Twitter is everywhere. From celebrities to wanna-bes, Twitter has become the latest “go-to” social network. It’s no wonder we’re seeing more and more “tweets” from within courtrooms across the country. The problem is fast becoming widespread enough that it’s starting to threaten the sanctity of the jury and a fair trial process. So much so that St. Louis District Judge Ed Sweeney has submitted a new jury instruction proposal to the  Missouri Supreme Court that would, if approved, specifically ban email, Facebook and Twitter from all jury trials.

There’s some serious legal impetus to get mobilized social networks under control in the jury box. An Arkansas court in February overturned a $12+ million dollar decision because one juror’s Twitter comments indicated that he was biased going into the trial. Then there’s the case of a juror trying to add a trial witness as their Facebook friend, prompting outrage and endangering the trial’s conviction decisions. And, the problem is international – a British juror was dismissed after asking friends to vote on what she should should decide in a sexual-assault case.

The problem isn’t just that Twitter and Facebook are tying people together, allowing them to reach beyond deliberation room walls. There’s a problem with awareness. While the likes of those reading this post will probably be well aware of Twitter, and may even have a significant following, judges and lawyers are largely in the dark. Sure, they know that email can be a problem, but do they know that email can be sent from cellphones? That Twitter is just a couple thumb-taps away?

Consider this, one judge recently allowed court reporters to “tweet” court proceedings in near real-time, as they happened. “The more we can do to open the process to the public, the greater the public understanding,” said US District Judge Thomas J. Marten. In response to concerns that jurors would be influenced by the “tweets,” Marten believed that jurors were isolated by jury instructions to avoid newspapers, TV and online reports. Of course, anyone that uses Twitter will know that a modest smartphone is more than enough to keep up with Twitter’s public stream of posts.

Perhaps it’s not a problem with Twitter, but a problem in the way our legal system deals with emerging technologies. Smartphones are becoming increasingly common, and their hyper-connected users will have to be dealt with specifically. Sweeney’s proposed jury instructions could be the first step to new rules regarding smartphones in the legal process.

[Via: Examiner]

It’s time for Palm (NSDQ: PALM) to start working to bring its WebOS beyond smartphones. Returning to the Foleo concept instantly comes to mind and that’s exactly where my thinking goes. The new Foleo should be lighter and in terms of size comparable to the Sony Vaio P series. Of course, it would rely on ARM-based processor (something like Snapdragon preferably), which should ensure long battery life. WebOS would provide the decent platform for running various apps and in that sense this kind of a device — that runs apps based on web standards — could be a true cloud computer. Of course, it wouldn’t be something that would make us dump our existing laptops, but a netbook (aka small complementary laptop) which would be easy to carry around for checking email, writing, web surfing and so on.

In a nutshell – we want a cheaper Sony Vaio P, which at the same time is less powerful, less pricey, and optimized for “web work” / cloud computing. I think Palm has all the right technologies in place to release such a product and this time make it a hit! What do you think?

With mobile phones slowly becoming commodity nowadays, it’s not hard to imagine a day when today’s high-end smartphones will cost $100 or even less. The only thing that will make the difference will be in the software and services, handset maker or carrier provides with the device. That said, I’m not surprised to see virtually all major handset manufacturers entering the world of services, to compensate on shrinking margins and further develop brand awareness among its customers.

On the other side we see an emergence of many interesting mobile service providers, which give their best get a slice of the huge mobile market. In that sense, they’re partnering with handset makers and operators to capture eyeballs and get more people to use their services.

One such service is the mobile social network and user-generated content service – GyPSii, which keeps growing like crazy. During the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, they announced a major deal with LG as well as a new developer API. Even earlier, they scored a deal with the world’s largest mobile operator in terms of number of subscribers – China Mobile (NYSE: CHL). And as they add more to the table, they became more interesting to other larger companies as a potential target for acquisition. That’s the main idea of this article – some smart handset maker should acquire GyPSii!

As I said, margins are going down and it’s the software and services that will make or break a handset maker’s offering. Including or pre-installing something like GyPSii could be of benefit to both end-users and handset makers, which could additionally make money from advertising and other value-added services provided via GyPSii.

Nokia (NYSE: NOK) instantly comes to mind as it’s the single largest “mobile services pusher,” but they’ve already heavily invested in Ovi and I don’t see GyPSii adding much to the mix for them. The Finnish giant seems to have all the technology and synergies are not visible, at least from where I stand. Other handset makers are a different story — by acquiring GyPSii, they would get an instant access to the mobile services market and eventually be ready to compensate on lower margins.

With recession looming, company valuations are going south, hence it’s an ideal time for strategic acquisitions. GyPSii could be just the company to go in line with handset makers’ strategy… Any thoughts?

This article goes in line with my previous writing that Nokia should dump its name from the Ovi branding. The idea is to offer an array of useful services to the consumers, both on the web and on their mobiles. That said, here are seven companies which services could be of use for Nokia (NYSE: NOK) handset users:

1. Evernote – the single most popular web-based note taking tool today. It’s not only a web-based service as there is also a desktop component, as well as mobile apps for Windows Mobile and the iPhone/iPod Touch. By acquiring Evernote, the Finnish giant could include a powerful note taking tool in its Ovi suite of services, as well as develop and offer Series 40 and S60 mobile clients.
2. Viigo – popular RSS/news reader. Let’s face it, RSS readers are getting common even among the “not that tech savvy” population and Nokia could certainly benefit from offering such an app/service. By acquiring Viigo, Nokia gets an instant access to other platforms as well. Additionally, they could create their own web-based RSS reader that would work in sync with the mobile client.
3. Mobispine – like Viigo, it’s an RSS/news reader. It’s Java ME-based, and it already works on many Nokia devices, feature phones included.
4. iScrybe – I’m not sure about this one, though, but at one point it was very promising online organizer. Then they seemed to stop developing it. Nokia could add some cash to the company and make them finish their product — and remove that “beta” sign along the way. Afterwards a mobile client which sings along the web-based version is a must.
5. Remember The Milk – one of the most popular web-based task management applications, which also works on various mobile platforms. Unfortunately, Nokia phones are not on the list of supported devices, but that could easily change if they [Nokia] buy the company. Along with iScrybe (or some other online calendar) and Evernote, this could enhance Ovi’s appeal to business users. Alternatively, individuals could also benefit from using these services.
6. Netvibes – personalized homepage service, similar to iGoogle. If Nokia wants to tackle the larger audience and really establish itself as an Internet company, offering a personalized homepage to its users is a neat idea. In that sense, acquiring the Paris-based company could certainly be beneficial for the Finnish giant. When you think about it, if acquired by Nokia, Netvibes could evolve/change to some kind of myOvi service.
7. Pageflakes – another personalized homepage service, although not as near as popular. Still if Nokia could put its brand and cash behind, it could drive adoption quickly.

That’s about all I wanted to say. Is there any other company that could be of use to Nokia? What do you say?

As the mobile phone market gets more competitive, margins are shrinking and smart handset makers are focusing on value added services. I always thought of Nokia (NYSE: NOK) as a smart company and their entrance to the world of Internet services was fascinating move, when you think about it. Within just a few years today’s high-end smartphones will become a commodity, and software and services will be the “thing” that will make all the difference, as well as something Chinese companies can’t copy that easy. That said, and again to praise Nokia – Ovi seems like a right way to go!

However, what I think Nokia should do is dump their name from the Ovi website/branding. The idea is to partner with other handset makers and extend Ovi’s reach to other, non-Nokia made handsets. When you think about it, the Finnish giant’s main competitor in the future will be Google (NSDQ: GOOG), which is platform agnostic and their mobile products and services are available for virtually all platforms — we may also include Microsoft (NSDQ: MSFT) and Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) to the mix, but they are way smaller players. I think Nokia should go the same route and in order to do so, dumping its logo from the “Ovi equation” is the right way to go. I don’t think it’s impossible to imagine Ovi becoming Nokia’s primary source of revenue within 5-10 years. In that sense, it deserves a special place, the one that will go beyond Nokia’s brand.

Any thoughts?

There seems to be a growing buzz in the media industry generally right now about 3D – how good it is, the fact that consumers are bound to want it, and crucially, how to do it. Interestingly though, Mobile may be very well set up to handle 3D and potentially even take the lead over it’s progress in Home Consumer Electronics Devices – let’s consider a few key points:

- You (mostly) need glasses for 3D – in order to get one eye to see something different than the other (and hence create anything more than a flat image), it’s commonly accepted you need some kind of viewing glasses. The way the glasses achieve the result can be variable, but unless you get a (currently) very expensive (and limited) 3D TV set, then glasses are where it’s at. But Mobile is already moving in this direction, what with the proliferation of “video eyewear” companies out there (notably Vuzix, who we’ve covered before at IntoMobile, here and here for example).  Mobile screens are really too small for prolonged viewing, so if you can utilise the video-out on your device (now on an increasing amount of devices), you can plug in some video eyewear, and get your video fix – and why not make it 3D!

- Content delivery is a consideration for 3D – bandwidth on any delivery medium, be it broadcast, Internet, or Mobile, is always a consideration – and with 3D, more information is being sent per second (i.e. the bitrate is higher) – and hence more bandwidth is needed. Well for Mobile, the issue of bandwidth is a decreasing one, unlike with both broadcast and (fixed-line) Internet access. In Mobile, we’ve done WiFi chips in handsets, and we’ve done broadband modems (dongles) – so we know we can get decent bandwidth for mobile video. Remember that Mobile video is for a smaller screen and hence requires (much) less bandwidth, and suddenly you can deliver the data needed for 3D video with increasing ease as time goes on. Mobiles have never been so connected, so lets leverage the wider pipe that is now available!

- Content - you gotta have good content for it to be successful – nowhere is this more true than on Mobile devices – if the content ain’t good, people will not buy it. Hollywood is busy now creating more and more content that is in 3D at source – and they have a valid and sustainable channel with Mobile to try it out. I think 3D has a real home in the Mobile channel, and (great) content is one of the key pillars to it’s introduction

The one current barrier is the potential number of ways to create the 3D effect, as I alluded to above– right now there are probably 3 or 4, ranging from basic to more advanced – however, if this doesn’t reach some degree of standardisation, we are going to be stuck with a range of systems, and fragmented content / hardware. Let’s not have another Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD battle please, and get with a single standard.

Overall, the future of 3D is looking rosy, we just need to sort out a few niggles, and I believe Mobile could (and should) lead the charge in to a new era of immersive and innovative user experiences!

Not so very long ago in the news, there was a story about a mandate laid down by the Government that within 5 or so years, everyone should have access to the InterWeb, at a speed of 2Mbps or more. The medium of connection for that statement was not defined, but of course there could be a range of options – (x)DSL, Cable, FTTH, Mobile, WiMax – the list goes on.

However, in the last 24 months, the runaway success has been Mobile broadband – plug a self-installing USB dongle in your PC, and off you go – InterWeb access straight away! So I pose this question – would the Government’s mandate best be served, in large part, by USB dongles on current/next-gen networks?

I’m not of course suggesting that we just dump tens of millions of extra users on to existing networks, but, instead a multipoint plan revolving around:

•    Government investment strongly in to the Mobile Operator Networks
•    Government definition of requirements of Operators to share mobile mast sites
•    Government subsidy of USB dongles for those disadvantaged
•    Government definition of clear wireless networking strategy

It’s a snap for mobile broadband dongle vendors to include multi-mode radio in to their devices, and with increased coverage, we could get a roaming super-network, overlaid with a couple of generations of radio access technology – ultimately providing very good coverage for anyone with a need to access the InterWeb.

I’ve a feeling the Government might stay technology-agnostic, and just lay down more general plans about the % of people that should have access in 5-10 years’ time, but in fact, at this point, due to the dramatically slow speeds of things like the (widely-deployed) xDSL, it is the time to get directly in the technology definition path. Take a hold of things, define how they ought to work, and make the Mobile Operators play nice together. InterWeb access is becoming a utility, and without strong leadership in this area, the disadvantaged will end up with differential access to another key commodity of the future.

We are charging at a frightening pace toward the ability to record at least 720p HD video on Mobile devices, following the introduction of a raft (e.g. Flip Mino HD, Toshiba (OTCPK: TOSBF) P10/S10) of Mini-camcorders, at very low price-points (~£100). It would appear the miniaturisation process of the chipsets to pass-through and process hi-res video has well and truly happened, and it won’t be long before most manufacturers are including these in order to differentiate their products.

Samsung are out there first, with their Omnia HD device – not surprising really, given their expertise in other HD CE (consumer electronics), and their predisposition to whacking great big image sensors (i.e. 8-12MP cameras) in their devices

The largely ninja-like (in it’s stealth thus far) Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) next-gen device is also fabled to have video recording AND editing – now it would make a lot of sense for that to be HD also, though in some sense I’d bet against it because Apple don’t lead in all their hardware – they don’t need to, since they have the marketing halo that all other manufacturers would kill for!

But I’d bet LG, Nokia (NYSE: NOK), and potentially Sony Ericsson (NYSE: SNE) will strongly be considering how to mainline HD recording in to their handsets ASAP – they have successfully marginalised the digital camera for stills, and camcorders (in the £500-600 range) will be the next bastion to fall – mark my words…!

Is it just me, or are Baby Monitors as bad as DECT landline phones in how far behind the technology curve they are? And this isn’t the first time I’ve ranted about it either……!

I just can’t believe that such a lucrative market segment (trust me, new parents will buy ANYTHING!) is not being exploited properly by companies out there. What we have right now in terms of baby monitors is in my opinion close to cr*p – not often I curse, but it gets me so irate.

Our £100 baby monitor at home is rubbish – old-tech batteries, rubbish run-time, poor sound quality, poor aesthetics, cr*p range – the list goes on. Now let’s take a look at the available tech in Mobile/wireless:

•    good batteries
•    good screen
•    good UI
•    cameras – with lots of scene-sensing tech
•    WiFi

If we even consider just the PC market, the Webcam has much of what is needed to make a good baby monitor, and is way cheaper! I came across the other day a now-defunct wireless web-cam that was remote-controllable, had low-lux, and was it’s own webserver – so you’d login via laptop and could steer the cam about in the child’s room – perfect!

Knowing this I went off to find the best baby monitor available to the general consumer – and it looks like something a toy manufacturer would make – frankly, not designed for use – or as I would say, rubbish!

Now monitoring babies is quite an emotive topic, an important one, and one that is very close to many parents’ hearts – yet the tech deployed to do the job is OUT-OF-DATE. There’s a screamingly good argument for a mobile manufacturer to come in and innovate in this area, to produce a reasonable cost, well-specced device. They know they could do it, and with such a lucrative market segment, if it were priced correctly, it would PWN the market – literally.

But no, right now we are served with sub-standard, out-of-date, and not-fit-for-purpose tech that we have to put up with, in the hope that our babies/kids will be fine when we are not immediately there – unacceptable, in my view.

Rant over. For now.

What a strange title you might think – but I suggest you consider what might be the relation? Well I came to one the other day and it is thus: both are TERRIBLE in terms of their impact on the environment!

For those of you unlucky enough not to have a child/children, you may not realise the amount of waste that is created by these nappies – virtually all are single-use “disposable”, and usually wrapped in a non-degradable bag once used. Now, consider that somewhere between 4-6 nappies are created per child per day (more if the child isn’t well ), and multiply that by the number of babies growing up per country/globally, and you have a MAJOR environmental detractor – thing is though, it all just gets buried, so the environmental timebomb is out of sight, out of mind… right?

Interestingly, mobiles have some similar form – they aren’t easily recycled, people leave them out of sight when they’ve finished using them, and they have some potentially toxic chemicals in them. Whilst there are not the same volume of units being buried in the ground, there is an environmental threat there based on the number that are “in stasis”.

In the Mobiles’ favour, there are now a number of schemes that allow you to get rid of your old mobile for money. The idea (I understand) is that devices are then re-purposed for developing countries, and can continue to be used. However, I wonder as to the efficacy of this process – mainly because I read more than one report since the start of the year that PCs which are supposed to be “re-purposed” are actually DUMPED in developing countries – in or on the ground…

It all sounds a bit negative doesn’t it – neither Nappies or Mobiles are potentially great environmentally, and whilst they have their differences (you wouldn’t hold a used nappy to your ear, would you!), there are similarities in the lack of decent solutions for disposing of them.

Is there a good answer(s) for processing either of them? I’d be very interested to see what the IntoMobile readers have to say on an issue which isn’t going to bite us now, but may well do in tens or hundreds of years… after all, we reap what we sow, right?