auto-incorrect

The "I Hate My iPhone" article in The New York Times was very silly. Of course it was popular: any article called "I Hate My iPhone" in The New York Times is bound to be exciting to people. But all the writer really says in it is that she can't figure out how to type*—in fact, that's pretty much the entire article right there ("My right index finger—the only digit precise enough to hit the close-set virtual iPhone keys—seemed an anemic cerebral thing..."). That, and she says she's afraid to touch the touch-screen because she doesn't want to smudge it.

She does also complain about the iPhone's "iciness," a fairly meaningless objection given that the source of its popularity is that most people think it's wonderfully charming and exciting and delightful—pretty much the opposite of icy. (To be clear: by this I mean NOT that her opinion is invalid or wrong, but that it isn't particularly effective as a counterargument to all the iPhone worship out there. It would be like if I said, "I think The Godfather Part III is the best in the series," and then my whole argument was just, "I just thought it was better than the other two": perfectly reasonable, but not persuasive or evidence per se of anything but my own idiosyncratic and unrepresentative tastes. Although actually she elsewhere talks about how the iPhone "seemed to want to be...jollier than [she] was," which seems incompatible with the iciness objection; hmm, could it be possible that this is just some kind of a...no!...a mindless fluff piece with nothing really to say...?)

THAT SAID:

One thing that is indeed infuriating—even intolerable—about the iPhone is that the otherwise quite excellent auto-correct feature regularly corrects its to it's. That is something that it simply shouldn't do. One of the few things I have in this world is my ability to distinguish between its and it's, and the iPhone takes that away from me because I'll send an e-mail with the it's typo (one of the most embarrassing, in my opinion), and I didn't even make it! I didn't even make that mistake, my phone made it for me! You have to watch it like a hawk, the iPhone!

Also, hell becomes he'll—less embarrassing but similarly maddening.

Fortunately, it's quite easy to type on, otherwise, and very, very user-friendly. And the touch-screen technology is brilliant and beautiful. And in spite of great scenes in The Godfather Part II, the first movie is the best of the series.***

* Speaking of which, I want to know what in the universe this could possibly mean: "I spent my adolescence touch-typing, convinced my life would be passed secretarially, my left pinkie building novelty muscle manning the A. Then the technology changed, and I improvised an inelegant three-finger style for computer keyboards." Um...the technology changed? What about the shift from typewriters to personal computers means that touch-typing needs to be replaced with a three-finger style, elegant or no? I touch-type on a computer. Is it such a radically different keyboard? "Then the technology changed"? What is she talking about? If we want to evaluate her response to the iPhone, I think that this might be a subtle clue.

** One more think about Heffernan's article: "At 4 in the morning...I couldn't stop thinking about that device's tarty little face and those yapping 'apps' you can download for it." Jesus, lady, who cares? I was at a dinner party recently when it suddenly came out, to the amusement of all, that coincidentally everyone on one half of the table used Fæcebook and everyone on the other half did not. I was on the half that does. And 5, 10 minutes later, I realized that the Fæcebook half of the table had been talking seriously about 9/11 and international politics while the non-Fæcebook half of the table was talking about...Fæcebook! There is a moral to this story but I leave you to figure it out for yourselves.