
I think Penny Arcade pretty much sums it up right here. The link to the picture is the news post for the comic on Penny-Arcade's website.
And if you're late to the game:
then

You didn't misread the title. I'm not purchasing an iPhone. Some people have their reasons, to me it comes down to asking myself what I'm buying and whether it's worth it. I should preface this post with this. By all accounts I should be lining up first day to buy one. Reason number one, my Cingular servitude is running up this August. I'm familiar with their network, I'm a valued customer, and probably a shoe-in for a renewal. Reason number two, I recently purchased a Macbook Pro. Mac users have been waiting eons for the ability to sync a PDA with iCal with Apple-like serendipity. If I want a good PDA that will truly be effortless in setup, another Apple product is the way to go. This is because there is not a snowballs chance in hell a Blackjack running Windows Mobile whatever is gonna sync with iCal. I haven't personally looked into it and maybe I'm wrong but this seems pretty obvious that I shouldn't keep my hopes up. Reason number three, my demographic. A 23 year old male with a decent job and very tech knowledgeable shouldn't have any qualms over getting a hip iPhone.
With all of those great reasons, why am I not getting out my camping gear? For starters, I seriously don't have the spare 500 dollars to justify getting something that will litter ally have to replace many electronic devices I already own. I have a 60 gig iPod for music and movies, a black Razr for phone calls, rudimentary web surfing, and texting, and a black DS Lite for gaming (and maybe web surfing, more on that later). Replacing all of these things would be great, but its not like its a heavy burden to carry them. Also, having an all in one device just means that when it gets stolen you lose all functionality.
Would I buy a cool Apple phone/PDA with no iPod built in? Sure, especially if the user input wasn't a touch screen (seriously I have big fingers, hard to pinpoint), but for right now for me, it looks like I'm going to have to experience the iPhone through someone else. Which is fine for me, because right now I don't really think I need it.
I've never had a problem using technology as a means to an end to get what I need done. Web based email to check and keep up with friends and family, a modded Xbox for movie and music storage and server capability. A music player to listen to music and podcasts, keeping me sane at work. But there are a few advancements that I think we as a society could do without, and Twitter is a great example. Thankfully, only the technocrats know exactly what its for and use it often, but what it basically does is lets you give live up-to-the-minute updates about your thoughts to people who are subscribed to your twitter. You post to twitter by just sending a text message, or on their website, and it then texts everyone who has subscribed to you. But what practical application is there, really?
If my friends want to do something, they either text or call my cell. They all have cell phones. And while there is some voyeristic leanings with this service that makes it interesting, its not interesting enough to anyone what I think or feel any given minute. Myspace was useful only because it lets the luddites create a webpage and others easily find and link their webpage to yours. This is not new, just look at Geocities back in the day. In fact, the only difference between Geocities and Myspace, is that Geocities didn't have the foresight to make it easy for people to link to one another and post comments, show who is your friend, in house email system, free easy to use blog software. To their credit, they did their best to be a free website host, but imagine what if. Now, it seems, that the masses attracted to Myspace may leave it for the same reason they joined. Facebook, with their recent inclusion of people not neccessarily in college may be the 'next new thing', who knows.
All I know for a fact is my circle of friends doesn't really need to know what I'm doing at any given moment, its too impractical.

Wouldn't think of a free online encyclopedia to be a romping ground of great images but fortunately there are a listing of people who scour Wikipedia for great images and nominate them for the pic of the day. To be pic of the day, its stipulated that it has to be desktop sized, making life easy from the start.
While there are a ton of pics on Digg, there isn't really a wallpaper section to vote up really good images on the web. Socwall solves this, in a similar way too...and hopefuly the site gets popular only to get more quality. Completely supported by ads, it invites people to vote up or down on images, filtering the spam and rising to the top quality images. Its only downside really would be the legality of being able to post someone elses pictures on their server. Maybe they should go to linking soon? Who knows. Its still a great site and a vote in my book.
When Google was created (or popularized) they diverged from company mantra with a simple line in their creed: Do no evil. Now many of Google's critics point out certain instances where this has either been looked over or simply ignored, the biggest instance that sticks out in my mind is when Google negotiated with the Chinese Communist Government in helping censor the web from its Chinese citizens. While that in itself is terrible, what was the alternative? Pull out of a 6 billion person market to let Yahoo and MSN stay to take over Google's remaining market share to companies with even less scruples to an extent to let the Chinese government open email accounts of its patrons? (Hello Yahoo mail, feel guilty about helping China imprison a citizen yet?)
If you get angry about that, then here are some examples of companies who do evil and don't care:
RIAA/MPAA/Copyright Royalty Board
Normally putting this three-headed dragon's name in print causes me to go into convulsions, but soon something as simple as internet radio could go by the wayside and needs to be mentioned. Now I'm not going to go into the usual diatribe as to saying something as inflammatory as the RIAA, MPAA and the like were doing what they did to protect the artists they whore out represent, but now another business model they couldn't monetize to death could be legislated away. The Copyright Royalty Board, under pressure from the RIAA greatly increased the cost to play licensed music over the internet to an extent well beyond what could be feasible by internet radio stations, large and small alike, could sustain. (read more here) Surprisingly, a few contenders have come to fight the evil. Remember, these are the same people who tried to browbeat Steve Jobs into selling music for something more then $0.99 for more popular songs. (to which his reply was "LOL") So don't expect this to be the last media companies and the legislators they have in their pockets will continue to do YOU disservice.
Verizon
Apparently Verizon thought they were God's gift to teh interwebs because not only did they complain loudly enough to prevent Pennsylvania's free Wi-fi program to its knees (yeah I know Verizon, you couldn't stand a couple million poor people get free internet access but would rather them pay through the nose) but are now going after a company to protect its arcane technology. Now granted, if Vonage was a boxer, he would look bloodier then Rocky fighting Apollo but the premise is extremely interesting. Basically, using existing Internet technologies, bridges the gap between the Internet and the Telephone in a way that would make a tel-co sick to their stomach. Want an easy phone service where you have crystal-clear cheap phone calls and take your number wherever you go? Yeah, your phone line isn't doing that. What got me upset wasn't that Verizon is suing Vonage to protect their patent but that Verizon was suing Vonage to prevent that technology in the market and keeping their existing business model viable. Whether or not Verizon had the patent first is a moot point. The U.S. patent system is comparable to an injured bird that can't fly and flapping on the ground so any patent holding company could find patents they held and claim technology that was theirs just for the big payoff someday (Blackberry anyone?). If IF Verizon was to incorporate what Vonage has done completely into their broken land line and long distance model, then that's less evil enough for me to stomach. Maybe its a little too much to ask for companies to think how to make their products better for their consumers without thinking of ways to overcharge them in the process. GG Verizon, your inscrutable business practices might make you savvy in making money, but as a company, I'd rather spend my hard earn cash on someone who is a little less of a dick. Here's to one less customer.
Sony (and Sony BMI)
Anyone remember the spyware program known as Gator that infested your computer with adware and slowed it to a screeching halt, all the while calling it a "service"? In comes Sony Music. They hire a team of coders to do something similar to your computer so you can't do what the RIAA wishes could never be done: rip CDs. Long story short, removing the software did nothing short of damage your computer's CD drive and render it nonoperational.
Now I'm not saying avoid these companies or that my choices are any better. I'm sure Cingular/AT&T have done equally worse and that Verizon/Sony/RIAA are just rightfully protecting their interests, but that doesn't mean you have to actively participate with them. While none of us will ever have the money to be truly heard by any lawmaker, don't sit there like a stub and actively be unaware. Try within your power to do no evil. §