Over two years ago I posted a write up on all the features I’d love to have on my iPhone. Since the release of iOS4 it seems time to revisit that list and see what has been scratched off my list and what hasn’t

Features I Asked For and Got

• Copy & Paste
• iChat – 3rd parties have filled this role and now with multitasking chat works. There is also Facetime. Though I’m still surprised there isn’t an actual iChat client.
• Video camera – had to buy a new iPhone  to get it but that’s alright as I also got video editing which completely surprised me.
• Horizontal keyboard anywhere
• Search Functionality
• vcard sending
• Save photo you get via email into your photos
• iCal event web sync
• Safari should have a larger cache – sorta solved as the new iPhone has more RAM.

Features that are still missing that I still want

• Airtunes support – I still wanna play my iphone tunes directly to my Airport Express
• wifi sync – at least for contacts and calendar
• Taking a photo for assigning to a contact should also place that picture in your photo roll.
• Email map routes to others. This should include the text list and a link to a google map.
• Network Printing – There are 3rd party apps for this but it should be built in to the OS.
• Clicking on the upper-left edge/wifi icon should bring you to the wifi settings screen – there are several times I’d like to easily turn off wifi so that it doesn’t ask me to join a network.
• One The Go favorites photoset – make this work just like a music on the go playlist (which by the way I love the iphone’s on the go playlist functionality!

Dude total score! Look what I found in a bar! It’s Jason Chen of Gizmodo’s press card!

Normally, I’d not comment on tabloid news on my blog, but the recent iPhone 4 prototype fiasco with Gizmodo is pretty fascinating on a number of levels.

First off I sorta feel for Jason Chen. I don’t know the story completely but I assume he talked this out with his superiors at Gizmodo’s parent company Gawker and they agreed to have him pay $5000 for the iPhone. This here was their fatal and most stupid flaw. He trusted them and now he’s paying the price.

How could they have handled this differently?

1. avoid paying money for the phone and only post the photos they got in an email like Engadget did.
2. pay money for more detailed photos and video of the phone, but never actually take possession of the device itself.

Number 2 is the obvious easy solution, which in hindsight or if they actually had competent legal advice they should have known was the best course of action.

A lot of people are pointing their finger at Jobs/Apple for releasing the hounds. Well they are right to an extent, as it does seem that Apple requested the police look into the matter. But at the same time, it’s hard to feel sorry for Gizmodo who not only fucked up in a rather large way but also behaved like complete full of themselves asshats the entire time.

It remains up in the air what criminal charges they/Chen will get if any, and if they will get hit with a civil suit. From a criminal stand point, they are hiding behind the Shield Law, which it seems is a failed strategy (I usually agree with the EFF but I don’t get their stand on this for this particular case). Maybe just maybe they can rule that the iPhone was materials used for the story, and since covered under the shield law, but that’s a stretch.

Should be interesting how this plays out.

UPDATE (Apr 28th):

EFF seems to be sticking to their story that Chen is covered by the Shield Law. Yet other legal experts seem say otherwise:

“But Francke said shield laws aren’t designed to protect journalists from their own criminal acts. “I don’t think that anyone’s arguing that these protections for unpublished information provide protection against accusations of receiving stolen property,” said Francke.

The difficult question of law will be whether or not Chen’s source of the iPhone can be protected the same way that a source of information is, Francke added.

“The question is: Can he use his own rights as a journalist to suppress evidence that’s sought in the prosecution of someone else?” Francke said. “My rough guess is that he probably can.”

source: Law.com

Franke is right, it’s pretty clear that the police can’t use warrant to reveal the source for the iPhone—though they already know who it is—nor can they use any evidence they find via a warrant against said individual. Now the question becomes can they use the evidence against Chen for the crime he committed?

I’m guessing that Gawker will soon issue an injunction to stop the police from reviewing Chen’s computers, and it will probably be granted. Whether or not the police can review Chen’s computers will ultimately depend on the reading of the following bit of evidence code section 1070:

“[cannot be adjudged in contempt or issued a warrant] …for refusing to disclose any unpublished information obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving or processing of information for communication to the public.”

Does this protect any journalist’s information from warrants for any crime that was committed while in pursuit of a story? Personally I think no, Gawker says yes as does EFF, but it’s a tricky question. And even if the police are granted the ability use the evidence, it becomes a tricky process since they then can’t use any of it against the person who sold the iPhone to Chen.

Should the police instead have issued a subpoena? Probably. They could decide to return Chen’s computers and issue a subpoena. This could then allow them to use any evidence gained from the subpoena against both Chen and the person who sold the iPhone.  Though this would likely drastically limit the amount of evidence they would be able to get.

…yep still interesting

UPDATE (Apr 30th):

Seems that Wired tracked down the iPhone finder/seller one Brian J. Hogan and CNN found his accomplice Sage Robert Wallower who acted as a middle man contacting media companies and attempting to sell it.

According to Wired, “a friend of Hogan’s then offered to call Apple Care on Hogan’s behalf, according to Hogan’s lawyer. That apparently was the extent of Hogan’s efforts to return the phone”

So Brian Hogen, never contacted the bar to see if the owner had asked for it, nor did he contact the Grey Powell who he already knew was the owner of the phone. In fact it seems like he wasn’t about to do anything as his friend called for him. Sounds to me like a guy planning on keeping the phone which is theft. Supposedly Hogen “regrets his mistake” but sounds to me like he left mistake territory a long time ago. According to his attorney he “volunteers to assist his aunt and sister with fundraising for their work to provide medical care to orphans in Kenya,” his attorney says. “Brian is the kind of young man that any parent would be proud to have as their son.” I’m sure his parents will be proud of him when he’s on trial for selling stolen goods.

Looks like his friend Sage Wallower is in for a heap of trouble too. After idiotically blabbed to CNN and he then added, “I need to talk to a lawyer,” Wallower said. “I think I have already said too much.” …ya think?

We’ll see how long it take Gawker to start pointing fingers at Hogen and Wallower, saying that they paid for it in good faith they Hogen tried to contact Apple. Though I doubt that will fly as a defense.

…and the saga continues

Dave Pell has an excellently written, if slightly melodramatic, post on forgetting telephone numbers, My Head is in the Clouds:

“…My head was once filled with bits and pieces of information like phone numbers, to-do lists, and addresses. I’ve ceded that responsibility to technology. Last summer, I forgot my friend Norman’s birthday. We’ve known each other since elementary school.

…Now, after a few years of this, I realize that when I look up from the screen I know almost nothing. And maybe that would be fine if the absent phone numbers and upcoming dates were freeing space for deeper and more introspective thought.”

While the picture he paints is engaging and on the face of it convincing, he needs to get off the hyperbole horse. Seriously, think about it, how many phone numbers, addresses, birthdates, etc. did you use to remember?

Personally, I never had more than 3-5 phone numbers memorized at a time, but then again why would I have to? Pre-cellphone, the only place I’d normally make calls is from home where I had my address book; if I was out and about usually the only number I ever called was home. It’s only since the invention of the cellphone, where every single person we know has a phone number and we call people all the time from anywhere, that we need to have phone numbers with us at all times.

These days the only addresses I remember fully are my work and my home, but this really isn’t any different than before. I still manage to get to places just like I always have without an address, by remembering the street and knowing what their house looks like.

As to birthday’s, well I never had much of a head for dates so I never remembered more than my family’s birthdays and if I was lucky the person I was dating. Pell lamented forgetting his friend Norman’s birthday who he’s known since elementary school. He blames this on the fact that he’s grown used to being reminded of birthdays via facebook/twitter/etc and Norman isn’t as active online. But is this really the reason? When you are a kid, birthdays are huge deals, but when you get older they tend to pass on by. They become less important, with less celebration, and thus less reason to remember them.

Pell speaks of freeing up space like the brain is a computer with a limited hard drive, but this is not how memory works. The fact that we no longer remember phone numbers is not because technology has made our brains lazy—it’s because we don’t physically dial numbers any more. There is no data being off loaded; we are not freeing up storage. It’s just not something we do and without doing there is no memory. If Pell wanted to, he could start remembering phone numbers again by dialing it using the key pad. Just like he could reinforce the memory of Norman’s birthday by planning a birthday party for him next year.

Clued in by Daring Fireball about a recent NYTimes article on the Game changing nature of the iPhone App Store. There are a number of good quotes in the article, but the one Gruber pulled was the one that made me think:

“Our goal is very simple: We want to have the best platform for applications that there has ever been on any product,” notes Mr. Schiller, the marketing executive. “We know we’re not perfect, but we know we’re better than anything else that has been and we want to keep improving it.”

He’s right too. Of course the app store has issues—often of the highly annoying and stupid kind. However, it has succeeded to do something remarkable. In the article, Craig Moffett says “The iPhone will be remembered as the first true handheld computer.” However, he’s missing half the story:

The iPhone app store is amazing not because of all the things it allows a phone to do—just ask any iPhone hater and they’ll name a number of features that it’s missing. What is truly remarkable about the app store is how it’s normalized the process of searching for, finding, purchasing, installing, and even upgrading applications.

In the world of computers, it’s only the geek and the early adopter who even thinks about new software. Whereas, the average user seldom installs any new software. Your normal user will often use what’s already installed or what IT (or their son/daughter) installs for them, and they are also often terrified of upgrading anything. The iPhone app store has changed the all this. This is why the app store is a game changer. Suddenly the audience for shiny new applications isn’t just the computer know-it-all, it’s anyone.

First post from my iPhone. Had to upgrade my wordpress install and convert my old UTW tags to wordpress tags. The UTW was causing a communication error. Well here goes — hitting post — hopefully this doesn’t throw up a new error.