While some AT&T honchos are busy courting Apple to extend its iPhone exclusivity, others are busy hawking a new ?family friendly? service called FamilyMap.

With this new offering, users can locate any phone that's tied to the same billing account (like family accounts) by checking an online map via a computer or an AT&T mobile phone.

Hitting the web too much trouble? There's a scheduling option that lets account holders receive updates at specified times by text or email. So if you know that Susy's supposed to be at cheerleading practice at 3:30 everyday, you can set up alerts that confirm it for you ? or tell you if she's at her jerky boyfriend's house across town instead.

The service works best on phones with GPS, but can use cell signal triangulation in the absence of that.

The cost of snooping is as follows: Users can track up to two handsets per account for $9.99 monthly, or up to five for $14.99. There's a 30-day free trial.




I?m really not sure how I feel about this service.

On one hand, I can see how useful this can be for children's safety (especially since kids are getting cell phones are alarmingly younger ages). On the other hand, this just looks like high-tech spying. What are the odds that a jealous husband won't keep tabs on his wife or that a nosy mom wouldn't abuse this by prying in her teen's life? In fact, this doesn't just encourage micro-parenting, the service facilitates it. And that can only inspire a pushback of out-of-control behavior.

To prevent a complete impingement of privacy rights, AT&T does offer a few notification options. The service can alert located phones when the program first activates, transmit reminders to family handsets that they may be tracked, and if the account holder chooses, send individual notifications each time location info is requested.

But, in the words of Hell's Kitchen's Gordon Ramsay: Not good enough. When it comes to honesty and transparency, leaving notification options in the hands of snooping account owners is like putting a bank robber in charge of security at First National.

Maybe I?m wrong (or hopelessly naive), but I believe this service sends a clear message of distrust that I wouldn't want to introduce to my family. Then again, I don't have kids, so I have no idea what I?d actually do as a parent. But I?d like to think I wouldn't resort to this.