People Finally Realizing That SMS Isn't Good For Emergency Alerts
from the about-time dept
Only two years or so after we questioned why anyone would seriously consider the notoriously unreliable SMS text messaging system for emergency alerts, the mobile trade group 3G Americas has released a research report stating the same thing. Basically, the system isn't reliable or efficient, and in an emergency is likely to get overloaded quickly. It's not clear why it took anyone until now to notice this, but hopefully no one was seriously considering using SMS for emergency alerts.German Court Bans VoIP On The iPhone; Says It's Unfair
from the felony-interference-with-a-business-model dept
We've pointed to a bunch of stories that involved Apple somewhat arbitrarily forbidding or banning iPhone apps, but now it appears that the courts are getting in on the game as well. A German court has banned a VoIP iPhone app after T-Mobile, the mobile operator who offers the iPhone in Germany, complained. The court says that this VoIP app "makes use of unfair business practices," though it's difficult to see how. VoIP is a perfectly acceptable application, so why is it unfair? The court's explanation here seems a bit stretched as well. Apparently, the only way to run this particular VoIP app is on a jailbroken iPhone, and T-Mobile's contract forbids jailbreaking the phone. Of course, if that's true, isn't it an issue between T-Mobile and its customers who broke the contract? Why should the app maker be blamed? All it did was build a useful app? This seems like yet another case where a company is arguing that interference with a business model should be illegal.India Looks To Make Open WiFi Illegal
from the overreact-much? dept
In most of the discussions we've had over the years concerning the legalities of open WiFi networks, the issue was whether or not it was legal to access an open WiFi network. Over in India, they're taking a different approach, apparently preparing rules that would outlaw offering an open WiFi network (via Slashdot). This is in response to the recent bombings in India, where officials believe the bombers used open WiFi networks to email each other. That seems like a pretty big overreaction. If it's not open WiFi, the terrorists will come up with other ways to communicate -- and in the meantime you inconvenience everyone else, and make it impossible for those who want to offer open WiFi to do so.Linguist Explains That Txting Isn't Ruining Spelling Or The English Language
from the try-again dept
For years, we've been responding to highly questionable reports or unsubstantiated claims that "txt spk" was somehow destroying the English language and seeping into all sorts of written communications from students who just didn't know any better. Much of that myth was apparently built off of a paper that was posted to the internet, that many people then insisted must have been true -- but which later turned out to be a hoax. Yet, the myth prevailed despite plenty of studies that showed children of this generation are better writers because they spend much more time with the English language than earlier generations. And, despite widespread opinion, they usually know which type of writing is proper for which context. In fact, studies showed that there were no ill effects of students learning "txt spk." Yet, because the myth is so strong, even when studies come out disproving the myth, the press often misrepresent the results.One of England's top linguists has seen enough, however, and has gone through all the research, along with some of his own to come out with a book dispelling the myth that texting hurts a child's language skills. As he notes in a recent interview:
"Almost every basic principle that people hold about texting turns out to be misconceived. Misspelling isn't universal: analysis shows that only 10% of words used in texts are misspelt. Nor are most texts sent by kids: 80% are sent by businesses and adults. Likewise, there is no evidence that texting teaches people to spell badly: rather, research shows that those kids who text frequently are more likely to be the most literate and the best spellers, because you have to know how to manipulate language."Hopefully, with more studies and academics pointing this out, we can start to put this myth to bed.
"If you can't spell a word, then you don't really know whether it's cool to misspell it. Kids have a very precise idea of context - none of those I have spoken to would dream of using text abbreviations in their exams - they know they would be marked down for it."
Apple's Podcaster Block Backlash Getting Louder
from the not-so-good,-Apple dept
Apple is getting an awful lot of attention for blocking a podcasting app from the iPhone App Store because it competes with iTunes, and the more details come out, the worse it looks for Apple. In the original post on it, I had wondered, as an aside, if the app had useful functionality that Apple refused to provide -- and, indeed, that's the case. CNET is pointing out that the app is much more useful, since it lets you download podcasts directly to the iPhone -- something iTunes doesn't currently allow. Yet, Apple has no incentive to add this very useful feature, because it can just block out anyone who tries to do it for them. In the meantime, the developer of the app is forced to use a very limited workaround to offer the app to folks who want it (knowing that Apple could just come in and shut it down). Again, these moves are all well within Apple's right to do -- but it's going to piss off developers (and customers) if these sorts of activities keep up.Filed Under: app store, applications, competition, iphone, podcaster, useful
Companies: apple
Apple Now Banning Potentially Competitive Apps From The iPhone
from the pissing-off-developers dept
Yet another day and yet another odd attempt by Apple to arbitrarily control what's in the App Store for the iPhone. A bunch of folks have submitted the news of a podcasting app that's been blocked because Apple claims it competes with iTunes. This should, of course, scare of iPhone developers even more than previous bans. After all, it means that should an app get particularly popular, Apple would most likely just create its own competing version and remove the popular app from the store.While some are decrying this as being an abuse of power, Apple certainly has the right to do it. It's just not a particularly good long term strategy -- and likely to backfire badly. Pissing off your developers or making them worry isn't going to get very many good apps written going forward. Also, limiting competition is actually going to hurt Apple, because it no longer has anyone driving them to be better. What if this podcasting app had certain features that were really cool and useful -- and not available in iTunes? Right now, Apple has no incentive to include that functionality, thus making its own software worse.
In the meantime, you've got to imagine that a number of iPhone developers may be eagerly awaiting the launch of Google's Android platform which won't have such arbitrary restrictions.
Filed Under: app store, applications, competition, iphone, platforms, podcasting
Forget Driving While Texting, Now There's Train Conducting While Texting...
from the im-nt-pying-attntn dept
As you probably heard, Friday afternoon there was a tragic train crash in California, killing a bunch of people. There were some rumors going around over the weekend, and now the press is picking up on a report that the engineer of the Metrolink train that missed a signal leading to the crash may have been text-messaging with someone moments before the accident. It's the type of story that the press loves, though there's not that much evidence other than the claims of the kid on the other end of the text messages. Just as politicians are now pushing through "driving-while-texting" bans, you have to imagine that this will also help push along those initiatives. But, once again, the same issue comes through. The problem isn't text messaging: it's people in control over big, powerful machines (cars or trains) not paying attention the way they're supposed to be paying attention.If Text Messaging Is Too Expensive, Why Are More And More People Using It?
from the trumped-up-controversy dept
Earlier this week, the chairman of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights, Senator Herb Kohl, made a bunch of news for questioning why text message rates have become so high. He implies that because the number of national wireless carriers has shrunk from six to four thanks to mergers, that the four major carriers have too much market power. That sounds great, but is highly misleading -- as evidenced by a new report that notes that the number of text messages being sent is growing rapidly. If the price were such a huge problem, wouldn't that not be the case?Part of the problem is that the Senator seems to only be looking at the a la carte pricing for text messaging. However, these days, most folks who use text messaging on a regular basis have signed up for some sort of bulk texting plan, that allows them to send hundreds of messages for a set price. The a la carte text message pricing is really only for those who rarely, if ever, use text messaging. Furthermore, if the mobile operators really are constraining the market and push things too far by driving the price even higher, then there are many alternatives that will quickly show up. As we've discussed in the past, it's only a matter of time until other options for messaging become popular on phones, such as instant messaging clients -- which can provide service for free. Once again, it seems like the gov't is stepping in and complaining where there's no real problem.
Filed Under: antitrust, herb kohl, text messaging
Court Says Your Mobile Phone's Location Data Protected By The 4th Amendment
from the for-now... dept
There's been quite an attack on the 4th Amendment's requirement for "probable cause" for gov't searches. For instance, the Justice Department is asking Congress to scale back what "probable cause" applies to, while other law enforcement officials have found clever tricks for getting around it by doing things like subpoenaing third party data providers -- like your mobile phone provider -- to get info on you without having to show probable cause.However, a court today pushed back, noting that your mobile phone location data is protected under the 4th Amendment, and law enforcement should need to show probable cause before getting a warrant to obtain that info from your mobile phone provider. This is definitely a big win for those who believe in the 4th Amendment, though it will probably only last until Congress changes the law, as per requested, to allow law enforcement to ignore probable cause. Then we'll have a constitutional legal battle to watch, but it will take years to resolve.
Filed Under: 4th amendment, privacy, probable cause
