So after all the $199 hoopla it turns out the price of the 3g iPhone is...no different than the price of existing iPhone's now. 

AT&T retail stores will be open at 8AM local time on July 11th, so be “iReady!” Existing customers who don’t qualify for an upgrade will have to shell out $399 and $499 for the corresponding iP3G model. Customers who don’t want to extend their current contract will pay $599 for the 8GB and $699 for the 16GB model.

Now let me say that I don't have a problem with them announcing $199 as the price even though that price requires a 2 year contract.  That's just marketing. 

But I do find two things a little disingenuous...

1.  They framed this as a price drop which it isn't.

2.  They waited until now to reveal how much it would be for those not eligible for an upgrade.  Since that group includes every existing iPhone user I think this counts as "stringing your existing customers along"

I think its debatable where the line is between good marketing and flat out lying but Apple's definitely right up against it with this (if they didn't cross it completely). 

I love my iPhone but as someone who hadn't owned an Apple product before this I'm constantly surprised by Apple's shoddy treatment of their customers. 

Addendum: Kudos to VentureBeat for catching this, the new iPhone 3g data plans don't include any text messaging.  Read about it here.

Whenever I see a Steve Gillmor byline I always think back to the above cartoon (excuse the poor scan quality, I don't have the books with me right now and had to go off an old scan I gmailed to someone a few years back). 

For those who don't know Steve Gillmor is a man famous for posts that contain sentences like this...

Imagine (not for long will it be ephemeral) an information bus that orchestrates the signaling of text, rich media, calendar, communications, transaction, and group location status under a social graph umbrella based in part on user-controlled behavior aggregation (gestures).

Honestly, I'd kind of come to terms with the man.  Don't get me wrong, I still think its immoral to write in a way that purposely tries to make others feel dumb so that you can appear smart.  But people who I respect seem to like him so I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt. 

Maybe he's doing it on a sub-conscious level or something. 

Which is why I decided to comment on a story he posted yesterday where he said...

As Bill Gates closed the door for the final time Friday on his ex-office (Ballmer takes over Monday) the rhetoric about continued one day a week doesn’t match the reality.

Now that looks a lot like he's saying he didn't realize Gates wasn't the CEO any longer but you have to assume he knows that.  But if he comes back and tries to defend himself its going to look like he's covering.

So I jumped in and tried to illuminate what I think he meant for him.  I said...

I’m going to give the benefit of the doubt and assume by “(Ballmer takes over Monday)” you meant to imply that Gates was somehow “shadow running” the company from his position as Chief Software Architect since I can’t imagine you’d be so stupid as to not realize Ballmer has been CEO for years now.

But something went wrong and the post didn't show up. 

Now I was on my way out the door at that point and didn't have time to retype it so I just let it go.  Then I checked back a couple of hours later and...it was there.  Not only that, there were no posts criticizing Mr. Gillmor's writing style.

That's when it hit me...he's moderating the posts.

Now I realize there are trolls on the Internet and if someone is posting just to cause trouble I have no problem with people moderating those comments.  But moderating for any reason (like in this case where the purpose is clearly to silence his critics) is rude and disrespectful.  The people commenting that his posts don't make sense have the right to their opinion and don't deserve to be treated as undesirables because of it. 

I always thought Mr. Arrington (Techcrunch founder and CEO) had a little more respect for his audience and its disappointing to find that he doesn't.

P.S.  Just to end on a bright note here are a couple other comics that I sent in the same e-mail.  I'm a big Calvin and Hobbes fan and these two are my personal favorites...

A couple days ago I made a post on what appeared to be the end of the Shel Israel saga but sadly it persists because Mr. Israel simply can't seem to let it go.  Here's a quote from his latest post entitled "About Loren Feldman & Michael Arrington"...

Another question that I get asked is why more people have not stepped forward in my defense. I'm pretty certain I know the answer to this one. Loren Feldman has a big and powerful friend in Michael Arrington. I have received a great number of private messages from people who have said precisely that they hate seeing what is being done to me, but they will not speak out because Arrington has become singularly the most powerful individual in social media. We should all think about the power he is assuming and what the repercussions of it are.

How Michael elected to assume the role of Loren Feldman's champion, I do not know. Some think that this was all a set up, that Michael will start a TechCrunch Video with Loren--his frequent houseguest--as the lead program. Actually, I tend to believe it is more the way Michael said it was when he called me to extract three words from from a 20-minute interview about our feud. He told me that he had been ignoring the whole matter, until Loren brought some incendiary tweets of mine to his attention. Then, he decided he was going to stand up for his little friend and give me what-for.

But that's just my perception. To understand more you'll have to ask Michael.

This has been an unquestionable success. Silicon Valley is a bad neighborhood to live in when you have pissed off Michael Arrington. There was a noticeable step back after Arrington ran three pieces in three days extolling the virtues of Loren and the vices of Shel.

I do believe Arrington was instrumental in getting the puppet interviews rolling. The first wave of interviews was with people who are closely connected with Arrington, including people with financial ties or well-known friendships. It has spread to include people who are notable, and less connected to Arrington's inner circle. Some of them are people who I have considered friends for a good many years. The perception is that they have gathered around Loren in support f him and against me.

The rest of the post goes on in about the same manner.  Notable omissions include the fact that both Michael Arrington and Jason Calacanis were attacked by Loren Feldman in the same way Mr. Israel was but they both took it in stride and are now friends with him.  Also missing is the concept of "people can find something funny and not be against you". 

So much easier to explain your troubles away with a persecution complex I guess.

On that note, this is the end of my writing on the issue.  The truth is up until now I didn't really have a horse in this race.  I thought the situation was fascinating from a "what not to do" perspective but I really wished both parties the best (and have made a  point of saying I hoped Mr. Israel would wise up in both of my posts on it) 

But that has now changed, I honestly dislike the guy at this point and really do hope he fails in all his future endeavors.  I feel terrible for saying it but its true.  People that arrogant and that stubborn don't deserve to succeed.  At least not when there are people who are hard working and willing to see their mistakes out there. 

Which is why I have to bow out here.

I'm someone who truly believes there's a place for everyone and truly wishes the best for everyone which is how I can function as a blogger.  Once I stop wishing the best for a person I won't talk about them anymore because it makes it too easy to be mean.  So I'm done with this (though I can't imagine Mr Israel is).

Addendum: One Caveat Here, if this is Mr. Israel realizing the value of publicity and specifically attacking to get attention I'd have to admire that.  It really is the only thing that could redeem the man to me at this point (though sadly I don't think he's that clever)

Addendum #2: I’m going to harp on this just a little bit longer because I think there’s a revelation to be had here. I keep asking myself “How can someone who has been on this Earth more than double the time I have be so lacking in wisdom?” and after considering it I think I have a simple answer.

Anyone who has studied morality learns really quickly that there are truths that are universal among most religions and moral systems. One of those is that systems listing vices/sins always seem to put Pride at the top of the “dangerous” list.

Christians believe Pride gave birth to Lucifer, Jews believe it felled the 1st generation of man, Mayans feature it prominently in their creation story and even secular philosophers like Immanuel Kant and Ayn Rand make a special point of defining a level of excessive Pride that is unacceptable. Sir Thomas Aquinas goes so far as to say it is the cause of all sin (paraphrase, I can’t find the exact quote).

When I was young and studying all these various moral systems I have to admit to wondering why it was given such a prominent position. I mean, people kill over envy and in anger (aka Wrath) and because of Greed and because of Gluttony and because of Lust. So how could Pride be the deadliest of a list that contains all those others?

 But in the end I think Pride is the death of the mind. Though all of the above are a danger and all of the above lead to horrible consequences Pride is the only one that can actually kill the person inflicted with it by effectively sticking them in amber for life. That person inflicted with excessive pride can’t learn or grow because they’re self-love keeps them from doing so.

I’m not sure I saw just how true that was until now. It’s amazing how a seemingly small incident can lead someone to a truth that had eluded them for years but that's how I feel. I have a respect for the dangers of excessive Pride that I simply didn’t have before and that's based largely on Mr Israel and his handling of this situation.

(For the record, the answer I was given to the question above about people killing for other vices is this: People kill over envy, greed, anger, lust and even Gluttony.  But in each circumstance they know what they are doing is wrong and choose to do it because their other needs are overwhelming.  Pride is the only sin that convinces people they are correct in whatever they do and that opens them up to kill for no reason at all if they so choose.  Which is why it is even more dangerous even in that sense)

A while back I made a post on a situation that had arisen between Loren Feldman and Shel Israel over...well...basically over Mr. Israel's general suckiness in the area of video.  In the post I tried to lay out exactly how Mr. Israel had gone so wrong in handling the situation and how he could do better in the future. 

Today that situation reached as much of a conclusion as it probably ever will in that  Mr Israel announced that both his video show on Fastcompany.tv and his website sponsorship from SAP would be ending.  Here's the quote from The Inquisitr...

According to a post at Global Neighborhoods, Israel claims that he asked to take the GlobalNeighborhoods.tv (GNTV) out of FastCompany.tv and to show it instead on the Global Neighborhoods website. Israel notes that the cost of sponsoring a show with Fast Company involved was too high and now that the show has been liberated, it will cost less to sponsor the show.

Notice the extensive use of the word "claimed" in the Inquisitr post.  That'll be important later.  (Edit: See Duncan Riley's explaination for this in the comments below)

But before I get to my point I wanted to quote an exchange from the comments of Mr Israel's actual post.  The first comment comes from Tom Guarriello who says...

The whole episode with Loren was an integral part of much of happened during the period you're describing here. I hope you've learned something from this whole episode, 'cause you've definitely paid the tuition.

Best of luck, Shel.

Shel Responds...

Tom,

Could you tell me what the lesson you think I had to lean from Loren was?

and then Techcrunch's Michael Arrington responds to Shel...

Shel, based on your last comment, i can pretty much say you didn't learn much from the loren situation.

Obviously I agree with Mr Arrington and in the spirit of "posting productive" I thought I'd make a list of lessons that Shel Israel STILL hasn't learned from the situation...

Pride and Transparency simply don't mix:  Lets be blunt here, the man's Fastcompany show couldn't get sponsorship after months of trying yet he claims it was his decision to move it to his personal site and frames it in a way that makes it seem like Fastcompany was the reason the show didn't get sponsored.

Now, if that's true I apologize in advance but that is the most untrue sounding thing I think I've ever heard.  I suspect there is a lot of sugar coating of the truth going on. 

(I doubt I'm the only one given the extensive use of the word "claimed" that I pointed out above)

There's nothing necessarily wrong with sugar coating a harsh situation but if you're a guy who co-wrote a book on transparency it comes across as completely disingenuous.  You can be transparent or you can be diplomatic but you can't be both. 

Know what type of detractors you have:  There are two types of detractors in this world and those are (a) people who just want to attack someone to cause pain and (b) people who attack for some constructive reason.  One of the most important life lessons I've personally learned is to realize the difference between the two and to seek advice from the latter group. 

What Mr. Israel should have done from the start of this is to acknowledge the criticism he was getting and ask for help from those critiquing him.  Instead he threw out some snide replies and continued to go it on his own which we now see ended in failure.

Never take things personal: This is where Mr. Israel lost any respect I might have for his expertise.  The blogosphere, and the Internet as a whole, is full of people who are going to be critical of you.  If that's not something you can deal with than you shouldn't be claiming to be an expert on social networking or blogging. 

Take a look at this post I made a couple days ago.  In it I have to admit I screwed up and flew off the handle.  The subject of the post, Mark Evans, left a comment on the post that was completely good natured and that took the post in stride.  Because of his response I gained more respect for him in the end.  THAT is how you handle criticism on the blogosphere. 

Don't take yourself too seriously: One of the "satirical criticisms" of Mr. Israel was the presence of a really gaudy owl in one of his videos.  After that was mocked Mr. Israel started carrying the owl around with him which he apparently thought was funny.

The problem with this is that Mr. Israel wasn't "getting the joke" he was trying to "one up the joke" with a weak attempt at mocking it.   It was pretty awful.  So the bottom line is this: don't take yourself so seriously  and if you can't help but take yourself seriously than know that's a weakness of yours and drop the subject entirely. 

In Closing...

Though I'm a little ashamed to admit it, this situation brings me a certain amount of personal comfort. 

I'm someone who feels very guilty about the modest success I've achieved.  When I look back over my life I generally find that a lot of my success was due to nothing more than dumb luck.  Not having any way to gauge how much dumb luck other people  have received and looking at how lucky I've been I often think that maybe its all random and I just happened to get a little more luck than they did. 

Then I see a situation like this and think that maybe everyone gets their fair share of luck and some people just constantly squander it because they are too stubborn to learn from their own mistakes. 

The good news for Mr. Israel (if you can call it that) is that there isn't much further he can fall.  He wouldn't be the first person to find the strength to change at rock bottom and I hope, for his sake, that he does. 

Addendum: This was too much to pass up.  In response to the Michael Arrington comment above Mr. Israel replies...

Michael, I have learned one thing from you. People should be extremely wary, when you call them a "friend" in your column. There's no telling what sort of "friendship" they'll find in the following paragraph. Take care, old buddy.

When people point out your idiocy they are, at some level, trying to do you a favor by getting you to stop acting like an idiot.  The above comment couldn't be more snide but the true irony of it is that Mr. Arrington's comment was actually trying to help Mr. Israel.  He's just again too proud and too arrogant to realize it. 

This kind of says it all...

Finally, at 11:35 (over an hour and a half later) the iPhone 3G is announced.  So far it doesn't look all that special.  An all plastic casing, slightly thinner, and 3G.  I'm going to do a little live blogging here to burn off some of that excitement energy while watching...

"the iPhone 3G is 36% faster than the nokia N95 and Treo 750" - Steve Jobs

Download times compared: Edge: 59 seconds, 3G: 21 seconds, WiFi: 17 seconds

Built-In GPS (as expected).  It uses all three (WiFi, Cell Towers and built in GPS) to calculate location.  If you leave the program open as you drive it shows a dotted line as you move along the map.

You know how you can tell its an Apple announcement?  When the Starbucks pereson comes over and instead of thinking you're crazy for continually pushing the F5 button she asks "Did he announce it yet?"

$199 for the 8Gb, $299 for the 16Gb...

Uh oh...July 11th Worldwide Rollout Date? 

Well, and that's about it.  I'm really disappointed now.  Not just that I couldn't buy one today but that there was no "surprise" feature.  No Video Chat.  No new Macbooks.  No "One More Thing...".  Nothing. 

Honestly, I thought I'd be so excited that I'd go buy something from the Apple store even if there was no iPhone today but this whole experience was kind of a downer.  2 hours with no surprise is pretty lackluster for an Apple announcement. 

For the record, I think I like live blogging (from people who are really good at it like Gizmodo and Engadget) more than live streaming. 

You get high quality pictures instead of grainy video, you get to walk away for a couple minutes and do other things without the risk of missing anything, and you get brief bits of commentary from people who have watched past announcement way closer than you have. 

Anyway, still no 3G iPhone

This is interesting.  Apparently Apple has decided to handle all Push communication themselves.  So applications can push data to an iPhone but they have to send it through Apple to do so.  The advantage of this is that only one program is running in the background (and I assume the unspoken advantage is that Apple can shut down an abusive server which should make it pretty  hard to create a "spam app" for the iPhone)

If there are no further updates beyond this point, you can just assume my head has exploded.  I realize this is a developer conference but they are on the 9th application demo at this point and its really getting tedious.

Some are kind of neat.  I'm not a big Baseball fan but MLB.com has an app that not only allows you to check scores but also watch clips which are available only minutes after the play happened (for those who don't know Major League Baseball has one of the most advanced back ends out there with each stadium wired with multiple cameras that all feed into servers that can disseminate them to web viewers)

But geez its been an hour already...

The problem with having a big announcement that everyone knows about is that it overshadows the rest of the presentation.  Right now they are going over items that, if not for the impending iPhone announcement, would be really fantastic. 

In particular Sega's entry into the iPhone market is really impressive (Engadget and Gizmodo are both putting up some awesome photos).

P.S.  Twitter is still up but Techcrunch has taken a dive.  How's that for irony.