iphoting's Sink

2 years ago, I was handed a Dopod M700 running the latest Windows Mobile operating system then, 5.0. My experience was beyond terrible that I had to stop using that phone after a week as it could barely keep up with my usage style, brought over from my previous phone, a Sony Ericsson K610i. As a brief background about this smartphone, it is a huge touchscreen with a scrollwheel and a few utility buttons.

The first problem which I attribute to the fault of the OS is that I spent most of my time launching task manager, killing software that should not be running when they are not the foreground process.

Secondly, I spent and unwieldy amount of time attempting to launch software via its “Start” menu.

Thirdly, my contacts were in such a messed up state that I wasn’t able to contact anyone. As it only supports ActiveSync, Mac support is totally out of the window (pardon the pun). Having seen how Outlook behaves, I don’t exactly want to fathom what it’ll mean to my contacts.

Fourthly, pressure-based touchscreen is a pain to type with its tiny virtual keyboard. You’ll need to keep fingernails just to accurately touch something.

Fifthly, the ringer settings are beyond primitive that it doesn’t feel like a phone.

Sixthly, I can’t switch the usability feature on as I can’t find it!

In all, the device software feels more like a PDA with the phone functionality added as an after-thought. Really, if there’s anyone who claims WM OS is usable, I think he doesn’t understand what usability is. Many would also claim that the new version of the OS is better but I’ll beg to differ. Unless Microsoft redesigns the OS from scratch, it’ll still be a desktop metaphor crammed into a tiny screen.

Listening in forums about the iPhone, many claim that they prefer other ‘touchscreen’ phones such as LG’s or Samsung’s, etc, whereby all but one fail to consider or realise the difference in their touchscreen technology.

iPhone and the iPod Touch uses a capacitance-based system, where it is “skin-activated” rather than pressure activated. As such, just tapping with your fingertips would produce a result. On the other hand, most other touchscreen phones employ a pressure-based touchscreen system, where a precise and pressured point is required to register an input. Moreover, most pressure-based touchscreens are confused when the size of the pressure point increases. Thus, the usage of fingers rather than fingernails on such touchscreens result in poor recognition. A stylus is therefore usually provided.

This tiny but distinct difference is huge enough to affect usability experience to the extent that it makes or breaks “typing” on the on-screen virtual full-sized keyboard. This also explains why critics of the iPhone claim that it is impossible to type on the iPhone virtual full-sized keyboard as they fail to realise the subtle difference in technology employed.

In my opinion, the capacitance-based touchscreen system is worth more than enough to compensate the apparent “software fixable” cons such as the lack of MMS, cut and paste, email attachment support.

The only problem thus far is the built-in battery with a three-digit replacement figure.

I’ve come across this interesting wikipedia article, Illiberal Democracy, where Singapore is cited as a clear and distinct example.

The stance in the article is further emphasised by the following speech by NMP Siew Kum Hong. What he doesn’t say and why he had to make this speech would make very good food for thought in the light of the article mentioned above.

Happy grinning.

I’ve been observing the prices that SingTel sets since the release of the product in Singapore and managed to gain a few interesting insights.

In the beginning, iPhone 3G (8GB) sells for S$598 with the Classic 100 plan. A week later, the pricing of this plan is removed from their advertising literature and subsequent calls to 1626 reveals that the price has been raised to $658. Next, iFlexi Premium plan does not come with a $300 handset voucher annually, due to “generous data and voice bundle”. Speculatively due to high demand, it was reinstated.

A new Broadband on Mobile plan, called the Plus, was created at the speed of 3.6 mbps with free data worth 500 MB at $19.90 monthly. A current Broadband on Mobile 1000 plan at the speed of 1 mbps with free data worth 50 GB costs only $22.42 monthly. With a 12 month subscription, there will be a 30% off, putting the price at $16 monthly.

I’ve done rather elaborate thinking on why such inconsistent plans such as the iFlexi plans are made and have yet to find an answer. I might be able to do so if I can have a feel of the take up rate of those plans. Furthermore, their FAQs regarding this question doesn’t exactly answer the question satisfactorily.

My calculations show that the iFlexi plans costs almost the same as the corresponding iPlans with great bandwidth but sacrificing a few magnitudes of free local data allowance. The cheapest so far would be a Classic 100 plan with BBoM 1000 at the 4th year loyalty tier at only ~$44 a month. The downside is that you’ll need to fork up a hefty bundle of cash upfront.

Hence, it will be imperative that would-be buyers do their sums first before signing up for these rather expensive plans.

What I’d learnt in business about message delivery is to pass the message directly to its intended recipient, with as little intermediaries as possible. In the place I work however, they stubbornly adhere to the contrary – message passing. If you’ve ever played the game called, “broken telephone”, you’ll know exactly what I mean.

To illustrate my organisation and the context, I’ll let you imagine an auditorium where a level of students are assembled. Each level contains 3 classes is divided into 30 people each, led by a class in-charge. Each class subsequently is divided into 3 groups with 10 people each, led by a group in-charge. Effectively, the group in-charge has at most 9 people under him.

Let’s say the principal needs to get everyone to do something such as taking out a piece of paper from their pockets, most normal organisations would have the principal go to the microphone and address the gathered directly. At most, the level in-charge would be informed and announcement made by him.

However, in my organisation, things work in a more ridiculous way. To send a message, the principal would instead summon his deputy and passes his message to him, and his deputy would then summon the discipline master and pass the message to him. Following which, the discipline master would summon the level in-charge and pass him the message; and subsequently, the level in-charge would then summon the class in-charge, and the class in-change would summon the group in-charge. Finally, the group in-charge would then summon the remaining 9 people under his care to tell them the (possibly already distorted) message – do an equipment check before moving off.

These elaborately detailed procedures happen all the time, regardless of the need nor inefficiencies.

You wouldn’t believe me if I were to tell you that the organisation that I am forced to work for is sadly hopeless and stifling.

My breakfast this morning was different from others after reading a strange article from ‘TODAY’, Is it that simple?. Despite my drastically declining intelligence, I’m amused to be able to find the article pretty flawed; let’s dissect it and see what he’s trying to smoke.

My comments are in brackets, [].

Is it that simple?

MM questions younger Singaporeans’ desire for multi-party politics.

THE political problems faced by many countries in Asia can be traced back to two words: Money politics.

And the reason such troubles have not taken root here? There is no “money politics” in Singapore, and “we have a Division One team in charge”, said Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew last night. [Div One by whose standards? Number of prisoners escaped? Or the rate of foreigners taking up PR?]

In many Asian countries [Singapore included?], money politics is simply the “code word” for buying votes to gain power [$100 million Hougang upgrading?], and after that is done, “to recover your expenses plus some profit for the next round of vote-buying” [GST raises to help the poor?], said Mr Lee at the Tanjong Pagar 43rd National Day Celebration Dinner.

“One of the big problems they now face, in other countries, is the people in power want to reserve the money, keep it for themselves. [Multi-million dollar salaries?] So, they exclude young able people who want to join their team ... [So who joins their team?]

“The result is, there is no talent inside the existing parties.”

Contrast that to Singapore.

“In other countries, elections do not put up a Division One team. They are a Division Three, either a B team or a C team in charge. In Singapore, we carefully select our candidates ... [Home Affairs is a Division One A team I guess?]

“Over the years, with each election, we see the quality of the MPs, their education levels, their competence, their abilities, their energy. [Yes, immune to resignations when mistakes are made; but draw salaries comparable to people with risk exposures a few magnitudes higher.]

“Their youthfulness is renewed and we have a leadership that’s able to meet the rising standards of the population,” said Mr Lee. [You sure the standards of the population are being met?]

But today’s younger generation does not understand all this, the Minister Mentor said. [Thank your ministry of Education? or the failed NE policies? or the ST for such lousy spins?]

“They say, oh, let’s have multiparty politics. Let’s have different parties change and be in charge of the Government. Is it that simple? You vote in a Division Three government, not a Division One government, and the whole economy will just subside within three, four years. Finished.” [He means that once there’s a credible opposition, PAP will no longer contest with Division One teams. Shadow governments don’t exist in Singapore too; No need for accountability!]

Such proponents should study Taiwan, Thailand and the Philippines, where rotating party governments have led to more mismanagement. “And a ‘freewheeling paress’ (sic) has not cleaed (sic) up corruption, although according to American ‘liberal’ democracy theories, it is designed to do so,” Mr Lee said. [I don’t see how legalising corruption clears up corruption; it just cleanliness through obscurity. Where’s the ombudsmen? Where’s the freedom of information act? What did Goplan Nair do wrong?]

Even in the face of a global recession, Singapore has enough long-term investments to buffer the setbacks, noted Mr Lee. [Yep, inflation is not an issue, nor are people starving in the streets.]

“Why are we on top of our problem? Because there’s a Government that’s planning ahead, seeing ahead, calculating ahead, making the right decision. Yes, there will be recession around the world. But we will have enough investments already going on,” he said. [You mean only countries without opposition can think ahead? Why hasn’t Hong Kong’s economy “finished”; or why is Taiwan’s economy going pretty well? Or maybe it’s the Ivory Tower syndrome. More ERP gantries would be a ‘long term’ planning ahead solution, rather than building wider, better connected roads too, right?]

As a mentor and advisor to the younger policy-makers, he cited how he backed Singapore’s hosting of the Formula One in September, even though he himself was not a fan. “We cannot stay still. The world has changed – there’s a jetset (sic) that travels all over the world because they are interested in the Formula One races. Why? I don’t know. [What about the Casino? and all the Hubs that they never boast about?]

“I find very little excitement in it. They wheel around and around, and it’s over. And there’s an accident – so what? But I’m told there is tremendous exitement (sic) in the way you get the cars, the way you change wheels, the way you drive, and so on,” he said, drawing chuckles from the audience.

It’s quite funny, the MM. Interesting use of hyperbole.

Four months since applying to SMU, I’ve been met with silence over the application process. Wrote an email asking them if the “pending” status is still valid after so long and they promised a response the following week.

Today, a letter of offer finally arrived and I can say goodbye to NUS.

Here’s a good article on “Why NS Didn’t Make Me Patriotic”.

Why? Because in NS, it really goes like this: I pretend to be a soldier, and you pretend to treat me like a soldier. NS has become so ritualised that serving the nation has lost its meaning.

When something becomes a ritual, it loses its meaning, and whatever passion there was is lost, and what you get are the tired faces and the bad-ass attitudes that are commonplace among the guys serving.

Unless and until the question of purpose and service can be answered, Singaporean men (and some women) will find themselves losing passion for the country they’ve been asked to serve, longing for greener pastures always.

Subsequently, one of the comments about NS as a whole that follow the article stands out interestingly.

Comment 35:-

Some said NS is good.

Some said NS is bad.

Some said NS is okay but …

Some said we are defending the foreigners and investors.

Some said we are defending the material wealth of Singapore Inc.

Some said I will fight for my family, the only ones I’ve got.

Some said I will fight for the values and allegiance that I have pledged.

Some said Singapore is defensible and should be defended.

Some said Singapore is not defensible, best to protect your family is to get them out of the danger zone as early as possible before bombs start raining.

So, NS is both good and bad, as well as so so only. Does that matter?

I think what actually matters most is whether the NS troops, with the kind of present leadership and morale, will be able to defend Singapore effectively to buy the necessary time for the UN to intervene, and whether Singapore is defensible or not? How do we know?

First, we have to ask ourselves a few questions before we even venture into answering the question: “Would I defend Singapore or not?”

Q1. Do I know the Terrain? Is the Singapore terrain defensible? Surrounded all-round by waters with no natural features to obstruct invading forces, how to defend such a piece of land? Forward defence concept? Pre-emptive

strikes? If so, wouldn’t Singapore be seen as an aggressor in the eyes of the UN. Then how can we be sure that the UN will come to our rescue? Where is the justification?

Q2. Do I know the potential Enemy? Who are the real threats? What kind of forces Singapore would likely face? What will be the ratio of combatants vs combatants? Can technological advantage really help? What will the Enemy

or Enemies do? Are they as dumb as you think they are?

Q3. Do I know Myself? What kind of leaders do we have? Will our fellow NSmen fight together with me as a cohesive team or I have to fight alone? How do others feel? What is their emotional and psychological make-up? Will the govt take care of my family’s welfare when I am fighting in the front-line, when it keep reminding me that “Welfare is a dirty word”? How will my family feel? Should I put my family overseas first or should I leave them at home under constant threats and fear when bombs start falling and bullets start flying? Can I be sure that they will be safe and safeguarded while I am fighting with the enemies?

Q4. Do I know the Time and Space? How much time do we have to defend the island? The Japanese took 70 days to march from Singora to Singapore, and only 7 days to finish up Singapore and force the Allied Forces to surrender. How much space can we breath? Will there be enough room to maneuver our forces? Will there be enough space for the non-combatants, the old, the children, the women and the invalids to hide? Are the few meager bomb shelters sufficient? Are our logistics and supplies sufficient to last that duration of time and space?

Second, after considering all that, ask yourself: Do I have the guts to fight against overwhelming odds? Will I be dead before I even say “Enemy in front, charge!”? It is very easy to talk in front of the computer screen and say I will his and I will that. BUT when the bullets start flying and bombs start dropping and watching your comrades dying and screaming of pain, will your nerves withstand the test?

Third, consider all options available to you, as an individual with your family, and select the best option opened to you when war is eminent. Select that option and then tell us what you would do.

Fourth, consider what the gahmen would do. Where would the leaders be under such circumstances? Will each and everyone of the political leaders continue to stay within Singapore when bombs are raining and bullets flying? How many of them have already bought houses overseas? How many of them have got bank accounts overseas? How many of them have already sent or are planning to send their children to stay overseas? Why are they fattening up their pockets with ever-increasing salaries sky-high, while simultaneously holding down our meager wage increase, using different sets of logics to make justification?

Now, tell us: Would you sincerely believe yourself that you will fight to your last drop of blood to defend Singapore?

What would you do?