding Steve Jobs that I haven't seen.  But, this morning, I came upon this clip (of which I hadn't laid eyes on previously).  It's a rare look at Steve as he explains the thinking behind their incredibly popular "Think Different" marketing campaign.  If you have a few minutes, watch this and listen to what he says.  Listen for his vision on how computers are more than task accomplishing boxes, but rather instruments that help people change the world.  The original Think Different campaign ad is at the end of the clip.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmG9jzCHtSQ]

It occurred to me that Apple has ALWAYS been about thinking different. In nearly every product that Steve watched over, this has been a frequent concept.

In 1977, Apple introduced the Apple II, the first successful personal computer.  Novel idea then. Huge advancement over Apple I.

In 1984, Apple introduced the Macintosh, the first machine to use a mouse and a Graphical User Interface.  Truly bringing computer usage to the masses. No more having to remember command line codes to do simple tasks.

In 1991, Apple took the popular design of portable computers (laptops had the keyboard close to the user, with an empty space behind it) and flipped the design, allowing space for palm rests and an area for a trackball to act as a mouse.  This idea seemed to catch on.  I haven't seen a laptop without this design in my memory.

In 1998, Apple released the iMac, after finally getting Steve Jobs back to the company. The iMac was designed by Jony Ive and brought a unique design with an all in one interface to the market.  In other words, there wasn't a tower along with a monitor, along with speakers, that all had to be hooked up to one another in a mess of cables. All in one.  Relatively new concept.

In 2001, Apple decided that portable media wasn't good enough and that digital music was where the industry was leading.  So, they introduced the iPod.  I'm not sure that anyone knew at the time how revolutionary that product would be.  It saved Apple and changed our world.  They weren't the first company to have a hard disk media player, but they did rethink the software integration required to make a great product. Ease of use wins.

Also in 2001, Apple rethought tech support when it opened it's retail stores.  To this day, if you have a problem with an Apple product, you call or visit Apple.  They don't send you to India to talk to HP or Dell, and then they don't tell you that it's a software issue and transfer you back to Microsoft.  Apple makes the hardware.  Apple makes the software.  Apple fixes your problem if it's under warranty.  As frustrating as an issue may be, at least you know that you have one place to visit and ask.

In 2007, Apple released a phone unlike anything anyone had seen.  It was basically a big screen. Talk about thinking different.  It didn't use a stylus (which all "touch screen" devices did at the time) and it integrated music better than anything on the market (including Apple's own products at the time, by the way).  You were able to play YouTube with a touch of your finger, anywhere in the world. The important thing about the iPhone too was that Apple took a different approach to working with a carrier than anyone else had at the time.  They did not let the carrier dictate what was on the phone anymore.  Anyone who has used an early Verizon cell phone knows the hurt that carrier dictation can play on a device.  Even Google's "open" Android can't keep this from happening today. And AT&T (Cingular at the time) took a huge leap to allow them to do this.  It changed the world and the industry in one feel swoop. And according to recent reports, wasn't always easy for either company (great read if you have time).

In January 2010, Apple released the first mass market tablet device. It used a finger instead of a stylus and had an Operating System that allowed this to work, instead of one based off of pen input. Windows tablets have existed for a long time, but none had the appeal and potential of the iPad.  As of D8, Apple was selling an iPad every 3 seconds.  Hurt economy anyone?

THIS is why I love Apple and am continually inspired by their work.

If the church wants to come back from it's dying days, I see it as having two options: Hire Steve Jobs (highly unlikely) or learn to Think Different. Friends, the world needs to change and the opportunity is in front of us.

-B

Yelp! for Christians

My good friend Ashley started a blog when she moved out to Los Angeles. She is incredibly talented and pursuing a career in acting.  For now, she meets a lot of famous people. I thought about calling this blog "Bryant in Ra-Ra Land" but it just didn't seem to work. (Im kidding, obviously)  But it is a new experience for me, to move to a place that isn't within driving distance of either one of our parents.

Allison and I are new to the Raleigh, NC area and I've already been blessed with an opportunity to lead worship in a nearby town of Cary, NC at a new church start.  However, one of the things that Allie and I have missed is the opportunity to actually go to church.

So, because we are committed at this church on Sunday mornings, we thought it would be fun to "church shop" on Saturday nights or Sunday nights.  Besides, it is fun for me to explore other churches and see what is going on in this area.

Now, Steve Jobs said a few months back when he introduced iAds that something interesting is happening in the smart phone market that wasn't happening on the desktop.  "When people want to find a place to go out to dinner, they're not searching, they're going into Yelp!" [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7WVt63S49s] And it's true.  Now that Allie and I have moved to a new area, we are finding that it is difficult to make an educated decision on which churches might work for us in our situation or even what else is going on in the churches around us.

So I thought, what would happen if churches had a mobile app (because that's where the action is) to help people find a church that they would enjoy?  Like UrbanSpoon for Churches.  Why is the business world so far ahead of us in this?  I could tell the app when I would like to attend church and what style of service I am interested in and then shake the device.  It would find me results that are the closest to my location.  The United Methodist Church seems like it would have a good setup to be able to get this running relatively quickly.  I mean, this kind of information has to be documented already right?

I was asked a few weeks ago what the church's take on technology should be.  I think the first thing the church ought to do is not fall behind. This would be a good place to start.

I mean, almost every church has a website.  And almost every church has loads on information on this site. Many churches are on Facebook and Twitter.  But why should I have to consult Google and do a blind search for a church that I think I might connect with.

Like Microsoft marketed, I need a decision engine.  For churches.

Think about it.

-B

What the heck is that?!

I have often wanted to tweet, "I think my problem is that I have too many interests.  Never get to be excellent at any one thing." When I was speaking to a group of people a few months back, I was introduced as someone who is beginning ministry by "dovetailing" several things together.  Admittedly, I didn't really knew what she meant.  Enter, Wikipedia.

Undoubtedly you are aware of a dovetailed joint, if not by name, then by sight.  They're everywhere in woodworking.  What I like so much about the concept is the resistance to being pulled apart.  Like all of us, they're interwoven in a way that make a strong infrastructure.  Primitive, yes.  But, strong nonetheless.  In that way, we are all like a dovetailed joint.  The things that make us up, make it hard to pull apart who we are.  This is...for the better.  I think.

It was at this point that I realized that all these things that interest me, music, church, technology, faith, etc. actually make up who I am.

I'm not sure why I want to start a blog.  I'm way behind on this blog thing anyhow. I do know that I have often wanted to explain my thoughts or feelings on a given topic but needed time to think through my ideas.  I could write a book (and anyone can publish one of those nowadays) but that sounds like a lot of work.  Maybe after I write this blog, I'll do just that.

You're probably asking yourself, "Self, what will this blog be about?"  Who knows.  I think I'll talk about music.  I'll probably talk about ministry.  I'm sure I'll touch on technology. I guess I'll talk about what makes up "me". I'll annoy you with funny videos.  I'll present you with interesting articles I find.  You can choose whether or not to read them.

Now, there are a few things that I have learned about blogging though that annoy me.  So I'll attempt to lay out the things that I'll try not to suck at (and some links to examples). Think of this as our "contract". From writer to reader.

1. Keep up the blog.  If you don't post often, people stop reading.  That's right...you, Mr. TuckTuck.

2. Don't post too much.  No one has time to read EVERYTHING.  No one really cares either.

3. Link to things in the midst of sentences to reenforce a point.  It adds to the experience and cleverness of a post.

4. Don't buy stolen property just to get some more page views. Did you HAVE to click that link? Plus, I didn't pay $5,000 for my iPhone 4.

5. Share great videos and articles whether or not they fit with the blog. After all, blogging is about sharing right?

So, if you stick with me, I think we're in for an adventure.  Sometimes the posts will be long.  Sometimes they'll be short.  Stick with me and subscribe.  I'll try not to let you down.

-B