Apparently, my server's motherboard clock battery is dead and the system time got reset to January 1, 2000, which screws up record-keeping for new comments and Movable Type automatically denies them. I will keep an eye on it until I get things moved over to a new server.

Until then, keep your fingers crossed and keep the comments coming.

Engadget: "Ultimately -- carriers and developers notwithstanding -- what Palm has done is not only a major feat for a company of its size (and its dire position), and we think it's an important step in the evolution of mobile computing. Just like the iPhone's notches up the ladder, and the G1's contributions, the Pre moves the game forward in a very real way."

David Pogue / New York Times: "So do the Pre's perks (beautiful hardware and software, compact size, keyboard, swappable battery, flash, multitasking, calendar consolidation) outweigh its weak spots (battery life, occasional sluggishness, ringer volume)? Oh, yes indeedy."

PreCentral.net: "Palm has hit a home run with the Pre. Probably not a grand slam, but a definite home run."

MyPre.com: "This is first-generation hardware running a first-generation OS, and yet it delivers not only the expected functionality but an innovative UI, solid cellular performance and synchronization features that rivals are already scrabbling to counter. The Pre isn't perfect, but it's very good; when Palm start rolling out OTA updates and delivering things like video recording, it'll get even better. We've high hopes for the Pre's success, but we're even more excited about where Palm will take webOS."

Gizmodo: "The Pre may have hardware that's worse than the G1/G2, but the whole package--the software and the hardware--isn't bad. It's good. It's different. That's something we can get behind. I can''t wait to see what Palm gets dealt in their next hand."

Boy Genius Report: "The OS is great. There's no ifs ands or buts; it's really refreshing to see something that's brand new with a UI unlike anything else out there. The only problem with this is, Palm's never been a hardware company that anyone's really cared about. They have been the furthest thing from innovative since circa-2003 -- their hardware has always been second rate at best and it doesn't seem to be changing now. Couple that with the nation's underdog carrier at a $299 price-point (before rebate), and we're not sure how many people are going to be lined up overnight, yet we're pretty confident once people are able to play a real unit themselves, there will be more than a lot of happy Palm Pre customers."

PC Magazine: "Overall, though, webOS is the most exciting mobile platform I've used in quite a while, and the Pre is pretty impressive, so it nabs our Editors' Choice for smartphones on Sprint."

Walt Mossberg / Wall Street Journal: "All in all, I believe the Pre is a smart, sophisticated product that will have particular appeal for those who want a physical keyboard. It is thoughtfully designed, works well and could give the iPhone and BlackBerry strong competition -- but only if it fixes its app store and can attract third-party developers."

CNET: "Despite some missing features and performance issues that make it less than ideal for on-the-go professionals, the Palm Pre offers gadget lovers and consumers well-integrated features and unparalled multitasking capabilities. The hardware could be better, but more importantly, Palm has developed a solid OS that not only rivals the competition but also sets a new standard in the way smartphones handle tasks and manage information."

Wired: "The Pre emphatically shows that Palm has not reached the stage of suffixes. And multitasking rules!"

CNN Money / Fortune: "That means even if you're one of the folks who likes the Pre's features a bit better than the iPhone's, you might have to do without some of the cooler mobile apps for a while. If that's OK with you, the Pre is a very good choice."

Michael Gartenberg: "Palm's clearly delivered on the vision they articulated last January and the Pre/WebOS combo are clearly going to be a mobile to force to be reckoned with. It's the first platform that's really differentiated itself from the iPhone and looks to be among the few devices that could serve as competition to that most iconic of phones."

Associated Press: "Move over, iPhone. You've had two years on top of the smart phone world. Now there's a touch-screen phone with better software: the Palm Pre."

Phonescoop: "The Pre offers a lot, but has some glaring omissions. If you're willing to give up features such as video capture and don't mind being limited to 8GB of storage, the Pre will offer you excellent personal information and messaging management along with a user interface that outperforms many others in return."

FOX News: "My takeaway: The Palm Pre is an impressive device with a slick design and an even slicker user experience. It took me five minutes to learn how to use it, unlike the Sprint Instinct, which I almost threw into oncoming traffic."

USA Today: "I've been testing the Pre for more than two weeks and like it a lot. Pre is easy on the eyes. I can't think of a more comfortable cellphone in my hand. It has a lovely screen for taking in YouTube videos or browsing the Web. The "always-connected" software foundation at its core, which Palm designed from scratch and calls WebOS, is slick and rife with possibilities."

Laptop Magazine: "We've seen many smart phones come and go since the original iPhone, and the $199 Palm Pre is the first device we've tested whose user interface not only matches up well to Apple's offering, but also beats it in some areas. The Pre isn't just cool and fun to use; its highly integrated approach to calendars, contacts, and messaging, the way it elegantly multitasks, and makes apps and notifications accessible across the device change the game. However much the Pre does for you without your lifting a finger, managing the number of open apps (so you don't hit the limit) can feel like work; and we wish the phone lasted longer between charges. Nevertheless, Palm and Sprint have a hit on their hands with the Pre, and the webOS is a smart phone platform to be reckoned with."

Palm Infocenter: "The Palm Pre delivers on Palm's promise of a bringing a next generation differentiated product to market. WebOS is a powerful and compelling new mobile platform. Despite being a 1.0 product, the Pre is pleasantly functional and it users in new level of simplicity and ease of use. Coupled with the attractive hardware design and charming display, this adds up to a distinctively agreeable experience for mobile phone users. Palm has a lot riding on the Pre and it now appears to be fully back in the game with a superb combination of software and hardware."

Brighthand: "The Palm Pre has been tasked with an almost impossible job: it's the device that's supposed to put both Palm and Sprint back on course after months in the doldrums. Amazingly, it just might do it. Palm has created an operating system and a suite of software that's easy to use but powerful, and has the features both consumers and business people are looking for in a smartphone."

SlashGear: "Still, these are shortcomings in a first-generation platform on first-generation hardware, and we're happy giving Palm the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps it's the threat of financial ruin, but the company seems far more attuned to user feedback than previously; there's a lot riding on the Pre, and Palm know we know it. Thankfully they've delivered a smartphone not only capable but honestly impressive and distinctive. Improvements to webOS will only make it better, but even in this fledgling state we'd readily recommend the Palm Pre."

MobileTechReview: "A most excellent start from Palm with their first new Web OS smartphone. The hardware is attractive and the Pre looks great, feels great (albeit slippery and fingerprint-y) and is smaller than the iPhone and many other touch screen smartphones. The phone is intuitive, fun and generally responsive, though there are occasional minor slowdowns. The capacitive touch screen is not only beautiful but easy to control and the Pre has all the bells and whistles of smartphone except local syncing: email with Exchange support, GPS, top notch web browser, WiFi and Bluetooth. If you're a Sprint user and have been hankering for something truly different and fun, the Pre is a go."

The teaser video featuring Roger McNamee and Jon Rubenstein arguing over how to promote Palm's forthcoming Pre smartphone is, by most standards, pretty funny. And by Silicon Valley geek standards, it's hilarious. I think Palm would be justified using Roger and Jon in some future tongue-in-cheek ads.

This video was shown at the D7 conference today. Have a look:

Acknowledgment: I owe the inspiration for the "Mac & Ruby" abomination above to this tweet by Rene Ritchie, and I'm quite sure I'll never again be invited to Palm's Sunnyvale headquarters because of it.

Here's one of his interviews; he talked about webOS and the Pre, as well as EP's stake in Palm, on CNBC on March 6th, 2009. Below the video is a transcription of some of the claims he makes about the Pre.

"It has a clock, it has your calendar, and it has GPS. So it knows not only where you are, it knows where you should be. So, for example, if you were going to be late for a meeting, it not only alerts you that you're going to be late, it will automatically email ahead to the people you're going to see and tell them. It automatically downloads all of your maps each night before your meeting for the next day."

He made similar claims in another interview around this time (I cannot find that video, though), so this was not a one-off mental slip.

I don't know about you, but I've watched darn near every walkthrough and demo video I can find on the Palm Pre and have never seen these automation features mentioned anywhere other than by McNamee. If the Pre were so advanced as to be able to link its calendar, GPS, and email apps to effectuate the type of autonomy McNamee is describing here, well, I just don't think Palm would've kept it a secret until now.

What do you think? Was he exaggerating, or does Palm have a surprise in store for us come June 6th?

Not being able to visualize, I whipped up a quick and dirty comparison and included two other 320x480 screen mobile devices (the iPhone and the Palm TX) just for reference:

Yes, the Palm Pre's screen is smaller than the iPhone's, but the whole device more pocketable due to being narrower and shorter overall. So, until we figure out how to pack a 20" display into something you can drop in your pants pocket, there will continue to be this compromise between screen size and overall dimensions; we want one to go up and the other to go down, and borders can only get so thin.

For another take on screen specs, check out my recent post: Mobile Device Displays: A Few Words on Pixel Density

In 1993, Apple launched what many consider to be the first serious attempt at a sophisticated PDA (personal digital assistant): the Newton MessagePad. Typically referred to simply as a Newton, it was, by most measures, a disaster in the marketplace. While it seemed like a brilliant concept, its uneven performance -- most notably, its lackluster handwriting recognition -- lead it to become the target of much mockery (e.g., several mentions in Doonesbury).

Watching all this transpire was a small group of entrepreneurs and inventors who wanted a crack at the PDA space. This foundling company lead by Jeff Hawkins was Palm. In 1996, it launched its own take on the PDA: the Palm Pilot. Palm had learned several lessons from Apple's experience with the Newton.

For example, instead of trying to transcribe anyone's handwriting (a feat difficult even for the human brain), Palm decided to require the user to learn Graffiti, a special script specifically developed for better handwriting recognition. And it worked; the Pilot soared to heights of popularity, partly because Graffiti was a much better solution to the input problem.

Apple abandoned the PDA market and, after failing to purchase Palm, their paths crossed only very infrequently over the next several years at the corporate level. However, several Apple employees left to join Palm. That trend continued; in fact, a significant percentage of Palm's employees are today former Apple staffers. Palm's Chairman, Jon Rubenstein, lead development of the original iPod while at Apple; he joined Palm and launched the program that resulted in the new Pre smartphone. That cross-breeding may be part of the reason that Palm and Apple continued to learn from each other.

In 1997, upon Steve Jobs' return to Apple, it decided it would cease this practice (for various reasons that continue to be debated to this day). Around the same time, Palm decided to start licensing its Palm OS to other hardware/device makers. Palm quickly began to understand the complexities associated with trying to run a business that sold devices while licensing the OS that ran those devices to its competitors. Diverging product lines and pressure from licensees to open up the OS beyond what Palm could readily manage eventually lead Palm to split in two; its device (PalmOne) and OS (PalmSource) sides went their separate ways with only a licensing agreement and some lingering animosity to connect them.

A few years later, Palm found that the venerable Palm OS was running out steam and chose to begin developing a Linux-based replacement. That new OS, which has been called webOS, will launch on the Palm Pre June 6, 2009.

This OS replacement situation was similar to one Apple faced about a decade ago. Around the time of Jobs' return, Apple decided to begin phasing out the original proprietary Mac OS and replace it with the new UNIX-based OS X, which launched in 2001.

Another way Palm has learned from Apple is how it handles product launches. Steve Jobs has long been considered master of the product launch. Apple tightly controls pre-launch information leaks, highly engineers new products so as to rely on minimal "patches" after launch, and puts heavy emphasis on industrial design. Palm's latest launch, that of the Palm Pre, has all the trademarks of an Apple event. Information has been, for the most part, carefully managed. Palm has taken extreme care in ensuring that the product that hits the streets on June 6 is as devoid of flaws as possible. And the trade-offs associated with form versus functionality are often skewed towards the former (e.g., the rationale for not including a removable memory card slot in the Pre was to ensure the unit was as sleek and small as possible). While both companies have less-than-perfect track records in product launches (e.g., Apple's MobileMe and Palm's Foleo), Palm is clearly learning from Apple's successes in this regard.

But the learning hasn't been all one-way; Apple has also learned quite a bit from Palm's experiences over the past 13 years. Several design decisions in the iPhone are straight out of Palm's playbook: a touchscreen, icon-based interface; an external "ringer" switch to silence the device; an application-launcher "home" screen; and so forth. While the iPhone is different in many ways from any Treo or Palm device ever made, it is clear that some elements were lifted from Palm's successful line of handhelds and smartphones. Palm returned the favor by including some multitouch gestures similar to those used in the iPhone; Apple was unhappy enough with that to threaten legal action, but nothing came of it (yet).

Apple also learned from one of Palm's main failings, which was how it managed third-party development in order to create value for its user community. While Palm had occasionally encouraged and/or partnered with software sites that catered to Palm OS users (e.g., Stingersoft, PalmGear, and Handango), there was never a centralized, easy-to-access catalog for those new to the platform. And even if the user found one of those sites, he still had to navigate downloading to a PC, sometimes unzipping and/or running an installer application, and then syncing the new app to his device. All told, it was not a thoughtfully engineered user experience suitable for the masses. Apple's App Store greatly improved all that by making the one place with all apps available directly from the device. While some might argue that the lack of an open market ecosystem retards innovation, there's no debate over the improvement the App Store approach has had on users' familiarity and usage of 3rd party software.

One area that both companies have had similarly poor performance is interacting with the fan community. Apple is notorious for suing blogs over rumors and product leaks. Palm has sued websites over naming issues. Both companies have had their share of PR faux pas when it comes to handling contentious issues on the Internet. Apple found itself in hot water over how it addressed pricing changes shortly after the 1st-gen iPhone launch. Palm messed up an opportunity with the PreDevCamp crowd over secrecy/transparency pressures (although that appears to be reconciled, now). While it's easy to make original mistakes, let's hope that both companies improve how they manage their community relations.

While I'm certainly not claiming that either Palm or Apple is beholden to the other company for its success (or failure), it seems clear that both companies have carefully observed each other and tried to learn from their experiences. Not replicating your competitors' mistakes is always helpful.

Going forward, as Palm and Apple find each other squarely in the other company's sights, it will be fascinating to watch how each move is countered and each new product is reacted to. With all the history and common blood linking these two firms, this match-up could be one of the more compelling and interesting over the next few years.

Update: Rene Ritchie pointed me (indirectly) to a list of Apple's product flops over the years, which is interesting reading to reflect on when you start thinking the company can do no wrong.

Update #2: Fortune has an interesting story on the impending rivalry: Palm fights back (against Apple)

Comparatively, there are relatively few reasons not to support it, with the primary ones being ignorance of the facts combined with fear of change.

Hopefully, if the matter does come to a vote, concerned citizens will educate themselves before casting their ballots.

More than half of American adults have changed religion in their lives, a huge new survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life found. And there is no discernible pattern to the change, just "a free for all," one of the lead researchers told CNN.

"You're seeing the free market at work," said Gregory Smith, a research fellow at the Pew Forum. "If people are dissatisfied, they will leave. And if they see something they like better, they will join it."

Many people switch because they move to a new community, and others because they marry someone of a different faith, he said.

Some don't like their ministers or pastors; some like the pastor at another church better.

And many people list more than one reason for changing, Smith said.

"The reasons people change religions are as diverse as the religious landscape itself," he told CNN by phone.

Read full story (CNN.com)

So if religion is something most people choose to engage in, and their religion isn't forced upon them, but rather freely decided upon in a "free market" environment, why is religion protected from discrimination along with race, color, gender, and national origin by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Those protected attributes other than religion are inherent and impossible, if not exceptionally difficult, to change. One's race, color, and national origin are set for life; one's gender is genetically mandated at birth, although outward manifestations can be altered through radical surgery and hormone treatment.

But religion is something completely different. No one is born a religion and unable to change it during their lifetime. Even if that statement doesn't pass one's "common sense" test, the Pew study's statistics show it clearly to be true. Religion, or, more specifically, one's religious affiliation is a conscious choice that everyone is free to make and change at any time.

Some individual attributes that employers can legally discriminate against and fire (or not hire) an individual based on include the employee's clothing, their education level, and their willingness to travel, just as a few examples. It's relatively easy to see why an employer should be able to let an employee go, or not hire someone in the first place, if the employee chooses to wear inappropriate attire, doesn't have the correct education, or declines to travel for a job that requires it.

If individuals can, and do, choose their religious affiliations and change them at will, why do we protect religion when other individual attributes, such as what we wear, what we know, and how far away from home we prefer to go, are not protected? Is what we believe so different from these when they can all be changed at will? Logically, it doesn't seem so.

In some sense, it almost appears as if religion is getting special treatment as the only choice given protection from discrimination.

But why should it matter what religious affiliation someone has when considering or retaining them as an employee? Because sometimes it makes a difference in how well, or even if, the employee fulfills his job responsibilities.

Case in point: healthcare workers whose religious beliefs trump their medical training when making decisions that can affect the health of their patients (e.g., this article in the Detroit News).

Suppose someone is hired as a pharmacist and, at the time of hiring, has no qualms about fulfilling prescriptions for emergency contraceptives. A short while later, he switches religions to one that opposes this practice and decides that he can no longer fulfill that responsibility.

I am no lawyer, but under the Equal Rights Act, I would suspect the pharmacist's employer would have a difficult time replacing him with someone who would fill the script.

But why is this situation different than when an employee decides that he doesn't want to travel any more, or is tired of wearing neckties, or fails to complete a mandatory educational requirement? All of these would be sufficient reason to fire the employee, as travel, dress, and education aren't protected attributes.

If I can choose my religion just as I choose what to wear, why is one protected and the other is not? Why are some of our choices permitted to be inspected and acted upon by employers while others are not? This is logically inconsistent, which seems like a significant chink in the armor of an otherwise good law.

Ultimately, one's choice of religion seems much more similar to one's other choices in life (e.g., where to live, what to wear, how much and what kind of education to get, etc.) than it is to one's personal attributes that cannot be changed (e.g., race, ethnicity, origin, and gender).

It is likely that those with strong religious beliefs will make claims that what one believes should be protected from discrimination. Fine...what about beliefs regarding clothing? One might believe that God says "life is sacred" just as someone might believe that ties are uncomfortable, yet only one of these beliefs can be acted upon by an employer.

In reading the above, some might accuse me of trivializing religion. Certainly not -- I would very much like to have my choice of clothing also be off-limits when discussing job security with my employer -- but a belief is a belief, and beliefs are not the same as permanent, unchangeable attributes that define who we are and for which we had no choice.

One can change one's religious convictions and affiliations; one cannot readily change one's race, color, sex, or national origin. So, again, why are all of these granted equal protection? So far, I fail to see a compelling reason.

I probably won't follow you if:

1) Your friends-to-followers ratio is well over 1:1 -or- you have way more friends than followers.
If you are following 1,200 people (i.e., have 1,200 friends) and only have 100 followers, then you're probably up to something. Perhaps you just joined and are trying to build up a huge followerbase by doing mass followings in hopes of snagging lots of auto-follows. In that case, I'm not going to contribute to your game.

2) You haven't tweeted in a long time, if ever.
Why should I follow you when you aren't contributing to the conversation?

3) You don't have a bio or a pic or a website. And no, Myspace pages don't count.
If you aren't going to reveal anything about yourself, why should I follow you? Give me a reason to find you interesting.

4) I'm not finding your recent tweets very thought-provoking, entertaining, or compelling in some way.
You may be doing everything right, but I still may not follow you. Sorry...it might just be that we don't have much in common...it happens. Or, perhaps your tweeting every meal, belch, and bowel movement just doesn't do it for me.

5) You're offensive.
I don't follow raving lunatics, extremists of any kind (political, religious, sports fans, etc.), people who express themselves only in crass banalities, or those who TYPE IN ALL CAPS.

6) You're on Twitter solely to sell me something.
Are you an SEO? Social media expert? Online marketing consultant? Bean curd and flaxseed extract vendor? Sorry...I'm not interested and far too busy bored with you to listen to your pitch.

7) You play games following and unfollowing.
Update: I just was reminded of another reason. If you follow me and then unfollow me shortly afterwards when I don't follow you immediately, and then follow me again when I do follow you, you're getting unfollowed and blocked. You're not only annoying, but you're gaming the system and I don't like it.

Most likely, if you're an actual person with a bio, a photo, and something reasonably interesting (IMO) to say, I'll follow you right back. But if not, well, consider this post our official "it's not me, it's you" talk.

p.s. If you've landed here from my Twitter profile page and aren't finding it very useful to discover just who this schlub called Craig Froehle is, then check out my abbreviated GearBits bio or the longer bio on my personal website.

PreCentral.net broke this story on April 1st, meaning it took a bit more convincing than normal that this was, in fact, true.

The "Classic" emulator will be provided by MotionApps. As you can see on the graphic, they cleverly use the bottom third of the screen to represent the standard Palm's hardware buttons, meaning most functions should be usable on regular apps. Hacks and system-level utilities, such as things that change how the keyboard functions, alter Palm OS preferences, or access specific bits of hardware on the Treo (e.g., the camera) likely will not work at all.

One interesting thing is the performance gain that MotionApps' Classic will offer to legacy Palm OS apps:

Compared to Treo 700p your PalmOS apps will run approximately twice as fast on Classic.

Wow! That speaks volumes about how poweful the Pre's new TI OMAP 3440 CPU will be if it can run apps in emulation mode twice as fast as the 700p's 312 MHz Intel XScale PXA270 processor.

While using crusty (in most cases) Palm OS apps isn't the main reason so many are excited about the Palm Pre, it is certainly comforting knowing that those of us who still rely on a Palm OS device as our regular smartphone, but want to move to the Pre when it launches, won't have to lose a lot of functionality while we wait on developers to port over their apps or code up replacements that are better integrated with the Pre's webOS platform.

Backward compatibility is truly the best of both worlds, the old and the new.

Update: Here's a short video of a Palm rep demoing the Classic emulator for Phonescoop:

In the 15 or so years I've been "on the web," I've tried to maintain a division between my personal life and my professional life. The reason is pretty simple: some of the things I might say or do with friends and family might be incompatible with expectations for my behavior as whatever kind of professional I'm employed as at the time.

I'm not talking anything scandalous...no KKK activities, secret families, or felony indictments...but statements and actions that might seem totally innocuous in one context and to one person (e.g., joking with an old friend) might seem out-of-place in another context to a different person (e.g., to a student or client).

And that division is slowly eroding...slipping away as my ability to keep one "life" separate from the other disintegrates. Some of my work colleagues and students have started following me on Twitter and friending me on Facebook (hi, folks!), places that I've never intended to engage anyone from work (with, perhaps, a few exceptions). More confounding is LinkedIn, on which I have a complete cross-section of associations from every corner of my personal and professional lives.

Many of those connections, and the overall intermixing of my personae, are, admittedly, my own fault. When I initially set up Facebook, I accidentally let it troll through my Gmail addressbook and send out automatic invitations. Newbie mistake. On Twitter, my profile is open, meaning anyone can follow me. And, I also have this tendency to only use my real name online; I never felt comfortable hiding behind a quasi-anonymous pseudonym or fake profile. All considered, I really only have myself to blame for allowing the online division between my personal self and my work self to blur.

So what does this mean? I think it means that my online "self" will have to be much more thoughtful and considerate of the implications, for every facet of my life, of my actions online. A bawdy joke told in a small, yet public, mailing list could easily find its way to my boss' desk. A thoughtless, or even mean-spirited, comment could ultimately offend a co-worker. These unintended consequences are like civilian casualties in a war; collateral damage from acting thoughtlessly in a casual space that is, ultimately, connected in a very real sense to one's professional environment.

Perhaps this is precisely what all those Gen-Y kids were learning when their Facebook profiles and Myspace pages were being used by potential employers as reasons to not hire them; 27 photos of you drunk off your butt at a fraternity party doesn't tend to impress the HR department very much.

So, the bottom line is this, what I'm calling my Golden Rule for the digital era:

If I treat every interaction, whether online or face-to-face, as if it were happening in person, I'm sure there would be times I would handle it differently. Is it better to have less freedom to do as my basest reactionary self wants, less consideration for the human on the other end of the bitpipe? No, I think society has always relied on our ability to reign in that temptation. And the Internet changes nothing in that regard, except, perhaps, to give us more opportunities to screw up.

So, now, going forward, the real test is seeing if I can live by that rule of mine. Wish me luck!

Here's a short list of 5 applications that I'll miss when I migrate to the new Palm Pre (assuming it doesn't come with something equivalent):

1) Capital & Function Key Customizer -- A utility that greatly increases the usefulness of my Treo's keyboard is KeyCaps600, which enables capital letters by press-and-hold and enables symbols by double-pressing the key. This is much faster than hitting the Shift and Symbol buttons prior to the keypress. Given the Pre's hardware keyboard, something like this would be a natural project for the aspiring programmer.

2) Mode / Profile Manager -- Profiles is a utility that does some amazing things. First, it lets you set up different hardware profiles, which determine how the phone works (e.g., backlight level, ringer volume, vibrate mode, etc.). For example, I have a "Meeting" profile that turns off the volume for all purposes, but enables vibrate for calls, text messages, and other notifications. Doing all those things separately would take many steps, but Profiles combines them all into a single switch. Second, Profiles lets me automatically switch among these hardware profiles manually or automatically based on triggers (e.g., calendar events, time of day, etc.). For example, I have a trigger set up to completely silence the phone and disable vibrate at 10pm so as to keep inbound calls and text messages from waking up my wife. It then re-enables all those alerts at 6am. It's incredibly handy and I'm really hoping that kind of functionality is included with the Pre...or comes out shortly after it's launched.

3) Button Customizer -- I've gotten totally spoiled by LudusP, a utility that lets me remap many of my 700p's hardware buttons. I imagine someone is already working on a way to make the Pre's one hardware button (apart from the physical keyboard) do more things than just bring up the app panel...at least I hope so.

4) File Browser -- A powerful file management app makes light work of moving, deleting, and copying media files and other content. With 8GB of onboard storage, the Pre better have a decent interface for managing all that stuff.

5) Backup -- An automated backup utility, like Backup Man, will be impossible to replicate since the Pre has no expandable storage / flash memory card slot. Hopefully, its "cloud" functionality will make this moot...hopefully.

The Pre looks like it will be an incredible device, but there's always room for improvement...or at least customization.

Now, it's pretty clear that GearBits has gone through several stages in its short life. At first, it was a curiosity...a chance to learn about blogging, host a webserver, and some other aspects of a techno-centric life that are best acquired through hands-on experience.

Then, I invited some friends to play. Mitch, Sam, and Ken, and later Bob, all brought unique voices, but as the site was never more than a casual outlet for occasional thoughts, it never really gelled with any of them. But, seeing friends contribute their thoughts and ideas in ways very different than I would have was educational for me and a lot of fun.

As their interest vacillated, my own did as well. While I continued to post, it became much more sporadic. I deviated from technology and consumer electronics more heavily into politics around the 2004 and 2008 elections, primarily as a cathartic tool...one small voice calling out the absurdities and injustices.

Then, in Spring 2008, something happened that changed how I see my blog entirely: Twitter. I've become a bit of a Twitterholic. As my brain is rather limited in its capacity for complex thought, many of the things I think seem to fit nicely in 140 characters or less. Since my joining Twitter less than a year ago, I've made nearly 4,000 posts (tweets). Compare that to less than 1,200 posts on GearBits in six-year span.

But why? Thinking about it, it seems there are three reasons: convenience, engagement, and reduced expectations. First, posting to Twitter is incredibly convenient; I can do it through text messages, via the web interface, on custom apps...all easy and quick. Second, given the size of the community on Twitter, it's easy to be engaged in conversations and get feedback very quickly. That's rewarding, so it prompts me to do it more often. Comments work here, too, but they're not nearly as quick and convenient to post, read, or respond to.

Third, and perhaps most surprising (to me), is that I've always felt like anything I post on GearBits needed to have some meat...be substantial. While I clearly didn't always accomplish that, I almost always strived for it. On Twitter, however, there's no such pressure to create meaningful content. When giving a talk, every sentence matters. When chatting with friends, however, there's a much lower bar to clear. And that's the way Twitter feels to me.

So, will I continue with GearBits? Probably...almost definitely. I want to continue having my own server -- it's just too convenient. Since that's in place, hosting Movable Type isn't a huge amount of incremental effort or cost. A second reason GearBits will continue is that I will, from time to time, have information I'd like to "put out there" that doesn't easily fit on a tweet. Product reviews, short essays (like this one), graphical content, etc. all fit much better on a proper blog than on Twitter. Finally, there's value in what I've already done. I don't get huge numbers of people at GearBits...a thousand or so each day...so, if it were to go away, it's not like the masses would rise up and demand I put it back up. But, during the six years I've been adding content, there are some pages that a nontrivial number of people seem to find helpful (see the most frequently commented entries, for example). So, if having it around helps a couple people a day fix a problem or make a better tech decision, then that's more than enough.

Thanks for reading (if anyone actually does) and I'll hopefully see you in another six years.

And it's fairly easy to do. With Twitter's search engine, it's relatively painless to stay abreast of any mention of your company or its branded services. Monitoring this constantly is essential to initiating timely contacts with customers who mention they are having problems.

But, before companies jump into offering customer service via a novel medium like Twitter, some caution should be taken; while the payoff of an innovative move like this can be significant to your customers, there are easy mistakes to be made. So, a quick list of some general lessons:

1) Twitter isn't the best option for most, or even many, of your customers

For part of my PhD dissertation, I worked with customer support of a major ISP researching how they interact with customers over various channels (at the time, it was phone, email, and IM). We found that different problem types and different customer needs were most effectively handled via different media (due to the characteristics of those media)...there was not one medium that did the best under all circumstances.

So what does this mean when using Twitter? Different customers are going to have different needs. Some are going to have very simple problems that can be addressed quickly and are going to be fairly matter-of-fact/rational about the issue. Twitter could be a terrific medium for those kinds of situations.

But, many customers are going to have complex problems, be upset about the problem, or both. In these cases, Twitter is unlikely to be the best choice. In these situations, the 140-character limitation of Twitter makes it really difficult to engage in complex conversations with completeness and clarity. And in cases where the customer is upset or angry, you need to convey empathy and concern. The terseness required in Twitter is just not adequate for mollifying emotional customers.

2) Use Twitter to route customers to better support channels in your firm

Instead of trying (and likely failing) to address customers' issues via interaction on Twitter, use that opportunity to direct customers to those other people/channels in your company who can best handle them. But don't just rely on a message like the following:

You clearly risk losing the customer. Instead, ensure the hand-off happens by getting the customer's contact information (obviously best if done via direct message) and then passing that onto the appropriate channel so a support rep can then join and continue the conversation that was started on Twitter through whatever medium is best suited for the problem at hand (phone, email, etc.).

3) Failures are public spectacles

It's important to remember that Twitter is a social medium. Any failure on your part to soothe an aggravated customer could easily turn into a public shouting match, even if the shouting is only one way. And to make matters worse, that conversation is persistent, there for the customer to reference for any and all friends to view. A happy customer might tell a friend, but an unhappy one will tell the world. And, since that unhappy customer is already sitting there in front of a potentially huge social network, that negative word-of-mouth can spread quickly. This makes it just that much more important to avoid long, public conversations with upset/angry customers on social networks like Twitter. If the customer wants to vent, let them rant over a medium that is isolated away from public scrutiny and where they are guaranteed to have the customer rep's undivided attention.

4) Do it well, or don't do it

As social media are still fairly new to many companies, it's tempting to let an employee or two who are particularly interested in the medium "try it out" informally, perhaps even during off-hours. This approach is unlikely to result in highly satisfied customers for a few reasons. First, the hand-offs mentioned in #1 above are unlikely to happen smoothly and quickly, thus risking further alienating a customer already having problems. Second, these employees who are interested may not be the best people in your company to do this; they may not even be customer support professionals with appropriate training and/or people skills. And third, a lack of formality means that key lessons may not be captured in order to help improve future efforts at using social media for customer service.

No, instead, set up a quick team with appropriate resources. This doesn't have to be, nor should it be, a several-month project to assemble the team and create policies and document processes. But, some level of formality can be helpful, even if it's simply a list of contacts within the company for handing off different types of problems/customers and a regular (e.g., daily) huddle to share insights and set expectations. This will likely be a very new way to engage the customer, so learning is inevitable. You're unlikely to get it perfect from day one, but getting there as quickly as possible is the key to creating an advantage over your competitors.