by Larry Magid
This article originally appeared in the San Jose Mercury News

Facebook’s announcement last week that it passed the 500 million mark reminded me that the concept of a “face book” is not unique to Facebook.com.

Long before computers and the Internet, the term was used to describe printed books that included pictures and brief descriptions of students. I’ve read that founder Mark Zuckerberg’s high school, Phillips Exeter Academy, had a printed publication called “The Photo Address Book,” which students referred to as “The Face Book.”

My children’s elementary school didn’t have a face book but it did have a printed student directory. And probably because it was in print, and not online, I never heard parents express concern about the possible negative implications of having a printed book with the names, addresses and phone numbers of young children and their parents. Perhaps that was because we all appreciated how the book made it easy for us to reach other families who were part of our school “network,” or maybe it was because we weren’t quite so sensitive about privacy issues back then.

While Facebook.com might not look much like those original photo books and directories, it does help us find and communicate with people who share a common bond. Indeed, based on “friend” requests I’ve received on Facebook from former classmates in college, high school and even elementary school, it truly is a replacement for that old printed ”face book.” It’s also starting to replace those venerable high school yearbooks, and its impact on alumni inspired Time magazine, last year to run a story “How Facebook is Affecting School Reunions.”

To commemorate its 500 millionth member, Facebook launched “Facebook Stories,” where members are encouraged to share their experiences. Although it’s clearly a self-serving move on the part of the company, it’s nevertheless a revealing glimpse into how people are using the service to connect. Stories are organized by location and by theme, including crime fighting, grief, movements, pets, causes, lost and found, religion, natural disasters and, of course, love. Kevin’s story is not uncommon: “Because of Facebook I found my long lost crush since grade 4 “… now I’m 23 years old. She’s now my girlfriend and soon to be wife.”

Look at Privacy from Both Sides Now

My guess is that Kevin was able to find his long-lost crush because she made at least a little personal information available either to everyone with access to Facebook or to friends of friends. I say this because Facebook has received a lot of negative publicity (including from me) about its privacy policies, which, by default, expose some personal information to everyone.

While I understand why a lot of people object to these defaults (I have argued that the disclosure of most personal information should be opt-in rather than opt-out), I can also see the other side to this. The default settings that disclose users’ photos, posts, bios and family connections makes it easier for people like Kevin to make sure that the 23-year-old woman he found on Facebook is the same person as that fourth-grader he once fancied. This is especially the case for people with common names.

I met my wife a long time ago by one of the old-fashioned methods — at work. But I’ve certainly unearthed a lot of old friends on Facebook. In many cases, we found each other because we were “friends of friends.” For example, someone I worked with in the late ’70s “friended” me last year, and once I accepted him as a friend, I started browsing through his friends and came across a number of people we knew in common.

As a result of this one friend, I ended up “friending” several of our mutual friends and — two weeks ago — my wife and I spent the night on Cape Cod with one of them and her husband. I had posted a note on my profile that I was visiting Cape Cod and because she had access to my “news feed,” she knew I was nearby and sent me a message inviting us to stay with them.

That little reunion on the Cape would never have happened if my friend and I had maximum privacy settings turned on. We would have never found each other had either of us restricted our basic information to “friends” only. And had I used the “customize” feature to further restrict access to my news feed, she might never might have known I was on the Cape.

None of this is to suggest that watchdog groups and public officials shouldn’t continue to scrutinize Facebook’s privacy policies, or that people should uncritically accept Facebook’s default privacy settings. I think it makes sense to look at your settings periodically and think about what you want to expose and to whom. To that end, I created a tutorial on Facebook privacy that you can view at connectsafely.org/facebook.

Disclosure: Facebook is a supporter of ConnectSafely.org, a nonprofit Internet safety organization where I serve as co-director.

As I reviewed the recently relesed Droid X cell phone, I started thinking about my long career as a technology journalist.

I got my start in the early ’80s writing exclusively about personal computers, starting with the Apple II, followed by the IBM PC, PC clones and the Mac. Like the handful of other computer journalists at the time, I would quickly get my hands on just about every new machine that came to market, testing the speed of its processor and noting how many kilobytes of memory it had. I would carefully inspect the screen to see if the resolution was any better than its competitors and peck at the keyboard to see if it was suitable for a touch typist. Often, I’d come across a model that stood out from the competition and occasionally I’d find one that was not worth recommending. But what I remember most about those early PC years was the pace of change as PC makers struggled to differentiate themselves from the competition.

Today’s PCs are, of course, a lot better than anything on the market back then. But in many ways they’re not as interesting. That’s because virtually all of them do exactly what they’re designed to do in pretty much the same manner as their competition. Macs and Windows PCs are different, but fundamentally they perform the same tasks.

There are occasional interesting moments — such as when Apple or Microsoft releases a new operating system or a PC maker incorporates something particularly

innovative, like a touch screen or a solid state drive. But even to a trained eye, most of the machines on the market look and function pretty much like the models they’re replacing.

So, instead of getting excited about PCs, the now greatly expanded corps of technology journalists and bloggers are all gaga over the newest smartphones. Anything with an Apple logo on it gets the most attention as we slice, dice and dissect every new iPhone released, singing its praises and damning its flaws.

The tech press is also eager to get its hands on new Android phones to see if any qualify as an “iPhone killer,” or just to compare the latest processor with the one it replaced or the latest smartphone screen with all the others on the market.

I certainly did that in my review of the Droid X that appeared in last week’s Palo Alto Daily News (owned by the same publisher as the Mercury News). But as I was writing the review, I started to wonder when we’ll get to the same point with smartphones that we have reached with PCs. It won’t happen right away because the smartphone industry is still in flux. There are lots of interesting and, in some cases, profitable apps being written for smartphones and we’re about to see a whole new smartphone platform when Microsoft releases its Windows 7 Mobile operating system later this year.

Still, to this reviewer, some of the new phones are starting to look a lot like others on the market.

For example, the Droid X has the same size screen (4.3 inch) as the HTC Evo that Sprint started selling (for the same $199) a couple of weeks ago. It runs the same Android 2.1 operating system (albeit with some minor differences engineered by Motorola and HTC) and the same Android apps. It has the same excellent Google Maps with turn-by-turn directions, and its camera has the same 8-megapixel resolution as the Evo, although the Evo comes with both a front and rear camera. For a fee ($20 for the Droid X and $30 for the Evo), they both can create their own Wi-Fi hotspot, which is a really useful feature if you need to get a PC on the Net and have no other Wi-Fi nearby.

Even when I compare the Droid X with the original Motorola Droid, which came out in late 2009, the similarities are greater than the differences. Sure, the original has a slide out physical keyboard, only a 5-megapixel camera and a slower processor, but they both run the same operating system and the same applications. And, yes, they both make phone calls.

Even Apple’s iPhone 4 isn’t as unique as the company’s “This changes everything” ads suggest. Sure, there are new features. But fundamentally, it’s a refinement over previous iPhones and not all that different from Android phones.

Yes, the iPhone has FaceTime, iMovie, Apple’s legendary ease of use and a really high-resolution screen, but the Evo has videoconferencing and there are video editing programs for Android and more on the way. And while the iPhone screen does look better than the Droid X’s when you place them side by side, I don’t recall anyone clamoring for higher resolution on screens that are small enough to fit in our pocket.

That’s not to say there aren’t other differences or to deny that there will be some who swear by one platform and swear at the other. But at the end of the day, they’re all wonders of modern technology.

I guess it has something to do with perspective. The first “portable” cell phone I used came in a bag and was too heavy to carry around without a shoulder strap. Come to think of it, I also remember the time when phones were tethered to a wire, and even recall having to use a rotary dial to make calls and pay as much as $3 a minute to place a call from one part of the U.S. to another. But, as cranky as this column may make me seem, I don’t remember having to turn a crank to make a call.

As Facebook celebrates its 500 millionth member, ABC World News Tonight anchor Diane Sawyer talked with founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg in a rare broadcast interview. But in May, I had a chance to interview Zuckerberg mostly about the company’s privacy problems. We also talked about Facebook’s growth strategy including his plans to expand overseas including in Russia and Japan.

And how will Facebook continue to grow? Zuckerberg says it’s by tapping into the “core human need” that “people really want to stay connected with their friends and family and the community around them.”

Even though he just told Diane Sawyer that he wasn’t sure the company would reach a billion members, in June he reportedly said that “it is almost a guarantee” that Facebook would eventually reach that milestone.

My CBS News 1-minute segment on Facebook’s 500 million milestone (includes cuts from Zuckerberg)

Diane Sawyer’s ABC News interview

It seems as if the world is having a love/hate affair with Apple. People obviously love their products. How else would you explain the company’s incredible earnings report for the latest quarter, exceeding analyst expectation with a 78% increase in net income from a year ago.

The company sold 8.4 million iPhones during that period including 1.7 million iPhone 4’s which came out only three days before the quarter ended. Last week Steve Jobs said that the company had sold over 3 million iPhone 4’s in the first 22 days it was on the market.

Apple has also had great success with its iPad with sales of about 3.3 million in the product’s first three months.

Yet, despite all this success, Apple has had a bit of a tough time thanks to a minor flaw in its iPhone 4. As you probably know by now, the phone can lose signal strength if you touch a seam in the wrap-around metal antenna. I say it’s a minor problem because: Not everyone has been able to experience the problem – I couldn’t see any drop in signal strength when I tried touching that spot the other night and even if you are experiencing it you can avoid the problem completely by not touching that spot or by putting a case or “bumper” around the phone.

Consumer Reports which said that it can’t recommend the phone because of this problem said that one solution is to put a piece of duct tape around the crack. I don’t know what they recommend people not buy the iPhone 4 after coming up with such an elegant and simple solution. Seems to me that the only thing better then owning an iPhone 4 would be to own one with a piece of duct tape stuck to its lower left corner.

As you’ve probably heard, Steve Jobs held an unprecedented press conference last Friday to address the “antennagate” issue. I was invited to the event but elected instead to finish my vacation on Cape Cod rather than rush back to California on a day’s notice to sit in a room with other journalists to listen to Steve Jobs make excuses. I did, however, catch the live blogs of the press conference and watch the video replay on Apple’s website. If you have a chance to watch it, I’m sure you’ll enjoy Jobs performance, especially early in the speech where he tries to make the case that the problems with the iPhone 4′s antenna are no different than those of other smart phones.

To make his point, he showed videos of people gripping a Blackberry Bold 9700, an HTC Droid Eris and a Samsung Omnia II that showed all phones lost signal strength if gripped in a certain way. The Blackberry Bold’s signal strength meter dropped from 4 to 1, the HTC Droid Eros from 4 to 0 and the Samsung Omnia from 4 to 1. When the person in the video released his grip, the bars went back up.

Jobs demonstration didn’t convince makers of other phones. Research in Motion, which makes the Blackberry quickly retorted that “Apple’s claims about RIM products appear to be deliberate attempts to distort the public’s understanding of an antenna design issue and to deflect attention from Apple’s difficult situation.”
Other phone makers also chimed in. The All Things Digital blog quoted HTC saying “[Apple] apparently didn’t give operators enough time to test the phone.” Motorola, according to the site says that it has avoided using external antennas “because consumers don’t like being told how to hold the phone.’

Nokia issued a statement that “antenna performance of a mobile device/phone may be affected with a tight grip, depending on how the device is held. That’s why Nokia designs our phones to ensure acceptable performance in all real life cases.”

Whether accurate or not, what struck me about Jobs comparison of the iPhone to the competition was that it was an admission that the iPhone is basically just another phone with some of the same flaws as other phones. Every other press statement about the iPhone positioned it as a revolutionary product. In its press conference when they introduced the phone and in subsequent ads, Apple positioned the iPhone 4 a product that “changes everything: again.”

Jobs also admitted that the iPhone 4 drops slightly more calls than the 3G. Although he didn’t say how many calls either phone drops, he did say that the difference is less than one additional call in every hundred calls,
To make his users happy he promised a free case to any iPhone 4 buyer (offer expires September 30th) and said if that doesn’t make someone happy they can return the phone for a free refund with no restocking fees. He said he believed that AT&T would wave their early termination charge.

Job also admitted that he knew there could be a problem if people touched the antenna in that spot but, said “We didn’t think it would be a big problem because every phone has this issue.” He also said, “We went to a lot of trouble to show people where you can touch the antenna. You might as well put a red flag there.”

Steve Jobs Claims Apple’s Problems are Common to Smart Phones (Photo from Apple Video)

Before he announced he was giving every iPhone 4 user a free case and an opportunity to return the phone for a free refund if they weren’t happy, Steve Jobs took several minutes to make the case that the problems with the iPhone 4′s antenna are no different than those of other smart phones. (Click here to video Apple’s press conference)

Do all Smart Phones Suffer from Grip of Death?

To make his point, he showed videos of people gripping a Blackberry Bold 9700, an HTC Droid Eris and a Samsung Omnia II that showed all phones lost signal strength if gripped in a certain way. The Blackberry Bold’s signal strength meter dropped from 4 to 1, the HTC Droid Eros from 4 to 0 and the Samsung Omia from 4 to 1. When the person in the video released his grip, the bars went back up.

Other Phone Makers Beg to Differ

Jobs demonstration didn’t convince makers of other phones. Research in Motion, which makes the Blackberry quickly retorted that “Apple’s claims about RIM products appear to be deliberate attempts to distort the public’s understanding of an antenna design issue and to deflect attention from Apple’s difficult situation.” (Scroll down for full statement)

Other phone makers also chimed in. All Things Digital quoted HTC saying “[Apple] apparently didn’t give operators enough time to test the phone.” Motorola, according to the site says that it has avoided using external antennas “because consumers don’t like being told how to hold the phone. While the whole industry has to deal with phones being held in different ways.”

Nokia issued a statement that “antenna performance of a mobile device/phone may be affected with a tight grip, depending on how the device is held. That’s why Nokia designs our phones to ensure acceptable performance in all real life cases.”

RIM’s full statement

“Apple’s attempt to draw RIM into Apple’s self-made debacle is unacceptable. Apple’s claims about RIM products appear to be deliberate attempts to distort the public’s understanding of an antenna design issue and to deflect attention from Apple’s difficult situation. RIM is a global leader in antenna design and has been successfully designing industry-leading wireless data products with efficient and effective radio performance for over 20 years. During that time, RIM has avoided designs like the one Apple used in the iPhone 4 and instead has used innovative designs which reduce the risk for dropped calls, especially in areas of lower coverage. One thing is for certain, RIM’s customers don’t need to use a case for their BlackBerry smartphone to maintain proper connectivity. Apple clearly made certain design decisions and it should take responsibility for these decisions rather than trying to draw RIM and others into a situation that relates specifically to Apple.”

iPhone Antenna Song

Steve Jobs began Friday’s press conference by showing a video that makes fun of people who are complaining about the iPhone 4′s antenna problem to the refrain “If you don’t want an iPhone 4, don’t buy it. If you bought one and don’t like it, bring it back.”

Apple is poised to make a major announcement about its recently maligned iPhone 4 at a press conference at its Cupertino headquarters on Friday. Although I don’t know exactly what will be said or who will say it, having attended scores of Apple pressers, I’m pretty sure it will start out with all the good news – so far – about the iPhone 4. They’ll recite statistics about the incredible sales of the device, quote some of the rave reviews and point out that most iPhone users are enjoying excellent reception. They will undoubtedly remind us that people have waited in line for the phone and, despite the reported problems, sales remain strong.

Some high level Apple executive – possibly Steve Jobs but possibly not – will admit that there have been some reception problems. The evidence reported by Consumer Reports is pretty hard to ignore, but it will be downplayed.

Then there will be some “solutions” including the already announced update that “fixes” the problem in Apple’s software that indicates stronger reception that may actually be the case. As you may recall the company was “stunned to find that the formula we use to calculate how many bars of signal strength to display is totally wrong.” The company might also announce a software change to mitigate the antenna problem.

If Apple is smart, they will offer iPhone 4 owner a free “bumper” case or a gift certificate that can be used to buy a case or anything else at an Apple store. Not only does that solve the problem, it also gets people into stores where they’re likely to spend more money and be around Apple staffers and fans who can remind them who wonderful the iPhone 4 and other Apple products really are. It’s also a lot cheaper than a recall.

Should We Care

The real question that plagues me is why everyone cares so much about this antenna issue. To begin with, many iPhone 4 users haven’t experienced the problem at all and those that have can make it go away simply by not touching the lower left corner of the phone or using a case such an inexpensive (as low as $10) rubber or plastic bumper case that’s a good idea anyway because it protects the phone if it’s dropped.

Second of all, the problem – to the extent it exists – is simply one of cell phone reception. It’s not the same as the accelerator sticking on a Toyota or tainted Tylenol. No one is going to die as a result of this antenna problem.

It’s time for all of us in the technology press – and the people who click on our articles – to take a deep-breath and put this issue into perspective. I’m far more worried about the Gulf Oil spill, the Afghan and Iraq wars, the economy and tensions in the Middle East than about a flaw in a cell phone antenna.

But I have to admit that speculating about Apple is a lot more fun than worrying about world peace.

This post also appears on the Huffington Post

I’m writing this aboard Delta airlines flight 262 from San Francisco to New York.  The good news is that not only is there Internet aboard but it’s one of the few Delta planes to have AC adapters so I’ll be able to use my laptop the entire flight.  The bad news is that the person in front of me has just fully reclined his seat-back so it’s nearly impossible for me to perch my laptop on the tray table.  In fact, had it not been for a quick response on my part, the laptop screen might have broken when he abruptly reclined his seat.

I don’t blame the guy in 19F, I blame Delta and almost every other airline for allowing seats to recline this far in their economy sections.

With the seat in front of me  fully reclined, the only way to use my laptop  is to shove it all the way into my belly.  To keep my hands on the keyboard, my elbows have to be so far back that I feel like I’m doing isometric shoulder exercises rather than typing.

Not a Good Trade-Off

What especially bothers me about the seat-back issue is that the extra discomfort  I’m experiencing  greatly exceeds the small amount of extra comfort the person in front of me  may be enjoying.  Even if I weren’t using a laptop, I’d be far less comfortable having his seat in my face than I would be sitting upright

In the meantime, when you’re on a plane, think about the person behind you.  If you must recline, don’t go all the way back in one swift motion and, consider only going back part of the way. You might even turn around and ask if it’s OK.  And let’s hope that the person in front of you heeds the same advice.

What do you think?  I’d love to hear from others on the question of whether the ability to sit back justifies the ability to enjoy a little bit more space in front of you?

Droid X (left) next to HTC Evo (photo credit: Larry Magid)

The Droid X from Motorola and Verizon is right up there with the Apple iPhone 4 and the HTC/Sprint Evo as one of the coolest and most useful smartphones on the market.

The new smart phone will be available on July 15 for $200 with a two-year service contract.

Excellent screen

Its 4.3 inch (854 by 480 pixel) screen is the biggest you’ll find on a smart phone which, of course, makes the Droid X an awfully big phone.  Some people might find it too big but, at 2.6 by 5 by .4 inches it fits nicely in my pocket and my relatively small hands.  Still when sitting next to the 2.3 by 4.5 by .4 inch iPhone 4, it seems gargantuan by comparison.

As for screen resolution, while the Droid X has a great screen for watching video, Apple’s 960 by 640 resolution iPhone 4 screen looks far better at close range. Whether that matters is another issue; I care more about high-resolution video on a TV than on a smartphone. All modern smartphones have screens good enough for video. I care a lot about high resolution video when I’m sitting in front of my 55 inch TV but I don’t worry about it so much (nor do I watch much video) on a tiny smart phone screen.  Not that anyone is likely to use this but, if you want, you can plug your Droid X into your big screen TV thanks to an HDMI interface on its side.

Virtual keyboard

One important by-product of a larger screen is a larger onscreen keyboard.

Unlike the original Droid, the Droid X doesn’t have a physical keyboard but the onscreen keyboard is not only larger but has more space between keys which cuts down on errors. The HTC/Sprint Evo has exactly the same size screen but the keys are closer together so even when compared to that other excellent phone, I prefer the Droid when it comes to typing.  Maybe HTC will get the hint and make the keyboard a bit more spacious in a future software release.

Swype interface lets you trace letters (Credit: Swype)

The Droid X also has what Motorola is calling a multitouch keyboard which means that you can press more than one key at a time.  For the most part that’s kind of useless but it does allow you to hold down the shift key and a letter at the same time instead of using the shift key as a toggle between lower and upper case the way most other onscreen keyboards work.  The biggest innovation to the keyboard is the option of using the Swype interface where instead of lifting your fingers to press each key individually, you slide your fingers around the keyboard from one key to another without having to lift it between keys.  It takes getting used to before this has any potential value but even after lots of practice, I’m still not convinced it’s all that faster than just tapping the keys.
One difference between the Droid X and most other Android phones is that the X has physical buttons below the screen instead of virtual or “soft” keys. Like most phones there is a Home, menu, back and search button.  Unfortunately, there isn’t a dedicated physical button for the phone – I wish smart phone makers would realize that placing, answering and hanging up phone calls are still the most important uses of their product and make it easier to accomplish those important tasks.  One nice thing about the phone is that there are three microphones including a noise canceling microphone that improves sound quality in phone calls and also when recording audio or video.

Great pictures but slow shutter speed

The phone’s 8 megapixel camera produces excellent stills and impressive 720p high definition video. Instead of an onscreen shutter button, there’s a physical shutter button on the side of the phone. My only complaint about the camera is slow shutter speed. It’s not nearly as quick as an iPhone 4 or other Android phones I’ve tested.

Like the HTC Evo, the new Droid can create its own WiFi hotspot so you can use it to provide internet access to up to 5 devices (the Evo supports 8). That can be handy but if you’re using this feature be sure to have a charger with you. It’s a major drain on the battery. Like most smart phones the Droid X lets you use an available WiFi signal for data access and it supports Bluetooth.  It has a fasts 1 GhZ processor and comes with 8 gigabytes of onboad memory plus a 16 gigabyte microSD card (expandable to 32 GB).

This article first appeared in the San Jose Mercury News

The era of ubiquitous Internet access is fast approaching and it can’t arrive soon enough.

I’m writing this column from 35,000 feet on a flight from Washington, D.C., to San Francisco aboard Virgin America, which has Gogo Internet access on all of its flights. American, United, Delta and U.S. Airways are among the airlines that have access on some flights. Virgin America also has standard power outlets at every seat which makes it possible to use a laptop for the duration of a cross-country flight.

I was also online on the way to Dulles Airport, thanks to a borrowed Sprint EVO 4G phone that generates its own Wi-Fi hotspot. Customers pay an extra $30 a month for that service. Verizon’s new Droid X has a similar feature.

A friend of mine recently upgraded his Google Nexus One phone to the newest Android 2.2 operating system and it, too, now supports “tethering” and creates a Wi-Fi hotspot. This feature will presumably be available on all phones that run Android 2.2 or higher but it’s up to the carriers to decide whether or not to charge extra for the service.

A few weeks ago, I took the Bolt bus from Washington, D.C., to New York, which also provides Wi-Fi and power outlets.

I have a friend who works at Google, which operates a free shuttle between San Francisco and its Mountain View campus as one if its many employee benefits. Naturally, there is Wi-Fi aboard. BART is in the process of rolling out Wi-Fi on its trains.

This is a good trend. But one challenge of many public Wi-Fi networks and 3G solutions is that they are often not fast enough to stream video. On this flight, I was able to stream a Hulu video and a Netflix movie, though there were frequent starts and stops when the Wi-Fi wasn’t able to keep up with the amount of data needed to view the video. The same is often true when I’ve watched video on the 3G networks run by Sprint, Verizon or AT&T.

While I realize that the ability to watch TV and movies 24/7 is not exactly an inalienable right, it is one of the most popular things people want to do online. Hulu, last week, announced a $10-a-month Hulu Plus service, which will allow subscribers to stream all episodes from the current and past seasons of many popular shows, including “The Office,” “Glee” and “30 Rock.” If people are going to be able to enjoy this while on the move, they are going to need wireless broadband at a consistently fast speed.

The new so-called “4G networks” promise this. But with the exception of Sprint, none of the carriers currently offer 4G. Sprint’s version, so far, is available only in 33 markets, with the Bay Area slated to come online later this year.

Despite my travels, I haven’t had the opportunity to try the EVO 4G in any of Sprint’s current 4G markets, but The Wall Street Journal’s Walter Mossberg was able to test his in Baltimore, where he discovered that “when using 4G, the EVO’s battery runs down alarmingly fast.” Even without using 4G, I’m having battery issues with the phone. I rarely get through an entire day without having to recharge it.

The iPad 3G is one of many devices with built-in wireless capability. Owners of that device can tweet, update their Facebook profiles, send e-mail and, in theory, watch movies from anywhere there’s a 3G cellular signal. But there are some issues with that as well. In addition to not always having enough bandwidth to stream a movie, AT&T’s new 2GB-per-month cap on its data plan will greatly limit the amount of video users will be able to watch before they have to start paying extra for data consumption.

So even though the prospects for ubiquitous Internet are getting better, we still have a long way to go. While current 3G networks are fine for using a smartphone for e-mail, texting and limited Web access, they are not generally adequate for serious use of a computer or iPad-like device.

Not only do we need more access, we need faster access and we need more affordable access. My hope is that as the carriers roll out their next-generation services, they will not only provision enough bandwidth to make them truly useful but also will price them within the budgets of most consumers and business users. Until then, most people, when away from home, will continue to hunt around for Wi-Fi access when they need to get online.

Credit: Apple, Inc.

Apple’s explanation for the widely reported iPhone 4 reception issues is, literally, stunning. “Upon investigation, we were stunned to find that the formula we use to calculate how many bars of signal strength to display is totally wrong,” the company said in a letter to iPhone 4 users.

The company implies that there never was a drop in reception, “We sometimes display 4 bars when we should be displaying as few as 2 bars. Users observing a drop of several bars when they grip their iPhone in a certain way are most likely in an area with very weak signal strength, but they don’t know it because we are erroneously displaying 4 or 5 bars. Their big drop in bars is because their high bars were never real in the first place.”

Fixing the Display but not the Problem

Apple said that it is working on a fix that will improve the way they display signal strength but “the real signal strength remains the same.” They will fix the way they meter and report signal strength but not the signal itself. The “fix” is expected within a few weeks via a free software upgrade.

So, going forward, users will be able to figure out that they can’t use the phone by looking at the screen instead of trying to make a call. This would be like an airliner having a faulty fuel gauge that says the tanks have fuel when they’re actually about empty. The good news is that pilots would know they’re about out of fuel. The bad news is that they would be running on empty.

It Took Three Years to Discover the Problem

What’s really amazing about this is Apple’s admission that “this mistake has been present since the original iPhone.”

I find that astonishing that a company that prides itself on having the world’s best software engineers could – for three years– have a software problem as basic as not reporting a phone’s signal strength. It’s especially puzzling considering the enormous interest in the product and the millions of people who use it, including many of the world’s most technically savvy people.

For more, see “Poking holes in Apple’s iPhone 4 antenna explanations” (CNET News)