I've had AT&T since it took over Cingular and it's never been that great. Until I got a smartphone, the biggest problem was the dropped calls and lack of reception in certain areas. It was actually amazingly predictable in some places and people I talked to frequently could actually figure out where I was based on dropped calls. When I upgraded to a smart phone in 2009, I discovered a new reason to be frustrated: their internet. It wasn't that noticeable at first, since I had a Blackberry Pearl that didn't have 3G (which meant, though I didn't realize it at the time, that I only connected to the Edge network, even in 3G areas, yet I was still paying $30 per month for data). Once I upgraded to a Blackberry Bold, the problem became more pronounced, since I would sometimes have 3G (which works well enough) and have to deal with Edge other times (which is sloooooow). My other mistake was in getting another Blackberry and signing a two year contract that expires in 9/12. My reason for this was that I had trouble wrapping my mind around paying $200-300 for a phone with a contract (which ruled out Droids and iPhones) and I paid about $50 for the Blackberry with a contract. It worked better than my Pearl in the same way that even an old car running on the worst gas possible works better than a bicycle...except when it stops working completely.
I've been frustrated enough to want a new phone and possibly a new wireless company (Verizon is looking pretty good now), but I wanted to wait until the new iPhone came out. By then, I would be able to see how the iPhone looked, compare it to the available Droids, and the longer I waited, the lower my ETF would be if I switched to another provider. (Right now, it's $275.)
My view changed Gamestop debacle last week. I had a coupon for a "Buy Two Get One Free" on used games that I didn't print out, but decided to use in the store. The guys working there said I could just go to my account on the website and pull up the code, so I tried it. And tried it again. And again. First, I couldn't even log in with the Blackberry's native browser, so I tried Opera. Then, the coupon was a PDF file and while it downloaded to my phone, neither my roommate nor I could figure out how to open it. We tried multiple things and nothing. The frustration was increased by AT&T's slow Edge network (which made loading pages horrible) and the Blackberry's overall slowness (which made switching apps equally frustrating). We started around 8:45 and finally left the store at about 9:20 and we still weren't able to pull up the coupon.
This, more than any other problem I've had with my phone, drove home the fact that I'm paying for a service that I can't fully use. I've been debating whether I really needed a smartphone for a couple of months now, since I've noticed that I use my iPod Touch much more than my Blackberry. My Blackberry gets used mainly for a quick web check, email, Facebook (and the reliability on that is 50/50) or Google maps. I track my spending on my Touch, organize coupons, use Rhapsody, organize store cards, and lots of other things. Forgetting my Blackberry is inconvenient if I need a phone or if I need to check an address or pull up a number, forgetting my Touch affects my daily routine. And there's also the fact that I'm carry two devices, one that comes with a $30 monthly fee and I use 25% of my time, one that is free and I use the remaining 75%.
Based on this, I've come up with a few different plans of action. Here's what I have so far:
Stay with AT&T and Do Nothing. This one seems like the worst of all possible worlds. I'll stay with my current provider (AT&T), keep my current phone (Blackberry Bold), and current plan ($30 unlimited data pack). The one pro to this is that it requires the least effort and I won't incur any additional expenses by buying a new phone or paying an Early Termination Fee of $275 (it will keep dropping $10 per month). The other pro is that I'll keep my $30 unlimited plan, which is grandfathered in and I would lose if I dropped t. This may also be a con in pro's clothing, though. When I had my Pearl, with the exception of one month, my data usage never exceeded 26MB. Getting the Bold in September increased my data usage, so I currently use an average of 96.3MB per month with a max of 120.4MB and a minimum of 57.9MB. Not surprisingly, the amount of data used increased with the more time I spend in 3G coverage areas and decreases with Edge. Based on this, I could easily drop to the $25 2GB plan and probably drop to the $15 200MB plan. The other thing to consider on this is that while switching providers would cost $275 as of this payment cycle, keeping the unlimited data plan is going to cost $580.
Keep AT&T, Switch Smartphones. A better phone might offset the incredibly slow internet. I know that a significant portion of my problems last week were related to the Blackberry's limitations. The problem with this is that getting a new phone will involve signing a new contract and buying a new phone, which would probably run at least $100. There are a couple of Droid and iPhone options below that, but most are at least $200. And I'm still going to be paying $30 per month (or $25, if I drop to a limited plan) for a service I'm not happy with. This is the worst choice.
Keep AT&T, Downgrade to a "Dumbphone." This option has its merits. The biggest cons again would be either signing a new contract or else paying a significant amount out of pocket to avoid a contract. A contract would mean a free or very cheap phone and, since the non-smartphone ETF is $175 less $4 for every month of completed service, if I rode it out for the remaining 18 months on my Blackberry contract (I have extra lines available for upgrade), the ETF would be a little over $100. The data plan would run $30 per month for unlimited data and texting and I'm currently paying $45 for a smartphone data plan and 1500 texts. Alternatively, I could drop to 1000 texts which would put the cost at $25. The biggest pro to this is that I managed to get a 450 plan. Looking at last month's bill, I used 143 rollover minutes, 323 minutes, and 220 expired. I also have 3300 rollover minutes banked. Switching to a regular phone would drop my bill by between $15-$20 dollars per month, not counting fees and taxes.
Switch to Verizon and Keep My Blackberry. Pros here would be faster internet. Cons are AT&T's $275 ETF, higher prices (the cheapest plan I could put together with a smartphone still ran about $25 more than my current bill), losing free calls to my parents' landline (they're on AT&T, so it doesn't cost minutes), and losing free mobile to mobile with friends who use AT&T. I could get Friends and Family, but that would increase my bill another $20. Also, I'm still stuck with my Blackberry, so I'm on the fence.
Switch to Verizon and Get a New Phone Same cons as switching to Verizon and keeping my Blackberry, but also add the cost for a new phone (again, budgeting $100 would be conservative, I think), another contract, and my $275 ETF.
Switch to Verizon and Get a "Dumbphone" This would reduce the cost of a new phone and a data plan, but it's still going to be more with Verizon. Also, given that I would use that phone less for internet access, I'm not sure how much 3G would matter.
Drop to Voice and Texting Only and Get MiFi This would work for either AT&T or Verizon, but AT&T would have more advantages. I've been looking at the Virgin MiFi Hotspot for a while and I really like the idea. It costs $150 for the device and then either $50 per month for unlimited data (2.5GB 3G, then 256K when 2.5GB is reached) or $10 for 10 days with a limited of 100MB. The second plan is intriguing to me, because daily use would mean 30 per month for 300MB assuming daily use and possibly being able to get away with $10 per month when I didn't use the service daily and used it lightly. The MiFi also works with multiple devices and the devices treat the connection as a WiFi connection instead of 3G, which makes a difference with some sites or services. (Verizon offers a similar service with the device free with a 2 year contract or $70 with a one year, but the monthly service fee is $60). Since I jump back and forth between my Touch and my iPad, this might be a nice option and if I knew how well Virgin MiFi would work, I'd probably jump on this option right away. Unfortunately $150 is a lot to spend when I don't know how it works.
The bottom line is that I'm pretty fed up with paying $30 for a service that's unusable half the time and I'm not that crazy about dumping another $100-300 for a new phone that may or may not improve my issues, but that will extend my contract with a company I don't like doing business with. Verizon looks good and seems to have some great reviews and some loyal customers. (Plus "Verizon Sucks" gets 323,000 Google hits, "AT&T Sucks" gets 4,410,000 hits.) That said, I'm not sure how much wireless phone service is worth to me period and how much good (or great) service is worth to me vs adequate service. (And make no mistake, AT&T service is adequate. Calls go through, but drop more than I like, service is sometimes spotty in places where it shouldn't be, and I'm thoroughly unimpressed with their customer service.) But is Verizon service really worth an extra $30 per month or $360 per year? Or, for a two year contract, $720?
I'm going to talk to Verizon to see if I can get a better deal in-store than on the website. My sweet spot is about $90 for the equivalent of my current plan. If someone can offer my that, I would switch in a heartbeat because that's going to put me in the same place financially that staying with AT&T would leave me. I doubt that's realistic, though, so I think it's going to be a game of "how low can you go" until I find out exactly what "good" vs "adequate" service is really worth to me.
That said, being able to leave AT&T without losing money would put me over the moon.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Persona Friday: Cherry Blossoms
One of my favorite things about Firefox is the Personas add-on. In fact, one of the top tags on my Diigo account is "Christmas Personas." I also use Personas Rotators, so I get a new Persona every few minutes. It definitely falls under the category of "small things that make me happy," because seeing a particularly cute one when I've had a bad day or a gorgeous nature one when I'm stuck inside because of bad weather definitely brightens my day.
I'm constantly browsing the site, I thought I'd share a few of my favorites. All the cherry trees in bloom now, so I'd thought I'd share some of my favorite cherry blossom Personas.
1. A Flowering Springtime Cherry
2. Cherry Blossom Sakura
3. White Cherry Blossoms in the Sun
4. Pink Cherry Blossoms
5. Sakura Flower Symbol of Japan
How to use Personas: Go to the Personas page and click the green button to install. After that, you can click on the Persona you like and choose "Wear This" or, if you're created an account, add it to your favorites by clicking "Add to Favorites."
Installing the Personas Rotator: Go to here and click the green "Add to Firefox" button. You'll be required to restart Firefox and then you can enable it by going to the Tools menu, then selection the Personas sub-menu, then the Persona's Rotator sub-menu, then selected "Enable Rotation." If you create an account at Get Personas, it will cycle through the Personas in your favorites. If not, it will cycle through random Personas. Warning: If you just allow it to rotate through random personas without creating an account, it will pick from all the available Personas. While I haven't encountered anything terribly offensive, I limit the Peronas to my favorites so that every third rotation isn't a sexy woman in a bikini.)
I'm constantly browsing the site, I thought I'd share a few of my favorites. All the cherry trees in bloom now, so I'd thought I'd share some of my favorite cherry blossom Personas.
1. A Flowering Springtime Cherry
2. Cherry Blossom Sakura
3. White Cherry Blossoms in the Sun
4. Pink Cherry Blossoms
5. Sakura Flower Symbol of Japan
How to use Personas: Go to the Personas page and click the green button to install. After that, you can click on the Persona you like and choose "Wear This" or, if you're created an account, add it to your favorites by clicking "Add to Favorites."
Installing the Personas Rotator: Go to here and click the green "Add to Firefox" button. You'll be required to restart Firefox and then you can enable it by going to the Tools menu, then selection the Personas sub-menu, then the Persona's Rotator sub-menu, then selected "Enable Rotation." If you create an account at Get Personas, it will cycle through the Personas in your favorites. If not, it will cycle through random Personas. Warning: If you just allow it to rotate through random personas without creating an account, it will pick from all the available Personas. While I haven't encountered anything terribly offensive, I limit the Peronas to my favorites so that every third rotation isn't a sexy woman in a bikini.)
Personal Finance, Minimalism, and (Not) Spending Money
For the past few months, I've been reading personal finance blogs. I find them fascinating, specifically seeing how other people are spending (or not spending) their money. Most of the blogs read aren't very heavy on investment advice or telling you how to most effectively minimize your tax penalty. Most of them focus on saving or, perhaps more accurately, not spending money. It was a whole new world, because my idea of not spending is passing on the book I'm looking at or ordering a less expensive item in a restaurant. Imagine my surprise when I found out that a few people have declared "no spending years" and it's not uncommon to declare a no spend week or month. (No spending, if you're wondering, generally isn't literal. People buy groceries, pay rent, buy gas, etc... they just limit their spending to necessities). I've been inspired to try to do a "no spend" day once a week, but it seldom works out...not because I'm routinely spending huge amounts of cash on a daily basis. I usually get tripped up by little things, like a soda or a coffee or realizing I forgot to pick something up I really need. It's mainly due to poor planning on my part combined with a slight lack of impulse control when it comes to very small purchases.
Another topic that seems to be closely related to personal finance (at least in the blogs I'm reading) is minimalism. Very few of the blogs I read embrace "true" minimalism. If you want an entertaining (highly exaggerated and very tongue in cheek) explanation, check out this video. One thing I see frequently with minimalists is counting their possessions and occasionally posting the lists of what they own. 100 things or less seems to be a goal for a lot of people. I like having possessions and can't imagine ever limiting myself to less than 100 things, but on the other hand, I'm not sure that I need the 100 ink pens and pencils I seem to have, for example.
One thing I like about it, though, is the idea of really putting thought into what you buy. Even if you budget fairly carefully and limit the amount you can spend in frivolous categories, you're possibly only preventing yourself from spending more than you can afford, which means that you still may be buying things you don't really want or need because the money's there. This was the subject of a debate between myself and my roommate in terms of budgeting. If you limit yourself to spending X dollars on entertainment each month, what happens if you spend $50? Her opinion was that anything she didn't spend in the course of a month should go into savings. That's a good thing, I think, but I voted for at least some rollover. First, she might want an item that costs more than $100 one month. Second, I think that no rollover could possibly encourage a "use it or lose it" mentality, where she bought items that she didn't really want that much just because she had the money and wasn't' going to use it.
Weighing the value of your purchases certainly isn't a new concept. I can't remember how many times my mother asked me "Is that really worth the money you'd spend?" or dismissed something, saying "I like it, but I don't like it $xx worth." And a few years ago, when times started getting tough for everyone, I remember Suze Orman suggesting that people should try to live on half their actual income. It seemed like a good idea, but it didn't really resonate with me until I read Everyday Minimalist's announcement that she had earned enough in January-March to cover her expenses for the year and had declared 2011 "The Year of Travel." Granted, she has a relatively high income (according to her blog, $17,000-21,000 per month), so this probably isn't feasible for most people, but still... Wrap your mind around the idea of being able to say in before the year's 1/3 over "Okay, I've earned what I need for the year...what do I want to do now?"
Even if I were in that position (and I doubt I'll ever be that lucky), I don't think I'd take the rest of the year for world travel. I have too many attachments here and I don't like the idea of professionally dong nothing for a year while I travel around the world. Plus, I hate long plane rides. That said, I love the idea of being able to do it, especially in light of life's unpredictability. What if something happened that put me in a position of being unable to earn income for a year? Or what it it happened to someone I cared about? How much better would you sleep at night knowing that you've made enough to live on for March 1, so even if something happened that prevented you from earning money, it wouldn't matter for nine months because you'd covered your expenses for the year? Furthermore, there's a lot of concern about retirement nowadays. If you work from 22 to 65 and succeed in living on half your income for those years 43 years and saving the other half, that would mean that, even without interest, you'd have saved enough to live on for another 40 years. (Granted, it's a huge over-simplification, but the fact still stands that every dollar you don't spend now is one you can spend later).
And, honestly, even though Everyday Minimalist is making a very good income, I doubt it was easy for her to accomplish this. It's just as easy to get caught up in the cycle of "more, more, more," whether you're earning $6,000, $60,000, or $600,000 per year. To do it, someone would absolutely have to learn to really weigh the value of everything they buy and learn to pass on things that you sort of want and can easily afford. I don't think it means being deprived or giving up all your worldly possessions, but it definitely means a new mindset.
There's also the issue of how much can you really reduce your expenses. Some things can go pretty easily, like the whole Latte Factor. If you're buying a $3 drink from Starbucks on the way to work every day and you work five days a week, fifty weeks per year, then you're spending $750 a year. If you're buying one bottle of $1.25 soda or water from the vending machine at work, then you're spending another $312.50. Cut those two out and you're saving $1,000 per year. Other expenses aren't so easy to get rid of. Everyone needs a place to live, electricity, food, basic medical care, and, in most places, gas. There are things you can do to reduce those costs, but they're always going to be there.
Of course, people go to some pretty extreme lengths to save money, like the guy who managed to eat for $1 a day for a hundred days,, but at some absolutely horrifying meals in the time of it (and also supplemented his fruit supply by eating fruit that squirrels discarded after a bite). It works for him, I guess, but what's the point? And if you truly value that latte on the way to work or grabbing a soda from the vending machine in the afternoon, then by all means, go for it. As much as I support the idea of saving for the future, it seems ridiculous to do so at the cost of any enjoyment of the present.
Still, I think that it's important to balance enjoying the present with planning for the future. No one wants to give up every single pleasure in their youth with the intention of enjoying it all when they retire, only to be hit by a truck as they're leaving work for the last time, but neither doesn't anyone want to never deny themselves in their youth only to find themselves with nothing in their old age. That's where I like at least some of the minimalist principles, like thinking long and hard about every purchase, even the small ones). I may not ever reach the point where I can get away with working three months a year, but every dollar I don't spend thoughtlessly today is a dollar that's going to be there later on if I really need it.
Besides, if I embrace minimalism, I can have all the Apple products I want and none of them count in my list of 100 possessions!
Another topic that seems to be closely related to personal finance (at least in the blogs I'm reading) is minimalism. Very few of the blogs I read embrace "true" minimalism. If you want an entertaining (highly exaggerated and very tongue in cheek) explanation, check out this video. One thing I see frequently with minimalists is counting their possessions and occasionally posting the lists of what they own. 100 things or less seems to be a goal for a lot of people. I like having possessions and can't imagine ever limiting myself to less than 100 things, but on the other hand, I'm not sure that I need the 100 ink pens and pencils I seem to have, for example.
One thing I like about it, though, is the idea of really putting thought into what you buy. Even if you budget fairly carefully and limit the amount you can spend in frivolous categories, you're possibly only preventing yourself from spending more than you can afford, which means that you still may be buying things you don't really want or need because the money's there. This was the subject of a debate between myself and my roommate in terms of budgeting. If you limit yourself to spending X dollars on entertainment each month, what happens if you spend $50? Her opinion was that anything she didn't spend in the course of a month should go into savings. That's a good thing, I think, but I voted for at least some rollover. First, she might want an item that costs more than $100 one month. Second, I think that no rollover could possibly encourage a "use it or lose it" mentality, where she bought items that she didn't really want that much just because she had the money and wasn't' going to use it.
Weighing the value of your purchases certainly isn't a new concept. I can't remember how many times my mother asked me "Is that really worth the money you'd spend?" or dismissed something, saying "I like it, but I don't like it $xx worth." And a few years ago, when times started getting tough for everyone, I remember Suze Orman suggesting that people should try to live on half their actual income. It seemed like a good idea, but it didn't really resonate with me until I read Everyday Minimalist's announcement that she had earned enough in January-March to cover her expenses for the year and had declared 2011 "The Year of Travel." Granted, she has a relatively high income (according to her blog, $17,000-21,000 per month), so this probably isn't feasible for most people, but still... Wrap your mind around the idea of being able to say in before the year's 1/3 over "Okay, I've earned what I need for the year...what do I want to do now?"
Even if I were in that position (and I doubt I'll ever be that lucky), I don't think I'd take the rest of the year for world travel. I have too many attachments here and I don't like the idea of professionally dong nothing for a year while I travel around the world. Plus, I hate long plane rides. That said, I love the idea of being able to do it, especially in light of life's unpredictability. What if something happened that put me in a position of being unable to earn income for a year? Or what it it happened to someone I cared about? How much better would you sleep at night knowing that you've made enough to live on for March 1, so even if something happened that prevented you from earning money, it wouldn't matter for nine months because you'd covered your expenses for the year? Furthermore, there's a lot of concern about retirement nowadays. If you work from 22 to 65 and succeed in living on half your income for those years 43 years and saving the other half, that would mean that, even without interest, you'd have saved enough to live on for another 40 years. (Granted, it's a huge over-simplification, but the fact still stands that every dollar you don't spend now is one you can spend later).
And, honestly, even though Everyday Minimalist is making a very good income, I doubt it was easy for her to accomplish this. It's just as easy to get caught up in the cycle of "more, more, more," whether you're earning $6,000, $60,000, or $600,000 per year. To do it, someone would absolutely have to learn to really weigh the value of everything they buy and learn to pass on things that you sort of want and can easily afford. I don't think it means being deprived or giving up all your worldly possessions, but it definitely means a new mindset.
There's also the issue of how much can you really reduce your expenses. Some things can go pretty easily, like the whole Latte Factor. If you're buying a $3 drink from Starbucks on the way to work every day and you work five days a week, fifty weeks per year, then you're spending $750 a year. If you're buying one bottle of $1.25 soda or water from the vending machine at work, then you're spending another $312.50. Cut those two out and you're saving $1,000 per year. Other expenses aren't so easy to get rid of. Everyone needs a place to live, electricity, food, basic medical care, and, in most places, gas. There are things you can do to reduce those costs, but they're always going to be there.
Of course, people go to some pretty extreme lengths to save money, like the guy who managed to eat for $1 a day for a hundred days,, but at some absolutely horrifying meals in the time of it (and also supplemented his fruit supply by eating fruit that squirrels discarded after a bite). It works for him, I guess, but what's the point? And if you truly value that latte on the way to work or grabbing a soda from the vending machine in the afternoon, then by all means, go for it. As much as I support the idea of saving for the future, it seems ridiculous to do so at the cost of any enjoyment of the present.
Still, I think that it's important to balance enjoying the present with planning for the future. No one wants to give up every single pleasure in their youth with the intention of enjoying it all when they retire, only to be hit by a truck as they're leaving work for the last time, but neither doesn't anyone want to never deny themselves in their youth only to find themselves with nothing in their old age. That's where I like at least some of the minimalist principles, like thinking long and hard about every purchase, even the small ones). I may not ever reach the point where I can get away with working three months a year, but every dollar I don't spend thoughtlessly today is a dollar that's going to be there later on if I really need it.
Besides, if I embrace minimalism, I can have all the Apple products I want and none of them count in my list of 100 possessions!
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Make It Easy for Me to Give You My Money
I don't know if I'm in the minority for this, but for me, the initial charm of Napster circa wasn't the fact that I could suddenly get music for free. What I loved about it was the fact that, despite living in an area with limited radio variety, I had access to a wide variety of music. Before that, no matter how much someone raved over and album and told me how much I'd love that artist, it was hard to justify spending $15 for a CD I'd never heard. More than that, though, even if I was willing to take the risk or if I was familiar with the artist, my only option for getting the CD was to either special order it at a store or order it through the mail or online. And, of course, bear in mind that ordering online wasn't nearly as easy in 1999 as it is now.
Suddenly, though, I was able to download MP3s and check out the albums that people recommended to me. Granted, it was only three songs at a time and each of those songs had about a thirty minute download time, but who cares? I was able to listen to artists that I loved but most people hadn't heard of. And I'm also proud to say that, for the most part, if I liked the music, I bought the album eventually...usually when I could finally find it. (There was also the matter of rare songs that, to this day, I haven't found since.)
This is not an ode to piracy, however. Nowadays, I get my music through the proper channels. Initially through iTunes, then Amazon, and currently Rhapsody. In most cases, it's cheaper, which was the big reason I was willing to make the jump from CDs to MP3s. Saving a few dollars per album is always a good thing, plus there's the option of downloading individual songs. What I love is the convenience and variety. If I like a song, it's probably going to be available on Amazon or Rhapsody, so I can download it right away without having to find a store that carries it. (I'm starting to approach that attitude with ebooks, too, but I'm not fully converted yet.)
Unfortunately, this isn't how it works with games, movies, or television shows. It's getting better, but between availability and pricing, it still trails behind music.
Here's my major frustration: With digital music, I can go to the site of my choice, find the music I want, and easily put it on my iPod. I like the iPod for reasons other than digital music, so I didn't have to significantly change the way I listen to music. The other industries just don't seem to have that yet. Assuming they're available online at a reasonable price, I still frequently have to modify how I would watch the movie.
Netflix is moving in the right direction. I pay a flat monthly fee and, in exchange, I can watch television on my television (provided I have a device that plays Netflix). Unfortunately, Netflix's options are still somewhat limited. Watching Hulu is nice enough, but, as of now, I have to watch the shows on my computer. Hopefully, Hulu Plus will come to the 360 and PS3 soon and help fix this. As for Amazon or iTunes video rental? It's great if you have the equipment and they would be nice to fill in gaps where the content wasn't available on Netflix or Hulu, but if you don't have the equipment, then you can't watch it on television. And, call my crazy, I like my television on a television.
The problem I see is that a lack of convenience and availability might be a big factor in piracy. I'll use my experience with Breakfast at Tiffany's as an example.
I read the novella about a month ago and I wanted to finally watch the movie. Unsurprisingly, I couldn't buy it at any local stores and it wasn't available for rental at Blockbuster. It wasn't on Netflix, so no instant streaming. Until I thought of Amazon Instant Video, I thought my only option was to order it off Amazon and wait. Unfortunately, even though it was available on Amazon Instant Video and I can watch Amazon content on my Tivo, I hit a snag when I found it it would take five hours to download. And with that, my pizza and movie night with Breakfast at Tiffany's died.
The incredibly frustrating part was the knowledge that, most likely, somewhere out there I could find a copy of the movie that I could download quickly and easily. Since I have a 360, I could play certain file types on that, so I could watch it on an actual television instead of a computer.
Now, piracy is a complicated issue and I'm not implying for one moment that if it was just easier to get things, piracy would stop. It wouldn't. However, the fight against online piracy has been going on since at least 2000 and, frankly, while I wouldn't say that Hollywood, the music industry, and the game industry are losing, I can't say that they're winning. They go after one service or site, another pops up.
That said, when it's easier to get an illegal copy of the item than it is to pay for it, that can't help their cause. They have to understand how people are using their products and accommodate that. I want to play music on my iPod, watch movies and shows on my television, and play games on my consoles. And, frankly, I've been spoiled by things like iTunes, Netflix, Rhapsody, and Hulu. I'm willing to pay for the content, but I'm not willing to go out of my way to get it. I want to be able to come home and be able to choose my movie after I've settled down on the couch. I don't want to have to plan ahead and go out of my way to get it. And I'm willing to bet a lot of other people feel the same way.
In short, if Hollywood wants to fight piracy, they at least have to make it as easy to buy the product legitimately as it is to pirate it. Doing so won't stop piracy, but I'm fairly sure that failing to do so means Hollywood is behind before the race even starts.
Suddenly, though, I was able to download MP3s and check out the albums that people recommended to me. Granted, it was only three songs at a time and each of those songs had about a thirty minute download time, but who cares? I was able to listen to artists that I loved but most people hadn't heard of. And I'm also proud to say that, for the most part, if I liked the music, I bought the album eventually...usually when I could finally find it. (There was also the matter of rare songs that, to this day, I haven't found since.)
This is not an ode to piracy, however. Nowadays, I get my music through the proper channels. Initially through iTunes, then Amazon, and currently Rhapsody. In most cases, it's cheaper, which was the big reason I was willing to make the jump from CDs to MP3s. Saving a few dollars per album is always a good thing, plus there's the option of downloading individual songs. What I love is the convenience and variety. If I like a song, it's probably going to be available on Amazon or Rhapsody, so I can download it right away without having to find a store that carries it. (I'm starting to approach that attitude with ebooks, too, but I'm not fully converted yet.)
Unfortunately, this isn't how it works with games, movies, or television shows. It's getting better, but between availability and pricing, it still trails behind music.
Here's my major frustration: With digital music, I can go to the site of my choice, find the music I want, and easily put it on my iPod. I like the iPod for reasons other than digital music, so I didn't have to significantly change the way I listen to music. The other industries just don't seem to have that yet. Assuming they're available online at a reasonable price, I still frequently have to modify how I would watch the movie.
Netflix is moving in the right direction. I pay a flat monthly fee and, in exchange, I can watch television on my television (provided I have a device that plays Netflix). Unfortunately, Netflix's options are still somewhat limited. Watching Hulu is nice enough, but, as of now, I have to watch the shows on my computer. Hopefully, Hulu Plus will come to the 360 and PS3 soon and help fix this. As for Amazon or iTunes video rental? It's great if you have the equipment and they would be nice to fill in gaps where the content wasn't available on Netflix or Hulu, but if you don't have the equipment, then you can't watch it on television. And, call my crazy, I like my television on a television.
The problem I see is that a lack of convenience and availability might be a big factor in piracy. I'll use my experience with Breakfast at Tiffany's as an example.
I read the novella about a month ago and I wanted to finally watch the movie. Unsurprisingly, I couldn't buy it at any local stores and it wasn't available for rental at Blockbuster. It wasn't on Netflix, so no instant streaming. Until I thought of Amazon Instant Video, I thought my only option was to order it off Amazon and wait. Unfortunately, even though it was available on Amazon Instant Video and I can watch Amazon content on my Tivo, I hit a snag when I found it it would take five hours to download. And with that, my pizza and movie night with Breakfast at Tiffany's died.
The incredibly frustrating part was the knowledge that, most likely, somewhere out there I could find a copy of the movie that I could download quickly and easily. Since I have a 360, I could play certain file types on that, so I could watch it on an actual television instead of a computer.
Now, piracy is a complicated issue and I'm not implying for one moment that if it was just easier to get things, piracy would stop. It wouldn't. However, the fight against online piracy has been going on since at least 2000 and, frankly, while I wouldn't say that Hollywood, the music industry, and the game industry are losing, I can't say that they're winning. They go after one service or site, another pops up.
That said, when it's easier to get an illegal copy of the item than it is to pay for it, that can't help their cause. They have to understand how people are using their products and accommodate that. I want to play music on my iPod, watch movies and shows on my television, and play games on my consoles. And, frankly, I've been spoiled by things like iTunes, Netflix, Rhapsody, and Hulu. I'm willing to pay for the content, but I'm not willing to go out of my way to get it. I want to be able to come home and be able to choose my movie after I've settled down on the couch. I don't want to have to plan ahead and go out of my way to get it. And I'm willing to bet a lot of other people feel the same way.
In short, if Hollywood wants to fight piracy, they at least have to make it as easy to buy the product legitimately as it is to pirate it. Doing so won't stop piracy, but I'm fairly sure that failing to do so means Hollywood is behind before the race even starts.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
The iPad and the Budding News Junkie
It's also amazing how a different method of delivery can drastically change someone's behavior regarding news. Case in point, me.
Up until recently, I've kept up with the news well enough, but it was always fairly passively. I would stop to listen to the story running on a 24 hour news channel or click on whatever stories interested me when I checked my email or visited a search page. About a year ago, I started using Twitter to follow news or other feeds that interested me, mainly legal related. That wasn't bad, but it was a bit of a pain scrolling through several hours worth of posts and clicking on the links that interested me. (I never said I wasn't lazy.)
Next I tried Google Reader. It's great for a lot of reasons, including the ability to star and share interesting posts as well as the "sort by magic" feature that filters everything based on past history. Still, it's a lot of work. I suppose I could add everything into one category and read it, but then it's a jumbled mess and I find myself always trying to wade through hundreds or thousands of posts to get to the ones that interest me. I've tried to organize everything by category and to prune my Reader frequently and that helps a lot, but it still feels like a bit of a chore.
Enter the iPad. It's more flexible for reading and I find myself using it instead of my laptop more and more often. Unfortunately, reading Google Reader through the iPad web browser worked fairly well, but it was much easier to use on a computer. Reeder was recommended frequently, but at $4.99, it seemed to be a waste of money when Google Reader worked well enough on the iPad and the computer was always a viable option. (On a side note, this is why app developers need to offer free trials of their products. I have no problem with paying for an app that provides a service that I can't get for free or improves upon the free service, but I need to know that the service is worth the money. Had Reeder offered a free trial, I might be using it now.)
Then I discovered Flipboard. It was my favorite price, which is free, so I downloaded it and promptly forgot about it. I started using it again about a week ago, though, and I'm fairly happy with it. You can add your Google Reader account, your Facebook account, and your Twitter account, or you can just use pre-selected feeds like News, Art, Fliptech. You can also add individual blogs or Twitter accounts. What I like most about it is that it shows up as a magazine-like layout. The Twitter section doesn't just show Tweets, it also displays linked articles or photos in some cases. If it just shows a Tweet, I can easily click it and view the whole article. Same with Facebook posts. When my FB friends share a link, I see the entire article or video...or at least a decent teaser. It makes it a lot easier to scan through them to see what interests me the most. I like the Google Reader selection for the same reason, though as far as I can tell, flipping through the headlines doesn't mark them as read. I like the fact that I'm still able to star items or add things to my shared items, but I miss being able to bookmark things with Diigo. Still, it works and I'm more or less happy with it.
I'm also experimenting with Zite, which is about a week old. Supposedly, you can add your Google Reader and Twitter and it gives content based on that. It also claims to learn from your reading habits and give you more of the types of stories that interest you. The good thing about this is that it allows you to get information from sources you wouldn't normally read, which is always a good thing.
I'm not impressed, though. It wasn't bad enough to make me give up on it totally, but it also wasn't good enough to make me give up on Flipboard. First, despite following 40 different Twitter feeds and having 228 subscriptions on Google Reader, Zite wasn't able to generate automatic content for me so I had to add my own. Not a huge problem, but definitely not living up to the hype. Second, it's buggy in a couple of ways. The most noticeable was extremely slow loading times and, at one point, a message saying that it couldn't access content because of too many users. In most cases, it wasn't a huge wait, but I left behind waiting five to ten seconds for a page of text and one picture to load when I gave up dial up. It also crashed a couple of times and I couldn't get linked videos to play. Also, if I clicked on a link to another website or even another story on the site I was reading, it opened Safari. That meant that when I was finished, I had to reopen Zite, wait for it to load, go back to the section I was reading, and start again. I didn't have this problem in Flipboard. Finally, a few things were out of place on categories. It didn't stand out until I got to the humor section and found a story about a tiger killing a lion in a zoo. This wasn't by the Onion and it didn't reference Charlie Sheen, so either their categories are glitchy or someone has a really, really sick sense of humor.
All in all, I do see myself using the iPad more and more for news. I can't see myself paying subscription content, though that might change. What I want is a nice little iPad app that will let me manage all my Google Reader and Twitter content, share or bookmark as needed, and let me easily leaf through all the content. Oh, and introducing new content? It's a positive, but not a requirement. And since I plan to stick with a wifi only iPad, the ability to periodically refresh and store content for offline browsing would be great, too.
Up until recently, I've kept up with the news well enough, but it was always fairly passively. I would stop to listen to the story running on a 24 hour news channel or click on whatever stories interested me when I checked my email or visited a search page. About a year ago, I started using Twitter to follow news or other feeds that interested me, mainly legal related. That wasn't bad, but it was a bit of a pain scrolling through several hours worth of posts and clicking on the links that interested me. (I never said I wasn't lazy.)
Next I tried Google Reader. It's great for a lot of reasons, including the ability to star and share interesting posts as well as the "sort by magic" feature that filters everything based on past history. Still, it's a lot of work. I suppose I could add everything into one category and read it, but then it's a jumbled mess and I find myself always trying to wade through hundreds or thousands of posts to get to the ones that interest me. I've tried to organize everything by category and to prune my Reader frequently and that helps a lot, but it still feels like a bit of a chore.
Enter the iPad. It's more flexible for reading and I find myself using it instead of my laptop more and more often. Unfortunately, reading Google Reader through the iPad web browser worked fairly well, but it was much easier to use on a computer. Reeder was recommended frequently, but at $4.99, it seemed to be a waste of money when Google Reader worked well enough on the iPad and the computer was always a viable option. (On a side note, this is why app developers need to offer free trials of their products. I have no problem with paying for an app that provides a service that I can't get for free or improves upon the free service, but I need to know that the service is worth the money. Had Reeder offered a free trial, I might be using it now.)
Then I discovered Flipboard. It was my favorite price, which is free, so I downloaded it and promptly forgot about it. I started using it again about a week ago, though, and I'm fairly happy with it. You can add your Google Reader account, your Facebook account, and your Twitter account, or you can just use pre-selected feeds like News, Art, Fliptech. You can also add individual blogs or Twitter accounts. What I like most about it is that it shows up as a magazine-like layout. The Twitter section doesn't just show Tweets, it also displays linked articles or photos in some cases. If it just shows a Tweet, I can easily click it and view the whole article. Same with Facebook posts. When my FB friends share a link, I see the entire article or video...or at least a decent teaser. It makes it a lot easier to scan through them to see what interests me the most. I like the Google Reader selection for the same reason, though as far as I can tell, flipping through the headlines doesn't mark them as read. I like the fact that I'm still able to star items or add things to my shared items, but I miss being able to bookmark things with Diigo. Still, it works and I'm more or less happy with it.
I'm also experimenting with Zite, which is about a week old. Supposedly, you can add your Google Reader and Twitter and it gives content based on that. It also claims to learn from your reading habits and give you more of the types of stories that interest you. The good thing about this is that it allows you to get information from sources you wouldn't normally read, which is always a good thing.
I'm not impressed, though. It wasn't bad enough to make me give up on it totally, but it also wasn't good enough to make me give up on Flipboard. First, despite following 40 different Twitter feeds and having 228 subscriptions on Google Reader, Zite wasn't able to generate automatic content for me so I had to add my own. Not a huge problem, but definitely not living up to the hype. Second, it's buggy in a couple of ways. The most noticeable was extremely slow loading times and, at one point, a message saying that it couldn't access content because of too many users. In most cases, it wasn't a huge wait, but I left behind waiting five to ten seconds for a page of text and one picture to load when I gave up dial up. It also crashed a couple of times and I couldn't get linked videos to play. Also, if I clicked on a link to another website or even another story on the site I was reading, it opened Safari. That meant that when I was finished, I had to reopen Zite, wait for it to load, go back to the section I was reading, and start again. I didn't have this problem in Flipboard. Finally, a few things were out of place on categories. It didn't stand out until I got to the humor section and found a story about a tiger killing a lion in a zoo. This wasn't by the Onion and it didn't reference Charlie Sheen, so either their categories are glitchy or someone has a really, really sick sense of humor.
All in all, I do see myself using the iPad more and more for news. I can't see myself paying subscription content, though that might change. What I want is a nice little iPad app that will let me manage all my Google Reader and Twitter content, share or bookmark as needed, and let me easily leaf through all the content. Oh, and introducing new content? It's a positive, but not a requirement. And since I plan to stick with a wifi only iPad, the ability to periodically refresh and store content for offline browsing would be great, too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)