Betanews - Tech Gear

Without its own 'iTablet' yet, is Apple missing the boat?

Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:58:07 -0500

E-readers seem to be smoking hot this year. The Amazon Kindle, of course, has been leading the pack, but Sony seems to have sold more than a handful as well, and its new Sony Daily Edition e-reader may be in short supply. Meanwhile, newcomer Barnes & Noble already sold out of its new Nook e-reader, which the company just announced a month ago -- and that's only pre-orders that aren't shipping until the end of this month. Order a new Nook now, and you'll have to wait until January to get it.

Sounds a bit like Amazon's first sold-out holiday sales effort with the Kindle.

So how popular are these e-book readers, anyway?

Consumers will buy 3 million units by the end of 2009, 900,000 of which will sell during this holiday season alone, according to Forrester. Plus, Forrester expects sales in 2010 to double, which will bring the cumulative sales of e-readers to 10 million by the end of 2010.

So those numbers are nothing to sneeze at, but still, we should be clear -- the e-reader market isn't nearly as large as, say, the iPod market. Apple sold 10.2 million iPods in its last quarter alone, and I wouldn't be surprised if the company didn't blow past those numbers this holiday season as well. The iPod touch is a pretty darn versatile device.

I believe that most consumers don't rush out to spend hundreds of dollars on a new device if the one they already use does a pretty good job. So would many Kindle users buy a Nook? I'm guessing not, based on all sorts of rave reviews. Part of those raves are due to the versatility of today's e-readers.

For example, actor Woody Harrelson uses a Kindle. "Oh, man! I love it!" he recently told Esquire. "They send my scripts to it. I read books on it. My office can send my schedule to it. So any time I want to see it, booooom -- there it is. Toronto, New York ..."

So is Apple missing the e-reader boat? The answer has at least two opposing sides. The first is that yes, yes it is. While Harrelson has enough extra cash to try a new device, I don't think most happy consumers do. If Apple ever gets around to delivering a rumored and much-anticipated iPod touch-like "iTablet," you can bet it's not going to sell for the Nook's USD$259. It'll most certainly be quite a bit more expensive. If this premise holds true, then some of the most technologically inclined readers will be investing in and building experience with e-readers that are not from Apple.

And yet, Apple might not be missing anything at all. The company does have a modus operandi for most of its products, and that is to let others fumble around with new devices and create a rudimentary market for a few years and then bust loose with a new device that aims to do most everything better than the original device leaders. The iPhone is the biggest example, of course. Now it's hard not to mention the iPhone anytime anyone is discussing smartphones. It's got crazy mindshare, super profitability for Apple, and if you really think about it, the iPhone is simply a well-thought-out upgrade to previous smartphones already available in the marketplace.

So yeah, there's still a spot on the boat for Apple, if the company ever chooses to build an iTablet device.

The plot gets a little thicker. Steve Jobs has already gone on record to say he doesn't believe that single-purpose dedicated devices will be a big market. "But I think the general-purpose devices will win the day. Because I think people just probably aren't willing to pay for a dedicated device," he told The New York Times.

So what is the iPod touch? Just an MP3 and video player? No way. It's also a gaming unit that runs a full universe of apps, including email and Web browsing. One day it'll eventually get a camera like its smaller iPod nano sibling. That's right: general purpose. It's safe to say that any new Apple device with a larger form factor than the iPod touch, regardless of its name, will be designed to play games, movies, television shows, surf the Web, run apps, and maybe even navigate the world.

An iTablet would be so much more than an e-reader.

If Apple does indeed redefine the publishing industry for newspapers, magazines and textbook publishers, an iTablet would be a supremely capable device for it. And while we're talking about the publishing industry, Apple has filed a patent for technology that displays on most any electronic screen and compels users to notice it, according to The New York Times. This is not to say that Apple will use the patented idea, but it's clear the company is thinking and planning.

Back to versatility: Forrester also notes that its latest e-reader projections -- 6 million to be sold in 2010 -- could be easily surpassed if the category expands beyond e-ink-based displays.

If Apple does create and deliver an iTablet, it's got enough resources on hand to build its own vessel -- so I doubt Jobs is concerned about jumping aboard any e-reader boat. First of all, an iTablet would appeal to any person interested in the consumption of media. You don't have to be a book lover, and in fact, Apple might prefer it if you weren't. Movies. TV shows. Music. iTunes. App Store. Games. Gorgeous moving graphics and flickering light. This alone is enough to sell iTablets.

Throw in some snazzy TV commercials, and it's not hard to envision mindshare sliding toward Apple.

Of course, if Microsoft could deliver something almost as compelling as the mockup of the Courier that slipped out a couple months ago, even Apple might miss connecting with more than few potential customers. In the meantime, at least a few million consumers are buying e-readers right now and aren't waiting on Apple -- but I wonder how many are?

Originally published on MacNewsWorld

Not-so-mobile battery life: Time to force the issue

Carmi Levy — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:47:30 -0500

By Carmi Levy, Betanews

I was having a lovely conversation last week with a woman who had just upgraded to a Palm Pre. She's been an avid user of Palm products since the company's first-generation PalmPilots defined the PDA market, and was thrilled to see her beloved Palm finally get back into the game with a modern smartphone, a competitive OS, and a reasonably solid-looking business plan.

She waxed poetic about its user interface, the slickness of its multitasking, the smoothness of its application integration, and its great camera. I nodded appreciatively as she took me through her experience. I'm an old Palm PDA addict, too, and I often find myself secretly rooting for the company to overcome its demons and regain, if not market dominance, then at least something that'll allow it to survive and thrive as a smaller kind of innovative agent provocateur in a larger smartphone market.

Your mileage may vary

Then she told me about battery life, and suddenly things weren't so lovely. Her device lasts for about three hours of consistent use before she needs to plug in. Granted, she admits she's a heavy user, often hammering away at her device as incessantly as most of us use a regular desktop or laptop computer during a typical work session. Even so, she hardly expected to have to charge up by lunch each and every work day. It means she carts her adapter with her wherever she goes. She's bought one for the car, too, as well as an extra one for the office so she's never far from a top-up.

And on the days when she's either not in the office or simply forgets to bring an adapter along with her? She lightens her use as much as possible, which sometimes gets her to dinnertime. Or she simply does without, which kind of defeats the purpose of buying a mobile device.

I'm not the only one who thinks this is a little more than ridiculous. Later, over dinner with a group of tech journalists, they all scoffed at a half-workday's worth of power, and said they'd strike any energy-deficient devices off their personal-purchase shortlists. And while our battery-starved Pre user says she remains enamored of her new device and has no intentions of returning it to the store, they felt those intentions were largely due to her status as a Palm superfan. Their opinion was, only a true Palm fanboy or fangirl would find it within herself or himself to ignore such a glaring fact as energy drop-off, when comparing the Pre to any other device in the store...assuming she'd even go so far as to make a comparison first.

Behold the power-blind consumer

But maybe that's the problem: You can't really see power drop-off in the store, can you? Chances are, most consumers will never know about battery performance before they sign up for a two- or three-year contract and bring their new wonderphone home. At least when we buy cars, we have EPA stickers that provide somewhat understandable estimates of city and highway fuel economy. We know the numbers are often optimistic because the test regime is so patently disconnected from the real world. But at least these figures provide some basis for comparison and understanding. Consumer electronics buyers don't even have that. Manufacturers provide little to no guidance and in-store salespeople, focused on making the commission-boosting sale, are rarely of much use.

And using "lousy battery life" as an excuse for returning a recently purchased phone won't fly with most carriers. It isn't defective, after all: That's just the way the thing was designed. (I suppose you could lie, but I can't sanction such behavior.) If you bought the electronic equivalent of a gas guzzler, you're stuck either buying extra batteries for the thing, or walking around with adapters in your bag and one eye on the nearest outlet.

This isn't solely Palm's issue, and I don't want to seem like I'm harping on this one company. The sad reality is all smartphones suffer from this same affliction to varying degrees. Every new feature seems to require a new kind of radio. Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GPS, and multiple flavors of second- and third-generation cell network coverage may result in the electronic age equivalent of the Swiss Army knife, but they exact a heavy toll on battery life. Once you turn them all on simultaneously to run all those funky apps you downloaded to find the nearest restaurant, alert your friends via Twitter and Facebook, shoot and upload a video of your adventure and keep the cops from busting you for not using a handsfree device, you'll be looking for supplemental juice soon, too.

Apple's iPhone gets an extra slap with a wet noodle because of its non-removable battery. At least the Pre gives you the option of swapping in a fully charged battery when your first one dies. The iPhone seems to be somewhat better at managing its battery through the day, but even friends and colleagues I've spoken to say stretching things much past dinnertime is often asking too much.

Failure to meet growing demand

Moore's Law never seems to have applied to battery life. And while processors, memory, and screens have all advanced by leaps and bounds in recent years, batteries have not. While new battery technologies and chemistries hold promise, we're stuck in neutral -- or reverse -- for at least the next couple of years.

Perhaps we've grown accustomed to laptops that barely squeeze two or three hours out of a full charge. Perhaps we've actually believed netbook manufacturers who claim eight-hour runtimes or handheld vendors who swear by week-long standby endurance. Whatever our earlier assumptions, we now know we're being hosed on the battery life front. We've moved beyond basic e-mail and voice on our mobile handsets, and now use them to run intensive, integrated, connectivity- and power-hungry applications. It's entirely appropriate for us to move power capacity closer to the top of our priority list.

Until an industry standard for battery life along the same lines as the EPA's fuel economy estimates emerges for mobile devices, consumers will continue to shop blindly, only to get home and gradually realize that they aren't as mobile as they thought they were. Expect this to be portability's Achilles Heel until the industry gets serious about properly, and transparently, balancing between power and performance, and until consumers begin to demand the same.

Carmi Levy is a Canadian-based independent technology analyst and journalist still trying to live down his past life leading help desks and managing projects for large financial services organizations. He comments extensively in a wide range of media, and works closely with clients to help them leverage technology and social media tools and processes to drive their business.

Kindle 2 update adds battery life, native PDF reader

Tim Conneally — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:42:02 -0500

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Today, Amazon announced that an automatic update to its popular Kindle 2 e-reader will extend the device's battery life by 85% and add a native PDF reader to its repertoire of functions.

The Kindle 2 could previously stay on for four days with wireless connectivity activated, following the firmware update, Amazon says the device will be able to stay turned on for a whole week.

Formerly, PDF documents had to be converted to Kindle format to be viewable on the family of e-readers. Now, users can e-mail PDF documents or upload them to their Kindle through a USB connection and be able to read them without conversion.

It's a small, but significant upgrade as e-readers are looking like some of the most desirable gadgets this holiday season and the competition to Amazon's Kindle 2 is stronger than it's ever been.

Microsoft's .NET Micro Framework is now free and open source

Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:38:33 -0500

By Jack M. Germain, LinuxInsider

Microsoft announced at its Professional Developer Conference on Tuesday the release of version 4.0 under the Apache 2.0 license. The license transfer makes good on a longstanding promise from Redmond that it would make the popular .NET code base available as open source.

The gift to the open source community, however, does come with some strings attached -- or, rather, removed from the gift wrapping. Microsoft reduced some of the framework's functionality in making the Software Developer's Kit open source, according to Peter Galli, the Open Source Community Manager for Microsoft's Platform Strategy Group. In his blog post last Tuesday, Galli revealed details about the code release.

Microsoft pulled the framework's cryptography libraries and also stripped out its TCP/IP stack because it contains third-party software licensed from EBSnet, wrote Galli.

"While the Micro Framework constitutes only a small part of the total .Net corpus, it is a significant step forward in making Redmond's ubiquitous framework more available and interoperable with other FOSS code," Bill Weinberg, principal analyst at LinuxPundit.com, told LinuxInsider.

The .NET Micro Framework is a development and execution environment for resource-constrained devices, according to Galli. It is well-used in embedded devices with low-powered processors that have a limited amount of RAM.

The framework was initially developed inside the Microsoft Startup Business Accelerator but was recently moved to the Developer Division to be more closely aligned with the overall direction of Microsoft development efforts, he noted.

"The result of this is that the .NET Micro Framework has become a seamless development experience, bringing a single programming model and tool chain for the breadth of developer solutions, all the way from small intelligent devices to servers and the cloud. There are also no more time-limited versions," wrote Galli.

Microsoft's decision to include the source code for almost all of the product ensures that developers now get access to the Base Class Libraries that were implemented for .NET Micro Framework and the Common Language Runtime (CLR) code itself, he added. CLR is a core component of Microsoft's .NET initiative.

The TCP/IP stack is third party software that Microsoft licenses from EBSNet. Thus, Microsoft did not have the rights to distribute that source code.

Microsoft did not include the cryptography libraries in the source code because they are used outside of the scope of the .Net Micro Framework. Customers who need access to the code in the cryptography functions can get that functionality in other sources.

Microsoft plans to remain active as a community partner to continue developing the framework. While the license allows customers to develop their own specialized versions of the framework, Microsoft intends to stay involved to avoid any possible fragmentation of the platform, Galli explained.

"As such, we are planning on establishing a core technology team that is made up of both Microsoft and non-Microsoft contributors that continues the goals of producing a high-quality product for very small devices. This group will act as the gateway to community contributions while, at the same time, Microsoft Developers will continue [to] add functionality and coordinate with the overall .NET team," Galli said.

Microsoft also plans to form a community of involved members to help shape the future direction of the framework product. This will include a core technology team composed of Microsoft and external partners. People will be encouraged to propose projects, which will be vetted before they are accepted, he noted.

"The site will also support people building extensions that exist alongside the platform rather than being integrated into it," Program Manager Colin Miller told Galli, according to the blog.

In the short term, the Micro Framework will only aid developers and integrators of resource-constrained embedded systems and not the larger communities building more robust intelligent devices, desktop and enterprise applications, according to Weinberg. More crucial is the potential for pressure from other other source projects to spur .NET uses.

"I find the release more interesting for its use of the permissive Apache license. By licensing the Micro Framework under Apache, the release throws down a gauntlet to open source .Net work-alike Mono, which is licensed under GNU GPL and LGPL. What used to be a stark choice between highly proprietary and closed source .NET vs. open and free Mono is now more clouded," Weinberg said.

Embedded developers and others could find Redmond's code and terms more attractive for the flexibility conferred by Apache licensing. The key is that Apache 2.0 demands minimal reciprocity for code licensed under it. The license requires only preservation of the copyright notice and disclaimer, he explained.

"Unlike GNU, GPL and LGPL employed by Mono, Apache is not a copyleft license and allows use of source code for both proprietary and FOSS derivation and deployment. While OEMs, integrators and others are today mostly comfortable with the disclosure requirements imposed by GNU licenses, their legal departments still cleave to closely held IPR, potentially giving .NET Micro Framework advantage over its traditional FOSS rival, Mono," concluded Weinberg.

Originally published on LinuxInsider

Google's value proposition for Chrome OS: Should we feel insulted?

Scott M. Fulton, III — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:19:32 -0500

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

Let's be absolutely honest and straightforward about this right up front: Google Chrome OS is not an operating system. It's a device, like the iPhone, only that Google wants to license its specifications to OEMs. Any OEM that builds it is making a Chrome device, whose profile will be so low that it could probably never be switched out to run Windows, even XP. Probably great connectivity, but not enough solid-state storage to manage local documents or store many media files.

More than an Android device, less than a Windows device.

Any amount of SSD storage does not come cheap, though, so a Chrome device will not be a cheap netbook. But it will not be a PC, and that fact alone should tell the market that it will not compete against Windows -- not really. Instead, Google's play appears to be in the narrow field of subsidized connectivity devices that aren't meant to be used as highly portable PCs.

And who exactly is that? Not anyone who makes ample use of her digital camera, not anyone who collects music or videos (even legally), not anyone who makes DVDs of his home movies, not anyone who uses a printer for anything besides a screen dump, and not anyone who plays a game whose depth of graphics exceeds Frogger circa 1979 or whose interactivity with other players goes beyond Club Penguin. At the same time, this ideal customer must be willing to keep her documents online, her personal profiles online, each and every transported photograph online.

The difference between private and public in this world is that "private" starts out with "public" as its base, with layers of protection to obscure it. Security through obscurity -- a method that has never worked yet, not once.

There comes a point in the evolution of almost every computer company of respectable size when it toys with the idea of being able to channel the entirety of computer users through a device or mechanism or program of its own design. And for a while, their ideas actually show some progress and bear some fruit -- e.g., MS-DOS, Windows, and to some extent the iPhone.

But even then, history has shown that customers have only been willing to invest in devices or software that refrains from limiting their choices, whose clear and unequivocal benefits can be demonstrated, and where gains from making the choice and taking the leap are quantifiable and guaranteed. In every instance in history, that guarantee has come from a solid, underlying, pre-established platform.

Consumers do not take well to being cattle-prodded into pre-established purchasing channels on the promise of future value. Invest now, reap later, is a value proposition that has never worked for any type of technology, at any time in history.

Here's what Google thinks about you, the potential Chrome OS user, from the company's launch video last Thursday:

If you're like me, you spend something like, I don't know, 90% of your time on the Internet in a browser -- there's e-mails, chatting, you're reading news, you're watching videos, you're playing games, you're buying things, just to name a few. Which kinda makes the Web browser the most important program on your computer...If everything's stored on the Internet, then your phone, your computer, all of these devices, are what people call stateless. Which is kind of a big word.

Maybe you caught the hidden message behind all that: Google thinks you're unemployed. You're illiterate, you don't know the difference between a Web browser and a spreadsheet, and you spend 90% of your online time doing nothing that earns you a living -- Google either implied all that or said it explicitly. And as if to drum home the point, in the little cartoon, a speaking bubble next to a productivity icon on the desktop reads, "Nobody clicks me anymore."

I know when I've been insulted, and I know when you've been insulted. If you're indeed unfortunate enough to be among the 10% of our brethren who are unemployed, then I would imagine you are spending 90% or more of your online time working hard to rectify that situation. If I were to make the same presumptions about you that Google just did, you would stop reading me right now, click on a new bookmark, and never come back to Betanews again. I wouldn't dare make that presumption. So why should Google?

When Apple came to market with the iPhone, it was not like Great Britain's attack on the Falkland Islands. It had the well-respected platform of the iPod and iTunes already established, it had plenty of decent applications already built, and most importantly, it had one very attractive device.

The Chrome device, at this point, does not appear to have any attractive benefits to it, besides the possibility of those that OEMs may add to it through their own volition. One could foresee multitouch as an option. But with only enough solid-state memory to get it running and, I guess, store cookies and bookmarks, it would be difficult for the Chrome device to have enough local media on-hand to be stretched or shrunken or manipulated, even with a link to Picasa. And with the principal application being the Chrome Web browser, there really isn't much use for touch for most instances besides scrolling and tapping.

One has to wonder what manner of sociologist or market consultant or psychoanalyst or supermarket tabloid psychic led Google to this conclusion: that you, the poor, illiterate, unemployed socialite, have the intrinsic desire to become a bandwidth consumer. The Chrome device appears geared around the idea that you want to consume bandwidth, so much so that you're eager to transfer the interface between CPU and local storage entirely to the Internet, and delegate the job of protection and privacy to "the cloud." Because without a "killer app," without a truly revolutionary device design with orders of magnitude more functionality than you've ever had before, and without clear and obvious gains from making the switch, people typically don't make the investment.

The Mattel Aquarius computer, circa 1983. [Photo credit: OldComputers.net]

Technology has never inspired leaps of faith from consumers. They will make leaps, but only with guarantees. Without them, the manufacturer's value proposition doesn't look any more solid than, say, Mattel's in 1983. Mattel put together a handful of applications (one of them Microsoft BASIC), made a deal with its manufacturer in Hong Kong for a cheap device, and essentially said this: Since you're only using your television to play games anyway, why not stick a keyboard on it, and maybe you can pretend you're doing something productive or educational? At least you'll feel better while you're wasting your time.

The consumer knows when he's been insulted. A new device's value proposition only works when its manufacturer demonstrates that it has at least as much faith in its consumer as it would ask that consumer to invest in it. That's why the iPhone works, that's why the first BlackBerrys worked, that's why the Macintosh worked, it's why the first Android devices are working, and that's why the Google Chrome device has already failed. Chrome is Google's "Bob."

E-book readers will be in short supply this holiday season

Tim Conneally — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:02:14 -0500

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Black Friday is just a week away and the demand for ebook readers looks to already be too great.

Earlier this week, Sony said its 3G-connected Daily Edition Reader may not arrive in time for the holidays. Preorders for the device began on Wednesday, but it will not ship until some time between December 18th and January 7th, and it is not expected to land in stores until after the holidays.

Today, Barnes and Noble said that it has already sold out of its new Nook e-reader, and that the next shipment of devices will not be available until January 4th.

In November 2007 when the Kindle first launched, the device reportedly sold out in six hours and wasn't available again until mid-2008. Then the Kindle DX debuted, and it too was in short supply.

The link between these devices (and nearly every e-reader on the market) is their electrophoretic display, which comes from Massachusetts company E Ink Corporation. Betanews reached out to E Ink Co. today, to find out how its production is holding up in light of the high demand for e-readers, and a reply is pending.

We'll update as soon as the company gets back to us.

Sony looks to finally open a single storefront for downloads

Tim Conneally — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:12:20 -0500

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Sony yesterday discussed its plans to open a download shop similar to iTunes or Amazon Digital Downloads.

Reportedly given the tentative name "Sony Online Service," the online store would make the many different types of Sony digital content available in a single place. The company has a number of content portals already, but each is geared toward a related piece of hardware and run by a different business unit of the giant Sony conglomerate.

For example, PlayStation 3 and PSP users can download new games, movies, and TV episodes from the PlayStation Network, but users of the Bravia Internet Link on Sony's HDTVs get content directly from Sony Pictures services such as Crackle. Users of Sony's e-Reader family can get content in The sBook Store from Sony, but users of Sony's Walkman family of portable media players are encouraged to get their music from Sony MusicPass, which was launched to replace the defunct Connect music download shop that closed in 2008. There is also a substantial overlap in content with Sony's mobile phone joint venture Sony Ericsson and itsPlayNow arena..

Kazuo Hirai, Sony's executive vice president for networked products and services, says the service will be modeled after the popular PlayStation Network, which now has more than 33 million registered users. Hirai however, expressed doubt to Businessweek that users of PlayStation Network would actually migrate over to a new service.

Tuning out the tablet: Time to give the endless speculation a rest

Carmi Levy — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:42:53 -0500

By Carmi Levy, Betanews

I'm sure I'm not the only one who looks at renderings of Apple's long-rumored tablet - or iTablet, or whatever name the faithful have assigned to it this week - and wishes the FedEx truck would pull up to my door with an early demo in time for the holiday season. I'm sure I'm also not the only one who's ready for the endless speculation to, well, end.

I don't think I've ever seen an unreleased product generate so much discussion without so much as a peep from the vendor of record. I realize the frenzied speculation is as frenzied as it is because we're talking about Apple, and that if this were any other company, we'd collectively yawn our response before moving on to the next big thing. This is a company that seems unique in its ability to generate so much activity around what is, for now at least, vapourware. And while I appreciate the value of healthy exchanges in advance of a major product launch, I can't shake the feeling that the never-ending iTablet fever is just a little much, and that we'd all be doing ourselves a favor by giving it a rest and waiting until Apple actually ships a working product.

Like junk food - great taste, not so healthy

Don't get me wrong: This is all good for Apple. Once again, without spending so much as a dime on advertising, Apple has managed to keep its corporate brand front and center in both tech and mainstream media. It hasn't had to use its PR firm retainers to pre-announce anything because breathless conventional and social media folks have been perfectly willing to share their so-called news on the company's behalf. Any other vendor would sell its first, second and third born offerings to have even a fraction of this kind of market visibility and influence. Decades from now, when media mastery is taught in institutions of higher learning, Apple's ability to time and again conjure a deafening buzz around things that may or may not see the light of day will serve as an iconic case study.

But is any of this good for us? Is it helpful or hurtful for consumers and wannabes alike to spend days on end hovering over blog entries, twittering madly or debating in online forums? These activities in and of themselves are the sign of a healthy community, of course, and are crucial to giving vendors the kind of insight they need to continue to deliver market-relevant products and services. But has the uber-hype that seems to follow Apple around - and that has seemingly impossibly shifted into an even higher gear for the iTablet - finally reached the point of diminishing returns?

Too much of anything isn't good for you

I'm going to argue that the hype has gone well beyond the point at which it adds any value to our collective lives. We're working ourselves into a tizzy over something we know nothing about. We don't know what OS this thing will run, how large it will be, what kind of screen it will have and how much it'll cost. We've seen lots of beautifully rendered images of it and heard a near endless string of confirmed - then scotched - confirmations of imminent component orders and production. And as much fun as it is to bat around possibilities, it hardly seems like a productive way to spend time.

That's because while we're all breathlessly sharing thoughts and opinions - but precious few facts - on a mysterious device that we now won't apparently see until late next year, we continue to be challenged with more mundane needs, like using technology that's available today to keep customers happy, our bank accounts filled and our lights on. I have no issue gazing into the collective crystal ball as a means of informing the kinds of decisions we need to make either today or in the near future. Keeping at least half an eye on what's coming is one way of avoiding nasty surprises and keeping one step ahead of everyone else. But when said crystal ball becomes our sole focus of conversation, I'd like to humbly suggest that we've gone too far. Balance matters here, too, and if we're spending all our time discussing a mythical product that's close to a year from possibly seeing the light of day, we're missing the significance of today.

We're missing the real point

In a way, it's a little disappointing that the enormous halo cast by this not-quite-a-product product eclipses the real issue at hand: that vendors have for the better part of the last decade failed to convince consumers that they should pony up for devices in the empty space between pocketable mobile devices and laptops. UMPCs and later MIDs failed to gain any traction thanks to low value propositions and ridiculous pricing. Netbooks have come close, thanks largely to their just-good-enough-for-the-purpose performance, conveniently portable form factor and recession-friendly price point. Timing has also helped netbooks carve out a niche, as their short range wireless and, increasingly, carrier-supported 3G connectivity gives them mobile capabilities that earlier, less well-connected devices could only dream of. Increasingly Web-centric application models don't hurt, either.

The success of the netbook is giving rise to new forms of devices and revenue models that could - maybe - finally fill in the veritable valley of death that has already claimed so many mid-sized, mid-priced form factors. While it's unclear where Apple's product will ultimately fit, it's hardly a big story until the company actually moves closer to marketing the thing. Until then, every other competing vendor has just gotten a bit of additional breathing room to figure out what resonates with consumers before Apple satisfies the fanboys and finally introduces its tablet. Or whatever it is.

Until then, count me among the cynics who really doesn't care whether or not it has an OLED or a TFT screen, whether it's released as one product or two, or whether it costs $2,000 or half that. Only when we begin to see actual data points will we be able to decide whether it's worth pulling the plastic out or our wallets. For now, even Apple is capable of overstepping the limits of my patience.

Nokia re-affirms its commitment to Symbian, sort of

Tim Conneally — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:06:05 -0500

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Nokia has always been solid on its dedication to the Symbian platform, but a report from an N900 event yesterday cast some doubt on Symbian's future in certain branches of Nokia's product line, specifically the high-end N-series of smartphones.

I reached out to Nokia to find out exactly what is going on with Maemo and Symbian in the N-series, and received equal parts affirmation and denial.

Nokia's response was nowhere near as strong as the "outright denial" given to the short-lived rumor of an Android-based Nokia device last July, and instead served to paint a picture that's not so black and white.

Nokia North America's Director of Communications Laurie Armstrong told Betanews today, "Any speculation on our 2012 roadmap -- including operating systems and product branding -- are completely speculation."

But Armstrong went on to say that Maemo will have its own place.

"As we have stated earlier, Nokia has multiple platforms to serve different purposes and address different markets," she continued. "Globally, Symbian is more successful than ever in bringing smartphones to the masses. Maemo is our software of choice for devices based on technology that you'd typically find inside a desktop computer. It delivers a different user experience and enables us to widen the market we can address."

After the Psystar verdict: Send in the clones

Carmi Levy — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:57:19 -0500

By Carmi Levy, Betanews

I feel a little sorry for Psystar. But only a little, because the Mac clone maker should have realized it couldn't rewrite history.

Its latest courtroom loss -- where a US District Court judge last week sided with Apple and said Psystar can no longer sell hardware based on hacked versions of Mac OS X -- will in all likelihood bring the whole concept of clones to an inglorious close. And none too soon.

Another case of history repeating itself

We've been down this road before. In 1982, when a fully tricked out Apple II Plus cost an order of magnitude more than a modern-day low-end PC or netbook, there was ample room in the market for knockoff hardware that offered the same user experience for less. If your choice was a relatively inexpensive clone or nothing at all because the name brand offerings were simply too rich for your budget, the choice almost made itself.

Franklin Computer, which introduced machines based on Apple's motherboard design, reverse-engineered ROMs and openly copied operating system, was an early and perhaps the best known example of the breed. Unfortunately, it also learned rather quickly just how aggressively Apple would protect its turf. Barely two months after Franklin's first machines hit the market, Apple sued the upstart clone maker. After a six-year, often-nasty legal battle, Apple forced Franklin out of the clone business for good.

Of course, Apple wasn't completely averse to the idea...except when it wasn't on its own terms. The company licensed Apple II ROMs to Bell & Howell and Tiger Electronics, and by the mid-90s had launched an official Mac clone program as well. This short-lived dalliance ended abruptly, however, when Steve Jobs returned to the fold in 1997. System 7-based machines from such companies as Power Computing, Motorola, and UMAX died a quick death after Jobs terminated the licensing deals forged during his absence. The company's message, then and since, has been clear: The only hardware that runs any Mac OS will be a Mac box designed and sold by Apple.

You'd think that Psystar would have gotten the message.

The not-so-hidden cost of cloning

Twenty-seven years after Apple first went postal on third party clone vendors, it's a safe bet that Mac clones are finally a dead business. While there will always be hackers perfectly willing to reverse-engineer any combination of hardware and software to allow anyone to run some flavor of Mac on non-Apple hardware, it's equally safe to assume that solutions like these will live on the fringe of the market. So-called "hackintoshes" make for fun conversation, of course, and there's doubtless a visceral thrill associated with running an Apple-sourced, partially modified OS on something as cheaply mundane as a netbook. But would you stake your business on such a solution? Probably not, and there's the rub.

Clones introduce a level of unpredictability into the user experience that makes them a ridiculous proposition for any kind of business use. When a vendor-forced system update, patch, or bug fix can easily break a hacked solution, it's difficult to understand the value proposition of saving a couple of hundred bucks on hardware. If you're building a spare machine in your basement on the weekend, by all means have at it. If you're buying a fleet of machines for your company, however, the risks of not going with something more mainstream will almost certainly result in your spending more time than normal keeping things functional.

And as you try to calculate the TCO of a clone-based solution, don't forget to attach a dollar figure to all those hours you and your IT folks will spend on your cheap-yet-unsanctioned hardware/software. That extra IT time quickly negates any up-front savings. The equation doesn't change much if your business is too small to justify a full-on IT department. Even if you're a company of one working from home, can you really afford to lose your system when the vendor of record decides to break the clones once and for all? Can you trust that every court proceeding from here on out will be decided in the clone vendor's favor? Platform stability, never a strong suit for clone makers, is a crucial component of proper IT-business strategy.

Living with Apple's choice

We can argue ad infinitum over how Microsoft's embrace of open availability of its OS on commodity hardware allowed it to build a much larger ecosystem than Apple's closed strategy that inextricably and permanently tied its hardware to its OS. Could Apple have sold more copies of its OS had it opened it up to a larger number of hardware vendors? Certainly. Would it have been as capable of defining and controlling the end-user experience? No.

And given how the end-user experience has always been at the very core of Apple's value proposition -- indeed the very basis of its ability to command the prices that it does -- it's easy to see why Apple would consistently protect its rights and move to shut down wannabe-clone vendors at every turn. It's a mindset that doesn't just stop with Macs: This culture continues to serve it well as it oversees the growth of the iPhone/iPod touch platform, and has almost certainly helped fuel Apple's brand value.

As we examine Apple's mobile experience, we can whine all we want about how tightly it controls how its devices run, how apps are submitted and approved, and even how they're installed and used. But like the Mac before it, the mobile landscape is Apple's to control.

As much as clone vendors like Psystar have banked on the Robin Hood-esque notion of allowing those who could not otherwise afford a Mac to have some sort of access to the Apple experience, the apparently permanent truth is that Apple, whatever it's selling, has no intention of ever giving up its overarching control of the combined hardware and software environment that it created. And whether we like it or not, this is the business model that the company has chosen in its pursuit of profit. Don't like it? Buy something else, because the era of pretending to be something we're not is finally drawing to a close.

PS3, Xbox to soon get Twitter, Facebook integration

Tim Conneally — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:01:52 -0500

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Microsoft has kept few secrets about its upcoming Dashboard update, which will give Xbox Live Gold members Twitter, Facebook, and Last.fm integration on November 17.

"Xbox Live's differentiator has always been our community, and we've already seen a tremendous response to these features in our public preview. It's the community that drives us forward and allows us to pioneer new ways of connecting people through the entertainment they love," Xbox Live general manager Marc Whitten said.

But accidentally leaked screenshots of Facebook running natively on the PlayStation 3 have caused a little more of a stir among the video game media. As usual, this is because of the element of mystery involved, and also Sony's track record of giving out for free what Microsoft charges for. Sony has not yet issued any comments on the leaked images, but Eurogamer today said that there will be more information on them "very shortly."

Betanews sent an inquiry to SCEA this afternoon, and will report on its response if and when it comes.

Boxee's first official hardware to premiere December 7

Tim Conneally — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:54:29 -0500

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Boxee, the freeware multimedia management software based on the XBMC framework will soon be getting its own set top box.

Boxee's Avner Ronen today announced that the startup has signed its first partnership with a consumer electronics hardware company, and that the mockups of the upcoming set-top box will be shown off on December 7.

"This will be the first connected device running Boxee, but the idea is to provide consumers with a way to get Boxee in their living rooms, no matter whether it's on a Connected TV, game console, set-top box, BluRay player, computer, etc," Ronen said today. "Our goal is to be on every Connected device in the living room."

Last week, we saw the first shots of the upcoming Myka ION "nettop box," which is already running both Boxee and XBMC. We've sent out inquiries to find out if the two products are related in any way.

Universities reject Kindle DX as a textbook replacement

Tim Conneally — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:34:18 -0500

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Two universities running Kindle DX pilot programs have rejected the device as a potential textbook replacement, citing a poor feature set and the controversial accessibility issues. Primary among these is the text-to-speech capability.

This capability came under fire shortly after the Kindle 2 debuted, as the Author's Guild wanted writers to be compensated for the spoken "performance" of books, or otherwise have the text-to-speech function disabled.

Meanwhile, equal rights groups like the American Council for the Blind, the International Dyslexia Association, and the National Center for Learning Disabilities wanted the feature to be kept free and available as an aid to the visually or cognitively impaired.

The Author's Guild ultimately won and the text to speech feature became optional, an issue for the authors to decide individually.

Since the large screen Kindle DX debuted in the spring, a number of schools -- secondary and beyond -- ran pilot programs which tested the device's viability as a textbook replacement.

The University of Wisconsin-Madison and Syracuse University were two establishments running these pilot programs which recently decided not to adopt the device until its features are improved, including access to visually impaired students.

"The big disappointment was learning that the Kindle DX is not accessible to the blind. Advancements in text-to-speech technology have created a market opportunity for an e-book reading device that is fully accessible for everyone," Ken Frazier, the University of Wisconsin-Madison's director of libraries said. "This version of the Kindle e-book reader missed the mark. It is relatively easy to envision an improved e-book reading device that meets the needs of the entire university community. Such a device would include universal design for accessibility, higher-quality graphics, and improved navigation and note-taking. I think that there will be a huge payoff for the company that creates a truly universal e-book reader."

The National Federation of the Blind considers this a victory.

Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind, said in a statement that the Federation "commends the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Syracuse University for rejecting broad deployment of the Kindle DX in its current form because it cannot be used by blind students and therefore denies the blind equal access to electronic textbooks. We do not oppose electronic textbooks; in fact, they hold great promise for blind students if they are accessible. But as long as the interface of the Kindle DX is inaccessible to the blind -- denying blind students access to electronic textbooks or the advanced features available to read and annotate them -- it is our position that no university should consider this device to be a viable e-book solution for its students."

This announcement comes just a day after Intel announced an e-reader designed especially for the visually impaired.

New EU telecoms framework mandates user consent before getting cookies

Scott M. Fulton, III — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:19:25 -0500

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

The heads of state and high ministers of Europe's 27 member nations are now putting the finishing touches on a sweeping new telecommunications regulatory framework, some of whose provisions would go into effect as soon as the first quarter of next year. One of the provisions that appears likely to be approved without much debate would prohibit any Internet service from saving anything whatsoever to individual users' systems without their prior consent. And if they don't give consent, Web sites will just need to find a way to deal with it.

Although Europe's member states would be charged with enforcing this framework, technically there appears to be nothing that would prohibit any of them from taking action against non-conforming Web sites outside of their own borders -- even outside of Europe -- on the grounds that they publish to European readers.

"Third parties may wish to store information on the equipment of a user, or gain access to information already stored, for a number of purposes, ranging from the legitimate (such as certain types of cookies) to those involving unwarranted intrusion into the private sphere (such as spyware or viruses)," reads the October 22 draft of the regulatory framework (PDF available here). "It is therefore of paramount importance that users be provided with clear and comprehensive information when engaging in any activity which could result in such storage or gaining of access. The methods of providing information and offering the right to refuse should be as user-friendly as possible."

The exceptions that the new framework would allow include when a Web site must store something on the client side, when the user has specifically requested a service where that storage is necessary. But simply typing in the URL of that service may not constitute a request or an authorization for that storage; the site may still have to put up some type of notice. The framework also makes it feasible for Web browsers to effectively communicate a kind of "all cookies allowed" state to Web sites on behalf of their users, so that consent may be presumed if that's what the user permits. That would let users bypass a kind of "Vista UAC" scenario where they're prompted for permission to continue every 30 seconds.

But it might also become a security concern, as users who would enable browsers to say, "Go ahead and send me everything," and then filter absolutely nothing that's incoming, may open themselves up to more than they were expecting.

In the meantime, the entire Web may have to start functioning like User Account Control in order for sites to comply with this new directive, especially if it becomes law in a matter of months, in the opinion of Pinsent Masons technology law attorney Struan Robertson. In a post for his firm's Out-Law.com blog on Monday, Robertson wrote, "There has been almost no fuss about this little law, despite the harm it could do to advertising, the lifeblood of online publishing. It also threatens to irritate all Web users by appearing at every new destination like an over-zealous security guard."

Robertson was also among the first to point out that the entire Web analytics business -- how sites like Betanews counts their users -- depends on the cookie mechanism, which may no longer function in the background. "So almost every site that carries advertising should be seeking its visitors' consent to the serving of cookies," he wrote. "It also catches sites that count visitors -- so if your site uses Google Analytics or WebTrends, you're caught."

Myka announces its latest Linux-based 'net top box'

Tim Conneally — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:45:47 -0500

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Early in the summer, IPTV startup Myka delivered an impressive Linux-based device which was not quite a set-top box and not quite a home theater PC (HTPC). Though the device's identity was sort of nebulous, the company's goal was crystal clear: to easily make the tons of different types of Internet video content viewable on the TV.

This week, the company has announced its second device, the Myka ION, which pushes itself up against the HTPC category. Because it's equipped with a 1.6 GHz dual core Intel Atom 330 CPU, it could even be called a "net-top box."

Whatever you want to call it, Myka is really charging toward its goal of making the vast spectrum of Web video available in an easy and compact way. Since the ION is effectively an Ubuntu 9.10 mini ITX PC, it can run popular media manager software Boxee and XMBC alongside the Hulu desktop client -- a bit of useful software which neither Boxee nor XMBC can actually run themselves.

In case the name didn't already give it away, the Myka ION is equipped with an Nvidia ION GPU which supports DirectX 10 graphics, and full 1080p HD video without overtaxing the CPUs.

The company expects it to be shipping in about four weeks, and it will be available in various configurations, with different capacity hard drive sizes (up to 1 TB) and with additional options like a Blu-ray drive, and 802.11n wireless.

We'll give it a closer look when it becomes available before the holidays.