If a new study is to be believed, iPhone and iPod Touch users have next to no attention span.

We recently asked When Do You Have Too Many Apps?, but if a new study from Pinch Media is to be believed, having any apps is pretty much pointless.  We’ve told you in the app story we did that the total number of application downloads was over 500 million, but it appears that people download them and quickly forget about them.  Only 30% of users bother to look at a paid app on the second day they own it, and only 20% of users of free apps do the same.

While we’re sure Apple doesn’t care if you ever use an application again after the initial download, you have to wonder how much longer people will put up with paying for applications they hardly ever use.  When will they finally say ‘enough, I don’t use them’ and stop purchasing new ones?  I have purchased exactly one application for my iPod Touch, an instant messenger, and I use it quite frequently.  However, I have downloaded around 50 free applications, and I actually couldn’t tell you how many of them get used on a regular basis.  They all sound like good ideas when you first grab the, but then you simply don’t find you have time to play with them as much as you thought you might.

The even scarier part of this story is that only 1% of users end up using an application over a long period of time, with games having the highest retention rate.  So the idea people are buying so many applications are fantastic for Apple and the developers, but no so much for the users.

What say you?  Do you find yourself dropping applications quickly, or do you try to get your money’s worth out of them?

What happens when the world of parents and kids collide online? Embarrassment, what else?

In the early days of ultra-popular social network Facebook, you had to have an email address that ended in .edu to join the site.  It was originally intended as a netork to be directed primarily at college age students, but as time went on, they opened their doors wider to all comers, and now it seems that parents are finding the wonders of the site, much to the disappointment of their children.

The site has been well known as a place for students to post drunken pictures of themselves after a weekend of debauchery, but while that was already a bad idea due to school officials and employers finding them, what do you do when your parents see them?  Better yet, what do you do when your parents try to act “hip” and get in to all of the Facebook fun?  That is the question being put forth by MyParentsJoinedFacebook.com.

Examples of some of the best parent moments on the social network are being gathered up (an example below) to let every one see just how much fo a nightmare it can be.  With the ever increasing popularity of Facebook, especially with people trying to find old friends, wasn’t this sort of inevitable?  Enjoy the discomfort folks, it isn’t going away any time soon.

After much criticism from the public, Facebook has reverted to their old Terms of Service… for now.

In the very early hours of Monday morning USA time, Facebook changed their Terms of Service, the boring legalese rules of any site out there that hardly any one ever reads. Well, someone did read the changes, and what followed was a vicious firestorm of bad press for the ultra-popular social network.

This is what the old version said.

You may remove your User Content from the Site at any time. If you choose to remove your User Content, the license granted above will automatically expire, however you acknowledge that the Company may retain archived copies of your User Content.

The new version of the ToS said:

You hereby grant Facebook an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to (a) use, copy, publish, stream, store, retain, publicly perform or display, transmit, scan, reformat, modify, edit, frame, translate, excerpt, adapt, create derivative works and distribute (through multiple tiers), any User Content you (i) Post on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof subject only to your privacy settings or (ii) enable a user to Post, including by offering a Share Link on your website and (b) to use your name, likeness and image for any purpose, including commercial or advertising, each of (a) and (b) on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof.

Where it got even a little bit scarier is where is clued you in as to when this license would expire… never. The following is from the “Termination” section.

The following sections will survive any termination of your use of the Facebook Service: Prohibited Conduct, User Content, Your Privacy Practices, Gift Credits, Ownership; Proprietary Rights, Licenses, Submissions, User Disputes; Complaints, Indemnity, General Disclaimers, Limitation on Liability, Termination and Changes to the Facebook Service, Arbitration, Governing Law; Venue and Jurisdiction and Other.

Essentially Facebook was telling its users that the moment you uploaded anything to their system, it became their property forever, even if you left the service. Not only could they hold on to it forever, they could do anything they please with it, including selling it, without ever having to acknowledge you as the creator of the work, or they could even use it in advertising if they so desired. Imagine how you would feel 10 years from now having that picture of you doing a keg stand showing up on a billboard across from the office where you are interviewing for a new job.

The collective cry of outrage was deafening online, finally prompting the very reclusive CEO of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg,to take to the company blog on Monday afternoon and try to clear up some of the hard feelings people were having towards the new ToS.  He makes valid points that they need a license that covers the copy of an image that resides in a user’s inbox even if you should leave the service.  This is a good point, but it still doesn’t explain why they felt the need to say that they could also basically do anything they could ever dream of with your content.  As Adam Ostrow of Mashable said:

Ultimately, Facebook’s stance can be summarized as “trust us, we won’t do anything bad.”

Right around the same time Mr. Zuckerberg posted his response, Amanda L. French posted a comparison of the Facebook ToS with those of other services such as MySpace, Flickr, YouTube and so on.  To be blunt, it showed Facebook in a terrible light, and it fueled the user revolt even more.

To really get a feeling for how users felt about the ToS, yesterday Facebook polled their users to find out how they felt about the new rules, and the results showed 56% wanted them changed, 36% were fine with them and 8% didn’t know/didn’t care.  While not an overwhelming majority, it was still a sign people were annoyed, and so Facebook gave in and changed back to the old ToS.

While this may be a victory for the users of Facebook, some of the decision may have been prompted by the news that the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) announcing that they were preparing to file a formal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission over the new ToS.  Either way, the roll back has happened, but as Duncan Riley of The Inquisitr points out, it is not time to rest and just forget this happened because they still plan to rewrite the rules again, and if the users don’t express their views now, we could end up going through this whole drama all over again when the newest version is released.

On a personal note, I didn’t agree with the ToS at all, but honestly I’ve always pretty much thought that anything uploaded to the Internet becomes uncontrollable once it is out there, this just made that thought a bit more official.

A day that most mobile phone users have always dreamed of looks to finally be coming true: universal chargers are on the way.

You would be hard pressed to find an owner of a mobile phone who hasn’t at least once wished that all models of phones could use the same charger.  If you lost yours, and then had to hunt down just the right style, you realized what a huge pain having all of these different models truly was.  And the worst was if you were trying to use an older phone and your charger had been discontinued.  Luckily it looks like those days may finally be going away.

According to the Guradian, it was announced at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Spain that manufacturers have agreed to the new universal charger, based on the micro-USB standards BlackBerry users are already accustomed to on the Bold model, will begin appearing by the end of 2009, and will be widely adopted by 2012.  The new chargers will also feature a 50% reduction in standby power consumption.  Both benefits are part of the mobile phone industries efforts to improve their standings as being more green friendly as the business has always been seen as one of the least eco-friendly out there.

This is a development that has long been needed in the marketplace, and one I couldn’t be more excited about.  Having been a mobile phone user since the early 1990’s, I have had more chargers than I can remember, and I have always though there needed to a universal standard.  I honestly didn’t think we would ever see the day as the companies like selling you accessories specific to their phones, but it looks like consumer demand will finally win out.  The micro-USB format also makes the most sense as it will also give you easy syncing capabilities with your computer.

The phone I will be surprised to see this on will be the iPhone; due to its physically slim nature, it will be difficult to put the micro-USB port into it.  It would also be surprising if Apple would want to move away from their connection that they use on all the iPods.  I may be wrong about this, but I would be genuinely shocked if they joined in this movement.

Anyway you slive this, this move is a win for consumers and the environment.

Yesterday, Paisano shared the following video on his Twitter account, and we just couldn’t resist sharing it with you also for what it teaches us about modern day computers.

While this may be funny to look back at now, it is startling in how close to correct they were. True, online shopping doesn’t involve a camera in a store, and you don’t write out emails on your “electronic correspondence machine”, but the basic ideas are all there for what you are reading this very article on now.

Why is this important to a blog about simplifying technology?  Can you imagine how overwhelming this would seem to someone watching it in 1969?  The idea that their lives would be overtaken by computer screens and monitors, letting them shop from home, print out documents, sending electronic letters to one another, banking online and so on?  Now think about how today’s technology seems overwhelming to you at times.

Get it yet?

All new technologies seem like something you’ll never grasp when they first appear, but later on they become so common place that you don’t even think about it.  Sure it can be scary when you first hear about them, but could you imagine life without the “electronic corrspondence machine” now?  Doubtful.

This video is a perfect example of why we started StarterTech.com, and that is try to make technology more accessible and a little less scary.

Have you given any thought to how to protect your child as they navigate the wilds of social networking?

This is something I have talked about numerous times on my personal blog, SeanPAune.com, and something I can’t help but wonder how many peopel actually think about it.  It came to my attention again today when Linda Furrier wrote an article on Furrier.org about how she had recently attended a panel at her child’s school about safety on Facebook that was even attended by an employee of that popular social network.  I will quote the most imporant section:

The event l was billed as an event to increase your knowledge of your kids’ cyber culture on Facebook. The Facebook employee panelist was informative enough, but I couldn’t help feel that he really didn’t “get it”. His youth was indicative of the Facebook employee culture, but I am guessing he has never worried about a child getting home safely or being stalked on the Internet.

Questions were answered relating to privacy settings & Facebook procedures for blocking inappropriate posts and or members. The slide show was informative, but didn’t really reach the heart of the matter. The high school principal spoke with us about how the administration disciplines kids who post inappropriately in the high school network. The two high school age panelists spoke to their methods of protecting and sharing their information on Facebook. Yes, interesting, but I still left the event feeling hungry for more parenting tools.

I was left wondering, who is monitoring cyberspace outside of school hours? Whose responsibility is it? Should Facebook default to the most restrictive privacy settings for minors? Wouldn’t restrictions to spreading networks be highly counter to their business goals. Is Facebook’s sharing and connecting utility and business growth plan in conflict with the best interest of the kids?

This is a common issue that I hear time and time again about parents wondering why more wasn’t done to protect their children while they are online.  I always pose the exact same reply, “Why didn’t YOU do more to protect your children?

I applaud this school for trying to educate parents, and I also applaud Mrs. Furrier for trying to get more educated on the subject, but I always wonder why people bring up the idea it is the social network’s responsibility to protect their children.  Why should the school even be involved in anything a child does off of school grounds?  The whole point is that you are ultimately responsible for what happens inside of your own home, and this includes how your children interact with the Internet.

There are some very simple steps you can follow to watch over your child is they wander through cyberspace:

• The cheapest, and easiest, solution is no computer in their room.  If they have a computer in their room, simply don’t allow it to connect to the Internet.  Computers should be kept in a common room until you feel that your child has proven to be responsible enough to surf the Internet on their own.
• Install parental control software that limits when they may access the computer, the Internet or even just specific sites.
• Most routers have the ability to block access to certain sites based on address.

Essentially it all comes down to educating yourself and setting rules for Internet usage just like you do anything else in your house.  Your child’s safety is ultimately your responsibility, and not that of schools, the social networks or anyone else.  Always make sure that you are fully aware of what your child is doing online, no matter how much they may complain about it.

Google is at it again by adding more features to Gmail Chat.

Pretty much everyone that has ever used Gmail Chat has sent the person they are talking to a YouTube video to look at.  While fun, it can be annoying as it means changing to a different tab or window to watch it, leaving your conversation behind.  According to the Gmail Blog, they have now released a new feature that will solve this issue.

Whenever some shares a YouTube or Google Video link in Gmail Chat, you will now receive a preview of the video that you can play right in the chat window.  You will be able to continue your conversation while checking out whatever the clip may be.  This will certainly save you the troubles of changing tabs and the inevitable pause in conversation as you take a look at it.

While all of these recent additions to Gmail Chat are nice, SMS Texting Support and Video Chat being the biggest, one has to wonder why these features are not making the transition over to the stand-alone version of Google’s chat system, Gtalk.  I, for one, much prefer using the desktop application as I don’t have to watch my Gmail window 24/7, but I am starting to feel a bit left behind by all of the nifty new features that are missing from it.  We don’t even the ability to appear offline while logged in, something the Gmail version has had for quite some time.

Come on Google, where is the Gtalk love?

Rumors are circulating that Verizon Wireless customers may have the ability to get their own femtocell devices as early as January 25th.

According to Engadget, Verzion is preparing to release the Verizon Network Extender by the end of this month.  For those unfamiliar with femtocell devices, these are units that plug into your home Internet connection and give you extra cell phone coverage within a building by routing your calls over the Internet.  This gives the customer better coverage in their home or office, and helps out the cellular provider in that they don’t have to build additional towers to cover out of the way locations.

Sprint has been offering their own femtocell device, the AIRAVE, for several months now, and, as we reported, it appears AT&T may also be entering into the femtocell market sometime in the future.

With the AIRAVE having been first out of the gate, we have a barometer to measure these devices by, and the Verizon option is certainly falling short of it.  Sprint offered their device for $99 and unlimited calls with their service plan.  At this time it appears that Verizon’s device will run an amazing $249 with no mention of unlimited calls.  Of course, it can also be said that these devices should be free with the extra service plans they are selling since you are technically assisting the carrier, but we are unlikely to ever see that.

Could the August 1st cut-off date of the Windows 7 beta be a clue as to when Microsoft plans to launch the final product?

While the rumor of a fall 2009 release for Windows 7 has been heralded by some, and scoffed at by others, the idea has picked up some more steam since Alexander Wolfe of Information Week decided this truly may be a clue.

… even a Clouseau-like analysis (the Peter Sellers version, not Steve Martin) of that August 1st beta shut-off date leads one to the realization that Microsoft is probably planning to release the final version around that time. I’d say we can expect to see Windows 7 ship around back-to-school time.

I Think Mr. Wolfe has the right idea.  Seeing as the beta shuts down on August 1st, this means either you will have to roll back to an older version of Windows, a slim chance of going for a Beta 2 version, or, and this seems the more likely scenario, be told you can now go out and purchase the full version.

While there is nothing concrete to back this up as of yet, it is certainly something to keep in mind if you ware in the market for a new computer over the next eight months.  Can you squeeze by until the all new operating system comes out?  And would you even want to buy it when it first launches due to potential problems.  Only time will tell the answers to thse questions, but be sure to keep your ear to the ground, or your browser pointed here, to find out what the final result is.

Google, the leading search engine in the marketplace, has come up with a new tool that gives you more control over what you see in your results.

According to Google Operating System, the search giant has launched a new service called “Preferred Sites”.  The new service is currently in early testing, so it is not yet avaialble to every one, but you can read more about it on a help page Google created.

Essentially what the service does is allow you to dictate sites that you would like to have priority anytime you conduct a search.  Say you would like to include your local newspaper any time you went to search on a news story, it would now be given priority to show up on your first page of results with a marker underneath of it that says “My preferred site”.

If this feature ever goes live to all users, which seems likely, you would be able to make a list of sites that you find authoritative and trustworthy, and this could possibly be used to influence their regular rankings in the search results based on the number of people who choose each site.

While there are certainly some uses for such a service, we at StarterTech find it a bit worrisome that it might someday influence search results.  While it could be bad enough that individuals use it and just continually go to the same sites over and over again, never discovering new sites, this becomes really bothersome when you think of everyone on Google being influenced by this.  Say that PopularSiteX.com gets listed by thousands of people, and their ranking in search results goes up because of it, what happens when WannaBePopularSiteX.com starts up in the same niche topic and can’t get a toehold on their area of expertise because the other site has been pushed up so far in the results?

This certainly may be useful to some individuals, it could also possibly unbalance the way the Web works today, making it even harder for new blogs to ever be discovered.