While I was having dinner tonight at the local diner, I had the pleasure of sitting behind a group of four people that who are either in a community college philosophy course, a cult, or a self-help group. Whatever the scenario, the group “discussion” was being led by a 20-something deadbeat with an iPad (a [...]]]>

While I was having dinner tonight at the local diner, I had the pleasure of sitting behind a group of four people that who are either in a community college philosophy course, a cult, or a self-help group. Whatever the scenario, the group “discussion” was being led by a 20-something deadbeat with an iPad (a white one, too). I’m not sure what he does for a living, because he “doesn’t put labels on himself,” but I was able to – for free – glean these gems of wisdom over the course of my meal:

• You only have to smile for a micro-minute for someone to know you smiled.
• Communication is only abstract so much as it is scientific.
• WordPress is computer code that makes websites.
• When criticizing someone, leave a long pause afterwards in order to impart the value of revelation.
• The field of Graphic Designs is evolving.
• Communication Skills dictate that you explain your thesis for 5-10 minutes.

Seriously, this was like reading spambot comments aloud for an hour. I hope these four people aren’t the voting kind, because this just shattered my faith in humanity.

The most popular post on this blog, by far, has been what I wrote about using Evernote like Instapaper. Well, time has passed, and that post is completely outdated, yet it continues to get hits. Here’s what’s different these days. First, both Instapaper and Readability have become a lot more useful as standalone tools. Instapaper [...]]]>

The most popular post on this blog, by far, has been what I wrote about using Evernote like Instapaper. Well, time has passed, and that post is completely outdated, yet it continues to get hits. Here’s what’s different these days.

First, both Instapaper and Readability have become a lot more useful as standalone tools. Instapaper is supported in just about every reading app on every platform, mobile and web. Both Instapaper and Readbility support really rich Kindle delivery, and really nice rich formatting. And as of last week, both services are free. Personally, I’ve been using Readability to manage my reading list, and I’ve given up on Evernote.

However, I know a lot of you are still looking for a good method. The bookmarklet in my previous post linked Readability’s formatting to Evernote’s storage. Well, it turns out that Evernote has removed the middleman, and created a totally self-contained service called Clearly.

Their website does a nice job explaining it, but in a nutshell, it strips away the formatting from a page, presents it in a nice readable format, and allows you to save this unformatted article to your Evernote account. It even parses multi-page articles to present the whole thing at once. Essentially, it does what my bookmarklet did, but better.

So if you really want to use Evernote as your Read Later list, that’s the way to do it. No more janky javascript, no more hoping Readability still supports that script, and the whole thing is streamlined right into Evernote.

You know you’ve gotten them – those American Express or Chase gift cards that can be used just like a credit card, anywhere, to buy anything. Sounds great, except you can’t, really. Typically, these cards have pretty finite expirations, and after 12 months, a “service fee” starts being deducted from the card each month. Worse, [...]]]>

You know you’ve gotten them – those American Express or Chase gift cards that can be used just like a credit card, anywhere, to buy anything. Sounds great, except you can’t, really. Typically, these cards have pretty finite expirations, and after 12 months, a “service fee” starts being deducted from the card each month. Worse, you usually can’t use up the entire balance of the card, because you can’t overdraw them. Essentially, you have to keep track of the balance on your own, and hope that a merchant can split your purchase once you reach zero.

There’s a better way. Well, kind of. If you do a lot of online shopping from a single source, like Amazon or iTunes, you can easily apply the balance of your gift credit card to your account on one of theses services. This prevents the monthly charges, and allows you to use up the entire card on purchases.

The trick is to buy yourself a gift card. I’ll use Amazon as the example, but this should work for any other service that lets you maintain a gift balance in your account. From Amazon, simply click the “gift cards” like toward the top, and order a gift card (a digital one!) for the exact amount left on your gift credit card. Make sure you make your own email address the recipient.

When it comes time to check out, use your credit gift card number, its expiration, and whatever name the card company prefers you use. For some, like Chase, you’ll have to register the card on the bank’s website so it’s linked to your name. Others, like American Express, tell you to use a specific name, like “Gift Card Recipient,” and your own address. (Check the company’s website for how to use the cards online.)

Once you pay, you’ll get the gift code from Amazon in your email inbox. Simply copy-paste the code into the redemption center at Amazon, and this balance will hang around in your account until the next time you make a purchase. If you go over your balance, you can simply pay the difference with whatever real credit card you want, and actually use up the full amount of your gift!

Among the other benefits of this method is the fact that you can buy Kindle books this way. For some reason, Amazon only lets you purchase ebooks using 1-Click, which is linked to a specific credit card. However, if you have a gift balance, this is depleted first.

I should mention, too, that this is a great way of combining multiple credit gift cards. The amount in your Amazon account is one lump sum, so it doesn’t matter how many gift cards you send yourself – it all winds up in the same pot!

Last week, Netflix announced that it would be spinning off its physical disc rental business and rebranding it as “Qwikster.” A lot of pundits seem to think this is totally crazy, and anti-consumer. Reed Hastings, Netflix CEO, has said multiple times that this move is forward-thinking, and will position the company better in the future. [...]]]>

Last week, Netflix announced that it would be spinning off its physical disc rental business and rebranding it as “Qwikster.” A lot of pundits seem to think this is totally crazy, and anti-consumer. Reed Hastings, Netflix CEO, has said multiple times that this move is forward-thinking, and will position the company better in the future. My suspicion (and I’m surprised I haven’t heard this elsewhere) is that this will indeed purposely kill their disc rental business, but it will also bolster their streaming offering pretty drastically.

Netflix has become a behemoth of a service. Blockbuster, their closest competitor in the disc rental space, was driven to Chapter 11, and Redbox isn’t really competing much at all with their kiosks. Other than those two, can anyone even name another disc rental chain? Netflix completely dominates physical rentals, which means that the majority of rental licenses paid to film studios comes from Netflix. In a nutshell, the rental business belongs to Netflix.

I suspect many of Quikster’s subscribers will wind up there just because they were Netflix subscribers. If that service fails, I doubt many will go out and seek a new disc rental option. They’ll learn to embrace streaming instead. This leaves the lion’s share of rental customers leaving physical discs behind altogether.

Then, what do content owners do? If the whole disc rental market tanks completely, there are vast swaths of content that no one can rent. Studios will have to make more of their catalogues available through steaming in order to make any money on those properties at all.

I think Qwikster is a calculated move not just to kill Netflix’s disc rental business, but to kill disc rentals entirely. Reed Hastings is making the bet that without the old-time distraction of physical disc rentals, the studios will be forced to focus on new streaming licenses, and Netflix will be ready and waiting to negotiate them. And that’s great news for consumers.

I read the Bits section of the New York Times every day. I like that they lag behind the minute-by-minute tech news, and take the time to write what are generally “big picture” articles toward the end of a news day. However, I’m seeing more and more sloppy copy editing and generally bad journalism over [...]]]>

I read the Bits section of the New York Times every day. I like that they lag behind the minute-by-minute tech news, and take the time to write what are generally “big picture” articles toward the end of a news day. However, I’m seeing more and more sloppy copy editing and generally bad journalism over there. I have to think it’s because Bits is technically a “blog” from the Times, but come on. You’re still the New York Times, and I expect a certain level of writing proficiency.

This recent article really got me going. It’s a fluff piece to begin with; oh boy, there goes that crazy Steve Jobs shooting his mouth off again. But what’s worse is the middle school-level writing. To that end (paying respectful homage to The Detritus Review) let’s read Miguel Helft’s gem together. Blue is the article, red is me.

Update: The article has been updated since I first posted this. The most egregious English errors have been corrected. Notably, “dissed” has also been replaced. This all seems to suggest that The New York Times has a “post now, edit later” policy, which still disturbs me. It disturbs me more that they hire writers who don’t know the difference between “too” and “to.”

Steve Jobs: Our Approach is Better Than Google’s

On Monday, I wrote an article about the competition between Apple’s iPhone and smartphones running Google’s Android. The article discussed some of the advantages and disadvantages of Apple’s vertically-integrated and closed approach and Android’s more open strategy.

A little biased, a few too many strung-together clauses, but I get where you’re going with this, I think.

It concluded by quoting experts and analysts saying that while Android, and perhaps other systems, are likely to do well, Apple has little reason to worry.

Apple declined to comment for the story. But on Monday, Steven P. Jobs, Apple’s chief executive, took time to address the issue during the company’s fourth quarter earnings conference call.

Ah, so this is an I-told-you-so. I see what you did there! You get a pat on the back for that one, Miguel!

This was unusual, as Mr. Jobs doesn’t typically participate in the company’s earnings calls. But Mr. Jobs said he couldn’t pass the opportunity to drop in for Apple’s first $20 billion quarter.

Mr. Jobs stared by pointing out that Apple sold 14.1 million iPhones during the quarter, a 91 percent surge from a year earlier. Apple sold those smartphones at an even faster pace than the overall market for smartphones.

The “even” in this sentence implies that this is unexpected. I fail to see how this is remarkable, since you’d expect any company beating its competition to fall into this category.

Then he made an impassioned attack on Android and forceful defense of Apple.

“In reality, we think the open versus closed argument is just a smokescreen to try to hide the real issue, which is what’s best for the customer: Fragmented versus integrated,” Mr. Jobs said. “We think Android is very, very fragmented and becoming more fragmented by the day.”

Mr. Jobs noted that major Android manufacturers like HTC and Motorola put their own user interfaces on their devices and that different versions of the operating system with different capabilities are built into different devices, causing headaches for both consumers and application developers. Mr. Jobs said that Android sometimes left users to be the “system integrators.”

Interesting, provocative quotation. I assume you’re going to clarify what Mr. Jobs means by that, right?

“We think this is a huge strength of our approach compared to Google’s,” Mr. Jobs said. “When selling to users who want their devices to just work, we believe integrated will trump fragmented every time.”

Oh, guess not. The “system integrators” part did sound very official and intimidating though. That must be bad for consumers.

Then he added: “We are very committed to the integrated approach, no matter how many times Google tries to characterize it as closed,” he said. “We are confident that it will triumph over Google’s fragmented approach ,[sic] no matter how many times Google tries to characterize it as open.”

Mr. Jobs wasn’t just dissing Google.

The New York Times is now accepting “dissing?”

With a bit less passion, and perhaps a touch of disdain…

So, less passionate, but more disdainful. I’m with you. I think.

With a bit less passion, and perhaps a touch of disdain, he also dismissed Research in Motion, the maker of the BlackBerry.

Oh! That’s what “dissed” means! I wouldn’t know, because I’ve never seen that word printed in the New York Times!

Mr. Jobs noted that the iPhone had beat the BlackBerry…

Clearly no need for a participle there.

Mr. Jobs noted that the iPhone had beat the BlackBerry, which sold 12.1 million handsets in the most recent quarter. “We now passed RIM and I don’t don’t’[sic]see them catching us in the foreseeable future,” he said.

Actually, he didn’t say that. Close, though.

Mr. Jobs said that RIM was now forced to move beyond its comfort zone and attempt to become a software platform.

Right, it’s not like they have their own mobile OS or anything. Sillies!

“RIM has a high mountain a head of them to climb,” he said.

The New York Times: illiterate, or sloppily using text-to-speech software to write blog posts?

Mr. Jobs also had a word about those who want to compete with the iPad in tablets.

As opposed to competing with the iPad in, say, a vat of Jell-O.

He said that while many in the media have said that…

Whoa, did you just say that they just said that some reporters just said–oh, forget it. Someone said whatever you’re about to say.

He said that while many in the media have said that an “avalanche” of tablets are [sic]expected to compete with the iPad soon, he believes only a handful of tablets will be released this year.

Maybe this is splitting hairs, but competing with the iPad and simply being released aren’t really the same thing. But I guess we’ll table that for next week and focus on basic grammar and syntax for now.

He said all are Android-based tablets and are only 7 inches,

Me talk good when talk about tablet and are good with the words.

He said all are Android-based tablets and are only 7 inches, far smaller than the iPad’s 9.7 inch size.

(But really, it’s what you do with it that counts.)

A 7-inch screen, he said, is only 45 percent as big as a 9.7-inch screen, and Apple’s user testing has shown that is too small for a usable tablet.

Uh… huh. You mean it has only 45 percent the area of a 9.7-inch screen, right? Because 7 is 72 percent of 9.7.

“The 7 inch tables are tweeners…

The tables are tweeners? Where did the tables come from? And what’s a tweener?

…to big to compete…

Probably a simple typo. We all do it.

…to big to compete with a smartphone and to small to compete with an iPad,”…

Never mind, must be idiocy after all.

…Mr. Jobs said. Lest there be any doubts about his confidence, he added: “The current crop of 7-inch tablets will be D.O.A.: Dead on arrival.”

And so was the editor, apparently.