Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cellphones Software Apple

Low-Income Users Latch On To iPhone 422

Posted by Soulskill
from the for-sufficiently-high-values-of-low dept.
narramissic writes "The iPhone crowd is still dominated by affluent males between the ages of 18 and 35, but in a series of surveys ending in August, ComScore found that iPhone purchases grew fastest among people with annual household incomes between $25,000 and $50,000. The growth rate in this group was 48 percent, compared with just 16 percent among people with incomes above $100,000. And the down economy isn't going to turn this trend around, says ComScore Mobile analyst Jen Wu. 'I don't see there's going to be much of a slowdown, just because wireless devices are so much more of a necessity than they used to be,' Wu said." In other iPhone news, an anonymous reader points out a NYTimes story about the rise in car-related applications and uses for the iPhone, which points out that programmers are just beginning to "appreciate just what can be done with an iPhone and other advanced cellphones that know where they are and just how quickly they are going someplace else." Another iPhone story mentions that "Opera's engineers have developed a version of Opera Mini that can run on an Apple iPhone, but Apple won't let the company release it because it competes with Apple's own Safari browser."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Low-Income Users Latch On To iPhone

Comments Filter:
  • Antitrust? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by k33l0r (808028) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @10:24AM (#25594589) Homepage Journal

    "Opera's engineers have developed a version of Opera Mini that can run on an Apple iPhone, but Apple won't let the company release it because it competes with Apple's own Safari browser."

    Antitrust lawsuit, anybody?

    • Re:Antitrust? (Score:4, Informative)

      by dnaumov (453672) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @10:31AM (#25594641)

      "Opera's engineers have developed a version of Opera Mini that can run on an Apple iPhone, but Apple won't let the company release it because it competes with Apple's own Safari browser."

      Antitrust lawsuit, anybody?

      You can't have a successful antitrust suit against someone with a minuscule marketshare.

      • Re:Antitrust? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by k33l0r (808028) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @10:38AM (#25594685) Homepage Journal

        Aha, but market share of what? The browser market? The mobile browser market? The iPhone browser market?

        • by dnaumov (453672)

          Aha, but market share of what? The browser market? The mobile browser market? The iPhone browser market?

          The browser market, the mobile browser market as well as the mobile phone market.

      • I thought the same thing (minuscule market share), until I saw that in Q4 2007, the iPhone had a 30% market share of smartphones.

        It's since dropped [cnet.com], but I have no idea what's happened since the 3G model came out. Point is...it's not remotely minuscule; they're second or third.

        The other point: the market is pretty diversified between Palm, Windows Smartphones, Palm OS, Symbian, and others (like the Sidekick, running Hiptop OS.) If several companies colluded and blocked Opera, THAT would be an anti-trus

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Say I have a Linksys router, one which won't allow openWRT/DD-WRT to run on it. Does this also warrant an antitrust lawsuit?
      • by k33l0r (808028)

        Linksys never allowed or created any infrastructure to allow third party development for your router.

        Apple on the other hand wants to reap the benefits of third party applications without actually competing with them.

        It's as if you could only run IE on Windows or Safari on OS X.

      • Re:Antitrust? (Score:5, Informative)

        by binarylarry (1338699) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @11:02AM (#25594849)

        Usually, linksys routers such as yours are incapable of running a standard linux router distribution.

        It's like saying, "It's antitrust that I can't run Safari on my VIC-20."

        It's a technical limitation, not a political/strategic one... which is the case with Opera on the iPhone.

        I'm glad I bought an Android phone. :)

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by mrchaotica (681592) *

        Replace "Linksys router" with "TiVo" and "openWRT/DD-WRT" with "modified software for TiVos" and then you'll have a good argument.

        (Also replace "antitrust lawsuit" with "GPL violation (a.k.a. copyright infringement) lawsuit" in both cases.)

    • not Antitrust (Score:5, Insightful)

      by SuperBanana (662181) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @11:14AM (#25594927)

      Antitrust lawsuit, anybody?

      Jesus, no. Please go read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law [wikipedia.org]

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Winawer (935589)
      People angry that Apple rejected Opera on the iPhone should probably read John Gruber at Daring Fireball [daringfireball.net], who investigated this and found out that it doesn't seem to have happened at all, since Opera hasn't submitted the browser to Apple yet, let alone had it rejected. You can be angry at Apple for their ham-handed handling of the App Store as much as you like, but the "Opera rejected by Apple" story is, so far, from the Precrime [wikipedia.org] files.
  • by Joe The Dragon (967727) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @10:27AM (#25594613)

    The high cost forced data plan + voice plan is a trun off me. I want to get S60 based phone running Symbian OS with WIFI and just use WIFI I have ATT DSL so I can use there hotspots for free as well as not being forced to use 1 app store I can get apps from any one with out the app lock in.

  • by Majik Sheff (930627) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @10:29AM (#25594621) Journal

    This is just another sad example of the American tendency to live beyond one's means. This is another symptom of the disease that is eating this country: financial illiteracy.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      ... ComScore found that iPhone purchases grew fastest among people with annual household incomes between $25,000 and $50,000.

      Poor people are poor because they're stupid with their money. If or when the Democrats get control next week, we can see more money going down the poor people money pit: sales of consumer electronics, junk food, fast food, Walmart junk, etc... will all increase. But yet, when something that would reduce conspicuous consumption among folks who really need to save and develop some sort of fiscal discipline, it is shot down as helping the "rich". By the way, most middle and upper class folks need to develop s

      • by Lars T. (470328)
        So your solution is to bring those who sell them the junk to power?
      • by CronoCloud (590650) <cronocloudauron@gma i l . c om> on Saturday November 01, 2008 @12:04PM (#25595275)

        Poor people are poor because they're stupid with their money. If or when the Democrats get control next week, we can see more money going down the poor people money pit: sales of consumer electronics, junk food, fast food, Walmart junk, etc... will all increase.

        It's easy to be smart with money when you have a lot of it, you have more choices. Compare the price per ounce of orange soda vs orange juice sometime. Healthy food costs more than unhealthy food, that's why you see all those slender affluent women in the suburbs (plus they have the money and time to excercise) but when you head down to less affluent areas you see more overweight women. No money for healthy food, no money or time for regular pilates and yoga.

        Did you know that the government requires "food stamp" (they're now debit cards though) recipients to take a class in how to spend their food dollars before they get their benefit? They say things like "buy healthy food, buy fresh fruits and vegetables, don't buy junk." but every recipient knows that if they followed that advice their benefit wouldn't last the month.

        It's folks like you that cause politicians to talk about helping the forgotten middle class? How can the middle class be forgotten when everyone talks about them and wants to cater to them. It's the poor and lower class that are truly forgotten. When's the last time you ever heard a politician say, "hey let's index the minimum wage to inflation and the CPI and make it retroactive to 1980" or "Let's increase the "food stamp" benefit so that people can actually afford to follow the food buying advice we give them." or "Hey lets tighten up labor laws so we don't have grocery chains hiring teenagers because they can: pay them less, know they're less likely to unionize and are less likely to complain about sexual harassment or bad workplace conditions."

        • by Free the Cowards (1280296) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @12:44PM (#25595567)

          I had no problem eating well when I was a poor college student. For me it was easier to eat well when I was poor because all the pre-made frozen/boxed/canned meals were unaffordable. Now I have to work quite a bit harder to avoid the temptation to simply let Tombstone and friends do all my cooking for me.

          The poor people I know who eat like crap don't do it because they can't afford better. They do it because they have no willpower. They not only eat junk food, they eat out for junk food. Nobody who can afford to eat regularly at McDonald's is going to have problems affording healthy food.

          And really, I don't buy your argument at all. Eating healthy is harder if you're a lazy poor person. But potatoes, beans, and in-season vegetables are all cheaper than junk food.

          Oh, and food stamps? I don't live in an area with a lot of food-stamp recipients. But the last time I saw someone use food stamps at my local grocery store, she was buying two large bottles of Odwalla juice, clocking in at something like $15 total for perhaps half a gallon of juice. Obviously she's having no trouble affording healthy food!

          • by tompaulco (629533) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @02:29PM (#25596345) Homepage Journal
            Nobody who can afford to eat regularly at McDonald's is going to have problems affording healthy food.
            My sister, her baby and her baby's daddy used to live with me back when I was first out of college. I asked her to help out by paying some rent and she told me that she was so broke that she had to eat at McDonalds. That statement almost caused me to choke on my ramen.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Majik Sheff (930627)

        I know a few in that last category. Our household just barely falls into the lower middle class category, but because we're careful we're on track to retire at the age of 55 (comfortably). Save your money people, live cheaply. You'll be very thankful for it later.

        Recommended reading: "Rich Dad, Poor Dad"

    • by gregoryb (306233)

      Exactly! And as for this...

      'I don't see there's going to be much of a slowdown, just because wireless devices are so much more of a necessity than they used to be,' Wu said.

      Yeah, until a hard recession/depression redefines "necessity".

    • As opposed to all those wise people like me who lived well within our means and invested in stocks (!) and earned negative real returns on savings accounts? Yeah, that worked out real well for us, didn't it.

      • by mollymoo (202721)

        As opposed to all those wise people like me who lived well within our means and invested in stocks (!) and earned negative real returns on savings accounts? Yeah, that worked out real well for us, didn't it.

        The value of your stocks may have gone down, but if you haven't sold them you've lost nothing. If they are worth more than when you bought them but less than they were a year ago, you've made a profit. I doubt you were complaining when the value of your portfolio was being artificially inflated in the bu

    • by owlnation (858981)
      And this article seems also to be viral marketing. "YES!!! You too can afford an iPhone!!!"
    • by Shivetya (243324) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @10:57AM (#25594819) Homepage Journal

      Horrible decisions made from the financial standpoint.

      Still I am curious, how many of these people in the income brackets live at home, did not list their spouse's income as part of it, or share a house/apartment which could minimize their income needs?

      I know it seems heartless to some but a lot of people just don't get ahead because of their own actions. Go by an apartment complex and your bound to see many cars that make you shake your head. A great example is where I work. In our own support staff we have two guys with expensive cars, like a fairly current Mercedes or year old BMW 5 series. Throw in the cool cell phone and I just sigh and walk away when they bitch about not having sufficient money to do things other people do. Yet these same clueless individuals will buy into whatever politicians tell them, specifically that somehow its not their fault and its not fair. They really believe this to be true!

      An article in the AJC earlier in the year was showing the plight of the homeless in Atlanta, the impact of the story fell on its face as all but two of those pictured had a cell phone - a few were using them when the picture was taken.

      What it comes down to is that people fail to set proper priorities. They refuse to understand that they just can't have everything unless they have the real means to do so. Yet instead of spending that very same wasted money on improving their means they squander it forever setting themselves back. We used to be a society which tried to help each other out but that fell by the wayside when many began to demand that help without making any sacrifice themselves.

      • by cvd6262 (180823) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @11:39AM (#25595103)

        Amen.

        I heard an Ad Council ad on the radio a few years ago that dramatized a "Savers Anonymous" meeting.

        "Hello, my name is Dave... and... I drive a car... that's SEVEN YEARS OLD!!! (*sob*)"

        "Hi, I'm Dana, and last week... I couldn't help myself! I CLIPPED A COUPON!"

        Etc.

        The whole point was that in this world it is almost politically incorrect to be financially responsible.

      • I'm also going to throw out there that undergraduates are definitely in the poor brackets according to actual income. A low income bracket doesn't necessarily mean no disposable income. I am in this income bracket, and due to the way I live, would not have have any serious hardship imposed by having an iphone. Now, I happen to not want one, so it's not a problem, but statistics are always suspect until proven meaningful.

        Besides, aren't the over $100k per year still addicted to blackberries? That only leaves

        • by tompaulco (629533) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @12:46PM (#25595577) Homepage Journal
          Well I for one make pretty close to $100k and I can not imagine spending several hundred dollars on an iphone, nor the $70 a month cost for the service. But yes, pretty much half the people in my office have one, and they take delight in pointing out how they have one by complaining about how it won't stay synced with Outlook or how it is difficult to view such and such webpage on their iphone (though it would probably be easy to view it on their 21" monitor right in front of them. And of course, since they have all this texting and e-mailing and other automated junk sending to their phone, important e-mails occasionally slip through the cracks, but no more than a couple of times a day.
    • by DebateG (1001165)
      This study is leaving out very important details. How big are these households? I bet they are not single parents with four children. They are most likely young singles or couples just out of college, which is the likely to demographic to enjoy tech toys anyhow. Most of my engineer friends made within that income bracket just out of college. If you live in a city with decent housing costs (where I live, you can buy a house for $800 / month), you can easily afford an iPhone, a mortgage, a car payment, health
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by glitch23 (557124)

      This is just another sad example of the American tendency to live beyond one's means. This is another symptom of the disease that is eating this country: financial illiteracy.

      You give them too much credit. Another problem is that people who are on welfare, who need help buying groceries, may be buying these phones. Well, we are buying these phones for them in essence. That symptom's disease can be described as "we deserve everything but we don't want to pay for it so let the government help us do everything". Maybe that would be considered financial ignorance or dependence?

  • by ScrewMaster (602015) * on Saturday November 01, 2008 @10:44AM (#25594721)

    The iPhone crowd is still dominated by affluent males between the ages of 18 and 35

    Those of us who don't bask in the glow of all things Apple might say they're afflicted as well as affluent.

  • bling (Score:4, Insightful)

    by clang_jangle (975789) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @10:45AM (#25594725) Journal
    The iPhone is comming to be widely regarded as "bling". You always see more bling among low-income people.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    I don't want the same phone that some poorie has. That's the reason I own a MacBook Pro and a Mac Pro. No poories allowed!

  • "Fastest Growing" (Score:4, Insightful)

    by CodeArtisan (795142) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @10:49AM (#25594751)
    "Fastest Growing" is a meaningless statistic without context, and TFA doesn't give much of that. For example, it may be the fastest growing because the other income groups rushed out to buy first, while the lower income groups saved up.

    Similarly, it could be the fastest growing because it 'grew' from 100 people to 148 people. Still a meager total, but explosive growth.
  • by dlenmn (145080) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @10:51AM (#25594767) Homepage

    I'm a first year graduate student in physics, and about 1/3 of my class have iPhones. We're definitely low-income -- Teaching Assistant pay is ~$14k/year.

    Usually when the phrase "low income" comes up, people think poor people in the inner city or whatnot. Here, I bet low income mostly means students and the likes. I think owning an iPhone is silly on our pay, but at least we have decent future income potential (better than most low income people), so it may not really be beyond our means.

  • Low income? (Score:5, Funny)

    by dtmancom (925636) <gordon2NO@SPAMdtman.com> on Saturday November 01, 2008 @11:02AM (#25594851) Homepage
    $50k/year is considered "low income," now?
  • Maybe it's because low-income folk typically don't hold jobs that require a smartphone where said jobs have IT departments that say you can have a BlackBerry or a BlackBerry?

    I do agree with a previous poster that a lot of it is probably the American habit of living beyond their means as well.

  • by NtroP (649992) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @11:18AM (#25594953)

    I was asked about Opera not being allowed on the iPhone yesterday. My immediate gut reaction was that Apple was being a douche. All my instincts cry out that programmers should be able to put anything they want out there and let the market decide.

    I got to thinking about it though. To the best of my knowledge, there is no global preference in place to set which apps respond to which data sources. What I mean is, when I click on a link in an email, Safari opens the page. When I click on a phone number in google maps, an email or a web page, the phone app opens it. Same thing for music, podcasts, videos, etc. You get the idea.

    This keeps the phone simple, intuitive and predictable. All the other apps I install are all for doing some *other* specific task than what is provided by the core applications/functionality. What would happen then if I loaded Opera, Konqueror, Firefox, etc. on the phone. Which one would open my web links? Obviously the one specified in my preferences (which don't exist). What if I wanted to open this particular link with FireFox this time? I can't right-click and say open link with. Do I have to quit the program, open preferences and temporarily select Firefox?

    I realize that it would be rather simple for Apple to address these issues and add this functionality, but once that camel's nose is under the tent you are now dealing with people demanding a preference and underlying mechanism for modifying the behavior of all the core functionalities. I want Skype to open when I touch a phone number in an email or on a web page (or in my address book), but I only want it to come up when I'm not connected to wireless. When I'm on wireless I want MyVOIP to make the calls. This also applies to which app you want sending emails, text messages, etc.

    While the geek in me can get into this sort of configurability, I've already seen the whole other level of complexity added to the preference system with just the addition of push and Exchange connectivity. If users had to go through page after page of preferences just to find the right place to indicate which app they wanted to store their contacts in and have that tie into their Exchange push connection, it would be a nightmare.

    I don't think the masses are ready for that or even really want it. That sort of complexity will make the iPhone just like every other smart phone out there. My coworker was bragging up his WinMobile-based smartphone at lunch the other day. He was saying it could do so much more than the iPhone. I don't doubt it, but my god, the gyrations he had to go through to tweak a setting to get it to do things. Just setting up a new wireless connection or a new IMAP email account seemed ridiculously complex. He said it was just due to the fact that he'd downloaded other email apps and tools and that each one had a different place to set up some of the preferences.

    Is there a place for a mobile device that lets a geek configure every possible thing and choose exactly which software performed what tasks? Absolutely. That place should rightly be filled by Android and matched with the particular hardware design that that geek has chosen for their particular needs/fetish. I don't think the iPhone is where it belongs.

    It may be the height of irony but I can see the iPhone becoming the phone people refer to when they say "Dammit, all I want in my smart-phone is to be able to make calls, surf the web, email, mapping, music, games and movies! I don't want to have to mess with all that other crap." in the same way purists today say "I just want a phone that makes calls."

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Android actually indeed, from the ground up, allows applications to advertise to the system that they are willing and able to handle and display certain forms of data, or publish that they will allow the user to do certain things. [techsociotech.com] When an application makes a request to have a certain data-type handled (like "open this web page"), the OS selects which of the installed apps that can will get to handle the request.

      But this need not create a lot of complexity. The failure you are describing is a usability failu

    • by bussdriver (620565) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @12:21PM (#25595409)

      Sorry, but technology doesn't always make life easier; don't need fluff I won't use.

      "jPhone" or iPhone shuffle??

      1 button phone: answer/hangup; hold for power

      1 slide switch: silent mode; during conversation it turns on speaker mode

      Voice recognition: RECITE numbers to dial them

      Speaking interface: like voice mail menus- I never want to mess with options so its no big deal to wait for a talking interface whenever I want to setup speed dial or see the last call's number (it does have a tiny screen.)

      simple ring sound; if custom just have it record your own with it's mic

      Water resistant: sound quality often sucks anyhow

      Simple small B&W display; wrist watch like; callerID

      2 AAA NiMH batteries: new batteries shouldn't cost more than the phone! (I don't care if I have to swap batteries it doesn't have to charge them; I'm not that lazy...) /. is the wrong place to talk simple but I'm shocked nobody has made a phone that doesn't go in this direction.

      At least this is more Star Trek: push button, speak name of person to speak to - and it calls them; perhaps using other people's tracking info you can ask it where somebody is and have it speak an answer as well? It could speak their name when they call (known people only.)

  • status symbol (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Potor (658520) <farker1.gmail@com> on Saturday November 01, 2008 @11:22AM (#25594989) Journal

    This story concurs with my own observation; I take the Broad Street line in Philly from Center City and go pretty far north every day; there are many apparently low-income people with iPhones and iPod Touches. It actually amazes me.

    But unlike the article, I never thought the iPhone/Touch were chosen based on frugality; rather, I think they are status symbols, vulgar displays of wealth like knock-off designer clothes and cheap bling. There are much cheaper devices, or combination of devices, available.

    The article is more like industrial cheer-leading, which apparently concludes that the iPhone has become a necessity. Please!

    • by repetty (260322)

      > But unlike the article, I never thought the iPhone/Touch were chosen
      > based on frugality; rather, I think they are status symbols, vulgar
      > displays of wealth like knock-off designer clothes and cheap bling.
      > There are much cheaper devices, or combination of devices, available.

      I think that I weigh far less than I really do.

      So much for "thinking."

  • by Doc Ruby (173196) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @11:35AM (#25595059) Homepage Journal

    $25-50,000 annual income isn't "low income". It's middle income, since real median income is about $25-50,000 [wikipedia.org].

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by CronoCloud (590650)

      It's "low" to your average tech geek.

      Think about your average tech geek, they're white or asian, they grew up on the suburbs. maybe their dad got them a shell account on their workplaces Unix box, maybe they got a neo geo when they were kids. Their high school had a math team and a library right out of Shermer High School, they had an IBM PC when the things were $2000+. They could afford to take SAT/ACT preperation courses, their school had classes to prepare them to take the AP tests AND they could affor

  • ComScore found that iPhone purchases grew fastest among people with annual household incomes between $25,000 and $50,000.

    What!?! How can this group afford the monthly charges? I just checked the AT&T site http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/specials/iphone-info.jsp [att.com] and saw that the minimum monthly charge is $70/month, plus the $200 outlay for the phone itself. There is simply no way I could afford this while paying for taxes, mortgage, utilities, food, gas, clothing, college tuitions and hom

    • by Gibbs-Duhem (1058152) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @12:09PM (#25595311)

      Perhaps they don't have all of the costs you describe because they live within their means. $25k per year is over $2k per month. In my case, for example, I make $1900 per month, spend $850 on {mortgage, utilities, property taxes, maintenance} (I live in an expensive area), $400 on food, nothing on a car, nothing on gas, nothing on tuition, next to nothing on clothes, and minimal amounts on entertainment.

      Which means each month of my $1900, I have $650 of overhead that either goes to savings, or electronics projects.

      We don't all have your expenses. If I wanted to afford $70/month for a phone (I already pay $30/month for just a regular cell phone, so only a $40/month marginal increase, btw).

      • $850/month is expensive for mortage/utilities/prop taxes/maintenance!? You must have a few roomates. What about income tax (state and federal)? Is that in the $850 also? And I suspect you are in the minority if you live in the US and don't have a car.

        Oh, and I carry a pay-as-you-go phone that costs me $0.80 (yes, 80 cents) per month as long as I don't use more than about 50 minutes per month.
  • Old adage (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Centurix (249778) <centurix@NoSPam.gmail.com> on Saturday November 01, 2008 @11:52AM (#25595189) Homepage

    "If you want to be rich, sell to the poor. If you want to be poor, sell to the rich."

  • I know this will be moderated down into oblivion, but it's true...

    Article- "Opera's engineers have developed a version of Opera Mini that can run on an Apple iPhone, but Apple won't let the company release it because it competes with Apple's own Safari browser"

    Slashdot- "So what. It's their phone, they can do whatever they want. No one ever said the iPhone would run every app. Uncle Steve is just acting in our best interests"

    But what if......
    Article- "Opera's engineers have developed a version of O

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by moreati (119629)

      You're right.

      The iPhone platform is closed, Windows Mobile is much more open. The arbitrary way that Apple get to pick and choose really sucks.

      However, iPhone wipes the floor with Windows Mobile on usability. Some slashdotters value openness more, some value UI more and are willing to overlook Apple's behaviour so far.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      And which platform is easier to use for the average person? Answer: the iPhone. Consider this, linux is even more open than windows but which is more popular and easier to use? Answer: Windows.

      The average person does not give a damn about choice if the default offerings are good enough.

      BTW. Have you tried Opera lately on any platform? I've noticed that it does not seem to really "fit" in with the UI or user experience of any of the platforms it's on. This is one of the reasons why opera is not allowed o

  • by CohibaVancouver (864662) on Saturday November 01, 2008 @12:24PM (#25595435)
    I live in a neighbourhood which is rapidly gentrifying - So you have a mix of 'poor' people, middle class and upper-middle class. It's interesting to look at the houses when I walk my dog in the evening - The houses which would be branded as 'poor' - Junk in the yard, unmowed lawn, shabby house, almost always have a 50" flatscreen glowing away in the front room, showing hockey in high-def. Then I go home to my ten year old 28" CRT television with analog cable.

I have not yet begun to byte!

Working...