iPhone 3GS

So. The 'Sport' version of the iPhone is with us. Of course 'S' doesn't necessarily stand for sport, but other high end brands such as Porsche use an S to differentiate their run-of-the-mill sports cars from their really-nice sports cars, so I'll leave the comparison in there.

The new product is a little underwhelming. No forward facing camera, little visible difference between it and it’s now cheaper (more on that shortly) sibling and price tags have not really changed much. There are some potentially exciting new bits and pieces under the hood, but on the whole this feels like a point update to the hardware.

The really cool stuff is in the software - and this we’ve known about for some time. So was this a slightly cynical attempt to answer the huge expectations for a new iPhone? I think the answer to that has to be yes. Ground breaking this product certainly is not.

Maybe this is why there has been none of the clever background support that came in with the 3G?

 O2 are telling me that as a UK customer I will have to wait for my current 18 month contract to expire before upgrading to this device - something I find a little surprising as the ostensibly friendly option of upgrading your year old 18 month contract to a new 18 month contract every July would essentially tie you in in perpetuity.

There was no comment about price parity across countries - and the results of this are pretty clear when you compare a $99 3G in the US with a £96 3G in the UK. Has the missing hand of Jobs on the tiller undermined the level of attention to detail in all this?

Time will tell, I suppose. One of the things that has made the iPhone  such an exciting piece of technology was it’s ease of access - both in it’s functionality and in one’s ability to get hold of it. Enforcing customers into the old ‘not until your contract expires’ upgrade path will surely consign the iPhone and it’s as yet unseen progeny to the heap of other bog-standard phones. We must have it NOW, or we will take a little more time to choose.

Domino's spots - could they be catching?

So the whole YouTube video debacle with Domino's Pizza has put an idea in my mind which I'm sure is nothing new... but I thought I'd jot it down anyhoo.

The video was made by employees - sure. But what if it hadn't been. Could these employees have been paid by a competitor to produce a video that would be bound to have massive impact on the target company? The possibilities for guerilla viral social counter-marketing (for want of a better phrase) strike me as boggling. You may remember the damage Sony did to itself, albeit limited in scale, with it's 'All I want For Christmas is a PSP' attempt at viral marketing? The web address for which, by the way, is now parked, camped, and shows all the signs of neglect you'd expect from an un-loved progeny. This raised the ire in the gaming community to such a level - judging by forum furore, not the best indicator I realise - that Sony's representatives published an official apology on the afore mentioned website.

Viral marketing tactics backfire quite often, especially when as crass as the above Sony example, and the Domino's youTube number was a prime example of how viral marketing can work from any direction. Is the adage that 'any publicity is good publicity' true here? Probably. Especially if The Onion is to be believed.

2005? 2009?

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that when I log in to blogger (for the first time in years) I have to re-assign the account to a gmail one. But now it lists me as having been here sine 2009? I joined in 2005... surely this can't be right? My interweb credentials simply must list me as having been present for years, not months.

Ah well.