The BlackBerry PlayBook is awesome. I’ve said this since it launched in 2011. It has the best user interface of all tablets I’ve tested, incorporating an ingenuous touch-sensitive bezel. It has a blazingly fast processor, good battery life and used to have the best screen on the market until Apple unveiled the new iPad with Retina Display. But despite the PlayBook being a rocking piece of hardware, it had major flaws that prevented me from recommending it to people.

Until recently, when asked what I thought of the PlayBook I would say, “It’s rad. But don’t buy one.”

It had no native email or calendar client. Its app store was like a ghost town. It might’ve had a bitching interface and hardware, but it sucked in every other regard.

That’s changed. A recent update and general improvement in logic at Research In Motion have stacked up to make the PlayBook one of the best tablets on the market. Here are five reasons why I think you should consider buying one.

1. PlayBook OS 2.0
   The PlayBook has always been awesome from a hardware perspective, but its original operating system left a lot to be desired. You  had to connect to a BlackBerry smartphone to do email that and other basic things like calendaring – unless you were happy with web interfaces. The new OS, however, mends all of these problems. It has a kick-ass email client, nice calendar app and no longer makes the PlayBook feel like a smartphone accessory. It also has one of the best user interfaces I’ve ever seen. Much better. Thanks RIM.
2. Price
   After a troubled launch, the PlayBook is now one of the cheapest tablets on the market. In my home country of South Africa you can pick it up for less than R3000 and in the USA prices go as low as $200. For that you get some of the beefiest hardware available on a really well-built tablet that has just had fresh life blown into it with OS 2.0. At prices these low it’s worth buying even if all you use it for is an espresso tray.
3. Accessibility
   File management on the PlayBook is near-perfect; you simply access shared folders on the device over your WiFi network. It makes it really quick and easy to drop a movie file, for example, onto the PlayBook for viewing on the go, without even having to take the tablet out of your bag. It also supports Adobe Flash better than any other tablet platform I’ve tried. While I still find tablets to be a very limited computing environment, and prefer just carrying around my laptop, the PlayBook is less limited than most. The form factor and light weight also make it easier to transport and less cumbersome to use than bigger tablets.
4. Charging
   This might not sound like a big deal, but bear with me. Remember, it’s the small things that matter with tablets. The PlayBook uses an industry-standard, micro-USB connection for charging. This means that not only can you use any other BlackBerry smartphone charger with it – but any other phone charger too, from Samsung, Motorola, Nokia, or whoever. One of the things that drives me crazy about other tablet brands is that they each have a proprietary charger than can’t be shared with my phone – except the iPad. And since Apple has its own connector for iOS devices, the PlayBook is the most universally compatible by far. For someone who travels weekly as I do, being able to carry a single charger is a killer feature.
5. Apps
   The single biggest problem with the PlayBook at launch was a lack of apps. There was no Evernote, Dropbox, Angry Birds or any of the apps that people had learned to love on iOS and Android. But that has changed. BlackBerry App World is now full of awesome apps for the PlayBook including an official Evernote client and, yes, Angry Birds. Twitter was also conspicuously missing from the original PlayBook OS, but it is now incorporated in the universal messaging platform of PlayBook OS 2.0. While the PlayBook still trails way behind Android and iOS and in the apps department it is now way, way better than it was and can actually be used for stuff now.

I own a small menagerie of tablets – an iPad, Motorola Xoom, several other Android tablets and the PlayBook. Out of all of them I find myself using the iPad most, but it has recently started taking a backseat to my PlayBook, especially when traveling. Watching movies on the PlayBook is second-to-none, and that’s mostly what I want to do with a tablet while flying.

If the iPhone was the Jesus phone then the PlayBook is the Lazarus tablet. It was dead and gone, but now lives again – kicking ass and scaring disciples.

Is there still hope for BlackBerry? Can Lenovo make a dent in the tablet market? We don’t know the answers to these questions, but are willing to speculate wildly. This week Andy Hadfield, Simon Dingle and Steven Ambrose discuss the Lenovo K1 tablet, Samsung pulling the Tab 7.7 from its stand at IFA, the Amazon tablet, app stores and operators, iOS 5, the launch of Telkom Business Mobile, Evernote acquiring Skitch, Google shutting down old projects, and more…

A trusted source in the telecommunications industry tells me that Microsoft has been planning the acquisition of Nokia for over two years. According to my informant Redmond is waiting for the Finnish mobile phone provider to shed more of its market cap – currently sitting at around $22 billion – before tying things up.

I don’t believe it.

Firstly, Microsoft already has everything it needs from Nokia following the signing of an agreement between the two companies that opens various avenues of opportunity aside from Nokia licensing the Windows Phone operating system – which is the most significant part of the deal for Microsoft.

Secondly, Microsoft doesn’t do hardware unless it has to and can clearly differentiate – such as in the case of the Xbox and Kinect. It’s a software licensing company. You don’t make healthy margins from hardware unless your surname is Jobs. For everyone else it’s a tough volume game that I’m pretty sure Microsoft has no intention of playing.

But while we consider the marriage of these two technology giants, we were recently provided with a glimpse of what Nokia could’ve been sans Microsoft.

Windows Phone has been a failure to date. Its predecessor, Windows Mobile, had a pitiful market share in the smartphone arena, ending up with 5% last year according to Canalys. Since launching Windows Phone 7 Microsoft’s market share has actually deteriorated, falling to 3% in the first quarter of 2011.

Look at leading manufacturers’ operating system approaches and there is no question as to why Microsoft has fallen behind. Samsung and HTC are fully committed to Google’s Android operating system and their releases of Windows Phone devices have been little more than experimental. Microsoft is yet to win over handset vendors and it remains to be seen whether they ever will.

A source at one of the world’s largest handset manufacturers recently confirmed what I had suspected: nobody wanted the Windows Phone 7 device that their company launched in SA. Stock was returned by operators who could not dispose of it, while the company’s Android devices sold like hotcakes. The market has spoken.

Nokia will be the first manufacturer to go big on Windows Phone, but it remains to be seen if it can turn the tide for Microsoft.

And while Nokia prepares to enter the market with Microsoft onboard, the fruits of previous engagements are about to launch.

The Nokia N9 was announced in recent weeks running the MeeGo operating system that Nokia created in partnership with Intel. This was part of the strategy that the old Nokia regime put in place to regain relevance in the smartphone market. And it might have worked if their shareholders had given it a chance before displacing the CEO and alienating other key executives in the company like Anssi Vanjoki.

The N9 looks spectacular, although I haven’t had a chance to play with it yet. MeeGo seems to address all of the crippling issues that users had with the Symbian operating system. It also utilises the powerful services Nokia has built via its Ovi brands, such as Maps and Music Store. These services used to be differentiators for the company, but are now being tied into Windows Phone to the benefit of other manufacturers too.

Earlier this year I met with the new Nokia CEO, Stephen Elop, who explained that if Nokia was to be successful as a Windows Phone manufacturer it first had to work to improve and grow the Microsoft ecosystem. This makes perfect sense and I have faith in Elop’s strategy and ability to execute, even if I am skeptical of Microsoft’s mobile prospects.

But the N9 and MeeGo could’ve been the renaissance Nokia needed. The once fiercely contrarian Finnish company may well have clawed its way back to the top of the market without Microsoft.

Of course, now we’ll never know.

The N9 will soon have to compete with similar devices running Windows Phone, from the same manufacturer. Any success it does have will be weighed down by Nokia’s commitment to Microsoft. Marketing resources, etc. must be split. You won’t hear Intel’s take on this out in the open, but you can bet they’re fuming. The Nokia that Intel originally partnered with is no more, its attentions split and its strategy transformed – not necessarily a bad thing, depending on your perspective.

So while we wait to see whether or not Microsoft and Nokia can redefine themselves in a market obsessed with Apple and Google, let’s take a moment to consider what could’ve been.

Check out the promo video for the N9 below. I can’t wait to get my hands on it.

I have just finished a column for Fin24 on the performance of Microsoft since the dot-com bubble burst in 2000 and how its mobile strategy may elevate the stock for the first time in a decade. If you like numbers then look for the article on my columnist’s page. Here we’ll stick to why I think the mobile market needs Microsoft – but we need to look at some numbers.

The current status quo in mobile is represented by the pie chart attached to this post. It shows the market share of leading smartphone platforms in the second quarter  of 2010.

Nokia is still the market leader with its Symbian platform and ships more smartphones every day than any other manufacturer. Android is the fastest growing mobile platform and Research in Motion is losing ground with BlackBerry – although it is doing the right thing by opening up to developers. Apple is happily occupying 14% of the market and is making more revenue from that slice than Nokia does in its entirety.

Microsoft has a relatively tiny 5% of the market despite having one of the first “smartphone” platforms with Windows CE that presented itself as Pocket PC in 2000 and since rebranded to Windows Mobile and now Windows Phone.

Too many technology enthusiasts are dismissing Microsoft and writing off Windows Phone 7 before it is even available. I’m not suggesting that Microsoft is guaranteed success in the market, but I don’t believe you can write it off. And whether Windows Phone 7 makes it or breaks it, I believe it will introduce a healthy dynamic.

For one, it will offer a true convergence of Microsoft services, bringing together the Zune Marketplace for content, Xbox Live gaming division and Microsoft’s productivity offerings. This is a win if you use these services and holds promise for gaming. Xbox Live is launching in South Africa before the end of the year and I suspect Microsoft will unleash Zune in the local market soon too – especially if it wants to meet and beat Nokia that already has its Ovi services, including music store, up and running in SA.

Love or hate Microsoft most of the market uses its products and services and will welcome a mobile platform that integrates with these. We get caught in bubbles like universities or tech fraternities where Apple is ubiquitous, for example – but in the real world Microsoft still owns over 90% of the computer operating system market. It also has the second biggest gaming console brand and dominates productivity software.

The ecosystem play by Microsoft is going to force its competitors to think about how they integrate with customer’s existing environments. Not that they aren’t playing that game already – but they’re about to be schooled.

Nokia has maps and music. RIM has BlackBerry Enterprise Server and Messenger. Apple has the lion’s share of applications and content retailing. Microsoft has its Live services, including mapping, it has Exchange, Xbox, Zune with music and video – and the list goes on. We all know the market is currently about service integration and nobody has more to integrate than Microsoft.

The Redmond giant knows how to convert and retain developers and has more experience with third party supporters than any of the other mobile players. Windows Mobile was open to apps years before the app store was invented and allows for development in one of the most familiar environments in computing with its Microsoft Visual Basic CTP for WindowsPhone Developer Tools.

RIM recently opened up the BlackBerry platform to a rang of development environments, including a very competent take on web applications that plug into the BlackBerry API stack with WebWorks – it’s a great move and don’t doubt that it was, at least in part, prompted by the loom of Windows Phone.

The race is on like Donkey Kong when it comes to enticing developers. Apple has nothing to worry about in this department thanks to the ridonkulous revenues it has shown via iTunes. Microsoft has already cleared the biggest hurdle – getting them trained on the tools.

Mobile platforms are going to have to open up and innovate in the race for developers if they want to stay ahead of Microsoft and this is all good news for consumers.

Microsoft is going to get the competition on their toes and keep them there – hell, it’s already started doing this. It will take the fight for developers to a new level and will further educate the market in terms of smartphone usage models.

And it might fail. But I doubt it will. Even if it does – it will have an overwhelmingly positive effect before it fizzles out.

iPhone versus Windows Phone 7

In the Web 2.0 echo-chamber  bad ideas spread fast. This time nodal sparks came from web celebs like entrepreneur Jason Calacanis and online broadcasting demigod Leo Laporte – both of which I have the utmost respect for, and both of which are proponents of the anti-Facebook movement.

I also respectively believe they’re taking things too far.

Calacanis is known for jumping to conclusions and he’s been wrong before. A great example of this was his Twitter attack on the New York Times’ David Pogue for daring to publish books on products from companies he writes about in the ‘Times. He attacked Pogue’s integrity and my opinion that he was wrong in doing so isn’t just an assertion – but listen to Pogue defend himself in TWiT episode 213 and decide for yourself.

Calacanis is clearly a principled guy who feels strongly about things. I’m the same and have made bad calls on that basis before too, so it would be hypocrisy for me to criticise him too harshly. But I believe he’s wrong about Facebook.

That Zuckerberg is an awkward kid with a track record of doucheness is undoubtable. He has been presented as such from all quarters and even the movie about the birth and rise of Facebook apparently casts him as ruthless and untrustworthy, amongst other things.

But so what? I’ve met some hard hitters in the tech space, including CEOs of large companies, and I can assure you that being ruthless is a common trait amongst almost all of them. Being untrustworthy, on the other hand, is a common trait with young men in general and Zuckerberg was very young indeed when he allegedly knifed business partners in the back. Raise your hand if you went through your teens without doing anything stupid… I didn’t think so.

If you’re going to quit Facebook because its leader is an arrogant know-it-all with weird preoccupations and because the company isn’t in full adoption of the open approach to privacy and technology in general then I would tender that you should be selling all your Apple products, deleting Windows off your PC and getting rid of all your gaming consoles. No more Kindle books, and you should probably sift through Google’s user agreements too. And good luck finding a mobile phone and network to use it on.

The fact is that Facebook is a great and useful service irrespective of its CEO being a douchebag (which may or may not be true). The privacy thing also isn’t as big a deal as some will tell you.

I’ve always been very wary of online privacy and have implemented advanced controls on my Facebook account since it was possible to do so. I have groups of users and I control who can see what. For example, I don’t let anyone except really close friends and family see most of the pictures and videos of my kids. Those settings have persisted and Facebook hasn’t changed them. My account is still as secure as it was this time last year.

The problem Facebook has is that it does privacy too well. It allows for advanced control of your personal content and I’m yet to see another service come close in terms of the granularity it allows. As with any feature in technology, if you don’t apply these controls then it’s you that has the problem, not Facebook. The user is still in control of what the public gets and what stays private in terms of specified user groups and networks.

Because it does this better than most, people expect Facebook to shine at privacy. They don’t care that Twitter is completely open because it’s always been that way, unless you have a locked account.

I am not suggesting that Facebook is faultless, however. The company certainly has played hard and fast with the information of people who do not lock down their information and accept the default settings. It also clearly plans to leverage its situation to make money. But I’m not sure those are malicious actions. God forbid anyone makes a profit, right?

My suggestion is that everyone takes a deep breath and calms down. Facebook is no more or less evil than any other company trying to drive a profit. We could pick out individuals from any organisation and form opinions of the company as a whole based on that one person – but this is shortsighted and infantile as far as I’m concerned. Zuckerberg is the baby and Facebook is the bathwater. Let’s not throw them both out – even if Mark has been peeing in the bath.

There are way more people involved in the creation and running of the company than just the CEO.

I’m all for open software and networks. I believe the guys over at the Diaspora project are on the right track with their plans for a “privacy aware, personally controlled, do-it-all distributed open source social network” and I can’t wait to see the fruits of their effort and funding. But for now Facebook is still a useful tool to me. I have no privacy concerns because I’ve taken the time to set things up properly. I don’t approve of everything the company does, but I could say the same for all the other providers whose products I use on a daily basis including Twitter, Sony, Apple, etcetera.

And, it bears repeating: if you accept the default settings then you can’t complain too loudly when they change. Lock it down like I did.

I had an enlightening discussion with science fiction author and digital rights activist Cory Doctorow in Croatia in 2008 where we discussed his abandonment of the Mac, amongst other things. Cory, who has a tattoo of a Mac on his right bicep, found himself at odds with Apple as a company in recent years and switched to Linux. I asked Cory how he was enjoying Ubuntu Linux, which he runs on a Lenovo laptop.

“I’m extremely impressed with Ubuntu,” he said. “But less impressed with Lenovo as a company.”

The problem? Lenovo’s user agreement for their laptops. The reality is that if you look at most technology companies closely enough you’ll find something to disapprove of. Sometimes you just need to consolidate that in terms of the advantages offered by the technology itself. Cory still uses Lenovo products. And I still use Facebook.

And no, I won’t be deleting my account today. Spare me the hype. I’d go so far as to say that most of the people who have been swept up in the anti-Facebook togetherness are ignorant as to exactly what it is they’re protesting.

But, if you do want to get rid of your Facebook account, check out Seppukoo – a service that aids you in your virtual suicide. And ra-ra for taking a stand.

In the enterprise space cloud is less remarkable than its most vehement proponents would have you believe. The IBMs and Microsofts of the world have established metrics, case studies and methodologies for how it’s done. And, as IBM CEO Sam Palmisano said in a meeting with press at Armonk, New York Yesterday – this cloud stuff is “nothing new”. He’s seen it all before. In the consumer space things are different, however, and here I include small business.

In that arena cloud is pitched as a vital next-level computing paradigm. And so it is. Google, Microsoft and Apple are all being challenged by the consumer market for cloud solutions that enable a distributed personal computing model where online is everything and individuals rely on multiple devices that need to be kept in sync.

Google is perhaps most favourably positioned in terms of this new paradigm. In its arsenal it has… well, the Internet. Everything Google does is intrinsically online. Orchestrating cloud services for its technologies is a natural progression more than a challenge.

For Microsoft and Apple, however, distributed meshes in personal computing are contrary to the centralised approach they inherited from a previous era.

Before we continue, we must separate Microsoft in terms of enterprise and consumer markets. We’re talking about the Microsoft that is pushing Windows Live and Office Live services here – not the Microsoft that developed Azure. To make the point again: the challenges and principles are different for corporates – we’re dealing with personal computing in the consumer sense here where a distributed typography underpins the trend.

While Google was born online, Microsoft has made great inroads in moving into the cloud. The laggard here is Apple – but I get the feeling it is about to take a giant leap forward.

MobileMe was part of Apple’s first play with cloud services, along with iWork.com. As is the typical Apple approach Steve Jobs and co. started with simple services that are slowly being ramped up. Apple never goes all out at the get-go.

Jobs clearly has big plans. In recent months Apple has been ramping up its server infrastructure. A new data centre for the company is being rolled out in North Carolina to supplement its existing site in Newark, CA. With an east-coast centre online Apple will apparently add five times more capacity at a cost of about a billion dollars. Either Jobs thinks that MobileMe is going to grow substantially, or Apple is planning something big and new in the cloud space.

Speculation is rife as to what this could be. Recent acquisitions suggest that an iTunes streaming service is on the way – something that would allow you to store your media libraries in the cloud and access them from anywhere. This seems logical, but I get the feeling there is more to it.

Services like Dropbox and Google’s pending Gdisk are making amazing things possible in terms of online storage, while companies like Carbonite are taking online backup to the masses. My prediction is that Jobs intends to take MobileMe, which already includes iDisk, and turn it into Apple’s “hard drive in the sky” complete with Time Machine backup and a range of services building on iWork.com, Mail and its other existing offerings.

With Apple’s developer conference around the corner iPhone fixation has once again hit the market – but I would pay careful attention to Jobs’ “and one more thing” when he presents his keynote because I think it is likely he will announce additions to Apple’s cloud offering. It just makes sense to include MobileMe with every Mac, including a cloud hard drive for media and other file storage and backup. Apple needs to do something now as Microsoft and Google continue to plod ahead in terms of cloud services and third-parties fill in the gaps.

The recent launch of Ubuntu Linux 10.04 also introduced Ubuntu One, which is Canonical’s first romp into cloud services that includes online storage and a music store with cloud media services. In the next few months and years we are going to see Ubuntu rising to challenge what Google, Microsoft and Apple are doing in the space and I’m inclined to think that Jobs’ strategy will more closely resemble Ubuntu’s than anyone else’s.

I remember buying my first set of Technics SL 1200 turntables and a cheap Behringer mixer ages ago and learning to DJ on that. Since then I’ve tried a number of more modern hardware alternatives – starting with CDs, then looking at computers and even iPod mixers. Nothing compared to my turntables. Will the iPad change that? I think not.

But when it comes to live production, which is more of what Rana is doing, then the iPad undoubtedly offers some advantages, especially given the low price of software for the device when compared to their hardware equivalents.

Before the launch of the Apple iPad many potential uses were postulated for the device. The most prominent of these was in publishing as people perceived new applications and media delivery to tablet devices that would impact on the world of magazines and newspapers. Movies, textbooks and social networking were all correctly predicted to be the kind of things that the iPad would be good for. But few guessed that the device would mean big things in the world of music.Within two weeks of launch the iPad app store had over 180 music-related applications with many of these being committed to actively using the iPad for making music.

The most obvious of these applications were virtual piano apps like Virtuoso Piano and interesting DJ apps like  iTurntable. But more sophisticated applications have turned up such as AC-7 Pro Control Surface that allows for the iPad to be used as a control interface for professional audio applications and hardware.

There are even guides sprouting up online for more complicated setups, like using the iPad to control Ableton Live. And, as is obvious from the video above, it’s possible to use the iPad as a serious instrument.

Music apps made their way onto the iPhone originally and some pretty impressive things were achieved – like being able to use the iPhone as a virtual flute or as a unique instrument in itself using the Ocarina application.

While rudimentary music production was possible, and even mastered, on the iPhone, the iPad with its larger screen and more powerful processor is taking things to a new level. The device has only been available for two weeks, so I look forward to seeing what musicians and producers manage to pull off with the device in the next year or two.

The problem:

The solution: The SilentRingTone™ that I have created for you. Here’s the deal: download the The SilentRingTone™ (right-click to download), add it to iTunes and sync it to your iPhone. Then make sure that you set specific ringtones for each of the people who you want to always be able to reach you. Now, when you don’t want to be bothered, change your default ringtone to The SilentRingTone™ and everyone except contacts with specific ringtones will get pure, auditory silence from your phone.

I’ve made this ringtone for the iPhone, but if you want to make your own silent ringtone it’s simple – create an audio file with a few seconds of… well… nothing in it. And if there are better ways to achieve this sort of functionality then let me know – this was all I could think of =)