Way back in the fall of 2001, when BoomTown was but a less-aged version of myself, I attended a keynote speech at the now-defunct Comdex show in Las Vegas, where Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates continued to bang the drum for one of his long-running obsessions: The tablet computer.

“The tablet takes cutting-edge PC technology and makes it available whenever you want it, which is why I’m already using a tablet as my everyday computer,” Gates said at the time to the audience gathered at the MGM Grand Garden Arena. “It’s a PC that is virtually without limits and within five years I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America.”

Well, that did not happen.

But Gates did keep his promise about using a tablet–he kept on doing so and also harping on the topic all the time, with Microsoft even releasing a giant tabletop Surface several years ago and supporting multitouch in the coming Windows 7.

I recall Gates talking about the idea of how important the tablet is on innumerable occasions, more than any single concept I can recall.

It is ironic, then, that all the hype has suddenly and firmly coalesced around the particulars of the tablet that Apple (AAPL) will be unveiling in the coming months.

And now that CEO Steve Jobs is back fine-tuning the whole shebang, the obsession has moved into overdrive, punctuated only by endless stories about every single new app for the iPhone and fights over some of those new apps for the iPhone.

It’s a complete aside, but how ironic is it that Apple has somehow managed to make Google (GOOG)–the Skynet of the Internet–seem like a victim over this Google Voice shrillathon?

Back to the Apple tablet, which is playbook hype for iconic computer giant.

Besides being a secret project everyone in Silicon Valley seems to know about, the coming device is enjoying full-on breathless reportage of every single possible button and every possible feature, with every single bit of functionality parsed, dissected, masticated and spat back out.

But let’s be honest–in the end, this Apple tablet is probably going to be some kind of giant, sleeker, more glorified and doubtlessly niftier version of the iPod touch, called the iTab or the iPad or the iAmSoCoolAren’tI?, at three times the price.

Now, as it turns out, Microsoft (MSFT) is also at work on a table device, this time called the Courier.

This development became known recently after a demo video of it in use was somehow “leaked”–three guesses about which software giant in Redmond, Wash., put that out, and the first two don’t count!–to Gizmodo.

It seems to be some kind of tablet mixed with a journal mixed with a day planner, with a hinged two-page look. Digital writing and a stylus are involved, but also lots of touchscreen action.

Well, I say, good for Microsoft, and perhaps for Gates, who has now mostly disengaged himself from the day-to-day particulars of the behemoth he built, including the Courier.

Nonetheless, in all likelihood, Apple will still garner the most buzz in this tablet faceoff and will, more than likely, sell more.

A delicious irony, given that in their fascinating and long-running rivalry, it has usually been Jobs playing the hopeless dreamer and Gates the one who makes bank from the dreams of others.

No longer, which should make this round between Microsoft and Apple the most interesting of all.

Speaking of dreaming of dreams, it is always a good time to post the video of Susan Boyle singing “I Dreamed a Dream”:

This week, BoomTown has found an interesting chart to peruse about the loyalty people have for their smart-phone apps.

The takeaway for developers: Try to stay in Quadrant I!

In other words, Sally-Field-at-the-Oscars territory–it’s where they love you, they really love you.

To grok this, you’ll need to view the two charts below from Flurry Analytics, a mobile analytics and monetization tools start-up in San Francisco, from a blog post titled “Mobile Apps: Models, Money and Loyalty.”

Flurry used a sample size of 2,000 live applications and 200 million user sessions on the IPhone and iPod touch from Apple (AAPL), Google (GOOG) Android, Blackberry from Research in Motion (RIMM), and other platforms.

In Quadrant I are reference, news, and weather apps, which are frequently accessed and retained longer.

Quadrant IV is also good, with high retention rates–education, social networking, medical–but less frequent weekly use.

Here are the charts (click on them to make them larger):

BoomTown is certainly going to be one of the many-so-many who immediately fork over whatever it takes to get my mitts on the upcoming tablet device from Apple.

And that’s why, according to a new report from Piper Jaffray Senior Research Analyst Gene Munster–who is monk-like in his devotion to writing down every scrap of information he can scrape up about whatever Apple HQ in Cupertino, Calif., deigns to release–it’s going to be raining money down on the company, just like manna from heaven.

That would be $1.2 billion in revenue in calendar year 2010, after he estimated that Apple (AAPL) will sell two million units at a price of $600.

“While at first glance this may appear to address a niche market, we believe the addressable market is larger than that of the Apple TV, of which Apple sold about 1.2m in its first year,” wrote Munster.

He apparently spoke to some leaky Asian component suppliers, who have received orders from Apple, to be “fulfilled by late CY09.”

Munster, who also provided the mock-up image of the Jesus Tablet seen above (it will take its place next to the Jesus Phone and Jesus Pod), wrote that the device was pretty much a larger iPod touch.

It will run all the usual apps and have some extra ones, specially designed for the big screen, he predicted.

It will also be Web-connected and, of course, is a touchscreen and play all kinds of media, like music, games and video.

But don’t call it a netbook!

“We believe an Apple tablet would be priced 30%-50% below the $999 MacBook, and would offer best in class web, email, and media software,” wrote Munster. “In other words, we believe Apple’s tablet would compete well in the netbook category even though it would not be a netbook.”

Also, there will be a 3G modem–personally, we all pray Apple picks Verizon (VZ) and not AT&T (T) to be the mobile provider–with a possible subsidy on the sale of the device.

The hype around the new and doubtlessly innovative Apple product–my vote for a name is that it will be called iTablet–is likely to grow into the fall, especially if it is introduced by the miraculously on-the-mend CEO Steve Jobs.

Apple fanboys: Can you say Hallelujah?

Does the tech march ever slow down?

Not this week it doesn’t! And Digital Daily’s live-blogger de tutti live-bloggers John Paczkowski will be there to cover every move.

Today, in case you haven’t heard, is the big annual Apple (AAPL) event: The Worldwide Developers Conference in San Francisco.

The keynote at the Moscone Center kicks off at 10 AM PDT with Phil Schiller, senior vice president of worldwide marketing, along with other Apple execs. They will be presenting to 1,000 developers, at what is now the only major products event for the iconic and innovative Silicon Valley company.

A passel of press, as well as John, will also be there, along with our Web guru (and closet Apple expert) Adam Tow. They’ll be liveblogging and posting photos to the All Things Digital site throughout the event.

It’ll be a lot of iPhone news, according to reports, with possibly an upgraded device and all sorts of new features and software.

But, unless it is their lucky day, Apple fanboys likely to have to wait a little bit longer for the return of Apple’s leader Steve Jobs, presumably astride a steed bearing a giant tablet iPod Touch.

According to The Wall Street Journal last week–whose report is finally, finally, finally the most solid, thus far–Jobs is set to return soon to the helm of Apple after a six-month sick leave.

And that means reports of Jobs’ imminent demise early this year were, as it turned out, quite premature.

Which makes it laughable that those who trumpeted someone’s allegedly fatal illness without even close to adequate sourcing are now–as the specifics of their clear overreaching have faded–they were sort-of right, since, you know, he was sick.

But let me review what was reported then, using a single source: Jobs was “declining rapidly” and “it may be even worse than we imagined” and, quoting the source directly: “Apple is choosing to remove the hype factor strategically vs. letting the hype destroy Apple when the inevitable news comes later this spring.”

Oops, it is June now and Jobs appears to be on the mend, it did not turn out to be worse, even if he was quite sick, and spring has passed without the “inevitable” happening. Close is only right in horse shoes, especially in this case.

Who knows what tomorrow will bring. I certainly don’t, but neither does anyone else, which is why–unless you’re looking at Jobs’ medical reports or hearing from someone who has seen them–it’s pretty much an impossible story to get right either way.

So, no matter how much they try to defend themselves in a recent piece in the New York Times (which was silly enough in its toothless blogger-bashing)–claiming it is fine and dandy to insinuate that someone is at death’s door without, you know, knowing for sure if it were true–it’s just lame all around.

But, lamer still was the climbing-onto-a-very-high-and-precarious-horse reaction to that dopey Times article, by giving these dog-ate-my-homework reporting lapses the even sillier moniker of “process” journalism.

I confess I am utterly flummoxed by this term, because it seems to boil down to:

We have a firm commitment to report it wrong until we, um, get it right or someone, anyone, please hurry, corrects us–not that we’ll ever admit an error, just like mainstream media!

Actually, it sounds more like processed cheese journalism–completely without nutrition and eventually bad for readers’ health. But eat up and get obese on it, because it’s free and cheap and even tasty at times!

But, I digress.

After all the Apple news is chewed and re-chewed up by one and all, Google (GOOG) will be holding an app event tomorrow, also in San Francisco.

Said a Google email: “At this invitation-only media gathering, we’ll announce product news, share perspectives of new enterprise customers, see demos, and review the Google Apps business. You’ll have the opportunity to speak with a number of senior IT decision makers who have moved their businesses to cloud computing, as well as Google executives, and engineering and product managers. We hope you’ll be able to join.”

Paczkowski will, of course, join and be serving up organic liveblogging fare, full of vitamins and minerals and all the good stuff, both fast and accurate!

Process that.

But, fear not, it will also be, as usual, quite tasty too.

Oh, Scooby-Don’t…

You could not be more wrong in your post last week–titled, “Why Kara Swisher and Walt Mossberg are wrong about naming Web 3.0 ‘Web 3.0′”–about Walt and I being wrong about naming Web 3.0 “Web 3.0″ in an essay we posted at the start of our D: All Things Digital conference, which took place last week.

I know writing “Kara Swisher,” “Walt Mossberg” and “Wrong” is well-nigh irresistible, but your solution of calling the digital era we are in the “2010 Web” is equally confusing and incorrect.

So, since you know I love to do translations, let me try to take apart your entire piece paragraph by paragraph:

What Scooby-Don’t wrote: Can we just head this trend off at the pass? It seems that Kara Swisher and Walt Mossberg, at their “All Things D” conference announced the beginning of the Web 3.0 era.

And I’m not the only one to think so.

BoomTown response: Walt and I simply wrote an essay in which we said we thought mobile and smart phones were super important as the next platform and represented what we thought Web 3.0 innovations, such as social networking (which we also think is important, by the way) would pivot around.

We didn’t “announce” anything, although that does sound awfully grand.

But so what if we did, because it happens quite a lot?

Dan Gillmor, for goodness sake, declared it Web 3.0 in 2005. His take was different:

“The emerging web is one in which the machines talk as much to each other as humans talk to machines or other humans. As the net is the rough equivalent of a computer operating system, we’re learning how to program the web itself.”

And in 2007, Tim O’Reilly weighed in on it, responding to Web 3.0 theses by Jason Calacanis and Nova Spivack, and also noting Stowe Boyd’s thoughts on the subject.

You get my point, Bobby? Lots of folks have opinions about what is Web 3.0, much as they will when we start arguing over what Web 4.0 is.

At Web 5.0, of course, a self-aware Google (GOOG) will have begun its inevitable war with the human race, sending back a cyborg to terminate you before you wrote that post, thereby making this rebuttal moot.

But, I digress!

Scooby-Don’t wrote: Short aside: It’s interesting that neither Kara nor Walt show up very often on friendfeed, which is the best example of the 2010 Web right now. Kara Swisher has made a total of five comments there. Walt is even worse, doesn’t bring any items in there, and only has six comments. How can you know what the 2010 Web is, if you don’t use it and don’t participate in it?

BoomTown response: The fact of the matter is that neither Walt nor I like to use FriendFeed as much as you do. I daresay that no one likes to use FriendFeed as much as you do.

Thus, hinging a larger point to this, just because we don’t play in a particular sandbox you like to play in, feels a little too much in the digital weeds to me.

Just because you have chosen to be the unofficial spokesmodel for the very laudable service–about which I have done a very lovely reported post on complete with video–I am not clear why you need to accuse Walt Mossberg and I of not being social because we don’t use it as much.

We both just happen to prefer Twitter and blogging as our social outlets.

I have done 3,255 updates on Twitter since I started last year, for example, which is certainly not as much as your 21,224. But–and I think we can all agree–as blabby as I am, I am simply not as blabby as you.

So, let’s try to make this as clear as possible.

We. Don’t. Use. FriendFeed. Regularly.

As I said, we use Twitter, we use Facebook, we use SMS, we use blogging and we use a whole lot more. In fact, between us, we try out pretty much everything.

While I appreciate that FriendFeed seems to be your home planet of the moment, it is not the only place to realize your term, 2010 Web, and it feels very Web 1.0 to say so.

Scooby-Don’t wrote: The Web does NOT have version numbers. Naming what was going on in the last eight years “Web 2.0″ did us all a large disservice (Tim O’Reilly did that, mostly to get people to see that there was something different about the Web that was being built in 2000-2003 than what had come before).

But by naming it a number, I believe it caused a lot of people and businesses to avoid what was going on and “poo poo” it as the rantings of the new MySpace generation (which was just getting hot back then).

BoomTown response: Let me see if I can get this straight. You can call it 2010 Web, but we cannot use version numbers, such as Web 3.0?

Hey, we’ll call it Britney Spears if we want!

Actually, I like naming the next era of the Web after the always volatile entertainer. She’s mobile, ever-changing, ubiquitous and always entertaining! Also, there are several eras of Britney: Sweet, Timberlake Lady, Federline Lady, Young Mom, Nuts, Nuttier, Nuttiest, Hospitalized, Medicated.

My main point remains: Who died and made you Boss of Pointless Internet Catchphrases?

Scooby-Don’t wrote: See, the Web changes EVERY DAY and a version number just doesn’t do it justice. Think about today, we saw Microsoft (MSFT) announce a major new update to its search engine, named “Bing,” that turns on next week and is already getting TONS of kudos. Seriously, in the rental car shuttle today a guy I met said the demo he saw at Kara and Walt’s conference was “awesome.”

Also today was Google’s Wave, which caught everyone by surprise and which sucked the oxygen out of Microsoft’s search announcements. Check out all the reports that I liked from around the world this morning.

BoomTown response: The Web changes EVERY DAY? You’re kidding! We had no idea! Thanks for that critical morsel of info!

Earth to Robert: Walt has spent a large part of his life writing about the panoply of new devices that have come out in an unceasing flow and I have written at least 10,000 news stories and two books about the Web since the early 1990s.

Pretty much all we write about is how the Web changes every day. Actually, every second.

Scooby-Don’t wrote: But, back to the theme of this post. There IS something going on here. I covered it a few weeks ago.

7. Hybrid infrastructure. At the Twitter Conference this week lots of people were talking about how they were using both traditional servers along with cloud-based approaches from Amazon (AMZN) and Rackspace (RAX) to store, study, and process the sizeable datasets that are coming through Twitter, Facebook, and friendfeed.

BoomTown Response: We had folks on stage at our D7 conference discussing all this last week. In fact, we covered a whole lot more than that, which you can read about if you click on through.

While I think all yours are also interesting ideas, I am still not clear why you need to get your knickers in a knot, since we happened to think mobile platforms and smart phones are more important trends at this juncture.

Also, could please explain how Google “caught that wave big time Wednesday when it handed Android phones to everyone at its IO conference.” Google is innovative because they give free swag to folks?

We gave free swag to folks this week at D7, so I guess that makes Walt and I 2010-Web-worthy!

Scooby-Don’t wrote: So, why doesn’t a version number work for these changes? Because they don’t come at us all at once. A lot of these things have been cooking for years. The Internet makes iteration possible. Tomorrow will be better on the Internet than today. In the old world of software you’d have to wait for the compilers, then you’d need to distribute tons of CDs or disks. That no longer needs to be done.

Same with the Web. Calling it the “2010 Web” puts an urgency into what’s happening. If your business isn’t considering the latest stuff it risks looking lame or, worse, leaving money on the table. Just like driving a 1994 car risks looking lame or, worse, breaking down a lot more often than a newer car.

BoomTown response: Actually, I would have to say that your year numbering system is deeply confusing and I am not sure we can treat Internet development like some auto or, even, say, fine wine.

Ah, that 1995 Web was saucy with a smooth Netscape IPO finish, while 2001 had a disappointing popped-bubble tone, due to the excessive tannins of Pets.com. Now, the 2009 is still very young, but it has a frothy Twittery taste, which goes surprisingly well with brie.

Scooby-Don’t wrote: Is the year metaphor perfect? No, I’m sure there are a few things wrong with it. For one, if you want to host a conference based on the “trend” you’ll have to change your conference name every year. That costs money, which is why conference companies like to have more stable trends that they can exploit for a few years, at least.

BoomTown response: D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, D6, D7. So far, changing the number has worked out well for us that we’re going to go for D8!

Scooby-Don’t wrote: Also, there are some clear “eras” in the Web, so I could see wanting to suggest that we’re in the third era of the Web, but I’ve been studying this for the past eight years and calling the second era “Web 2′ actually held us back because mainstream users didn’t think anything was happening in the past few years and Web 2.0 became a useless phrase anyway.

BoomTown response: You must know that mainstream users don’t pay one bit of attention to any and all of the dumb terms Silicon Valley comes up with.

And, with all the obviously massive change that has happened in the past few years in tech and the Internet (iPhone, Kindle, Facebook, Twitter to name a few), it seems odd to say that anything has been held back.

Frankly, it would be nice if tech innovation took a breather once in a while.

Scooby Don’t wrote: Anyway, can we use year numbers to describe the Web now? It’ll make it easier to evangelize the modern world to businesses. We’re entering the 2010 Web, that’s what I’m exploring. Calling the Web a version number is for people who don’t really understand, or participate in, what’s going on here. Kara and Walt, you gotta do better here.

BoomTown wrote: What’s in a name?

Well, it’s dang easy to attack, of course, instead of actually discussing the actual premise that we were outlining in our essay, titled “Welcome to Web 3.0.”

As we wrote:

“So what’s the seminal development that’s ushering in the era of Web 3.0? It’s the real arrival, after years of false predictions, of the thin client, running clean, simple software, against cloud-based data and services. The poster children for this new era have been the Apple (AAPL) iPhone and iPod Touch, which have sold 37 million units in less than two years and attracted 35,000 apps and one billion app downloads in just nine months.”

So, if you want to just focus on the name, then you gotta do better here.

Until then, you say 2010 Web, we say Web 3.0 and let’s call the whole thing off.

That would be Walt Mossberg and his well-known Personal Technology and Mossberg Mailbox columns–as well as BoomTown, John Paczkowski’s Digital Daily, Peter Kafka’s MediaMemo, Katherine Boehret’s Mossberg Solution and video and photographs from our famous D: All Things Digital conferences.

Today, All Things Digital is introducing its very own app for Apple’s iPhone and the iPod touch, offering all the posts and columns you get on this Web site–including news, product reviews, analysis and video–from our crack team.

Just smaller and cuter.

All free. All mobile. And completely designed to let you access ATD content 24/7/365, which is how we like it.

In addition, the app will allow users to post links directly to both Facebook and Twitter, because we also like you to overshare our content.

Developed by the amazing team at NewsGator–with additional heavy lifting by ATD staffers Christine Mohan, Adam Tow and Mossberg–for some months, the app was first available in…Latvia and London. Also France and Australia.

Frankly, we don’t grok the method Apple (AAPL) uses to globally spawn apps, but it has now reached the U.S. at the iTunes store. You can also get info about the app here on our site.

So download us and take us along everywhere you go–ATD really enjoys long walks on the beach.

Here is the full press release about our newest digital delivery at ATD:

ALL THINGS DIGITAL LAUNCHES MULTIMEDIA APPLICATION ON APPLE APP STORE

App for iPhone and iPod touch offers tech and media news, product reviews, analysis and video from Walt Mossberg, Kara Swisher, John Paczkowski, Peter Kafka and Katherine Boehret

SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. (May 18, 2009)–All Things Digital today announced the launch of a new iPhone™ and iPod touch® application on the Apple App store.

Co-edited by Wall Street Journal columnist Walt Mossberg and BoomTown blogger Kara Swisher, the AllThingsD.com site launched in 2007 as the online extension of the annual “D: All Things Digital” conference, started by Walt and Kara in 2003 and attended by the digital elite.

The app makes exclusive content from AllThingsD.com and the D conference available for iPhone and iPod touch with a range of features and tools including:

• Kara’s BoomTown, John Paczkowski’s Digital Daily and Peter Kafka’s MediaMemo blogs and video

• Walt’s Personal Technology and Mossberg’s Mailbox columns, his videos and his Mossblog

• Katherine Boehret’s Mossberg Solution column and videos

• Ability to post article links and text descriptions directly to Twitter and Facebook, or to email them to a friend

• Galleries of D conference videos and photos including the full 2007 historic joint appearance by Steve Jobs and Bill Gates

• Live D7 conference coverage throughout the May 26-28, 2009 event.

“At AllThingsD.com we strive to deliver news, reviews and commentary that are both accurate and entertaining. Our app offers the same quality experience, enhanced by engaging photos and daily video,” said Mossberg. “All Things Digital for the iPhone is a smart, streamlined mobile application that we know iPhone and iPod touch owners interested in technology and media will enjoy.”

Developed using the NewsGator iPhone Media Application Framework, the All Things Digital app is designed to contain all the news and reviews from the Web site. As on AllThingsD.com, each journalist’s section is identified by specific color schemes and headshots, including stylized icons that emphasize each writer’s personality and beat. Customized navigation enables users to choose their favorite sections and personalize the content.

Availability

The All Things Digital app is available for free from Apple’s App Store on iPhone and iPod touch or at www.itunes.com/appstore/. For more information, go to www.allthingsd.com/mobile/iPhone.

###

About All Things Digital

All Things Digital (www.allthingsd.com) is devoted to news, analysis and opinion on technology, the Internet and media. Co-edited by Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher, the site is the online extension of the annual “D: All Things Digital” conference started by Walt and Kara in 2003 and attended by the digital elite. The site is a mix of columns, blogs and video including Walt’s Personal Technology, Kara’s BoomTown, John Paczkowski’s Digital Daily, Peter Kafka’s MediaMemo and Katherine Boehret’s Mossberg Solution. AllThingsD.com is part of The Wall Street Journal Digital Network which includes WSJ.com, MarketWatch.com and Barrons.com.

Apple, iPhone and iPod are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries.

BoomTown is not proud of the problem.

Not at all.

But, after hearing the same situation described over and over again from many other parents like me, I am also not alone.

As it turns out, our almost-seven-year-old son, Louie, has morphed into an iJacker.

That would be of my iPhone, which I switched solely to recently after a longtime attachment to my BlackBerry.

That RIM (RIMM) mobile phone never turned into a CrackBerry for him, as Louie did not care much for its lovely keys for emailing that so captivated me.

But now he wants to grab my iPhone from my holster all the time, having become entranced by apps–lots and lots and lots of apps–that now litter the digital pages of my Apple (AAPL) device.

DizzyBeeFree and Super Monkey Ball. Touch Hockey and Paper Football. Finger Sprint and MoodPhone. Bounce On and Crazy Penguin Catapult. Lie Detector and Crazy Snowboard. Tic Tac Toe and Hangman. And iChess, iCheckers, iBowl.

Of course, there are also the bubble poppers and light sabers and more cowbells.

And, good lord, how did a “Race to Witch Mountain” app get on there?

So, I don’t need any stats to tell me that the iPhone, and the iPod touch too, have turned into gaming devices of great impact.

But there are stats, like yesterday’s from comScore (SCOR), showing that 12 out of the top 25 all-time iPhone apps are games. (See the chart below; click to make it larger.)

It’s easy to understand why. The ease of use, the small form factor, the great graphics in this mobile phone that is actually a powerful computer.

In fact, Louie hardly has any interest in the desktop computer anymore, or even a laptop. Although we limited his access to it, it’s moot, since he hardly ever uses it now that the iPhone is around.

Why? It is clear, most of all, that Louie loves the movement and the touch features, which turn the experience into a visceral one.

And, uh-oh–according to a post last week on the blog Blorge.com, “The industry patent watch reveals that Apple has filed patent applications that seek to patent certain user interface ideas for the iPhone, including the use of movement, vibration, and pleasure.”

Oh, this is not going to go well when Louie is a teenager.

Thus, aside from switching to a Microsoft (MSFT) Zune, what are our parenting tactics to stave off that day from coming sooner?

Well, obviously, as much as he might beg–and he does beg and wheedle and plead–Louie gets to use the iPhone sparingly, on short car trips mostly.

And he has to play not only the sillier games, but use ones like iChess or word games that require some brain power.

Lastly, Louie must be analog more than digital and playing inside and outside more than any of it.

There should be more rules, I know, but for now he seems just as riveted to baseball and kickball too, so I am not quite in the panic stage.

More the do-not-leave-the-iPhone-on-the-counter-if-I-ever-hope-to-see-it-again phase.

Louie’s almost-four-year-old brother, Alex, is less interested in games on the iPhone, as it turns out.

Instead, for him, the iPhone is a magical music video device on which I bring him old musical numbers.

Last night, it was “I Like to Be in America” from “West Side Story” and the night before, “Oh, What a Beautiful Morning” from “Oklahoma!”

He was as delighted and mesmerized, as I was when I first saw those classics on the television when I was a kid.

And, even seeing them on an iPhone, of that, I am proud.

But, to give you the full picture of the situation, here is a video interview I did of Louie in action with my hijacked iPhone (it is not pretty):

Or, as the old retail cliche goes: Stack them high and watch them fly.

The bid to bring the groundbreaking smartphone to the masses is a good thing, of course, in order to move its influence well beyond the early-adopter crowd and generally elite market that it has been most popular in.

I was one of those customers, of course, buying an iPhone almost as soon as it was available.

But, from reports, even though the 2.0 version is obviously better (although I have yet to see one), I will not be doing that again when the new iPhone 3G (pictured here) comes out in a few weeks.

Why not?

No, it is not because AT&T’s (T) network is so weak–as it has been for me–because I am already locked into a two-year contract anyway from my first iPhone.

No, it is not because I am cheap either–I will buy any gadget that shows up on my doorstep.

No, it is not because I don’t admire the iPhone for many of its qualities, such as its spectacular touchscreen, Web and multimedia experience (although a better camera would be nice).

It’s actually because of the same rap everyone has made on the first iPhone–the virtual keyboard that I still find irksome to use, which makes my email and texting experience completely frustrating.

Add to that the continued lack of a cut-and-paste function–it makes the decision not to upgrade an easy one.

On the other hand, I will be first in line to decide on which of the next versions of the RIM (RIMM) BlackBerry I will happily overpay for.

That would either be the BlackBerry Bold (pictured here), a tasty-looking upgrade to the traditional one with better everything (screen, multimedia, connection).

This is an easy yes for me, because I have been a fan of the BlackBerry from its block-of-soap format to now, largely due to its huge usefulness as a communications device.

True story of my obsession: I was clicking away and sending updates, right up until the drugs kicked in as I was wheeled into the delivery room when I was having my son.

I know, I know! I am a freak.

But the thing is exceedingly useful to me and has been, as I often joke, one of the most reliable relationships of my life.

That’s why I am a bit wary of the second possible BlackBerry choice–its iPhone-copycat called the Thunder.

Despite my so-so-experience with the iPhone, I do love its touchscreen technology, a feature I miss with my standard-issue BlackBerry.

So, that will obviously be the most attractive part of the Thunder to me.

My great hope, of course, will be that it will have more than a virtual keyboard, but one with real keys to click.

Because the lack of one is a nonstarter for me, which is exactly why my iPhone 1.0 has become a glorified and much more expensive iPod Touch for me.

(By the way, here’s a post on Walt Mossberg’s first impressions of the iPhone 3G and here’s a Voices piece by Dan Gillmor, who is also dubious about getting one.)