Windows 8 has become quite the topic of conversation these past few months—and for good reason.  Redmond seems to have really polished up the infamous OS to release the historically un-intuitive bindings and create something truly unique and fresh.  I for one support Microsoft because it creates diversity and competition for my long-time favorite Mac OS X.

You can choose not to like Windows.  I won't judge you nor will I blame you, because I feel Microsoft still has a long way to come before I'll be persuaded to jump ship; however, I was infuriated by a comment I saw on YouTube today.  One that a shocking 146 people liked.

Are you even being serious right now?  Okay, let's stop drinking the idiot flavored Kool-Aid and think for just one second.  Microsoft is not a hardware company.  Apple is.  It makes sense for Microsoft to charge substantially more than Apple because that's how they turn a profit.  When you walk out of the Apple Store with your new MacBook Air in the ornate white bag, Apple has already turned a strikingly large profit off of you, whereas Microsoft has to charge a garganutan price on the OS to even turn a svelte profit.  In essence, Apple is subsidizing your OS upgrades because you already paid 150% markup on computer hardware.  All Microsoft gains from your PC purchase is a single, bulk-priced OS license.  Therefore, come update season, Apple only charges $30 because they made $600+ off of you when you bought your computer, but Microsoft made less than $80.

Get it, people?  Ugh.

I don't care what religion (if any) you're a part of, but I want you to understand the importance of service to your fellow man.  There are so many people out there that are in need of help and you can change their lives; even the smallest of ways.  It saddens and bothers me that so many people refuse to lend service, or find excuses for not helping the hungry, the homeless, the mentally ill, the elderly, the unlearned, the list goes on.

Humanity shares one basic emotion: empathy.  Don't just talk about how messed up the world is and how you wish there were less people in need.  That gets you nowhere.  Take action!  People think that helping the impoverished requires money, and this couldn't be more incorrect.  By simply lending a few hours here and there, you can change people—especially yourself.  Help your old neighbor rake her leaves, lend your hand at the soup kitchen, befriend the mentally ill.

Service isn't always the most motivating thing and we ofttimes make excuses for ourselves or rationalize how we wouldn't/couldn't possibly positively change someone else.  Don't.  You have no excuses.  The reward and comfort you'll receive from helping others far surpasses the few hours of meaningless entertainment you would have received from watching TV or playing video games.

Don't get caught up in the world of politics, commerce, academics, technology, if you lose sight of what truly matters.  People.

I have always been fascinated by the way companies package and box-up their products.  You know the old saying, "don't judge a book by its cover?"  Well, no one listens to that.  First impressions mean everything.  One example of such dominance is Beats by Dre.  They don't sell a particularly good product, but they brand and package it in such a way that makes it nearly irresistible.  Apple, Kellogg, and other brands follow suit.

Fanny Wang is a newish headphone company trying to branch into this market, and thus far, they've done a decent job.  They make a nice sounding headphone with good design and sell it for a fair price.  Sure, it's a designer headphone, but the quality and looks of the product make it sell.  One thing they haven't gotten right, however, is the box.  Granted, most of their distribution and sales are done online, but I still wonder how successful they are in brick-and-mortar retail.  You can tell that they wanted to make nice packaging.  There is a magnetic latch, customized packaging, and a nice instruction/warranty manual.  Even the outside of the box looks nice.  The font used looks good and they carefully describe the advantages to the product they're trying to sell.

So what's the issue?  For the main picture on the box, they use a massively pixelated and blown up image.  Why?  Beats me (see what I did there?), but it's certainly noticeable.  I don't know if they didn't want to pay their designer for a higher quality image or if the factory didn't print it right, but it's heinously noticable.  As a consumer, I would not have bought these headphones simply on the basis that their packaging is lackluster.  Silly?  Yes.  But, problematic?  Certainly.  Packaging and first impressions mean everything, and if you can't do it right, don't do it at all.

First off, the name.  It sucks.  Badly.  Look, I'm all for ditching the nameology.  Once you get into high upper digits like we'll see with the iPhone 5/6, it gets messy.  We don't see an iMac 14, or an iPod 8, we just see the product name with a generation notation.  It's one thing to call it "the new iPad," but keep in mind, they're also retaining the iPad 2 in the lineup at a $399 price point.  To have the iPad 2 and the new iPad, it gets really awkward.  I say ditch the names.  Go to iPad.  And when you call tech support, they'll ask you what generation—iPad 3rd gen, or iPad 1st generation.  There is no need for this confusing nameology.  Apple wants to get away from it, but can't fully break free which is why they have this "the new" precursor, and it sucks.  Remember back in 2009 how the iPhone 3GS was launched and marketed for the first few weeks as iPhone 3G S?  Well it was confusing and journalists hated it so Apple changed it.  I hope they do this with the new iPad.

Secondly, the cameras.  There is now a 5MP 1080p camera on the back and the same shameful VGA camera on the front.  ARE YOU SERIOUS?!  No one, and I mean no one uses the iPad as a video camera.  You look like a baboon.  It's heavy, awkward, and generally unpleasing.  Now, the front-facing camera can be used all the time—in Skype, FaceTime, Livestream, and other applications.  Why must the only useful camera stay inferior to the other camera we'll never use?  Additionally, they called the rear facing camera "iSight."  WTF, Apple.  iSight has a notoriously bad reputation and hasn't ever been on anything other than a Mac.  I can see why Apple might want to do this to bring the Mac-like nameology and features to the iPad which is supposed to overthrow the computing market, but it's weird.  Just call it a camera.

iCloud.  What a mess.  I finally started to think I understood exactly what Apple intended iCloud to be used for, but now it's even more abstracted and broken than before.  The new iWork update, which should be out today, brings tighter iCloud support, but documents are still oddly synced, they're not really well integrated with Lion, they're not multi-account supportive, and more.  Additionally, the new iPhoto hosts libraries which Apple explicitly stated they would never consider last year.  Look, iCloud, whatever it is, is a good idea in concept, but actual execution is awful.  Apple needs to tell people what iCloud is, what applications support it, how it syndicates, how multi-platform syncing works, and how to actually use it.  Right now, it might as well be a placebo because it's nearly impossible to use.  The "it just works" slogan should have an asterisk followed by an "April fools" in fine print.

I'm sure the new iPad will be a smashing success, and I know the things I'm nitpicking about are small, but a few things Apple did today were not only weird, but I think borderline stupid.

Let me be clear.  I'm not here to undermine the capabilities nor technology behind Thunderbolt as it's certainly the best I/O method on the market; however, I can't help but criticize the technology and it's lack of success.

Thunderbolt has been on the market for just over a year.  Unveiled at Apple's January 2011 MacBook Pro keynote, Thunderbolt technology promised to bring the "fastest and most versatile I/O ever."  While this is accurate from a technical standpoint, we have to take a look into the past at Apple's failures: trying to create an I/O that is widely adopted.

Let's jump back to the year 1999.  Apple had re-branded the infamous IEEE 1394 interface as FireWire.  This technology was groundbreaking because it had the power to transfer files at up to 400 MB/s (while it only truly transferred about 49 MB/s)—a stark improvement on the unreleased USB 2.0 technology which technically could carry up to 480 MB/s, but was really only achieving about 10-13 MB/s.  Because of FireWire's raw power, much of the A/V industry began to move cameras and other media devices to this technology, but one specific limitation, price, prevented it from overthrowing USB.

Apple wanted money.  The near-bankrupt company was charging a $1-2 royalty for every FireWire 400 port.  While this royalty charge was eventually abolished in 2001, it was done too late.  USB 2.0 had just about every advantage.  Technically, the open-standard was just as capable having had legacy support for USB 1.1 devices which had already taken the market with storm.  Not to mention it was open.  No royalties.  Over a few years, even Apple began to lose interest in FireWire and moved over to the more universally accepted USB.

Before I get into failed market strategy, I want to mention the actual hardware limitations of the Thunderbolt I/O technology.  Unlike USB, Thunderbolt doesn't have 1 central controller.  USB can handle 127 devices per controller whereas Thunderbolt can only handle one.  Technically, this isn't much of a problem, but cost really takes a sucker-punch here.  While it may not be a big deal to add multiple controllers on laptops with a gargantuan price tag, on a $200 tablet, this is seemingly less feasible.

What Apple advertises to be Thunderbolt's greatest strength, I see as the biggest weakness.  Daisychaining.  The theory is simple.  Hook up a hard drive, game controller, display, and sync cable up to your computer all from one port without noticing a loss in bandwidth.  In order to daisychain, all devices require two Thunderbolt ports.  One input.  One output.  This will certainly drive the cost of the device up exponentially.  Did I mention troubleshooting?  Something stops working.  Is it the cable?  Bus?  What if your first device's output goes out and every other daisychained device stops working?  Yeah, so you can mix and match the cables or move devices around, but this isn't always very easy reaching behind your desk through the slew of cables to find out what isn't working correctly.

Let's talk marketshare.  Apple is still in single digits.  Now that's nothing to mock, but less than 10% of computers are Macs.  Do you really think a 10% demographic can change the input/output technology of the other 90%?  Face the facts: PC manufacturers control the market, and with the exception of Sony, there has been zero interest in Thunderbolt technology from big PC conglomerates.  Additionally, PC manufacturers have already embraced and adopted USB 3.0.  Back in '99, Apple had the advantage of releasing FireWire before USB 2.0.  The successor to USB 2.0 has already been on the market for nearly two years, and hundreds of computers come stock with USB 3.0.  Oh, and mark my words... Apple will have USB 3.0 in their 2012 computer lineup.  USB 3.0 cables, despite their 50% slower transfer rate still haul butt—they're well fast enough for most individuals, and as PC manufacturers have already embraced USB 3.0, there is no room or need for an expensive, proprietary technology.  A Thunderbolt cable costs $50 from Apple.  For one cable.  USB 3.0?  There are hundreds of cables from dozens of manufacturers starting at $1.  Yes, obviously part of the lack of expense is due to market adoption which Thunderbolt has yet to receive, but I'll be surprised if the technology can be dropped to that low of a price even with adoption due to complex components located in the cables themselves.

Last, look at the evidence.  It's been 13 months since Apple announced and shipped their first Thunderbolt enabled computers. There are exactly 9 Thunderbolt devices that can be purchased today.  9!  Many of which are 200%-300% more than the USB counterparts, and are cluttered with bugs and problems.

I'm not trying to be a downer.  I think Thunderbolt is an amazing technology that far supersedes USB 3.0 in power and size; however, Apple screwed the pooch.  They were too late into the game, and USB 3.0 has the monetization, legacy, backwards compatibility, market adoption, and development.  Thunderbolt was dead before it was born.

It isn't a failure.  It isn't something I am simply giving up on.  As many of you know, I'm preparing to leave for two years on an LDS mission to Bolivia.  I cannot manage all of the Internet propreties that I'm actively involved whilst on said mission.  Yes, I could still retain ownership and have someone else manage it, although that is not something that can be done easily with hosting, legal ownership, taxing, regulation, domain registration and a flurry of other issues and concerns.

Snazzy.FM is just the first of my projects to go by the waysides, and many other projects I actively work, including TSIG, will disappear in the coming months as well.  It isn't an easy thing to do—having to give up what I spent years building up—but it's something I must do for myself, and for those that I have closely worked with over the years.

Rather than sell the existing site with the current shows, I'm giving independent freedom to my hosts allowing them to continue the shows on their own accord.  I'm working closely with them to help this happen for those that are interested, and I'll keep you all updated with shows that stay on the airwaves.  Because of this, Snazzy.FM will most likely go for auction—I haven't decided yet, although I am accepting monetary offers by email.

I thank every single person that was involved: show hosts, syndication managers, application developers, and especially my avid listeners and supporters.  It was a fun ride, and one that I'm sad to see go by the waysides, but everything that's good must end, and Snazzy.FM is something I have to end sooner rather than later.

This is not my grandpa. Merely a cute old man I found on Google Image Search.My tech-savvy grandmother finally convinced my 87-year-old grandfather to buy an iPad 2. The Apple Creative Specialist sold him a 16GB Verizon 3G model—which I'm glad—as he doesn't have Wi-Fi in his house. As the "tech genius" grandson, he recruited me to teach him how to use his device, and I couldn't have been more excited.

He has never used a computer. Barely knows how to type. This iPad stuff is completely foreign. Unfortunately, at 85, he's not very adventurous and worries about diving into applications in fear of getting lost and screwing things up. After telling him again and again that messing it up is essentially impossible, he still hesitates to do any real exploration: he wants me to teach him everything. I'm not bothered by this as what he wants to use the iPad for is fairly limited: read the local newspaper, check email, and use the moderately basic LDS Church apps.

I've talked in the past about how brilliant the singular home button is. If the user ever gets lost, **bam**, hit that button and you're back on Springboard: familiar territory; however, ever since the adoption of multitasking in iOS, this n00b-phone-home concept is becoming increasingly more skewed.

Prior to iOS 4, apps were killed upon exit. This wasn't really all that great for us power users, but for inexperienced users it was fantastic. If ever you got lost in an application, hit the home button, re-enter the app, and you're back to where you're familiar. Now, with multitasking, you exit the app, re-enter, and you're in the exact same spot. Now, yes, I know that you can double-tap the home button, hold the application until it wiggles, and then kill said app; however, this is no easy task for an intimidated old man, and he's confused enough as it is—I don't dare introduce this seemingly uninnovative concept.

I wish there was a simple mode designed for children and seniors alike; a button for the intimidated. Get rid of multi-tasking, get rid of notification center, get rid of folders even. Rid the iPad of all the great features us competent users know and love. If I could downgrade the iPad 2 to iOS 3, I would in a heartbeat. Apple, address this problem, there is a serious need for it—especially if you want to enter the education market.

As innovative and simple as it is to us, it's still too indimidating for some.

Snazzy Labs has been bringing the most honest tech reviews to the Net since 2008, and it has always been something that I have triumphed upon—I feel like it's the one true thing I do better than most other reviewers—convey an unbiased and completely unequivocal truth.  This is not as easy as it seems, however.

Up until now, I have loosely followed a 1-10 grading scale; however, a scale like this is fundamentally flawed.  A 1-10 scale, I feel, is misused by many publications.  With a range of ten numbers, the median should be five.  5 should be the average score.  But it's not.  Most publications make average in the ballpark of 7-8 handing out tons of what should be perfect 10s to products that are far from perfect.  Additionally, you have a completely unweighted and non-linear lower end.  

Not only is a scale like this often misinterpreted, but it's too subjective and inconsistent.  With so many options, numbers begin to duel against each other, and ratings are oftentimes based from prior scores that may have been issued uninformatively.  Obviously, grading is subjective; however, with so much hubabub concerning prior reviews, issues arise—things simply don't scale well.

The New Scale:

In order to maintain fluidity across the board when it comes to ratings and comparing products side-by-side, we're moving to a much simpler, much more graduated and consistent grading scale.  We call it The Snazzy Scale.

 Not Snazzy:

 This product has a flurry of issues and problems making it hard for us to recommend it to anyone.  It might be a good idea in concept, but the product was not tested well and is fatally flawed.  You should stay away. 

 Somewhat Snazzy:

This product isn't all right, but it isn't all wrong either.  Sure it has it's flaws and tradeoffs, but it's a decent product all-in-all.  Still, we'd recommend trying before buying—this isn't for everyone.

 Snazzy Labs Approved:

The highest honor.  We're hard-pressed to find many things wrong with this product: it's innovative, unique, well-made, and well priced.  We recommend this to anyone and have a hard time believing someone would be truly disappointed by a product like this. 

So that's our new scale.  Is it perfect?  Maybe.  Maybe not.  One thing is for certain though.  It is going to be a lot easier for us to give products a definitive grade and maintain consistency from product to product.  Snazzy Labs's top priority is to bring honest and unbiased reviews to the Net.  To mess that up on our own accord simply because of a poor grading scale would be devastating—so we finally decided to do something about it.

Welcome The Snazzy Scale.  It's here to say.

Ordering from Liquipel was a breeze.  They give you a little packing slip to throw in with your phone so that they can identify it, and then you mail it out with your parcel service of choice.  I chose USPS.  I ordered the service Thursday night, and shipped the phone out Friday afternoon.  All was well.  Or so I thought.

Late Monday evening (over 3 days after my order), I received this (what appeared to be) automated email:

Hello,

We are extremely sorry but due to an incredible demand for the Liquipel technology we must ask that you hold off on sending your device. We are working diligently to reopen our retail service and in the meantime are unable to process anymore devices at this time. We are incredibly sorry for the delay and will be working around the clock until we are caught back up. If you have already sent your device please contact us and we will work with you to come to the most convenient resolution possible.

As one should imagine, I was less than happy.  I had already paid $15 to ship the phone, and I wasn't too keen on the fact that I had paid $60 for a service that was delayed into infinitum.  I emailed back with the following response:

This doesn't look to kindly upon your company!  I already sent my device as requested in my order form.  I run a tech video network (I published a little preview two days ago at CES: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQ4g-5VBzVs), and I have tons of really anxious viewers ready to see how Liquipel holds up.  If we can avoid delay, that would be nice, but I don't know how you want to work this out as I've already shipped my device and don't really want to send it back again.

A bit harsh?  Nah, I really don't think so.  I was nothing short of infuriated.  If they weren't able to fulfill orders, why accept them?  Even worse, why wait 4 days to tell me?  I received an email a few hours later (at 12:08 am!):

Hello Quinn,

I'm pretty sure I had the opportunity to meet you at CES and I understand completely your frustration. I have seen your video and I know that it is because of people like you that we are getting the amount of interest we are. Our number one goal at Liquipel is customer service and that is why I am emailing you personally. Our service turn around time and customer perception of our company are absolutely crucial to our success. I understand the situation is quite unfavorably and that is why we are working around the clock to get caught up. We just want to make sure we are being clear about the situation and communicate as well as possible. I will know more clearly in the morning what the output status is. We would certainly appreciate your loyalty through this transition and will do anything necessary to keep you happy. I will give you an update in the morning. Either way I am happy to refund your order for being such a supporter of our. Again thank you for interest and business. 

Regards,

Kevin Bacon

Liquipel Co-President/Founder

Kevin,

I'll be looking forward to the update, although, you might consider not accepting orders until you're ready to fulfill them.  Thanks.

About 12 hours later (yesterday afternoon), I got an email from Alex Hill, the operations manager that I spoke to at CES. 

Hey Quinn This is Alex!

We just got your phone in today, We can either turn around and overnight it back to you. Or push it threw the line. how would you like to proceed?

I told him to keep my place in the line, and that they could send it back whenever/if-ever they were finished with it.

Alright, so here we are 5 days later, and I had been offered a refund.  That's certainly nice of them, but any company would do this if they couldn't fulfill orders, right?  Most likely.  So I remained bitter and unimpressed with the company thus far.  Nonetheless, I knew how cool the service was, and was willing to wait if it meant I could get a waterproofed iPhone.

Hey Quinn,

Its Alex, you did an interview with me at CES. We are pushing your device threw either today or tomorrow. Because of the major traffic we received from your interview and many others at CES, we are slammed. Which is a good problem to have, but what I'm contacting you about is to get you taken care of. Taking care of our customers is our #1 priority. What we are willing to do is give you a free treatment. Ill void your transaction and you can still fallow your device when its going threw our process. I hope this situation dose not make you loose your faith in liquipel. Just understand we are doing what we can, working around the clock to get caught up. 

Thanks for everything, if you need to contact me this is my personal email. Much faster than the one from the site due to massive amounts of emails!

---

Alex Hill

Operations Manager

Alright, that's more like it!  Not only are they putting my phone through the Liquipel process, but they also are offering to refund me in addition to treating my phone—free service.  Now, I emailed Alex back telling him there was no need to cancel my order and that I was more than happy to pay for the service.

Now, is Liquipel taking care of me simply because I'm part of the press with a relatively large following?  Yes, I suppose it's possible; however, I think Liquipel is treating every paying customer with the same respect and going head-over-heels to make sure they're happy with the service.  Most companies would refund, but very few would be willing to offer the service for free.  It shows that Liquipel is not a faceless company—they're actual people that understand their customer's frustrations, hit some unexpected fame and attention at CES—and are working around the clock to get things fixed for current and future customers.

Congrats Liquipel, I haven't even tested your actual product out yet, and I already like you.

Nearly 5 years later, we've seen the living testament of this. Nokia, Motorola, and Palm—companies who first mocked the iPhone—have gone through the wreckage of this disruptive force. Some have made it. Others have not. Even if you hate Apple with every drop of blood in your veins, you cannot deny the fact that the iPhone changed everything. For the better. Android, Windows Phone, webOS, and MeeGo are all "me too" responses to iPhone OS.

"But Quinn, Android was being developed before iPhone was announced, so you're dumb."

Neat story. Guess what? The first demo of Android was comically bad. The iPhone kicked Google (as well as other manufacturers) in the pants to get them to develop a faster and more streamlined mobile OS to create a more diversified and competitive industry.

The problem with iOS (for me) is simple. Since I've been using it since the early days, I am so dreadfully sick of it. iOS has hardly changed since day 1. Sure, many improvements and features have been added; however, the operations and nuances (such as the springboard) have remained ultimately unchanged.

Jon Rettinger of TechnoBuffalo posted an article today that conveys a similar message as this article. It isn't that iOS sucks—in my mind it still reigns king in the mobile OS war; however, it has become so incredibly dry and lacks character.

Jon switched to Windows Phone whereas I have switched to Android. Despite our variance in change, I think the underlying message remains the same. Google and Microsoft caught up. Fast. It was less than a year ago that I had my first Samsung Focus running Windows Phone 7.0. It was a nice thought, but lacked some crucial (basic) features such as multitasking and cut and paste. It was not a practical switch—especially not from an iPhone 4 user. It was less than 9 months ago that I had my HTC Inspire running Android 2.2. It was a decent phone spec-wise, but I was constantly lambasted by unstable, unscaleable applications running atop a lackluster OS.

Things have changed. Big time. Android is no longer unstable. Windows Phone is no longer limited in functionality. The mobile OSes have come full circle, and really accelerated into the realm where Apple has stayed relatively stagnant. In countless ways, both WP7 and Android have superseded iOS in many areas. Android gives you the ability to upload or view any file to any Web site, email client, or application. There is an actual, tangible filesystem that the user can choose to take advantage of, or leave it be if things need to be simple. Windows Phone has beautiful transitions and integration with Exchange and other Microsoft services that are crucial to many.

I'm not saying that iOS sucks. I'm saying that iOS's time as the dominant platform is quickly slipping, and that it is fallacious to assume it will remain king if Apple doesn't make some seriously big additions in coming updates. Because guess what Apple, you're not only one innovating. This might be your 1984, if you stand still.