I cant believe how fugly these red keyboard units are. If this is what AT&T actually offer I'm going to have to look elsewhere which is amazing considering i've been hanging out for this handset for at least 6 months.

Fortress can F off if this is considered 'an enhancement'.


Dean

I'm surprised more people aren't making a bigger deal about this.

I wrote a post last year about what this could mean for the future of video and music licensing here
http://deancollinsblog.blogspot.com/2008/08/cloudification-of-your-content.html

(lol or just go to www.Cloudification.net - i cant believe that domain wasn't taken).

yep, if cingular dont get the touch pro 2 fairly soon i could be shopping for a new mobile carrier for at least 2 unlimited voice and data accounts.

cool, more opportunity for competitors to come in with a faster service.

yep and what ports/user restrictions on apps are they placing on their residential users.....?

What a stupid waste of tax payers money in these tight economic times.

As always, all the little piggy consultants ensuring they milk even more money out of the DTV handover with this 90 day delay.

Sounds like Obama is the same old, same old. So much for change.


Cheers,
Dean

good to see some real world uses of QR codes.

If you want to see places you can implement QR codes for you own business (or personal use) check out www.Conation.net/QR for a 60 sec dummies overview.


Cheers,
Dean

Boring, there is no advantage in this over QR codes which are license free and not encumbered with any kind of microsoft tax.

So I've been on holidays for a few days and was just catching up on my reading (live.com is my rss reader -works great)

I came across a post on Mark Cuban's blog from last week
http://www.blogmaverick.com/2007/08/24/the-internet-is-dead-and-boring/

Dude...what are you doing? Are you crazy we haven't even scratched the surface of what a permanent omnipresent network can do for our lives.

Yeh sure it's easy to point to the web and say 'whats new' (and I totally agree about your comments on web 2.0 - it's just a change of fonts and some java & ror programming tricks) but saying that this is it 'as far as you personally can see' is like saying once Rome settled on a standardised road format that all roads here and ever after will be more or less the same (and yes I think even the Italians will agree that some other countries evolved on the original concept and produced something even better).

I know for a fact that once the internet evolves from a person to machine transaction platform to a machine to machine fabric we will be able to implement far more radical applications into our lives.

It may not seem like a big difference but think of it like going from Atomic Fusion to Atomic Fission. Pretty much the same thing but with radically different outcomes and even bigger ramifications to the wider world (global warming, world peace, less reliance on middle east oil etc).

We here at http://www.cognation.net/ are working on some amazing web application concepts that hopefully will change your mind about what the internet 'will finally evolve into'.

Mark I know you have to make 'wide sweeping statements' to get peoples attention but you need to choose your targets more widely.

Cheers,
Dean

This is a copy of my post I made on Friday July 27th at www.collins.net.pr/blog

I assumed at the time your speech at CTAM on the 25th was misquoted/mis-interpreted and your post above makes more sense.

However my comments still apply. The 'problem' with the internet isn't the architecture but the current termination speeds.

Video delivery and innovative presentation of that video (check out http://www.cognation.net/old/cablecard3) is only being held back by vested interests.

You might also want to check out an aussie colleague of mine who posted some interesting data on speeds and hours per week.
http://www.rossdawsonblog.com/weblog/archives/2007/07/global_comparis.html





Mark Cuban is Wrong
http://deancollinsblog.blogspot.com/2007/07/mark-cuban-is-wrong.html

Well this time anyway (it's hard to call foul on a guy that in my opinion is a legend and worth $5.7b so was obviously right more than a few times in his life).....but in this case Mark you are just plain wrong.

So go and read this article and come back to read the rest of my post.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6463169.html

So here is where he is wrong
"Developers will figure this out and develop applications to match. If, for instance, a developer wanted to build suites of office applications, he said, the better environment would be servers on local cable systems"

This would be correct if you ran a cable network 'AND' had the worlds best developers on your payroll (apart from the obvious point about you couldn't make a profit with this big a staff) but the value of the internet is that any tom dick or harry working in his mothers basement can create the next Digg or Flickr.

Its the collective brain power of all the people working, creating, dare I say even blogging that creates the massive value or worth that we have today.

Walled Gardens never work, will continue not to work, and consumers are tired of being 'penned' in by them.

He then goes on to say
"so-called clustered collections of cable networks provide an enclosed environment that allows high-bandwidth, complex applications to thrive".

So the issue isn't a requirement for walled content BUT for an internet of higher bandwidths.

By breaking down the barriers between all networks - the network here in my office, the network of servers a Blogger, the network of servers at Flickr for the photo I'll insert into this post we can create interactivity.

We just need higher bandwidths and more exposed API's between these applications (oh and a way to pay developers/web site owners for creating those API's - but thats a story for another post) the last thing we need is a You Tube that only works on Time Warner and a Flickr designed only to be optimal on Cablevision.

Cheers,
Dean Collins
www.Cognation.net