There seems to be three dogs in this fight.  One one side, there are those who think it is long overdue that Apple started defending themselves against intellectual property theft.  On the other side is a group that believes Apple is acting like the new Microsoft by using the courts to try to intimidate any real competition to the iPhone.  Then there are those who believe that all technology companies have lost their minds and sold their souls by using patents as weapons.  Place me firmly in the third camp.

The patent battles have become ridiculous.  Apple and Nokia have been trading barbs over who infringed on who's patents for the past few months.  According to an article on CNet's News.com, Nokia claims that Apple infringed on seven Nokia patents "in virtually all of its mobile phones, portable music players, and computers."   I don't know who is right and who is wrong is this case, and I believe that patents are necessary to protect your company's technology, but the current state of patent litigation mania will only hurt one party: the consumer.

I have some personal experience with absurd patent lawsuits.  Many years ago, I worked for a company that developed internet kiosk hardware, software, and services.  Don't look for it, it's not there anymore.  Using Microsoft development platforms, we developed proprietary technology that allowed retailers to put kiosks in their stores that gave customers access to internet.  The technology we created locked the kiosk down to only being able to browse certain websites and kept customers from accessing pornography or other objectionable content from the kiosk.  It all sounds pretty simple now, but 12 years ago it was pretty hot.

One day our boss informed us that we were being sued for patent infringement by a competing company that supposedly had a patent on putting internet access in kiosks.  The company in question was all but bankrupt, and it was obvious that they were looking for a quick settlement for some cash to keep them going.  In fact, I'm not sure they even produced a product; they just held the patent for internet kiosks, or so they said.  The sad thing is that there are companies that do just that.  They don't make anything.  They just try to obtain as many patents as they can and sue, sue, sue.  What really made my blood boils was not the fact that we were being sued, but the fact that somebody thought that they could actually patent public internet access from a kiosk.  It just seems so obvious an invention.   I could see some merit to such a lawsuit if we had implemented the idea of an internet kiosk in the exact same way, but while my company created custom, proprietary computer programs to keep kiosk users limited to certain websites, the company that was suing us only put graphics over the address bar of the web browser.  Not only were the two implementations completely different, but their solution was lame as well.

In the end, the internet bubble burst and we all went out of business before the suit was ever resolved.  I never became an internet millionaire, but I was able to wallpaper my bathroom with the 30,000 shares of stock that was supposed to get me there.

I guess the lesson learned here is: you have to advertise your products!  Apple and Motorola/Verizon inundated television with commercials for their phones.  Google’s marketing plan so far is to have text and image ads all over the web via Google AdWords/AdSense.  Combine the lack of television advertising with the fact that you can only purchase the Nexus One through Google.com, and you have a recipe for disaster.  You can go to any Apple or AT&T store and hold an iPhone in your hands, or you can visit the Verizon store for a demo of the Droid.  Being able to actually use an expensive product before purchase means a lot.  Not to mention that stores and salespeople have a vested interest in making you buy their phone.  When Verizon or AT&T gets you in their store, they can do the hard sell, and they can up-sell you service plans and accessories.  When you go to google.com/phone, you will see an awesome demo of the Nexus One, but all you have to do is close your browser when you've had enough.

Selling consumer electronics is not like launching Google Maps.  The Nexus One can’t be in ‘beta’ for 3 years.  If Google search goes down, so what?  Users will switch over to Yahoo! or Bing.  If a user’s Nexus One locks up, they are going to want immediate customer service.  When you shell out a couple hundred bucks for a phone and it doesn’t work, you’re not going to be too pleased with searching a support forum for answers.

Unless Google finds a partner to help them sell and service the Nexus One (T-Mobile is the Nexus One network, but they don’t provide customer sales or support), the Motorola Droid will continue to be the Android top dog (until the next big think comes along in about 10 minutes ).

I have noticed that some people never negatively criticize something they have purchased, a sports team they follow, or anything on which they have spent money, time, or energy.  I assume that they subconsciously feel that their choice of purchase reflects on them to a very large degree.  Not me.  I'll tell you straight up that I purchased a Chrysler PT Cruiser in 2002, and it was the biggest piece of crap that I've ever owned, but others would never admit it.  They would defend the Cruiser and tell you how great it is despite their deep hatred for the car.    This mentality is completely foreign to me.  What's the use of being alive if you can't complain about living?!

If you are a regular reader of BackingIn, you know that I'm a Microsoft enthusiast, but don't get me started on how much I hate Microsoft Outlook.  I live for the New York Mets, but I could do a thesis on why they suck out loud.  I bought a 2009Volkswagen Rabbit, and it is a great car, but it gets horrendous gas mileage and the fit and finish are sub-par.   I own a Motorola Droid, and it is way cool, but rest assured, I will give you a true assessment of it below.

A Quick Motorola Droid Review

The Motorola Droid is an Android-based smartphone sold by Verizon Wireless.  The Droid has many features not found on the Apple iPhone, its main competitor.

• Physical keyboard
• User-replaceable battery
• SD Memory card
• Multitasking
• LED Flash for Camera
• Open application development
• Widgets
• Verizon Wireless
• Support for Adobe Flash 10.1 (to be released Q1 2010)

It is because of the above features that I chose the Droid.  Well, that and the girl who sold me the phone at the Verizon kiosk was super-cute.  After almost two months of ownership, I still love my Droid.  The phone sound quality is excellent.  I have experienced no dropped calls, and the 3G coverage is  omnipresent.  Web browsing is fast and seamless.  The onscreen keyboard is as easy to use as a touchscreen keyboard can be.  I especially like the predictive text feature.  The hardware feels solid and well built.  Battery life has been excellent so far.  There are over 20,000 apps available for the Android operating system that runs the Droid, and you can find almost everything that you want in the Android Market application store.  Almost everything.  And that brings me to the fun part.  The negatives:

• Applications.  Unlike a Windows Mobile phone, where Mobile Office is included, the Droid does not come with an application that can create or edit Office documents.  There are applications that you can purchase from the Market that will give you edit capability, but the phone should come with Office compatibility.  Also, unlike a Windows phone, the Droid does not make it easy to sync with Outlook.   You can't even access Google Docs from the Droid or any Android phone.  Google made Android!  What's up with that?
• Applications, part II.  There are thousands of Android apps for the Droid, and the fact that the iPhone has over 100 thousand apps is no big deal.  The number of apps is way less important than the availability of the apps that you want.  Most companies are not going to develop separate apps for iPhone, Blackberry, Android, Windows Mobile, Palm Pre, etc.  They are going to produce an iPhone app and maybe a Blackberry version.  Hopefully this will change with Android and other smartphone operating systems pledging Flash support.
• Touchscreen feel.  The Droid has a very good touchscreen, but there is a slight delay from when you touch and drag your finger across the screen to when the interface begins to move.  It is not as smooth as the iPhone (or the Nexus One, so I'm told).
• Camera.  The camera takes way to long to focus and snap a picture.  The wait time between photos is long as well.  Photo quality is good for a cell phone, but flash photo quality if very low.
• Stability.  I have had to pull the battery out of the Droid about 4 times to fix problems.  Three times the phone was locked up, and recently, it lost all data connectivity.  Pulling the battery fixed the issues, but the lack of OS stability is troubling.  The Android 2.1 update is due for the Droid, but no date has been given.

All in all, I recommend the Motorola Droid.  Despite its shortcomings, many of which will hopefully be fixed by future software updates, it is the best smartphone on the market.  The Google Nexus One has a better screen and faster processor, but it remains to be seen if Google can service a consumer electronics product effectively.  The iPhone has the apps and the accessories, but it lacks many important features and is tied to iTunes and Apple censorship.  The Palm Pre has received glowing reviews, but will Palm survive 2010?  To paraphrase the great Obi Wan, "These are the Droids you're looking for."

Google will really blow the wind out of Motorola’s sales with the Nexus One.  The Nexus One is thinner, faster, and has a better screen than the Droid (and the iPhone!).  Nexus also has specific hardware and software features like 3D and voice to text for all input fields.  Not to mention, that when people think about the iPhone’s biggest competition from now on, it will be the Nexus One.

This always happens to me.  I purchased a 2009 Volkswagen Rabbit (AKA Golf). I really wanted a Mazda3, but Mazda was going to release a new generation Mazda3 in 2010, and I didn’t what to have an ‘old’ car after just a year.  I read on car blogs that Volkswagen takes a long time between introducing new models, and the next Rabbit wasn’t due for at least a couple of years.  I even asked the dealer (after I bought the car), and he said we wouldn’t see the next generation Rabbit for a few years.  Eight months after I purchased the Rabbit, VW introduced the next generation 2010 Golf (they  dropped the Rabbit name and went back to Golf).  It isn’t so bad.  The new version looks pretty much like mine, but it gets better mileage, and the interior noise has been reduced.

I’m not buying a new car, but maybe I can upgrade somehow to the Verizon version of the Nexus One that’s due in the Spring.  I could just learn to live with it and enjoy what I have…naaaaah!  That’s not going to happen.