Android Apps: Fun, Amusing, Useful, and Useless
Lots of useful apps are available for Android tablets and now that I'm a new user, I've started to find some that are indispensable. But there are also some apps that have no apparent reason to exist: Not useful. Not amusing. Not fun. And not discussed here. Let's take a look at some that you might like if you have an Android tablet.
Talking Tom (useless but fun): It's a cat. He just stands there. You can tickle him, scratch his tummy, or rub his ears. You can have a dog explode a paper bag behind him or poke him on the nose. There's a free version but for 99 cents you get some extra features. In both the free and paid version, Talking Tom listens to you and repeats your words. You can also record a video with him and send it to someone.
Kindle for Android (useful): I have a Kindle but I also have Kindle reader apps installed on every computer I own and also on the Android tablet. Books purchased from Amazon automatically show up (depending on licensing) on the Kindle and all devices with the Reader. It's a free application.
Thumb Keyboard (if you type, indispensable): The trouble with the basic keyboard design on tablets is retention of the standard QWERTY layout. That's fine if the tablet is lying on a table but most of us interact with tablets while holding them and we type with our thumbs. A standard QWERTY layout doesn't work for that because a lot of important keys are in the center of the keyboard. Thumb Keyboard places the numbers in the center and the letters near the edges. QWERTY layout is maintained but now all of the letters are within reach. This application does a lot more but if that's all it did, it would be more than worth the $2.30 price.
StumbleUpon (extraordinary time waster): If you have a StumbleUpon account on your desktop computer, you'll probably want the free StumbleUpon app on your Android tablet. When you have a few minutes to spare and no projects that fit the time available, stumbling around can be interesting and sometimes even educational. The application is free.
Google Docs (essential if you're a Google Docs user): I don't use Google Docs but, if I did, I would want this free app. Manage and edit Google documents from wherever you are. When collaboration and sharing are important, the Google Docs applications are good choices. Word processor, spreadsheet application, and presentations. Read PDFs. Use your tablet's built-in camera to take a picture that you incorporate into a document.
Poweramp (if you listen to music with your Android tablet, you want it): The tablet has a built-in audio player but Poweramp is the difference between a no-frills player and something that you'll enjoy listening to. There's a free trial but you'll probably end up paying $5 for this app. Poweramp supports most audio file formats such as MP3, MP4, M4A (Apple's format), OGG (open source), WMA, FLAC, WAV, APE, VW, AIFF (another Apple format), TTA, and maybe some that I've missed. Add cover art display, gapless playback, and a great user interface and you have a player that lands on my must-have list.
Terminal Emulator (essential for Linux geeks; useless or dangerous for others): Below the Android's graphical user interface you'll find Linux. You might want to modify something at the operating system level. Or you might want to use Linux to perform tasks that aren't available through the GUI but if terms such as "vi", "grep", "cat", and "top" are meaningless, this does not apply to you. Terminal is free.
Other Good Choices
Download a browser to replace or augment the built-in Browser application. I've obtained both Firefox and Opera (both are free). If you use Google Earth on your desktop or notebook computer, you'll probably want the equivalent application on your tablet. Tablets are outstanding places to keep reference materials. For example, I have a dictionary and reference works for HTML5, PHP, Linux, and JQuery. And many news organizations have Android applications. Here's my short list: Columbus Dispatch, New York Times, Associated Press, CNN, NPR, Huffington Post, Slate, Columbus Business First, Al Jazeera, USA Today, and several news aggregators that provide links to smaller newspapers. I can even read the Bellefontaine Examiner on my tablet.
Micro Fiber Cloth (not an app but you need one): Your shiny new tablet will quickly become covered with fingerprints, grease, and other gunk from your hands (particularly if you use the tablet while eating). Spend a couple of dollars to buy a micro-fiber cloth that can be used dry to wipe away basic fingerprints and slightly damp to eliminate the traces of lunch.
Megaupload is Dead
The feds have shut down Megaupload, proving that even without SOPA and PIPA the federal government can shut down sites that offer illegal access to copyrighted materials. The Hong Kong site was clearly an illegal operation. Or was it? Might it be that Megaupload was the victim of a police riot?
There's no question that Megaupload was a haven for stolen files but it was also used by people who wanted to make their office files available for work at home. Several other online services could find themselves accused of similar illegal actions. YouSendIt, SendYourFiles, SendThisFile, and FilesAnywhere all offer similar capabilities. If you have a large file that you want someone else to have, these services are invaluable. But even applications such as Carbonite could be accused of making illegal files available because those who use the backup service can make files available to others.
Ira Rothken is the attorney who represents Megaupload in the United States. He says "the allegations are without merit and Megaupload is going to vigorously defend against the case."
What about services such as Flickr or Photobucket? Both of these sites (and many others) allow subscribers to upload large files that can be downloaded by others.
Megaupload's terms of service say that illegal uploads are not welcome and the site offered a link that copyright holders could use to report abuse. Instead of shutting down the entire site, would it have been more reasonable to pursue those who illegally posted copyrighted information?
The Justice Department says the anti-theft efforts were simply a facade and that the site's owners knew that they were enabling piracy. According to the DOJ, it was difficult for copyright owners to search for illegal materials.
CNN reported "In an unofficial sampling of CNN Tech readers on Twitter, many quickly acknowledged using the site to watch TV shows or movies. But others cited more legitimate uses, with some saying they've lost legitimate content, not to mention money, after the government crackdown."
The CNN report quotes Seng Ung of Boston, who said that he paid more than $250 for a lifetime membership so he could store old files from childhood and college. "He didn't lose them," the report said, "but now he's gotten nothing in return for his payment." And CNN also quotes open-souce software developers and musicians who say that they use Megaupload to store their personal files. "Collateral damage", I guess. We had to destroy the village in order to save it.
Google's New Privacy Policies Raise Concerns
Google is changing its privacy policies so that they will be consistent across most of the company's offerings. This will be more convenient for users, Google says. But security experts caution that the new policies will make more of your information available to advertisers. And everyone is right.
If the CIA or the FBI knew as much about you as Google does, you would probably be concerned, and rightly so. Because Google handles so much information for so many people, the company has unprecedented access to information about what you search for, what you buy, what maps you look at, where you live, who your friends are, who you communicate with, where you are right now (if you have an Android device). The list goes on and on.
These days you can think of Google as sort of a superset of US intelligence agencies, Interpol, the Mossad, Russia's Federal Security Service (formerly the KGB), Britain's MI5 and MI6, and China's National Security Bureau.
Is it good for one company to have all of this information available for its own use and for the use of its customers? Can something that benefits advertisers also benefit Google's users?
Google says the changes will make its privacy policies easier to read. True. Instead of dozens of policies, each with different stipulations, there will now be just one primary policy and a few special conditions for some services.
Google says the changes will make data from one service a user has signed up for available in other products and that this will improve the user's experience. This is also true but it's not the entire truth. It will also give advertisers a better way to pitch products and services to you.
How about the advertising?
Advertisers have know since the beginning of advertising that a lot of money spent on advertising is wasted. How much is wasted depends on lots of things, the one of the primary considerations is who sees the pitch. If you try to sell me cigars, your money is wasted. Tell me about a new beer or an electronic device and you might get my attention.
So the underlying issue is whether it's good for advertisers to be able to closely target consumers who will be interested in the product or service and whether it's good or bad for consumers to see advertisements that might be of interest to them.
As an advertiser, I want to spend my money wisely. As a consumer, I don't want to be bombarded by ads that are of no interest to me. So it looks like a win-win solution. But as a consumer, I would prefer not to be bombarded by advertisements at all. Still, if I must be bombarded by ads (and that's the way capitalism works) then I'd prefer that the ads promote something I'm interested in.
Reducing Google's many privacy policies to a single document is probably overall a good thing. But I'm not sure that I want YouTube data and Google Docs data to be merged. For me, that's not an issue because I've never used Google Docs for anything more involved than some basic testing and evaluation of the service. That is to say that I don't have anything important online. And although I say truthfully that I rarely use G-Mail, I do forward mail from most accounts to G-Mail to provide an easily accessible on-line repository of messages.
The Concentration of Information
What is of concern to most people is that just about everything you see and do on the Internet will be available to Google. If you use Google's products, you provide information when you sign up. Google has access about your data use and storage. Google can link together information about all Google services that you use. If you have an Android device, Google can determine your location. Google knows what applications are installed on your Android device. Using Google's Dashboard and Ad Manager, you can specify what you want to see and what you want to omit, but you can't opt out.
The fact that Google has so much information isn't new. What's new is Google's decision to combine data across services "for your convenience". The changes go into effect on March first.
On a Google blog, Director of Privacy For Product and Engineering Alma Whitten explained the policy this way: "If you're signed in, we may combine information you've provided from one service with information from other services. [W]e'll treat you as a single user across all our products, which will mean a simpler, more intuitive Google experience."
Between now and March first, expect to receive messages from Google about the changes and to see the changes explained on the company's various services.
If you don't like the policy, you have one choice: Close your account. Google says that closing your Google account will delete your various Google services. How long data remains online (or on backup) isn't directly addressed.
If you have a lot of information saved in Google services (G-Mail or Picasa, for example), Google says it will provide directions on how to retrieve or move your information.
And if you use Google only for searching, you're not affected by the new policy.
Short Circuits
Apple Co-Founder Steve Wozniak Likes His Android
You may have heard that Steve Wozniak likes Android phones but you may not have heard the entire story. In an interview with Dan Lyons on The Daily Beast, Steve Wozniak admitted that his Android phone offers more features than his Iphone. This is in contrast to the other Apple co-founder, the late Steve Jobs, who loathed the Android and threatened to bankrupt Apple if that's what he had to do to kill Android.
The vendetta clearly didn't work and now the other Steve is saying nice things about Android.
You may have heard that part and it's a significant admission. But the rest of the story is this: Wozniak still considers the Iphone to be the better overall device because of its ease of use. Even so, though, he says Android has moved ahead of Apple in several important ways.
A quote from The Daily Beast regarding his Iphone: "I love the beauty of it. But I wish it did all the things my Android does, I really do."
On the issue of which device is easier to use, Wozniak says Android devices are harder to use than the Iphone but "if you're willing to do the work to understand it a little bit, ... there's more available."
Lyons writes, "Android could do to IOS (Apple’s mobile operating system) what Microsoft Windows did to the Macintosh in the 1990s. Microsoft triumphed because it licensed its software to many different hardware makers and ultimately had much greater market share than Apple, which would only sell its operating system on its own hardware."
Read the full interview on The Daily Beast here.
Symantec PC Anywhere Going Nowhere
If you use Symantec's PC Anywhere to work on remote computers, Symantec says you should disable it right away and wait for a patch update. The shady group known as "Anonymous" broke into Symantec's servers (embarrassing) and made off with the source code for PC Anywhere (even more embarrassing) so Symantec really had no choice other than to warn people not to use one of its products.
Symantec is, of course, one of the leading companies that provides computer security for its clients.
Even more embarrassing, though, is this fact: The break-in by Anonymous didn't happen this week or even this month. It happened in 2006 and nobody at Symantec was aware of the problem until Anonymous announced that it had done the deed.
So now Symantec has published some background information and suggestions for its clients.
The background: "We believe that source code for the 2006-era versions of the following products was exposed: Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition; Norton Internet Security; Norton SystemWorks (Norton Utilities and Norton GoBack); and pcAnywhere."
The suggestions: To limit risk from external sources, customers should disable or remove [PC Anywhere] Access Server and use remote sessions via secure VPN tunnels. Client Management Suite and IT Management Suite customers should modify or remove all policies relying on access server.
A tweet by "Yama Tough", who claims to speak for Anonymous, said: Was the 2006 theft perpetrated by someone now affiliated with Anonymous? Was there a secondary breach last year? If so, we should find out about it in roughly 2017.
The author's image: It's that photo over at the right. This explains why TechByter Worldwide was never on television, doesn't it?
