The Mobile Information Age

Seemingly from the dawn of the written word, Man has endeavored to "take it with him" and "spread the word". With some thought to the history of technology, it isn't surprising to see how important it is to us to have certain information at our disposal. 3x5 cards, a Rolodex, PDA's and SmartPhones make up the bulk of the most important information to have at hand. Contacts.

On the larger scale of technology you see portable file cases, then FAX machines, data tapes, Hollerith Cards (look it up if you don't know what they are) and disc packs. These made information in a more permanent state more portable but still used a lot of room for the contacts and more detailed information businesses needed to have at hand.

Between these two sets lay the most robust industry to rise up. The personal computer set a level of expectations that gave a lot of us access to a wide range of information from a single machine. It wasn't a main frame or a mini-computer. It really wasn't portable but could be moved if needed though cumbersome to do so. It could connect through the telephone system or a dedicated line like a terminal from an office or home to connect to an even larger repository of information that might be needed.

Out of the PC environment came the need to "take it with you" to visit clients on site or demonstrate new applications or make presentations. The portable PC was created to satisfy that need and it was a PC with a built-in monitor and disk drives. From then it was a matter of making it smaller, faster and more powerful. Miniaturization was the buzzword of the day and computer manufacturers took it to literal proportions and thus was built the PDA. At first it was a kind of set back due to its limited capabilities but it did put our contacts and some other types of information quite literally at our fingertips. As we got used to using these devices and learning to reliably synchronize them to our laptops and desktop systems, we began to demand more of the little gem.

As the technology progressed, so to did the demand for more power, memory, speed and connectivity options. InfraRed (IR) by now was too slow but remained on most portable platforms as the only or more reliable wireless solution available. Bluetooth technology was to increase wireless security but kept running into issues with initial connectivity causing many to forego the security and go back to a wired solution which still proved faster and more secure even today.

Now the wireless communications companies or "cell phone" companies if you prefer, are offering far more powerful devices that do a great deal more than make phone calls and keep contacts at your fingertips. These are miniature computing platforms running one of three main-stream operating systems. Apple's iPhone, Microsoft's Windows Mobile and Google's Android. Which is the best solution? That's a trick question that depends on far too many factors that must be taken into account sans personal preferences. And since the consumer is not shy about making their preferences known, it would be impossible to say which is best for all people everywhere. So that questions won't be answered here. On the other hand, I'll make my preferences and opinions known knowing that it may stir up dissent and strife among the masses.

I can sum up all of my opinions and observations with the following:

Palm OS was but no longer a serious contender.

Microsoft CE/Windows Mobile stripped down windows to fit in the limited confines of the hardware rather than build a purely mobile solution and strive for a standardized hardware hook list. Good for many things but now outdated as of version 6.5. No real improvements in mobile computing and seems to lag in available apps for the masses.

Apple iPhone was the most significant and directed improvement in mobile computing for a hand-held device. Though Apple's anally strict application rules for "their" device severely restricts true open platform choice by the masses, their strict adherence to these rules have produced very fine apps. It's interesting to see how Apple and Apple owners have for years complained about Microsoft's attempts to "control" the market with a closed operating system (Windows) while Apple does control the market with their own stringent and anal-like adhering to a finite set of rules. Seems to me that's how Sony lost the Beta/VHS battle and Apple lost the PC market.

Google Android. It's new and looks cool. It's a young and undeveloped total mobile package platform as compared to Apple's iPhone. However, that is changing very rapidly. It seems that Google foresaw the need for a true open platform that offered just about everything you could want in a mobile device app list. So being the new kid on the block isn't about how well it does now but how well it does it in the future. If Google stays on course, Android will easily out-distance iPhone forcing Apple to make a couple of hard choices. With Sprint's focus on the HTC EVO 4G device running Android 2.1 and the build-up of the 4G infrastructure Sprint may very well become the embodiment in a single package of a single company that Apple and Microsoft can only do part way each.

The culmination and melding of Google Android, devices by HTC, a huge ready-to-make-it-better base of companies that have accepted the operating system and Sprint's relentless progress to increase capability nationwide is unmatched. Come June 4, 2010, Sprint looks to be in the position to take the hill and keep it.