So the new iPhone 3G is out and there seems to be talk about how much it costs to own. It’s about time too I never understood the first version being released without 3G access - it wasn’t exactly a new technology.

Lets face it the iPhone is mainly a fashion statement, a bit of a status symbol for people to show off. It’s the prettiest phone you can get (although it will be covered in scratches and fingerprints within seconds of leaving the box). You can get other phones that do the same functions but maybe not in such a well rounded package.

The iPhone is a designer item which people are willing to pay a premium for. Whether everyone will be put off this premium phone due to Apple pushing the limits as much as they can with changing interfaces with every new model:

Stef Lewandowski: “I got an iPhone 3G and now wish I hadn’t - it’s slow and glitchy, and I have to replace all of my charging devices including my bedside clock radio because they have subtly changed the interface it uses. “Free”? Sure.”

There are certainly features in the iPhone that are great and will push the entire mobile market forward to provide much more useful mobile devices (not just phones) which certainly isn’t a bad thing.

The mobile phone market is very cut throat and Apple again have carved their own high-end niche which is their to lose rather than others to gain. I’m interested to see a real iPhone contender stepping up and see where that makes new innovations to lead.

I wrote a few weeks ago about an “article” I saw on the BBC that I thought was biased with regard to free software. It was a tirade by Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation essentially attacking proprietary software as the source of all evil.

Well it seems the FSF are at it again and this time I really think they’ve lost the plot.

Apple has popped up on their radar and it seems they are using underhand tactics to attack Apple through their “Genius bars”.

Now although I’m actually pleased in a way that I’m not the only one that doesn’t think Apple is soft and cuddly. I’ve expressed my views in the past that I believe the software and hardware shouldn’t be so locked in. But free software is a choice not a need! Where the hell is my free choice if they are actually going to use what are essentially denial of service attacks?

Hardly the type of action that is going to convince people their cause is one to follow. It’s only going to alienate the very people they want to get on board - the consumers. Be passionate about your cause but try and think through your actions.

What are these people thinking? Numpties.

Free software can be great (this blog uses WordPress) but it’s got to be better than the proprietary competitors if you want it to be used. It’s an open market. Why waste all this money on FSF when it could all be ploughed into developing the next generation of open source products?

Rumours are going around about a possible new Apple product. Essentially a Macbook with a touch screen. Of course there have been tablet PCs for some time however they’ve never really taken off and this takes things a little further.

Apple seems to have the magic touch for opening up markets to the masses - MP3 players were hardly ten a penny before the iPod.

Everything seems to be moving towards this new “touch” interface - Microsoft Surface is another possibility but I’ve never been convinced that this is a mature product. I’ve never felt Microsoft are pushing this as a replacement for the reliable old mouse - hedging their bets just a tad.

I’ll be interested to see what appears on the scene.

Virgin media have been given a slap on the wrist by the Advertising Standards Authority because they overstated broadband speeds in adverts.

I understand when it comes to advertising there has to be small print saying people won’t always receive the top speed mentioned depending on time of day, quality of line, etc. but I’m not sure why it isn’t followed through to fair trading after you sign up.

There is a larger issue here altogether meaning that ISPs are misselling broadband entirely. If I get a 8Mb/sec line I expect to get close to that stated speed at some point in the day. If it never gets above 2Mb/sec surely I should be charged the cost of a 2Mb/sec line? OK there are various factors that effect this especially line quality when it comes to ADSL. However I believe that when you are setting up a new broadband connection the ISP should do a line test and provide you with a cost, a maximum speed and a minimum speed. This way it is totally transparent to the customer and if there are problems they have a point where they can complain they are not receiving an adequate service.

I’ve experienced speeds of 256Kb/sec on a 8Mb/sec connection, only 3% of the speed sold, and been told by BT nothing is wrong. Clearly they were under-performing here but I had no way of complaining as there was no technical fault to speak of. Does this sound right to you?

Yes there are many variable factors when providing broadband but these could be taken into account and the contract amended accordingly.

In addition this also brings up the subject of net neutrality - should broadband providers be able to limit bandwidth according to agreements they have with content providers? No! If I pay for 8Mb/sec I pay for 8Mb/sec to every location on the net I choose! Underinvestment in your infrastructure is not a reason to try and screw over your customers to try avoid needed upgrades.

It’s about time the whole issue of selling broadband should be tightened up.