Unlocking phones is illegal? Let’s fix this. Sign the White House Petition.

My friend Jason Grigsby notes on his blog that apparently unlocking cell phones is illegal:

When you buy a phone, it is your property. If you have a contract that provides a subsidy for that phone, after that contract ends, you should be able to do whatever you want with the phone. You bought it.

Unfortunately, the Library of Congress sees it differently. It recently ruled that unlocking phones is illegal.

Our phone service in the United States is already more expensive than other countries because of lock in. This will make it worse.

Please sign this petition to make the White House review the policy.

We need ~24k more signatures before February 23 in order to get the White House to respond to the petition so after you sign it, please pass it on. Everyone with a mobile phone is impacted by this ruling.

We now need less than 5,000 signatures. Even if we go over every additional signature makes our case stronger. I hope you will take a moment to sign the petition.

Google Now and the Mobile Information User

Fred Wilson wrote about Google Now yesterday. If you are not familiar Google Now has an interesting promise: that it knows stuff about you and can help you even without asking. To me, Google Now is the closest thing we have to fulfilling a need for what is very close to an ignored user group in the mobile market place, information users.

Michael Mace wrote in an incredible article a number of years ago on the various use cases for mobile computing. He simplified it down to three core user groups: communications, entertainment, and information. I believe very strongly that the first two are being covered well but the third is basically ignored (from the OS/hardware companies).

Google Now is interesting to me because it starts to get at a core need of information users. I have an appointment each month and invariably I forget the meeting once every couple of months. So I start setting an alarm, which sets off 10 devices around my house and means another thing I have to set. But Google Now has the potential to be smart enough to know where I am, the direction I am heading, what’s on my calendar, and which devices I have with me. If it knows all that, it can be smart enough to tell me if I’m not headed to my appointment, reminding me it’s time to go but also smart enough to not tell me if it sees I am on my way.

Once my devices are smart enough to look at my calendar, contacts and current position — with all kinds of other information — it can be smart enough to help me in all kinds of ways. I’m driving and traffic is backed up beyond my vision, it can tell me to take an alternative route. It knows where my meeting is and which parking meters are open near by, directing me to the one closest to my meeting. It knows where I am headed is for work and track the mileage for my expense report automatically.

As an information user myself feeling a bit underserved by current apps and OS implementations, I can’t wait for this future.

Adventures In App Marketing

My friend Patrick Thompson pulled off a great presentation last month at Mobile Portland. Patrick’s built an excellent indie company, accomplishing the goals he set out to accomplish, doing it his way. In this presentation he walks through how he built his company from scratch, describing in detail the things he learned along the way, including mistakes he made. He shared tons of data! Enjoy!

Wayne Dobson Doesn’t Have Your Cell Phone

The technology integrated into cell phones that make it possible for us to be found is also the same technology used to find your phone. Apparently in  Las Vegas, though, a software glitch means Wayne Dobson has your lost phone, or at least that’s what GPS is telling Sprint customers. Not a long read this weekend, but it didn’t take too many lines of copy to relay one of the weirder stories I’ve read in a while. Enjoy!

Apple’s Churning Of The Gut

It’s the funny season in technology land. The holidays are over, the major technology trade shows are soon to pass, and thousands of tech writers have nothing to report. So we get stories like the Wall Street Journal quoting unnamed sources that say Apple halved their component orders for calendar Q1. I find the whole thing fishy (via Loren Brichter) and never personally made the connection that a decrease in parts meant a decrease in orders. John Gruber linked to a great Forbes article that could explain the situation.

Personally, I’m really bored with these stories. Unnamed sources say such-and-such, the blogosphere goes wild, some rise up to defend Apple while some rip it down. The stock price moves. Then everything returns to normal, waiting for the next big “story” to appear days or weeks or months later. Yawn.

What interests me more is why does this stuff keep happening in Apple’s name? No one comes out and says this crap about Samsung, Google, Nokia, RIM, Microsoft or any other big name in technology. It’s all Apple, all the time.

One possible answer is that Apple’s headlines are perfect link bait. Write something disparaging about Apple and everybody who follows technology clicks the link. Posts get written about it for weeks. The irony is that all the commentary keeps the story alive, drives more traffic to the original writer’s web site, which gets them to write more of this garbage. The second possible answer is that we thrive on building up companies (and people) then tearing them down. Apple was the underdog for so long and now that it is one of the biggest and most successful companies in the world, well, we can’t root for them anymore. A third is that the company is just that divisive. These have been talked about endlessly; none ring perfectly true to me. They all strike me as symptoms, not causes.

I have come to believe that the true cause is something bigger than all of this. I think the right answer is that Apple just fails to pass the gut test for most people. It’s an incredulous reaction to Apple’s success. Look, how is it even remotely possible that a company with such a small market share could really be doing so well? How can a company that had so little success, a company that survived by the skin of its teeth in the PC era, be one of the largest companies in the world now? How can a company with so few products be such a behemoth?

I honestly believe people read their gut and say it can’t be possible therefore it isn’t. Apple can’t be this successful. It’s not possible. And I know that because my gut tells me so.

I had lunch today with one of my old college professors and his attitude was almost “about time.” Apple had its day in the sun, it did well for a while, but it’s time for market realities to catch up to the company. Apple has been a fad for a decade now — since the iPod launched in 2001 — and it is time for it to fade into the sunset like some hokey 1950s western.

Which I think leads to the last unfathomable point that makes Apple’s case so gut-wrenching. There is no way, the gut tells folks, that Apple can continue growing at the current rate. There’s no way! But what the gut can’t fathom is that the markets Apple is playing in are so ridiculously large that there are only a handful of other things that play at that scale, and all of those are at the base level of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. I mean how in the world is it possible that smartphones could play at a seven billion unit market scale? After all, everyone needs air, water and food. Not everyone needs a cell phone.

The gut can’t believe it. Reality, though, can be brutally hard on the gut.