It’s Not All Black and White: Social and Mobile Make the Miles Disappear

Apple’s iPhone 4 only comes in one of two color options; Black and White. Did Apple’s designers just decide for a simple and chic look of sophistication? Or is there more to it than that? Made popular by literary figures, such as Nathaniel Hawthorne, in his infamous novel, “The Scarlet Letter” the contrast between white and black carries more implications than just aesthetics that imply sophistication. Really it’s a contrast between good and evil. Now, I’m not trying to be presumptuous in implying that Apple’s designers really were aiming creating a contrast between good and evil in their iPhone designs, I’m using it as an avenue to discuss the varying views of the public on the impact of some technologies.

Simply put, the youth is constantly berated for being too involved in Social Media. Critics of Social Media have made claims that these online platforms are ruining our social skills, and cause us to lose touch with real face-to-face interactions. But I disagree wholeheartedly. I believe Social Media offers much more than what the critics see. I admit there is a very different social dynamic between online conversations and texting, than an actual phone call or in-person meet up. But they just require minimal adaptations to each social setting.

Rather, my perception on the benefits of Social Media could not be greater. As a recent college graduate, I have found it hard to keep in touch with some of my greatest friends as our careers have taken us on different paths. As a result, I’ve found that some of the people I care about most are beyond reach of constant face-to-face interaction, and phone calls would take up hours of time that I simply don’t have and I know my friends can’t afford. In fact, two of the people I enjoy talking to most are spread out across different states. One is attending grad school in Washington D.C. while the other is doing the same close to Philadelphia, while commuting from New Jersey. But to be without speaking with them would be unbearable!


Now with Facebook, Twitter, and Google Plus’s Video chat, we can watch our favorite TV shows together, and laugh about the latest actors on SVU that we both despise. And it’s almost as if the miles between these long lost friends disappear. And with the amazing advances in mobile technology and the ability to utilize all of my social apps, it’s almost as if my friends are with me wherever I go. And for that reason, it’s no wonder the mobile app market is in such high competition. In the past year alone, mobile app store powerhouses, such as Apple, Android, and Blackberry have grown almost unbelievably by 111%, 544%, and 268% respectively.

This information was provided by an amazing mobile app store infographic done by WebpageFX, a company specializing in internet marketing and SEO packages. Even more so, these app stores are making a killing with reported revenue in 2010 amounted to $5.2 billion. All of which I feel is justified by the fact that more and more individuals are realizing the priceless benefit of staying close with the people they care about.

Patent Wars: Google Vs. Apple

This Guest Post Patent Wars: Google Vs. Apple was submitted by: Thomas Stone. If you would like to Submit a Guest Post please see Submit Guest Post.

Silicon Valley is a war zone.

Over the past month, the drama in Palo Alto is unfolding like a military epic. Technology goliaths are firing lawsuits like canons at each other and the heavy artillery comes in the form of patents.

A patent used to be a way for inventors to license their ideas, and protect those ideas from infringement. If an idea was good enough, a company might buy that patent from the inventor, and develop a product based on it. In the end, the inventor sells an idea and the company gets a product to sell. Unfortunately, this is all a dream world compared to the rugged landscape of patent litigation we have today. Companies are now amassing huge troves of patents without any intention of using them for innovation, but to threaten and strong-arm other companies into paying.

Google made a move that shocked the tech world last week when it spent $12.5 billion (a significant portion of the company’s total profit last year) to acquire Motorola Mobility, or more specifically, Motorola’s patent portfolio. Motorola’s hardware manufacturing may or may not be worth the price depending on whom you ask, but the 17,000 patents owned by the company now become the property of Google.

Things have been tense since Apple surpassed Google as the most valuable brand in the world earlier this year. Google and Apple are not only competing in the mobile arena–there’s all out war being waged between them in the cloud computing arena as well, as both companies gear up to dominate cloud software, online file storage, and cloud hardware.


These days, patents are more important as protection against (and tools for) lawsuits than ownership of original ideas. Tech companies, especially those invested in mobile hardware and software markets, are looking for ways to stay above water as the list of smart phone losers gets longer. One strategy is to sue companies for patent infringement, demanding that an up-front fee is paid in addition to licensing fees for profiting from a product based on another company’s idea.

Google recently became the target of one such lawsuit. A campaign led against Android by a number of companies including Microsoft and Apple, sought to garner licensing fees from Google by purchasing a number of patents from Nortel and Novell. As a defensive measure, Google claims to have purchased Motorola partly to gain control over its thousands of patents, which would help protect the company and its subsidiaries (read: Android) from these suits. It also fills Google’s arsenal with a bevy of ideas with which they can turn around and sue any other company.

These companies are fighting patents with patents in an arms race against each other. Google maintains that they are simply defending themselves against the ravenous legal assaults of Apple and Google, assaults the company thinks are strangling innovation and purchasing patents for ideas in order to leverage them against other companies in the courtroom rather than utilize those ideas to create a new, compelling product.