Ampers & Dot

A year back I wrote a post about my 2009 Tech Resolutions. Well what’s the point of resolutions if I’m not accountable for them? So today I want to look back and see how well I did. Then, assuming I don’t get too depressed from my ‘09 performance, I’ll make a few new resolutions for the upcoming year. Let’s dive right in:

2009 Resolutions:

• Keep better control over my RSS feeds. This is a big win for me. Over 2009 I was much more flexible with my RSS feeds, in that I cut off of feeds that were too noisy (or too stale) and added feeds that were either more personally focused or specifically relevant. This has made my RSS reader cleaner and easier to manage, while delivering better content than ever.
• Help at least five people quit AOL. I helped three. So that’s not too bad.
• Make 40-50% of tweets replies. I just checked and I’m around 25-30%, about half my goal. It’s a good wake-up-call to see this resolution and something I’m going to try at again.
• Sign up at least three friends to Twitter. I likely helped sign up 20+ people in ‘09, so this was a nice over-performance. Though with mainstream media’s constant spotlight on Twitter, this was fish in a barrel.
• Contribute more in online Forums. Huge failure here. If I contributed 5% in ‘08, then I was likely at 2% in ‘09… I’ll need to keep working on this one.
• Buy ZERO computers. Another big failure. Enough said.
• Redesign my website. Potentially the biggest failure on the list. This will remain a priority in ‘10 (see below).
• Use more features of Facebook and LinkedIn. A small success! In 2009 I started using these networks much, much more. I’m still no power-user, but I’ve uploaded pictures, kept my profile current, and interacted with friends and colleagues.
• Write more conversational blog posts. Another moderate success! I definitely wrote significantly fewer posts in ‘09 (as predicted) but my post-to-comment ration went from 1:2.4 to 1:3.1 - I’m proud of that and would like to keep seeing that number climb.

That’s a relatively successful year! So here’s what I’m planning for 2010:

• Buy ZERO computers. None. Not even one…
• Redesign my website. Just do it. (Ok, now on to new ones:)
• Drop to one Netflix disc. I started 2009 with three discs, but thanks to Netflix Instant (and Xbox 360 integration) I’ve been able to cut back to two. Netflix Instant is an amazing feature and I plan to rely on it only more this year. This will be pretty contingent on Netflix adding more available instant movies, but I don’t see that being too big a problem.
• Evangelize the cloud. I’ve begun relying on Microsoft’s Live Mesh and it’s amazing. Syncing files between multiple computers (between work, home desktop, home laptops, etc (see resolution #1)) Mesh has changed my life. With that and Dropbox, I aim to set up friends and family with these tools - to rely less on faulty external harddrives and more on online options.
• Be more open minded about mobile OS preferences. In 2009 I blogged a LOT about Windows Mobile, some about Android, and a little about BlackBerry… oh, and just a little about the iPhone. I mentioned Palm’s Web OS twice and Symbian almost never. In 2010 I can’t imagine losing interest in Windows Mobile - but I’d like to get more involved with other platforms too as this will help me perfect my mobile expertise. For example, there were dozens of complaints about the iPhone that I didn’t even know about until I got one…
• Engage more online. This is a bit of a leftover from last year, but with greater context. I want to interact with followers more on Twitter, friends on Facebook, connections on LinkedIn, comment more on blogs I read, and answer more questions in forums. The whole point of social media is the “social” part - time for me to contribute more.

So that’s it. Let’s see how well I do.

Have a happy and techy 2010!

A few months ago a colleague of mine at Forrester published a report claiming that “The Smartphone is Dead” (clients only). The argument, with which I fully agree, is that as even the dumbest of phones gains “smart” features and functions, the concept of a dichotomous world of “smart” and “dumb” phones makes no sense.

It’s a fantastic report and has a great series of recommendations on what this means for the broader scope for Consumer Product Strategists, and I was reminded of the research when I saw this YouTube video (in German, which might actually help its cause):

Oh, so your phone has an App for that? Well this phone has hardware for that. Now is this a “smart” phone, or a really dumb idea?

Ok, sure this is a joke, but it brings up a good (and hilariously animated) point: how much function do we really need in our phones? At what point are we overly depending on a single device? Now don’t get me wrong, I’m all about convergence, but how much convergence is too much?

It’s like TV/VCR/DVD combos. How many of these out there still have three functioning parts? My guess is that over 80% of them have at least one of the three components in a less-than-functional state. And once one component breaks, then you either a) have to replace all three or b) have to replace part of it with an additional device giving you a big clunking TV/VCR/DVD connected to a DVD player.

But then there’s the other side of this argument: what if your device only does one thing and instead of a converged device, you carry many devices? I know people who carry one phone for calls, a BlackBerry for emails, and an iPod for media. This isn’t so crazy, right? Well thanks to smarter devices, it seems a little crazier now than ever before.

Converged devices, like the iPhone, have gained so much popularity because of their ability to eliminate the need for carrying multiple gadgets. Maybe a converged Phone, VCR, Toaster, Car-Charger, Printer, etc. is indeed in our future. So what does this do to the market? Mainly, I think it makes single-function devices considerably less attractive in the broader landscape of gadgets.

If, in the future, cell phones have image-stabilized, 12mp, zoomable cameras - we won’t need point-and-shoots. If laptops integrated 3G connections better, would we need MiFis? If phones have 3D, graphics accelerated gaming - would we need Gameboys? (Apple’s hoping the answer is “No”.) And if cell phones have SMS, email, or web connectivity, would we need a Twitter Peek - a device that only does Twitter? Well… no.

And that’s my point. Single-function devices are in trouble as converged devices take over consumer’s pockets. Will we ever get to a point where our phones make toast? I sure hope so. But in the meantime I think three things make sense: 1) only converge functions that naturally fit together, 2) don’t buy any converged device that integrates VHS, and 3) be leery of single-function devices.

The smartphone may be dead - but I look forward to seeing what new smart features converge in future devices.

Starting in the late ’90s, HTC has been a driving force of some of the coolest mobile devices on the market. But because HTC rebranded phones for other companies, until recently, you likely wouldn’t have known where the devices came from. Now, after more than a decade behind the scenes of the smartphone world, HTC’s taken huge steps in marketing itself as a consumer product. (For a little more background reading on HTC’s history, check out my totally geeky post from last fall on HTC’s move from being an ODM to an OEM.)

If you’ve walked around New York, or if you’ve watched primetime TV recently, you’ve probably seen ads for HTC. Here’s one of my favorite current spots:

HTC’s launched an aggressive campaign in the US market to get its name out to consumers. And this is a very, very good move.

For HTC to increase its stake in the US market, consumers need to associate HTC as a company. HTC might have made dozens of phones that consumers know well, but until late 2008 HTC hadn’t even put a logo on a US-released phone. And consumers are very brand conscious with phones: people often ask “what’s that phone?” to which they expect a response like “Razr” or “the new Samsung” or “BlackBerry Bold” (don’t even get me started with phones named like “The Verizon XV6825asdf blah blah blah83425″ because that’s a post for another time). Consumers want brand named devices.

With a successful branding campaign, HTC can become a household name for mobile devices. I mean, it worked for LG. Only a few years ago no one in the US had heard of LG, but with a number of high quality phones, a bit of branding, and good marketing, and consumers go into stores asking for “The LG Vu” or what not.

HTC’s made some of the best quality devices and while that’s been enough to build the company a reputation of success within the gadget community, it’s good to see it take steps towards the larger market. Now, as they combine that with a branding campaign, I expect great things coming for HTC and look forward to seeing more a) awesome devices and b) impressive advertising.

Android, the Google-developed/Linux-based mobile OS, debuted last fall as yet-another platform in the ever fragmenting war over smartphones. Going up against Apple, Windows Mobile, Blackberry, Symbian, and now Palm’s WebOS - Android was positioned last year as an “open source” operating system that could run on almost any hardware.

Unlike Apple, that has one OS and one device, or Windows Mobile, with multiple OSes for various devices, the promise behind Android was that it was a flexible, lightweight, and robust platform (seems like an contradictory adjective list, no?), that could run on barebones dumbphones as well as super-powered, touchscreen, smartphones. The surprise however, is that for the first 10 months of Android’s existence, it was only available on a single device: the TMobile G1 (warning, that link has annoying music playing in the background).

The G1 (or HTC-manufactured “Dream”) landed on TMobile late 2008 and introduced Android to the masses. Now this is tough for me to say, because I’m potentially one of the biggest HTC fans out there, but the G1 is actually a pretty flawed piece of hardware. I previously documented the problems with the hardware design (hint: it has to do with buttons), but beyond the lacking functionality, the G1 just doesn’t feel that great in the hand. It’s a bit clunky and big, but not very sturdy feeling. Its sliding screen feels a little cheap and the keyboard is just junky.

So what does this mean for Android? The answer should be: “Nothing”. But as this was the only piece of hardware out for Android’s first ten months, it means that Android became associated with the G1 - and not in a totally great way.

Now I’m not saying that Android has a bad image - most gadgeteers are quite fond of Android - but what I’ve seen for the better part of this year, is constant speculation on Android’s future. The common statement I’ve heard is that “it’ll be great to see what happens when Android makes it onto more devices”. And I agree. Android has loads of potential, but we won’t really know how it will pan out until more phones run Android.

Fortunately, that time is fast approaching.

Last month TMobile released a second Android handset, the MyTouch 3G (also manufactured by HTC, named Magic) - a device similar to the G1, but lacking a keyboard (argh! I’m not getting into this today). And now, a few weeks later, the floodgates have opened. Before the year’s end, there will likely be a dozen available Android handsets. That’s a big increase from ONE.

So what does this mean? Here’s my take:

This is good for Android because:

• More devices means more consumer adoption. Not everyone wanted a G1, but now there are choices. Really, something for everyone.
• More carriers means more consumer adoption. Not everyone wants TMobile. With Sprint selling the Hero this fall and Verizon and AT&T playing up rumors of new devices, there will be an Android device available to all big US carriers.
• More consumer adoption means more developer adoption. The more Android devices out there, the more desirable it will be for developers to build great apps - making the phones that much better for consumers. It’s cyclically awesome.
• Android is no longer just for geeks. Yes, I said it. I work in Kendall Square in Cambridge, arguably one of the geekiest places in the world - I see more G1s here than anywhere else. Correlation may not be causation - but I’m just saying - the G1 is geeky. New Android handsets are slick and more appealing to the mass market.

But also bad for Android because:

• Fragmenting the platform makes development difficult. Developers constantly complain that Windows Mobile is tough to develop for, because there are many different screen sizes, processors, hardware specs, etc. With each change, developers have to build/tweak to get their apps to work correctly.
• More devices means more confusion. If you have an iPhone, you know it’s an Apple iPhone. There’s no mistaking that. But the more varied devices that run Android, the less consistent the brand recognition. The less brand recognition, the less brand loyalty. Ultimately, more devices dilutes Android.
• Android isn’t geeky anymore. It’s the “Google Phone” or “Linux Phone” - over the last year, I’ve always loved talking to G1 owners who have built their own apps, customized their interface, or hacked it to play Doom - but as Android makes its way to the masses, it looses its geek-cred.

Well in the end that’s 4-3 in favor of this being a great thing for Android and I’m excited about that. I think it’s a great platform and at very least is driving the smartphone market to become ever stronger. Is Android ready to take down Apple? No. But is it going to be fun to watch the platform expand? Absolutely.

We’ve all seen the commercials: white background, hipster jingle, soothing voice, and a hand swiping through an iPhone application explaining how whatever your wildest dreams might be, there’s an app for that. As Apple claims: there are “Apps for Everything“.

Before I get to the rant section of today’s post, I should preface with the fact that I think the App concept is fantastic and has revolutionized the mobile industry in a great way. iPhone app development is cheap, quick, and relatively easy, drawing out hoards of developers making it a strong marketplace where there truly is an app for just about everything.

The app-ification of the mobile industry is even better. Following Apple’s Shaq-sized footsteps, Blackberry has App World, Windows Mobile has a Marketplace, Palm has its App Catalog, Android has App Market, Nokia has Ovi, and Motorola has App Warehouse (ok, that last one was fake, but if Motorola had a platform, its apps likely would be sold from a warehouse). Although I’m vehemently against the fragmentation of development platforms (expect a blog post on this sometime soon) I’m still glad to see mobile platforms deservedly gain developers’ interest because it means more fun and function for consumers.

Now of course, not all the apps are that great, or useful, or appropriate… (you all know that iFart and 30+ noise emulating clones exist, I’m not even going to link to it because they don’t deserve it), but amazingly, that’s not what I’m going to rant on today. Instead, I’m going to rant about feature apps - applications that enhance the phone’s functionality.

Here’s the back story: earlier this week my friend Matt took me to a Red Sox game (thanks Matty!) and we had pretty awesome seats (seriously, thanks!), right down at about field level. In between innings we decided to take a few pictures. Matt pulled out his trusty iPhone (the most popular camera in the world) but wanted to take a picture of a player deeper in outfield. The iPhone’s camera is pretty good, but it has no zooming ability. But not to fear, Matt showed me that “there’s an app for that!” and loaded up a third party application that zooms in the camera, “and for only a buck - well worth it”. Although I agree with him, that only a dollar seems fair for an application that adds such a great feature to the phone, I’m less enthusiastic about it being a third party app.

My question: why doesn’t Apple include these much-needed features into the standard build of the operating system instead of selling them?

As indicated by third party developers, the phone is fully capable of these features, but for some reason or another, aren’t included in the standard build. Is it because Apple makes more money for every time it sells an app? Man, I hope not. If there were security or stabilization issues, then why would Apple release an app to the public at all? If it’s a copyright problem, that third party developers came up with an idea and won’t sell to Apple, well that shouldn’t be a problem for them either (if you don’t know what I’m talking about, go watch Pirates of Silicon Valley. You can borrow my copy if you want…).

Oh, wait… (and here comes the punch line) taking good third party ideas and building them in is exactly what Apple is doing. In the annual iPhone upgrade, Apple is indeed baking some of the most popular apps to give users the features that should have been there all along. Here’s a good list of “15 Apps Rendered Obsolete by the iPhone 3GS“. #10 on the list: Camera Zoom.

Ultimately Apple’s seems to be slow on improving its operating system because independent developers are doing the work instead, a detriment, and cost, to consumers.

So the next time you wonder if “there’s an app for that” - instead maybe you should wonder why it’s not already standard.

Although I don’t use a BlackBerry on a daily basis, I understand them and the people that swear by them. They are fast, simple, and functional devices that easily empower business use with a sturdy feel in a stylish package. BlackBerries are great.

Maybe this is why I had such a difficult time understanding the touchscreen focused BlackBerry Storm. For those that don’t want to go back and read that post, mainly I argued that the touch-centric device took away from what makes a BlackBerry so great - pure functionality. By forcing the user experience to be entirely touchscreen, it makes even the simplest task - like checking email - a hassle.

My biggest gripe was that BlackBerry scrapped the clickwheel/ball, in favor of the poorly implemented finger dragging mechanism - meaning that if you wanted to navigate between two emails you’d have to click, hold, drag down, wait, and hope you didn’t overshoot. Considerably more difficult (and annoying) than rolling a little ball a little bit.

So I gave BlackBerry the advice that they should have started the move towards touch devices a little safer - testing the waters by adding a touch screen to their already popular devices - as opposed to the Storm, which was a full on belly flop into the murky drudges of Lake Touch. Now, only a few months later, a new device leaks into Rumorville (related note: Lake Touch is actually the main tourist attraction of Rumorville, millions flock there every year).

Courtesy of CrackBerry.com (who speculates this is likely a fake) we have  a leaked image of the BlackBerry 9900 for Rogers (oh, Canada…).

The 9900 is basically a Bold, but with a touchscreen… and without a clickball. Dammit BlackBerry, you missed my point. This is a perfect opportunity to trial touch capabilities within the BlackBerry OS - figure out the kinks and work on the the numerous bugs - but retain the full functionality of why people love BlackBerries. But I think this misses the point, again.

The Storm was a big overstep also because of its lack of a physical keyboard, so I guess the 9900 is at least a step towards sanity. But forcing users to still use the finger drag scrolling, clickable screen, and dysfunctional touch OS just seems cruel.

I guess all I’m saying is that I’m all about innovation, but it should come more gradually through an evolution. To me, it seems like BlackBerry is forcing evolution by skipping generations - which ultimately leaves the newer models missing the fundamental core of what makes a BlackBerry so cool.

Or maybe I’m just sad that we continue to lose out in the War on Buttons.

This week, after nearly a year of anticipation from Blackberry junkies, TMobile finally released the Curve 8900. This model (code named Javelin) is a nicely improved follow up to the hugely popular Curve, giving TMobile a contending Blackberry to fight off AT&T’s Bold and Verizon’s Storm. Now all three carriers have exclusivity to a new, next-gen Blackberry - giving “crackberry addicts” from each something pretty to play with.

Blackberries Storm (VZW), Javelin (TMOB), and Bold (ATT) - Courtesy of Engadget

Before I dive in to a rant - I want to address the Curve 8900 and how much of an upgrade it is over the original Curve.

• Better screen - Kevin at JK on the Run even uses the word “love” in bold, when describing the 480×360 display. I can’t even begin to tell you how many pixels that is in such a small space - but let’s just say: PRETTY.
• Incredible form factor - As Sascha Segan from PCMag says it’s the “best of the past three models”. It’s smaller than the original Curve, but with the chicklet QWERTY pad. As slim as the Pearl, but with a Bold size screen. This thing has it all - and is TINY.
• Better Camera - the 3.2 megapixel camera is better than the original Curve, plus has video recording.
• WiFi - Yes, it’s Edge only… but TMobile is still pretty much EDGE only anyway- so the important thing is that the 8900 also has WiFi.

So there- I’ve made the case that this is arguably the best Blackberry on the market (depending on your preferences). So why the post? Because chances are you haven’t even ever heard of this phone. And that really bothers me.

When AT&T launched the Bold this fall there were Blackberry nuts (sounds like a crappy cereal found at Whole Foods…) lining up waiting to fork over $300 WITH contract.

When Verizon launched the Storm you’d have thought it finally had an iPhone, based on the lines at retail stores. VZW spent more promoting the Storm than a governmental bailout (too soon?). But it worked. There was so much buzz around the Storm that people actually got excited to talk about Verizon!

So what the heck happened? Why didn’t TMobile promote the 8900? At all? It’s just sort of there. Even now, months later - Verizon still has a section of its homepage dedicated to the Storm. AT&T has the Bold featured (in between iPhone glamor shots) on its wireless page. TMobile? Nothing.

At the time of this writing - to find the 8900 on the TMobile site you have to go to the phone page, select “Blackberry”… then go to PAGE TWO! Do they even know they have this phone?

I think TMobile missed a big opportunity here and while I have some theories (that all include the Google Phone and/or Steve Jobs), I can’t figure out why there was no push.

I often complain about the lack of marketing for Windows Mobile devices - that there’s never a consistent or clear message, no branding, and overall no marketing support - but this isn’t a problem with Blackberry devices. People love them. They’re buzzworthy. “Blackberry” is almost a colloquialism for email device. So why not push it?

No excuses. So here’s an endorsement: the TMobile Blackberry Curve 8900 is an AWESOME phone.

There: I’ve just done more than TMobile’s entire marketing team.

The title introduces this post pretty well, but let’s set it up a little more…

Last week Verizon finally (after multiple delays) released the brand new Blackberry Storm. The Storm is the keyboardless touchscreen iPhone competitor-du-jour, manufactured by RIM. Longly anticipated by Blackberry fanatics, the Storm is an entirely new form-factor for the traditionally business focused smartphone, giving even the stuffiest suit wearers an opportunity to swipe a finger across their phone’s screen and make a “woosh” sound… unfortunately that novelty wears off very quickly and the troubled functionality remains.

Initial usability reviews have been relatively mixed, from “useless” to “frustrating“, but the most telling review is from The Boy Genius - one of the bigger Blackberry enthusiasts out there - who spent over 6,500 words trying to justify the Storm, only to conclude that it “is the best phone to ever touch Verizon Wireless so far” but…

“We wouldn’t trade our Bolds in for Storms if you paid us. Like a lot of money. Like, six figures. It’s not that the Storm is a piece of junk for the most part, it’s that it goes against everything a BlackBerry stands for… Quick. Easy. Effortless. The touch screen on the Storm complicates the simplest of tasks sometimes, you lose that lightning fast BlackBerry crack-addict mentality, at least to us.”

And as much as that is just a jab at Verizon’s phone offerings, the biggest point to all of this is that the Storm is a misfit. It might be positioned as a competitor to the iPhone, but it’s no competition to any other Blackberry.

Problematically, this is RIM’s first touchscreen device. This is RIM’s first keyboardless device. The first Blackberry in two years without the Pearl nav wheel, or about five years without a clickwheel. This is the first Blackberry ever that wasn’t first and foremost about function. And this will be the least successful Blackberry yet.

I’ve always been an advocate (not user) of Blackberries because they are just incredibly utilitarian. Completely functional email devices built for business use but also sleek and gadgetastic enough to enjoy playing with. Although the Storm certainly ranks perfectly on its gadgety-goodness, it lost the inherent usability of a Blackberry.

So now let’s get back to the comparison: A McDonald’s Veggie Burger. McDonald’s is presumably awesome at cranking out cheap burgers, cholesterol packed fries, and soft-drinks big enough to drown in. The fast-food powerhouse caters to people who want cheap, quick, and tasty burgers. You don’t head to McDonald’s in search of a healthy snack - that’s just not what they do.

But why not? RIM saw that there was a market for touchscreen devices and wanted to take a piece of that pie with the Storm. McDonald’s knows there are people out there who don’t eat burgers, why not market to them too? Well, actually I have a real answer for you.

Taken from McDonald’s Q&A page:

Q: Why doesn’t McDonald’s offer a veggie burger on its national menu?
A: After testing several types of veggie burgers in different parts of the country, we’ve chosen not to offer one on our national menu at this time. We’ll continue to look at these options and make decisions based on good business sense from a customer interest and sales perspective. Ultimately, however, it’s our customers who choose what’s on our menu. We’ll continue to offer those menu items that are most popular with a majority of our customers.

It’s just not the burger-marker’s sweet spot. “Good business sense” either means that they just can’t make a cheap veggie burger that isn’t disgusting and that people will actaully buy or it means that people just don’t go to McDonald’s for healthy food. Similarly, “good business sense’ is that either RIM can’t make a great touchscreen device or its customers don’t want it.

Maybe I’m wrong and maybe the next iteration of the Blackberry Storm will work out the kinks and be an awesome device. Or maybe in a year or two RIM will go back to its roots and keep producing the best business devices on the market that work well, and instead make a Q&A section on its website with the question: “Why doesn’t RIM offer a Touchscreen device?”…

Yesterday I read BGR’s impressively in depth review of the upcoming TMobile G1 (aka the GooglePhone (aka the HTC Dream)), which noted a few surprising hardware flaws. I mean, I always thought HTC was infallible, but apparently the device feels and acts like a prototype.

The two biggest surprises to me were a) the weakly implemented row of buttons on the front of the device, that are apparently so flush to the body that they are almost impossible to push. And conversely b) there is NO onscreen keyboard, requiring the user to pull out the QWERTY pad for even the slightest amount of input.

Here’s why these things seem strange to me: everyone is dropping buttons right now in favor of touchscreen-focused devices. Sure, Apple may have started the trend, but it’s not just the iPhone I’m talking about- recently Samsung launched its relatively buttonless Omnia, HTC’s Touch HD is almost entirely buttonless, Blackberry is heavily promoting its all-touchscreen Storm, and even Nokia’s new XpressMusic opts for touchscreen focused use (not sure how well that’s going to work with Symbian though…). HTC opted for buttons on the G1, but failed in making them truly useful. It forces the use of buttons sometimes, but then offers buttons that aren’t easy to use…

But on to the bigger point: why are we getting rid of buttons? Because the iPhone did it? If the iPhone jumped off a bridge, would you do it too? Ok, yeah, probably… but still- this is no reason to scrap the concept of buttons on phones.

As completely awesome as touch-focused user interfaces have become, buttons are still a simpler, quicker, and a more accurate navigation tool, and it’s frustrating to see that go away. Swiping your finger around to navigate is fun and easy, but it’s just not that practical. Blackberry hit the jackpot when it introduced the click-wheel (then again with its rollerball thingy) because it made navigating easier. Moving away from buttons makes it all seem only more difficult.

Flick through emails with your thumb?! Cool! Oh, whoops, I just flicked too slowly and now opened the wrong message… oops and now I flicked too far and have to go back… and now I just launched a that application that makes your phone look like it’s filled with beer… crap.

And look: I don’t care how fast you’ve gotten at typing on your keyboardless device, it’s not as fast or remotely as accurate as an actual keyboard. I’m sure that anyone can get pretty good at typing with onscreen keyboards - but I have NEVER seen anyone touchtype without a physical button underneath. You’re still required to look at every virtual key before sliding your finger to it. This might be fine for short text messages, but I cannot imagine a business device that will be used primarily for email have someone hunting and pecking for every letter (yes, I’m looking at you, Blackberry Storm).

Think about your TV remote. When you grab it to change the channel, do you need to look at where the “Guide” button is? Or to turn the volume down, do you first look and stare at it for a second (if “yes”, are you under 73 years old?). No. You can feel with your fingers where buttons are and you have tactile memory of button placement. This simply does not exist without phyiscal buttons. It’s incredibly difficult (impossible?) to slide your finger to the exact spot on a phone without looking, making it necessary to constantly stare at your device.

Alright, Yes. This is a heavily biased personal opinion: I prefer buttons. I want MORE buttons. My current device has a QWERTY pad, a click wheel, two multifunction buttons, a 4-way d-pad, 11 other hardware buttons… and a touchscreen. I use them all (plus, one opens a shortcut menu containing 12 onscreen quick launch apps). I also change songs while the phone is in my pocket, turn the volume down on loud calls without looking, type without staring at my fingers, and play games with buttons that don’t take up screen space.

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that buttons - for lack of a better word - are good. Buttons are right. Buttons work. And buttons - you mark my words - will not only save mobile devices, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA.

This is a post I never envisioned writing, but is actually long, long overdue.  As an avid Windows Mobile fan, who has more-than-occasionally dissected the smartphone market, I’ve somehow never really addressed Blackberry’s presence.  Mainly, because until recently, there wasn’t much to talk about.

Let’s quickly go through a little background information on Canada’s third largest export (after hockey and grizzly bears): Blackberries. And first, no: RIM (the Canadian company that makes Blackberries) likely doesn’t manufacture the devices up north, but it’s still noteworthy to point out that Canada is home to one of the most successful gadget manufacturers in the world. Taiwan, China, Japan, Korea, Canada?

Anyway, RIM has had a strong history of making email-centric devices for the business masses. Originally in silly QWERTY-pager form, RIM started cranking out the Blackberry line about 10 years ago, which is interesting when you think of how few different devices have actually been produced.

Over the last three years we’ve seen the the Electron series, the Pearl series, the 8800 models, and most recently, the Curve series. And even more noteworthy, is that the Curve debuted on US shelves in the beginning of 2007. That was a year and a half ago. No new devices in a year and a half?

Let’s say that a different way: No new devices in a span when Apple produced two different iPhone versions? And even though the second iPhone was more of a haircut than a redesign, Apple will sell 14 million units in a time that Blackberry produced zero new hardware.

So what’s RIM doing to counter this? Surprisingly, a lot.

After 19 months without a new product (and new colors are not new phones, RIM… come on!), there are now FOUR new Blackberry models on the horizon. Seems strange to load the market that way… but wow- four new models!

First, is the long-rumored and highly anticipated follow up to the Curve, the Blackberry Bold (likely launching on AT&T the first week of November). Let me say this: I’m actually impressed with the Blackberry Bold. It’s a great looking device, with a great size factor, that should find its way into the jacket pockets of hundreds of thousands of executive suit-pockets before the end of the year.

Second, the upcoming Blackberry Javelin. A freakishly small but powerful device that has already garnered a large amount of attention (aka: $17,000 on eBay). I have no other comment about this. It sold for $17,000… that’s a lot.

Third, is a device that I personally thought was fake… until it was recently confirmed: the Blackberry Kickstart (Pearl 8220), which is basically two little Blackberry Pearls hinged together to make one whopping flip phone.  There are a number of rumors floating around about when and where this device will land, my guess is TMobile, just in time for the holidays.

And finally, the device that makes the Kickstart look conventional: the Blackberry Storm, RIM’s first keyboardless touchscreen device and a likely answer to the hoards of full touchscreen phones popping up from every corner of the mobile world. Although I’m not wild about the technology used for the touchscreen (the whole thing is one big button… to type you actually have to push the screen in repeatedly), this thing looks sweet and has the features to impress (and possibly convert) any smartphoner.  This will hit Verizon shelves (CDMA getting a Blackberry before GSM!? This deserves a post to itself…) within the next few months.

The point to all this? I’m impressed. Blackberry did exactly what they had to do. A company that generally made the same predictable devices and sold them to the same predictable people now has an arsenal to interest the entire market. RIM took a lot of risks and although they may not have perfect devices coming out of the risks, they’ve taken a step in the right direction by giving consumers options and giving the other guys (Apple and Windows Mobile) a little competition.

If you’re a Blackberry enthusiast, these are good times and it’s worth getting excited.  But if you’re not a Blackberry fan, now might be the time to take another look.