One of the saddest websites I have ever seen is this one. Basically it is a catalogue of pubs across the country that have closed in the last decade or so. It is so grim to go back to your home town (in my case St Neots) and see the number of pubs that have now closed. Some were always going to disappear - my local High street ultimately had way too many - but it is still a shock to see hostelries that I once supped warm beer in got chased out of for being underage turned into flats, supermarkets or worse.

In fact it is estimated that as many as 25 pubs hang the permanent closing time sign up each week. That's actually a much better scenario than in 2009 when the number was double that figure.

So what is killing British pubs? Well the answer that the brewery trade and others seem most fond of peddling is that the smoking ban has driven people away. I think that's true to some degree, as are theories about the price of beer - I paid £4 for a bottle of ale yesterday, I could have bought four bottles of beer for the same price from my local Asda. There are also big issues facing pub owners who have to deal with escalating rent prices, demand for housing which makes it attractive for developers to buy premises and competition from pubs owned by chains who can offer discounted beer.

However I think the prime reason is one that is just becoming more apparent now and that is that we are becoming a society that's much happier socilaising in our homes than outside of them.

Over the last decade there have been many factors which have kept us at home. TV has become more compelling - not necessarily the quality of the programmes - but the fact that we can chose to watch them when we want now. Then there's the endless distraction of the Internet. There is a fear (which is probably not justified) that city centres are no go zones, while country dwellers are very aware that a whiff of alcohol on their breath now when driving is likely to get them into trouble.

A prime reason though for the shift away from pubs is that we are changing the way in which we socialise. For me the whole point of going to the pubs was to sit around talking rubbish with my friends. Now, thanks to social networking, I don't need to go to the pub to do that. I can do it at home.

I am also not limited to a few close mates. If I want to talk about the 13th Floor Elevartors there are a number of psych heads on Facebook who will gladly argue the toss about whether the band's second or third album is their masterpiece. Similarly I can share my frustration about Arsene Wenger's lack of signings with mates (and quite often randoms) on Twitter and on countless blogs and forums.

In some ways the Internet and social networks have spoiled us rotten. We no longer have to worry about getting stuck in public place making small talk with someone whom we have little in common. Put simply we don't have to make an effort any more. We treasure our free time, why spend it with people who bore us?

Besides we can get online and share our stories with people anywhere in the world who immediately understand our reference points, nuances and arguments. Real world networking in the local just doesn't compete.

Is this necessarily a good thing? Well it is bad for the brewing trade? It is also bad for local communities too, especially if our only point of contact with those around us in shops or schools. I don't however buy the idea that we are all lacking in real world social skills. Until the day when home working becomes the norm for everyone we still have to engage with others in work situations.

There are many others who feel our addiction to social networks is a bad thing. In Jonathan Coe's recent novel The Terrible Privacy of Maxwell Sim, the main character is a person who has countless friends on social networks but no one he can turn to in a crisis.

Then again maybe being much more picky about how we spend our precious spare time is a good thing. What's really that wrong about only spending your leisure time with people who share your passions? As Mae West once said 'Too much of a good thing can be wonderful.'

The pub at the top was The Cross Keys in St Neots. For several centuries a key staging post on journeys from London to the north it is now shops and estate agents.
pic from this ace site

In my daily work of keeping on top of what's going on in the world of social media it is becoming apparent that the two biggest social networks, Twitter and Facebook, are becoming increasingly alike

While Twitter once tried to distinguish itself as an "information network" it has with its recent product announcements, like an improved Twitter.com and a native photo sharing service, put itself right up there to take on Facebook head-to-head in the battle for the social network crown.

Pivotal to Facebook's success is its photo sharing facility, not relying on third party applications to let you share snapshots of your life with whoever you choose to have on your friends' list. Now, wanting to take advantage of people's apparent love for sharing photos, Twitter has announced a native photo and video sharing to its service. This facility received a massive boost last Tuesday (7 June 2011) when Apple announced that iOS 5 would include deep Twitter integration. Being taken under the wing of one of the most world's most successful consumer electronics companies means that that the 200 million plus people with Apple gadgets will be able to post videos, links and photos to Twitter with on single tap.

This is might prove to be a significant blow to Facebook which has for a long time been the preferred - or default - 'connection' mechanism for social sharing.

It is however interesting to read on Mashable that Facebook is now trialling a 'live feed' of what users' friends are liking, sharing and commenting on in real time. The 'Happening Now' sidebar will show up next to the primary news feed, and will duplicate much of that content in shorter form on which you can choose to click on to explore in more detail without leaving the feed. Err so basically what Twitter is all about...

Personally since signing up to the service in 2009, I have used Twitter mostly to share and discover fun things related to work, personal interests and what's happening in London. Most of the accounts I follow are those that I feel can add value to my day - why I still follow them - most of who I have never met in real life.

Facebook on the other hand is where I socialise with people I have met at one time or another and who I consider acquaintances if not friends. Yet many of the updates (read photos of your child or gaming updates) I have absolutely no interest in, yet I cannot bring myself to cull some of them from my friends' list. Perhaps it's because social network rejection is horrible, even if you haven't spoken to that person in years...

However, with these increasing similarities making Twitter and Facebook appear more like a Tweetbook, will people eventually choose one over the other as their services will no longer offer enough differentiation to justify keeping them both alive?

Last week the lovely people at Ford UK sent us to Courmayeur, Italy to test out their new C-Max on European roads. Here's how it went.

As a UK resident who learnt to drive on the right hand side of the road (steering wheel on the left please) I was excited about the prospects of finally driving again. Unlucky for me, we were met with a fleet of UK cars - I have never driven a UK car and wasn't going to attempt it for the first time on European motorways, so I opted for the role of excellent co-driver and road sign reader extraordinaire.

En route through Switzerland and France - complete with the Mont Blanc tunnel - towards our destination of Courmayeur, a small picturesque village at the foot of the Italian Alps, I was impressed with the smooth, comfortable drive the Ford C-Max offered. Of course nothing had been spared: we had a fully decked Titanium ride in Mars red, complete with leather trim, heated front seats, built-in sat-nav, key-less driving, EcoBoost technology (that means improved fuel usage and lower CO2 emissions), a panorama roof (perfect for looking at the stunning Alpine peaks) and more dashboard buttons than a Boeing 747. The car was spacious, provided enough legroom, and clung to the road like a mountain goat to Alpine ridges. If this is the way a Ford car treats its owner, no wonder the Ford Focus was the best-selling new car in January*.

We arrived at Courmayeur as dusk was settling, and Craig - my driver for the day - and I ended up on an unplanned sightseeing trip around the town centre after missing the exit to the night's lodging, the Hotel Auberge de la Maison. After a few more wrong turns we ended up ignoring the sat-nav that wanted us to stay in the town centre and instead trusted the printed guide left in the car by the Ford team.

After a wonderful Italian feast the evening before, day two was mostly spent in the slopes as the rest of the world's car enthusiasts and motor experts gathered for the Geneva Motor Show some 100 kilometres away. Set among some of the largest mountains in Europe, the Courmayeur Ski Resort offers spectacular views on a clear day and fantastic slopes to swoosh down.

We left the glittering snow covered hills after a few hours to head back to the hotel in order to pack-up and prepare for the return journey to Geneva Airport - the nearest airport to the resort if you fancy heading there yourself.

The driving conditions were optimum and I even got to test the Bluetooth operated sound system and voice controlled phone call function before reaching the airport departure car park.

As I sat in the Business Lounge, munching on the complimentary gummy bears, I wondered how I would ever be able to go back to London buses and tubes after having been driven around for two days in such a high-tech car...

*Source: Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders

The biggest debate online today has undoubtedly been around the twitter joke trial, and what the outcomes mean for free speech online.

For those who aren't familiar with the case, the whole thing started when Paul Chambers, a 27-year-old accountant jokingly tweeted that he was going to blow up Robin Hood airport, near Doncaster, if his flight was delayed or canceled due to heavy snowfall.

He has since been convicted of "menace" and fined. The debate stepped up when Stephen Fry, offered to pay Chambers' fine and legal costs, amounting to around £3,600, tweeting
"My offer still stands. Whatever they fine you, I'll pay."

Now a Conservative councilor, Gareth Compton has also been arrested under the same legislation used to convict Mr Chambers, after tweeting that journalist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown should be "stoned to death".

While both Compton and Chambers comments were hugely inappropriate, you really do have to wonder if they should be legally reprimanded. By its very nature, Twitter encourages spontaneous comments that are for the most part not premeditated and while there are always consequences to your actions, it is evident that neither of these men posted these with actual malicious intent.

For freedom of speech campaigners this landmark ruling is worrying as it could be used to set a precedent which would see our comments on public sites, such as Facebook and Twitter, open to legal action.

Twitter has been buzzing about the story all day as the #twitterjoketrial tag trended and users retweeted and created spoofs of Chamber's original tweet. I believe what both men said was undeniably wrong, however, also believe that it is important that online freedom of expression is maintained.

Earlier today, I droned on about the pros and cons about Grindr, the location-based pick-up app for gay, bi and curious guys. And I explained why I don't think the model will translate easily into the straight market.

But I do think the model itself is a good idea. Using GPS to find the kind of people you want, or need, to be in touch with - immediately, with minimum effort - is better than brilliant. Which is why we've put together a list of Grindr alternatives that we wish were in existence...

Gigpartnr: You've got a secret penchant for My Chemical Romance, and know that none of your friends is going to emo it up with you when the band next tours in your area. An app to find similar solo gig-goers would help you get together with other like-minded fans. Buddy up, have a beer and talk about how *nobody* understands you.

Moviegor: Along the same lines. Going to the cinema on your own is OK, but it means that you're in danger of polishing off an entire box of Revels all by yourself (you know it. Even the coffee ones). This app would pair you up with other lone movie fans, meaning you'd have someone to share your popcorn with.

Trainr: What about all those people who get bored jogging on their own, but can't face gym fees or committing to a running club? A training app would help lonesome runners get together for a workout. And you never know which taut-abbed exercise addict you might meet (sailing dangerously close to the original Grindr app, here...).

Helpr: Imagine how good this would be... You're wrestling with a jar of pickles, but it's... just... too... strong. Luckily, all the Good Samaritans in your area have signed up to Helpr, and are on call to assist you. Think big strong men getting kittens out of trees, opening those particularly pesky bottles of wine, etc. Nice.

And one that's probably not going to happen...

Biebr: An app for Justin Bieber fans to all get together and whinge about how mean the interwebz are.

Any Grindr-style apps you'd like to see on the market?

Aaah. The world wide web just won't leave the poor wee soul alone. After a weekend in which an XSS vulnerability meant that his YouTube videos were hacked - redirecting viewers to porn sites or displaying messages of his 'death' - Justin Bieber's Twitter page has now been the cause of much viral hilarity. A poll asking viewers to nominate the country for his next tour has come up with the rather unexpected result: North Korea.

Just in case you're wondering, word on the street is that the tour is probably not going to go ahead.

On a more serious note, the XSS vulnerability caused quite a kerfuffle for tech lovers. And If you were embroiled in the panic that engulfed the Twittersphere in the last 24 hours, you might be interested to read this post from threat researcher Christopher Boyd. He was interested to see people posting messages declaring: 'Don't watch any youtube videos or comment them today, there's a virus! Spread!' Before anyone knew it, the virus talk went viral itself, and the Chinese Whispers became as disruptive as the threat itself...

The upshot is that many people were unnecessarily alarmed. Probably about as much as Justin himself when he heard the rumour that his mum was going to pose for Playboy...

Grindr - the hook-up app currently being used by over 700,000 gay, straight and curious men - is sure getting some airtime. Shortly after Steven Fry explained the concept to Jeremy Clarkson and the viewers of Top Gear, The Guardian's Polly Vernon asks whether the app constitutes 'a new sexual revolution'. With an app for straight men and women on the way, could Grindr really be the app to change the way the world's relationships work?

To give you a bit of background, Grindr is a free app which uses GPS to locate men in your area, providing users with a grid showing (often shirtless) images of nearby guys who are keen to chat. The immediacy is absolutely incredible - I had a cheeky play on a friend's phone, and could see that a chap called Danny, who had eye-watering abs, was a mere 177 metres away. Trent, a rockabilly-type with cheekbones to die for, was just as close and online at that very moment. And there were plenty more guys to meet. The idea is that, were I a gay guy looking for fun or company, I could chat to them straight away, and maybe arrange to meet up.

Natually, sex is the most significant part of Grindr's appeal. In a matter of minutes you can not only find someone you're physically attracted to, but walk around the corner and meet them in person. It's not about dating, which is time consuming and occasionally laborious. This is fun-on-demand, with no effort, and no strings.

And that's why it will be interesting to see whether Grindr can make it in the straight market. Because - rightly or wrongly - the way men and women operate when it comes to sex and relationships is (and perhaps always will be) poles apart. In his interview with The Guardian, the founder of Grindr confesses that he doesn't know 'how to think like a woman'. And women looking purely for sex are still rarer than you might imagine. Sure, Samantha Jones might have been the pin-up for a sexually-liberated generation of noughties women - but let's not imagine that Sex and the City is about anything other than its main characters finding fulfilling long-term relationships (cue actual cheering and weeping in the cinema when the independent-minded Carrie finally gets her proposal).

And why is this? For a start, it's instilled in us by society - unfortunately, the old double standards still exist. Men, straight or gay, who are looking solely for sex are normal, fun-loving and virile. Women looking solely for sex (so the thinking still unfortunately goes) must be easy, desperate or both. In this way, the Grindr model doesn't work so easily in the heterosexual model - with two gay men, the power balance is much more equal than in a male-female connection, in which a set of preconceptions and presumptions will inevitably arise. It's certainly telling that, in Vernon's interview, men admit that they 'would think less of women' who put themselves out there on a Grindr-style app.

I think Grindr is a great idea. But only on a level playing field. And sadly, when it comes to sexual liberation, men and women aren't there yet. An app focused on dating - in which you could see at a glance whether that cute guy in the coffee shop is single and looking for love - seems like a fantastic app. Perhaps, as a friend of mine suggested, you put women in the driving seat by creating an app in which they can see the men but the men can't see them. But women would still be in the exposed position of making the first move (and let's face it, a system like that is just too open to abuse by men wanting to take the mickey out their mates...). And anyway, is it even safe for women to approach men in the street based on their profile on an app?? Again, the power balance between two gay men is arguably more equal here - but for women, who are constantly warned about connections they make on social networking and dating websites, they could even be putting themselves in danger.

What's more, we just have to be careful that our real life connections, being so easy to establish, don't become just as easy to drop. After all, connections without any effort can easily be connections without meaning.

Once again, tech lovers are being warned of the dangers of iPod oblivion: the 'trance-like state' users find themselves in when listening to music on their mobiles or mp3 players. With a plugged-in cyclist recently getting rather too close to a tram in the Australian state of Victoria (he was lucky to escape with only bruises), the debate once again rages about the way we use our favourite tech.

And it seems our boundaries are a very personal thing. I listen to my iPhone all the time on my daily stroll to work, and - if I'm honest - probably have the volume cranked up louder than it should be. But, perhaps as someone who cycles rarely and isn't 100% confident on two wheels, I wouldn't dream of using an mp3 player on the roads. (I know plenty of people who do, though.)

The whole thing reminds me a little bit of the sat nav scandals of recent years... back in 2007, hardly a week went by without some tabloid headline screaming SPLASH NAV, CRASH NAV or SPLAT NAV (or some other hilarious GPS gag) in a story about another hapless driver who'd driven their vehicle into a lake / though someone's garden / off a cliff. And although the blame was initially laid on the GPS systems which 'told me to drive that way', the fact is that the users were simply switching off their brains as soon as their gadgets were turned on.

That's what happens with iPod oblivion. And while it's not necessarily fair, the fact is that road users are not only responsible for making sure we don't make any mistakes - we're responsible for spotting those made by other people, and dealing with them effectively (it's one of the things I remember whinging about to my driving instructor). So, travelling mp3 users might be blameless, but they still need to know what's going on around them.

Let's face it: all we're saying is that technology has to be used responsibly. Your mp3 player might be an escape from the drudgery of your morning commute - but it's not an excuse to switch off completely. Maybe keep an eye on your volume levels, or maybe just take that extra bit of care. Enjoy your gadgets like the rest of us, I say, just don't forget about the real world. What do you think?

As the increasingly-unpopular George Osborne announces that, as part of the new budget, incapacity benefits will be cut, we wondered: if we at Shiny Shiny had our own emergency tech budget (*shudder*), what would we cut if it came to the crunch (*double shudder*)?

Naturally, it's a matter of personal taste - we imagine that diehard gamers would ditch even the luxurious iPad in favour of their console of choice. Crackberrys would most likely hold onto their smartphones at all costs, and Apple fanboys would sell their children before parting with their Macbooks (we imagine). But, from our point of view...

For a start, we'd ditch the frivolous app habit. Sites like appcity might offer all the apps your heart desires for a fixed monthly fee - but, at the end of the day, loads of free apps are usually (if not great) adequate enough to meet the essential needs (eg. it's pretty average, but BigOven does the job for my recipe needs when I'm out and about. And it's free. Unlike Jamie Oliver's £3 20 Minute Meals).

Next to go? Cripes. It's a tough call, but it might well have to be the high-end home audio system. Yes, those Bang and Olufsen speakers create the perfect sonic ambience and are an ideal talking point for those sophisticated candlelit soirees with the neighbours. But, costing the best part of five grand, you can't afford them right now. And so, until the good times roll again, you're going to have to make do with a wi fi connection and a Spotify account.

There's one piece of kit that I could ditch pretty easily, actually - my TV. [Gasp]. Bear with me. In fact, my TV was once broken for a matter of months before I even a) realised, and b) did anything about it. And that's simply because I watch the majority of my video content online. From iPlayer to YouTube, I find that I actually prefer watching the content I want, when I want, even on a laptop screen. Of course, I watched the England game on a 52" Sony. But I rather wish I hadn't bothered.

And I know this is predictable - but the one thing I can't ditch is my lovely iPhone. Text, calls, emails, news, music, a world of apps... Ah. Dearest gadget, you have never let me down. (Except with your dodgy 3G signal. But that's all in the past...)

What would you cut in your own tech budget?

Think online video, think YouTube. Right? Well, sort of. Back in 2005 YouTube was just one of a series of start ups that tried to capture the user generated video space. Well the team must have got something right, because YouTube has established itself as the de facto online video destination, no doubt helped by its big money tie-in with Google.

However YouTube's early rivals haven't all disappeared, and several of them have some very interesting USPs. Vimeo, Viddler, Dailymotion and Blip.tv - can in many ways present a real challenge to the broadcast behemoth.

We all know what's great about YouTube. As well as being free and easy to use, it's now packed with quality broadcast content, and gives you an HD option in case you want your videos to look a bit more pro. And, with so much content, it's a rare day that you won't find exactly what you're looking for. But the most common complaint about the site is that, being the first and most popular, it's been cluttered with junk. Want a video of a cute kitten playing with string? Maybe. Want twenty thousand? No, not really. The same goes for the community aspect, which - though lively - is marred by trolls who only want to insult other filmmakers or start arguments with other users. So what else is out there if you're ready for a change?

Well, Vimeo is something different altogether. Claiming to feature the 'best tools and highest quality video in the universe', this is a site aimed at creative types who really want their movies to look fantastic. Full of animations and short films, it's not about teenagers falling off skateboards or Lady Gaga makeup tutorials - it's a stylish, professional looking site with over 3 million members, with a $60-per-year Vimeo Plus service for those want to upload unlimited HD and weekly uploads of up to 5G. however, if you're looking for community stuff, it might not be for you - while you can comment and create groups, the site isn't about counting views and subscribers. It's about hosting and nurturing creativity. It's a similar mindset to Blip.tv, which is all about finding an audience for independent shows - Blip say that they 'help creative people be creative'. Ie, no videos of failed BMX stunt, please.

Although it won't win any beauty contests, Viddler is another option for would-be filmmakers. It features a free service for non-commercial users, while its business service that lets you create your own branded player, priority and HD encoding as well as iTunes support. Last year the site was reported to have just under 1.5 million users, making it a bit smaller than the Vimeo bunch. But some users find the easy-to-use Viddler player a bit nicer than Vimeo (which, as you might expect, is more functional).

And if you still haven't found what you're looking for? Paris-based video sharing site Dailymotion is a really clean and straightforward-looking site, with categories across the homepage allowing you to find anything from news and music to short films. Videos have a twenty minute limit, which is pretty generous even compared to YouTube, and a separate Cinema section showcases full-length feature films. Since introducing HTML 5 last year, you'll need a compatible browser (Firefox 3.5, for example).

Have a look around, and - depending on what online video means to you - you might find that while YouTube is the biggest, it's not necessarily the best. (But, for attention seekers out there who just want their Nickelback cover version to be heard by as many teenagers as possible, there's only one place to go.)

We've all heard the horror stories. You're all loved up and full of the joys of spring. Your phone beeps. You gleefully open your inbox, expecting another kiss-filled missive from your other half, and there it is: the SMS which says 'sorry. You're dumped'.

Or it might be an email. A Facebook update. Or - horror of horrors - a tweet. Yes, there are people out there whose relationships have actually been ended in less than 140 characters. Could it be that the digital Dear John is now an acceptable way to say 'it's over'?

The figures are pretty astonishing. Earlier this year Reuters reported that 'digital dumping is on the rise', with a third of respondents to a poll - yes a THIRD -confessing that they had dumped someone by email. 13 per cent had changed their Facebook status to announce their new found singledom (that old chestnut), while a shocking six per cent broke the news on Twitter. And the trend has supposedly hit celeb-land - Ashley Cole, Lindsay Lohan, K-Fed and Jennifer Aniston have all reportedly been dumped by text.

Don't know what to say? Don't worry. This website will even craft a breakup email for you (and my, once you've sent one of these you can guarantee the ex won't be coming back). Sure, it's easier - and quicker - than having the awkward conversation face-to-face. But if you're thinking about writing the message yourself, be careful - and rewind to this cyber scandal of 2003 to recall just how out of control a person can get once they're in front of a keyboard.

And that's the problem. Technology is amazing. But it can take us out of the real world, and sometimes - due to ineptitude, thoughtlessness or bravado - it helps us say and do things that we just wouldn't do in real life. Just think of all the people whose reputations have been damaged thanks to inappropriate Twitter outbursts (Labour candidate Stuart MacLennon, Union boss Derek Simpson, the list is long and distinguished).

And, in real life, we wouldn't go round to our other half's house, open the door, shout 'I'M LEAVING YOU' and then run away. Which is, effectively, what the digital dump amounts to. And so, as tech etiquette becomes ever more sophisticated, perhaps we'll realise that there are some conversations that simply have to happen offline.

While, writing this article, I remembered - I once got dumped by text, actually. It was fine though. I didn't like him anyway.

My name's Kate, and I'll be holding the fort at Shiny Towers for the next week or so while the lovely Anna jets off on holiday.

I've enjoyed a love affair with gadgets since I won a remote-controlled car in the 1992 inter-schools Halloween fancy dress competition (I nailed it with a Grim Reaper costume that my mum made out of a duvet cover). I've written about everything from cutting edge music software and groundbreaking GPS systems to Egyptian sarcophagus DVD cabinets, and will be looking at Shiny-style breaking news, gadget reviews, and all the miscellaneous lols in between.

So, if you want to say hello, drop me a line on kbaxstar@hotmail.com. And stay tuned for many Shiny shenanigans.

In a comeback to our piece on the death of the girl phone, Lauren Bravo from ShinyStyle casts a critical eye over the smartphone market and explains why there's still a niche for the fashion phone and why an iPhone isn't on her shopping list

On finding out I was writing this piece, my (male) flatmate launched into an attack on girl phones. "The other day, I saw one advertised purely on merit of it having a QUILTED BACK," he said, incredulous. "Pah, ridiculous," I said. But I thought, "Mmm, Chanel." And there, folks, we have the purpose of fashion phones - men don't understand them, and girls want to stroke them.

Fashion and technology have a notoriously erratic relationship. Like the Carrie and Big of consumer trends, they're on again/off again at a headier pace than most can be bothered to keep up with. Yet girl phones (I won't mention specific models but you know what I am talking about) appeal to us in the same kitschy-cool way as chandelier earrings and lurid nail art.

Really, it all comes down to personal style. There is an impeccably groomed contingent of the female population for whom an iPhone might blend into a futuristic wardrobe of Hussein Chalayan. But for the rest of us, those who relish the creative, the colourful, the playful and the downright experimental of the fashion world, buying an iPhone seems like surrendering to the enemy. Think about any seriously arty people you know - don't they all have a tinny phone, held together with duct tape and covered in splotches of nail varnish, which half the time they don't turn on? Yes, it's merely a different sort of pretension, but it's also a darn sight cheaper.

Not being a seriously arty person, or even a very good impostor, I have decided: I do need a smartphone. After a year of defiantly touting round a £20 Nokia (the telephonic equivalent of a Sainsbury's Basics turnip), I am admitting defeat and joining the ranks of the contactably mobile. But I know I will plump for a lesser-known, less expensive and less ubiquitous model than Apple's. The iPhone may push all the right buttons technologically (or touch all the right bits of the screen), but from a fashion perspective its novelty has worn off.

Firstly, there is the male-centric element of competition. It seems that iPhones have replaced sports cars as the compensation of choice for the poorly endowed man. We don't need that level of pub table one-upmanship; we already have shoes. There's also their comparative bulk, which is an obstacle if, like me, you're in the midst of new-season bag-downsizing.

Then there are the apps. Internet? Good. Email? Good. Facebook, Twitter, eBay? Good. Book a restaurant table/feed a virtual goldfish/scan a barcode/pretend to be a zippo lighter? Not so much. Aren't we just back where we were with Facebook apps a year ago? I didn't want to join your zombie war then, I STILL DON'T WANT TO NOW.

So no, we don't all need an iPhone. Some of us just need to check our emails, some of us just need a little individuality, and some of us need something a little more glitzy to justify spending our money on.

Lauren's blog

After my rant about my T-Mobile Broadband last week I felt I had to share this new research by Broadband Expert with you.

Firstly to show you that I wasn't just moaning, and secondly to show that companies are seemingly telling us a few porkies with their mobile broadband advertising.

The survey by the comparison site found that UK mobile broadband providers are delivering services "far lower than advertised".

Almost three and a half thousand broadband connections were tested over a five month period. Over this period the survey found that users only recorded an average download speed of 1.1Mbs, which is far less than our mobile broadband companies promise us.

Rob Webber, Broadband Expert's commercial director, explained how they did the tests.
"These are tests performed by users on the Broadband Expert website. They select their internet service provider, their promised connection speed, and the sort of connection they have.

"As a result, some providers got tested more than others and we did not have enough data on British Telecom or Virgin Mobile to give a valid result," he said.

I know I've said it before but I would love to hear if you've had any problems with these pesky dongles, maybe then we can start getting companies to wake up to the fact that their advertising standards need some serious thinking about.

What makes a blogging platform cool and another less cool? Posterous has stolen my heart - for its simplicity and ease of use - but not everyone is so impressed by ravishingly efficient content management. Some people have other criteria when assessing blogging sites or social networks - like, are they cool?

Tumblr is really cool apparently. Several people on Twitter and IRL have told me so, and somehow I know it is when I look at it. This one for example. But why?

Fashionistas are always making comments like 'bat-winged jackets are really cool' and then inventing spurious reasons about sleeve-trends and how bat-wings/retro-tailoring/apricot leather captures the zeitgeist as proof for their statements.

I just decided, for one post at least, we'd do the same with blogging platforms. Of course this opens up definition-busting broader questions like 'what is cool anyway?' I don't know, but let's shove that aside and make a few lists about stuff I do know.

Follow on after the jump

Genevieve picks up on a handbag with a difference...

While I'm not a celebrity, I am familiar with people taking photographs of me on nights out, not looking my best and in compromising situations. Instead of Paparazzi, I have click-happy friends. So this prototype handbag looks rather tempting. Coined the "Anti-Paparazzi handbag", it detects camera flashes and emits a powerful strobe to dazzle the photographer.

Whilst it's just a prototype at the moment, it seems like a good idea, but has anyone seen a picture of the bag? Does anyone know what it looks like? There will probably be an artist's impression "8" long, satin finish and had a menacing look about it" is what I imagine the eye witness report will sound like. It could be hideous and you'd be carrying around a really ugly handbag if no one was snapping you.

Also, what happens to it if it gets caught in the headlight of a car? Does it then go dazzling innocent motorists?

The more I think about it, the more I see holes in the idea. Still, at least knicker-less celebrities can use the bag to cover their parts as they're getting into cars. Then impressionable teens can read the gossip magazines and say "I knew it, the sun really does shine out of their bums".

By Genevieve Sibayan
AHProjects [via BoingBoing]

Last week we did a piece on 5 reasons why Twitter will kill blogging... and got a big reaction.

As one commentator sweetly pointed out, Shiny Shiny is in fact a blog so we do have a vested interest in defending them. Others said that Twitter is link dependent, so actually drives traffic to blogs. Several people pointed out that blogs can be great and that sometimes people want to read content that is longer than 140 characters.

From a reader's point of view, then: Twitter one-liners supplement but don't replace the more satisfying content on blogs and it could make it easier to find them. So it's probably fair to say that Twitter helps strong blogs get stronger.

But for the bloggers themselves? Will they still have the motivation to post a web-log about their daily lives/pet rattlesnake/bedroom antics when Twitter and Facebook are easier and quicker?

We delve into the motivation behind blogs after the jump..

Now Photoshop has long since been the favourite programme for those who like to try their hand at image editing, but credit crunch times means you can't always justify forking out £70 odd quid just to remove red-eye. Sure, if your job revolves around editing images you're going to want to buy this (plus Quark/ InDesign etc), but if you're one of the masses who just need a good imaging programme for cheap what do you do?

I've compiled 4 great Photoshop looky likeys for you to try- and they're all free! Two are online, two are downloadable, it's up to you to pick which one best suits your needs.

Number 1: Sumo Paint

This is the first free Photoshop style programme I worked with, and it still holds a special place in my heart. OK it doesn't do everything you want, so if you're really into editing collages and fine tuning and framing pics this may be a bit too basic, but it sure beats your basic Paint round the head, cuts it into little pieces and distributes it at four secret locations. You get a floating toolbox, huge colour palette. Loads of brush editing tools and you can even upload images from your desktop or a URL. You do need to be online to use it though- which also means you'll have it wherever you go, and not be tied to one computer.

So you're thinking of buying an HDTV? Congratulations, you'll be entering the world of hi resolution imagery, and getting a picture so sharp it will make you want to start attacking your old TV with your fingernails .

But what should you buy? With three main technologies on the market, you're entering a confusing world of LCD, Plasma and OLED, not to mention pixel ratios, bezel size, and of course... price. Well we aim to clear up the confusion, and we're going to use short little words to explain all those baffling terms.

It seems everyone has a blog nowadays, from your postman to your mum (eek!) but what really makes one stand out whilst other fade into oblivion? Having a great design definitely helps, as well as making sure you've laid out your site efficiently, but I tend to think the real success of a blog is in the content- and the commenters.

Feedback is an essential part of web 2.0 as that's what really makes the blog format stand out, but why some posts gets loads of comments and others get none remains a mystery. Sure, if the topic is very controversial you know you're provoking a debate, but what about the majority of stuff that falls into the middle ground? Ever felt a little bit green when your friend skins up her site with a stylish new template, or you see a semi-identikit post get 100 comments to your none? What you're suffering from is Blog Envy.