Created with Love

It seems to me that so many products out there are built to make a buck and often don't show the creating company's passion.

I love technology, though I'm certainly not an early adopter. When I first saw an Ipad at Future Shop I was in awe. The feel and look were amazing. The screen is more reactive than I realized it would be. I came within a hair's breadth of buying my first Apple product.

But then I started to really look at the features that Apple DIDN'T include in the IPad. No USB slots. No camera. No Flash. No multitasking. Can't be used in direct sunlight. No ability to expand the memory.

I'm not knocking the Ipad. It's still an amazing product and I applaud Apple for coming out with the first and flashiest tablet on the market. They have an amazing fan base and some solid products on the market. My daughter loves her Ipod Touch. I honestly don't design on a Mac because I learned on a PC and have never felt the need to learn the new system.

I do, however, wonder if it was the best product for their customers or if it was the best product for their pocketbooks. Did they really believe that Ipad users didn't want a camera. Is their feud with Adobe really important enough to keep people from playing their flash games? And what's the reason for not having a USB port? I see an amazing product that should have been so much better. I'm sure we'll be seeing an Ipod II in the coming months that will fix some of the problems the IPad has, but shouldn't they have made and sold a product that didn't have such big features missing? Don't they owe it to their customers - to the early adopters who help drive sales of a new product - to release a product that has all the bells and whistles?

I have no idea what Apple was thinking. Maybe they put out a product that they thought was perfect.

I won't buy it as it stands because there are so many things I would like to be able to do all the things I'd like to be able to do with a $800 piece of technology.

I started looking at the other tablets coming out in the next year. Three really stand out to me as being able to do what I need them to do:

RIM's Playbook looks amazing. It's powerful, supports flash and I don't have to buy another data plan because I can tether it to my Black Berry. It's backed by an excellent company that I know I can trust to put out a great product.

Dell's Duo is exciting because it gives me what I always worry about not having with a tablet - a key board. It also boasts a pretty powerful processor since it's really just a net book with a touchable screen. I like the idea of having a basic computer that I can also use as a tablet, but I worry about size and durability.

The one company that I will probably buy from, however, isn't even based in North America. Notion Ink, a new company out of India, will be getting my money (so far) with their new Adam. They strongly believe that they are putting out the best product. It also will be one of the most inexpensive products in the market. If it's even half as good as it looks, the Adam will still stand toe to toe with the biggest companies trying to bring a tablet to the market. If it is as good as they want it to be, it will be the best product out there.

But it's not just the features that are intriguing me, though they are looking pretty amazing. I have been reading the Notion Ink blog and what I see isn't just a drive to put out a successful product, but instead I see a drive to be the best in the world at what they do. I see passion. I see genuine belief in excellence.

When you strive to be the best instead of striving to be the biggest or the richest, you create more than just a good product - you create a good brand. Branding is so important for a company, especially when the company can begin building their brand before the product has even been released.

Rohan Shravan, Notion Ink's CEO, keeps interested parties informed with a weekly blog, but he also stays on top of the comments from the blog and also other blogs and news stories. He seems always willing to jump in and answer any questions he can, though at 1000 comments on a blog post only days after it's been posted means that he can't talk to everyone.

One of the things that sold the company and the product to me was the marking on the back. On the back of every Adam will be the words 'Created with Love by Notion Ink.' Corny and cheesy? Yeah, probably, but it also hints at an underling value system at Notion Ink. They do love what they do and are striving for something more than just a product; this isn't going to be just a plain old tablet to watch movies on. This will be something special.

The jury is still out on the Adam. The release date is creeping slowly forward, and who can honestly say what the product will be like. Being able to build a brand without a product only works if you can back up that branding with something great. The company has to be true to that brand from the moment the product hits the shelves.

I don't know Mr Shravan, so I can't begin to say if he's honest and as excited about the product as he seems. What I do know, however, is that if Notion Ink and it's young CEO are as honest as they seem, I can't imagine the product being anything less than stellar. And that's enough to sell me.


Notion Ink website
Rohan Shravan's Notion Ink Blog

The Internet is Forever - Part 2

A couple weeks ago I posted the story about a government agency saying it is illegal to fire someone for something they say on Facebook. I disagreed with that idea then, and still do, but as I reread the post, I'm seeing that I missed the original point I was going for. While I still stand behind the point I made, it is not quite the idea I was trying to communicate.

Half of my readers thought I was an idiot, but I think the problem he had with it was more because I didn't make my original point particularly clear.

It is not really about whether it is fair or right or just that someone is fired for comments they make online. I can have my opinions and I'm sure others have theirs. Opinions are like... Well, I won't get into what opinions are like save to say that everyone has them.

The fact is that people loose their jobs all the time because of things they say. Sometimes they say something at work that is overheard, or at a restaurant where they didn't know their boss was at the table behind them or over the internet.

The question isn't even about whether someone should have a reasonable expectation of privacy for things they say on the internet.

The issue is more about the fact that things you choose to say are have a much more lasting impact on your life than ever before. The girl I wrote about before will see her life effected by the comments she wrote. Future employers can, and will, see these stories about her before they will decide to hire her.

Maybe she is well within her rights to say and write anything she wants. Maybe it would be illegal to fire her for those comments. Maybe there is nothing legally wrong with it. I'll concede every one of those facts, because that isn't the point.

Someone did see it and there were consequences because of what she wrote. One of those consequences was immediate - She was fired. Other consequences may come about later.

And in the end, the person most at fault isn't her boss. It's her. She chose to make the comments. She chose to put them online.

Okay, so where does the internet come in? It is all about the numbers. More people than ever can interact together than ever before. I can talk to people in Europe, Asia or even Antarctica with only a few keystrokes. I can do it from my office, my vehicle or even while on an Airplane. When I post something on my blog, literally millions of people can read it (not that they do - but I do appreciate my readers. You both rock, btw). Never before could we simply get online and tell our favorite actor that we like them. Heck, never before could we tell them anything directly. In the past our letters would have gone to an agent or agency for review before it eventually (maybe) made it to our favorite actor. Now? I simply log into twitter and I get to directly communicate. Heck, I just went and saw a picture of Levar Burton's Thanksgiving Turkey - that's pretty personal access. Imagine that even a couple years ago.

More importantly, nothing on the internet is really private. How many sex tapes have leaked? How many times have comments that were meant to be private ended up on the front page of a newspaper. Even when we think that something we say to a closed group is private, it's not. When I post something on Facebook, not only can all my friends read it, all the friends of my friends who comment get to read it as well.

Okay, so now that I've tried to clarify my earlier point I'm sure you are wondering why I've brought it all back up. My original post was more about the power of the internet and why we have to be more guarded about what we choose to say than ever before.

5 years ago YouTube didn't exist. It's extremely possible that if it was 2005 Dr. Stephen Duckett would still have a job.

Don't know the story? Look it up - let the power of the internet work for you. YouTube would be a great place to start. Not that interested? Fine.

Dr Stephen Duckett, the CEO of Alberta Health Services recently chose to not respond to a couple reporters by saying that he was eating a cookie and couldn't answer them. Due to his flippant attitude toward the media and his unprofessional conduct he was released from his position. Less PC - he was fired. Maybe it's not exactly that simple - there were rumblings that he might have been released anyways- but this was the perfect excuse.

But what if we had no YouTube? No internet? No way to make it possible for hundreds of thousands of people to view the episode. No way for hundreds of thousands of people to comment on the episode. Maybe he would have sneaked past the media with a slap on the wrist. As it stands, anyone can easily find and watch a mashup of Dr Duckett and Cookie Monster happily sing about their love of cookies.

I can't say with 100% certainty that he would have kept his job in a pre-YouTube world, but I can say that the YouTube videos are what hurt him the most. That's the power of nearly unlimited viewers. Who, other than Albertans, really cares about the state of the Albertan Emergency room wait times? But how many non-Albertans have access to those videos?

Would Dr Duckett have said what he did if he had known that the comments would have ended up all over the internet? Of course not, but he should have known better. People have adapted to the ability to post information on the internet instantly. I'm currently typing this while my wife tries on jeans at the mall. My daughter was showing me pictures that a friend posted on the internet. We can share pictures, stories and videos instantly with millions of people, but we, as a society, haven't yet learned that what we say on the internet can have much more lasting and larger impact than what we say because it reaches more people and is more permanent. Google saves websites. Facebook posts stay around for what amounts to forever, you can look up news articles from a decade ago and you can still watch the first YouTube video ever posted, Me At the Zoo, almost six years ago.

I'm going to give you one more example. I have a half dozen web comics I enjoy. The artist and writer of one of them is on Twitter and I follow him. He posts whatever is on his mind and had no problems being insulting or rude to other people on Twitter and chooses to post derogatory comments about religion and other people's beliefs. On a free speech level, I can't say there is anything wrong with what he posts. He's entitled to say pretty much anything he wants, but that doesn't mean I have to like what he says. What he chooses to say is his choice, but he should remember that he is running a business. He sells t-shirts and books and other memorabilia from his comic. He can say whatever he wants, but I get to decide if I want to send him my money for his products. Up until I started following him on Twitter, I had every intention of buying a couple items from him, I've purchased many books from a different webcomic company, so I am certainly in his demographic and a buyer. I'll still enjoy his comic and read daily, but I'll choose not to purchase his items because I don't like what he writes on his Twitter account. I'm not spying on him - his Twitter name is displayed on his webpage. He's purposefully attached his Twitter account to his business, but when he posts he chooses to ignore the fact that potential customers will be reading and making opinions on him and his business. Maybe he makes plenty of money and doesn't need my purchases, and that's fine, but the point I'm trying to make is that he has lost business because of things he chooses to post. There are repercussions to his actions. Maybe not loosing a job or finding himself being made fun of on You Tube, but he will make a little less money.

There is a whole range of effects that come from our choices. The internet can greatly increase the severity of these effects. The effects aren't always directly noticeable and certainly don't have to be negative (Justin Bieber was discovered because of You Tube) and don't always effect just the person who makes the post or is on the video (again - Justin Bieber learned this when posting a fan's phone number on Twitter).

Regardless of anything else, remember that what we choose to do or say, both on and off line, can have lasting effects. Post whatever you want on Facebook, twitter or YouTube, but know that when you hit that publish or share button you are entering that item into a public record of your life. Be aware of the public side of the internet. Know that you aren't always in control of who reads the information you choose to put out there. And most important of all - remember that it's your choice to make the comments.

Diamonds The Internet is Forever

Apparently, the National Labor Relations Board (USA, not Canada – I have no idea if Canada has an equivalent) has declared that firing a person due to comments they made on Facebook is an illegal act. Specifically, they determined that conversations with fellow employees regarding work situations and pay is protected and therefore posting comments on Facebook that are of a work-related nature that may be read and commented on by other employees is protected as well. To quote the New York Times who quoted the NLRB’s general counsel:

Lafe Solomon, the board’s acting general counsel, said, “This is a fairly straightforward case under the National Labor Relations Act — whether it takes place on Facebook or at the water cooler, it was employees talking jointly about working conditions, in this case about their supervisor, and they have a right to do that.”

There is an important piece of information that Mr. Solomon has missed. When you put something on the internet, it’s never between you and other employees, but instead is potentially with every single person who is currently using or may eventually use the internet. It's naive to believe anything else.

Think about that for a moment. According to Internet World Stats there are nearly 2 billion people using the internet. That’s a potential audience of 2 billion people. Now, I know that 2 billion people will not go look at a Facebook page where someone says bad things about their boss. What I am saying is that if 2 billion people wanted to see it, they could. Kinda makes the 2-3 people around the water cooler seem insignificant, doesn’t it? And while many times facebook statuses (statusi) are for friends only, do we really need to talk about the security of a site like facebook?

Without having to go as far as 2 billion, let’s just talk about the fact that the New York Times is running a story on the situation. I- and you, since you’re reading this- now know that one Dawnmarie Souza, who worked for American Medical Response of Connecticut made disparaging remarks about her boss, including referring to him as a psychiatric patient. I’m not one of Ms Souza’s friends on facebook, but I now know the basics of what happened. More importantly, I don’t have all the facts, but that doesn’t stop me from making an opinion regarding Ms Souza or her former employers.

It's not just the 2 billion people currently using the internet. I said everyone who has or may eventually use the internet. Five times as many people are using the new as just 10 years ago. How many people will be online in the next ten years? How about ten years after that?

If I’m standing on a hill with three of my co-workers and start shouting about how I hate my boss and that he’s an awful person and my boss is walking past, do you think I’m going to keep my job? Probably not, but this example is lacking. Even if we covered that hill with people, my message can only go so far and unless someone is videotaping (not unlikely in this time period) my yell and posting it onto the internet, I’m only likely to reach a couple hundred people and it will only last as long as I choose to scream. Afterwards, I might even feel bad and wish I hadn’t done it, but that’s okay because it was only a one-time thing.

We don’t have any of those considerations when we post on the internet. Like diamonds, the internet is forever. Remember the giant pink bunny that a bunch of artists built that can be seen from space? No? Well, go look it up – it was made 5 years ago. How about the Taco Bell commercials with the Chihuahua? They are there too. It’s all here – and most of it in full color and often accompanied by video.

This doesn’t even have to be about a specific instance or a specific social media site. Everything you do, say or post is saved forever. Don’t think that just because a government organization says that the internet is an extension of our freedom of speech we can say what we want. I’ll leave you with one last thought about it. The government may come back and say that American Medical Response of Connecticut was wrong in firing Ms Souza. They may make them pay her restitution. They could, though unlikely, demand that they give her job back to her. No matter what may happen, Ms Souza will eventually have to find a new job. What’s that potential employer going to find when he looks up her name on the internet?

Check out where I originally found the story - Mashable.com is a great resource for all things Social Media.