I have been unhappy with my cell service & phone for some time now – there is some a great deal of irony in that – and last last week splurged on a very cool new smartphone and different service.

I acquired the new BlackBerry Storm 9530, and have been slowly learning to navigate the new interface.

The Storm has gotten mixed reviews as a brand new device playing on the Apple iPhone’s playing field. It does have its strengths and weaknesses, but so far (three days) I’ve been happy with mine.

The main reason for my choice (Storm vs. iPhone) is that the Blackberry is primarily a messaging device and phone, and does those two things very, very well, and the media capabilities are adequate but not spectacular. The iPhone is primary a media device, and the phone and messaging are secondary functions.

I also went and played with both for a good period of time, messing around with the user interface and using their touch keyboards to enter text. The Storm’s interface was a bit easier for me to use. I did like the click technology better than I thought I would.

I’m looking forward to finishing its configuration, setting up Outlook and learning to really use it.

Pros so far:
Crisp, clear display screen
Much improved web browser
Physical lock/unlock button

Cons so far:
Battery life isn’t the greatest – about 28 hours
Verizon provided me with *no* activation instructions – I had to google it

Jury’s still out:
Ease of outlook setup
Ease of text entry/interface use
Camera quality (not that it’s a primary camera, but useful in a pinch)

If I have anything substantive to add, I may write a 30-day review.

About a month ago, I decided to re-try Twitter.

I made a stab at using social networking media a year or two ago, and it just didn’t click for me – partially because I didn’t really use it, and maybe because the media itself hadn’t reached the tipping point among my peer group. I was on Pownce, Facebook, LinkedIn, BlogCatalog, etc, but did nothing with them.

This time, though, it’s been a fun – and I’d say successful – experiment.

What is Twitter? It’s a microblogging platform, allowing users to post short, 140 character posts via web or cell phone text message to their own user-ID branded page. Users can follow, reply to and direct message each other, giving Twitter feeds the feel of a public instant messaging forum.

Why use a microblogging platform like Twitter? For me, the reasoning was simple – it’s an augment to my blog, a way to say short, snarky, stupid things to the universe and my circle of friends that wouldn’t really merit a blog post of their own.

Others use Twitter to market their blog, to connect with their customers and readers, to solicit relatively timely think-tank feedback from a broad follower base, and to network with a larger circle of acquaintances than they’d typically encounter online.

Why was this try successful?

First, and most importantly, I jumped on the platform at the same time as several other friends, which gave me a built-in conversational group. Twitter is most enjoyable as an interactive medium. I don’t follow everyone indiscriminately, only friends, colleagues and a few highly entertaining authors – the fabulous (and evil) Kate has a superb post on that subject.

Second, I downloaded a third party Twitter application to my desktop that behaves like an IM client. I chose Twhirl – but others use different applications they’re equally happy with. I wouldn’t remember to go check the website nearly as frequently, but checking an application that’s open on my desktop is pretty easy. I also added a Twitter-Facebook connector so my updates flow to Facebook, and a Twitter feed sidebar on my blog.

And, third, I think that this particular type of media has hit its tipping point. While it was popular with early adopters a year ago, it’s becoming fairly widespread; middle-of-the-road techies are now using it as well. Stats show that the user base has grown from 650,000 in Dec 2007 to over 4,000,000 in December of 2008 – that’s huge.

The sad downside of this equation is the growing view of the Twitter userbase as a potential advertising market. The question is out there, on the table – how do advertisers and top Tweeters monetize Twitter? I offer the revolutionary observation that just, maybe, you *don’t*. The conversations about snowpocalypses, grocery store lines, cats and cookies are of far more value in our overstressed, technologically adept society than one more ad-saturated media channel.

Don’t advertise on Twitter pages and feeds. Don’t spam via Twitter. In fact, as much as I value my friends, if they choose to use Twitter to send spam or ad media, I will unfollow them pretty darn promptly because I am not a volunteer ad subject.

In spite of the small spam issue, at the end of the day, I’d say my Twitter experiment has been successful, primarily because it’s been *fun*. I don’t have enough fun things in my life, so I think I’ll keep this one.

As some of you know, I attended my first really big science fiction convention this summer, the 2008 Worldcon, as part of a get-together with friends. It was a great deal of fun, but admission and travel can be expensive.

For Worldcons, it’s possible to purchase a supporting membership for half the full membership price; this doesn’t include attendance, only Hugo voting rights and a packet of information at the end of it all. Cheryl Morgan’s excellent after-analysis got me thinking – what if there were more?

On the other side of the world, Conflux Australia again held a virtual SF mini-con in parallel with the real life convention last month. The virtual mini-con is essentially a fully Internet-based online convention, a gathering of friends and fans that follow a program to chat with a special guests or panels. Conflux’s virtual con was bulletin-board-based.

With all the powers of interactive media available today, what if organizers pulled many multimedia channels together to host a virtual con? For example:

• I host project meetings using webcast, web chat and audio conference to keep participants engaged. For large groups, we have lecture or Q&A modes to keep the audio channel usable.

• I just participated in Linux Journal’s inaugural live event – a combination of streaming video and web chat.
• I have participated in distance learning events, a combination of streamed video/audio presentations, chat room real-time discussion, stored sessions for playback and follow-up forum-based follow-up discussion. This format, in particular, might lend itself well to virtual convention attendance.

If convention organizers would consider investing in setting up this type of technology, webcasting a key set of sessions and providing moderated chat and discussion forums, they could extend the privilege of attending and truly participating to a much broader audience. By carefully calculating the price point and successfully marketing this membership category, the virtual convention could pay for the required technology set-up.

I believe this approach would help grow the Worldcon’s media coverage and attendance base. Plus, I believe the interactive technology aspects would appeal to a younger fan base – it’d be awesome.

Earlier this week, Emily Gould wrote a thought-provoking article in NY Times Magazine about blogging and over-sharing – and Beast Mom wrote a great follow up.

The question is how much personal information should you share on a blog? How much is too much? There is a fine line between having a warm, personal voice and oversharing.

There are all sorts of blogs out there. Some are are topic focused, on politics, technology, business, celebrity, even on blogging itself. Others are more personally focused, diarist blogs on home, family, lifestyle and personal observations. I would consider mine to be fairly eclectic – with some posts on travel, business, tech and writing and others on what’s happening in my family.

I have always been very conscious that anything I write on the Internet is completely public, and have refrained from blogging about work frustrations, family issues and sensitive subjects like religion and politics. I would never want anyone that I’m having a problem with to read about it online!

Beast Mom’s point is that in today’s environment of online oversharing, we may be hurting our childrens’ futures. Today those seeking political office have their past examined in minute detail; tomorrow that may apply to the average job as well. The more information there is online, the easier it is to dig into that background detail.

In my opinion, most parents who blog about their children do so respectfully and positively. I never complain about my kids’ problems online, but I’m quick to rave about their successes! I also ask their permission and give them an opportunity to review when I post about them. The oldest likes being written about online; the younger would prefer not to have that attention.

Kids, however, don’t blog about themselves and their peers quite so respectfully. When they hit young adulthood, college, and beyond, they set up MySpace and Facebook pages. Some use less-than-stellar judgement and fill those pages with raunchy screen names, racy pictures and trashy commentary.

I repeatedly caution my teens about their online presence – I want them to create an image they’d be proud of if an employer, pastor or future spouse were to find their web pages. I also caution them to not divulge their last name or detailed contact information, for safety and searchability reasons. I check their pages occasionally, more because I’m fascinated with their online voice.

So, does my blogging about my kids hurt them? I don’t think so – although they are probably embarrassed from time to time that their ancient, dumb mother is even online and can code rings around them.

Can their own online presence hurt themselves? Probably, but we work on encouraging them away from making that happen. Who knows, maybe 20 years in the future having Myspace indiscretions cached in the Wayback machine will be de rigueur – like inhaling seems to have become today.

A couple of weeks ago, a news article hit the press about a soldier’s cell phone dialing home during a firefight in Afghanistan. Apparently the soldier had taken his cell phone with him in the field, combat heated up, and somehow he managed to press his redial button in the heat of the action.

This made for a pretty scary call for the soldier’s parents, especially since the call cut off after another soldier shouted, “Incoming! RPG!” The parents eventually made contact with their son’s unit and found out all was ok.

This raises a lot of questions.

What are our soldiers doing with cell phones in the field? Isn’t this:

• a source of data on troop movements, based on triangulation of signal source
• a potential intelligence breach, as cell phone conversations could be intercepted and overheard by hostile forces
• a hazard in a covert operation, should the phone unexpectedly ring, or even if the screen illuminates and lights blink at night
• a distraction to the soldier – shoot, we’re not supposed to talk or text and drive in Washington, so surely our troops shouldn’t be operating a cell phone while they reload in Afghanistan.

I have read that cell phones are being used more often for official purposes in combat, as a backup to radio and other communication sources. That application just seems odd – especially the hazard and distraction factor for any troops who might be on the receiving end of such calls.