Mobile: T-Mobile's No-Contract Plans And Phone Payments Works Offer Better Transparency

I think the $99 down payment for flagship and top-selling devices like the iPhone, HTC One, Z10, and the forthcoming Galaxy S 4 is going to be a major hit for users looking to migrate to T-Mobile's new no contract plan.  For the reason that in-depth discussion about T-Mobile's new mobile plans isn't needed here, you're welcome to visit T-Mobile for more information.


What the new plans offer is greater transparency about subsidies and where your monthly payments to carriers go to.  In the past, you might pay $80 for plan and get a phone for free, $99, or even $199.  You sign a contract with the carrier and that’s it.  Locked in for two years.  While it might be kinda nice to know the breakdown of your $80, it’s was not something the carriers are obligated to tell us.

With T-Mobile’s plans, you know you’re pay, say $60 a month plus whatever amount you owe to cover the cost of the device you bought from T-Mobile for 20 months.  You see where that money is going towards and the diminishing balance of whatever device you bought from T-Mobile.

That’s kinda nice.  In the current plans offered by AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint, you pay $80 a month and even after your contract is over, you’re still paying $80 a month.  Just because you fulfilled your contract does not mean you automatically get a lower rate.  In fact, you still have to pay $80 a month to continue using the service under the same terms of your expired two year contract.  The extra money just goes into the carriers’ pocket.

After paying off your phone under T-Mobile’s plan, your rate remains the same but you’re no longer paying for your phone.  It’s how it should work.  It’s a fair deal.  And this is why I think T-Mobile’s new plans are very Apple-like in that they going to disrupt how carriers deal with its users from now on.

You pay the rate of your plan, the down payment of your device, monthly payment for the remaining balance of the device, and done.  I know many bloggers even now as looking for a “but…” but so far so good.

iWatch: It’s Not A Watch, Folks – Start Calling It iWear

I suck at naming names which is why I am not in any creative job or have ever been.  However, the more I think about it, the more I think this iWatch everyone is chiming in about is not a watch at all.  I think it’ll be a small device that is wearable and flexible in terms of where you put it on your person.

Let’s call it the iWear.

If you want to put a strap to it and wear it like a watch, go for it.  Many folks have done it with the last generation iPod nano.  Dorky looking but Apple didn’t stop you and won’t be stopping you from using iWear like a watch.  Wanna wear it around your neck?  Apple has don’t that before with the first generation Shuffle.  Looks good too.  Wanna clip it to your belt?  Sure.

iWatch is too limited.  That’s the whole point.  iWear?  I reckon it’ll spawn a whole new third party accessory industry unlike anything we have been before.  Look for Kickstarter to get inundated with accessories and add-ons for iWear.  Imagine a clip-on device for the iWear that monitors vitals or provide additional battery life.  A GPS or pedometer unit for running from Nike for iWear.

Just so you know, this is my own speculation.  But it makes a heck of a lot more sense than a watch.  But it makes a heck of a lot more sense than a watch.  And though it might be used as a watch, the idea of such a device being a GPS for your life pertains to iWear as well.

No! The End Of Reader Does Not Mean Google Will Buy Twitter

This Motley Fool post, and note that I'm stressing the "fool" part, suggests Google shutting down Reader, which I think is a mistake, is related to a buyout of a pretty big social network.  That company is Twitter.  Fool.

There just is no way this would happen.  I can't imagine Google shelling out anywhere from $20 to $25 billion for Twitter.  According to Fast Company, Twitter is worth about $10 billion today and we can see that get closer to $15 or even $20 billion by the time it goes IPO, whenever that may be.  On top of that valuation, any suitor will have to pay a premium over that to satisfy future Twitter shareholders.  It's an expensive buy.

Furthermore, after the poor execution of the Motorola buyout, I'm not sure the market is ready for this.  And can you imagine the number of defections that'll occur from Twitter if this were to happen.  

This idea is just as bad as if someone suggests that Apple buy Twitter or Facebook or another network.  And one last thing, there have been rumblings of past attempts by tech giants to buy Twitter and failed because Twitter just was not willing to sell out.  Not yet.  

The thing that has made each of these social networks so successful is that they don't owe themselves to one specific platform.  For instance, Twitter is a default social network on Apple's iOS and OS X.  However, Google+ isn't because of the ongoing competition between the two giants.  I'm pretty sure that Apple will cut iOS and OS X should there be a Google takeover.  It would be the same for Microsoft, Blackberry, or anyone else.

And the truth is the same if Apple or Microsoft were to take over Twitter.  I'm sure Google will do more to steer users away from Twitter and towards its own Google+ network or just cut Twitter out entirely.

The bottom line is that the Fool post failed to explain how Google shutting down Reader is an "indication" that a Twitter buyout is even remotely being considered.  If anything, Google might consider a Google+ lite version that essentially duplicates what Twitter already does now - limited characters for quick thoughts or links.  

A more likely scenario here is that Google may add a new feature that duplicate Reader's main RSS function and give users a format similar to readers.

I would not have a problem with the post if it simply say that it's speculation rather than try to suggest the author knows about a link between Google killing off Reader and Twitter.  

Personally, I think any self-respecting social networks should do what Facebook is doing.  As much as I hate Facebook, it's done the right thing so far.  It avoided selling out to avoid conflicts of interest within the mobile platform and has not release its own mobile device to compete with the iPhone or Android devices. It has a prominent place in all of the major mobile platforms - ensuring its main core revenue goal is intact:  making as money as it can off its users.  

And since Twitter has a similar business plan, selling ads, it makes sense to be on as many users' phones as possible.  

One thing is for sure here.  Google getting rid of Reader may have made solidify Twitter as the source of news and other social feeds for its users and it certainly would welcome us hapless Reader users.

iWatch (or Galaxy Watch): GPS For Your Life

I recently bought a very nice watch that I like very much.  It’s well built, expensive, and only tells time.  It costs more than the Pebble smart watch and will probably cost more than any watch that Apple, Samsung, or anyone else can release given consumer willingness to pay for a smart watch, which isn’t a lot.  If you’re an Apple fan, that’ll be the iWatch.  For Android fans or Galaxy fans, maybe it’ll be the Galaxy watch (and just about every tech giant out there are now said to be working on their own watches).

World War Z: New Footage Shows Just What’s Going On

I just watched the newest World War Z trailer and I’m hating myself for it.  First, I love almost everything I saw and I’m so pumped but I have to wait until freaking June for it.

I am still not sure about the undead climbing all over each other.  In World War Z the book, there was no references to anything like that.  I like that out-of-the-box thinking in this regard but I much prefer The Walking Dead type of zombies.  However, it’s not to say I’m not going to be waiting in line to one of the first to watch this at the Arclight (assigned seatings).

Now, here are new footages of the Brad Pitt version of World War Z.  And I must say, I’m loving every bit of it. Again, not crazy about the water-life wave of undead coming at you but it does add to the immediacy and feeling of being overwhelmed.

Here’s the clip.  Enjoy.

Twitter Should Incorporate A RSS Feed (But Probably Won't)

As you know by now, though you may not care or have done ranting about it, Google decided to kill off one of their biggest driver for blog traffic:  Reader.  It's an RSS reader to aggregate, you guessed it, RSS feeds into one place.  I swear by it and I've since moved on to Feedly.

However, I think Twitter should pick up the mantle.  I know this is probably not something that Twitter will even remotely consider doing but I think it could work very well given that many tweets are about articles from various news sources or blogs.

Or, even create channels which allows tweets to be turned into RSS substitutes.  I've been organizing my "followings" into lists as many of you have already done so for various reasons.  I've only recently given it another look after the impending death of Reader.

Of all the social networks that can most act and capitalize on Google's mistake of killing off Reader, I think it's Twitter.  Sure, I've done something similar by organizing circles but right now, many folks are feeling uneasy of Google products and their longevity.  How many products that you've used from Google in the past only to see it axed years if not months later?

And Facebook?  Sure, Facebook that allows crap left and right.  Forget that.  Facebook is a joke and the sooner people realizes that fact and leave it, the better the world will be.

That leaves mostly Twitter to act on this.  I know there are many RSS feed providers out there but they're nothing like the kind of power that Twitter can bring for organized feeds.

Twitter has become an indispensable source for many people to get valued information in ways that it probably never considered before.  It went from people telling their friends how long they stayed in the bathroom to being a tool for organizing revolutions around the world.

So, why not add a RSS reader with deep Twitter function?

And if a RSS reader on Twitter becomes successful, don't think it won't go unnoticed by Google.  It may even make Mountain View think twice about jerking us Google app users around so easily.

Twitter, RSS reader, and mobile.  What a potent weapon that'll be.

SciFi: Twins Play Harps To The Doctor Who Theme (And The Walking Dead Theme)

Source:  Kotaku.

What can we all mobile fans agree on?  SciFi, right?  How about Doctor Who?  Yup.  That's right.  Science fiction is like the neutral zone for all mobiel warriors regardless of whether you like Android, iPhone, Nokia, or Blackberry.

What's more, about about two hot twins performing the Doctor Who theme?

Enjoy.

As a bonus, the twins playing The Walking Dead theme, anyone?