As my contract with AT&T is due to expire in the latter half of this year, I have the option to *upgrade* to a better phone with a good discount on the device in return for committing myself to two more years with AT&T. While I disprove of the two year commitment, high monthly fees, and discount on the device style of contracts, I am obliged to stick with AT&T because I have the main line of my family's AT&T family plan. Therefore, although Android phones are coming to AT&T, the best choice for a smartphone is the iPhone.
Speaking of Android and iPhones, it is interesting to see the commentary on Microsoft's Windows Phone 7. To this day, technology pundits still compare new smartphones and their operating systems with the iPhone, the giant in the smartphone industry. With every release of a new mobile operating system, there are some out there who claims it will be the "iPhone killer", meaning it will be the one who takes control of the market share from the current leader in a David vs. Goliath battle. Some are so adamant on finding and declaring iPhone killers that they have established informational web sites that educate people on iPhone alternatives.
In any situation where the rest of the competition are all attacking the same party, there has to be some merit to the defendant. The Apple iPhone, first released in the summer of 2007, has been refined many times in terms of software, hardware and network. First generation iPhones ran on AT&T's 2G EDGE network and only ran Apple's native applications. The second iteration of the product took advantage of AT&T's developed 3G network, allowing for faster data access speeds. (For the laymen unfamiliar with the cellular network terminology, simply remember that higher the number of G's a network is, the faster the data speeds will typically be i.e. 3G speeds > 2G speeds) In 2009, Apple only made minor upgrades to the device, those that were also found from the transition from its initial release to the second generation of the device, such as faster processor, better camera, and additional features in the operating system.
Even from the get go, the Apple iPhone, despite its lack of certain features desired by consumers, defined the new generation of consumer smartphones. Smartphones were by no means new to the cell phone industry, but they were primarily reserved for businesspeople because the costs associated with purchasing and maintaining the device and service was unjustifiable with the device's usage - until the iPhone came out. Apple redefined, or even pushed the frontier, for the consumer smartphone market. Again, Apple did not invent the consumer smartphone industry, but its product had new features that appealed to the mainstream cell phone customers. The intuitive operating system combined with an equally interactive input method, namely the touchscreen, allowed even the most technologically uninitiated to understand how to manipulate the device quickly. This instantly lowered the learning curve and lowered the technological barrier for adoption for most people.
However, the high sticker price was definitely still an issue for most people. Initially the device went for $499 at the cheapest option. Keep in mind that this is the subsidized price, meaning that AT&T has to pay Apple a share of the money they get from the monthly bills over the two years the iPhone customer would be committing to. The monthly plan attached to the iPhone, at least for the 3G service, comes with a certain number of minutes for voice calls and unlimited data. Text messaging will again be a separate fee. $69.99 per month would get an iPhone user, who has already paid a few hundreds of dollars for their device, voice calls and "unlimited data" access. What is intriguing and essentially puts the final nail in the coffin for me is that even if one chooses to pay the unsubsidized price for their iPhone, meaning it will cost an additional few hundred of dollars, they still pay the same monthly fees as those who paid the subsidized price.
Logically, the high monthly fee for the iPhone is only justified because AT&T has to recuperate their losses of having to pay Apple for the subsidized price by locking the customer into paying per month for at least 24 months. However, how is it justifiable to make those who don't want commitment and already paid for the iPhone in full, meaning they've settled their debt with Apple, to line AT&T's pockets with extra money that's not going to Apple?
Despite the flaw in the pricing logic, the iPhone has been immensely successful, as demonstrated in the aforementioned analysis of the "iPhone killer" concept. Apple keeps on perfecting their product with each new reiterations of their device while the rest of the market tries to play catch up. It has inspired the competition to either compete head on with a new mobile operating system, such as Google's Linux-based Android; refine their existing mobile operating system, like PalmOS and Windows Mobile; or avoid the smartphone industry entirely, which seems to be be Nokia's strategy. Nonetheless, the Apple iPhone probably has the strongest market share of the regular mainstream cellular phone consumer, which is why I'm opting for the device to, to be explain in a subsequent article.
For the full story and more like it, check out Gotlactose Development.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Comparison of Cars
I have access to four different cars and I've driven each of them enough to give a good analysis.
1996 Honda Odyssey
1999 Toyota Corolla
2005 Honda Accord
2008 Toyota Camry
Of all four cars, I find that the Honda Accord is the most comfortable to drive. The moment I got behind the driver's wheel, I could feel how comfortable the entire driving experience was in the Accord. The steering wheel responded smoothly under my hands and the acceleration and brake performed just as well.
The Toyota Camry leaves me with a sour taste in my mouth after driving it. I can see that Toyota has put in effort at designing a good driving experience, but it doesn't handle as nicely as the Accord does. The one good design I like about the Camry is the transmission stick: instead of the shift lock button to prevent accidental gear shifting, there are horizontal and vertical wells to shift into gears, which makes for shifting gears while driving much easier.
The Honda Odyssey, despite its age, is still a good minivan to drive. The rate of acceleration is a far cry from the newer cars, but the car still handles well given its circumstances.
The Toyota Corolla was my very first car and I got my license with this baby. It has its merits and I love it for its maneuverability and compactness, but I will admit that it lacks in aesthetics and horsepower.
I'm no car guy, but I can definitely appreciate cars and their performance.
1996 Honda Odyssey
1999 Toyota Corolla
2005 Honda Accord
2008 Toyota Camry
Of all four cars, I find that the Honda Accord is the most comfortable to drive. The moment I got behind the driver's wheel, I could feel how comfortable the entire driving experience was in the Accord. The steering wheel responded smoothly under my hands and the acceleration and brake performed just as well.
The Toyota Camry leaves me with a sour taste in my mouth after driving it. I can see that Toyota has put in effort at designing a good driving experience, but it doesn't handle as nicely as the Accord does. The one good design I like about the Camry is the transmission stick: instead of the shift lock button to prevent accidental gear shifting, there are horizontal and vertical wells to shift into gears, which makes for shifting gears while driving much easier.
The Honda Odyssey, despite its age, is still a good minivan to drive. The rate of acceleration is a far cry from the newer cars, but the car still handles well given its circumstances.
The Toyota Corolla was my very first car and I got my license with this baby. It has its merits and I love it for its maneuverability and compactness, but I will admit that it lacks in aesthetics and horsepower.
I'm no car guy, but I can definitely appreciate cars and their performance.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
My Take on Apple's iPad
Apple's iPad product announcement on Wednesday sent shockwaves across the entire Internet and technology industry. People responded in great numbers to Apple's new device, either with praise or acridity. There have been a few points that have been raised about this device, some of which I will highlight.
I understand the sentiment of the consumers out there who were hoping for a particular feature on the Apple iPad, features such as a webcam, camera, multi-tasking abilities, Adobe flash support, and the totalitarian nature of the iPad operating system. While I cannot explain Apple's decision to not include a front or rear facing camera, the lack of the other features can be explained.
Apple's approach to its mobile devices and any technological device in general is that it wants to leave the user with a good aftertaste. The biggest complaints that the average layperson has about computers are that they are hard to understand and they are slow or become slower over time. Apple's intent with the Mac, Macbook, iPod Touch, iPhone, and now the iPad product lines is to give the layperson a product that will be reliable to use, fulfills their needs, has a really gentle learning curve, and performs at its best regardless of its age. And that's exactly what Apple is going to deliver with its iPad.
The lament over multi-tasking isn't without its flaws: you can listen to your music while checking your emails. You can get push notifications while you're surfing the web. However, Apple is the one deciding which applications can run together and which cannot, which is an understandable concern. Apple has the final say on how their products operate because they designed it a certain way and they want to ensure that the consumers use it as intended. People who jailbreak, or use a software to take advantage of exploits in the iPhone operating system to install non-Apple approved apps, may be able to circumnavigate what is perceived as Apple's tyranny over its devices, but their devices become unstable and performance is decreased. Therefore, Apple keeps a iron fist on the software that goes onto their products to protect their users.
But Americans are known for loving their freedom and liberty! Why should Apple be the only one to get a say on what goes on their products? After all, Windows users have such a great flexibility on what goes on their machines and there are no major problems with that. But Apple's response to that is users are protected from software instability, malware, and otherwise unwanted malices that Windows users experience (BSODs, viruses, pop ups, etc.). That is not to say that apps on the iPhone OS do not crash, but they are in general much more stable than their Windows counterparts.
I am usually not a fan of politics, but Apple's approach to the lockdown of their products is eerily similar to that of the People's Republic of China. With a growing middle class who enjoy individual economic prosperity, the average Chinese citizen does not worry too much about their limited political voice and opinion. As long as they are happy with their lives, the government is doing a good job in their book. The same can be said about the average Apple user: as long as the user experience is great, the software is responsive, and what needs to be done gets done efficiently, there is no reason for the Apple user to be unhappy with Apple's lockdown.
Apple's lockdown is also the reason why Apple mobile devices still do not have Flash support. Apple is unwilling to work with Adobe to get flash working on mobile Safari because it cites the instability, resource-intensiveness, and insecurity of flash. All of these claims are mostly true, but we don't notice this on a day to day basis with our computers because today's laptops and desktops are mammoths compared to the mobile devices that comfortably slip into our pant pockets. For a device with limited computing power, every hertz of processing power is sacred. The current argument for supporting Flash on mobile devices is that users do not get the true Internet experience without it because many websites depend on flash to work properly, such as Hulu, Disney, etc. However, this is a weak argument because HTML5, the updated standard for the most fundamental web coding language, supports rich media, which means flash can be ditched entirely in the future. Youtube, Viemo, and mobile Google Voice have updated their websites to support HTML5, so rich media content such as videos, music, and interactive websites can be done without relying on Flash or other plugins. I, for one, support Apple's decision to keep Flash off of their mobile devices because I see Flash as just a web coding crutch, just like frames and tables were crutches for good web page designs.
So in true Apple revolutionary product release tradition, I will wait to see how well the first generation operates then see how Apple updates its iPod Touch product line. If the iPad is significantly improved, specifically a webcam/camera and cheaper price points, I may contemplate getting the device. After all, as Jony Ive, the senior vice president of design for Apple, says that the iPad "exceeds your ability to understand how it works, it sort of becomes magical". It'll take me at least until the second generation of the iPad to try to understand how the magical device works and if it's worth my money.
For the full story and others like it, check out my blog.
I understand the sentiment of the consumers out there who were hoping for a particular feature on the Apple iPad, features such as a webcam, camera, multi-tasking abilities, Adobe flash support, and the totalitarian nature of the iPad operating system. While I cannot explain Apple's decision to not include a front or rear facing camera, the lack of the other features can be explained.
Apple's approach to its mobile devices and any technological device in general is that it wants to leave the user with a good aftertaste. The biggest complaints that the average layperson has about computers are that they are hard to understand and they are slow or become slower over time. Apple's intent with the Mac, Macbook, iPod Touch, iPhone, and now the iPad product lines is to give the layperson a product that will be reliable to use, fulfills their needs, has a really gentle learning curve, and performs at its best regardless of its age. And that's exactly what Apple is going to deliver with its iPad.
The lament over multi-tasking isn't without its flaws: you can listen to your music while checking your emails. You can get push notifications while you're surfing the web. However, Apple is the one deciding which applications can run together and which cannot, which is an understandable concern. Apple has the final say on how their products operate because they designed it a certain way and they want to ensure that the consumers use it as intended. People who jailbreak, or use a software to take advantage of exploits in the iPhone operating system to install non-Apple approved apps, may be able to circumnavigate what is perceived as Apple's tyranny over its devices, but their devices become unstable and performance is decreased. Therefore, Apple keeps a iron fist on the software that goes onto their products to protect their users.
But Americans are known for loving their freedom and liberty! Why should Apple be the only one to get a say on what goes on their products? After all, Windows users have such a great flexibility on what goes on their machines and there are no major problems with that. But Apple's response to that is users are protected from software instability, malware, and otherwise unwanted malices that Windows users experience (BSODs, viruses, pop ups, etc.). That is not to say that apps on the iPhone OS do not crash, but they are in general much more stable than their Windows counterparts.
I am usually not a fan of politics, but Apple's approach to the lockdown of their products is eerily similar to that of the People's Republic of China. With a growing middle class who enjoy individual economic prosperity, the average Chinese citizen does not worry too much about their limited political voice and opinion. As long as they are happy with their lives, the government is doing a good job in their book. The same can be said about the average Apple user: as long as the user experience is great, the software is responsive, and what needs to be done gets done efficiently, there is no reason for the Apple user to be unhappy with Apple's lockdown.
Apple's lockdown is also the reason why Apple mobile devices still do not have Flash support. Apple is unwilling to work with Adobe to get flash working on mobile Safari because it cites the instability, resource-intensiveness, and insecurity of flash. All of these claims are mostly true, but we don't notice this on a day to day basis with our computers because today's laptops and desktops are mammoths compared to the mobile devices that comfortably slip into our pant pockets. For a device with limited computing power, every hertz of processing power is sacred. The current argument for supporting Flash on mobile devices is that users do not get the true Internet experience without it because many websites depend on flash to work properly, such as Hulu, Disney, etc. However, this is a weak argument because HTML5, the updated standard for the most fundamental web coding language, supports rich media, which means flash can be ditched entirely in the future. Youtube, Viemo, and mobile Google Voice have updated their websites to support HTML5, so rich media content such as videos, music, and interactive websites can be done without relying on Flash or other plugins. I, for one, support Apple's decision to keep Flash off of their mobile devices because I see Flash as just a web coding crutch, just like frames and tables were crutches for good web page designs.
So in true Apple revolutionary product release tradition, I will wait to see how well the first generation operates then see how Apple updates its iPod Touch product line. If the iPad is significantly improved, specifically a webcam/camera and cheaper price points, I may contemplate getting the device. After all, as Jony Ive, the senior vice president of design for Apple, says that the iPad "exceeds your ability to understand how it works, it sort of becomes magical". It'll take me at least until the second generation of the iPad to try to understand how the magical device works and if it's worth my money.
For the full story and others like it, check out my blog.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Return to Blogger
I thought I could live without Google's presence in every facet of my life, so I exported my blog from Blogger to Wordpress. But now I cannot come back to Blogger! Therefore, I will experiment with Blogger for a while and see if I like it. It seems much more open than Wordpress is, so I am more inclined to stick to Blogger this time around.
Fighting for Equality Beyond Civil Rights
Today is set aside to commemorate the birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr., a man whose passion and actions for civil rights in America shaped the nation to how it is today. His work set ripples throughout the country and inspired others to fight for equality of those of any ethnicity. Today, we are blessed to be living in a society where we are supposedly judged with absolute disregard to our ancestry.
But not all that has been fought for has been gained. You see, while Mr. King Jr. did fight for equal rights, he did not necessarily fight for equal respect. He was invigorated to fight for his people and I too share that passion. Yet the focus of my fight differs than that of Mr. King. Some may argue that my fight is trivial compared to that of Mr. King's, but I carry on the spirit of passion that embodies today's holiday.
I am of course talking about the yellowfever problem. No, not the disease caused by the yellow fever virus, but rather the trend that Asian women are marrying Caucasian men but the opposite is not happening. While there are people who believe this is just a nonsensical idea, I see it as a problem. The Asian male population is losing its Asian women to the Caucasian men, yet the equilibrium is not being balanced out with Asian men marrying Caucasian women. Therefore, the problem is that as more and more Asian women get engaged with Caucasian men, the Asian men are left with less and less women to marry because they're not necessarily getting the Caucasian women.
Don't believe me? Maybe some numbers will convince you. According to Wikipedia, there were a whopping 530,000 White husband and Asian wife marriages in 2006, while a mere 174,000 Asian husbands tied the knot with a White wife. That's a nearly FIVE TO ONE ratio. While it is arguable that the Asian population is much smaller than that of the White population and the ratio may be skewed because of that, the comparison I am making considers both genders of the Asian population, thereby making the disproportionate ratio between the two ethnic populations in general irrelevant.
All I'm asking for is to give the Asian man a chance. One may say that we Asian men should fight those stereotypes by not letting them get to us, but stereotypes are there for a reason. There may be more women in the world, but not when factors like the ramifications of the One Child Policy in China only make it harder for us Asian men to find a compatible mate.
Bottom line is, keep an open mind. Look for the right guy and not for the right ethnicity. You might say to yourself that you do not look at a man's race, but think of all the ex-boyfriends you have had and tell me that with a straight face.
Happy MLK day.
For the full story and others like it, check out my blog: http://gotlactose.wordpress.com/
But not all that has been fought for has been gained. You see, while Mr. King Jr. did fight for equal rights, he did not necessarily fight for equal respect. He was invigorated to fight for his people and I too share that passion. Yet the focus of my fight differs than that of Mr. King. Some may argue that my fight is trivial compared to that of Mr. King's, but I carry on the spirit of passion that embodies today's holiday.
I am of course talking about the yellowfever problem. No, not the disease caused by the yellow fever virus, but rather the trend that Asian women are marrying Caucasian men but the opposite is not happening. While there are people who believe this is just a nonsensical idea, I see it as a problem. The Asian male population is losing its Asian women to the Caucasian men, yet the equilibrium is not being balanced out with Asian men marrying Caucasian women. Therefore, the problem is that as more and more Asian women get engaged with Caucasian men, the Asian men are left with less and less women to marry because they're not necessarily getting the Caucasian women.
Don't believe me? Maybe some numbers will convince you. According to Wikipedia, there were a whopping 530,000 White husband and Asian wife marriages in 2006, while a mere 174,000 Asian husbands tied the knot with a White wife. That's a nearly FIVE TO ONE ratio. While it is arguable that the Asian population is much smaller than that of the White population and the ratio may be skewed because of that, the comparison I am making considers both genders of the Asian population, thereby making the disproportionate ratio between the two ethnic populations in general irrelevant.
All I'm asking for is to give the Asian man a chance. One may say that we Asian men should fight those stereotypes by not letting them get to us, but stereotypes are there for a reason. There may be more women in the world, but not when factors like the ramifications of the One Child Policy in China only make it harder for us Asian men to find a compatible mate.
Bottom line is, keep an open mind. Look for the right guy and not for the right ethnicity. You might say to yourself that you do not look at a man's race, but think of all the ex-boyfriends you have had and tell me that with a straight face.
Happy MLK day.
For the full story and others like it, check out my blog: http://gotlactose.wordpress.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)