Share

I’ve been asked many times about the best way to travel abroad with an iPhone without being hit at the end of the month with a jaw-dropping bill. Probably the best way to do this is to jailbreak your iPhone so it is no longer locked to AT&T. An unlock iPhone will let you use prepaid SIM cards you can purchase from local carriers – some even with data plans – giving you the full benefits of your iPhone wherever you travel.

The catch here is that you need to be willing to jailbreak your iPhone and deal with life outside the “safetynet” of the Apple ecosystem. Though the risk of problems with jailbreaking is low and the benefits are real, I made the personal decision a long time ago not to jailbreak my iPhone. I have enough technical complexity in my life, and just didn’t want to deal with another device requiring special attention. The entire iPhone ecosystem has worked really well for me, and I’ve never felt limited by the standard capabilities offered by Apple – except, of course, for the phone being carrier locked.

So can those of us with un-jailbroken iphones still make use of them abroad? Absolutely!

Here is a quick guide to maximizing your iPhone outside of the US:

  1. Unless you have money to burn, turn off data roaming on your iPhone. This will prevent it from connecting to data network of the local carriers in the country you are in – and save you potentially thousands of dollars in data roaming charges.

    Just go into SETTINGS->GENERAL->NETWORK and make sure that Data Roaming is set to off:

    If you really want to be certain that you won’t be pulling data, you can also turn off the Cellular Data option above it.

  2. If you don’t already have an account, you now want to sign up for Skype. Go to www.skype.com and click on the Join Skype button:

    It will give you a basic form to fill out to get your FREE Skype account:

    Once you have your Skype account set up, just log in to the site and you’re ready for the next step.

  3. Next, you need to buy Skype credits. For pennies a minute, Skype will allow you to place calls to actual phone numbers – not just other Skype users. This ends up being a tiny fraction of what any carrier would normally charge.

    For a recent week long business trip I took to Minsk, I ordered $20 worth of credits. I ended up making about 3 hours worth of calls but burned through less than $10 in credits. Skype absolutely is the most cost effective way to call people globally.

  4. If you would also like people to be able to call you via Skype from a regular phone, you can order what they call an Online Number. You can pick numbers local to any of 25 countries. I have a United States based Online Number from New York City, so anyone that has called me from there only needed to pay local toll charges – even when I was in Belarus.

    It costs about $60 a year to have an Online Number. Go in to your account details on Skype, and you will see the option to sign up for it:

  5. The next step is making all of this available on your iPhone.


    With that all set up, you now need to install the Skype application on your iPhone. Just go to the App Store on your iPhone, search for Skype. Select the Skype application and click FREE to get it:

    The Skype application interface looks very similar to the standard phone interface on the iPhone and works in pretty much the same way:

So what’s the downside with this approach?

Skype requires that your iPhone be connected to the internet, and with Data Roaming disabled, that means you’ll need to be connected via a wireless hotspot. In most places you visit, there are many options available for this. Almost every hotel will have it available for guests, and many restaurants and coffee shops provide it for free. A useful resource for finding hotspots globally is a site called Hotspot Locations. You just need to choose a country and city, and it will give you a list of places there that offer wireless access. Make sure you pick several alternative locations in case certain ones are no longer available.

Another useful tip to keep in mind is that text messages can be sent and received even outside of hot spots. They will typically cost $.50-$1 per message, but can be a useful backup way of communicating when a hotspot isn’t available.

What I’ve outlined here is essentially what I use myself when traveling abroad. If any of you road warriors out there have other suggestions for world traveling iPhone users, just leave them in the comments.

Share

{ 3 comments }

Share

One of the things that has been keeping me so busy recently is the release of our new iPad app – Curator HD. Curator HD is the first full featured curation application for the iPad, combining a great feed reader with commenting and sharing options for social channels, email, and even custom newsletters. It also allows for the creation of folders to store and organize stories that you might not be ready to share yet.

I put together a video overview of Curator HD, both to introduce it to the market and to help people get started using it:

Curator HD is available now for FREE in the productivity section of the iTune App store.

Just click here to download.

Share

{ 0 comments }

Share

Microsoft’s has been struggling for several years to unhook their mobile strategy from their previous “Windows Mobile” initiative, and effectively reinvent their footprint in this space. This week, they took what I hope is just a first step down a new mobile path with the launch of Windows Phone 7.

Unlike Apple’s iPhone or most of the Android phones I’ve seen, Windows Phone 7 is not an “App Centric” device. It presents an interface built around ‘information tiles’ that provide a composite/mosaic view of the things that are going on around you. The following video offers a good overview of this design:

While I applaud Microsoft for actually trying to forge their own path in this space, I do have several concerns about the approach they have taken:

  • Easy access to applications is an important aspect of mobile computing. In the mobile world, applications are replacing generalized search for many uses, and easy access to both productivity and entertainment tools is important to many people. In its current ‘first release’ version, Windows Phone 7 seems to provide a less direct way for people to access its applications – a real limitation in my opinion.
  • Having used the iPad since it first came on the market, I can attest to the importance of the tablet form factor to mobile productivity. While I have no doubt that Microsoft understands this as well as anybody, I am not sure they are willing to abandon their Windows based focused in going after this market. I have yet to hear any mention of a “Windows Slate 7″ version of this platform in the works, which concerns me. The mobile and full size computing experiences are fundamentally distinct, and Microsoft’s entire mobile strategy should be built around a single mobile-centric OS platform – not a stripped down Windows hybrid. We’ll need to see where Microsoft and it’s hardware partners go with this.
  • As Apple has shown, success in mobile requires not just great software and hardware, but the evolution of an entire ecosystem to support it. This is not something Microsoft can simply farm out to their hardware partners. They need to own it and focus on it. Unfortunately, this is not an area that Microsoft hasn’t been strong in historically, and I haven’t gotten a clear picture of their plan for developing this.

I am looking forward to seeing how Microsoft evolves this platform. There are clearly some well thought out aspects to Windows Phone 7 that are not (yet) available on competing platforms, and also some parts that seem to have received a lot less attention. That said, you really can’t judge what the ultimate impact of Phone 7 may be based on what we are seeing now. What will matter is how quickly Microsoft evolves the platform over the next year, and the strength of the ecosystem they are able to build around it.

For Microsoft’s long term prospects, this is far more important than the release of Windows 7. The success or failure of the Windows Phone 7 platform will define the impact Microsoft gets to have on the next major generation of personal computing.

Share

{ 0 comments }

Share

It wasn’t that long ago that most of the computer technology used by people was provided by their employers. It started out being desktop systems physically located at their offices. Everything installed on these computers was work related. They connected to corporate services via an internal network, and accessed the internet in a controlled way through corporate firewalls.

As the workplace became more distributed and mobile, computing shifted over more to laptops. Since these systems were with people all the time, they started to get used for both work and personal things. Access to the internet became open, with people connecting via their home networks and public hot spots. To accommodate these mobile workers, internal corporate systems started shifting to browser based interfaces, letting them access these systems via secure connections back to the corporate network. Many corporations also supplied phones to these mobile workers – typically RIM Blackberries – to let them make calls and access email. In total, it was a fairly complete set of corporate sponsored tools.

But then a few interesting things happened:

  • Laptop prices dropped dramatically, fueled in part by the popularity of very low cost netbooks.
  • Apple introduced the iPhone and AppStore.
  • Social networking tools became a popular way to communicate.
  • Free, cloud based services expanded the range of capabilities available to people.

As laptop prices fell, people started to purchase their own systems to use. Some wanted to use MacBooks instead of corporate provided windows systems. Others wanted systems that had specific features or form factors not offered by their organizations. Instead of finding ways to squeeze the applications and services they personally wanted onto the systems supplied by their companies, these users flipped the model – looking at ways to integrate what they needed to do for work onto their personal systems.

The introduction of the iPhone continued the push away from corporate sponsored systems. The iPhone was the first mobile phone to offer a real browser, and people quickly gravitated to the promise of having the real internet available on something they could slip in their pocket. Despite little initial interest by IT departments to support the iPhone, people simply bought their own and used them for both work and personal needs. The introduction of the App Store a year later cemented the iPhone as a true mobile productivity platform, making it the smartphone everyone wanted to have.

Along side these developments, social networking started to grow in importance as a viable channel for people to communicate across. This led to more sophisticated social applications appearing – both on mobile platforms as well as PC’s – making social networking a practical tool for professional users as well as consumers. However, outside of cost saving tools like Skype, corporations have typically been slow to bring social applications into the sponsored fold.

Also during this period, cloud based applications started growing in both popularity and sophistication. Beyond the free emails services that had been popular for many years, this generation of cloud based services covered everything from comprehensive office productivity applications to services like CRM systems, cloud based disk storage, and even cloud hosted databases. Most were free or very low cost, and didn’t require technical sophistication on the part of users.

Collectively, these developments have had a real impact on the way employees view their corporate IT services, and where their expectations are now set.

People can now afford to buy their own equipment, and are comfortable using all of these tools on their own. There are now free or inexpensive applications and services available to these people that cover all the capabilities of their traditionally IT sponsored equivalents. There are also applications that people use on their own – like social networking – that aren’t yet being considered by most organizations.

In short, many people are now able to become their own IT providers, leveraging only a limited set of capabilities that are uniquely available from their employers. This represents a real shift in the ‘balance of power’ between users and their IT groups, and fundamentally blurs the role and mission of many corporate IT departments. Without acknowledging and adapting to the realities of this new environment, traditional IT departments run the risk of becoming irrelevant – or even worse, a liability to their organizations.

Share

{ 0 comments }

Share

I find the tools most social networks give you to share with your contacts to be fairly primitive. They typically force you to explicitly organize people into a flat set of groups, and then use those groups as the granular basis for all of your sharing decisions within the network. This can be useful for interacting with groups that mirror actual real world groups (eg – family, coworkers, teammates), where a person’s membership in the real world group is the reason for sharing with them. However, I think it falls short for sharing around less rigid associations like interests or skills – the exact things I find be most valuable in my ‘real world’ relationships.

To better address this, I would like to see social networks offer tools for sharing that are based around taxonomies of attributes in addition to the typical ‘flat groups’ model. Conceptually, this approach would assign attributes to individuals in my network and share any content I post that I tag with a matching attribute. My posts could still be constrained to more structured groups like ‘Family’ or ‘Friends’, but they would end up being better targeted to just the members of those groups that would most likely have an interest.

The challenge with this approach is its complexity. A simple rule of thumb is that the more effort and understanding that’s required to use a feature, the less likely it is to be used. To have any chance of being successful, the ‘heavy lifting’ required to configure a taxonomy like this would need to be automated; letting individuals tune it over time.

The first step would be having individuals ‘self describe’ – defining the things they are interested in sharing around. The network could make a pass based on an automated classification of their posts and the content they read and link to. A user could then make any manual adjustments they wanted to directly, but could also train the system based on the content they see. By tagging things as either interesting or not, the platform should be able to statistically analyze the content and use it to tune their user profile.

The next step would be automated tagging of content that gets posted or linked to. This tagging can be based on the content itself, but tuned by the profile of the person posting it. There are well-understood and highly efficient methods for doing this type of analysis.

In this model, the ‘flat groups’ would still allow a poster to define the total audience they want to make something available to. However, the tagging and self-description then become the targeting mechanism to route it to just those members in the audience that would have an interest in it.

A multifaceted approach to sharing no longer requires the poster to know who in their network might be interested in something they post. By decoupling these two aspects, posters could share more broadly knowing they wont be spamming their network, and the value of an individual’s network can be preserved even at larger scale.

Networks built around information sharing will continue to grow in importance – both in personal and professional settings. I believe we are just at the early stages of this model of collaboration, and automated classification will play a central role in shaping it’s evolution.

This is a topic I’d like to explore a lot more of in future posts…

Share

{ 1 comment }

Share

Back in the late 1990′s, the internet was starting to blow up into something big. Tiny companies with no revenue – but outsized ambition and fanciful business plans – started going public with astonishing valuations. More established businesses, looking on with envy, made getting on the web in some form a strategic mandate.

In those heady days, any company that wanted to be perceived as ‘hip’ started forming a digital division to manage their web presence, and advertising agencies rushed to form web consultancies to help them. Billions of dollars were spent setting up new ‘online’ divisions. It didn’t matter if what they did on the web really served a business goal – or even if had anything to do with the business they were in. It was more about flash than substance, and being digital was a virtue in and of itself. Everyone involved had a real sense of the major shift that was taking place, and no one wanted to miss out or be left behind. Even though so much of what was being done then was just bad business, it didn’t seem to matter.

At least until the crash of 2000 gave everyone a new perspective on things.

After that wake up call, businesses started reevaluating their approach to the web. It stopped being the ‘new thing’ and started becoming another tool – albeit an important one – in the suite of tools they used to service customers. Being digital shifted away from building a walled off silo of technical coolness, over to providing the technical foundation needed to support an organization’s overall business strategy. It was a tough way to learn the lesson, but the tech bubble collapse was – in retrospect – a positive turning point in the development and maturity of the commercial internet.

Unfortunately, history seems to be repeating itself in the mobile space.

Mobile is the new pillar of technical coolness. Companies are rushing to get their iPhone apps developed and approved. They are touting their ‘mobile strategies’ and setting up mobile groups to let them take advantage of this new channel. The sense of needing to be on a handset is everywhere. So many of the mobile apps being developed by businesses are poorly designed and executed, lacking the substance needed to make them valuable. But that doesn’t seem to matter because businesses are once again afraid of being left behind in the rush. Being mobile is good – no matter how it gets done.

Like the internet, mobile can be an incredibly important business asset – but only if its adopted in a rational way. Businesses need to think clearly about how and where their services can benefit from a mobile connection with their clients. They won’t win by simply showing up for the party – they need to bring something to it with real value. Mobile, like the internet, needs to become a foundational component of a fully considered business strategy – not just an expensive checkbox on a list of cool features and capabilities to deploy.

Lets hope we don’t need the ‘mobile bubble’ to burst before businesses start to see the connection.

Share

{ 0 comments }

Share

Those that may have glanced up at the URL bar of your browser while reading The Digital Edge over the last couple of months probably noticed something a little strange with my domain name – it wasn’t ‘thedigitaledgeblog.com’ anymore…

As I blogged about earlier, chronic problems at my old hosting provider have forced me to relocate my blog to Hostgator. Since I made that switch, I have been working to transfer the domain name over here as well. Unfortunately, the process has been far from painless. (At one point, I was afraid I might actually lose the domain altogether!) It ended up that the least risky thing for me to do was to simply redirect traffic from ‘thedigitaledgeblog.com’ over to a temporary subdomain I set up here at ‘blog.gnural.net’ – and work in the background to get everything resolved.

That was the domain you were seeing…

Well the saga has finally come to a close, with my blog and it’s domain name happily reunited. I’m not sure what any of this has done to my search ranking, but hopefully that will just take care of itself over time. What I am excited about is that I can now focus more the content side of blogging again, and continue working with all of you make this community a worthwhile place to spend a little time each week.

Thanks for your continued support of The Digital Edge.

Share

{ 0 comments }

Share

Having Google and Verizon trying to reach their own compromise around net neutrality has me concerned. Having the FCC threatening a regulatory approach to net neutrality also has me concerned.

I’m just not sure which concerns me more.

I absolutely believe in the importance of net neutrality. It is the driving force behind the evolution and phenomenal growth of the entire web universe. It has allowed tiny startups to have global impact, and has provided the foundation for outsiders to challenge the status quo within institutions and across industries. Preserving net neutrality is central to securing the future viability of the internet.

The thought of having two major corporations – both representing today’s status quo – sitting down together to define what net neutrality should mean for everyone is a bit unsettling. I completely understand the FCC’s reaction and side with their desire to preserve an open internet:

Any outcome, any deal that doesn’t preserve the freedom and openness of the Internet for consumers and entrepreneurs will be unacceptable.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski

So what concerns me with the FCC?

It’s really simple – ‘Regulated Net Neutrality’ isn’t the same as ‘Net Neutrality’. The net neutrality that has existed so far has been based on an ethos – a shared way of looking at the net. It can easily adapt to change and make exceptions as needed, because any decisions that are made are done through the lens of open and equal access.

Unfortunately, that isn’t how regulation works.

Regulations are lists of rules – not a code or belief. Some will be vague and others specific, but they will boil down to a list of behavioral do’s and dont’s. Once regulations are passed, the ‘moral code’ they are based on in some ways becomes irrelevant. Lawyers and courts start to become the driving forces behind what is and isn’t acceptable. The specific language of a regulation gets parsed, loopholes get added, and the process ultimately becomes political.

So where does that leave us?

On one side we have an internet defined by lawyers, courts, and politicians, and on the other side an internet defined by large corporations.

I’m simply not in a hurry to embrace either one right now.

I’m still not ready to walk away from the ethos of net neutrality.

Share

{ 1 comment }

Share

After spending over a week on my new Android phone (Samsung Captivate Galaxy S), I can’t help but wonder if the experience I’ve been having with it is typical for other Android phone users.

The Captivate has a lot going for it – a beautiful screen, fast processor, excellent video camera, and good battery life to name a few. It just seems to me that the software – Android 2.1 – isn’t really a serious production release. There seem to be so many things with it that simply don’t function well or reliably. And some of those things are pretty significant on a smartphone:

  • The device constantly loses the settings I’ve configured for my Exchange server email. It completely forgets that the account existed on the phone and prompts me to enter a new email account as if I were starting email for the first time. I had it happen at least 7 times before I simply gave up and stopped setting it up again.
  • During those times when it did remember the account, deleting emails would be problematic. I would select a set of emails and press Delete, but still see those ‘deleted’ emails sitting there even after the app said they were removed. Sometimes they would go away if I waited a bit. Sometimes I needed to exit out of mail and then return for them to be gone.
  • The unit often becomes unresponsive if any I/O is taking place, with the touch screen remaining frozen until it finishes what it is doing. There were several times when I thought the unit had crashed on me only to have it spring back to life 20 seconds later.
  • Getting the GPS in the unit to lock on to my position is a complete crap-shoot. Sometimes it connects right away while other times I need to try repeatedly to get it to work – with both experiences happening in the same location right outside my office.

Given my lack of familiarity with Android, my initial reaction was that I was doing something wrong that was causing these things to happen. But after doing a little research to try and figure things out, I’m not so sure. It seems that I am not the only person having problem like this. Whatever the causes, I find myself in a position where I have no confidence in the device.

I had even considered returning it to AT&T for a different smartphone.

What kept me from doing that, despite the problems I’ve been having, is that I can see some real promise in the platform. It absolutely doesn’t feel completely baked or debugged to me, but I can still see glimmers of ‘something powerful’ in the software that are making me stick with it – at least until the new 2.2 FROYO version is released.

Once it’s out, I’ll do a through review of the device, and compare it in detail to my experiences using the iPhone.

And I’ll decide then for myself what I’m going to do next.

At this point, I couldn’t recommend (this) Android phone to anyone if it were the only smartphone/portable computing device they wanted to carry. The reliability just isn’t there – at least for the things I’ve been trying to do with it. If you needed to choose something right now, I think the iPhone is still the way to go – assuming you can deal with being on AT&T.

If you can wait, the best option is to see how good the Android 2.2 released ends up being, and to make your decision then.

Share

{ 4 comments }

Share

I’ve been creating and manipulating media digitally in a variety of formats for over 20 years. For most of what I do, the mouse and keyboard are my main tools. Every tool – digital or analog – influences the creative process to some degree. That said, the digital experience still lacks the immediacy and transparency you can get when using just paper and pencil. In the same way that a tool like PowerPoint shapes the way you think about presenting information – and ultimately what you present – most digital media tools I’m familiar with seem to channel your creative energies in certain preordained directions. I know first hand that you can do some awesome original things in the digital space, but the technology behind it does seems to leave a lot of its own fingerprints on the creative process.

But this might be changing.

Touch based platforms are letting digital tools come closer to replicating the analog experience most of them are modeled on. The video below is an example I found on YouTube of an iPad based art program called “brushes” in action:

The video is really a bit too long, but it is worth skipping through it to see how things are starting to evolve in this space. Both the process and the end result are impressive. What makes this so significant is that everything in the video is happening on a basic portable device – the iPad – that costs just $499, running an inventive drawing program that costs just $7.99. You don’t need to be a digital artist to appreciate just how revolutionary this could end up being.

And this is just the first generation of these tools. Imagine where they’ll be in a couple more years.

Touch computing will be transformational.

Share

{ 0 comments }