Apples and Berries

http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/14/heres-a-blackberry-10-device-next-to-an-iphone-5/

Remember BlackBerries?  The devices that were firmly and not-so-clandestinely clutched by self-important businessmen and college students?  Though they never confirmedly left, their obsolescence and resultant obscurity were such that it is appropriate to newly sing, “They’re back!”

“RIM is launching BlackBerry 10 in February 2013 with several devices.  Little is known about these handsets but the pic here shows the touchscreen model next to an iPhone 5.  Tantalizing, I know.

“Draw your own conclusions but what we’re looking at is a device that looks a lot like a Droid X/X2.  It appears to be a little wider than the iPhone 5, which is encased in a bumper here.  Unfortunately the screen is not turned on so a snap judgment cannot be made about the future of RIM based on the low resolution picture.”

My current quandary:  Can any device, however unexpectedly inventive or clever or pioneering, ever sparkle when placed next to a gadget stamped with the trademarked nibbled apple?  Will we recognize imaginative genius when it is offered to us, given our present iProduct mania?

When we permit a few more of the specifically technology-based droplets to evaporate from this puddle of queries, we recognize that this is simply a matter of individual pluck and point of view.  Is man confident enough to advocate a contrary concept?  To defend an unpopular option?  To embrace the obscure?  To trust his preferences and dismiss the viewpoint of the masses?

I await the release of the BlackBerry 10.  My hope is that the device boasts solid hardware that shifts the loyalties of Apple users.  Why?  Not because I wish to hasten the decline of the iPhone, but rather because I am eager to observe the potentially original but likely conforming actions of my peers.

As a reader, you’re lucky, as I’m offering you notice of my impending social experiment (hee hee hee).

More White Squares, Fewer Green Rectangles

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/08/31/can-square-remain-hip/?ref=technology

This article discusses Square, a payments company that permits all businesses, regardless of size or savvy, to accept credit cards by attaching a card reader to their Android, iPhone, or iPad.  Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter, leads this company.

As the article notes, “Square charges merchants 2.75 percent of the amount transacted when a card is swiped, or $275 a month.  That’s at the low end of the fee scale.  But it may also be too low for Square to profit on payments below $10, which are a big part of Square’s business.”  Evidently, some speculate that Square’s profit margin is unsustainable, given the fees charged by credit card companies.  However, partnerships with such retailers as Starbucks offer hope to Square as it attempts to expand the popularity of its tiny, white payment device.

My two reactions to this article are seemingly contradictory.  Predictably, I am disappointed by the nearly universal rejection of traditional forms of paper currency.  Little by little, money is becoming more of an idea and less of a germy, clanking, graffitied, yet still satisfyingly tangible object.

Conversely, I do promote those technologies and devices that assist small businesses.  Because it is exceptionally difficult to compete with the power sellers that manipulate and define this global economy, I am pleased to read of a tool that specifically targets the world’s smaller scale companies.  From farmers to in-home manufacturers, Square will aid such overlooked businesses as they complete daily transactions.  For this reason, I view Square as a less superfluous technology than most others.

And thus, the double-edged sword stabs us once more.