Ian’s first point: Computing is heading towards a new, simplified era. Your riposte: Apple is evil Devices are heading towards ubiquity and ease of use. This is a good thing. Hate on Apple all you want but they are pushing ease of use and everyone else is following. This is also a good thing. Attempting to argue that Apple have a walled garden, while fashionable amongst the technorati, isn’t relevant.

Ian’s second point: The most important thing about the iPad is the battery life. Your riposte: Mobile is a two horse race that Google are going to win. The iPad has a fantastic battery life and it is an always on and instant on computer than can do most things that people use a computer for on a day to day basis. Battery life is essential for this. Silent handheld computing devices are definitely the way forward for the casual user. Evo battery life on the other hand is craptastic. Not entirely sure about your rant on the state of mobile – at the least it is off topic – but hey. The point is that Google will win the vast amount of market share. They will steal share from Windows Mobile, Symbian and the other also rans but they will make no money in doing so. This is quite important. Apple can grab the market share they want and make serious money on each unit sold. This is very important. Apple have a business model, Google appear to be attempting to break the market. After yesterdays earnings I’m not entirely sure that Google shouldn’t actually start manning up and become a serious business.

Ian’s third point: When it comes to broadband, speed is less important than always-on. Your riposte: Cloud is good. Always on is important. I have family all over the globe. Being able to talk to them in real time is far more important to me than speed of file transfers but the geeks seem to differ on this. “It’s what mobile is actually about” actually being able to make calls is what it is all about actually. I don’t think we are there yet. Especially in the mobile space. Maybe with the roll out of LTE and other high bandwidth and high capacity networks then the cloud will finally work. But at the moment all that stuff being shoved over the airwaves is just not great for your fellow users. You can have all you eat as long as you don’t give a care about what others need too.

Ian’s fourth post: In five years time, not using your own name is going to look … old-fashioned… Your Riposte: I only have 2 basic online identities, my name, and my old school handle. I confess to mostly posting under this pseudonym but it is a character I created about five years ago and have stuck with it through most areas. I have nothing to hide as such but it is convenient to keep my posting separate from what I do in real life. So, like your example, I have two basic identities, my name and my handle.

Ian’s Final Post: “The hobbyists” are losing control… and they won’t like it. Your Riposte: AOL, Yahoo, Microsoft. What’s the point anymore? What do they stand for? Your response appears to be a bleed through of the previous point. Ian was saying that not using your true identity would be as old fashioned as AOL names. It was just an example, he meant nothing further by it. I think you are agreeing with him but I can’t be sure. What Ian was saying is happening is that the cabalistic technological priesthood are losing their control and power. Postings such as yours reinforce this impression.