Om posted a funny pic on his blog comparing Apple’s new iPhone with what looks like Microsoft’s Zune, tablet PC (Origami?), and what looks like a PDA. I can’t really tell, but I think it illustrates the point. Apple’s new release definitely crosses a lot of borders and looks to combine several different appliances into one. But, do you think the product couldn’t have been released initially? Was there really any need to start with the iPod and iPod phote, then move to a unit that could handle video, and then release a version with a phone? Probably not, but it makes sense to keep re-selling to the same users with new features. As well, when the three MS products were released, although the Zune is definitely too late, they target niche markets. Lots of technogeeks are drooling over the iPhone release, but does the average person really need to combine all that yet? Probably not. I applaud the move, and believe this is coming late in the development of tech products, but then again, I think it’s a good step.

While everyone is busy being wowed by Apple, Microsoft quietly made what I consider to be a more important release. There are lots of reasons why the iPhone is good, and quite a few that show the release as lacking. Ultimately, your handheld device will have to sync with everything, from your work PC, to your home PC, and yes, to your car. Microsoft already has the upper hand with more people using their PC’s, and have taken a step at tackling what I believe will be the second most important aspect of the whole equation, which is your car. By teaming up with Ford, Microsoft has tapped into a multinational producer and distributor that holds a fair amount of North America’s and the world’s automotive market. I still believe that Microsoft has vision and depth, while Apple continues with their arrogance. I give credit where credit is due, and Apple does well with their design and marketing, but as the saying goes, beauty is only skin deep. The iPhone is not the final answer users will look for, and with some of the restrictions like a closed-platform and Cingular-only service, there should be more critics making their voices heard.

It’s tough to really add much to what has already been said about the iPhone. Apple continues to move forward with their own line of consumer goods, hoping to help leverage computer sales by getting their users accustomed to their products, I’m sure. With the threat of a Cisco lawsuit looming, it seems the iPhone’s future is somewhat grey, but more importantly, there are still questions to be answered about the item itself. Somewhat skeptical, it seems, Mike Elgan gives us 20 things we don’t know about the iPhone.

Of course, there are always the standard sites with information on the release:

Techcrunch

GigaOm

Infectious Greed and here

There are no breach notification laws in Canada. Believe it or not, businesses in Canada are not obligated to disclose any major security breaches. Instead, they are only required to employ reasonable security measures, and, working in the security industry, I can only imagine who is left to interpret what is considered reasonable. The Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic is requesting that changes be made to the  Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) to force businesses to inform those whose personal information may have been compromised as a result of a security breach.

In the United States, there are 30 different states that have their own versions of breach notification laws, but unlike Canada, there is no national privacy law, leading to discrepencies between states. Although the path being taken by Canada has created a national standard, something that avoids the patchwork-like implementation seen in the U.S., without specific legislation that requires the release of such information, security breaches that affect consumers will remain company secrets.

Larger companies are obviously at a higher risk, with their repuations on the line and the logistics of reporting any large-scale security breach being difficult to develop and have in place. But with more and more sensitive information being stored digitally, the likelihood of an individual being affected by a security breach is increasing, and it’s important that Canadians are protected. Too often it seems to be a reactive solution rather than a proactive solution.

With so many companies in Canada operating in the United States, a large percentage of Canadian businesses are already affected by state laws regarding data breach notification. This makes it more likely that companies will provide little resistance to similar legislation in Canada.