HP's new tablet

I'm a diehard Apple guy (unlike my friend Steve), so HP's new Slate 500 is less than compelling to me. I'm old enough to remember the early Windows-based tablets that never really worked, since the OS was designed for a keyboard and mouse, not a stylus. Now we have the Slate, which is based on the much-better Windows 7 OS, but still was designed for a computer, not a tablet (ie. something you control with your fingers).

I'm sure, like the old Palm Pilot, that developers will design specific apps for it, but at first glance, it looks like general consumers would be better off with a generic Windows laptop. As for me, I'm taking a look at the new Apple MacBook Air, especially the one with the 11-inch screen (I already bought an iPad for the office!)

What sets the iPad and the Mac laptops apart is that their software has been customized for the hardware...it's been this way since 1984 and unfortunately, many Windows devotees just haven't had the opportunity to experience this seamless connection between software and hardware. If you try out an iPad, you'll see it doesn't work like a laptop, because it isn't meant to do the same things. It's primarily designed to consume media like movies, books, magazines and TV shows. Sure you can email and surf the web, but you'll be much happier creating content on a laptop or desktop computer.

As for the Slate, I don't think you'll be happy at all.

One-Third of iPad Owners Are App-less

With Apple's announcement yesterday of the App Store coming to the Mac, most people assumed it would be the move that will push the new Macbooks to unprecedented success when it's launched.

But I'm not so sure, especially after seeing a recent Nielsen report about app-buying habits on the iPad. Shockingly, over 30% of iPad owner have never downloaded an app for their device. The reason this is so surprising is that app support was one of the major selling points behind the device.

Apple should take notice of these statistics, because a third of your users going app-less on a device aimed to be used for apps can't be taken lightly. And while app support is a cool feature and certainly hasn't deterred people from buying iPads, we all may have overestimated the impact of apps on non-smartphone devices.

Additionally, there are two main takeaways from this study. One, Apple will have to make sure that apps never become the primary selling point for any of their devices given the high percentage of people who don't utilize them outside of their iPhones.

Secondly, this is good news for iPad's competitors who have been criticized for not supporting apps, because obviously there are a multitude of other reasons why people buy tablets. This means the tablet playing field might be a lot more level than we originally thought.

Gender Confusion for Android

Android may still be the third must popular smartphone brand behind Apple and Blackberry, but it may not stay that way for long based on a recent Neilsen report. But despite the growth rate suggested in the report, Android is still dealing with a largely-male user base that lacks universal appeal. I look into both of these issues in today's video post:

Starbucks Adds A-Latte to Online Experience

Starbucks made a splash when they started offering free Wi-Fi in their coffee shops, but now they are hoping to rope in even more coffee aficionados with the launch of the Starbucks Digital Network (or SDN for short).

It's basically an exclusive content network curated by Starbucks and meant to add to the customer’s experience while in the store. Customers who use Starbucks' free Wi-Fi at any of their 6,800 or so stores in the U.S. will be greeted with this SDN.

SDN is a collaboration between Starbucks and Yahoo, offering access to The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times and USA Today, with more content centered around six channels (News, Entertainment, Wellness, Business and Careers, the Starbucks customer channel My Neighborhood, and a channel focused on Starbucks' social media outlets).

It's a smart move, because there is a large demographic of caffeine addicts like myself who hang out in coffee shops quite a bit. But honestly, I think the free Wi-Fi is still more important than this personalized network. I'm not necessarily saying that people won't use the SDN, just that I doubt the impact of this SDN alone.

However, this a unique branding opportunity and it will be interesting to see if any other franchised companies who offer free Wi-Fi will try to duplicate Starbucks' efforts and make digital networks of their own.

Clicking Away Our Photo Freedom

When I signed up for Twitter, I, like many people out there, didn't even bother to skim the Terms of Service section before clicking I Agree (c'mon, why would I want to read 5 pages to start sending 140-character tweets?). But if you're one of the millions who upload photos to Twitter, you may have clicked away the rights to your pictures.

Although most of those Terms of Service sections are pretty generic legal lingo, the writers at Photofocus uncovered a sneaky little curveball Twitter threw in. I'll start by laying out what's actually in Twitter's Terms of Service:

By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed).

 Unfortunately, it goes a bit further:

You agree that this license includes the right for Twitter to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals who partner with Twitter for the syndication, broadcast, distribution or publication of such Content on other media and services, subject to our terms and conditions for such Content use.

If you're confused by all of that, I'll summarize it Twitter-style in 140 characters:

If you post a picture on Twitter, we can do what we want with it and sell it to whoever we want. You want a royalty check? Sorry Charlie...

Now I won't rake Twitter over the coals too much here, because in all fairness they did put it right there in black and white. But given the backlash, I wouldn't be too surprised if Twitter did go back and change their stance on photo posting.


However, anyone who posts pictures on Twitter needs to be aware of this and needs to accept the fact that those pictures could end up somewhere else without their permission. This is especially true for photography enthusiasts and professionals, because they lose all licensing rights to their photos once they're posted on Twitter.

More importantly, this is a wake up call that we do need to start paying attention to every Terms of Service agreement, because you may end up clicking away your freedom.