Create a Free Graffiti Wall in 5 Seconds

Do you feel cramped by Facebook‘s enclosed and neatly ordered wall? Is Twitter‘s wall of self-promotion getting you down?

If so, you’re in luck. Thanks to YourWorldOfText.com, a Google App Engine based site, you can now create your own wall, right out here in the big, scary internet. Updates are visible in real time.

All you have to do is add a page name after http://www.yourworldoftext.com. Here’s one I made.

click for larger view

I have no idea what this is good for, and I can imagine things getting chaotic fast. But it’s still kinda cool.

(via Google Blogoscoped)

Why It’s Good that Scoble Un-followed Me

Robert Scoble, the incredible hulk of the social networking space, un-followed over 100,000 people on Twitter this week. I was one of them.

But that’s OK. In fact it’s a very good thing. Here’s why.

My single biggest gripe about social networks in general, and Twitter in particular, is that far too many people use them to blast out the content they want others to see. With little or no concern about what others are saying. When that happens, the platform becomes a stage at best and a spam-fest at worst. I’m all about conversation and back and forth. And face it, that is impossible when there are 100,000 people in the room.

There’s nothing even remotely social about trying- or pretending to try- to interact with that many people. A follow becomes a virtual autograph. Most of us don’t want autographs, and even real celebrities are beginning to realize that they are better served with a more direct connection to a smaller group of people.

So when an influential person like Scoble makes a considered decision to manage his content in a way that is actually manageable and allows meaningful social interaction, that’s a very good thing. If Robert rejects, even indirectly, lecturing as a proxy for interaction and follower numbers as a proxy for authority, then maybe others will follow suit. When that happens, the social networking space might actually become social. And useful. Maybe even a little conversational.

Granted, it would have been better to adopt this approach from the start, before building up a six figure following. To do it this way necessarily opens the door for criticism- non-reciprocity, the gatekeeping thing, etc. There’s nothing to be done about that, and I say better late than never.

A manageable social network is better, in every way that counts. I hope others will un-follow me too, if that’s what it takes.

Can TIVO Emerge from the Grave?

As long time readers know, my TIVO cycle went from deep and abiding love, to concern as the horizon darkened, to anger at DirecTV for abandoning TIVO, to a cynical Deathwatch and, finally, to irritation at what I saw as irrational death throes. Well, there have been recent signs that, like Dracula, TIVO may soon emerge from the grave and retake its place with the living gadgetry.

First, there came news that DirecTV had seen the error and avarice of its ways and was partnering up with TIVO to develop a high definition DirecTV TIVO. Initially, I put the odds on this happening just above the odds of me ever using Facebook. Which at the time were astronomically low.

Well, guess what. . .

But the new DirecTV TIVO story had some staying power. At the moment, it looks like DirecTV customers might get a new TIVO option next year. Maybe. You can sign up here for relevant announcements.

image_thumb It gets better.

Today, I read that TIVO has enabled a feature that lets users subscribe to and download video podcasts. There are potential devils in the details (most significantly, the ability or lack thereof to create a “season pass” equivalent for custom video feeds), but there’s no denying that if executed correctly this will be a neat feature.

Does this mean I will trash my semi-functional but nowhere near a TIVO DirecTV HD recorders? I don’t know. It depends on the cost. Much more delay and I will be out of the contract period I agreed to when DirecTV gave me the new boxes (after I threatened to go crawling back to cable). If I can get a fancy, new TIVO. If it doesn’t cost me too much. And if I believe that history will not repeat itself. Then I might.

Either way, competition is good for consumers. And it would be psychologically rewarding to see a technology as good as TIVO survive. Even if it is, to some extent, in spite of itself.

How to Make Everything Better: Google Edition

There are a lot of cool services and applications on the internet- no doubt about it. I use a lot of them, and they make my life easier, more organized and more fun. But they can be better. And I’m going to tell you how. Starting right now.

I’m going to improve the various services and applications I use, one or two at a time. Starting at the top, with Google.

I have capitulated to Google and have moved a lot of my information and data to the various Google apps. Most of them work very well, though it was a mistake to abandon Google Notes, since a full featured application suite needs a note taking app. So Google improvement number one is to bring back Google Notebook with a commitment, or better yet buy Evernote.

Google Calendar is very elegant, and the sync app works well. I have generally moved my personal calendar to Google Calendar. I wish there was a better, more flexible way to sync multiple calendars, so I could sync my Outlook calendar at home and at work with Google Calendar. Much of the business population that Google covets has this issue, and Google could make great inroads with that population by making it easier to sync multiple calendars, without the soul crushing multiple (upon multiple, in some cases) event problem that many of us have experienced.

While Google Calendar is elegant and works, Google Contacts is an absolute train wreck. It looks like something that was tossed in as an afterthought. But people need a central contacts application just as much as they need a calendar. Google needs to put 10 or 20 of its best people in a room for a week (or however long it takes) and tell them to completely rewrite Google Contacts, including a way to sync contacts along with calendars.

Some will point to Google’s exchange-based sync option, which works reasonably well. The fatal flaw in that approach is that the much-desired business population uses Exchange to access their work email and, as we all lament, you can only configure one Exchange sync. So Google needs to create a way to do the same thing via desktop applications. And while they’re at it, add the ability to sync email via the exchange-based sync. Currently, only contacts and calendar are supported.

The easiest and perhaps most needed improvement is to make the various Google apps more integrated. Google has made strides in this area, but too many of the apps still look and act like separate programs. They should look, feel and act integrated. One giant, easy step would be to give the user more control over the links at the top of the various Google app pages. Why can’t I add Contacts, Google Voice, Google Maps, Tasks and even custom links to other sites (like Flickr) to this list?

Google needs to give the user more control to create a personal control center, from which the user can easily access the things the user needs- not just the stuff Google thinks we might need.

I’m slowly learning to like, if not yet love, Gmail, and I’m not going to preach again about Gmail folders, though folders should be implemented, at least as an option. Another mandatory thing Gmail needs is a one click way to backup all of your Gmail on your hard drive or to the cloud location of your choice. With the backed up data to be searchable, perhaps via Google desktop search. Also, while the ability to use a third party mail server to avoid the annoying “on behalf of” confusion is wonderful, Google should not limit the ports you can use to do that. For various reasons, some people have to use another port to access their mail server. Google should accommodate this.

The port choices above are limited to 587, 465 and 25

I use Google Reader more than any other Google app. It works great, with one small annoyance that, like dripping water, can drive you mad over time. Google badly needs to figure out a way to speed up the process of marking a group of items as read. There is a small but aggravating delay between clicking the “Mark all as read” button and the moment the applicable items disappear. I don’t care how much of my computer resources it takes, I want that action to be instantaneous. I’m talking speed of light fast. That one little thing would vastly improve the quality of my online life.

Google Documents is very close to becoming a legitimate alternative to Microsoft Office. I have migrated my wife and kids to Google Documents, and I’d like to migrate there too. But for me- or any other corporate user- to have the option to use Google Documents full time, Google must implement a way to show document edits in a track changes compatible manner. If someone sends me a document, I simply must have the ability to edit the document and send it back with my changes apparent. Google Documents has a way to view versions and edits (Tools>Revision history), but the compare feature is not elegant and there’s no way to send a document with revisions marked that can then be accepted or rejected by the recipient. Sure, it would be nice- for Google- if everyone collaborated online via Google Documents, but that is never going to happen. If Google really wants business users, it is going to have to come up with a workable, emailable, track changes equivalent.

That’s enough to keep Google busy for a while.

Coming up next: Evernote

Apple Faces a Revolution at the Crossroads

It will be interesting to see if the rising number of denunciations and protests over Apple’s banning of Google Voice apps will have any effect. During last night’s podcast, I said I thought Apple was an extremely arrogant company and asked my podcast mates if they could think of an example where Apple reversed a decision due to popular outcry. We couldn’t think of any good examples.

Meanwhile, the protests continue.

Today, Mike Arrington quit the iPhone, expressly as a result of the Google Voice debacle. I applaud Mike for doing that. I don’t often- or even usually- agree with him, so if he and I are on the same side of an issue, we must be right. Stated simply, it’s foolish and unnecessary for Apple to side against its customers and Google. If people are forced to choose between Apple and Google, Apple may be surprised at how many puppies run to the other side of the room.

And there’s more at stake here than meets the eye. While the App Store/Google Voice thing is important on its own, I believe it is a barometer for Apple’s future.

Do the right thing, and everyone falls immediately back in love with all things Apple. Stay the inconsistent and illogical course and this issue could be the beginning of the end of Apple’s golden era. You can’t call yourself a hero and act like a villain. You can’t be the people’s choice if you don’t choose the people.

One interesting subplot to all this: Google wins either way. Think about it.

Harry McCracken believes Apple may come around. I hope he’s right, but I’m not so sure. The price cut Harry mentions was a nice, but isolated gesture. I suspect Apple views the wall it has erected around the App Store as more sacred- and more profitable- than what amounted to a glorified coupon (recall that the credit Apple handed out was good for future, marked up, purchases). To reverse course now on the Google Voice decision- even though it would be the smart and just move- would set the stage for more second guessing of Apple’s erratic app approval/rejection process. And we know that the one thing that Apple loves almost as much as money is control.

The most amazing thing about this whole app approval brouhaha is how easy it could be fixed. All Apple has to do is three simple things:

1. Be at least semi-transparent. Tell people what is going on. In life and business, a little explanation goes a long way.

2. Tell the truth. Don’t speak in riddles or half-truths. Don’t let ATT take the blame if the blame is not theirs and toss them in the grease if it is. And don’t hide behind the duplicate functionality canard. If you simply want to control the experience to the detriment of customers, Google or whomever else, just have the stones to say so.

3. Be consistent. Inconsistency is the great motivator of unrest. Apple has been the model of inconsistency as far as the App Store goes.

That’s how to make it better. But it could also get worse.

Lately we have been seeing more and more signs that Apple is struggling with the jailbreaking thing. First came the warning that jailbreaking could result in terrorism. Now we read an official support article warning folks about the risks they assume by choosing the apps they want to install, rather than letting Apple decide for them. I wonder if the great irony that it is precisely Apple’s iron grip on the app approval process that is driving people to jailbreak their iPhones is lost on Apple?

So for now Apple tries to educate us away from jailbreaking. What’s next, when that doesn’t work? Will Apple start disabling jailbroken iPhones? Or perhaps take a page from the record industry’s book of bad strategy and try to litigate the cat back into the bag?

As you can see, this issue is bigger than just our desire to have Google Voice apps on our iPhones. Apple and its customers have come to a crossroad, and we need to at least try to point Apple toward the right path. We need to continue to express our concerns, displeasure, questions, etc.

We have looked out for Apple, now Apple needs to look out for us- by siding with the legitimate desires of the customers who made Apple what it is today.

And who will make it what it will be tomorrow.

Nero: Snatching Fail from the Jaws of Awesome

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. And all that.

A long time ago when I first started to explore recording data, songs and music onto CD-Rs, I began with what was then ironically called Easy CD Creator, mostly because some crippled version came pre-installed on my computers. I thought of it more as Easy Coaster Creator, but with enough effort I could burn a CD or two when adequately motivated. For a few years I soldiered on, making a good supply of both coasters and CDs.

But as Easy CD Creator (d)evolved, it started to feel bloated. And it seemed to want to take over my computer. Before long I was just a spectator, watching as Easy CD Creator and RealAudio Player fought a turf war over my desktop. I soon decided that I’d rather never hear another sound than to use RealAudio Player, and uninstalled it and all of its tentacles from my computer.

Not long after, I went looking for a “less is more” alternative for burning CDs.

I settled on Nero Burning ROM. It seemed to be the favorite of the hardcore tech crowd. It was relatively lean, and it had a semi-witty name. And, best of all, it wasn’t Easy CD Creator. Things went swimmingly for years. Until Nero started to get fat.

Sure, the emergence of recordable DVDs required a some additional applications. But when Nero starting growing it couldn’t stop. Before long it seemed as massive as Easy CD Creator had been. All I wanted was to burn some disks. I didn’t want or need all that extra junk.

So I I went looking for a new “less is more” alternative for burning disks. I found and installed CDBurnerXP, which badly needs a name change, but works well. Still, I kept Nero installed and often found myself using it, mostly because of familiarity.

But Nero kept growing. And that wasn’t all. Somewhere along the way Nero decided to commit a couple of unpardonable software sins.

First, Nero began attempting to install other software during the installation process, and to change your default search engine.

If I wanted some stupid toolbar, I’d go get it. Taking money (I assume) from some other desperate company in exchange for trying to slide their desktop clutter by customers is wrong on many levels. Sure, you can say no during the install process, but it’s still wrong.

Second, Nero ignored my repeated requests for technical support after Kaspersky Antivirus kept telling me there was a P2P worm in the install package for Nero 9, the newest version of Nero, which I paid for (on 1/18/09).

clip_image001

So Nero 9 never made it onto my computer, and I guess Nero can keep my fifty bills. But Nero won’t sell me any more product and people will get the pleasure of reading about my disappointment here. Voting with your fingers and whatnot.

I suppose Nero heard at least some of the hue and cry, as it recently released a basic, stripped down, free version of its disk burning application. That’s a good start, but it it looks like the installer still tries to slip a toolbar by you, and to change your search provider. Not OK. Nobody wants.

Nobody wants.

All in all, it took a while to do it, but Nero found a way to snatch fail from the jaws of awesome.

How I Read the ATT Comment on Google Voice

Here’s how I read the latest on Apple and/or ATT’s absurd and utterly annoying rejection of Google Voice apps.

The ATT statement doesn’t say that ATT- or the requirements of ATT’s agreement with Apple- is not the reason why Google Voice apps have been banned. It simply says that ATT does not manage the App Store and is not part of the approval process. There are four ways to interpret this:

1. That Apple decided on its own to ban the Google Voice apps for some inexplicable Apple reason, which seems to be what ATT would like us to conclude. This could be accurate, given that other phones on the ATT network have Google Voice apps. If so, the torchy mob should immediately descend on Apple’s castle and demand a straight forward explanation. Don’t buy the duplicative feature canard. All kinds of duplicative apps are allowed. It’s only the one that would most improve the iPhone experience that is not.

2. That the agreement between Apple and ATT requires, either directly or indirectly, that apps that might take money out of ATT’s pocket be excluded. This would be consistent with the wi-fi-only Skype limitation. The rub here is that we’d be talking about SMS charges only, and there are tons of apps- Beejive for example- that already allow you to send free text messages.

3. That Apple decided to ban the Google Voice apps because it knows that ATT’s network is crappy and fears that any significant additional load will grind things to a halt. This could also explain the Skype limitation, and the crippled SlingPlayer (though nothing can explain Sling’s ridiculous $30 app money-grab).

4. That Apple decided to ban the Google Voice apps because it gets a share of the money that ATT makes, and Apple wants to squeeze an extra dollar out of the faithful. I would find this the most irritating.

It may just be that ATT sees the writing on the wall as far and the iPhone exclusive gravy train goes and is tired of getting kicked around every time someone has a bad iPhone experience. Maybe ATT decided to try its hand at posturing by press release, and is feeling out Apple in the first round with these vague and non-inflammatory jabs.

We may never know the real story.

What we do know is that we want our Google Voice app, and our Google Latitude app, and all kinds of other apps that have not and may not see the light of day. The more we run into these walls of nonsense, the more likely we are to go rogue and jailbreak our iPhones. I’ve never seriously considered doing that.

Until now.

One Bad Apple Does Spoil the Whole Bunch of Apps

So I write a happy, hopeful post about how Apple is going to save the tablet space and maybe even break Amazon’s stranglehold on the e-book market. Then I walk all aglow out to the garage for my nightly treadmill run and The Wire watching, certain that the tech world was a wonderful place.

A couple of hours later I come back, all sweaty and tired and sad about the beat down that Bunny Colvin took at the end of Season 3, and read that Apple is removing Google Voice apps from the App Store.

Are you shitting me? People have made careers out of crapping on Microsoft for making people spend 10 minutes downloading and installing a third party browser. Where is the outrage here?

Look, I too have worried about Google taking over the world, and all of our data with it. Shoot, it was just the other day that I finally capitulated to Google, and admitted that eventually it will contain my entire life. That was after I fell in heavy like with Google Voice, but before I realized how cool and useful Google Latitude (another app that Apple has apparently squashed for no legitimate reason) can be.

Either Apple has lost its collective mind or it is once again doing ATT’s dirty work. I’m guessing it’s the latter.

Here’s the thing, Apple. It’s not ATT or any other carrier that put the iPhone where it is. It’s the loyal, evangelical, tech-loving customers, many of whom really want to use Google Voice, Google Latitude and all kinds of other apps that ATT- the same ATT that can’t get it together enough to accommodate MMS and tethering- might not like. Oh, and the developers, who write the apps that give Apple such a commanding lead in the apps race.

If ATT’s network can’t handle the demand of the greatest mobile phone ever made, then why in the world did Apple give ATT the exclusive for so long? And doesn’t that agreement require ATT to have some level of network capacity? Maybe I’m missing something, but this seems backwards to me. If ATT can’t (or won’t) play ball, then let the other carriers in the game so there can be network sharing. And if it’s not ATT, then I hope someone at ATT says so, so the torchy mob can run howling back to Apple’s door.

This is messed up.

I don’t care that Apple and/or ATT nixed the SlingPlayer app. Sling’s ridiculous $30 app price makes me pull against them, and I have a Slingbox. I don’t care all that much that I can only use the Skype app via wi-fi.

But Google? Not only can you not survive on the internet without giving Google its propers, but even Google, who is bent on internet domination, gives almost all of its stuff away. Google ought to start charging ATT every time an ATT customer uses Google’s network, and see how that works out.

Apple needs to immediately reverse course on this, and accept not only the third party Google Voice apps, but also Google’s own Voice and Latitude apps.

One caveat: I am assuming that Google isn’t going along with this nonsense or suppressing its objections in some harebrained scheme to give Android devices some perceived advantage. Outside of that, I think there should be a general uprising until Apple comes to its senses and, if necessary, tells ATT what’s what.

In sum, this is stupid and needs to be fixed.

Now.

Phones Down, Tablets to Go

While much of the Apple tablet coverage is, at this point, speculation and rumor, I think it’s reasonable to believe that Apple will release a tablet or tablet-like device. And I think it’s a good bet that when it does, the Apple tablet will revolutionize the tablet space the way the iPhone forever changed the mobile phone universe.

In other words, the only train wreck I predict is a traffic jam created by the train loads of people lining up outside the Apple stores to buy one. Or two or three. I can envision- and embrace- a world where the Apple tablet simultaneously turns the tablet, music and Kindle markets on their respective heads. I’m particularly hoping Apple can find a way to knock the Kindle off the top of the mountain, and bring choice, price sanity and color into the game. The hard part will be getting the publishers onboard, but if anyone can do it, Apple can.

For $800 or so, I will buy one the day they are available. To the extent I can replace both my tablet, my over-priced 1984-stealing Kindle and maybe a music player or two with a single device, I’ll be happy. Integrated wireless broadband is a must. To the extent Apple does the only sane thing and avoids tying me to a single wireless carrier, I’ll be really happy. To the extent I can do all of that for something less- maybe $500- I might buy one for my kids.

But there are a few hills to climb on the journey from strategy to implementation.

First, Apple has to decide which side of the fence the OS will land on- iPhone or Mac. It’s odd, but the Mac has become the weak-point in Apple’s line up. I can’t imagine ever using a mobile phone other than an iPhone. Apple TV is an elegant, fun and much under-marketed device that could easily replace a more traditional television service (for one monthly DirecTV payment, I could buy all 5 seasons of The Wire for my Apple TV). While I use my Mac occasionally, the fact is that it doesn’t do a lot of stuff as well, or cheaply, as my PC. The cloud will help, but not enough. I hope the Apple tablet experience is more iPhone-like and less Mac-like.

This would mean that either iPhone apps will need to work on the Apple tablet, or Apple will have to make it harder for developers, by asking or requiring them to develop for separate platforms. I’m betting- and hoping- for the former. There’s very little I need done that can’t be done on an iPhone. Only the screen size holds me back.

Second, Apple needs to walk the music walk and create a good sound. I don’t think you can do that with integrated speakers on a small device, so that means Apple will need to develop and either include or offer good, affordable external speakers. And a remote control. iPodish docking devices would be another option, but I want the tablet to be the device- not support the device, so I want good external speakers.

Finally (and here comes my sermon again), Apple needs to completely trash the current iTunes application and build a good one from scratch. iTunes is both the control panel and traffic cop for Apple’s audio video content. And it sucks. Completely and utterly. Even the stripped down Apple TV interface is better than iTunes. I realize this isn’t going to happen- especially if the “this year” rumors are true regarding the tablet. But iTunes needs to go, and the sooner the better.

If they play their cards even halfway right, Apple can own the tablet space. There are some issues to address, but I’m not going to bet against Apple.

Not again.

Has Feed.Informer Lost Its Mind?

I have a couple of places here at Newsome.Org where I publish breaking news headlines. One is in the right hand column of The Home Place, my internet start page, and another is on a dedicated Headline News page. For years, I have used the service that is now called Feed.Informer to combine RSS content into combined RSS feeds, called digests, to display this news content.

The other day, I noticed that Feed.Informer had inserted a Feed.Informer logo and link at the bottom of each of my digests. Being very stingy with my web site real estate and deeply ad-averse, I visited the Feed.Informer web page in search of a way to get rid of this logo. What I found was interesting.

Like most of its generation of web services, Feed.Informer has offered both free and paid accounts. Because I like the service and have found it to be the best option for combining and displaying content, I have had a paid account for a long time. In fact, I thought I still had a paid account, and my account details at Feed.Informer confusingly indicate that I still have a premium account, though one that expired in April of last year. This confusion seems to result from Feed.Informer’s decision to eliminate premium accounts, seemingly in favor of paid support and, get this, paid logo removal.

Do what?

A paid support option is just another way to spin a premium account. I’m cool with that. What I am definitely not cool with is having to pay $50.00 per digest to get rid of the logo. I have 6 digests, so if I were insane enough to do it, it would cost me $300 to have logo free content. And that charge would apparently apply even if I had a premium account.

Which I can’t get, even if I wanted to, because the Buy Premium Account button doesn’t work. No harm here, though, since I don’t need priority support. I’d just like to lose the logo/link/ad.

There seems to be a smattering of complaints in the Feed.Informer support forums. I don’t know if the lack of a general uprising is indicative of Feed.Informer’s user base (e.g., that it is small) or that most people don’t mind choosing between a logo/link/ad and stack of $50s.

But I think this is one wacky business model. Sure, I have and would pay for a premium account to avoid the logo/link/ad. I don’t recall what the premium accounts cost back in the day when you could buy one, but if they keep the service fresh and feature-rich, I’d pay $20 a year or so. But $50 per digest to get rid of the logo/link/ad? Not in this lifetime.

I’m not sure what other options are out there, and a logo/link/ad or two is not going to cause me to rip down my Feed.Informer digests in some tea party 2.0 hissy fit. But it does make me wonder about the decision process that led the Feed.Informer folks to this business model.