I jumped on the iPhone when it first came out. In fact, I'm one of the only people I know who even has a first generation iPhone. The day after it came out I went to the store to play with it just to see what the hype was about. I wasn't planning on getting one. I didn't even want one; not to mention the fact that I didn't have the money to buy one. After about 30-seconds of playing with Safari I decided that I had to have it. I went to the car, thought about it, then went back into the store and bought one.

Two years later, I've spent over $3,000 on the iPhone and the associated AT&T service plan. Today, I canceled my plan with AT&T, ported my number over to T-Mobile, and purchased a BlackBerry Bold 9700.

Why? Here's why:

• The iPhone is a terrible phone. Voice quality is terrible. Dropped calls are frequent. Calls often fail to even dial. Voicemails are delayed. Incoming calls constantly go straight to voicemail (which is then delayed).
• The iPhone is awful if you have more than one email address. The iPhone can only support a single Exchange connection. If you have multiple email addresses or calendars you have to pick the one that you want to be pushed. Everything else must be fetched via IMAP or POP at 15-minute intervals.
• Push email is unreliable. Many times emails are delayed. *Note: I've only noticed this with Google Sync, and I'm unsure if it's a problem with Google, Apple, or AT&T.*
• You can only have one email signature. Again, the iPhone just isn't set up to handle multiple email addresses.
• Battery life is abysmal. It's rare that you can even get through a full day with a single charge. This is why you now see every single socket in the airport occupied by an iPhone user. If you want your phone to be usable for anything that even resembles an extended period of time (by iPhone standards – more than 12 hours) you need to turn off Bluetooth, turn off Wi-Fi, and cut the brightness in half.
• It costs $100/mo just to have one.
• It costs $100/mo and you can't even tether it to a computer and use the data plan.
• As good as it is at text messaging, it's terrible at instant messaging. Since you can't run anything in the background, you really can't use IM at all.
• The inability to run processes in the background also makes applications like Google Latitude useless.

The reality is that the iPhone is a good pocket tablet. The iPhone is evolution of the Apple/Newton MessagePad, not the evolution of the phone. It's a deplorable phone. I would be more inclined to use an iPhone if it included no phone functionality at all. Maybe if the iPod Touch ever gets a camera, GPS, and persistent data connection I'll go back.

The best thing about the iPhone is the browser. The device would be better positioned as a "must have" if they scrapped the phone functionality entirely and worked out a carrier agreement for data like Amazon has done with the Kindle. Given the size of the application library, that's probably possible. Apple could pay for bandwidth by giving the carrier a portion of revenue generated from the mobile iTunes store. In fact, if an iPhone existed that ONLY featured a browser (even sans the ability to run applications) and some kind of persistent data connection, I'd buy it again. That's why I bought it in the first place.

Goodbye, iPhone.
Hello, BlackBerry.

Some believe that Facebook is now an integral part of our life. That it will only keep growing, and in a few years time it will be as ubiquous as email.

Those people are wrong. As more people use Facebook, it becomes less useful.

When you first sign up to Facebook, it's not that useful. You have to go out and make some friends. As you add friends, it becomes more useful and more interesting. Marginal utility derived, per user added, is increasing. It becomes addicting. But then it peaks. It peaks, and the trend reverses. The peak is different for each user, and depends largely on the kind of activities their friends engage in on the platform, but at some point the marginal utility per user added starts declining. Then it goes negative. It starts to get so noisy that you start wondering why you are checking it at all.

This problem is not uniqie to Facebook. This is what "killed" MySpace. And this is what is killing Twitter.

When I first started using Facebook I was still in school. Only people with access to a .edu email address could even request to join. It was a quiet platform with the occasional picture of drunken debauchery. You'd slowly add friends as more people came into the platform. I used it mainly for finding people in my classes and getting notes on days I skipped. At the time, there was an application built directly into the platform that let you enter your courses. Finding everyone in a specific class was incredibly simple. At some point this functionality was actually removed and then brought back later by a third party.

What's even more interesting is that those joining Facebook today have no concept of the kind of utility that Facebook was once able to provide. They have no frame of reference. They sign up and by the end of the week they could have 100+ friend requests. They assume that this is what Facebook is, and the way you use it is by saying as much stuff as you can. They are also going to be the first ones to move to a new platform that can provide them the same kind of benefits that Facebook originally provided.

The same thing is happening on Twitter right now. What started as an extremely useful communication tool, has become the noisiest broadcasting medium of all time. Everyone is scrambling around saying, "What's Twitter? Do I need to be on it? What's my Twitter strategy?" Do you need to be on it? No. No, you don't. Even more, there is a touch of hypocrisy in this post, since most people who read this will have found it through Twitter.

This problem with noise is what has me so interested in Google Wave. Direct messaging (email, IM, SMS) doesn't suffer from scale in the same way, and Google Wave functions more along the lines of email and instant messaging. The current model of Facebook, Twitter, et al. is one of broadcasting out everything, all the time, and hoping that the right people read it and respond. With individual "waves" you can create instances with only particular groups of people. You can fluidly add people and drop them. The network can be resized at any point, and one can create an entirely new network with the click of a button.

Help me Google Wave. You're my only hope.

I moved my main domain [here] to Posterous. I'll still be using Tumblr (likely more than I have recently), and you can find my Tumblr blog now located at tumblr.ralphthemagician.com. They've been adding new features hand over fist at Tumblr, which is cool, but there's something about the simplicity of Posterous that I've always liked, yet I've never used it. It's even more simple than Tumblr. I particuarly like the part where you can update everything via email. Everyone berates email as being "old," yet everyone has one. In spite of drawing a venn diagriam I'll just say this: You can't sign up for Facebook or Twitter without an email address.

This got me started on thinking about what kind of interactivity you could do simply via email. Why don't we talk about email more? Everyone is keen on finding new ways to integreate with Twitter and Facebook because they amplify an interaction through a person's social network, but if something is interesting people will talk about it anyway. The most engaging (and talkworthy) experiences are often those that require as small a barrier to entry as possible. That's what's so neat about Posterous. You don't even need to sign up to start using it. That, in and of itself, is an interesting twist on user aquisution flow that we don't see much anymore.

One of the other interesting things about email is that it's trackable. Very trackable. On of the more interesting studies I've read this year was the one done by IBM on the value of social networks. IBM has been working with MIT's Sloan Management School and NYU's Stern Business School to find out just how valuable an individual in a person's business address book is. They've done this, not through some out-of-the-box service, but through real regression analysis, and they've come up with a value of $948. You can read more about this research project here.

Some people think that email is dead – that email is being replaced by the inbox on Facebook. I don't think so. If anything, email is evolving. Perhaps what's dead are the POP and IMAP protocols, soon to be replaced by Google Wave or whatever comes next.