It's a Phone...No, It's an iPad...No, Its an iPad Mini

There is a negative connotation that associates middle children with being neglected; they are not the first born, nor are they the baby. They are a well rounded combination of the two: They have pressing expectations to be a good example, but they are also given mercy, and a share of the gos, and gawks from being one of the babies. I suppose the invention of the iPad mini is a desperate stretch to find middle ground. It is not a phone, not a laptop, and it certainty is not an iPad.   

The iPad mini is "as thin as a pencil and weighs 0.68 pounds, half as much as the full-size iPad with its 9.7-inch screen"(Svensson). In comparison, to other devices, the Ipad mini is "0.5 inch[es] larger than most full-size mainstream tablets and 0.9 inch larger than the iPad's screen" (RT Review).

I do not have an iPad Mini, a tablet, or an iPad. I think they are practical, and I understand why they sell as well as they do; personally, I would prefer to put money into building a computer that is capable of holding raw footage, and hosting film editing software. Also, when I go on a trip, I like having the excuse that I did not have access to the internet. I do not like having one foot plugged in, and the other out. I think having iPads, and even mini laptops obligate us to check Facebook, email, twitter, and blogs.

Granted, I think unlike the stereotype of the middle child, these mini's are doing quite well for themselves:
"Apple has sold more than 100 million iPads since their debut in April 2010. Analysts expect Apple to sell 5 million to 10 million iPad Minis before the year is out" (Svensson).

They are definitely striking some consumer interest. As stated in a Microsoft review "If you're an early adopter willing to forget everything you know about navigating a computer, the Surface tablet could replace your laptop. Everyone else: wait for more apps" (RT review).

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20121024/us-tec-apple-ipad-mini/

http://reviews.cnet.com/tablets/microsoft-surface-rt/4505-3126_7-35332494.html

Technological annoyances

     According to Roberto Baldwin the Twleve most annoying technologies as chosen by wired commenters are (1) Voice recognition (2) Car alarms (3) the iPad Camera (4) Fax machines (5) Touchless bathrooms (6) Credit Card Machines (7) QR Codes (8) Alarm clock Snooze Buttons (9) Subwoofers (10) Captcha (11) Facebook (12) and Technology Writer Roberto Baldwin.
    I found the results very ammusing. I think to some extent or the next we can all nod atleast in understanding of how these technologies could annoy someone else. However, I think my personal list would differ greatly.

The Good:
  To me, fax machines, credit card machines, and facebook are entirely to practical to complain about. All technology comes with a few corks. Touchless bathrooms still make me feel like I am in some kind of futuristic spaceship. I enjoy the experience! The alarm clock snooze button gives me five more minutes to sleep; I embrace that kind of technology!

The Bad:
 If someone does not like voice regognition, technology writers, and QR Codes they do not have to use, or encouter them. They are such aviodable annoyances; whereas, car alarms, subwoofers, and captcha, on the other hand, invaid your entire environment.

The Ugly:
    I think that the motion censored commercial-screens in Walmart, and in other shopping centers are incredibly annoying. One step, and the screen speaks: a poreless women telling us how beautiful are skin could look: another step,  hamburger helper oozing from a warm kitchen pan: another, world music breaking out from ill speakers. AHHHHHH!!!!! Now that is annoying!
    
   

Foxconn Attack

In the last discussion about Foxconn factories I was roped into siding with a lukewarm approach. One of the earlier articles claimed that Foxconn employees were enduring the long work shifts because they wanted to be able to earn more money. However, after reading about the mass riots in the Foxconn factory, I am quite sure that the employees were misrepresented. 

Riots broke out in the Foxconn factory that involved "2,000 workers" (Kan). It was said that the "incident first started as a “personal dispute”, and then escalated" (Kan). How a single personal dispute escalates into a 2,000 person riot is more than suspicious. Although the workers might have had bitterness towards their working conditions, if their need was only monetary, than why would anyone jeopardize their means of income for someone elses 'personal dispute'. The article even stated that "According to police, some 40 individuals were taken to the hospital for medical attention and a number of individuals were arrested...”(Kan) As a news article quoted labor experts,"Foxconn is not entirely transparent about the worker disputes that occur at the company’s factories in China." ...'NOT ENTIRELY!!!!?'

People do not join riots with so much to risk unless they believe the risk is worth taking. The workers are doing all they can with what they have. The people in China are not being treated justly, they are being misrepresented, and articles are being published to make all of their abuse look justifiable. They are sacrificing their jobs, and their health to make a stand. What are we doing to help? Are we a part of the problem, or the solution?
 

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2010498/mass-riot-erupts-at-foxconn-factory-in-china.html