Cell-phones, not PCs, ARE the user conduits for social networks

Well over a year ago, I wrote in this post:

Cell phones are going to become the dominant means of social networking. They’re already the best tool for it and the only reason PCs are dominant in the social net arena is because PCs have always been OPEN ENOUGH to participate social nets in a meaningful way. Cell phones haven’t been. Today I’m thinking about the nexus of mobility, identity management, and social networking.

So my point then was the, eventually, when a cell phone with enough functionality and usability finally shows up, users at large will fall into preferring cell phones over PCs for social networking over the web.  This is a point that didn’t get enough attention until iPhone 2.0 showed up last Friday. Now, it seems the web is abuzz about the potential of cell phones and social networks. Here’s a snippet from ZDNet’s Jennifer Leggio:

Think about it. Two of the big iPhone application announcements centered on location-based social networking sites Loopt and Whrrl. Both allow users to determine the locations of their friends and both provide microblogging and hyperlocal reviews, all using a GPS-powered application.

Jennifer goes on to say that social giants MySpace and Facebook have an advantage over upstarts like Loopt and Whrrl because, well they’re already giants. Touche. But MySpace is an incredibly stupid company with an incredibly poor base of core technology.  So, if social nets on cell phones are going to thrive in a lasting, meaningful way, my money’s on Facebook.

Correction to TruPhone Post (still, good British Tech)

In a previous post, I mentioned that the TruPhone app for iPhone uses 3G. As my friend Andy Abramson pointed out, this is not actually Tru.  The TruPhone app does support 3G minute diversion on Nokia handsets, but not on the iPhone.  Sorry for the unTru statement.  Blogging is a journey :)

Also — TruPhone still rocks–make sure you download it for your 3G iPhone ASAP.

I wonder how AT&T feels about TruPhone

Now that TruPhone’s minute diversion software runs on iPhone 2.0, the perfect storm is brewing for those of us who want cheap LD.  With AT&T requiring unlimited data plans for all iPhones, I don’t know why anybody wouldn’t use TruPhone to slash the cost of long distance calling.

The way it works, the TruPhone software uses VoIP to route your calls over the iPhone’s 3G cellular data connection, allowing your LD calls to be switched from TruPhone, not AT&T. The net? You save several cents per minute.

I wonder what creepy things AT&T might be concocting to fight back.

CORRECTION: WiFi is presently the only way to use TruPhone on the iPhone.  Still, I wonder what AT&T’s thoughts are on these 3rd party voice apps.

More Praise for VoIP Hacks

I recently ran across another review of my second book about Voice over IP, entitled VoIP Hacks, published by O’Reilly Media. The reviewers comments were very kind. Of course, I wish I could take 100% credit for the specific example this reviewer provides, but I can’t.  The ADSL packet queuing trick came from one of my contributors, among whom some of the best minds in VoIP were assembled.

In the time that’s lapsed since VoIP Hacks was published, many of the contributors have done pretty amazing things. Top of mind is Brian Degenhardt, who now works for Digium, vis a vis his role at Switchvox, one of the top Asterisk PBX makers anywhere.

Anyway, here’s a snippet from the review:

Before reading this book I would not have considered putting an IP-PBX on an ADSL link. The author’s idea of putting a Sangoma ADLS modem in the Linux box with PPPoE client software and controlling the modem queue is nothing short of genius. Then to top it off with the AstShape QoS scripts and the QoS monitoring tools, this book is an absolute bargain. With these tools I’ll not only know if the ADSL connection is capable of supporting VoIP service, but I’ll know exactly why. Much better than cutting over to the VoIP system and later discovering the problems. The whole book is just full of great ideas.

Sonicwall touts enterprise progress, but jeremy at sonicwall is a dweeb

I got an email from Sonicwall that excitedly touted the progress they’ve made in the enterprise space since acquiring Aventail.

Just yesterday my business partner had the absolute WORST customer service experience EVER from a guy named Jeremy at Sonicwall support. Jeremy hung up on my business partner after steamrolling him the whole time, despite Sonicwall’s mistake in issuing our client an incompatibile upgrade key for one of their devices.

So here’s to you Jeremy.  You suck.

Oh, and by the way, Sonicwall, you might want to have your marketing department double check those marketing emails that go out. This one had a 2006 copyright date on the footer. (Newsflash, it’s now 2008.)

When the truth hurts, regulate! REGULATE!

The San Francisco Chronicle is running a piece of tripe that attempts to leverage Google’s long-held stance on network neutrality as a headfake to distract people from the unsavory nature of their fast-in-coming acquisition of Yahoo’s search business, a move which some feel is a bad thing. An anti-competitive thing, in fact.  Possibly, an illegal thing.

Yeah, like Microsoft bundling software with Windows. Remember that?

Well, as it turns out, Google has been pwning Yahoo at search for 6 – 7 years, and the white hairs in Washington are only now noticing the impact.  Of course, who’s complaining?  Google’s domination of the search space has:

- Put an extremely downward pressure on advertising costs (oddly enough, the opposite tends to occur when too few competitors are involved)

- Reduced barriers to entry for keyword driven advertisers

- Made it possible for smalltime publishers, many of whom never made a penny on the web, to, you guessed it, make money on the web

- Legitimized pay-per-click over pay-per-impression

The truth is, Google just does search better, and has for a long time. I guess the truth hurts when the previous king becomes the marginalized underdog, a la Yahoo. So, to all those pundits poo-pooing Google because of their absolute crushing of Yahoo (and Microsoft) in the search war, I would propose this one question: Which search engine do YOU use?

Starts with a G, don’t it.  Yup, thought so.

iPhone/Rogers: Where’s the AT&T outrage?

I can’t help but chuckle when I read about how Apple is “sticking it” to Rogers, a Canadian wireless carrier, by shipping them a paltry number of iPhones for the Friday launch, as retribution for Rogers’ “egrigiously high” rate plans.

The whole thing is hilarious. First, Apple’s reaction is classic Steve. Second, why didn’t Steve have a huge pair of volleyballs when AT&T bent him over in the first place?  Third, where’s the outrage over AT&T’s no-outright-iphone-purchasing policy, which effectively eliminates people with poor credit or limited means from the iPhone party? Finally, does anybody really believe Rogers when they claim there’s a “reasonable cap” on unlimited services.  Tell me, how can you market something as unlimited if you LIMIT IT?

I just… can’t… take.. much more…. Guys, for the zillionth time, bandwidth is intangible. Just because you say it’s worth a lot per byte doesn’t automatically make it a scarce resource.  Consumers are so blind.

APPLE the ball’s in your court. Do something about these morons at the carriers.

You’d think Google of all people could get an iPhone SDK

So, “Google Talk for the iPhone” came out yesterday. I excitedly did my homework and came away disappointed.

It’s a hosted, web-based app (strike one) that disallows non-Safari mobile browsers by discriminating against certain user agents (strike two) and STILL doesn’t have voice chat (strike three).

What a let-down.  Google, go get an iPhone SDK and get busy writing a real GTalk client.