Our tour through browsers of all shapes and sizes continues in earnest. On today’s special edition of the Showdown, we look at four iPhone-specific browsers.

Browser #1: Safari

Developer: Apple
Rendering Engine: Webkit
First Impression: “It’s nice. A little basic at times, but nice nonetheless.”
Ease of Use (Out of ten): 7
Positives: By now, we have all seen those iPhone ads that show off what the Safari browser can do. Good news: there is actually some truth in advertising for once. Everything works, from the zooming functionality to the on-screen keyboard to the vertical/horizontal “orientation switching.”
Negatives: No Flash. Everyone seems to complain about this, and for good reason. There is supposedly an “unlicensed” version coming soon, but we’re not holding our collective breaths.
Overall: 8

Browser #2: Mango

Website: http://leopardmac.tistory.com/
Developer: Guho Choi
Rendering Engine: Mango
First Impression: “They have a ‘report bug’ button that you can push easily. That does not make me feel secure. And while we’re on the subject, why is it constantly linking me to Safari? I don’t like that one bit.”
Ease of Use: 5
Positives: The “forward” and “back” commands are accompanied by a nifty “page flip” animation. Oh … and it’s yellow. That’s a plus, I guess.
Negatives: What exactly is it that we like least about Mango? Is it the absence of an adjustable screen orientation? Is it the nearly broken zooming options? Is it the fact that it desperately wants you to go back to Safari in the worst way possible? Truth be told, it is all of these things and more. Simply put, it’s a bad browser.
Overall: 3; “…And I’m being generous here.”

Browser #3: iCab

Website: http://www.icab.de/
Developer: Alexander Clauss
Rendering Engine: WebKit/Proprietary
First Impression: “It looks like Safari.”
Ease of Use: 8
Positives: iCab is seems to have more in common with the desktop edition of Safari than it does with the mobile version. Anything that one would want in a browser is here and (gasp) functional, including tabbed browsing, an advanced “find” feature, and full screen support.
Negatives: The full screen is a bit difficult to get out of.
Overall: 9

Browser #4: Journey

Website: http://www.apptism.com/apps/journey-web-browser/
Developer: Nathaniel Herman
Rendering Engine: Unknown
First Impression: [Singing] “Don’t stop believin’… [Pause] What? That that’s my first impression.”
Ease of Use: 7
Positives: It does everything it should be doing. That’s surprisingly hard to come by in a mobile browser.
Negatives: There is a button near the bottom right portion of the screen that looks suspiciously like that old “Netscape Navigator” logo. Hate to be a killjoy, but it has nothing to do with the legendary browser. It actually opens up a new tab. It took us ten clicks to realize that we would not be seeing Navigator on this day.
Overall: 7

And the Winner is – iCab. It’s everything a mobile should be and more.

…And there you have it. Be sure to tune in tomorrow for part two of our feature on advertising, technology, and you.

Anyone who lived through the late 1980’s ought to remember Max Headroom, the hyperactive, pseudo-CGI “head in the box” portrayed by actor Matt Frewer. The Max Headroom character was everywhere in those days, from music videos to ads for Coca-Cola and seemingly everything in between. What many people don’t remember, however, is the science fiction program that bared the character’s name. This was not the lovable, wacky Max that called Cinemax and England’s Channel 4 home. This Max exists in a world where the major television networks are in charge. Because of this, such every day items as the off switch and the mute button are deemed to be illegal. Televisions are everywhere, including bathrooms and junk yards. Simply put, no one could ever escape the grip of the mass media, and the people like it that way.

Working within the confines of this odd, “Network-meets-The Matrix” world is Edison Carter (also portrayed by Matt Frewer), ace reporter for the highly-rated Network 23 and the “basis” for Max Headroom. It is his mission to bring his viewers the truth, no matter the situation. In the show’s fourteen episodes, Emerson and company does everything from thwart a sentient supercomputer to blowing the lid off of a dangerous subliminal advertising scheme run by Bill Maher, using nothing more than quick thinking and a heaping helping of brutal honesty. The viewer, both physically in the show and otherwise, are constantly reminded that the world is a better place thanks to people like Emerson Carter and his “computerized” alter ego. As long as there are people fighting for the truth, there really is nothing to worry about.

In many ways, we are approaching this basic existence, only with a different concept serving as our vice. Instead of thriving on a flashing picture, we are addicted to information. I don’t just mean the “TMZ/Perez Hilton” style celebrity gossip columns. I mean anything. Pick your topic — President Obama, professional wrestling, U2 — and I bet there is someone, somewhere talking, tweeting, or blogging about it at this very moment. We need to know about what is going on, and we need to know it now. Take the recent “best of seven” series between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Orlando Magic for example. Five years ago, we would have had to wait two to three days to hear former Laker Shaquille O’Neal talk about his former team. Thanks to Twitter, we heard it minutes after the Lakers cliched the NBA title. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that this kind of “instant feedback” can become addictive.

Now despite what some might be thinking, things really aren’t all that dire. Our world isn’t based upon the idea of two-way television sets or networks that can make commercials so compact that they make people’s heads literally explode. We’re simply talking about the delivery of information, not a re-creation of 1984. It’s human nature to want to know what is going on around us. Exploiting that desire, on the other hand, is something else entirely. It all comes down to priorities. Those who put more effort into their advertising than their content are more likely to alienate their audiences than the people who put their “product” front and center. By ignoring the very thing that got you into this very situation to begin with, the writer/blogger/YouTube “star” is actually sending a message that your fan base’s mouse click means more than their physical presence. Who cares if the content is good nor not? You clicked the link. It’s your loss.

While it might seem like a good idea now, turning your audience into a group of mind-numbed automatons randomly clicking things will not help you become a success in the long run. The trick, if you want to call it that, is to adopt what I like to call the “Edison Carter” approach to content creation and maintenance. It all breaks down to three basic principles:

1. Your users are more than just a group of random mice clicking a white box. They’re people. Your people. Always keep that in mind when developing your content.
2. Stay genuine to your cause.
3. Stay open to the needs and concerns of your user base.

Do this, and the world just might become a better place. If you don’t, well … let’s just say living in an “off switch-free world” is not anyone’s idea of a good time. Be sure to come back tomorrow for part two of our three part series. Until then, this is Brad Fallon signing off for Network 23 the Free Line.

Despite what you might have heard, not everyone has the ability to load third party browsers onto their mobile devices. Some of us are stuck with the software the factory gave us. On today’s edition of the Free Line, we take a look at two very different proprietary browsers and the platforms that they call home.

Browser #1: Web Browser for S60

Website: http://www.nokia.com/microsites/s60-browser-site
Developer: Nokia
Compatible Handsets: All Nokia phones running the S60 operating system
Rendering Engine: Webkit
Model Used: N81 8 Gig Edition
Mobile Network: AT&T
First Impression: “At least I don’t have to install this one…”
Ease of Use (Out of ten): 8
Positives: As odd as it sounds, the best thing about the S60 browser is the fact that it comes pre-installed. It makes life much, much easier. Keeping with the “odd” theme, S60 does not allow you to automatically “zoom in” to a particular section of the website. Instead, the S60 implements a feature called MiniMaps, which lets people view a thumbnail of the site before zooming into the desired section. While it might sound a bit awkward, MiniMaps makes finding exactly what you’re looking for easy and nearly painless.
Negatives: Nokia branding (and links) are everywhere throughout this browser. Although it really doesn’t inhibit the browser in any real way, it can get annoying. It also seems a bit slower when compared to the likes of Opera.
Overall: 7

Browser #2: Blackberry Browser

Website: http://na.blackberry.com/eng/services/devices/
Developer: Research in Motion
Compatible Handsets: All Blackberry devices
Model Used: Blackberry 8300
Mobile Network: T-Mobile
Rendering Engine: Mango
First Impression: “Doesn’t this thing go any faster?”
Ease of Use (Out of ten): 6
Positives: It works. Honestly, that is the only nice thing that we can say about it.
Negatives: Unlike the S60 listed above, the Blackberry browser has no need for landscape options or zooming features. After all, why play around with virtual magnifying glasses when you could simply display the site as is? While it might seem like a good idea, it just does not work. Most of the sites we tried appeared to be either smashed together, formatted oddly, or simply just do not work. It also doesn’t help that the browser is slower than the express lane at the Wal-Mart.
Overall: 4; “Only use this as a last resort. Trust us.”

…And there you have it. Expect to see reviews of Safari Mobile, several different versions of Internet Explorer Mobile, and the NetFront Browser for the PSP within a week or so. Be sure to tune back in tomorrow to catch the first in our three-part series about instant information, advertising, and the people caught in the middle of it all. Until then, I bid you all adieu.

As anyone who has turned on television can tell you, “web surfing” on the go is definitely the hip and trendy thing to do. In an effort to stay toe to toe with both the beautiful people and the so-called “in-crowd,” we here at the Free Line dedicate today’s Showdown to web browsers of the mobile variety. Unless otherwise noted, all of the browsers were tested using a Nokia N81 handset running on the AT&T mobile network.

Browser #1: Opera Mini

Website: http://www.opera.com/mini/
Developer: Opera
Compatible Handsets: Various
Rendering Engine: Presto
First Impression: “So … when are we going to get widgets?”
Ease of Use: 9; “It’s that good.”
Positives: Let us start from the top: It’s stable, much faster than the built-in S60 browser, supports almost every format we threw at it (save for Flash, of course), extremely easy to download … we think you see where we are going with this.
Negatives: It’s slightly harder to rotate the screen on the fly.
Overall: 8

Browser #2: Skyfire

Website: http://www.skyfire.com/
Developer: Skyfire Team
Compatible Handsets: Various
Rending Engine: Unknown
First Impression: “It has a really nice interface.”
Ease of Use: 8
Positives: Flash works! Sure, it isn’t the greatest install of Flash were have ever seen, but at least it works. Although it does not exactly reach “Opera levels” of speed, it does feel a bit faster overall compared to the pre-installed S60 browser.
Negatives: Try as we might, we simply could not figure out how to rotate the screen.
Overall: 7; “If I could figure out how to rotate the screen at all, it would have gotten an 8. Some things are just better in landscape mode.”

Browser #3: Bolt

Website: http://boltbrowser.com/
Developer: Bitstream
Compatible Handsets: Various (Including Blackberry)
Rendering Engine: Proprietary
First Impression: “Well it took me to YouTube in record time…”
Ease of Use: 6 “It’s a bit trickier than the rest.”
Positives: Not only does Bolt do Flash, it does YouTube. It’s a tad cramped on our tiny screen, but that doesn’t really matter at the moment.
Negatives: It took us a while to actually find this browser. We quite ran across it at the last possible second. It also has the tendency to be a bit “too careful” when it comes to “protecting” the user — warning messages are nice in moderation, but we really don’t need to see one every five seconds.
Overall: 6

Special Attraction: Mozilla Fennec

Note: The Fennec alpha test is only available for “select” handsets. Sadly, our unlocked N81 is not one of them. Because of this, we were “forced” to use the developer version designed for Windows. While we will give the browser the ol’ “once over,” we will not be comparing it to the other browsers listed. It just wouldn’t be fair.
Website: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/fennec/
Developer: Mozilla
Compatible Handsets: Nokia S180 tablet
Rendering Engine: Gecko
First Impression: “It seems to be designed for touchscreen devices. Oh … and it has tabs.”
Ease of Use: 7; “This score will definitely go up once the official version is released.”
Positives: It’s made by Mozilla and it supports tabs. ‘Nuff said.
Negatives: If you don’t own a phone with a large screen or a touchscreen, you might be out of luck.
Overall (As of now): 7; “I think there is a lot more that they could do with it.”

…And the Winner Is: Opera Mini. There is a reason why it reigns supreme over mobile devices.

PS: For all of those who are wondering why we didn’t cover the likes of Safari for the iPhone or the Blackberry browser, don’t worry. They are coming soon enough…

As you have probably heard, the so-called “King of Pop” Michael Jackson passed away yesterday afternoon. No matter what you might have thought of his personal life, it’s hard to deny the man’s talent. So in honor his legendary career, we here at the Free Line present you with an “innovation” that was truly bad: the CueCat. Although designed to be a full-on technological thriller, the device so off the wall and dangerous that it made users want scream. So sit back and relax as we describe the history of the CueCat, all in glorious black and white.

CueCat

Type: Peripheral
General Idea: The CueCat was based upon the idea of turning the average, run of the mill bar code into sort of an “offline URL.” When scanned by the provided PS/2 (or in some cases, USB) reader, these “links” would take users to a website dedicated to the product, service, or idea in question. An “audio” version of the CueCat was also laced into various NBC sitcoms. When played near a supported computer, these supposed “random sounds” would activate a website that pertained to the television program.
…What was the problem, then?: In an effort to make the device as commonplace as humanly possible, manufacturers Digital Convergence simply gave CueCats away to user with experience in various tech related field. While giving these little devices to the likes of Radio Shack customers and Wired subscribers might have seemed like a good idea at the time, it ultimately proved to be fatal. As they played around with their new toy, many users began to notice that the CueCat software was actually a highly sophisticated piece of spyware design to collect personal data from the user. Seeing this as an opportunity to “right a wrong,” the merry band of mega-geeks made it their mission to “declaw” the CueCat by removing the nastiness that was lying just underneath the surface. Digital Convergence, of course, did the only thing that sane, reasonable company could do: they threatened to sue the hackers who figured out how to delete the spyware. See, Digital Convergence claimed that users were essentially “renting” the CueCats from the company. By modifying both the device and its software, these hackers were breaking the terms of the lease and were thus subject to court action. The company started to “fade away” shortly thereafter.
Is it still in use?: Yes and no. Although the “official” purposes of the service — that is, scanning bar codes and spying on consumers — have been disabled, there are a few cataloging services that still support the device. There are also a select few who believe that the core technology and the principles behind it might appear again, albeit in a different, safer form. As for now, the CueCat remains the poster boy for “shortsighted thinking;” the kind of thing that only a hardcore marketer would love. And it is that very attitude that makes CueCat so very, very bad.

I know that we are officially a week away from the end from our 30 Days of GNU experiment, but I think it might be best to call it a day right now. We here at the Free Line have a few big projects in the works, and these “specialized” GPL beauties will just end up interfering with them. With that said, here we go:

Our little pulls into port battered, but still surprisingly resilient. Although there are still some parts of this “test run” that gave us a hard time — Evolution and K-Meleon, I’m looking in your direction — it was still a generally worthwhile endeavor.  That being said, there is still one part of this whole ordeal that still seems to be eluding people, and that is the very nature of the word “free.”

On the surface, the word is simple: if you get a legal, full featured application without having to pay anything, then that application is free. If it costs money, then it isn’t. Things get muddled a bit, however, when the words “how much” are thrown into the equation. In the minds of many, only a program that bares its source can truly be considered “free.” Sure, that shiny new copy of  Windows Live Mail or even Garage Band might appear to be free, but the closed off nature of the code is making you rely on the folks at Microsoft and Apple, respectively. A program like Evolution is free, but that is only because I have the ability to “take a peek under the hood,” as they say. In essence, it all breaks down like this:

When a program is given away at no cost to you, said program is considered to be “freeware.”
When a program and its source code is given away at no cost to you, said program is considered to be “free.”
When an organization and/or corporation charges for an application, but still gives the source code away for free, said program is still considered to be “free.”

While the strategy mapped out above might appeal to a programmer or to a person who likes the idea of “community involvement,” it tends to leave the average user out in the cold. It is our experience that “normal people” prefer performance, not the ability to stare blankly at pages worth of source of code. It is for this reason that we have to call our little “run with the GNUs” a marginal failure. Don’t get us wrong: we fully support of using GPL-supported programs. Applications such as Firefox, OpenOffice.org, and even aMSN are standard tools in our arsenals. It’s just that limiting ourselves to only GNU-approved applications left us angry and frustrated. Our advice is simple: use the free software that appeals most to you. It doesn’t matter if the code for it is kept on a website or on some protected server in Redmond. If you like it, use it. It’s as simple as that. Do this, and you’ll be happy. We guarantee it.

As we mentioned in yesterday’s post, it seems as if 95% of the tech world has two things on their collective minds: smart phones and Twitter. Since I think we have covered Twitter, Twitter clones, Twitter apps, and that goofy “Twitter apocalypse” thing that didn’t really happen to death, we are going focus on the wonderful world of mobile phones. But as you might have already guessed, I am going to do more than just merely “talk” about these phones. I will actually give one of these lucky mobile devices a thorough going over, making sure to tell you everything that you would ever need to know. Let’s face it: “smart phones” such as these could very possibly be the future of mobile computing. If your business isn’t ready for it, you could find yourself in very, very hot water. It is our duty, nay, our mission to make sure that this does not happen to you. Before we begin however, I do have a few notes:

Note #1: While the iPhone is definitely on my “smart phone” shortlist, we will not be doing a write up about it in this post. The reasoning for this is simple: anyone who is anyone already knows about it. We don’t know about any of you, but none of us here are necessarily fans of regurgitating common knowledge.

Note #2: The touchscreen Blackberry that Verizon peddles is all but out of the equation. First of all, it’s a Blackberry. Aside from the touchscreen, there really isn’t much different between the new phones and old “trackball” versions from last year. Secondly, I am not a big fan of Verizon Wireless. While their overall network is a bit better than the competition, it doesn’t justify the bloated, overinflated price that they charge. In short, I can get better equipment at a cheaper price. ‘Nuff said.

…With all of that laid out, here we go…

G1 (Dream)/G2 (Magic)/MyTouch 3G

Manufacturer: Google (OS); HTC (Phone; more phones from other companies will be arriving at some point in the near future)
Cell Network (US): T-Mobile
Open Source?: Yes.
Positives: Having been able to actually use this phone, I have to say that this phone’s biggest asset is the Android operating system. It has more of a feel of a scaled down desktop OS instead one designed for a mobile device. The ability to run a few third-party applications in the background doesn’t hurt things either.
Negatives: there’s something about the physical phone hardware than I just don’t like. It feels “cheap” and really isn’t all that much to look at. If I do decide to go with this phone, I will wait until the myTouch 3G is released in August.

Palm Pre

Manufacturer: Palm
Cell Network: Sprint
Open Source?: Yes
Positives: Palm is finally back. This is the phone that loyal users have been waiting for for quite some time now. While some might be upset at the loss of “classic” Palm OS software library, most will find the available apps to be suitable replacements. (A “classic OS” emulator is available for those who do not.)
Negatives: Not everyone likes the Sprint network.

As you may or may not have noticed, “smart phones” such as the iPhone and the Palm Pre seem to be the one thing that’s on everybody’s mind these days. Talk of these little mobile wonders seem to permeate throughout all forms of mass media, from print to late night talk shows and beyond. Even highly respected blogs such as this one “believes the hype” from time to time. On today’s action packed episode of the Free Line, we will be taking a look at four tools that will attempt to bring of that “3G style” to your web browser … and vice versa.

iphonesender – For Firefox. This little tool does only one thing — sends a customized link from Google Maps to your iPhone — but it does it well. Sometimes the simplest applications are the best.

PinPoints – For Firefox. This handy little addition sends large amounts of map-based information to the mobile phone of your choice. While any modern phone will work, a working GPS module is needed if you want the “full experience.” Unlike the other add-ons mentioned here, PinPoints requires you to sign up for their service. Although the non-existent price tag isn’t a problem, the simple fact that you have to subscribe to yet another service might bother a few people.

iGtalk – For Firefox. Ever wish that you could use the iPhone Gtalk application without having to break out your phone? Now you can, thanks to iGtalk. When activated, a familiar, iPhone-like application appears prominently in the left hand corner of the browser. While it might seem a bit redundant to some (Gtalk is available for all three major OSes), this is a tool that many could find to be useful, especially if that person is already familiar with the mobile interface. All in all, iGtalk is a great way to bring a little bit of that iPhone magic to the desktop, even if its existence tends to defy all logic.

Zhiing – For Firefox. On the surface, Zhiing appears to be yet another add-on designed to get maps from your browser to your iPhone. Look closer, however, and you will find an interesting little service lying underneath. Unlike the other services mentioned here, Zhiing does more than play digital taxi. It actually turns every street address into an interactive link. From there, you can choose from a variety of options, including getting driving directions and finding nearby attractions. Remember: Zhiing is still considered to be in the dreaded “beta stage.” Not everything is going to work the first time out (if at all). If you think that you can deal with these few minor inconveniences, however, it would be in your best interest to give Zhiing a try. You will be glad you did.

Our apologies, but we’re taking the day off. Not to worry, however. We will definitely be back tomorrow with all of that “web 2.0 news you can use.”

Remember the email clients from Monday? Let’s see how they are holding up four days later.

Client #1: Evolution

Positives: The account setup wizard is surprisingly intuitive. All you have to do is enter your POP3 and SMTP settings and the program does the rest. Specialized ports? Evolution detects them. Security settings? It picks them up as well. It also runs pretty quick for a program that isn’t a fan of Windows 7.
Negatives: First and foremost, the “included” spam filter simply does not work. If you want spam to “disappear,” you have to program it in yourself. Another thing: the automated “email check” is apparently broken as well. While it might not seem like a big deal, it can be bothersome to a person who routinely forgets to press that dreaded “send and receive mail” button. (If you haven’t guessed already, I am definitely one of those people.)
Overall: 3; “It’s alright, I guess. Could be better though.”
Worth a Download?: Sadly, no.

Client #2: Thunderbird

Positives: The ability to load add-ons is a big plus. Nothing says “try me out” quite like the prospect of total customization. The aforementioned setup is also a nice touch. While it isn’t the easier setup we have run into thus far — that award goes to, of all programs, Evolution — it does make life a bit easier.  And since it’s made by a subsidiary of Mozilla, complete and total compatibility with Firefox is a given.
Negatives: Aside from the much lauded add-ons, Thunderbird comes off as rather “basic.” Yes, it checks, writes, and sends email, but that’s all it does … without modification, of course.
Overall: 7; “It’s nice and stable.”
Worth a Download?: Yes.

Client #3: Zimbra

Positives: Unlike the rest of the clients on this list, Zimbra is more than just a simple “email client.” It’s actually a highly diverse desktop system, designed to eliminate the need for Google Apps a variety of third-party freeware (and in some cases, shareware) applications. Zimbra also gets a few extra points for presentation. As cliche as it might sound, the simple fact that it “looks” nicer than the other clients does wonders for this little underdog.
Negatives: It’s a bit on the slow side starting up. Although the plethora of extra features are nice, they have a tendancy to “get in the way” from time to time.
Overall: 8
Worth a Download?: Yes

Client #4: Sylpheed

Positives: Wait … give us a moment. There has to be something in this program that can be construed as a positive … [Pause] There it is! Sylpheed is the only program that, to our knoledge, allows you look at the source code of your messages. We’re not exactly sure as to why you would want to do that, but it’s always nice to have the option.
Negatives: The words “extremely basic” were bandied about more than once. Furthermore, the following “standard” features are not available in Sylpheed: A spam filter, automatic mail check, the ability to view messages in an HTML format, the ability to send emails at all … I think you get the idea here.
Overall: 3; “Outlook Express 4 that was bundled with Windows 98 First Edition can do more things than Sylpheed.”
Worth a Download?: No