Canada is a fairly laid-back country when it comes to almost everything, but if there's anything that can be determined by the existence of RuinediPhone.com, it's this: don't fuck with our mobile data plans! MacLeans' latest issue contains a lengthy article comparing Canadians and Americans (aside: compare us to a different country like Denmark or Australia for a change please and thanks...sigh). It turns out that when compared to our US neighbours, we have greater wealth, carry less debt, are healthier, live longer, have more/better sex, enjoy better beer, blah blah blah. We're still getting screwed on the cost of things other than greeting cards and books. Car and electronics companies have finally begun adjusting their pricing for the strengthening Loonie. Even Apple themselves, who I lambasted last year, have finally come around: base config on a MacBook Pro now only results in $100 difference between the US and Canadian online store - yay!

O2 in the UK and AT&T in the US both offer unlimited data plans. In fact, O2 offers nice 'n' short 18-month contracts and will even throw in the iPhone for free if you sign up for either the £45/month or £75/month plans. Rogers, on the other hand, give you fewer daytime minutes and the most data you can transfer in any given month is 2GB with their $115/month plan - no unlimited plans to be found. Go over your monthly data limit and you're slapped with $0.50/MB for the first 60 MB, $.03/MB thereafter.

Time will tell if Apple will put the pressure on Rogers before the iPhone launches ten days from now.

According to Apple, Safari is "the world's best browser". Really? It's pretty. It looks good with the rest of Mac OS X. However, compared to Firefox and Opera, Safari isn't in the same league. Try using all of Gmail's features in Safari and you'll see what I mean. It could be a good browser, but it needs much more work to get to that point.

So why are Windows users getting another browser to choose from? It appears that the iPhone might be driving this reasoning. Developers can create applications using nothing more than HTML and JavaScript, which will run on Safari on the iPhone. For Windows developers, they won't need to purchase Mac hardware to create iPhone apps. That makes sense, albeit the apps that can be created via HTML+JavaScript won't be as robust as those created with a native iPhone API.

Is there another reason Safari has been ported to Windows? I sure hope it's not to sway Windows users to the world of Mac, by raising awareness of Apple to PC users. If that's the case, they'd be going about it all wrong. For the past several years I've been saying that if you need a computer and aren't a tech savy person, buy a Mac. Having a Windows version of Safari available won't do much to raise awareness, even if they bundle it with iTunes+Quicktime, because:

• Average PC users generally don't actively look for new and better browsers to download and install. To them, the big blue "e" on their desktop that's been there since they first booted up their computer after buying it is the Internet.
• The upfront cost of Mac hardware scares most people away. A comparable system from Dell or HP that sells for $300 less will make the average computer user's purchasing decision easy, as they rarely are able to determine the total cost of ownership and are unable to realize that it's potentially less expensive to own a Mac in the long-run.
• Average PC users are afraid to switch because they're not certain if they can still run application X or if their files can be opened on a Mac.

For Apple to succeed in swaying PC users to the Mac side, they'll have to put people's concerns to rest regarding the higher initial cost of Mac hardware against the TCO of PC vs Mac hardware. Apple will also have to reassure users, through a closer relationship with VMware (Fusion) and SWsoft (Parallels Desktop) to alleviate PC users compatibility fears with their existing apps and files. And a sexy, but second-rate, web browser isn't the way to go about it.

First, Apple announced their long-awaited cell phone at CES today.

Then, the iPhone's page on the Apple site went live.

Finally, this happened:

It's funny what a sexy PowerPoint presentation can do, isn't it? Later on, Engadget uncovered what the iPhone is really capable of. It turns out that it's not a smart phone, per se. The only way new software can be installed on the iPhone is if Apple puts it there, and there's no connectivity to enterprise messaging like Exchange or Notes. It's a shame that 3rd party developers can't create any apps that could be installed on the iPhone. The iPhone apparently runs Mac OS X (in some form or fashion) and there are plenty of Mac OS X programmers around now. It seems like a very tap-able resource. Also, let's not forge the potential slough of new Mac OS X developers that could arise. So why did RIM's and Palm's stocks take such a hit yesterday? Enterprise customers (you know, the ones with budgets) will have no use for Apple's pricey phone. The iPhone is another geek chic item that will likely find a home on the hips of trendy urbanites with $500 to burn. It sure does demo nicely, though.

Let's not forget, however, that Linksys owns the real iPhone