Fringe gets weird(er): will the real Olivia please come home?

In its third season, Fringe has gotten even stranger. The season premiere last week (stop reading now if you haven’t seen last week’s episode yet) didn’t contain any monsters or any strange paranormal events for Team Fringe to investigate; in fact most of the main characters played reduced (or altered) roles in the season premiere as it took place almost entirely in the alternate universe. The real Olivia (the one we know) is still trapped over there, and evil Walter-nate (the one we hate) is trying to brainwash her into thinking that she is the alternate Olivia, for reasons that are not entirely clear, even to some of the other alternate-reality characters. Most of the episode centered around (our) desperate Olivia running around New York City in a hijacked taxi cab, trying to figure out either how to get home or get help or just get away, all the while fighting off the implanted memories of the other Olivia.

Mostly because most of the premiere took place in the alternate universe, little is resolved as far as what’s going on with the characters from our universe. At the end it’s revealed that not only has the alternate Olivia successfully infiltrated our universe, she appears to be picking up with Peter where he and the real Olivia had left off in the previous season finale.

So the ramifications for season three now stack up on two levels. First, can the real Olivia get home and successfully oust the alternate one? And secondly, will Olivia and Peter ever be the same, now that Peter mistakenly thinks he’s pursuing a relationship with her, but is instead unwittingly advancing things with the other Olivia?

Fringe is in some bold territory here. One has to wonder whether the entire third season (or at least the early portions thereof) are going to continue to center around the trapped Olivia / fake Olivia story, or whether things are going to magically steer back toward the status quo within an episode or two and return to the standard monster of the week formula. Almost lost in all the chaos of the alternate universe plot is that Peter, who’s from the alternate universe to begin with, is now in a relationship with the Olivia from the alternate universe – his original universe – and yet he doesn’t know it.

Here’s a guess, and it’s just a guess, not based on any kind of inside information, of which I have none: Evil Walter is trying to convince our Olivia that she’s the other Olivia so he can send her back to her own universe convinced that she’s the other Olivia, with orders to pretend that she’s our Olivia – in other words, pretending to be herself without realizing she is herself. This is the only way evil Walter can bring his Olivia back to his universe, where he probably figures he needs her in the long term for strategic reasons. That would open the door for Peter to figure it out, and for our Walter to come up with some way of deprogramming her into realizing who she really is. But that’s all just idle speculation. Even though Fringe has long been about testing just what you’re willing to accept as reality, the show has now kicked the perceptual door open so widely (in such a manner that’s every bit as disjointing as it is perfectly logical and believable) that there’s no way of knowing what comes next.

So what do you think will happen tonight on Fringe’s episode two of season three? Get your guesses in now, in the comments below, before it airs tonight and you’re too late to take bragging rights for having guessed correctly. No actual (rumor-based or insider-based) spoilers, please.

Terrence Howard absence from Law & Order Los Angeles premiere explained

The premiere of Law and Order: Los Angeles last night included many of the things you’d expected it would (and feared it might): a plot ripped straight from the Hollywood gossip sites instead of from the legitimate headlines that the original series used to poach, a Lindsay Lohan lookalike, a visit to the set of a reality television show, and even an attempt to work one of those gossip sites into the plot. But it was still a solid show, even though a few things were missing: the original theme music wasn’t there, nor were many of the other minor elements that gave previous Law & Order series the feel of being a Law & Order series. But one more noticeable thing was also missing: any trace of series star Terrence Howard.

Wait, what?

In fact, his absence from the series premiere was enough of a surprise to viewers that while the premiere was airing, “Terrence Howard” (or knowing Twitter users’ penchant for misspelling the names of famous people, It might have been “Terrance Howard” – we can’t recall) was a more popular trending topic on Twitter and “Law&Order” – leading us to do a bit of digging as to what just happened. According to wikipedia (and they’re never wrong except possibly on days that end with a “y”), Alfred Molina and Terrence Howard plan to alternate episodes, with each actor’s deputy district attorney character taking the courtroom reins every other time. That would explain why Molina appeared in the premiere and Howard was AWOL. As with all things, we’ll see what happens with next week’s episode. But if the show does plan to alternate the two actors, it’s surprising that NBC didn’t make more of an attempt to explain that to viewers up front. As it stands, many who tuned in last night have likely assumed that Howard is simply not a part of the new show after all.

Or, as Twitter user @RandomMaccess quipped about Howard, who lost his Iron Man role to fellow actor Don Cheadle in Iron Man 2, “Maybe he thought he’d been replaced by Don Cheadle and didn’t bother showing up.”

Seven things a Verizon iPhone can do that an AT&T iPhone can’t

Why do you need a Verizon iPhone, when the iPhone has already been available all across the United States via AT&T since 2007? Here are the top things you could do with a Verizon iPhone that you can’t do with an AT&T iPhone:

1. Make a phone call if you’re in an area where Verizon gets a signal and AT&T doesn’t.

2. Avoid the ignominy of having to publicly admit that you’re an AT&T customer.

3. Pretend that your carrier is actually the 1990′s band Vertical Horizon.

4. Become one of those Verizon users who love to claim that AT&T iPhone users have dropped calls all the time, even though you’ve never seen any evidence of it.

5. Switch to Verizon, realize it sucks nearly as much as AT&T, and then begin a multi-year campaign to try to force Steve Jobs to bring the iPhone to Sprint or T-Mobile instead.

6. Brag about how your carrier doesn’t have an ampersand in its name.

7. Make a phone call if you’re in an area where AT&T gets a signal and Verizon doesn’t – no wait, that’s something they can do and you can’t.

Law & Order Los Angeles: they should have called it “Law & Order TMZ” (Terrance Howard, where were you?)

As much as New York City itself was a character in the original Law & Order series, tonight’s debut of the new Law & Order: Los Angeles attempts to do the same with its west coast locale – primarily by mentioning it as many times as possible. Perhaps because most television shows are filmed in Los Angeles (whether they’re “set” there or not), thus far LO:LA has felt a lot like any other crime and punishment drama. So maybe the writers were trying to compensate for that fact by making the story line of the pilot so specifically identified with not just Hollywood (the wacky, grungy neighborhood I’ve spent three years living in) but Hollywood (the version that mostly only exists on television), as it vaguely mirrors the real-life headline from a little while ago when a gang of thieves was hitting the homes of Hollywood stars while they were out partying. And before the episode was half over, Perez Hilton and TMZ had both been name-checked (the latter actually turned out to be a source). Come to think of it, could the troubled actress with the manipulating mother have looked any more like Lindsay Lohan?

Aside from a plot that screams “Hey look, we’re in Hollywood!” every other minute, Law and Order: Los Angeles does show potential. Skeet Ulrich hasn’t really gotten a chance to flex yet, but his bald mustachioed partner could prove to be just as interesting of a character. The district attorneys played by Alfred Molina and Regina Hall show potential as well, despite not a huge amount of screen time. Law & Order series have always been based more around the procedure than the characters, with their development happening at a very slow drip over time. The real question is this: like any starstruck Hollywood newcomer, can Law & Order: Los Angeles stop patting itself on the back for having moved to Hollywood long enough to come up with some plots that don’t read like they’ve been ripped from TMZ?

By the way, where was Terrance Howard tonight? Isn’t he supposed to be one of the stars of the series? His face appeared in a future promo for a split second, but unless I blinked and missed it, he literally didn’t appear on the screen the entire episode. If they’re waiting until episode two to roll him out, I must say that withholding one of the advertised stars of the series until the second episode is an interesting strategy for trying to get people to tune back in for the second episode.

Greg Giraldo dead of Rx drugs: joins Brittany Murphy, Michael Jackson, too many others

Greg Giraldo is dead today after overdosing on prescription drugs yesterday, says TMZ. The standup comedian was a judge on the comedy reality television series Last Comic Standing. It’s been stressed that his death was an accidental one and not the result of an intentional overdose or suicide attempt.

Giraldo’s death (he was forty-four) at the hands of legal medications adds his name to an unfortunate yet growing list of celebrities (and surely non-celebrities as well) who have recently passed away in a similar manner, including actress Brittany Murphy earlier this year. The late Michael Jackson also died as a result of legal drug overdose, although in his case the drugs being administered by his doctor may not have been dispensed in a legal manner (a whole other issue).

Last night I noticed a television ad for a legal drug whose makers disclaimed that “the exact way” in which the drug works is unknown. I mused at the time that I bet heroin was being marketed in a similar manner a hundred years ago, back when it was both legal and considered beneficial.

I’m not about to say we should start banning drugs that work just because there are risks involved. I’d likely be dead myself by now if not for the fact that I’ve been taking a particular stomach medication (formerly prescription-only, now available OTC) on a daily basis for the past fifteen years. I’ve been taking the drug for nearly as long as it’s existed, and I knew all along that there would be side effects which weren’t discovered until later – and that’s turned out to be exactly the case. But on the other hand, it’s kept me alive and surgery-free all these years, so these things are always a trade-off.

I wouldn’t want to speculate about Greg Giraldo’s death until the specifics and details become known: what drug? How risky was it? Was he taking more than prescribed? Was his doctor negligent in prescribing it? Was the FDA negligent for approving it?

But those are all questions for another day. Right now all I can say is that Greg Giraldo was a funny guy – and one way or the other, he should still be with us. Rest in peace.

Top four reasons Verizon needs the iPhone (and the iPhone needs Verizon)

Why Verizon needs the iPhone:

1. Because the iPhone is still the only smartphone that’s truly suitable for non-geek consumers (sorry Verizon, but the Droid doesn’t count and you know it).

2. Because whatever the public thinks of the current quality of the Verizon and AT&T networks, the 4G era will level that playing field (at least in terms of perception), giving those Verizon customers who want an iPhone one less reason not to switch to AT&T.

3. Because whether AT&T realizes it or not, the fact that AT&T exclusively has the iPhone is the thing that the public perceives about AT&T the most positively (cynics would argue it’s the only thing the public perceives positively about AT&T), and a Verizon iPhone would wipe out the one bragging point for Verizon’s primary competitor.

4. Because there are more people searching the internet for “Verizon iPhone” than for any other Verizon related term, meaning that large quantities of current Verizon customers want an iPhone, and the continued lack thereof will continue to cost Verizon customers.

Why the iPhone needs Verizon:

1. Because those Verizon customers who want an iPhone but have been sitting on their hands for three years aren’t all going to switch over to AT&T just because Apple wishes they would.

2. Because the Verizon Droid is selling well, even though it’s no iPhone.

3. Because there are seemingly more people talking about an iPhone model that doesn’t exist (the “Verizon iPhone”) than any iPhone models that do currently exist.

4. Because when you can make a move that could effectively double your product’s marketshare almost instantaneously without any substantial downside, you do it.

Britney Spears back in the headlines for the right, Glee-ful reasons

It’s nice to see Britney Spears making headlines for the right reasons. As she prepares to take over Glee tonight in her much-anticipated guest appearance on the show, the pop superstar is finally seeing her name being spoken frantically for something that actually has to do with her talents, rather than sideshow stuff.

Earlier this year, Britney (briefly) became the most-follower Twitter user when she rested the title away from Ashton Kutcher, but it quickly became apparent that the milestone had more to do with her fans than anything Spears was doing right herself, as she failed to even acknowledge the milestone on her Twitter account, which sees as many (clearly identified) tweets from her manager as it does from Britney herself. And almost as soon as she took the Twitter crown, she lost it to Lady GaGa.

Back up further, and Britney’s previous headlines have been centered around the time she shaved her head, the time she tried to launch a comeback at an awards show but wasn’t up to snuff, questions about her parenting skills, her divorce, and so on. In fact one has to peer so far back into her history to find a time when she was making headlines for talent-related reasons, it’s remarkable that she still has the staying power that she does. But don’t tell that to the Glee folks, who are undoubtedly even more gleeful than usual over the fact that Britney has graced them with her presence.

A one-off appearance (or will there be an encore?) on a TV series is a nice start, but if Britney Spears really wants to get her name back into the headlines in an even bigger, more meaningful manner, she’ll go ahead and release a full album of new music. If her appearance on Glee is enough to get her name atop Twitter’s trending topics list (and it is), then just imagine what kind of a spectacle it’ll be if and when she finally does release a new album.

Crystal Bowersox to marry “best friend for years” Brian Walker

Crystal Bowersox is getting married next month to fellow musician Brian Walker, according to reports. Bowersox used her Twitter page to thank her fans for all the congratulations that they’ve been offering her since the news broke, and commented that she finds it “hilarious that people think brian and I just met. He’s been a best friend for years.” She further explained that she and Walker have “both always had pretty bad timing, but it finally worked out.”

For his part, Walker who just joined Twitter two days ago at @BrianWalkerLive, quipped “Brian Walker-Man of mystery, mwahahaha……who am I????”

Crystal Bowersox was a frontrunner and fan favorite on American Idol last season but surprisingly finished second to fellow contestant Lee DeWyze. In addition to getting engaged to Walker, Bowersox is also in the midst of recording her debut album, which she’s also been documenting via Twitter.

The Event, episode two: this time it might make sense.

As the second episode of the new NBC series The Event airs tonight, viewers who watched the pilot last week might still be suffering from whiplash. The pilot felt less like the first episode of a new TV series and less like a series of random clips pasted together from all different (and non-consecutive) periods of time within the show’s own timeline. There was a mysterious disappearance of a person – and then the same thing happened to an entire airplane. The U.S. President is a character, but it’s not clear why. There’s a prisoner who’s referred to as a “leader” but there are no real clues about her back story of any kind.

Last week that same character ended the premiere episode of The Event by telling the President, “I haven’t told you everything.”

This week, hopefully viewers will get told a little more about “the event” the show is based around, or even what the series “The Event” might be based around, than they were last time around.

Runner Runner talks debut album, poker, Letterman and more

Collaborating in 2008, the members of Runner Runner left behind (at least temporarily) their old bands. The band, consisting of singer Ryan Ogren, guitarists Peter Munters and Nick Bailey, bassist Jon Berry, and drummer James Ulrich, have been taking the U.S. by storm with their first hit single, “So Obvious,” and they have no plans of slowing down any time soon. I talked with Peter about where Runner Runner came from and where they’re headed soon.

Runner Runner is not only a band, but a poker term. What made you want to use this specific expression as the name of your band?

The term runner runner refers to a perfect underdog victory in a hand of poker.   When the two perfect cards arrive in order to beat an opponent who would otherwise have had the upper hand, the stars align and you go runner runner for the win.   We realize we need a lot of luck and a lot of passion to make it in the music game today, and we hope that fate will deal us a perfect hand as we proceed.  There are so many talented people trying to leave there mark on the music scene today; we realize that every day and are honored to put our dreams on the line and onstage.

Being the coagulation of the elements of three different bands, what made you all want to leave your own bands and start working together?

Runner Runner wasn’t necessarily formed from the desire to leave our several bands.   Essentially we are the super-friends who could not help but go on when other members of our bands chose to move on. In music, you have to either want it or go your own way.   We have the most fun in the world doing what we love, but it’s not difficult to see that after a while, this life is not for everybody. The fire in our hearts kept burning after songs and performance and the mission we feel we follow to find and make amazing music. That is the driving spirit behind Runner Runner.

Do you think that you will ever go back to the bands you were in previously?

A lot of the people we encounter on tour ask for another Over It [one of their bands previous to this one] record, and I think this could happen very easily.  In fact, it has already been written.  For now, however, Runner Runner is certainly a priority.  We want our songs to reach a massive, diverse audience.   If anything, years from now, hopefully the hard work we invest in this band pays off and allows us to do a plethora of other projects in the music world.   One chapter leads to another and we certainly want them all to survive.

Coming from such a diverse punk background, how did you come up with Runner Runner’s sound? How would you classify it?

The sound of Runner Runner is a throwback and tribute to the pop music that first drew us into the world of huge songs and radio when we were kids. Before we were “punk” and romanticized underground music that we still and always will adore, it was the power pop of the 70s, 80s and 90s which totally bewitched us all individually.  

So, we like to always nod at history, paying tribute to icons like Elvis Costello, Cheap Trick and the Cars, while always looking ahead and staying current. We believe that songs are either great or not songs at all, and they may sound a lot of different ways. Hopefully our fans agree that somewhere between Lady Gaga, Green Day, the Knack and Kiss, we can make a place to belong.

As a band, what do your fans mean to you?

As a band, our fans absolutely mean the world to us. What other reason do we have for being out here on the road, living our dreams?   Our priority at shows and on the internet is to involve our fans in this family that is palpably expanding every day.  No one is insignificant, and we want to know everyone on a first name basis. We are in this thing together.  Runner Runner is our band, but we belong to our fans!

Where has been your favorite place to play and why?

Personally, of the places we have visited so far, it is impossible to choose a favorite.  The first show we played, which blew my mind and really felt like some crazy dream, was the Punkspring festival in Tokyo in 2009.  Japan is so beautiful and fascinating. We played for roughly six thousand Japanese people and they made us feel so welcome and inspired.    I have no idea how they know the lyrics to “So Obvious”, but they did and that show certainly changed our lives forever.

How do you feel about being known as the first group signed to David Letterman’s record label, C.E. Music?

We feel uniquely privileged and proud to have the support that we do from Clear Entertainment, Capitol Records and MRV records. We have never before experienced a network of support or resources that is at once so powerful and vital, and so like a family. We are finding out every day that these amazing people are willing to work as hard as we do or harder to launch this band as far as we can possibly go. Our management and label arrangement is a massive blessing. We are also so excited to finally meet Mr. Letterman Monday, September 27th, when we appear on The Late Show.

Your producer, Dave Darling, has worked with a rather diverse range of acts, from the Stray Cats to Brian Setzer.  Did this uniqueness have any impact on your recordings?

I have heard people call Dave “the consummate producer” for our record, and I believe it is true. Not only does Dave have a uniquely gifted and soulful ear for sounds and song, but he was indispensably confident in the studio, always knowing where to turn and how to evoke every moment the most effectively. He also shreds on guitar.  He played on the soundtrack to Top Gun! We could not have made our record without his help and mentorship and he will always be an honorary member of Runner Runner.

What inspires you all to continue writing and playing your music?

Life is our inspiration for every song and every performance. Whether we are in or out of love, lonesome or ecstatic, our music is our salvation. It is a tremendous gift to see the truth of our lives, and jump off from that point in songs, and watch them come to life. Nothing compares to hearing people sing along to these songs at a show, and so the circle continues.

You were on tour with Secondhand Serenade this past summer. How did that go for you guys?

The tour with Secondhand Serenade was fabulous.  We all love John and the guys, and we want to thank them for sharing the road and their charming fans with us. Their love and companionship won’t soon be forgotten.

Is there any act that you’ve toured with that has taught you something valuable about music or life in general?

That is a great question! I feel like we learn something new from every artist and band with whom we share the stage. Once upon a time, Joel Madden from Good Charlotte told us “to always fight the good fight” when it comes to the band.  I think he was saying, stick together in a way. The idea is to know your family so that when things get wild and forces pull the band in a thousand directions, true friends are able to cling to one another and keep everyone afloat together. A great producer and friend of the band also told us to “never be ashamed of something you like,” which, in my estimation is some of the greatest wisdom I know.    

You recorded an EP of cover songs in 2009. What made you want to do this before putting out an original album?

Our cover song recordings began as a supplement to a release we did in Japan and evolved into a massive obsession. We love learning and developing our own recording skills and find it hard to step away from the studio whenever it is near.  Ultimately, I think our covers show that we are unashamed of loving great pop music.  Hopefully we do it the smallest bit of justice with our interpretations of great, timeless songs!

What is the game plan for Runner Runner for the rest of the year?

Runner Runner will be on tour through the end of the year, and with a little bit of luck, forever. Come and meet us and rock out with us at a show. Find us online and let us know how your day is going.  We look forward to hearing from you soon and want you to know that your support is the only reason we get to continue on this fantastic adventure.  Thank you for letting us have the time of our lives. Let’s party!

interview by Keri Franz

RunnerRunnerMusic.com • iTunes • Twitter • Facebook

ESPN makes fun of iPhone 4 shortage

Apple’s ongoing iPhone 4 supply shortage has now become fodder for more than just tech journalists. Today’s episode of the sports commentary show “Around The Horn” on ESPN, host Tony Reali opened the show by quipping “Welcome to the Apple Store, we’re out of the iPhone, try again in three weeks.” (may be slightly less than verbatim)

Three weeks is not coincidentally the wait time for the iPhone 4 has been listed at on apple.com, going back to shortly after the product launched. Apple’s lower-priced iPhone model, the 3GS, is also weeks-backordered.

Apple recently fired its head of iPhone hardware, Mark Papermaster. It’s not clear whether his departure was a result of the iPhone 4′s long running inventory and supply issues.

Around The Horn is a “competitive banter” sports commentary show on ESPN.

New Twitter.com is the same old crap, now with more clicks required

Pardon me while I wax indignant. I’ve heard so much hype about the new Twitter.com redesign, and yet all along I’ve said that it’s bound to be a waste of time. Instead, Twitter desperately needs to move beyond the limitations of something as outdated as a web browser and instead begin shifting its users to an official desktop app for Mac and PC, which the service has made no effort to do at all (in fairness, neither has rival Facebook). But after finally being allowed hands-on access to the new Twitter.com today, I’m even more disappointed than I thought I’d be, and for different reasons.

Don’t get me wrong: while I long ago moved to a Twitter app on my iPhone, I still use Twitter.com on my Mac because I’ve tried the various third party desktop Twitter apps and found that none of them even come close to the same basic level of competence that Twitter for iPhone provides (perhaps something about having too much screen space to work with and invariably screwing it up). So I’d been hoping that the newly revised Twitter.com, while a misguided use of time and resources on the company’s part, would at least provide a better desktop Twitter experience for me than the current Twitter.com, which feels like something straight out of 2006. But after having spent under a minute with the new Twitter.com today, I quickly opted back out of it in disgust. And I only have to point to one example in order to explain why: within a few seconds of road testing it, I found that one of the tasks I perform on an at-least-daily basis (checking to see which of my posts have been retweeted), now requires more clicks than it used to.

That’s all I needed to see. If there’s one instance of extra clicks now being required to accomplish the same basic tasks, then there’s likely at least a dozen other instances of the same which I’d have encountered if I’d remained in the new Twitter.com for more than the several seconds that I did. And after watching my Dolphins throw away their big game last night, I just don’t have the patience today to deal with another needless, pointless letdown. I suppose I’ll revisit the new Twitter.com later, to see if there’s some way to make it more usable than it is by default. But from what (admittedly little) I’ve seen, Twitter’s designers have fallen victim to the same plague as nearly every other technology creators out there: it’s the same old geek philosophy which says that the more vital and oft-used a feature is, the more deeply it should be buried in the interface. Nothing should be accomplishable in two clicks if it can be stretched out to five.

You see, normal people view technology as something they want to use as a means of accomplishing something else. But geeks view technology as both the means and the end. The mere fact that they’re using technology is enough for them, and accomplishing anything with it is incidental, so the mere act of using it needs to be an interesting challenge. Nevermind that 99% of users find that concept to be time-wastingly offensive.

In other words, like so many self-pleasing tech designers before them, Twitter.com’s redesigners have turned the site into a freaking video game in which the “fun” (for geeks, anyway) lies in hunting for features that used to be more accessible and figuring out the new site as if it were a puzzle to be solved. Meanwhile, the rest of us prefer to use Twitter to communicate with each other. But I guess our preferences don’t count for anything. The new Twitter.com is yet more proof that even as non-geek consumers are finally now flexing their muscles when it comes to consumer technology and showing far less patience for geek-oriented tech products than they used to, tech products are still very much designed for the geeks, by the geeks.

Did Southwest just hurt its reputation by buying despised AirTran?

The corporate news of the day is that budget airline Southwest is buying competing budget airline AirTran. In theory, they’re nearly the same airline: pay less than you would for a full-service airline, and simply put up with the airline’s deficiencies in exchange for saving a buck. I’ve flown both airlines multiple times, and while I’ve had low expectations for both airlines, I’ve found them to be vastly different experiences.

Southwest has you line up like cattle to get on the plane, and then grab seats as if you were fighting for a good spot in a mosh pit at a concert festival. The staff is sufficiently bare bones that you half expect them to ask you to drive your own bags out onto the tarmac and shove them into the bottom of the plane yourself. But you know what? I’ve never had a “bad” experience with Southwest. Of course at those prices I don’t expect much. But I do expect the plane to land on time, my luggage to arrive in the same city that I arrive in, and for airline employees to act like humans. And with Southwest that’s always been the case. If I can save a decent amount of money by using Southwest, I’m going to do it every time. After all, it’s not like the full-service airlines are offering anything better these days.

But I sure can’t say the same about AirTran.

Granted, I’ve only ever flown AirTran four times. But they stranded me overnight twice, and misplaced my luggage three of those times (on one flight, they managed to do both). Once, when the first leg of my flight arrived late, one of their employees once told me to my face that my connecting flight had already departed, causing me to miss it (and then made me pay for a hotel room despite their mistake). Generally speaking, their employees act like they don’t want to be there and don’t bother to try to hide that fact. And in terms of on-time arrivals, granted, I’m working with a small sample size, but there’s no way I would ever fly AirTran if I knew I needed my checked bags to arrive on the same day that I did, or if I needed to arrive at my destination on the same day that I departed.

Maybe I’ve just had really back luck with AirTran. And I’m sure plenty of people have had horror stories with Southwest (and every other airline out there). But maybe AirTran is inexpensive because it just sucks, and Southwest is inexpensive because it knows how to cut the right corners while not messing with the things that are important.

I never know what to think of other people’s opinions of airlines. One pleasant flying experience will have a blogger raving about how great that airline is (useless feedback), while one harmlessly negative experience (a plane arriving late due to weather, for instance) will set off another blogger on a tirade. I know I’ll likely never fly JetBlue again based on the fact that the one time I used them, it was perhaps the single most offensive customer service experience from beginning to end that I’ve ever had with any company in any industry – so let’s just say I wasn’t surprised at the whole flight attendant snapping and jumping out of the plane thing, as in my one day of experiences with JetBlue, they appeared to have the most horrible employees of any company I’ve ever dealt with. Then again, I dealt with fewer than ten JetBlue employees that day, out of presumably thousands. And everyone in the blogosphere appears to be so in love with JetBlue (primarily for their customer service, interestingly enough) that I simply don’t know what to make of it. Except that I won’t be flying JetBlue again, while at the same time I can understand why others who’ve never had a problem with that particular airline don’t hesitate to continue using them, even after hearing my horror story for the ages (which I’ll spare repeating here).

But back to Southwest and AirTran, the dilemma I’m faced with now is that the budget airline I like flying with and the budget airline I try to avoid whenever possible are now the same company. At least the good one bought the bad one. But still, isn’t all that AirTran incompetence now going to rub off on the Southwest experience one way or the other? I guess I’ll find out soon enough. But with AirTran having been firmly in my “don’t use them unless I can save hundreds of dollars, don’t need to arrive today, and don’t really need my luggage to arrive at all” category, can I now trust Southwest the next time I need a reliable flight experience?

review: STM iPad Org Board

Need a way to organize your iPad and its accessories? Meet the new STM iPad Org Board — it’s a minimalist’s design for taking your necessities on the go.

The iPad Org Board was designed with an on-to-go person in mind. Both sides of the board are made to be functional. One side of the board is made of neoprene, aimed to hold and protect the iPad. The other side is made of a micro ripstop backing along with a strip of stretchy fabric runs across it to create four slots for your accessories.

The neoprene side has a pocket that your iPad can slide right into. On top is a flap closure that encloses your iPad entirely in the sleeve. In the middle is a backing made of a sturdy board to give the Org Board its shape. I recommend sliding your iPad in face down so it’s flat on this surface.

On the flip side is a 300D micro ripstop that has 4 slots for your accessories. There are two large slots and two smaller ones. The large slots fit items like an iPhone or an iPod Touch. Ideally, you may want to put your iPhone or iPod Touch in one and wrap your charging cable in the other slot. In the center are two smaller slots, perfect for a pen, stylus, and/or headsets.

One thing to keep in mind is that the neoprene is form-fitted for the iPad, so it’ll work best if the iPad does not have a case on (unless it’s super slim). On the organizational side, I recommend sliding your iPod Touch or iPhone into the slot without a case, or with a very slim case on. A thick case may stretch the slot, or make it difficult to take out.

The ideal use for this iPad Org Board is if you want to carry your iPad to a short distance, perhaps to a meeting. You can carry it on your arm like a folder and still have all your accessories when you reach your destination. It’s also ideal to pack your iPad Org Board into another bag to make it easier to take your necessities with you anywhere.

Overall, the STM iPad Org Board is thin, minimal, and very lightweight to carry your iPad in. It’s certainly one of the more unique iPad accessories that makes a great organizational tool that’s perfect for carrying alone or putting it in another bag. It could be purchased at STMbags.com for $24.95.

3.5 out of 5 stars · STMbags.com · $24.95

Verizon iPhone needed for same reason as Coke and Pepsi

While being similar in most measurable aspects, Coke and Pepsi are, as it turns out, not the same drink – much in the same way a Verizon iPhone will provide a different user experience than an AT&T iPhone. Actually, America’s two favorite colas are remarkably similar: they’re both carbonated. They share many or most of the same main ingredients. They’re both carbonated. They’re both caffeinated. They’re both dark brown. On paper, one is no better than the other – but try telling that to the nation’s soda drinkers, most of whom prefer one over the other, and many of whom will only drink one or the other.

While most restaurants only serve Coke or Pepsi (you’re there because you like the food they serve, not because you decided you wanted a soda), just try finding a store that only sells one or the other. I was reminded of this last year as my cross country road trip had me in a tiny west Texas town one evening, trying to find a case of Mountain Dew (my personal favorite poison), only to be told by the lone clerk at the town’s lone store that “We don’t have Pepsi products in this town.”

It stuck out to me because it’s not something I’d ever heard before; a store (or a town) that only offers Coke or Pepsi is just that rare. Customers each know which one they want, and if one of the reasons they’re going to the store is to pick up some soda, they’re unlikely to go to a store that doesn’t carry their preferred soda. It’s why AT&T carries dozens of different cellphones. It’s why Verizon does the same. And it all makes it seem even more inexplicable that on the other side of the carrier-vendor fence, Apple only allows potential iPhone buyers to go with AT&T.

It’s not that Verizon’s underpowered U.S. network is measurably better than AT&T’s underpowered U.S. network. On this matter I can speak from personal experience, from overwhelming anecdotal experiences of others, and even from formal data which shows that the two carriers have nearly identical customer retention (and customer loss) rates. But none of that changes the fact that much like Coke and Pepsi, which on paper appear to offer nearly the same soda-drinking experience and neither can be objectively claimed to be superior to the other, cellphone users have their preferences – and indeed, often strongly preferred favorites – when it comes to choosing cellular carriers.

The reasons are as various: Perception. Local reception strength. Perception. Personal customer service experiences. Perception. And did I mention perception? But the validity of those reasons (or lack thereof) is irrelevant as far as Apple is concerned; trying to convince those with a stubborn preference for Verizon to switch to AT&T just to get an iPhone would be the equivalent of a store like Wal-Mart only carrying Coke and expecting its customers who only like Pepsi to just switch over to Coke, because after all, Coke and Pepsi aren’t all that different on paper.

Verizon iPhone more palatable than Verizon Droid for everyone but geeks

Geeks, look away now. This is not what you want to hear. A Verizon iPhone would be massively more popular than the Verizon Droid, and it’s for precisely the reason geeks don’t want to hear about: the Droid, part of Google’s Android platform, is a product that’s for the geeks, by the geeks, and of the geeks, by design. Always has been, always will be. And despite the delusions of those geeks who live too deeply inside their own geek bubble see it, non-geeks outnumber geeks by a margin too high to count.

Despite the many angles of debate as to whether the iPhone or the Android is the “better” platform, the fundamental differences are inarguable: the iPhone is a curated platform whose priority is in making sure each of its features is intuitively usable by users of all levels, with an app store full of apps but nothing that shouldn’t be there. Android is an open source platform whose priority is in making things as theoretically “open” as possible, where features are judged by their quantity rather than quality or usability, and its app store is full of half finished hobbyist projects.

In other words, the Android is suited to technology geeks and gadget hobbyists, while the iPhone is suited to everyone else. So why has Verizon decided to go with something as mainstream-unsuitable as the Android OS for its own iPhone competitor? Because it’s all that’s available. Apple doesn’t license its iPhone OS to be used on random hardware, Microsoft’s mobile OS is a joke, the BlackBerry OS even more so, and so on. So Verizon ends up pushing a “mainstream smartphone” that’s based on an OS which, while competent strictly speaking, also happens to be the most specifically, intentionally anti-mainstream platform conceived since back when delusional geeks thought Linux would magically replace Windows and Mac on mainstream computers.

And yet the Verizon Droid has sold well. But don’t mistake sales for an acceptance of the platform. Verizon customers who refuse to switch to AT&T for any reason (millions upon millions of people fall into that category, for various reasons), but wish they could have an iPhone, end up looking at the Droid because, well, Verizon is pushing the Droid as the fake-iPhone that is available on Verizon – and some of them are actually giving it a try. But the overwhelming quantity of Verizon users who still want to know when a Verizon iPhone is coming (“Verizon iPhone” is a more popular Google search than “Verizon Droid” or “Verizon wireless” or even “Verizon”) makes it clear that plenty of Verizon customers are ignoring the Droid and waiting for the real thing, or plenty of Droid users are dissatisfied enough that they still want iPhone, or more likely, plenty of both.

The toughest thing for Verizon to swallow about a Verizon iPhone might not be admitting that they screwed up when they originally turned down the iPhone years ago, and it may not be having to put up with Apple’s insistence that the iPhone cellular experience, you know, not such. What Verizon might have the hardest time accepting is the fact that as soon as a Verizon iPhone launches, sales of the Verizon Droid will fall off a cliff, as at that point literally no one but the geeks will even consider buying one – and that’s got to sting, considering just how much time, effort, and money Verizon has sunk into promoting the Droid, which would immediately become a flop. But then again, just by virtue of the fact that the Droid is based on someone else’s operating system (Google’s) and an approximation of someone else’s phone model (Apple’s), there is the question of just how much Verizon DNA is really in the Droid anyway.

Bottom line, Apple obviously needs a Verizon iPhone in order to continue platform growth and to put the Droid era to bed. Verizon needs the iPhone just as much, because the Droid will never, ever be a suitable iPhone substitute for anyone but the geeks (who hate the iPhone’s populist nature anyway), and needs to have the iPhone in its stable by the time these first-time Droid buyers go to buy their next smartphone, which many of them have already decided won’t be another Droid.

Time for a Verizon iPhone: AT&T BlackBerry commercials are an embarrassment

If the Verizon iPhone really is just around the corner, the best hint we’ve seen yet may have come from the entity which presumably stands to lose the most from such a deal. AT&T has aired its share of iPhone-promoting ads over the years, anded the carrier certainly has other phones on its roster that it necessarily needs to promote as well. But AT&T’s new ads promoting that new BlackBerry phone, the one that’s even more bent on ripping off the iPhone than the last touchscreen BlackBerry, is nothing short of embarrassing – and not just to AT&T and BlackBerry parent company RIM. Although there’s that too.

The AT&T-BlackBerry ads harken back to late-stage AOL ads, which presented the platform’s new features as being revolutionary even though they were years late and miles short of what was already being offered by every other competitor. At that point the remaining AOL user base consisted almost entirely of people who had been fairly early adopters of the internet years earlier back when AOL had been the only realistic option, and then had inexplicably remained with AOL even as service fell behind the competition to the point that AOL users were scoffed at for even having an aol.com email address – yet somehow they were so blissfully unaware that the internet had passed them by, they didn’t even realize they’d become an out of touch butt of others’ jokes.

Sound familiar?

Years ago, the BlackBerry was the smartphone. Those who bought one were early adopters, trendsetters, technically clued in folks. And then the iPhone launched and immediately made the BlackBerry a comparative stone-age product. But don’t tell that to folks who’ve been married to their BlackBerry since before the iPhone existed, as they have no idea (or are too stubborn to admit to themselves) that they’re still using an etch-a-sketch of a smartphone when there are now massively better options available.

But enough explaining why the BlackBerry is an embarrassingly outdated product, and how bizarre it is that the once-upon-a-time early adopters are still clinging to it. The real focus is on the fact that AT&T is embarrassing itself simply by partaking in the ads – and not just because associating ones own brand with America Online the BlackBerry is a good way to get laughed at by most people. No, the real embarrassment comes from the fact that AT&T is in danger of losing its cash cow, the one product on its roster that actually means much to the company in terms of its bottom line, in the form of the iPhone. But while business school 101 and common sense would dictate that AT&T do everything it can to sucker talk Apple into signing yet another long term iPhone exclusivity deal, the carrier instead goes and very publicly gets in bed with something as sure-to-flop as the next touchscreen BlackBerry. AT&T’s CEO might as well go on television himself and scream “Please, Apple, take this iPhone exclusivity off our hands and give it to Verizon. We can’t handle this kind of success, popularity, or profit.”

What was it that Al Bundy once said? If you’re gonna blow it, blow it big.

Apple has had its share of embarrassing partnerships over the years. There was Motorola, who never could get decent Mac microprocessors out the door with the promised clock speeds. And then there was IBM, which apparently just flat-out lied to Apple about its plans for microprocessors. There was ATI, the chipmaker who felt it was important to announce new Mac specs a few hours before Steve Jobs was scheduled to do so himself. And now there’s AT&T, which has spent the past three years giving its iPhone-using customers the middle finger in nearly every way imaginable, making Apple look neglectful of its users in the process (shocking, considering how much emphasis the company puts on user satisfaction), and making Steve Jobs look like an idiot for signing that long term deal (again, shocking, considering he’s otherwise proven himself to be the most capable CEO in the tech industry).

But all the above Apple partners have one thing in common: they all became former partners. Apple now gets its processors from Intel, which doesn’t blow the doors off of anything these days, but is at least reliable. And Apple has even begun developing its own processors in house, with its own plant and everything, because hey, years of getting kicked around by chip manufacturers was long enough and that particular liability had to be neutralized.

After years of being embarrassed by AT&T in terms of lacking network strength, lacking customer service, lacking data plans and pricing, and (perhaps most importantly) a sufficiently hard-earned negative reputation that plenty of Verizon, Sprint, and T-Mobile customers simply refuse to even try life on AT&T in order to get their hands on the iPhone they want, Apple has two options. It can build its own nationwide data and voice network, which would be far from simple but would still fall well within Apple’s extraneous cash position, and finally offers its iPhone (and now iPad) customers the kind of mobile data experience Apple wants them to have. Or Apple can simply accept the fact that no amount of exclusivity-fueled clout will ever be enough to motivate any one U.S. carrier to grow up and offer a real user experience, and the best thing the company can do is to simply move the iPhone to multiple carriers so users can at least pick their poison. While studies show the AT&T and Verizon networks to more or less suck equally, and the two even have similar customer retention numbers, you’d be hard pressed to find anyone in the U.S. who doesn’t, for one reason or another, favor one over the other – and that perception right there is a better reason for a Verizon iPhone to launch ASAP than any reasons of any logic or substance.

AT&T’s indifferent behavior toward iPhone users in 2010 has suggested that the carrier no longer even wants to keep iPhone exclusivity. And now these new BlackBerry ads from AT&T, which all but depict the CEO’s of AT&T and RIM running off to Vegas together to elope, suggest that AT&T now knows the end of iPhone exclusivity is very near and is already hedging its bets by getting into bed with as many other phones as it can.

The question is just how soon AT&T thinks (or knows) the Verizon iPhone is coming. One hint might be just how much more closely and publicly AT&T attempts to align itself to every smartphone not called “iPhone” on the market in the coming days and weeks.

The Black Crowes: the 2010 concert experience

If you think the nature of the Black Crowes concert experience in late 2010 is going to change just because the band is on its farewell (for now) tour, think again. The band’s gig at the House of Blues this week revealed that the brothers Robinson and crew are carrying out the latter days of this incarnation of the band in the same fashion they always have: the music goes where it wants to, and the music speaks for itself. In fact, if there is a perceptible change in the nature of a live Crowes show of late, it’s that the concept has been taken even further toward its logical conclusion. And for those who’ve come to savor just what it is that makes a Black Crowes concert such a different experience over the years than a Black Crowes studio record, it’s more than welcome.

Here’s what concert goers weren’t greeted to this past Wednesday night: there wasn’t any sort of banter or conversation between songs. Band members didn’t laboriously introduce each other at any point during the set. In fact the Crowes have worked so hard to streamline their shows down to what counts that there wasn’t even an opening act. What the audience did get was a setlist spanning the band’s twenty year catalog. Jealous Again from their debut album. Appaloosa from their recent “Before The Frost” experiment. A bit of everything in between.

That meant opening the night with Gone, which also opened their third album Amorica, which was as close to a hit song as the band performed during its first several numbers. During the course of the evening there were eventually plenty of hits mixed in of course, including radio staples Hard To Handle and Remedy along with live favorite Wiser Time. The latter was one of several songs which simply refused to end, with an extended breakdown which at one point consisted of nothing but keys and rhythm section while the band’s guitarists vacated the landscape. Not that there weren’t plenty of exposed guitar features (and for that matter harmonica features) in there as well. Those expecting a Crowes concert to consist of nothing but faithful to the studio versions aren’t going to get what they came for. Rather, the loyalty is devoted to what the songs could have been if not for the constraints of an album, each evolving over the years into a road life of their own.

Don’t get me wrong. The Crowes know how to interact with their live audience, and on a deeper level than a lot of other bands who try a lot harder to. But rather than telling funny stories in between songs, these guys simply speak to their audience with their instruments. At this point most people coming to Crowes concerts know what they’re in for, and they’re hanging on every note of it. Those looking for studio-faithful renditions of nothing but the band’s biggest radio hits are better off staying home and cherry-picking them from iTunes instead.

You can count on one hand the number of bands that are still commercially relevant in the twenty-first century (Croweology debuted in the top ten this past summer) and yet so brazenly indifferent toward that commercial success when it comes to their live shows. It’s not that the Crowes shy away from their biggest hits as a matter of course; it’s that they’re only going to play the hits that they feel like playing, the ones that feel right for the moment. It’s part of what makes them worth seeing on a repeated basis, because you’ll never end up seeing the same show twice. While their set this night included a number of songs from their heady debut album, their massive radio hit She Talks To Angels wasn’t one of them. Instead the band dusted off Could I’ve Been So Blind, from that same record, and dutifully presented it as one of those songs that’s morphed into something that the original studio version could only have ever dreamt of being.

It’s true of all bands to varying degrees, but with the Black Crowes more so than most others: they either work for you or they don’t. Particularly when you’re talking about a band that’s never tried to hide the fact that they’re rockers from the south, while never pretending to be southern rockers (you either get that delineation or your don’t). But if these guys are your thing, then do yourself a favor and catch them on what’s left of this tour if they’re coming to your town. Not that this will probably be your last opportunity ever, as both Chris and Rich Robinson told me earlier this year that it’s unlikely they’ll never reunite. But as they and their bandmates prepare to part ways at the end of 2010 in order to go home and raise their kids for awhile, it’s worth noting that they’re doing so at a time when their live set is at a historical peak.

review: iFrogz Luxe Original for iPhone 4

I’ve been a fan of sliding snap-on cases for a while. It’s because they’re easy to put on, take off, and offer the right amount of protection for your device. And with the iFrogz Luxe Original for iPhone 4, I’m not disappointed. This case is a two piece snap-on with a luxurious, silky smooth matte finish. Each piece of the case is a separate color – the sample I received was a royal blue [top] and black [bottom], so it adds a unique look to your iPhone. The inside of both pieces has a felt lining so that the back of your iPhone doesn’t get scratched. Inside the case is a groove along the sides so that you can slide in the phone without any harm to come to to the sides, especially where the volume buttons are.

It’s super easy to get the case on – just slide the phone in the top half and then close it off with the bottom. It will snap together with the trademark ‘button’ design of the Luxe line. If you need to take it off for any reason, just pull the two pieces apart. No harm done, but don’t overdo it.

The ringer toggle and volume buttons get a nice big space for easy access, like the Luxe Lean. The bottom charging port is also open, so it will work with your older iPhone and iPod cables. The headphone port is easily accessible as well. Only problem I had was that the power button seems to be a bit too deep with the case on – it ended up being a little harder to push it down. But it’s nothing major. The camera and flash get a nice little cutout that is nonintrusive on photos. Due to the matte finish of the case, it’s far from being a fingerprint magnet. However, it will start showing fingerprints or smudges if your hands have natural oil on them. But it’s very easy to clean with a cleaning cloth or by simply rubbing it on your clothes.

Also worth noting – due to the ‘button’ enclosure on the back, the snap is pretty tight. I’m not guaranteeing anything, but I believe that this case should be able to withstand most drops. Overall, I am going to say that this is my favorite two piece snap-on case for my iPhone 4 so far. It feels great, looks amazing, and allows easy access to everything. What more do you really need? Looking for a snap-on case? Then definitely get the iFrogz Luxe Original, or at least check it out.

review by Christine Chan

rating: five stars out of five • iFrogz.com

review: AGF Vandelay for iPhone 4

Those that are looking for a easy case and holster to carry and protect your iPhone 4 should look into the Vandelay case and holster from AGF.

The Vandelay case is a two piece snap-on that allows for easy installation on the iPhone 4. Simply slide the phone into the top half of the case and then close it off with the bottom piece. The reasoning behind this bottom piece is so that it will be easier for the user to remove for docking purposes, which is very handy.

The overall feel of the case is decent – the back of the case is textured to it to help you hold it in your hand. These textures can also be a great fashion statement to those that want to be bold or chic. The sides of the case are hard plastic, which may not add as much grip as rubberized cases but it helps improve the traction between your skin and the steel band.

All of the buttons are exposed, so there won’t be any obtrusion when trying to get to them. The headphone port gets a pretty wide opening, so there shouldn’t be any problems when using it. Despite the fact that the bottom piece is easily removable for docking purposes, there is a large enough opening on the bottom piece to allow compatibility with older chargers and accessories. The cutout on the back is also precisely cut so that only the lens and flash are exposed – none of the glass around it is exposed, so it’s protected very well.

There is a bit of lift from the screen so that the screen isn’t touching surfaces, but I felt that this was a bit lacking. I’m not too confident that it’s enough, but maybe I’m just being too paranoid. The case should withstand a drop without coming apart though, since it takes a bit of a pull to get the bottom piece off.

If you need to remove the phone from the case, I found the experience to be easier than other snap cases. The bottom piece is relatively easy, but the top part has a bit of a space on the side that makes it easier for the volume buttons to slide through – so there’s relatively no hassle when removing the case! I found this great, since it would make it easier to clean than other snap-ons.

The holster is a bonus if you prefer to carry your device on your belt or waist. The phone can be inserted with either the screen on the outside or inside. Removing the phone from the holster is easy – just apply a bit of pressure on the top and the phone will come right out. Without pressure, the device won’t budge. If you prefer to have the phone in a landscape orientation while on your waist, the belt clip is rotatable, so you can freely adjust it as you please.

Overall, if you are looking for a good case + holster combo, then definitely check out the AGF Vandelay. It’s one of the better two piece slide-in, snap-on cases I’ve encountered.

review by Christine Chan

rating: four stars out of five • agfindings.com

Next Page »