Microsoft Windows Mobile is (by far) the best operating system for mobile phones and PDAs. You have huge portfolio of commercial and freeware applications available, synchronization between Windows XP (using ActiveSync) or Windows Vista (Synchronization center) is easy, and new Windows Mobile devices by independent competing vendors are launched every day with latest innovations (3G, GPS, Wifi, HW keyboard).

For $35.95 your can add one more feature / advantage to Windows Mobile phones, and that is complete remote control from your PC, using mouse and keyboard, thanks to Pocket Controller Pro v6. Your Windows Mobile phone can be connected via USB, Bluetooth and/or Wifi.

Remote control your mobile phone from PC has many advantages. Installation and configuration of new software is much easier, and you can type SMS and MMS messages directly on PC keyboard.

This is what you see will see with Pocket Controller Pro and HTC Artemis connected:

Pocket Controller Pro - ovládání mobilu z PC

Pocket Controller Pro allows also to copy and save current device screen to PNG file, and can record video.

Pocket Controller Pro - screenshots and video

Excellent feature is also advanced sync of Windows Mobile devices. Be default, only "My Documents" is synced by ActiveSync and/or Synchronization Center, but with Pocket Controller Pro you can define additional directories (e.g. "Storage Card\My Documents") and keep them synced. Pocket Controller Pro can also edit your device Registry, provides a Task Manager for your device, and shows important device information.

Pocket Controller Pro - registry editor and advanced sync

Spending $35.59 on Pocket Controller Pro is a good investment for many users, as productivity and usefulness of Windows Mobile phone will go way up.

If your needs are simpler, or you do not want to spend $35.95, and you need just keyboard/mouse control of your mobile device with no extras, check also My Mobiler 1.0, which is freeware and does exactly that.

Is Mozilla Firefox secure (and advanced) enough?

Mozilla Firefox was primarily designed as a browser that should compete with Internet Explorer 6.0. That was not a very difficult task, as IE6 was launched in 2001, and it was really obsolete already in 2004. Firefox ambition thus was not a big one, simply copy IE6 user interface, add Netscape rendering engine, add Google Search box (already known from Google Toolbar), and add tabs (already known for years from Opera).

And Firefox succeeded, now about 10-20% people are using it. We could say Firefox is the most famous copycat. Some advanced users value Firefox for its extensions, but this is a minority, most users install it because it closely resembles IE6 they know, and has some missing features (ActiveX), which make it arguably more secure (but less functional).

Most people installing Firefox never even open a new tab, they use and view the browser as another IE6. You may have noticed that "New tab" button is missing in toolbar at default Firefox installation. They use it simply because it is "in", and see many others doing it as well.

Yes, there are some advanced users, that use Firefox for different purpose, and that is extensions. Extensions are brilliant concept, but they still have many flaws in Firefox. Pro user needs to add 20+ extension to Firefox to make it a bit more powerful then IE6 (not even speaking about superior and fast IE7), and here is where problems start.

Firefox extensions are not tested as a complete package, they come from various independent developers, and can completely break the browser or another extension. They are also huge (potential) security risk, you never know if some extension is not sending out your credit card info.

Mozilla Firefox 2.0

But we also have Opera, browser always targeted at pros. Opera is always years ahead of competition. Light, fast, yet with myriad of functions you really need. It has mouse gestures already, AdBlock, download manager, IRC client, Widgets (these are secure, unlike Firefox extensions), and most importantly, is tested as a complete package, and made secure as a whole.

\
Opera 9.21

Opera is a brilliant browser, which does everything you need. Trying to close the gap between Firefox and Opera functionality, I had to search for and install these 24 Firefox extensions, and it still is not as functional as Opera, and performs very slowly even on my quadcore CPU and 4GB of RAM:

Firefox Extensions - slow, buggy, and potential security risk

I understand why people choose Firefox. It resembles primitive IE6 interface and is thus "easy" to use. It is well-known to them. But if you are a pro, and value privacy, speed and security, Firefox does not seem to be a good choice. You have to spend hours configuring it, and despite that you will (never) reach Opera functionality, speed and security.

Download Opera and browse the Opera Wiki. Get productive with Opera. I highly recommend it.

Apple iPhone - dumb and dumber?

I am using Microsoft Windows Mobile phones for last two years, and will never go back to a non Windows Mobile OS again. It does everything I need, and I mean everything. I have installed about 100 applications and games on it, and truly love it.

We have also Apple iPhone on the market, which some people believe is going to be awesome. Or, at least, that is what Apple says. They claim it is revolutionary. Liars. The truth is iPhone is obsolete. It does not have GPS (Google Maps without GPS are useless), MMS, HW keyboard, fast 3G data transfers (only slow EDGE), voice dialing (to dial your mom in a car and not to kill yourself), incremental contact search, and it is not a smartphone. Yahoo.com homepage loads 2 minutes on iPhone's EDGE, and you cannot accept calls while EDGE is active. Lovely phone, isn't it?I

It is not using OS X. It is not a small MacBook. Do you know how long it takes MacBook Pro to boot? About 30-60 seconds, and that is with dualcore C2D CPU a 2GB of RAM. Now imagine +/- 600MHz ARM Samsung CPU in iPhone to do the same.. How long would it take? 30 minutes? It is using something like "OS X Mobile", which has pretty obviously nothing to do with the "real" OS X. Same as Windows Mobile has pretty much nothing to do with Windows Vista.

In fact, biggest disadvantage of iPhone is not even missing features like voice dial, MMS, HW keyboard and/or GPS, but completely missing SDK (development environment).

Developing SDK and giving it for free to developers is a major expense and major pain, and even companies like Nokia or SonyEricsson, which are on the market for "centuries", had problems with it. Microsoft has excellent SDK for Windows Mobile, and that is why there are millions of apps for WM5/WM6, a lot of them being freeware.

Apple has no development platform / SDK. They try to hide this huge shortcoming by saying "Safari is your SDK". Hehe. They can fool sheep that simple JavaScripts widgets running under Safari and accessible only as bookmarks are real apps, but not tech people and business people. You cannot code (e.g.) GPS navigation handling 1GB maps, or advanced IM client under JavaScript/HTML/CSS.

I would not be able to use TomTom 6 or iGo MyWay 2006 on iPhone, to navigate me throughout Europe, play Omaha and Texas Hold'Em, and use VNC and SSH to access company servers.

iPhone is basically a "dumbphone" with poorly designed basic apps, not a smartphone, as installing native apps is a primary thing that distinguishes dumbphones from smart ones. My 8-years old daughter is using a much better phone (Samsung D900), and it was only $199.

Now, would you pay $600 for a dumbphone when you have $100 - $299 Windows Mobile and Symbian (UIQ) smartphones available?

People buying iPhone are pure "believers", missing rationality and self-esteem, believing in the only God (erm, Apple), always doing what he says. And the God said: "I order you to buy iPhone today! Or two of them!". Some are buying Apple logo only and fancy animations, as functionality is definitely inferior.

Are these typical iPhone buyers?

There is nothing bad about this, nice personal choice (Do you love Apple logo above all? Go for it!), but they should acknowledge simple fact of iPhone being "technologically inferior and crippled". A dumbphone.

Americans are not (that) stupid, dumbPhone sales low

Apple iPhone - the dumbest phone launched in 2007 sold for $500-600 does not offer basic functionality $19.95 phone users are used to.

According to Dow Jones Newswires only 146,000 new iPhone subscribers signed up in the first two days of its launch - wildly successful for any other consumer- electronic product but a disappointment when compared with Wall Street's sky- high expectations. The figure, as well as speculation over a slowdown in demand has Apple - trading near its all-time high - taking a major hit in its share price.

The iPhone seemed poised to disappoint, given the ramping sales expectations for the much ballyhooed device, which in some circles earned the moniker "God Machine." After the first weekend, Goldman Sachs projected sales of 700,000 phones over the first three days.

There are many iPhone users returning it back to AT&T / Apple. According to them, if you value your sense of self, returning the iPhone is far more satisfying than using it.

More info on iPhone: Apple iPhone - dumb and dumber?