Monthly Archives: July 2010

HTC Desire – first impressions

Posted by David Hurst on July 15, 2010 2 comments

I’ve blogged before about my various irritations with the iPhone, which last year prompted me to ditch the shiny Apple handset and opt for a Palm Pre. I liked the idea of the Linux based OS, the multi-tasking and the real keyboard. In reality, the OS was a little limited, but the multi-tasking and real keyboard were good. Build quality, not so much.

When a saw a friend’s HTC desire, I was hugely impressed. The large, bright, high resolution screen, excellent app support and good build quality certainly appealed, but it was the impressive 1GHz processor that sealed the deal. I’m sick of sluggish phones, and the HTC Desire is certainly not sluggish.

There are certainly areas where the Palm WebOS is better, and it’s probably not as intuitive to use as an iPhone, but my first impressions are that as an overall package it beats the competition hands down.

I’ve only had mine for a few days, so I’ll do a more in-depth review when I’ve lived with it for a little longer.

Anyone want to buy a slightly used Palm Pre?

UK Government asks Facebook to remove sympathy group for Raoul Moat

Posted by David Hurst on July 14, 2010 None comments

Unless you’ve been living in a vacuum, you’ll probably have seen Raoul Moat’s exploits being mercilessly devoured by the British media. The former bouncer got out of prison after serving a short sentence for assault and promptly went after his ex-girlfriend, who had told him she didn’t want to continue their relationship and that she was now seeing a police officer. The following day, staff at the prison called the police and warned them that his girlfriend, Samantha Stobbart, was at serious risk of being assaulted by Mr Moat. The police did their usual excellent job, and shortly after Raoul Moat did indeed assault Miss Stobbart… with a gun. He shot her twice in the stomach through the living room window of her parent’s home.

Sadly Chris Brown, her boyfriend (of just one week), ran out of the house armed with an iron bar, and Raoul Moat shot him dead. There’s probably more to this than has been reported in the media – I can’t imagine anyone being foolish enough to take on an angry gunman with just a metal bar for protection.

Then the following day, Raoul shot police officer David Rathband through the window of his vehicle whilst he was on duty, after calling the police to tell them that they weren’t taking him seriously enough. Shooting a police officer certainly got their attention if the previous murder hadn’t, and there ensued an enormous man hunt at a cost of many millions of pounds to the UK tax payer.

Raoul Moat was finally tracked down on the 9 July, where a long stand off with the police resulted in Raoul being tasered (electrocuted with a stun gun) at least twice, before he finally “shot himself” in the early hours of the 10 July. At least, that’s what the police tell us and we’ll probably never know if that’s completely true or not. Interestingly, the taser guns used had yet to be approved by the Home Office.

I can’t envisage any scenario where tasering a man who is holding a gun to his neck could ever be considered a good idea. Electric shocks cause involuntary muscle contractions – not ideal if the person receiving the shock has their finger poised on the trigger of a firearm. In any case, how did they manage to taser him twice without actually managing to subdue and take him into custody? Why not use a tranquiliser dart instead?

It seems like extraordinarily harsh treatment of a man who clearly had severe mental instabilities, that would only ever have had one outcome. Some people are upset at the way this has been handled and as a result a Facebook group in sympathy of Raoul Moat has emerged, which David Cameron has rushed to denounce and is seeking to have Facebook remove the group. He may well have been getting all chummy with Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook founder – report here) recently, but I think he’s barking up the wrong tree here. Facebook is hardly about to start censoring its users’ activities – not unless they are in breach of Facebook’s terms at least.

In fact, it’s pretty outrageous that Mr Cameron or anyone in the UK Government should be seeking to stifle free speech in that way. Raoul Moat is certainly not a “legend” (as described on said Facebook group) and he may well have been a “callous murderer” (as Cameron put it), but I think some of the sympathy being shown is not necessarily for the actions of the man, but the way he came to a miserable end that might well have been avoided. The more sensationalist comments are no doubt posted by people who are simply hoping to provoke a reaction. Regardless, free speech and free thought are essential foundations of civilisation. We are not robots. We are not all the same. Some people say things that we find vulgar, offensive and distasteful, and we must let them say what they will because that is their right. Allowing them to say their piece, however unpleasant, is not the same as condoning or supporting their beliefs. The UK Government has no right whatsoever to police the Internet or freedom of speech – though of course they keep on trying.

In any case, much sympathy must go to Mr Moat’s family (who are completely innocent sufferers), to the family of Chris Brown and to Samantha Stobbart and Pc David Rathband as they start on the slow road to recovery.

Perhaps in future, the police might take more notice of proffered advice from their colleagues in the prison service.

How personal should your company website be?

Posted by David Hurst on July 2, 2010 None comments

The thing about companies is that they’re made up of individuals, and individuals have personalities. A company is the sum of its parts, and in the case of a service company  those ‘parts’ are people. This is a good thing, unless one personality becomes too prominent in the overall mix.

This is a problem experienced by a website development company local to me recently – one I once worked at. The dominant personality there is the MD, a man with strongly held opinions. There’s nothing wrong with that of course – we’re all entitled to our own opinions. Sometimes though, it’s best just to keep your opinions to yourself. The aforementioned MD, thinking he was having a private email conversation, expressed some particularly strong opinions (in a somewhat unfortunate way), and sadly for him, the email correspondence found its way to a national newspaper and received copious amounts of negative press coverage.

Whilst I was working for this guy many years ago, I recall recommending that he kept his strongly held opinions to himself and desisted from publishing them on the company website. He ignored my advice, but I still stand by it, and am perhaps somewhat vindicated in light of recent events. Strongly held opinions, particularly those of a political or divisive nature, are best kept totally separate from a company website, lest a potential client’s opinion of your company be coloured by their distaste for your personal viewpoints.

However, I have worked with many clients who have enjoyed success by personalising their company websites to some extent. People like to deal with people, and the Internet hasn’t really changed that. When you make an order with an online shop, don’t you like to know that there are real human beings at the end of a phone line who can help you in case something goes wrong? What better way to humanise a company online than feature a staff blog, or some staff profiles? For single owner and small businesses, it’s really not worth trying to pretend your business is something else. I once worked for a very small company that advertised numerous regional phone numbers and tried to give the impression of a huge operation when it was anything but. I’m just not convinced this has any benefit. Why not embrace your small business status and advertise that fact by personalising your company website. Just don’t get too personal.

The moral of the story is to ensure that anything personal presented on your company website has been duly sanitised. If you’re not sure, seek the opinions of others or just don’t publish. And remember, email is one of the most insecure forms of communication, so never use it for really confidential messages, and never commit anything to writing that can be misconstrued, used against you, or cause offence if the wrong person saw it.