WWDC 2013. iOS 7. Meh.

Yeah. I said “meh.”

What’s it to ya?

WWDC 2013 was much ado about nothing.

And the centerpiece of the keynote-that-wasn’t, was unquestionably iOS 7.

While Apple wants us to believe that the latest iteration of its OS is the next best thing to sliced bread, the rest of us know better.

So effing what they’ve adopted a “flatter” look.

Who the hell cares that they’ve changed the appearance of their icons.

Big deal if you’ll be able to flip through your open applications in a vertical Cover Flow fashion.

As much as I’m loathe to admit it, most of these “innovations” already exist on Android.

Earth to Apple: just because you do something doesn’t make it great.

I mean really?

Swipe a tile to the side to get rid of it?

Side reveal to open apps or menus?

New transitions?

Android.

Android.

Android.

If they announced one more Android standard as a new iOS feature, I was going to puke.

Yeah, I’m going in on iOS 7.

But to be frank, the entire WWDC keynote was a snorelax.

It wasn’t as bad as Google’s I/O 13, but it wasn’t much better.

Apple’s presenters actually appeared to be alive.

Beyond that though, the entire keynote was almost indistinguishable from Google’s in its sheer underwhelmingness.

I know, underwhelmingness is not a word.

But how else to describe an event so totally devoid of life and energy?

There was no punch.

No pop.

No pizzaz.

Especially when you start with a massive demo fail, when Anki Drive’s robotic car failed to….drive.

We all had to suffer through Anki founder, Boris Sofman’s plastic grimace smile as he waited impatiently for the program to reboot.

And things just went downhill from there.

Now to hear Apple tell it, WWDC 2013 was a huge success.

They unveiled all sorts of new features and products.

The Mac Pro, new MacBook Air, blah, blah, blah.

Each new reveal was as lackluster as the last.

Oh, and by the way, just because you say “isn’t it beautiful” over and over again, doesn’t make it so.

I, for one, am totally unenthused by iOS7.

But developers get ready, Jony Ives’ technicolor nightmare is upon us.

They recently published guidelines for developing apps consistent with the iOS 7 guidelines.

From here on in, the apps you create have to comport with this new LSD induced design aesthetic.

And all I can say is meh.

Posted with Blogsy

Google Now and Siri. Friends or Enemies? Frenemies.

There can only be one!

Didja hear?

Google Now is now available on iOS!

Aren’t you glad?

No?

Are you saying you’re not up on Google Now?

Google’s version of the personal assistant.

Well let me disabuse you of your ignorance.

About a year ago, when Google introduced it’s intelligent personal assistant for Android , many prognosticated the end of Siri.

Although Google Now wasn’t available for iOS, it was compelling and differed starkly from Apple’s PA offering.

For one, there was no Q&A.

You didn’t have to ask Google Now anything in order to get information.

Simply dial up the app, and it presented you with multiple options, all gleaned from you.

No questions asked.

More importantly, Google Now was intelligent.

Siri is stupid.

No learning curve.

No matter how many times you ask Siri a question, she’ll never intuit that you may be asking her to repeat a function she’s performed in the past.

Dumb dumb. You make me sick.

On the flip side, Google Now takes all the information it already knows about you and serves it back to you before you’ve even thought to ask.

The more you do (within the Google suite), the smarter it becomes.

Sounds bananas right?

How the heck can it tell you something about something you haven’t even asked about?

Magic, duh!

No seriously.

Google Now is an ‘intelligent assistant’, because it learns about it’s user based on that user’s activity and their previous history in other Google applications and services.

Say you’re heading out and start searching for a restaurant, Google Now will show you theaters and night clubs around you to hit afterwards.

Are you a fan of sports? Google Now will automatically update you on the latest scores from all the NBA playoff games.

That was then.

This is now.

And the feared rivalry is no longer conjecture.

Google Now for iOS is here!

Don’t look for it in the App Store though.

It’s not a stand alone app.

It’s an update to another app, Google Search.

I’ve got the Google Search app on my iPhone.

And lo and behold! There’s an update for it.

Update the app and Google Now is front and center with a little informational video.

Click through the navigation buttons, and Google Now walks you through the various utilitarian ways that it can help you.

From traffic alerts on your commute to work.

To flight information when you travel.

Google Now places a bunch of ‘cards’ at the bottom of the search screen, which you simply swipe up from the bottom to access.

My initial foray into Google Now served up the weather and a bunch of restaurants around the office.

There was also a card with an upcoming conference call.

Snorelax!

I’m sure folks with more exciting lives – or who live in Google – have infinitely more exciting stuff popping off.

If you’re (justifiably) paranoid about the privacy implications of yet another Google service, rest easy.

You’ve got to authorize the app to use your personal information.

But once you do look out!

Not really.

There are a bunch of things you can do on an Android which you can’t on your iOS device.

So that clever little swipe up from the bottom of the phone to activate Google Now – deaded.

Things like Fandango, Boarding Pass, and Events are all off limits too.

Not much of a rivalry.

I doubt I’ll remember to use the search app to look for shit anyway, even though its on my device.

So I probably won’t get much out of Google Now.

But the rest of you blokes should use it and tell me what you think.

Is Google Now the right information at just the right time?

Or will this be just another unused app icon sitting on your phone?

Need to do dirt? Get you a Burner (app).

When Techcrunch, Engadget and Gizmodo all talk about the same thing on the same day, my Spidey-senses start tingling.

So you can imagine the buzzing in my head reading about the release of Burner for Android today.

Don’t want to call your ‘herbologist‘ mom from your regular phone?

Can’t remember if the girl you copped that number from last night was cute (or not)?

Girlfriend mad at you and not responding to your texts?

Take no chances.

Burner is the solution for all that (telephonically) ails you.

The Burner app let’s you spoof your mobile phone number.

Instead of seeing your real number in the caller ID or as the source of a text message, your callers/text recipients see your Burner number instead.

Genius!

I took Burner for a spin and hit up my herbologist mom.

Getting set up was a cinch.

I downloaded the app from the App Store, entered my phone number and got an SMS with a verification code.

Once I plugged in the code, accepted the Ts&Cs and waited a few seconds, I was in.

Burner works off credits, which dictate how long your Burner number lasts.

Hence ‘burner’.

On the low end, there’s the Mini burner, which lasts 7 days, or 20 minutes talk time or 60 texts.

At the other end of the spectrum, there’s the Large or Long burner, which lasts 60 days, or 75 minutes talk time or 225 texts.

But you get a sample Burner right off the bat.

I’m not sure how much credits cost, but the next time I need to call my herbologist mom, I’ll let you know.

That’s my Burner number.

Feel free to give me a call or send me a text.

It’s a burner, so don’t sleep. The number will be gone tomorrow!

Need to do dirt? Get your Burner (app) on!

Facebook Home? NOMHS (Not On My Home Screen)

You’ve heard of NIMBY?

The acronym that stands for Not In My Back Yard?

It was coined by residents of towns and municipalities protesting attempts to place waste processing facilities and other similarly undesirable development close to them.

Well Facebook’s latest initiative, Home, intends to place a “takeover” app on your phone that would essentially make Facebook your default home screen.

The Facebook Home family of apps would replace the standard home screen of an Android user with an “immersive Facebook experience” that includes Facebook status updates from your friends, Facebook notifications and full screen photographs.

Facebook Home would essentially allow you to push all your Facebook-related content permanently to your phone’s home screen, giving you the ability to make Facebook your go-to app for all things social.

The centerpiece of the Facebook Home app is the ability to chat and message with your friends without having to navigate away from whatever you’re doing on your phone at the time.

The Chat Heads feature (who names this shit?) displays the face of the person attempting to message you, allowing you to immediately pull up and respond to the chat thread, without skipping a beat.

Tap the head, post your response, and you’re off.

Nifty right?

Wrong!

Facebook’s Home is a handsome Trojan Horse.

They have been talking Facebook Phone for a minute, getting everyone all hot and heavy, thinking Facebook was about to get into the handset game.

But they pulled a switcheroo and dropped Home instead.

Essentially giving Facebook the benefit of another massive installed user base, with none of the heavy lifting involved in creating a phone from scratch.

By piggybacking on the Android operating system, which is already Facebook friendly, Home gives Android users (aka suckas) the chance to spend every waking hour with Facebook.

Without having to open and close the app to do so…

Because its always on.

Will the wonders of time wasting technology never cease?

While folks debate whether Facebook will use their new app to push more advertising or not (yes they will)…

Or whether Facebook will use their app to collect data on users or not (yes they will)…

I take solace in the fact that this foolishness is Android only.

Apple is not so enamored with Facebook that they’d give up all that precious real estate to an app.

I won’t have to worry about the time (and battery) black hole drain it will invariably cause.

And I’m sorry, Facebook simply isn’t that important.

Facebook Home? Not on my home screen. Bitches!

The difference between an app and a mobile site is…

The other day, I nearly smacked the sh*t out of my wife.

Or rather, I had the urge to smack the sh*t out of my wife.

Now, I’m not a violent person.

Nor do I support domestic violence of any kind.

But she asked me a question…

So vile…

So base….

That it took every sinew in my body to restrain myself.

What, pray tell, did she ask to create such an impassioned emotional response?

“What’s the difference (between an app and a mobile site)?”

Can you believe it?

The nerve of this heifer.

I’ve been married to this broad for almost 13 years.

I’ve been in the mobile app/technology space for over a decade.

Over this period, I regaled her with stories of my exploits in cyberspace.

I converted her from a cave dwelling savage to a member of civilized society.

Where once stood a technophobe, now exists a technophile.

I brought her from a clamshell to a smartphone.

Raised her from the ignorance of PCs to the enlightenment of Apple.

Brought her from the dark of online social isolation to the light of social media and networking.

But, I digress.

Why did I want to inflict bodily harm?

Well, she was “pinning” on her Droid II and remarked how fluid the Pinterest mobile website was.

I casually remarked that if the mobile site worked so well, that the app would probably work better.

Following my advice, she fumbled around trying to locate the link to the Google Play Store on her device before realizing that the app was already installed.

Apparently, months ago, when she became the Pinterest-junkie she is today, I had installed the app to feed her voracious pinning appetite.

She had been using the app for a hot minute, thinking she was on their mobile site.

It was then, that she uttered those three dreaded words: what’s the difference.

They cut me like a knife.

She was looking down at her phone and didn’t see the murderous rage in my eyes.

We were in a public place (Ruby Tuesday) with the kids, so I channeled my inner Shaolin monk to avoid lunging across the table and throttling her.

Could she really not know the difference?

Maybe all the times she feigned sleep as I recounted my days’ work, she was really dozing off and not paying attention.

I should have known, with all those Help Desk moments, assisting her to remotely recover a file she thought she had deleted or locate a download on her computer.

Perhaps she was…daft?

My rage was quickly replaced by pity for my poor ignorant spouse, who continually failed to avail herself of her husband’s brilliance.

And it dawned on me.

If my bottom bitch didn’t know the difference between an app and a mobile site, perhaps my thirteen readers didn’t either.

I must right this wrong.

First, let’s start with definitions.

An app is a software application that’s written in the language of the mobile platform upon which it operates.

A mobile site is a website that has been optimized for browsing on mobile devices.

Now lets look at the primary differences between them, in the areas of: access, connectivity, content and compatibility.

Access

Apps are usually accessed directly from the mobile device. Typically, there is an icon for the particular app you wish to utilize, which launches the app. Click it and you’re off!

Mobile sites, on the other hand are usually accessed from within the mobile web browser. In order to access a mobile site, you’ve got to open up your browser, plug in the URL and hit enter. On many smartphones, though, you can now create a shortcut, which allows you to save the location of the web page as an icon on your device, which then opens up like an app.

Connectivity

Apps are usually available whether you’re online or offline. While many apps require an Internet or wifi connection to update their content, most are built to be used regardless of whether a connection exists. Typically, if a user is offline they can continue to use their app, and it will update once they’re in range of a signal.

Mobile sites require a cellular or wifi connection to be used. If you’re not in range of a wifi signal or rocking a device with a robust 3G or 4G, then connecting to a mobile site will be slightly…problematic.

Content

When you’re on an app, the content in the app can be stored on the device, pulled from the web and downloaded to the device, or both. Most game apps usually have content stored on the device. They user isn’t required to be online in order to play. Many games in the Apple app store, however, are now adding Game Center capabilities, which allow you to play against other users remotely. Game center content requires an Internet or wifi connection.

If you’re on a mobile site, the content is only available online. If you can’t get online, you can’t get to the content of the mobile site you’re trying to reach. Period. If you’ve got cached web pages, they’ll appear when you open up your browser, but once you try to load/reload that page, you’re screwed.

Compatibility

Apps are designed specifically for the devices they operate upon. An iOS app will not work on an Android device. An Android app will not work on an IOS device. And nothing works on Blackberries. Compatibility is not really the forte of apps.

Mobile sites, on the other hand, are compatible across devices and browsers. With the exception of Flash (which still does not work on iOS devices) most features and functions on mobile sites work on virtually all mobile devices.

My sweet ignorant wife got the abridged version of this breakdown.

Hopefully it stuck.

In my pity, I no longer harbored the desire to smack the shit out of her.

While my pimp hand is strong, so is my compassion for the enfeebled.

Hopefully my explanation of the differences between apps and mobile sites are too.

Note to my wife: If you’re reading this blog, these are just jokes. I never want to smack the shit out of you…except when you’re talking to me while sports are on the tele…or when you prattle on endlessly about inane topics you know I could give a fuck about…or when you get on me for being on my phone. But aside from that, you know I loves you.

Google Wallet makes mobile payments a reality.

Years ago, when I was working in mobile marketing, mobile payments were all the rage.

Brands were just starting to experiment with SMS, and premium SMS messaging offered content creators an opportunity to monetize their mobile campaigns.

If someone with a text-messaging enabled mobile device saw your call to action, “Text WAYNE to 12345 to get Lil’ Wayne’s newest single!”), they could type in the keyword, send it to a short code and Voila! they were listening to Weezy right from their mobile phone.

Of course, it didn’t always work that smoothly or all the time.

If you had Verizon phone, for example, which restricted hyperlinks, good luck trying to click through to the URL provided on the link you received.

Or if you hit your monthly messaging limit, you wouldn’t be able to send or receive text messages at all.

And at the time, mobile payments were restricted to paying for premium mobile content on your wireless carrier bill.

In order to complete a purchase, there was a double opt-in process, where the user had to validate that they wanted the content and understood the costs and conditions associated with the offer.

Typically, taking advantage of these premium offers involved giving your wireless carrier AND the aggregator AND (in some instances) the content platform provider a portion of the fees associated with that purchase.

Subscription chat lines and information services, like KGBKGB, sprung up to tap into users’ voracious appetite for texting.

You couldn’t buy tangible things with your mobile device.

Outside of wallpapers, ringtones and music downloads, mobile content was the only thing you could really purchase.

Today, that’s no longer the case.

Smartphones, mobile web sites, and mobile apps let you use your mobile phone to purchase virtually anything.

You’re no longer tethered to your wireless carrier if you want buy something.

iTunes and the proliferation of copycat app stores mean that you can cop plenty of compelling content right to your device.

And not have AT&T or Verizon Wireless mucking about in the transaction.

But there’s a different mobile payments space growing and maturing.

We’ve seen early glimpses of that with PayPal.

Apps like Square that have turned your mobile phone into a payment processing center.

In Europe and Asia, paying using your mobile device is commonplace.

But here in the states, the growth of mobile payments has advanced at a snail’s pace.

Until now.

Google Wallet is a mobile payment system that allows its users to store their debit cards, credit cards, loyalty cards, and gift cards on their mobile phones.

Using near-field communication (NFC), Google Wallet lets users make secure payments by simply tapping their phone on any PayPass-enabled terminal at checkout.

Although Google Wallet launched in 2011, it was only this August, that they set up expanded support to all major credit and debit cards including Visa, MasterCard, American Express, and Discover.

What does it all mean?

Well for one, you’re no longer reduced to making mobile payments solely with PayPal.

More importantly, the tedious process of entering your payment information, name, address, credit card number, expiration date, security code, etc., is as simple as providing your username and password.

This is a real boon for online retailers, who see the majority of their drop offs occurring at checkout.

The best thing about Google Wallet, unlike PayPal (the carriers) and virtually any other merchant processing system, is that they don’t charge processing fees.

No fees?

That’s awesome!

Mind you, I’m not a Google person myself.

Google Wallet doesn’t work on iOS devices.

So unless there’s an app in the works, hundreds of millions of Apple users will be in the dark.

But big up to all you Android users, who have the ability to truly experience what the mobile revolution is shaping up to be…

At least as it relates to mobile payments.

Apple 1 (billion). Samsung 0.

Samsung is cute and all, but original…not so much.

Yesterday, it was announced that the jury in the Apple patent lawsuit against Samsung had returned a verdit in Apple’s favor on virtually every count of their complaint.

The jury determined that Samsung had, in fact, ripped off Apple’s designs for the popular iPhone and iPad devices.

Despite a spirited defense, and counter complaints against Apple, alleging that Apple had infringed upon several of Samsung’s patents, the jury soundly rejected Samsung’s arguments and found in Apple’s favor.

The jury found that several of Samsung’s products illegally used Apple’s patented “bounce-back” feature when a user scrolls to an end image, and the ability to zoom text with a tap of a finger.

In so finding, they awarded Apple $1.05 billion, about $1.5 shy of what Apple was suing for, but a marked more than Samsung expected to pay.

Apple’s lawyers, seeing blood with the jury verdict, are now asking the judge to levy treble damages (triple the amount of the actual damages awarded a prevailing plaintiff, leveled to punish the losing party for willful conduct).

Of course, lawyers for Samsung immediately filed an appeal, seeking to reverse the jury verdict and challenge the damages awarded.

It’s unlikely that they’ll be successful.

But the bigger issue are the implications for the rest of the mobile phone industry.

Samsung isn’t the only mobile phone maker to use Apple’s bounce-back or zoom features.

A full range of Android devices are likely going to be in Apple’s crosshairs soon enough.

Samsung was one of the first companies to leverage Google’s Android platform on it’s devices, but it is far from the only one.

Motorola, HTC, and LG are all handset makers utilizing the Android operating system in their phones, but Samsung was by far the leader, with over 20 million Android smart phones sold since their introduction in 2010.

The real impact of this verdit will be seen in the coming months, as manufacturers determine whether sticking with Android will expose them to the type of liability Samsung has been exposed to.

If anything, this verdict re-establishes Apple claim to innovation.

Is Google Play the App Store Killer?

Will Google Play unseat the champion?

Google is trying to dethrone Apple for dominance in the app market.

Although Android’s smartphone marketshare far exceeds that of Apple (I think it’s currently approaching 50%), Google’s app store has not seen a commensurate level of success.

The iTunes App Store continues to dwarf the Android App store, and Google is looking to change that.

Yesterday, FierceMobileContent reported that Google is about to scrap the Android app store in favor of Google Play, which is being positioned to compete more effectively with Apple.

Google Play will be a combination of the Android App Market, Google Music and Google’s eBookstore, effectively mirroring Apple’s App Store, iTunes and iBook offerings.

Google Play will give users the ability to access all of their content in the cloud, from any of their connected devices.

Here’s a short video from Google’s blog (obtusely) promoting Google Play.

The video is a well-crafted pitch, but the absence of a real-life demonstration of their offering left me scratching my head.

With iCloud purportedly providing the same level of capability (seamless access to your content across multiple devices, etc.), Google Play is definitely designed to be a head-to-head competitor.

According to Google, current Android App Market customers will be upgraded to Google Play over the course of the next few days.

As an Applephile or Apple purist, I’m simply not convinced that Google Play (or anything Android-related for that matter) can hold a candle to Apple.

Having handled an Android device or two in my day, I can definitively say that the user experience leaves much to be desired.

Perhaps Google Play will create a more seamless experience for Android users –  at least as it relates to accessing and interacting with their content – but I doubt it.

Either way, I’m not sure that this move will really make Google any more competitive in the app market.

As they say, you can lead a horse to water…

…but can you make them download more apps?

Hey, what do I know?

If you’re an Android user, I’d love to hear if this announcement excites you (or not) and how Google Play will (or won’t) impact you.

Home Shopping Apps. HSN’s got the goods. Literally.

Home shopping on steroids!

I’m not an avid shopper.

Every once in a while, I’ll hit the store to pick up an item or two.

Most of my shopping is done online, and in response to a real need.

Christmas, birthdays, anniversaries, Valentine’s Day, etc., are when my shopping cap goes on, and I generally handle my business.

So shopping (outside of essentials) is never high on my list of priorities.

But that’s just me.

There’s a whole other world of shoppers, who take shopping very seriously: the home shopper.

If you’re into home shopping, then anytime is a good time to shop.

If there’s a bargain, you’re looking for it.

While shopping used to require getting into the car and heading to a mall, strip mall, flea market, or consignment store, the home shopper now has a number of different outlets for getting their shopping on (and I’m not talking catalogues either).

QVC, HSN and ShopNBC are probably some of the most well known brands in home shopping.

They’ve each got channels devoted entirely to giving shoppers steep discounts on everything from watches to sewing machines.

They also have websites, which allow visitors to browse items featured on the network, as well as other special offers.

But more importantly, each of them has a branded app, which allows you to shop directly from your iPhone, iPad or Android device, while you’re away from your television or home computer.

ShopNBC does the best job of promoting the fact that they’ve got apps.

ShopNBC does the best job of letting you know they've got apps.

The link to the iOS or Android version of their app is conspicuously located in the bottom left corner of the home page, alongside ShopNBC’s other social media links.

Although you’ve got to scroll to the bottom of the page to see this section, the iPhone and Android logos point to the fact that they’ve got apps.

And while they don’t promote the fact that they’ve got a mobile version of their site too, they do.

HSN’s apps are promoted in a similar fashion as ShopNBC, but not quite as well.

Although it's not explicit, HSN lets you know they've got something for mobile.

The mobile phone logo, appears in a banner below the fold of the page, under the title “HSN Everywhere”.

But where HSN falls short in the visual promotion, it more than makes up for it with the breadth and depth of it’s mobile app offering.

HSN has apps for the iPhone, iPad, Android phones and tablets, Nokia, Windows Mobile 7 and offers a mobile web version of their site and an SMS service.

QVC does the worst job of promoting the fact that it’s got a mobile offering.

C'mon QVC! You've got to do better than this! Site map, really?

The link to their mobile app is buried in the site map, located at the bottom of the home page, with no icons and even less fanfare.

QVC only offers an iPhone version of their app, and they don’t have a mobile site at all.

I took each of the apps for a test drive to see how well they were built.

I didn’t buy anything mind you, but I did check out what they had to offer.

As expected, each of the apps let you to make in-app purchases.

They also have a ‘watch now’ or ‘live’ feature that lets you to follow along with the network programming directly from your device.

There is a short time delay between the live show and the mobile version, but it’s not material.

But there are material differences in how the live viewing options work on the respective apps.

HSN does the best job for a few reasons, including the fact that it utilizes the accelerometer of the iOS devices, allowing you to watch in both landscape and portrait modes.

HSN's app is the hands down fave!

The menus and content streams, that frame the viewing area, adjust, letting you expand or collapse the screen to watch in full screen/partial screen mode.

While HSN gives you multiple viewing options, ShopNBC’s live viewing is only viewable in full screen landscape mode.

And unlike the HSN app, you’ve got to quit the video, in order to interact with any other content on their app.

QVC’s iPhone app works similarly to HSN’s and is viewable in both landscape or portrait mode.

In landscape mode, the dash slides away letting you watch full screen.

Sorry QVC, but watching TV on the iPhone simply isn't the move. Make an iPad app!

But after experiencing HSN and ShopNBC’s apps in the larger form factor of the iPad, watching QVC’s show on the iPhone was markedly underwhelming.

Each of these apps had their pluses. But hands down, HSN is clearly the most progressive and forward thinking of these home shopping networks.

They have the most comprehensive suite of options for accessing their brand.

Notwithstanding my critiques, each of these brands are clearly thinking about how to help shoppers get the most out of their connected devices.

And at the end of the day, if you’re a ‘shoppy’, you should be over the moon!

When Good Apps Go Bad (aka Bump You’re Obsolete)

Does anyone bump anymore?

Remember Bump?

Bump was the app that let you literally ‘bump’ your iPhone with another user to exchange contact info.

When it first came out, I thought it was the most ingenious app ever!

So, of course, I downloaded the app, and was ready to bump with all comers!

Whenever someone asked me for my contact info, I pulled out my phone and asked if the person wanted to bump.

I would push my phone furtively at them, grunting ‘bump, bump’ incessantly.

Usually, all I got back were quizzical stares.

I guess I was one of the very few who actually got bump, because I wasn’t really bumping with anyone.

Whenever I was in a position to use bump to exchange info, the other person didn’t have Bump.

The few that had it, didn’t know how to use it.

The ones that had it installed, didn’t have their contact set up and thusly, couldn’t bump with me.

After a few (too many) instances of bump fails, I just stopped using it.

It was too frustrating.

How many times would it take for me to realize that Bump just wasn’t that joint?

I don’t think I’ve used it in over a year.

I haven’t been asked by anyone to ‘bump’ in even longer.

But for some reason, I’ve still got it on my deck.

So I opened it up today, to see what (if anything) I’ve been missing

Apparently, you can use Bump to share pictures and music too.

You can connect with Facebook, Twitter or Linkedin now as well.

And there is a messenger function, that lets you message other Bump users remotely.

I did a Google search for Bump recently, and they’ve also got an Android version of the app.

The new Bump logo.

Does anyone even bump anymore?

There are a heck of a lot of ratings in the iTunes store (over 300,000), but are folks really using Bump like that?

I doubt it.

But hey, what do I know?

Do you have an app that you were once ga-ga over, thanthat now, you treat like a hump-backed stepchild and you don’t even look at?