Mooch Report

February 27, 2009

Totally Free

  1. Quicksys RegCleaner 2009 (free today)
  2. 12 SEO Campaign Killers

Good Deals

  1. BatRest Folding iPhone Stand – $4
  2. Sprinkler Hide-A-Key – $6

Telemarketers, Begone!

February 25, 2009

Mooch Report

February 24, 2009

Totally Free

  1. Camera Strap (use podcast name “photography.ca” or “tips from the top floor”)
  2. America’s Army (most realistic FPS ever made EVER)

Free After Rebate

  1. Samsung Original Multi Media Portable Speaker System

Good Deals

  1. Travel Charger + Car Charger Combo For iPhone & iPod – $5
  2. Ultimate 5-in-1 Geek Pen – $10

Verizon iPhone?

February 23, 2009

Looks like Apple might be working on a deal with Verizon. If this is the case, I may very well be able to get one.

verizon-iphone

P.S. Are you a RewardZone member at Best Buy? If so you can get the iPhone for 100 bucks with a 2-year contract, this week only, and only if you are already a RewardZone member.


Cell Phones: Cancer Hazards?

February 20, 2009

I’ve had it with random people who don’t know what they are talking about but love to talk about it anyway (aka rock bands) making noise about cell phones and the “dangers” they pose. Supposedly, cell phones generate radiation that is harmful to your brain when it is held so close to your head.

Sorry, but this isn’t the case. The same frequencies used by cell phones are also used by wireless devices that are far more common: televisions, radios, and wifi-enabled computers. Cordless phones and even baby monitors are also using the same type of “dangerous radiation” that cell phones use to transmit data. You can’t see it, smell it, touch it, taste it, or hear it, but hundreds of thousands of radio waves for these devices are zinging past your head every second. It really doesn’t matter if you have a cell phone.

P.S. For the record, this also applies to the rumor that keeping a cell phone in your front pants pocket will make a man impotent. Again, the same type of radiation being emitted by that cell phone is being emitted much stronger by TV and radio towers.


There’s an App For That! Well, There Was…

February 19, 2009

Countless iPhone apps have been removed from the App Store by Apple, many for unknown reasons. From apps that were just dumb (IAmRich) to potantially offensive apps (South Park player) to genuinely useful apps (Box Office), it seems nearly impossible to predict what Apple may or may not deem to be acceptable when it comes to third-party applications.

The South Park application has been turned away from the app store twice so far, for unknown reasons.

The South Park application has been turned away from the app store twice so far, for unknown reasons.

What if the same agreement that allows Apple to dump apps from the iPhone app store was used by Apple’s competitors, like Microsoft? Can you imagine buying some software, installing it on your PC, and then one day it is just… gone? No explanation, no refund, just gone. There would be absolute uproar. So why isn’t this the case with the iPhone?

Now I can understand why Apple would want to enforce strict policies on the content available for the iPhone. After all, this is a company that has made its fortune by purposely not relying on third parties to develop for its products. Practically every add-on (that is widely used) to any Apple product was, in fact, made by Apple. Rather than letting (and encouraging) any company to develop content the way that Microsoft has, Apple prefers to have maximum control so as to guarantee compatibility and stability.

The problem is: Apple is removing applications based on seemingly arbitrary and nonsensical policies that are impossible to figure out or predict. You literally cannot find out what is or isn’t acceptable, even if you are an app developer.

So where does Apple draw the line? Will the iPhone start to block websites with adult content? What about blocking music with explicit content? What about videos or pictures containing nudity? At what point does Apple say, “This is up to the user, let’s leave it alone”?

If I had an iPhone, I would like to have that Box Office app. I’d also like the South Park app. Why should Apple decide that South Park is not appropriate for me? That is a decision I should be making, and by downloading an app, I am making that decision. Besides, Apple has some pretty obvious double-standards when it comes to what is offensive. There are anywhere between 75 and 100 apps in the app store that simulate farts, for example.

South Park isn't acceptable, but a program that simulates farting is? No understandey...

South Park isn't acceptable, but a program that simulates farting is? No understandey...

This is nothing less than censorship, and it should be recognized as such. Want to install whatever app you want, without the all-powerful Apple telling you what to do? There’s an app for that! Actually, Apple just removed it. Sorry.