Technically Speaking

The makers of the iPhone, Apple, today announced a “revolutionary” device: a tablet computer they call iPad. Now, normally I’m a big fan of things Apple. I have an iPod touch (don’t want the service contract or wireless provider of the iPhone), and I love it. So you might be expecting me to be geeking out over this new device. But, not so much.

Here is what we know: the new device will run the iPhone OS (albeit an updated version). The iPad will have an option for unlimited wireless 3G connectivity (again from AT&T) for $30 bucks a month (or a limited plan for around $15 per month). If you don’t want 3G connectivity, you can purchase the non-3G version and just connect over wireless networks.

Steve Jobs, Apple CEO and presenter at today’s announcement, says that the iPad is thin and lighter than any netbook. In the $500 to $1000 price space, they are competing against similarly priced netbooks or low-end laptop computers. The iPad also comes with iBook – essentially an e-book reader, which puts iPad in direct competition with devices like Amazon’s Kindle e-book reader.

Essentially, it seems, iBook is a Kindle with the iPhone interface. Apps written for iPhone/iPod touch will run on the iPad, and Apple will roll out new apps (and released a developer’s SDK today so app writers can begin creating apps specifically for the iPad) so you can do word processing, spreadsheet data entry, and more on iPad.

But the question I keep asking myself is, “why?” I mean, Apple has been telling us for years now that smaller was better. Each version of the iMac seemed to get smaller. Each version of the Mac Book Pro got thinner. Apple even rolled out the Mac Book Air, and amazed us with a laptop that can fit in an manila envelope. Then Apple sold us on the iPhone and iPod touch, showing us that we can take the Internet, a bunch of very useful apps, and tons of our data everywhere we go.

Now Apple wants us to believe that bigger is better. Isn’t the iPad essentially an up-sized iPod touch (with optional 3G connectivity)? But are you going to carry the thing around with you wherever you go? That is what I love about my iPod touch–it goes with me everywhere. It is my PDA, it’s my music player, its my e-book reader, my e-mail client, and my portable gaming device all in one. Now Apple wants me to buy an iPad that does all of that, but is just bigger?

It will be interesting to see if iPad takes off like the iPhone did. I’m certainly not going to be standing in line to get one. I’m just not convinced that it will make my life that much better than my iPod already does.

What do you think? Are you geeking out over the iPad? If so, why? If not, are your reasons similar to mine?

Several months ago I bought a new laptop for my side business. I’ve tried to figure out a backup solution that would work for my computer, and after doing some research, I decided that I wanted an online backup solution that would work automatically in the background. I picked Mozy for several reasons. I got it installed, selected my directories I wanted to back-up, and let it go about its business.

Mozy has been great. It runs in the background and every so often updates the online storage with the latest files from my laptop. At under $5.00 a month, this is a solution that works nicely for me. I suppose, it is $5.00 of insurance because hopefully you’ll never need it, but it is $5.00 for peace of mind.

Like I said, I never expected I’d need it. Until last night. My computer had a catastrophic failure. I have no idea what happened. I hadn’t installed any new software or drivers or hardware for a couple of weeks (at least), but yesterday it failed to restore from hibernate. We ran several tests and it wasn’t able to fix itself.

Now, normally, I’d be panicking right now. This is the main computer in my house. It has all my writing for the book I’m working on. It has all the web work I’ve done including my backup files for my website. It has all my photographs and my music. I had over 60GB of data that was gone in an instant. But I’m not panicking, nor am I inhalint anti-anxiety meds. You see, I’ve got Mozy. And they’ve got my back.

Mozy is a great service. You download the Mozy client, and you tell it what directories you want to back-up. One folder I backed up was my “Users” folder in Windows, because that contains all my critical data.

Mozy gives you 2GB of backup free. If you want unlimited backup, it’s $4.99 per month (with discounts if you purchase larger blocks of time up-front). If you want to add a folder to the backup repository, but it isn’t already there, you can just right-click on the folder in Windows, and say “Add to Backup”.

When something goes wrong, you can either restore a specific file, an entire directory (including sub-directories), or in the case of a catastrophic loss you can request backup downloads, which get compiled in 3GB increments and which you can download from Mozy’s website. These backups are executable files that you can run to restore all your old files in their former locations. All of that is free (well, included in your monthly fee if you have more than 2GB of data).

If that solution doesn’t work for you, Mozy can even take your entire backup, burn it to DVD, and mail it to you. That is not a free option, but it is probalby the easiest option, and it is the option I chose for my data restoration. When I tried to restore my backup files, I was able to download several of the backups, but not all. I have high-speed internet (which, by the way, is required to use Mozy), but I think my ISP may have been throttling my speed after I tried downloading 15 GB + of data in a couple of hours. I didn’t have the paitence to keep waiting, so I decided that to restore all 60BG+ of my data, I’d request the DVD restore option.

Honestly, this option cost a lot more than I expected. They charge a base fee of $30 for setup, plus $.50 per GB for the media, plus $40 for shipping (Next Day Air, shipped via FedEx). So my restore of 60GB was just over $100.00. I understand the setup and media fees. I was dissappointed that the only shipping option was FedEx Next Day Air. There are many shipping options, and I wish Mozy had let me pick my price depending on how urgent my need was.

Now I await my restore DVDs. I am very happy that I selected Mozy’s service. Even though it cost me $100 to get my data back (because I dind’t want the free download), that is still a lot cheaper than what I would have paid to recover the files from my hard drive. And my music and images are worth the $100.00 restoration, because really, the photos are priceless.

If you don’t have a backup solution in place for your computer, I recommend you consider a solution like Mozy. It saved the day for me this week. When will it be your turn?

(By the way, I’ll write a new post after I’ve been able to restore my data, so I can tell you how easy/hard it was. Stay tuned!)

I was in the store with Christina on Saturday, and I was talking about my recent foray into Twitter Land. I found myself using words like “tweet” and “tweeting” and “tweeted.”

Christina looked at me and said, “Aren’t you embarrassed to say “I tweeted?”

Indeed, it does sound like my 2-year-old, who on Halloween night, went around saying “twick oh tweet”.

So, I’m tweeting on Twitter like my kid tweeted on Halloween.

And no, I’m not embarrassed about it, thank you very much.

In case you were ready to uninstall Chrome because of what I said in this post, Google updated the EULA for Chrome to the following:

11. Content license from you

11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services.

So, I guess there is less to worry about now.

I like new software, and I like Google. Generally speaking, that is.

Has Google gone off its rocker with Chrome? Does Google’s Motto “Do No Evil” not mean the same thing to them as it does to me?

Yesterday I downloaded Google’s new browser, Chrome, and I’m heading back to Firefox. (I won’t pass GO, and I won’t collect $200.) The browser is nice and clean, but it has its problems: (1) for some reason, I can’t add Facebook friends using Chrome. I have to open the page in Firefox to do that. (2) Chrome won’t display the web application we develop at work (AJAX [thus JavaScript] based, which is supposed to be a STRENGTH of Chrome). Oh and (3) Chrome users give Google a license to do WHATEVER THEY WANT with any content that we view or upload using the browser.

“By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. “

(I first read about this story here, on Gizmodo.com.)

Let’s consider the implications of that:

• Any content I submit to my blog using Chrome gives Google a perpetual, irrevocable license to publish, publicly display, or distribute any way they want.
• And e-mails I sent using Chrome gives Google the same license to share my private information with anybody they want however they want.
• When I access my banking information, Google has the right to reproduce my balance and transaction information, and publish that information publicly.
• I help people build websites on the side. Any content I create for my clients and upload or view through Chrome gives Google the right to modify, reproduce, adapt, and publish wherever and however they want.
• I work for a company that produces Web-based software. If I view our proprietary information with Chrome, Google has the right to harness that information and use it wherever or however they want.
• If my employer uses Chrome to administer confidential employee data, Google can intercept, store, publish, store, and broadcast that information.

11. Content license from you

11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.

11.2 You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.

11.3 You understand that Google, in performing the required technical steps to provide the Services to our users, may (a) transmit or distribute your Content over various public networks and in various media; and (b) make such changes to your Content as are necessary to conform and adapt that Content to the technical requirements of connecting networks, devices, services or media. You agree that this license shall permit Google to take these actions.

11.4 You confirm and warrant to Google that you have all the rights, power and authority necessary to grant the above license.

So their license allows them to do it in order to “display, distribute, or promote the Service.” That’s pretty vague, and I imagine it could be argued that a lot of what Google does falls into that category.

Um, thanks, but NO THANKS.

Off to uninstall Chrome until this has been resolved.