Tweet, Like, Fan, Friend and Post from the London Underground

Today, London, England’s famous subway system – the Underground – became a Wi-Fi access point for the city’s commuters.

Or at least some of those commuters – Virgin Media is working with Transport London to wire about 80 station platforms, allowing Londoners to use their Wi-Fi-capable mobile devices while waiting for the next train.

Don’t worry, annoying ring tones won’t wake you on your morning commute – the Wi-Fi service is only available from station platforms, instead of trains – for now.

As we become increasingly more dependent on our Smartphones, tablets, laptops and just about anything else in our digital world, the ability to access these devices grows too.

And it makes sense to eventually expand Wi-Fi access from subway platforms to within the actual trains – who wants their game of Angry Birds suddenly cut off because the train arrives?

There has been talk in other cities of wiring their undergrounds so passengers on mobile devices could use those devices deep under our cities.

Earlier this month, The New York Times reported that Boingo – love that name! – will be providing Wi-Fi access to its subscribers at subway platforms in Manhattan, Brooklyn, the Bronx and Queens.

Over two years ago, Canada’s largest city started taking bids on wiring their subway stations too. The Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) began screening potential contractors to set up cell service across all 67 station platforms in Toronto, with an estimated roll-out by mid 2012.

Since that 2010 report, the TTC has not made any further announcements about this roll-out, which was supposed to happen around this time.

Maybe the efforts by London and New York City will kick start Toronto’s council to get off their butts and get with the times?

Although for those of us enjoy our morning nap during our commutes into work, it might be nice to delay expansion of Wi-Fi to the trains, or to have Wi-Fi quiet zones so that we can continue to get some much needed sleep.

Hey Apple – Love the iPhone, Fix the iTunes

The tech world is always buzzing with the latest rumors from Apple. 

Will the next iPhone have a virtual keyboard which projects itself onto any surface? How about a holo-beam, capable of projecting anything on the iPhone’s screen into thin air – similar to the holodeck on Star Trek The Next Generation, only much smaller? Will they introduce a male version of the digital personal assistant Siri, so you can choose whether your phone is male or female?

Apple has an amazing marketing machine. They get the word out about their products through the rumor mill. Usually, when a rumor is spread about a company’s products, services, or even the company itself, it is negative. But Apple intentionally creates rumors about potential products and product features to generate so much media and geekdom hype that come launch day, we’re all like meth addicts climbing the walls waiting for our next fix.

Apple’s products for the most part are also technological break-throughs that rock the world, and change the way we do things for ever.

Remember the original Sony Walkman? A massive -- by today’s standards -- square of plastic, with a row of control buttons on the side.

We’re not talking about the next generation Walkman, which had the CD-player in it, we’re talkin’ the original from the 1980’s – long before anyone had ever seen a metallic disc – unless you’re referring to a heavy metal rock band’s metal-painted record. Remember those?

Both the record and the audio cassette became history as CDs and DVDs took the world by storm.

But the real innovation which shook the world was Apple’s iPod – a tiny portable MP3 player, which allowed you to carry more music, and it was crystal clear because it was digital audio.

When Steve Jobs first announced the iPhone with his famous phrase “this changes everything,” he wasn’t lying.

Before the iPhone, all most of us did on cell phones was talk, text and occasionally surf the net, using really bad text-driven cell phone browsers.

Who would have thought we’d ask our Smartphone for directions, what the weather forecast will be like, or to name the song currently playing in the restaurant?

Apple’s marketing machine is slick and creative, but their hardware products are also equally impressive – if not more so.

However, Apple’s software is surprisingly really, really, REALLY awful. Or at least it is on my MS-Windows machine, which may also be part of the issue.

Whenever I plug my iPhone into my computer to charge and sync with iTunes, I always cringe, watching with a tummy-turning uneasiness to see how iTunes will screw up my iPhone today.

Unless you jailbreak your iPhone, you have to use Apple’s iTunes to download and update apps, podcasts, and the latest updates to the iPhone’s operating system -- iOS.

You’d think Apple would have put as much care into creating iTunes, as they did their iTunes-dependent devices – iPods, iPads and iPhones all require iTunes for content management, unless they are jailbroken.

Think again.

It’s as if iTunes has a mind all its own, some days it’s in a great mood, and syncs without any issues.

The next day, it gives me an error and refuses to sync. Sometimes all it takes is unplugging my iPhone, closing iTunes, and starting again. Sometimes I have to delete backup files. Sometimes I have to enter crazy chaotic command line codes from an MS-DOS prompt window. Sometimes I just say ?!?!?! it and reset my iPhone to factory settings, and then restore everything from my network’s backup.

iTunes sucks – no – it is a disaster of an application. My iPhone can be working perfectly, and iTunes may have worked just as perfectly previously. But without any updates or warnings to either, when I plug in the iPhone – poof – iTunes decides to go all meshuguna crazy on me, and throws a fit. 

Maybe it’s because of Apple’s long standing rivalry with Microsoft. I run MS-Windows machines – as do about 95 percent of the planet – so maybe the Windows version of iTunes isn’t as error-free as it’s more native Apple-based Operating System (the Mac OS)?

If it is – Apple – get over it. Not everyone using an iPhone is going to change their entire platform to conform to your standards.

Whatever the issue – Apple really needs to seriously fix iTunes. Although Apple let the genie out of the tech bottle by giving the world its first real Smartphone, they are no longer the only game in town.

On Cats, Dogs and Social Networking

Why is it that many women post pictures of cats online on their social networking sites?

On Twitter, Google+, Facebook, Pinterest, even YouTube, I see cute cats with humorous slogans, mean cats in threatening postures, sly kitties taking advantage of their owners, cats, cats, and more CATS!

And I’ve noticed all of these are posted by women.

Maybe I’m biased ‘cause I’m more of a dog person than a cat person, but in a completely unscientific poll – judging from the numerous social networking sites I belong too – I’d say there is a definite slant towards posts about cats to dogs, and all the posts about cats are from women.

What’s the fascination with felines by females? And why isn’t there an equal amount of posts about dogs from men?

I don’t mind cats. I don’t adore cats. I can live with or without cats.

You can train a cat. Just unlike a dog which comes when you call his or her name, cats will only come if they want to come when you call them.

Cat’s have attitudes. Dogs are loyal. Cats nudge and meow when they want attention, other than that, they often just want to be left alone. Dogs love attention, even if they didn’t bark or jump begging for it.

Dogs may beg at the dinner table for scraps.

Cats never beg for anything.

You can put a leash on a dog, and take him or her to the park to play ball, Frisbee or to catch a stick.

Most cat’s don’t go on leashes, and I’ve never seen a cat catch a Frisbee and bring it back to their owner.

Some let their cat out at night, to play with the other cats in the ‘hood.’ If your dog accidentally gets out, you’ll spend hours looking for him, though many often find their way back.

Dogs help the blind find their way, sniff out dangerous and banned substances at airports, and have been part of police forces worldwide to catch bad guys, find lost children in the woods, and locate survivors of plane crashes and avalanches. 

I’ve never heard of a cat joining an elite team of search and rescuers.

Dogs usually play heroes on television and in the movies. From Lassie and the Littlest Hobo which always brought lost souls together, to Santa’s Little Helper on The Simpson’s very first episode which saved Christmas, even to Snoopy , the cartoon dog that often saved Charlie Brown from self-embarrassment.

Most of the cats on television and movies are self-centered, egotistical and evil. From the Austin Powers movies, Dr. Evil’s pet is Mr. Bigglesworth, a cat only a villain could love. Cartoon cat Garfield is always trying to get fed, even if it means getting his dog buddy Odie into trouble. Even lovable Morris from the classic Tender Vittles cat food commercials was so focused on getting his ‘Vittles’ that he’d ignore even the most amusing situations occurring around him as he ran past to his feeding dish.

Not that all cats are mean, and all dogs aren’t. Just ask the crazy cat lady down the street.

What Good Are Social Networking Apps That Don’t Work?

Recently, the fine folks at Google released the latest updates for their social networking app for Google+ on iPhone, and just last week for Android. All the tech media was buzzing with how Google had done a wonderful job, producing one of the most visually stunning apps ever.

Even I was impressed with the sheer beauty of the Google+ app’s design. The app smoothly scrolls both the image and the text of a post, placing the emphasis on the image by showing you that, as you scroll through your post streams.

As the app seductively scrolls in a full-color image, and alluringly pumps in the comment and descriptive link, you’re drawn into its appeal, like a lonely person surfing the net for some much needed company on date night.

However, just like that lonely person on date night may be taken in by lust at first sight, instead of love, my lust over the Google+ app has ended abruptly, and I wonder what I ever saw in it in the first place.

Although the Google+ app is a beautiful piece of app, it’s completely useless otherwise.

When you create a post on Google+ via the web, as soon as you enter a web address, Google+ pulls in images from the post, allowing you to choose which image to associate with your post. That image is then displayed along with your post on both the web and app feeds. It also uses the title of the page or headline from the text as the hyperlink as well as the description of the web page.

However, when I tried to post a link using Google’s beautiful new G+ app, it just posted the HTML link to the stream. I tried several times, and in all frustrated attempts, instead of getting the stunningly beautiful images, headlines and page descriptions, I got an ugly HTML link. I checked this out on the website, and sure enough, the link I posted was just that – an HTML link – nothing to look at.

Who’s going to click on some ugly link without any description or image, amidst a sea of descriptions and images from those posting on the web? Isn’t the whole point of the G+ app to create complete posts – with images and descriptive links – from anywhere at any time?

What good is an app, if all you can do is view the amazing things others are posting via the web?

To be fair, the G+ app does have some useful functions – you receive alerts on comments, new followers, and other notifications, and you can take a picture from your Smartphone and upload it to your stream. You can even use the G+ cool Messenger to ‘Hangout’ with up to 10 friends in a video conference using the app – that is really impressive.

But the most common thing we do on any of the social networks – from Facebook, Twitter, even Pinterest, is post to our feeds and streams.

You can post to your G+ stream using the Google+ app. You can choose which ‘circles’ (groups) of people your post is visible too, post your location, and attach a photo from your phone.

But when you try to attach a link you’ve copied while browsing the net as most of us do, all you can post is the ugly HTML link, along with any comments you add.

I suppose if you have the time, you can capture a screen shot of an image from the page you are linking too, save it to your phone, and then attach it to the post, along with the link. Aside from this being a lot of work, you’ll still have an ugly HTML link, as opposed to a clickable headline.

I’m a big fan of HootSuite to manage my Facebook and Twitter feeds. From Vancouver, Canada, HootSuite is a great piece of software, which allows me to create complete posts. What I really like about this application, is it’s a real time saver – I can schedule posts to go off to any or all of the social networks it supports at anytime on any day. 

The mobile version of HootSuite isn’t as fully functional as the web-based application, but I can still post complete posts – with images and shortened links – from the app.

Google+’s app doesn’t even shorten the links.

The chatter over at HootSuite is they are working on adding support for G+ “as soon as immediately possible” – which can’t be soon enough, because although the Google+ app is great eye candy, looks will only ever get you so far.

How Social Networking and Tech Are Changing Our View of the World

Today, Google posted a short video showing off a view from their new much talked about augmented reality glasses.

Augmented Reality (AR) places a tiny computer screen within your visual frame of reference, so you can utilize technology in a whole new way. Imagine seeing a concert poster, and then telling your glasses to call the number on the poster to order tickets. It would be like Apple’s iPhone 4s virtual assistant Siri being able to see.

Pretty cool indeed – and AR isn’t just limited to Google’s glasses. There are some smartphone AR games, which use the camera and GPS to place ghosts or other characters on the screen, using your current location as the background. You have to run around and avoid running into them.

AR is the latest in visual tech invading our mind’s eye.

Remember when 3D movies first came out? No – I’m not talking about the current crop of movies which use polarized plastic lenses, I’m talking about the original 3D movies, where you had cheap paper glasses, with a piece of red and blue plastic to see through on either eye.

I remember growing up and usually around Halloween, there’d be a scary 3D movie shown on one of the major TV networks. A fast food burger joint like Burger King or McDonald’s usually partnered in on these things, giving out free blue and red 3D glasses with their “happy meals.” The movies were cheesy B-movies, and the 3D effects weren’t that good. But as it only happened once a year, it was a different way to enjoy a night at home, with good friends, watching really bad movies.

These days, 3D movies are a lot better – the technology to produce, show and view them as changed quite a bit since the B-Movie horror days of my youth.

But you still have to wear those blasted glasses, which are never comfortable, especially for people like me that already wear glasses to see.

Now that we have 3D tech on TVs, that too is changing. Some of the major TV manufacturers are already testing out models which display 3D video, without having to wear those awful 3D glasses.

However, Google’s taken things to the next level, by incorporating high-tech glasses into our reality – to augment our reality with a smartphone.

The potential uses for AR glasses are mind-blowing. Doctors could perform surgery with greater precision, guided by their AR glasses. You’d never get lost walking in a strange neighborhood, as your AR glasses would clearly show you the way.

Forget your grocery list at home? No problem, your AR glasses would tell you what you need to buy, as you visually scan the grocery store shelves.

While at a party, you’d never forget anyone’s name, as your AR glasses could show you the person’s name, and complete contact details as you talked to them. You could even add each other to your social networks instantly, tweet about the conversation, or snap a picture or video of it instantly, without lifting your phone – just use your AR glasses.

Augmented Reality is a very cool way of seeing the future. I just hope the AR glasses are more comfortable than those blasted 3D ones we have to wear to watch movies.

All The News, But Not The News You See

How come in this fine city of mine, with no less than five twenty-four-hour news channels, when you see something going on which is really big, and you rush to one of these channels, they have nothing on it?

This has happened twice in the past week to me. I saw them close down a whole stretch of highway, and there were red, white, blue and orange flashing lights as far as the eye could see. Clearly something big was going on – but I couldn’t see it all. So I turned on the local twenty-four-hour news channels, watched and listened for at least 45-minutes – but nothing was ever said.

 

When a blackout occurred at a friend’s place, we noticed the whole street was dark, and there were fire trucks, police cars, and hydro crews everywhere. An ambulance left the scene with lights and siren – clearly taking away someone involved in a horrible accident.

When I got home, what did I do?

I ran to the tube, turned on the local twenty-four-hour news channels and watched to see what was going on.

Again, NOTHING! ZIP! Not even a little blurb in those really annoying scrollers that practically yell out at you as you’re trying to watch the cluttered screen.

What good is a twenty-four-hour news channel, if you can’t get news off of the thing?

Now I know a lot happens in a day, but back when I was working at a paper, news was stuff that actually mattered to people. News was happening too people in your local community. News was about the people, places and things which affected you.

These days, whenever Justin Beiber sneezes, that’s news.

WHY?

Will it actually ever affect YOU?

If Britney Spears doesn’t wear panties and decides to spread her legs showing herself to the world – how on earth will that affect you?

But when something happens that causes all the offices, including yours, to send you and all the employees home – that does affect you. Aside from getting to go home early, all those companies – including the one ya work for – lost business that day. There will be missed meetings, projects that need to get extended, angry customers to deal with – these things appear to have more of an impact on us than whether or not Britney Spears is wearing panties.

Still, the news media and their never ending quest for content to fill their twenty-four-hour news stations seems to find lots of stuff to put on there.

Problem is, most of it is irrelevant crap that really has no impact on those forced to watch it.

We tune into these channels for insight into the world around us, but instead we are fed puff pieces that just don’t deserve the oxygen used to voice them.

It’s a sad day, when you see news with your own two eyes, yet all the local stations cover some slutty celebrity and her decision to wear or not to wear underwear.

I think the broadcast regulators are the real villains behind all of this – they regulate and license the twenty-four-hour news stations.

As a requirement of having a broadcast license, each television station must provide the types of content described in its licensing agreement.

I don’t know what the lawyers in the television news business are smoking, but it must be pretty good stuff if their licenses provide for content which is meaningless, pointless, sexually charged, and potentially offensive.

I would hope that the regulators have clauses which tell the twenty-four-hour news channels to carry interesting, informative journalistically sound pieces, which have meaning and worth to the viewer.

But who am I kidding – the regulators probably get off watching clips of Britney Spears imitating Sharon Stone’s infamous leg uncross.