Laptop Magazine Rescinds 'Best Of Show' Award For Zer01

from the taking-it-back dept

Last month, our own Derek Kerton wrote a long post detailing many of the questions raised by the overhyped mobile service startup Zer01, which appeared to be making a bunch of claims that it couldn’t live up to (some of which were impossible) and failed to substantiate a bunch of other claims. Oh, on top of that, Nancy Gohring uncovered that it was involved in a sketchy multi-level marketing scheme run by a guy who is currently on probation after pleading guilty to securities fraud, and who’s been known to have run similar sketchy MLM schemes. The whole thing was incredibly questionable (though, there were a few true believers — i.e., people who’d already dumped a lot of money into the scheme) who continued to insist it was real. The one bit of support those folks seemed to have was that LAPTOP Magazine — a well-known and well-trusted tech publication, had given Zer01 a “Best of CTIA” award. Except… that’s now gone. Last week, LAPTOP rescinded the award for the first time in its history, noting not just the ethical questions raised by others, but the fact that the company did not live up to much of what it had promised the magazine. That included a promise from Zer01’s CEO right after the initial allegations came out that he would send them a phone to test by the following week. One of the big concerns is that no one has been able to actually test one of these phones. But the phone never showed up. LAPTOP concludes its retraction saying:

At this time we can only urge extreme caution to those interested in using or selling Zer01’s service.

And, yet, the “true believers” (some might assume “suckers”) continue to show up in our comments insisting that this magic phone service is almost here. But exactly none of them has responded to Derek’s original call, to find someone who’s actually used a phone, noted where the company’s engineers are located, where its towers are, who the network provider is and what the supposed patents are. Until someone can actually answer all those questions, it’s pretty difficult to assume there’s anything at all here.

Filed Under: laptop magazine, mlm
Companies: buzzirk, global verge, zer01

The Death Of Paid WiFi

from the it's-over,-done-with,-kaput dept

It’s been almost exactly six years since I got into a bit of a debate about whether or not there was a real business model for fee-based WiFi. Not surprisingly, I didn’t think it would last, even as there were a bunch of startups (some well-funded) trying to stake out a claim that they could build huge networks of paid WiFi access points. Those businesses never got very far. While there are still some fee-based WiFi access points around (mainly in airports), more and more are becoming totally free. Starbucks (which had been a holdout) has gone conditionally free, and last week Barnes & Noble WiFi went totally free. So can we now close the book on the idea that fee-based WiFi was ever a good business model?

Filed Under: fee, free, wifi
Companies: barnes & noble

Apple's Google Voice Rejection Wakes Up A Dormant FCC; Investigation Begins

from the whoops dept

We’ve had a bunch of stories about Apple’s rather arbitrary nature in rejecting iPhone apps it doesn’t like — including ones where it claims that they’re not allowed because they compete with Apple. However, Apple’s recent decision to reject Google’s Voice application didn’t just attract general public interest in Apple’s policies, it appears to have awoken the latest crop of FCC bosses. Yes, the FCC has requested more info from Apple, AT&T and Google concerning Apple’s rejection of the Google app. I wonder how the random Apple drone who made that decision is feeling right now?

Either way, this isn’t good for anyone. The FCC’s reasoning is that it:

“has a mission to foster a competitive wireless marketplace, protect and empower consumers, and promote innovation and investment.”

That’s actually a bit of a stretch on the FCC’s actual mandate. And as ridiculous as I think Apple’s actions are here, having the FCC get involved doesn’t seem good for anyone either. The FCC shouldn’t be involved in deciding what applications get put on phones. Apple’s decision has angered a bunch of people, with some swearing off the iPhone because of it. In those cases, those people have other options and other phones to go to. The situation doesn’t require the FCC to get involved. It should just require Apple coming to its senses and getting rid of its silly policy of outright rejections of apps it doesn’t like.

Filed Under: app store, fcc, gogle voice, iphone, rejection
Companies: apple, at&t, fcc, google

Is Apple Suggesting That The DMCA Prevents Terrorism?

from the yeah,-that's-believable dept

The EFF is trying to get a DMCA exemption from the Library of Congress for people who jailbreak their iPhones (if history is any indication, this won’t happen — the Library of Congress never seems to care about consumer rights). However, Apple’s response to the Library of Congress, suggesting that open or jailbroken iPhones could be used by terrorists to bring down cell towers is both preposterous and totally unrelated to the issue at hand. First it’s preposterous, as there are plenty of “open” devices out there already, and there has yet to be a single report of anyone taking down a cell tower with their mobile phone.

But, much more to the point: the point of copyright is not to protect us from terrorists taking down cell towers. If we, as a country, are relying on the DMCA to protect us from terrorists who don’t want us making phone calls, we’ve got bigger problems. Even if it were true that terrorists could take down cell towers with an open mobile phone, does anyone actually think they’d shy away from doing so because it violated the DMCA? It’s not like that’s going to make much of a difference at all. It’s entirely meaningless to the question of whether or not legal buyers of a mobile device should have the right to place whatever legal software they want on the device.

Filed Under: copyright, dmca, exemption, iphone, open, terrorism

What's Next? Can Senators Ban Stupidity While Driving?

from the legislating-while-grandstanding dept

A whole bunch of people have been submitting the story that some US Senators are now pushing a law that would effectively ban texting while driving across the country. Now, you may note that this is a state issue, rather than a federal issue, so the Senators have a sneaky way around that: they basically say that if states don’t pass such a law, they’ll withhold federal highway money. Now, let’s be very clear here: texting while driving is moronic. It’s obviously incredibly stupid and dangerous and you would have to be an idiot to do it. There was a recent study that wasn’t even worth mentioning because of course trying to type a message on your phone while you’re driving is going to massively diminish your driving skills and put everyone around you in danger.

That said, it’s unclear what good a “ban” on this does. It’s like trying to ban stupidity. There are a bunch of driver distractions, and people will continue to do them with or without a “ban.” The real answer is a combination of (a) education and (b) potentially technological solutions (voice control with voice-to-text?). Perhaps you could make the argument that a regulatory ban would serve to educate, but it seems like there should be more effective ways to teach people that it’s incredibly dumb to try to type out a text message while driving.

Filed Under: driver distractions, stupidity, texting while driving

New Mobile Music Service Works Via Voice Calls

from the well,-that's-different... dept

There are a bunch of different mobile music services out there (and more popping up every day). Some involve getting downloads to your phone, and others involve streaming (and, of course, there are things like ringtones and ringbacktones for specific functions). But Music Ally points us to a new service launched with Orange UK (and Universal Music) that will let users dial a voice call to hear some music. Basically, you call into an IVR system, and get a variety of options on what playlist you want to listen to. There’s some functionality where you can set up your own playlist on a computer, and then access it via the IVR. Of course, the service is quite limited, especially in that it only has Universal Music music right now. The article describes the service as “free” but also targeting “pay as you go” customers, which makes me wonder if people are paying for those voice “minutes” that they’d use (which could add up). Perhaps I’m missing something? I also would think the very limited selection is an issue. Still, it’s fascinating to see someone try such an experiment to get around some of the other barriers — especially for folks with lower-end phones that don’t have all the bells and whistles and app stores of higher end phones.

Filed Under: mobile, music, voice calls
Companies: orange uk, universal

Apple Says No To Google Voice On The iPhone

from the shameless dept

As we wait to hear if Spotify’s mobile app gets approved (I heard a rumor that it was, but have seen no proof yet), we hear of another questionable Apple iPhone rejection: the Google Voice iPhone app has been forbidden from the iPhone, though the reasons aren’t entirely clear. Still, it does show that Apple doesn’t care who you are, or how big a name. If it doesn’t like your app, too bad. Once again, this seems like an argument for why more open solutions will win out in the end. Not only do users not have to worry about arbitrary rejections like this, but innovation will happen much faster on open platforms where each innovation doesn’t need to be approved by a mercurial secret cabal.

Filed Under: app store, arbitrary, google voice, iphone, voice
Companies: apple, google

Fact Checking? UK Paper Simply Takes The Word Of Guy Who Claims WiFi Allergy

from the proof-please? dept

For years, we’ve been hearing stories from various people insisting that WiFi makes them ill. The only problem? There is absolutely no evidence to support this at all. Double blind tests with people have shown that the people who claim that WiFi makes them ill are no better at figuring out whether or not there’s WiFi in a room. A more recent, and rather thorough, test showed that while those who claim “electromagnetic sensitivity” are having cognitive and neurobiological reactions, it’s got absolutely nothing to do with electromagnetic waves. That is, the presence (or absence) of electromagnetic generating objects made no difference on the person.

And yet… reporters just seem to love the story about people being allergic to WiFi. The latest is in the Daily Mail over in the UK, which has an entire article all about a guy who lives in “agony” because of all the WiFi around. Not once does the reporter look into the evidence of the “allergy” but does claim that 2% of the population suffer from this. The guy travels around with a WiFi detector to protect him… but it’s not protecting him from whatever is causing his problems (as the study found). You would think that a reporter would actually check the facts on such things, right?

Filed Under: electromagnetic sensitivity, wifi, wifi allergy

Will Apple Allow Spotify On The iPhone?

from the one-to-watch dept

Having used Spotify a bit, I can definitely see how some people think it could potentially replace iTunes completely. It basically acts like an iTunes that has access to millions of songs at no additional cost (and, yes, it’s all licensed and legal). The songs are streamed, but you almost never notice it. It really does feel just like iTunes, while also having “Pandora-like” features for creating specialized stations or sharing others’ playlists. Unfortunately, it’s only available in the UK for now, though the rumor is it will be available in the US before the end of the year. However, where things could get really impressive is with Spotify’s mobile app. For a few months, there’s been a YouTube video of Spotify Mobile on Android:

The demo highlights the fact that you can sync any playlist for “offline” play, solving the biggest question about weak mobile signals on the go, or how you use it on a plane or somewhere without wireless access. With offline syncing, it’s basically everything that an iPod can do — with access to 6 million songs without having to pay for each individual song. But, of course, Android is still a limited platform. The big fish these days is the iPhone App Store, and Spotify has now submitted an iPhone app for approval, which raises all sorts of questions. With Apple’s history of rather arbitrary rejections — including ones for things Apple has deemed “competitive” — will it block Spotify as a rather direct competitor to iTunes? That would be very unfortunate, and again demonstrate the risk of a closed platform.

That said, the initial reviews of the iPhone app seem quite strong. Eliot Van Buskirk at Wired loves the syncing feature, and warns that “you’d have to pry it out of my cold, dead iPhone before I’ll delete it from my phone.” Meanwhile Music Ally points out that Spotify has uploaded a video of the iPhone app as well:

It really does look pretty slick. So now the ball’s in Apple’s court. I have no idea if Spotify can survive as a business (and I suspect that the royalty rates the music industry wants will make that difficult), but it is great to see more innovation in the space. Now we get to see how Apple feels about that sort of innovation.

Filed Under: app store, arbitrary, iphone, itunes, music, spotify, streaming
Companies: apple, spotify