When Smartphones Are The Wrong Tool For The Wrong Job

Normally I am all for using smartphones to make you better at your job or businesses more efficient. But sometimes things just cross the line.

The Chicago Sun-Times, a newspaper with a long and rich history, just fired its entire staff of photo journalists. It their place? The Sun-Times is going to teach every reporter the basics of iPhone photography. 

"In the coming days and weeks, we'll be working with all editorial employees to train and outfit you as much as possible to produce the content we need," said Sun-Times managing editor Craig Newman in a memo to the staff, according to media critic Robert Feder in a Facebook post.

This comes under the category of, “just because you can do something and it will be cheaper and easier, doesn’t mean you bloody well should.”

I take a lot of photos for articles with my array of smartphones. That doesn’t mean all of them are any damn good. Sometimes it can be damn hard to take a professional photograph of something with a smartphone for publication. You become a lot more aware of lighting conditions, distance, hand movement and stabilization. These are things that a good photo journalist with a decent camera just knows how to take care of to produce much better quality work than me and my point-and-shoot smartphone hack jobs.

In comparison to large newspapers, ReadWrite’s staff is small and we can only do so many things. Yet, we have a person on a photo desk (that serves other SAY Media-owned properties, as well) and we have been trying to be more proactive with original pictures and visual elements in our story. The Web is more and more a visual place, and quality photos are what make publications stand out from the dreck of social media and amateur blogs. Add in the fact that the Chicago Sun-Times actually prints a paper newspaper, and the matter becomes complicated. You ever seen a pixelated, blurry iPhone picture blown up and printed on newspaper parchment? No? There is a reason for that.

If newspapers are going to turn reporters into “backpack journalists" (where everything they need from camera, to notebooks to computer,smartphone and tablets is in  backpack), then they need to equip reporters better for photos than just a smartphone. The industry has made tremendous strides with smartphone camera technology (with Samsung, Nokia and HTC’s recent flagship smartphones all boasting terrific digital point-and-shoot apps).

For the most part though, they just aren’t going to be good enough for the professional-grade photography a major American newspaper is supposed to have. It would be better if the if the Sun-Times reporters issued high-quality digital cameras like the Samsung Galaxy Camera. They would be much better equipped to enter the fray than just with their smartphone. 

We can extend the bad decision of the Sun-Times to a variety of industries. Just because mobile might be cheaper, that doesn’t necessarily mean it is going to be better. The right tool for the right job makes everybody’s lives easier and more efficient. Sometimes, perhaps most of the time, that tool is not going to be a smartphone. 

Image courtesy of Shutterstock.

View the original article here

When Smartphones Are The Wrong Tool For The Wrong Job

Normally I am all for using smartphones to make you better at your job or businesses more efficient. But sometimes things just cross the line.

The Chicago Sun-Times, a newspaper with a long and rich history, just fired its entire staff of photo journalists. It their place? The Sun-Times is going to teach every reporter the basics of iPhone photography. 

"In the coming days and weeks, we'll be working with all editorial employees to train and outfit you as much as possible to produce the content we need," said Sun-Times managing editor Craig Newman in a memo to the staff, according to media critic Robert Feder in a Facebook post.

This comes under the category of, “just because you can do something and it will be cheaper and easier, doesn’t mean you bloody well should.”

I take a lot of photos for articles with my array of smartphones. That doesn’t mean all of them are any damn good. Sometimes it can be damn hard to take a professional photograph of something with a smartphone for publication. You become a lot more aware of lighting conditions, distance, hand movement and stabilization. These are things that a good photo journalist with a decent camera just knows how to take care of to produce much better quality work than me and my point-and-shoot smartphone hack jobs.

In comparison to large newspapers, ReadWrite’s staff is small and we can only do so many things. Yet, we have a person on a photo desk (that serves other SAY Media-owned properties, as well) and we have been trying to be more proactive with original pictures and visual elements in our story. The Web is more and more a visual place, and quality photos are what make publications stand out from the dreck of social media and amateur blogs. Add in the fact that the Chicago Sun-Times actually prints a paper newspaper, and the matter becomes complicated. You ever seen a pixelated, blurry iPhone picture blown up and printed on newspaper parchment? No? There is a reason for that.

If newspapers are going to turn reporters into “backpack journalists" (where everything they need from camera, to notebooks to computer,smartphone and tablets is in  backpack), then they need to equip reporters better for photos than just a smartphone. The industry has made tremendous strides with smartphone camera technology (with Samsung, Nokia and HTC’s recent flagship smartphones all boasting terrific digital point-and-shoot apps).

For the most part though, they just aren’t going to be good enough for the professional-grade photography a major American newspaper is supposed to have. It would be better if the if the Sun-Times reporters issued high-quality digital cameras like the Samsung Galaxy Camera. They would be much better equipped to enter the fray than just with their smartphone. 

We can extend the bad decision of the Sun-Times to a variety of industries. Just because mobile might be cheaper, that doesn’t necessarily mean it is going to be better. The right tool for the right job makes everybody’s lives easier and more efficient. Sometimes, perhaps most of the time, that tool is not going to be a smartphone. 

View the original article here

7 Reasons Why You Can't Go Wrong With Wimax

There are currently a number of different providers to choose from in the realm of cellular internet, but that doesn't mean they're all good choices. If you're not careful, you could end up choosing a service that isn't future-proof or one that has yet to prove itself now. Thankfully, there is an option that you really can't go wrong with: Wimax. The following are all excellent reasons why you'd be making the right decision by choosing that standard.

1. It's fast. You can judge an internet connection in a number of different ways, but probably the criteria that matters the most is speed. If your particular connection isn't up to par in this area, you're not going to think very highly of it no matter how good it is in other areas. Thankfully, your new cellular solution will feature transfer rates that hover around 6 megabits per second, which means that it will be able to handle anything the internet sends your way including high definition video, streaming audio, and more.

2. It's also going to be fast in the future too. Unlike HSPA+, Wimax isn't based heavily on the 3G network. On the contrary, it makes use of a completely new network that is projected to have transfer rates as high as 100 megabits per second in the future. In other words, you can be sure that your solution will be able to grow as the internet grows.

3. It's reliable. Some people unfairly characterize wireless connections as being inherently unreliable thanks to equipment used early on, but Wimax is considered much more sophisticated. Since it's based on reliable cellular technology, you will be able to travel all throughout the coverage area without experiencing any disconnections.

4. It's secure. Once again, people should put aside any preconceived notions they might have. For example, there are all sorts of security horror stories floating around related to Wifi networks, but the latest in cellular connectivity makes use of extremely effective encryption. When it comes down to it, you can expect the same kind of security that cable or DSL both feature, which is to say that your sensitive data is not going to get into the wrong hands.

5. It's affordable. Wimax knows that it has to compete with cable and DSL along with all the other cellular standards out there and they've priced their plans accordingly. Have a look online and you might be pleasantly surprised at what you see.

6. It has been around longer than its competitors. There is no good substitute for experience, and that's why you should choose the cellular internet provider that has been around the longest. Even though HSPA+ is based on 3G technology, it hasn't been around all that long. Long Term Evolution or LTE is the newest of the bunch and definitely hasn't had time to prove itself. Wimax on the other hand has been around is ready for the masses.

7. No additional services will be required. Cable and DSL often make you sign up for cable TV or phone service, respectively, but you won't have to sign up for anything but internet once you choose to go cellular.

View the original article here