We finally did what millions of others are doing: we pulled the plug on paid TV. Specifically, we got rid of our DirecTV satellite service. I'll admit it, I was a little anxious at first. We don't watch a whole lot of TV (and espeically not since Leo was born) but we do enjoy plopping down and watching something when we do get the chance.

We have a Home Theater PC as a DVR and it recorded everything we found interesting off of the satellite- so there was always a long pile up of recorded shows waiting for us. My faves are Discovery Channel, History, Military, Investigation Discovery, The Learning Channel, etc. 

But cable and satellite service is (IMHO) way too expensive.  In this day and age, there are alternatives. In droves, many people are ditching the paid services and turning to the great equalizer- (no, not firearms) …the Internet. 

Rather than a cable or dish, 300+ channels (out of which you end up watching only 6 or 7) and an inflated monthly bill, the new choice is a high speed internet connection, a PC or streaming media device hooked up to the TV, and whatever programming is online.

So far, I'm not missing the satellite. (Granted, we still have the softened-blow of several hundred programs recorded to the PC).

Below is my list of must-haves for jumping to Internet-only TV:

#1: Netflix streaming. 

One can argue their online service doesn't have the latest/greatest selection of content, and one would be right. However, thus far, it's the best game in town. The simple fact is, the powers that be (major studios, TV networks) don't want Internet-only delivery to be any better than it currently is, because it's the kiss of death to their dominance. They want you to pay $80+ a month for the shows they produce/broadcast. (That AND sit through their advertising- cake and eat it.) They want you buying discs, not streaming them- hence their fighting tooth and nail to prevent netflix from getting too much of the best content online before they've had a chance to gouge every nickel possible via traditional distribution. 

But netflix is huge, popular, profitable and it's not going away any time soon, so even though the content providers would love to squash it like a bug- they can't. But it IS the only game in town, and it will remain that way. If you're looking for a better source of online streaming with newer/better stuff that's just as cheap: keep dreaming. For the foreseeable future this is as good as it gets. 

And for Leila and me, it's pretty good. No, I can't watch the latest Hollywood blockbusters two days after they're released on DVD via online streaming, but they do have a modestly decent back catalog of movies and TV series- including a lot of the Discovery series that I like. 

And Netflix streaming is easy to access. Every other new TV, streaming media box, DVD or BluRay player sold these days has access to it built in. And of course any HTPC. Done deal.

#2. Home Theater PC

This relates directly to #1 on my list. If you're completely satisfied with Netflix as the pinnacle of Internet provided entertainment (which it pretty much is) then you'll be happy without #2. You can use any of the 1,000's of dirt-cheap devices (streaming media boxes, DVD/BluRay players, TV's etc) that  are 'Internet connected'. 

But here's the rub: most of these devices are only internet connected in that they connect to the internet to get Netflix and maybe one or two other (usually less-than-stellar) sources. So you're not actually getting "the Internet" on your TV. It's an important distinction to note.  If you were thinking you'd be watching from a choice of unlimited YouTube, Vimeo, Hulu, Network TV online content, endless streaming music, as well as Googling anything that just crosses your mind using a traditional web-browser, well… you won't be. 

And although Netflix IS the pinnacle of Internet-entertainment, keep in mind that all the other possible sources combined offer a lot of choices. It's easy to think: "Well hell, how much crap do you need? Isn't one source enough? I don't watch all that much!" But in reality- that's just it. I don't watch that much TV. Which translates to: I only watch what I like, not just any old thing that's on. Which then translates to: the stuff I like to watch is harder to find. No one provider is going to have the shows I like all in one neat stack just for me. I'm going to need a lot of options in order to find *anything* that interests me. 

This is where an HTPC fits the bill perfectly.

An HTPC is  just a PC (or Mac) that hooks up to an HDTV. With a few tweaks to make using it suitable from across the room, it's the do-it-all solution. You've of course got Netflix. You have access to anything on the web. Mountains of stuff on YouTube. Classic TV series on archive.org and other sources. Radio stations. Endless music from any artist that's ever recorded. And the list goes on. "Internet-connected" with a PC means just that, in exactly the sense you're used to.

It doesn't have to be a fancy-schmancy setup like the above image; it can be a crappy old beige box PC, a laptop, a nettop, or virtually any internet-connected PC with DVI orHDMI output that you can hook up to your HDTV and sound system. Even a modest PC with decent video and audio hardware can effectively replace every other set top device, and deliver any and everything found online to your TV.

You should also have a decent HTPC keyboard with a point device built in, and/or a decent HTPC remote. (IE: like a Windows Media Center remote).

#3. Software and Internet Sites

There's Netflix of course, but there's also Hulu (I personally don't find the paid Hulu Plus worth subscribing to. Browse their content selection, and if you can find more than 3 or 4 shows you've even heard of before, let alone want to pay to watch- then go for it. Otherwise, they're clearly in the tank for the powers-that-be. Which makes sense, since they are a creation of the powers-that-be.) Boxee, Amazon Video, Xfinity, and Sidereel.  Most of these sites are aggregators for the content that's also available on the online streaming sites of most of the major broadcast and cable networks.

Our living room HTPC setup, using the Kylo web-browser which is built to aggregate much of the content online into an easy to use 10ft interface

#4. An HDTV Antenna 

Don't discount good ol' fashioned OTA broadcast TV. These days all the major broadcasters broadcast in full HD, and most modern HDTVs have a tuner built in. If you have an HTPC, you can get a cheap ATSC tuner to schedule and record broadcasts in DVR fashion. For best results, stick an antenna on your roof and (if directional) use antennaweb.org (along with Google Maps) to determine the exact best spot to aim it.  Otherwise you can use an indoor ATSC antenna, but your results may vary.

The Pros of going online-only:

1. Price. Much online content is free. Netflix's streaming service is $7.99 a month. 

2. Picture Quality. Provided you have a fairly speedy cable or DSL connection, content is in most cases HD-quality. For us, it's been mostly a step-up vs. the mostly standard-def content we watched via satellite. 

3. No storage requirements. Content is online, not stored on your computer or device.

4. Advertisements. If you're used to sitting through commercials anyway because you don't use a DVR to record programs and skip commercials, then this will be a plus for you. Online advertising (thus far) tends to be very short commercials at 10-15 seconds each, then back to the show. 

The Cons of going online-only:

1. Finding what you actually want to watch, when you want to watch it. That can be difficult. Most content providers are pushing their more traditional distribution methods first, and online content begrudgingly dead-last. So few are working terribly hard to make things as easy as they could be. Most first run episodes of popular series aren't posted online until at least a day or two after they've aired. The back catalog of a series isn't likely to stay online for long either, as that's prime syndication/DVD collection material for the providers. So you'll mostly be watching things later than their original air date. If you don't care about discussing some show the next day after it aired, then you won't care if you're waiting a few days to see it.

2. Advertisements. Even though significantly shorter than on-air commercials, if you're used to a DVR and skipping commercials altogether (raising my hand) you'll find it jarring to suddenly have to suffer through them. But the concept is clearly justified. When I'm paying a hefty monthly fee for service, I think it's fair to skip the commercials which paid cable was originally supposed to eliminate. (Ever notice how the concept quickly fell by the wayside? Heck, even premium cable and public TV is chock-full of commercials as the broadcasters have their cake and eat it too.) With online content, its the only source revenue, so having to suffer through ads is reasonable. You can skip through most online shows, in DVR-fashion, but each time you do, you'll likely be forced to watch at least 15 seconds or so of commercials that can't be skipped.

3. A decent experience totally depends on your Internet speed. Dial up? Forget about it. Entry-level DSL? You'll probably have a fairly good experience, with perhaps the occasional pause due to buffering. Highest-speed DSL or cable? Generally you won't have problems. Keep in mind if you're uploading/downloading a lot of stuff at the same time you're trying to stream live content, you may run into glitches. 

4. The future is unknown. The powers-that-be are deathly afraid of the Internet. Networks that love having a monopoly on content. Studios that want  higher profits from their traditional content distribution. Politicians that can't stand the idea of information counter to their state-approved spin being freely distributed. (Basically ALL politicians, and yes, in the first world every bit as much as the third).

Together, all of these forces are very happy to collaborate and present the Internet as a threat: to democracy, to profits, to 'the children' to job creation, to virtually every hot-button issue one can name. The 'solution' -as it always is among such unholy allies-  is regulation and restriction in the guise of anti-piracy (read: censorship).

There's also the pretense that the resource itself is in limited supply (the whole myth of 'bandwidth' being a limited commodity). These Zillion-dollar corporations are hurt desperately by you downloading unlimited amounts of data, so they must impose limits "for your own good".

And the biggest ploy of all: the Internet itself in current form is "dangerous", a wicked den of porn, piracy and propaganda that no one can possibly navigate without a state-approved/corporate-sponsored nanny. Witness the recent SOPA and PIPA bills in the US congress for examples. So the Internet and bandwidth freedom we know today could one day become as restricted as the airwaves are currently- where individuals are forbidden to broadcast their own unlicensed content "for their own good." So enjoy streaming endless gobs of data while it lasts, just know that it may not last in its current unmolested state forever.

Well, we finally bit the bullet and got ourselves a more than decent camera. Ever since the birth of our son, we've been scheming/plotting/saving to get a DSLR. He's only going to be a baby once, so we figure we owe it to him to document his early days utilizing the best 21st century tech we can vaguely afford to get our hands on.

We had a very nice Leica camera my Dad lent us, but we've learned one very valuable lesson with cameras and kids: speed is everything. Most non-SLR cameras simply aren't fast enough for little tykes, and the older they get, the faster they get.

Meaning: he's doing something cute that you want to document,  so you grab the camera and press the shutter. It better fire off a picture that exact instant. A second on the shutter, two seconds, three seconds, six seconds… no picture and he's not only not doing the cute thing anymore, he's gone. Toddled onward to something else. You missed it.

For the past three months or so since Leo's been more mobile, for every one cool moment we've managed to capture of him, there were 4 or more we missed. As he gets more and more mobile, that ratio can only get worse. Life's too short, man!

A good DSLR with a fast lens not only won't take 7 crucial seconds to take a photo, it'll take more than 7 photos in a single second. Now that's more like it!

We looked at several models, narrowed it to a choice between Nikon (D5100?) and Canon, and finally decided we're more Canon folks than Nikon. (We've had a couple nice point and shoots from Canon that served us well.) So after a bit of research, we decided on the Canon T3i body. 

The body is important, and I love the T3i, but a good lens is everything. Put a crappy lens on a good body=crappy photos. Put a decent lens on even a crappy body: you can still get good results. Probably like every shutterbug that's ever lived, it soon hits you: it's all about the glass. And it's lifelong: there's always better glass.

And so off we go. Always on the lookout for something that meets every qualification: wide open f stop, quality optics, lots of blades, and perhaps the most important thing: we can actually afford it since if it's really all that, it'll cost five, six, seven times what the camera body did. Put it this way, if the camera body and a good lens were about to go over a cliff and you could only grab one: you'd grab the lens. That's the kind of lens I'd love to have. Of course, I likely never will. 

So for now, (and far into the  foreseeable future or so) the type of lens mere mortals can afford is what we'll be using. So far, I'm in love with the 50mm 1.8 prime we got. I don't care for zooms much. I can tell I like primes.

Another thing I was happy to discover is the M42 mount. This lets you screw-mount old film camera lenses on a DSLR body. I picked up a 1960's vintage Pentax 55m lens from the Pasadena camera show for $25. The same lens would have cost $400+ in Canon EOS form. Older lenses are not only solidly built, but the optics are often stellar (ditto the blades) and you can get extreme wide f-stops like 1/4 and even 1/2. Some friends of mine at work have camera lenses from the 1940's and 50's they use on their modern DSLR cameras. I've seen some amazing results with them.

There are even some people that use 100 year old lenses on modern cameras! Great optical technology is far older than I would have guessed. I'm intrigued by the whole concept. Of course, the main compromise with using all older lenses is it's strictly manual, no auto-focus. But then, as the pros chide us mere noobs: who in their right mind buys a decent SLR to use it in auto mode anyway?

In the latest chapter of the ongoing "Great Storage Conundrum", recently flooding in Thailand has literally crippled the world supply of hard drive storage. The largest manufacturers of hard drives operate in Thailand: Seagate, Western Digital and Toshiba.

Looked at drive prices recently?

If you can get a 1TB hard drive these days for less than $140-$150 bucks, do so. Consider that just two months ago, one could be had for a third of those prices.

The supply chain isn't expected to catch up until early next year, so more than ever, alternate backup is crucial.

I recommend singing up for an account on all forms of online storage. Currently, one can sign up for:

1. Dropbox – 2GB of storage free, accessible from your PC/Mac, iOS or Android device.

2. Sugarsync – 5GB storage free, accessible from your PC/Mac, iOS or Android device.

3. 4 Shared – 10GB storage free, accessible from your PC/Mac, iOS or Android device.

4. Box.com- If you're an iOS user (iPhone, iPad or iPod Touch) you can sign up for 50GB of free storage that's then accessible from anywhere. Granted, the online-only interface isn't great, but 50GB for free is silly to pass up.

5. Use online photo sites like snapfish.com, shutterfly.com, smugmug.com, etc. to not only print your digital photos, but store them securely online as well.

6. Use lulu.com and blurb.com to print hard copy of your important documents and photos.

7. Utilize cheap local storage options like USB flash drives to back up your most invaluable documents. Up to around 32GB, count on roughly $1 /GB, though prices vary either way.

8. Luckily DVD media is still very cheap and hard to beat. 4.2GB of storage per DVD for literally pennies. The downside is the time it takes to burn DVD media, and space requirements to store and catalog it.

Don't rely on just one backup for your most important photos and documents, use multiple online and local storage options. Above all, don't count on easily replacing your current hard drive(s) until mid-2012 without paying a small fortune.

Apple's website today.

As I tech-junkie and avid partaker of the modern digital world, I just couldn't fail to mention Steve Job's passing. Admire him, loathe him, or don't even know who he was, any of us that use personal computers for entertainment, artwork, communication, etc. owe at least some small debt of gratitude to Steve Jobs' visionary genius. I believe he was akin to the Thomas Edison or Henry Ford of his time.

Many of the engineering and technology advances he envisioned and then pushed for -often stubbornly against armies of corporate naysayers, and over the battered husks of overworked developers- have in many ways changed the world, and impacted us all.

Personally, I find it impossible not to admire a guy who was instrumental in bringing forth the tools that make my own career possible. I've been earning a paycheck using a Macintosh for the past nineteen years. Without the Mac- the job I do, and much of the modern industry I work in couldn't exist. And without Steve Jobs, there was no Mac.

People forget that he originally fought so hard AGAINST APPLE to bring the Mac into existence, that Apple actually fired him after the fruits of his effort seemed to bomb at first. But he was right- the innovations of the Mac did represent the future.

And  PC users, every time you fire up Windows: you have Steve Jobs and the Macintosh to thank for the fact that today, ugly 8-bit white lettering on a black screen is what you quickly skip past at boot up- not the end result.

The near complete disappearance of the corner record store that sells music on physical media? That's thanks in large part the iPod, and iTunes music store, which is again thanks largely to Steve Jobs fighting an entire industry.

I for one don't miss the old music industry; self-destructing media (records, cassettes, even CDs) and being forced to pay too much for 12 crappy filler tracks to get one or two decent songs on an album. The iPod/iTunes revolution kicked the old record company model to the curb and forced them into the modern age where I can download the whole album if I choose, or if you're still pushing filler, just the one or two good tracks.

I was saddened to hear of Steve Job's passing, but in hindsight, many people figured it must be eminent following his stepping down at Apple. He was truly one of a kind.

Over the weekend, a one terabyte hard drive in our home server bought the farm, taking one terabyte of data to the grave with it. Luckily, it was mostly a backup drive, so I still have the original files of most of the stuff. We lost some stuff, but we didn't lose anything priceless. Like the photo archives of our son. (I spent a good chunk of the weekend retooling the server with a newer version of Linux, testing it and tuning it, and then redeploying, but that's another matter.)

But the drive incident has me thinking once more about The Great Storage Conundrum- now massively intensified since the birth of our son. In the nearly five months since Leo has been here,we've generated over 20 gigabytes of data: pictures, movies, documents- of our little one.

I can't help but extrapolate that figure out as an average for say… the next five to six years of his life, and calculate the storage and backup requirements involved. It's a truly gargantuan amount of drive space!

Talking to friends and co-workers about the massive uptick in digital storage since the birth of our kids, I've gotten looks of sheer horror, panicked tales of losing "all of year two to a drive disaster…" and dire warnings that "It only gets worse and worse!" The best advice: edit. edit. edit. "Of the twenty photos you take of him playing, only keep the five really good shots. It's all you can keep. You will never have room for the other fifteen shots, even if they're all good too."

So basically the day I said goodbye to the cost of developing photos, and embraced the 'free! take all you want!' digital photo concept- I didn't really consider the storage costs. Nothing is free, and you still have to weed through the stuff that 'didn't really come out'.

Invariably, the discussion gets to the fact that when all of us were kids, no one documented our entire lives the way parents today document their kids lives. We're all lucky to have a few surviving photos from random years of our childhood. Home movies of us as infants? Forget about it! But in this day and age, everything is documented, from birth onward. Kids today may very well expect to have photos and video of most of their childhood- many of their peers certainly will.

I didn't think I was that bad of a digital packrat before Leo's arrival, but dammit- as a parent I want to keep every single one of the best digital photos and videos of my son, now and always. I vow to not be telling horror stories about how "I lost the digital records of the ___ year of his entire life to a drive disaster…" or other such tales of woe.

So basically, the only way that's really going to happen is with a solid data strategy. Every file generated has to have: a local hard drive copy, a backup server copy, an archive copy on DVD, and an offsite copy/cloud server copy. Two out of these likely WILL fail over the course of a single decade.

So I'm just taking a deeeeep breath…

And getting to it.

Making a backup of the April to June 2011 archives even as we speak…

Recently I installed Mac OSX 10.7 (Lion) on my 'Hackintosh' PC. It seems not five minutes after it was released in the wild (IE: Apple's App store) that a method was devised for installing it on PC hardware.

I've been a big enthusiast of running the Mac OS on unauthorized hardware since version 10.5 (Leopard) came out about three years ago. The original Leopard was very easy to get running on most any PC. Version 10.6 (Snow Leopard) was a little more tricky at first, but two or three weeks after its release the OSx86 crowd had it figured out as well.

Now Lion follows with very little actual 'hacking' involved. For me, the install procedure was maybe one or two steps beyond the same process on an actual Mac.

There have been mixed reviews of Lion thus far. There's a lot that's pretty much the same as Snow Leopard, but there are quite a few changes as well. (Whether each of them deserves to be called an improvement or not is debatable). One obvious change is a feature called Launchpad, that makes launching apps very similar to using an iPod or iPad. It's probably useful on a laptop with a trackpad interface, but on a desktop using a mouse, it seems a bit redundant, even silly. 

Another big change that I do like a lot, is Mission Control (seen in the screen shot above). From this view, one can quickly see every open window and application, as well as quick links to 'virtual desktops'. It's an extension of Apple's previous Expose feature, but personally I think the implementation is more refined. The concept of virtual desktops isn't new, but Apple's take on it with Lion is the best I've seen. With a quick keyboard shortcut (or gesture with a trackpad) one can brush aside the current user interface -say filled with Photoshop windows-  for another, filled with say, a web browser and email app. One can create as many of these virtual desktops as needed. Even the desktop background changes. (Personally, I think the effect would be even more useful if the desktop icons could also be customized between virtual desktops.)

Apple's widget playground, Dashboard, seems to be an afterthought in Lion. Rather than a transparent space that pops up over the desktop when needed, it now resides in a sort of 'sad grey area' off to itself. Apple seems to have relegated the idea of widgets to the back-burner, which is odd, considering they were early pioneers (not inventors) of the concept. For example: Apple shuns the idea of widgets on the iPad and iPhone- one is stuck with page after page of square icons to launch apps with either one, but widgets (basically small always open apps that display information, control panels, and added function on the desktop) are all but banished from the iOS platform. Little wonder then that Dashboard feels tacked on in Lion; there's clearly a conscious effort by Apple to merge iOS and Mac OSX into one thing.

Of course the hardware I choose to run OSX on would make Steve Jobs' design wizards cringe! I recently mounted my PC's motherboard on an acrylic test-bench, and put the hard drives in an outboard acrylic rack with a 120mm fan strapped to the front. A 140mm fan is strapped above the graphics card, and a second 120mm fan pulls air in under the door. Holes drilled in my cabinet keep the airflow moving.

The guts of my setup won't win any awards for looks, however, it really doesn't matter because this is all that is generally visible:

My current desk, complete with Dual 23" NEC monitors.

I've been part of the Amazon Associates program since 2005. Basically, whenever someone would click an Amazon link and thereafter order anything from Amazon, we'd get a very small percentage of the sale. Over time, this adds up in an associates account. Now, to be certain, it was never a big money maker for us, because the sites Leila and I run don't do that much traffic. (IE: zaptoons.com and eesti.us). Still, it was a nice little program that was 100% on autopilot, and while no gold mine, it did help offset the costs of server space and the like. For other larger site owners in Cali, it was income they counted on.

Well, no more. Greedy as ever, the California legislature decided to sink their tax hooks into online sales. The Supreme court has already weighed in on this matter- declaring that states have no constitutional right to tax the sales of businesses that don't have a physical presence in the state. Interstate commerce is a specified federal jurisdiction, therefore not a power reserved for the states. Most Cali state legislators no doubt haven't read the constitution since high school civics, and even then, didn't really pay much attention.

Looked at logically, it makes sense- an out of state businesses uses no resources (infrastructure, roads, etc.) within another state. Online sales are no different than me traveling to another state and shopping there. I just 'wired' my order ahead rather than hop a plane. The catalog I ordered from wasn't tossed on my doorstep, but delivered electronically over a wire. What has Cali got to do with the transaction? NADA. (By the way, the big pretense is that this is a brand new phenomena- but it's been going on for 150 years. Internet just sounds more Buck Rodgers than telegraph or radio, or telephone to folks, so therefore sales made over it must be up for tax grabs by whoever taps the line.)

Shipping companies that enter the state to deliver online goods pay taxes on the service fees, fuel and transport costs during delivery.  The business actually adds to the state's coffers. So there's no real argument for California taxing out-of-state online retailers.

But leave it to California's legislature: their argument was that Amazon Associates live within the state of California, therefore, voila! Amazon (and other online retailers) have a physical presence within the state, and therefore a tax can be imposed on their sales. Never mind that Associates already pay taxes on their income.

Amazon simply said: "See ya!"  to the Associates program. No more 'physical presence' therefore, no more taxes on their online sales.

I (and all other associates in Cali) got my notice of termination and final payout notice from Amazon last night. Ah well. T'was cool until some greed bags messed it all up. When I get back from a trip to the east coast where I'll be spending money that ALSO has no business being taxed by California, it will be time for me to start researching Google's associate program.

Verizon and Motorola finally dropped Gingerbread (Android 2.3) on the Droid X. The update went out over their network on June 1st. I've been messing with the new OS for a few days on my phone, and really liking it. Most noticeable for me, is the device itself is speedier running Gingerbread. It's probably more to do with Froyo (Android 2.2) having been half-baked, more than Gingerbread being so great.

Screen caps aren't easy to do on the Droid X without rooting the device. (Other Android phones make it much easier, but Motorola is funny that way). Since my phone isn't rooted, (an unofficial hack that allows a user root-access on the device, to say, delete all the branded Verizon crap, etc.) I had to install the Software Developer Kit on a PC, tether the phone, and capture the screens that way. 

The home launcher interface is the new Moto-Blur. So far,  I actually prefer it to third party home launchers like ADW and Launcher Pro.  But I have replaced the stock dialer with GoDialer, and the stock SMS with Handcent. Android simply can't be beat for customization. 

Widgetsoid lockscreen featuring my adorable son!

The copy-paste feature in previous versions of Android was tedious to use. Now it's much improved. I'm also using Thumb-Keyboard in place of the stock.

I've been busy building a new desk and storage setup for my new office. Above: drilling a 3" hole in the top of my computer cabinet.

When the dust cleared, installed this USB hub that's wired from inside the cabinet. Since my computer isn't directly accessible from the desk, I had to come up with ways to extend the USB connections and use an external DVD-R drive.  

I considered installing this on the desktop, but I didn't like the idea of drilling it and having the hub positioned permanently on the desk surface. The top of the PC cabinet was a perfect location.

Next up: I need to mount my remote PC power switch 'invention' of mine. For now, the switch panel out of my old desk drawer is temporarily in place behind the left speaker. 

The room is much smaller, but I actually have more desk space than I did in my old home office, plus the side shelf at desk level doubles as a laptop nook.

For comparison: the old office, during initial demolition last week. Next project: this space will become the baby's room. 

For some time I've wanted to make the jump to a 'smart phone'. I've been eligible for an early cellphone upgrade for months, but I held out until the phone I really had my eye on- the Droid X- was available. During my wait, the X was nowhere to be found: it seemed Motorola couldn't make the damned things fast enough. There were also reports of problems with the first units. And so I waited. It was well worth it!

When I finally I got my hands on this phone… wow! I love this thing! Forget the term "smart phone"- this is a brilliant phone. With Wifi, 3G, Bluetooth, cellular voice/data, compass and GPS it's like a multi-network communication's power-house. The 1Ghz processor, giant (for a phone) screen, and upto 40GB of memory make it more like a computer than a phone.

Google owns the world. Resistance is futile. Until Google becomes self-aware and destroys us all using its search-engine gathered data against each of us, I'm just going to enjoy the ride. 

Just a few of the uses I've added to my "How on earth did I live without this?" list:

1. Awesome voice recognition. Most things, I just 'tell" the phone to do, and it does, like a true personal assistant. "Call Leila." Done. Find the lowest gas price, and show me directions how to get there. Done. Translate my voice into text for note taking. Done. (Write the last blog post, take a photo, and post it to my site. Done!)

2. Barcode scanning. "Is this product good, and is this a good price?" Hold the phone over the barcode- click- looks up the product, fetches the best price online and locally (the phone always knows exactly where it is), as well as user reviews.

3. "Where did I park my car?" The phone knows! Another button press and it's literally leading me to it.  The phone not only keeps track of where I am, it keeps track of where anything else I want it to keep track of is, anywhere on the planet. If I want it to, it can broadcast my own location to anyone else, as well as see where my friends are. The thing can count my steps when I go for a walk, or tell me how many calories I've burned riding my bike down the strand.

4. "I wonder what that building or landmark is?" Just point the phone at it… -click- it scans the thing, searches through Google's ridiculous collection of… well, everything.. and then tells you! Chances are, someone's wondered the same thing about whatever that building or landmark is, and if so, the phone will find it!

5. Widgets for everything- right at my fingertips -always- news, weather, instant messages, email, stock prices, where the last earthquake happened, web search, etc. etc. etc all a mere glance away. 

6. An amazing level of two-way communication. "Are road conditions bad ahead?" "Is there a speed trap?" Other drivers on the road can send alerts from their phones to anyone traveling the same route or in the same vicinity. So in addition to live Google-traffic data, it also gives me access to countless other eyeballs on the road- all of course without taking my own off the road. "Texting and driving is hella-stupid, so how is anyone sending out alerts in traffic, let alone me sending out my own?" Good question, but pre-'brilliant phone' thinking. Just TALK to the phone and it translates your speech to text. Thus far, even in the car, it's been spot on accurate for me. Once, my passenger laughed as I was issuing a voice command. The phone typed: LOL.

7. Media and entertainment- games, movies, music, internet etc. Also, it's a decent digital camera, and video camcorder. It's multiple gadgets all rolled into one.

Droid X mounted in my car for turn by turn GPS guidance. Above, I was testing an app called nDrive, but I've since found I prefer the built in Google Navigation.

I've put up with everyone ranting and raving about how great their iPhones are. (Okay, granted. But no iPhone for Verizon, so no iPhone for me). Now it's my turn to rant and rave about how freakin' awsome Android and the Droid X are. So there!

So far, I'm failing to find a thing lacking in Android (2.2- 'Froyo") vs. Apple's iOS 4. Apple can boast a bigger app store- but I haven't found myself lacking for a single app type thus far. (There is a lot of truth to the "Do I really need 18 different fart apps?" line. Basically, both platforms have enough apps- and then multiple copycats of each one. So Android has 3 fart apps to Apple's 18. Whoopity.)  

Personally, I like the way Android feels and looks. I definitely like it's customization abilities. It's a complete chameleon- you can make things look and feel exactly how you prefer them -especially the desktop 'launcher' interface that sits on top of everything. With Apple, one has to 'jailbreak' the iOS before you can achieve anything approaching the same level of customization. So yes, basically you can have your iPhone! Meanwhile, you can have my Droid when you pry it from my cold dead hands.