Suitcase Nuke

There is one specific reason why Apple refused to support Flash in the iPhone's browser. It's the same reason Apple has ignored other media platforms like Windows Media or Real Player. They continuously push the open H.264 codec that is fully supported in QuickTime. When it came to Adobe's Flash, they recognized Adobe's push to close large parts of the web to a proprietary platform. They argue that you can accomplish the same task using open standards. Just go to Apple's site. Not one bit of Flash anywhere, but you wouldn't guess it.

When it came to the iPhone, Jobs argued that the regular variant of Flash was too bulky and bloated (following in Windows' footsteps) to be useful on a mobile device. He didn't spell out that he really believes Flash is unnecessary. But some people like their "Skip Intro" fun. He continued to point out that the mobile version used by many others was so stripped down it's basically useless.

I have hardly noticed Flash's absence aside from not viewing Strong Bad's emails . However, my aunt just surprised me by buying an iPhone for herself. And the uninformed AT&T clerks told her she would have no problem doing her online classes on the phone while she has downtime at work. Maybe she didn't explain how her school's system works, but it's a closed system that uses Flash for all interaction. So no dice.

Obviously it's a critical mistake to make web content only available on certain platforms or browsers. I still recall the early days of online banking when so many places wouldn't support anything but Internet Explorer, and sometimes not even IE if it was on a Mac.

It's hard to predict where this all goes in the future, but now it looks like Apple and Adobe might be working something out after all. You can read about it here at Appleinsider.com.

A text gets it done so much quicker in those situations. And the treatment it gets on my iPhone makes it so much more useful, storing the conservation thread so you can follow discussions, including dates and times. But there is one drawback: carriers are fleecing us with unnecessary charges. Apple forced 200 free messages to be included in the original iPhone's contract. Most customers aren't so lucky. And many of us have jumped over that number, only to pay $.10, $.15 or now often $.20 per message. For a brief time, I even chose the $10/month option to have 1500 messages.

But it turns out, Short Message Service is a simple, almost free burden for carriers. You see, the messages are carried on the bandwidth already reserved for control channels. As long as they're short, they aren't taking up any space. A quote from the linked article states that there really is no difference for a carrier to handle 1 million messages or 100 million. But carriers keep cranking up the fees.

As I was headed to "The Trail" today to pick out some new glasses, (LASIK is coming next year!) I got a text message from AT&T informing me that there is a new cell site in New Berlin to greater serve Union and Snyder Counties. I looked up the info, and all I found was the press release below on their site, dated September 23. I noticed some improved reception on 304 between Mifflinburg and New Berlin, but reception still drops out in between all the hills on 204 headed to Shamokin Dam. There were periods where the voice signal was poor, but the Edge network still seemed to do fine. It's nice they're giving us some attention here in the rural areas. Of course, as my visit to my grandparents last week confirmed, Perry County is still a "Dead Zone."