The Death of Newzbin and Limewire's dying words.

Early this week, Newzbin, the world's biggest newsgroup index service
closed it's site and put up a pathetic message saying they were out of
business, because of the legal actions against them. But this isn't
just about newzbin, this is about a whole concept, and it's being
outlawed.

For those who don't know, here is the crashcourse. Newsgroups are an
Internet medium where users host files for others to access. While I
can't say I've got a real good understanding of the architecture
behind newsgroups, their closest relative is probably the direct HTTP
Download, but from another user. Newsgroups themselves are a paid
service, but they're still huge. They're organized like forums, with
'posts' organised under categories (and organised by server). Each
'post' is a file host, generally made up of a lot of files. What
newzbin did was to provide *.nzb files. These were an index of a
newsgroup item. When opened, they would provide a list of locational
links for each file in the upload, in a format easily readable by a
specifically designed program. Newsgroups can host any file a user
uploads, meaning that material, coyrighted or otherwise, can be
downloaded by other users.

But here's the crux of the debate at hand. If Newzbin, a paid
subscription service, is not providing, or hosting any copyrighted
material for illegal download, why are they being closed down? On
newzbin, the only files available for download are *.nzb's. These
aren't actual files, so they can't be copyrighted material. Newzbin
didn't host any newsgroups or file groups. They didn't provide
download links to illegal material. They were basically an index of
files available elsewhere. So, on what grounds are they being sued.

Similarly, earlier this week, LimeWire, the popular web-bases P2P file
sharing network was crippled by a guilty decision from the courts.
Again, LimeWire provided no files, they only allowed easy indexing of
freely available information.

Despite the closure of Newzbin, one can still find all the exact same
files for download, from the exact same location, but now you just
have to go looking for it. There is no change in the actual download
of the actual files, it's just a little messier.

And yet, both networks are being pursued as if they were providing
illegal material. Part of this can be explained by the court's general
lack of technological expertise regarding the actual workings of these
networks. But a big part of it is simply a crusade against online
piracy that might've gone too far already. This is not the way to do
it. Piracy can be prevented, but only by removing the actual files or
the medium used to access them (very difficult to do) or remove the
motive (also difficult to do). Closing newzbin will only push users
onto other sites which provide a similar indexing service and not
treat the underlying cause.

However, authorities have decided to personally pursue the owners and
managers of indexing sites, rather than focus on the more pressing
issue of removing/disincentivising the actual files and download
thereof. Fools.

Blu-Ray: The Fatal Flaws keeping it from greatness

While I'm a big supporter of high-def movies and I supported Blu-Ray
from the start, I can't help but be frustrated by the few things
crippling the new format

First is compatability. Unlike DVD's Blu-Ray have already upgraded to
a new replacement standard, Profile 2.0, barely a few years into its
life. And it's problems like that that get in the way. Blu-Ray players
are constantly needing upgrades and firmware changes in order to keep
up with the latest changes in standard. On top of this, it seems that
every disc you buy/hire is running to a different format, further
complicating matters. If the format could be finally set in concrete
and left static for a while, we might have a chance

Next problem is that of DRM protection. Where DVD suffered from a lack
of digital protection, Blu-Ray has gone over the top. While a whole
new format with new hardware and new software certainly provides an
opportunity to solidify DRM capabilities, it shouldn't interfere with
the consumer experience, which it really does. For one thing, try
using a laptop with a Blu-Ray drive to playback a movie. First, you'll
need to upgrade the software (which was almost impossible to get in
the first place), then try to load it up without crashing only to find
that having paid good money for a HD movie, you can only output it via
an analog connection with 2.0 sound. All because of an instant
assumption that you are attempting to pirate the movie. Fine, protect
the movie, but let me play it.

And last is one of the more obvious ones: load times. It's simply sad
that until recently the PS3 Fat was the fastest Blu-Ray player around.
Then the PS3 Slim came along, then finally a player from Olin managed
to beat the consoles. Even on these high-end, fast load machines, it
still takes quite a long time for the disc to initialize and for any
of the features to become available. It's simply impractical.

If they can fix these flaws with the combines resources of the many
and varied backers from around the world, maybe Blu-Ray can properly
dislodge DVD as the primary video playback format.

New Google Search Page coming?

Just the other day, I logged on to a common computer and did a quick Google search from IE and was greeted with a new Google!

I've been unable to replicate the new design, but it was definitely there and was definitely much better.

The Google logo has been rendered in slightly cooler colours with less gloss to the letters. More importantly, the search page has a new options pane along the left hand side. It now allows you to choose the source of results from the usuals like Web, Images, Video and News. Also, you can now search Discussions and Social Updates specificially from an easy to use bar along the left hand side which has now taken over some of the old Google options as well as adding some new ones.

You can now further tighten your search, such as choosing just Forums or Q&A's within the Discussions banner, or sorting by date posted instead of relevance. You can also (unconfirmed) still access all the usual search options (including Wonder Wheel and Timeline) with any search. More importantly, you can now also include Page Preview thumbnails beside results so you can see what the target page looks like before you choose it. The general page is also cleaner, smoother and easier to use.

Now, I don't know how I found it, but it could be the latest iteration of the refresh that started with the Google Caffeine engine upgrade. No guarantees, but it could be coming.

YouTube redesigns their video page

In a fairly unanticipated move, YouTube has released a new design for their video pages. There is now more focus on three core elements. The video is one, which now appears less cluttered. The second is comments which now sit directly below and much closer to the video itself and related videos now takes the entire right column all to itself. Ancillary functions like sharing, embed codes and other bits and pieces, as well as the description, username, user's videos etc have now moved into small bars above and below the video and into nice drop-down menus for related functions like sharing, saving (to playlists and favourites only, no direct download of course), and author/user tools.

Overall, it's not a big change, and it could take a little getting used to, but it seems like a nice refresh. The prominence of related videos is a plus for YouTube and users alike. YouTube benefits from the longer-term stays encouraged by users who are quickly distracted by the myriad of related videos and therefore see more videos, more ads and spend more time on-site, all of which is an advantage for them. For the user, it means it is now easier to find not just what you wanted in the first place, but also other things which might interest us. Since they take up the whole bar, there is also less actual looking necessary, since the whole bar is videos, with less sponsored links, less ads in annoying places and more videos, in general.

Also, the old star rating system has been converted into a thumbs up/thumbs down system like the comments feature on the previous YouTube. This is combined with a cool new feature attached to the views counter. You can now get full statistics on a series of dimensions and parameters from Insight. You can get time graphs of the videos popularity from the click of a button which is neat little innovation from the boys at Google. Speaking of comments, you can still like/dislike comments like before but you can also use the @ tag to direct comments at specific users which seems to be popping up everywhere...

The Quicklist method of creating a quick playlist of videos without any hassle has been changed to the "Up Next Queue" and despite YouTube claiming that it's a new feature, it looks pretty much the same to me. What's not so obvious is that YouTube actually populates your Up Next Queue for you. If you arrived at the video through Search, then the search results form your Queue, or if it's a subscription, your other videos from subscriptions will form your Queue which seems to be a good way of finding videos but also a good way to waste a hell of a lot of time, especially since Autoplay (playing the next movie straight after the current one finishes) is on by default.

One unforeseen (at least for us) consequence is that the actual player has changed behind the scenes. The front end is exactly the same and the only thing that hints to me that something has changed is that navigating to the video on the website on an iPhone now shows a plugin icon, which has worked previously as a Youtube Video. However, the native YouTube app still functions perfectly so maybe it's just a coincidence. I will check the mobile YouTube site, but desktop no longer works. Also, trying to run videos through services like Zamzar (online video download/conversions) results in an error coming back every time, suggesting that something might have changed...

In the meantime, enjoy YouTube's new back to basics look and good luck finding all the old functions!!

Assorted iPhone News

The Internet is, as usual, running wild with rumours of the iPhone 4G,
but some of them aren't so likely.

The not-really-very-appropriately-named iPhone User Guide posted a
graphic talking about what users expected would feature in the next
generation of the wildly popular iPhone. There were the weird ones
like a glowing Apple logo on the back and such things, but there were
also some notable absences.

I, for one, can almost guarantee that multitasking will probably
feature, but whether this is a firmware or hardware upgrade is
unknown. Jailbroken iPhones have had this capability for a little
while, but the main populous haven't seen it yet. And with the Palm
Pre and Motorola Droid as well as HTC's Android offerings showing some
real capability (the Droid was Engadget's gadget of the year if I'm
not mistaken) Apple will be looking for some big advances.

iBooks has a decent chance of making the jump to iPhone, but there are
still some problems on that front. For one thing, that's one of the
big points of differentiation between the iPad and the iPhone/iPod
Touch series. There is also the small matter of the Kindle app that
most agree Apple is getting paid a truckload of money to support and
leave alone.

There has also been a lot of speculation since CNET's Crave blog
posted supposed pictures of the next-gen devices and started
speculation of what exactly a small semi-reflective piece was at the
top of the phone, near the speaker. Some said it was the proximity
sensor, but there's no reason to move it from it's current, invisible
position. Could it be that Apple's finally bitten the bullet and
decided to mount a forward-facing video camera in the next iPhone.
This could lead to great potential with the idea of video calling
jumping to mind. It could also be a trigger for Apple to release an
iPhone port of iChat to the market, which would be interesting to see.

And finally, there is of course that little issue of the lawsuit. Yes,
Apple is actually suing HTC over patent violations, just as they did
with Nokia. Which makes you wonder why they're doing it? The Nokia
debacle is still not over and there on flimsy grounds. There is, of
course, also the issue of Google's (and Microsoft's) involvement. By
directly targeting Android and WM handsets, they're running a big
risk. Microsoft will stay out of it, but Google could just weigh in.
If that were to happen, Apple might just find themselves in a little
too deep...

NOTE: Sorry about the long hiatus, but now with term back in for the
final year, the timetable is getting a bit hectic...

The Progression of Closed Systems

The idea of proprietary, closed systems has been around for yonks, since some marketing idiot (who should now be stoned to death for crimes against technology) had the realisation that if people can only use your device with your products and are entirely reliant on you, you can then milk the consumer for everything they've got and make a killing. Unfortunately for him, he was in marketing so he didn't realise that the world didn't work like that. So the hacker (note: not crackers, they're idiots) community came up with the brilliant idea that why not open up the closed system and make it even better than it was before. So was born the idea of hacking devices. Some of the more well-known ones of these are the PSP and the iPhone. These are more remarkable than the millions of other devices that were swiftly cracked and taken to the masses because Sony and Apple, respectively, have both tried very hard (to varying degrees of success) to halt the free flow of hacked software and hardware.


The ultimate reason that these companies cannot win is because they are taking the entirely wrong approach to solving the problem. Take the PSP Custom Firmware example. When PSP's came out, they were very quickly hacked and custom firmwares released along with homebrew games by the hundred showing the world a new world of portable gaming...free. Then, with Firmware 1.5, it all slowed down a bit, because with this release, Sony had added a new feature: the Internet Browser. users upgraded to get this new feature because they preferred it to the hacked solution's lack of said browser. Then, with Firmware 3, we see the other approach. Sony released a new Firmware, built off a new kernel, and with security like no-one had previously seen, but there was little increase in capability. So what was the end result of this move: Hackers across the interwebs got pissed and between the lot of them, cracked it in no time at all.

The point of all this is that you will never be as good or as secure as the millions of hackers around the globe are determined and skilled. Therefore, trying to secure your product from their hacking fingers is pointless. You must remove the determination. As far as I can see, the only way to stop people from hacking your product is to give them such capabilities and features that it's not worth their while to go without them.

Now, the iPhone. One of the most proprietary closed systems on the planet, Apple controls every aspect of the device, the hardware, the OS, the capabilities of the Apps and everything about the phone and it's equipment. And yet, they are regularly jailbroken and hacked by the multitude of ra1n and sn0w programs populating the darker corners of the Internet. So, what did Apple do. First was 3.0 which saw multitudes of people flock to the official OS for it's great new features. Next was 3.1.2 which was solely a security update which was met not by exodus from the jailbreak community but by stiff competition and determination from the hackers. This all culminated with GeoHot's fantastic Blackra1n, an easy-to-use 30-second jailbreak for any Apple Touch device, running any OS. So, their big move to stop jailbreaking led to it becoming a lot easier and a lot more accessible for the average user. No tricky consoles here, just one big button that says "make it ra1n" and you're done.


Of course, for Apple, one of the biggest reasons the jaibreak community are so successful is because they are getting apps for free, an income stream that Apple doesn't want to simply abandon, and Sony doesn't really want PSP owners to be simply downloading their ISO's off the net, and starving them (and the already nervous developers) of their revenue. Since, there's no real solution that keeps both sides happy, I think we've only really seen the very beginning of this.

iTunes: Apple's Elephant in the Room

When Apple released the first iPod onto the market, I don't think even they could've expected all this to happen. From a foundling product with not all that revolutionary features, iPod's now pretty much own the portable MP3 market. Initally, they faced stiff competition for the then unheard-of portable MP3 market. Now, iPods are everywhere running away with the market share in the face of only token gestures of disagreement from Microsoft and some very high-quality, but nonetheless unsuccessful new ranges of Walkmans from Sony. Now, the iPod is available in just about any size, shape, colour, format and with almost any capability you can name. And if the iPod can't do it, there's probably an app for that. So, Apple has been feverishly making bucketloads of money and trying to keep the momentum up, sometimes failing (new iPod shuffle), mostly succeeding (iPhone, ipod touch, iPod nano, etc.).



One of the big things that has let them take such commanding control over the market is the iTunes connection. By forcing iPod users to iTunes, you take more control over their actions as well as ensuring that most users will start purchasing content from the store. The initial iPods barely did anything but then the developments started rolling in. First there was music, then photos, then videos, then PIM data, then Podcasts, then Apps, Ringtones, Games, and various other extra functions. Unfortunately, fearful of losing their market momentum and iTunes users (to others like Winamp etc.). This means that they've kept essentially the same application since the first iPods, But the first iPods contained little more than music. Now, iTunes must sync multiple devices, multiple file systems, music, videos, photos, applications, PIM data and a billion other things that it was never really written to handle. Thus, we now end with what I believe to be one of the singularly worst mainstream bits of code that the world has seen on such a scale before. It's unstable, unreliable, difficult to use, requires immense resources and is generally not a very good program. Admittedly, it probably functions a bit better on Mac, but they should realise that the majority of their consumer base is currently using Windows.


My venerable old Acer Travelmate 4602 has finally been replaced by a new Dell Studio 1557, a far superior machine running all the newest gear (i7, yay!), and still iTunes 9 is slow, only starts up around 50% of the time and is a resource hog. I'm onw very relieved that I didn't try to upgrade the old machine with the new v9. On top of this, there are a multitude of things that software like that should be able to do, that it can't. Move to a new computer without ruining one's carefully organised music colletion, for example. Or to function fully without a stable internet connection. But it can't do this, or any of the other things that the Web would so dearly love.
Apple has simply been overcautious and (to an extent) greedy, trying to hold onto every scrap of market share and so simply stuffing a not-all-that-fantastic application with so much not-all-that-well-built functionality that it is just waiting for one of two things: major overhaul or catastrophic failure...

Computers

I just found this excerpt (over on the ZumoDrive Blog) from a 1985 Interview with Steve Jobs just as the Mac was launching on just what computing entails:

PLAYBOY: Maybe we should pause and get your definition of what a computer is. How do they work?

STEVE JOBS: Computers are actually pretty simple. We’re sitting here on a bench in this cafe [for this part of the Interview]. Let’s assume that you understood only the most rudimentary of directions and you asked how to find the rest room. I would have to describe it to you in very specific and precise instructions. I might say, "Scoot sideways two meters off the bench. Stand erect. Lift left foot. Bend left knee until it is horizontal. Extend left foot and shift weight 300 centimeters forward..." and on and on. If you could interpret all those instructions 100 times faster than any other person in this cafe, you would appear to be a magician: You could run over and grab a milk shake and bring it back and set it on the table and snap your fingers, and I’d think you made the milk shake appear, because it was so fast relative to my perception. That’s exactly what a computer does. It takes these very, very simple-minded instructions—"Go fetch a number, add it to this number, put the result there, perceive if it’s greater than this other number"—but executes them at a rate of, let’s say, 1,000,000 per second. At 1,000,000 per second, the results appear to be magic.

That’s a simple explanation, and the point is that people really don’t have to understand how computers work. Most people have no concept of how an automatic transmission works, yet they know how to drive a car. You don’t have to study physics to understand the laws of motion to drive a car. You don’t have to understand any of this stuff to use Macintosh—but you asked

Personally, I think that is one of the most brilliant descriptions of computing I've ever heard. And it is still technically correct, despite its simplicity. What this quote, I think, actually draws attention to, is just what computers are doing, and what we are doing that could make computers such an amazing thing.

Think about it, a computer is basically just a large calculator on steroids and yet, they've now taken on an enormous part of out lives and are capable of what people could only dream of not that many years ago. How we've come from a basic calculation device that filled a room and would give you results after about a week to near instant global networking of innumerable consumer PC's to create a network of information and people that can answer almost any question is even today a bit of a mystery. It seems to be the story of a series of very visionary people (Jobs among them) and some very dedicated groups each advancing in their own way, succeeding and failing in just the right places to create systems which then evolved and evolved until we have today's globally connected electronic world.

On a smaller scale, though, it's this evolution of systems that can really fascinate. Computers initially ran on actual physical glass valves and now the technology world gets all excited because we release a new line of processors which decrease in architecture size from 90 nanometer process to a 45 nanometer process. That's a change from .00000090 meters to .00000045 meters hoping to become .00000011 by 2015. The scale of computer electronics development is amazing not just for its capabilities, but it's evolutionary path. Fuelled by a realisation of possibility, few other things in the history of man with the possible exception of fire and the wheel have evolved quite so rapidly, so fervently and on such a scale. To obtain developments such as the 90nm to 45nm example, takes such levels of technology in itself that it is truly mind-altering. Engineers have managed to bring about a change of 0.00009955 meters since 1972 and this is a truly astonishing feat. Just the idea of 0.00009955 metres makes no sense to us. Our minds have not yet learnt to think on such scales, nor have we learnt to think on galactic scales, which only makes the computer evolution the more astonishing. We have put such development into this technological pursuit that it has (in some ways) evolved faster than our minds have been able to.

The majority of this lies in the same principle that makes parts of the internet so astonishing, elements of group theory and population dynamics combining to create a situation where such scales of individuals are working toward innumerable numbers of goals in myriads of pursuits, all combining into one crowning piece, combining the work of so many into one system.
And all of that is why us geeks absolutely love what we do. Bceause we all want to be a part of that 0.00009955 metres and we all can be.

Chrome OS! Joy! In a Box! Or a multi-coloured ball!

So, after that big release a couple of months back, we were all getting excited for November 19, 2009, Google's next big release on Chrome OS. While not very explosive, we're still all very happy because while Chrome OS is not yet available for free download and will be offered only on strict hardware configurations, it's open-source brother Chromium OS has been released to the public.

While Chrome itself also went through this Chromium stage before Google decided to dominate the browser market, there are some big differences. For one, I can download Chrome right now, Chrome OS will only be appearing pre-loaded on certain netbooks. That is, unless you buy a brand-new x86-based netbook from a list of manufacturers and are willing to stump up the cash for SSD's, there won't be any Chrome OS joy for you.

Okay, that's lame and very bad news. Better news? The Chromium project, effectively Google's open-source spawnchild has released Chromium OS, an open-source brother to Chrome OS. This means that with a bit of virtualizing joy, you can boot a working copy of something very, very similar to Chrome OS, right now.

And there are so many reasons to love Chrome OS. Okay, apart from being the same bunch of die-hard nerds who created all the fantastic things that make us love Google, they have created a fantastic OS. So, it's not real heavyweight, but it's not meant to be. Here's a couple of the reasons I love it:

1. Boot time:
Chrome boots in seconds, not minutes. Apparently, at the news releases, Chrome booted in 7 seconds and were trying to improve that! I've had enough waiting around for Windows to take it's time booting, then crash, have another go, then try and boot off some 3 day old standby information before deciding it can't do that, then stop, crash, boot, run Check Disk, then restart and boot again. Chrome just...works

2.Hardware:
To paraphrase another similarly minded blogger: "Windows 7 works better on netbooks than Windows Vista. No, Windows 7 works on netbooks. Period." Windows Vista was a massive hardware hoarder. It needed such weapons-grade hardware just to work at an adequate pace that half the planet is still running XP because that's all they could until now. Now, Windows 7 and promises to run better on low-power platforms. Unfortunately for the Redmond boys, Chrome has now arrived and running off a lightweight Linux kernel based around online usage, and is promising to demolish everything we know about low-hardware usage implementations. Running lightweight web-based OS's off an aging, under-powered netbooks? Not a problem. According to some of the reports, I could probably run it on my tired old geriatrics department that some would call a computer, currently gathering dust downstairs. Chrome OS test run on a computer running a low-spec version of the original Intel Celeron in an extremely aged budget motherboard with pretty much nothing else, anyone?

3. Chrome
The technical term for the screen real estate used up by an interface and google has a distinct hatred for it. The whole reason their last two projects have been called Chrome is because of a distinct lack of said chrome. Chrome OS appears to be a version of the Chrome browser running in fullscreen. However, each tab is capable of not just individual web pages, but one can also open a tab for certain web apps or apps in general, all on the one tab strip. The interface, to this extent at least is similar to the Lotus Symphony interface of integrating every function into one chrome. Also, there has been talk of a 'dock' of some sort at the bottom of the screen to hold function that you would want separate, but subtle. Things like music players (which Google is reportedly developing) and chat functions. Similar, I think, to a chunky version of a system tray. All in all, it looks very naturally intuitive and very, very easy to use without sacrificing the good-looking quality that comes naturally to Apple's OS systems.

4. Google
Kind of goes without saying, but Chrome OS is made by Google, which means it will work first time, every time, almost perfectly without undue risks, threats, explosions or unexplained errors. It will integrate with everything flawlessly and it will all be free. We salute you, Google.

Overall, I am now simply sitting around and waiting until someone comes out with a Chrome OS boot for USB disks before I Chromify everything I lay my eyes, hands, and anything else on.

Google Fast Flip: the new news-worthy revelation in news...

Google has finally unleashed it's latest Google Labs (experimental features) beta. Called Fast Flip, it aims to revolutionize the way people read news. Judging by what I've seen, it will.

The great hallmark of Google News has always been that it was one place where you could read news from just about every reputable source. This is still the case with Fast Flip, which not only increases it's catalogue offerings, but also allows you to filter by not just topic, but also publication.

But here is where the resemblance to Google News ends. Rather than present readers with plain text news on a page under headings. It gives you actual images of the actual stories from their original locations, complete with headlines, bylines, stories, and unfortunately ads. Then, you can simply Flip through all the stories under whatever category/source you're looking at. And in true Google fashion, there ain't no waiting for thumbnails to load here. It's blindingly quick. During our hands-on, I only managed to get to a story without it's thumbnail already loaded once. And I was being pretty demanding.

Then, choose your article with a simple click and it gives you a bigger preview of the story with some more options, including to see the whole article, or "Like" the story, the usual share options, etc. Then, one simple click and you have the whole story, at its original source. Right there.

It's freaking brilliant. It works like an absolute charm, and I have had no problems with the (still experimental) tool yet, so that's a good sign.

It also has a dedicated iPhone page, which is also fantastic. It operates as above, but a bit better because it has all the functionality of the multi-touch interface. First page you see you can choose your category, then flip through the stories with a simple slide. Then, you can either pinch or rotate your iPhone to get a closer look. Tap to get all the usual options in it's own dialog box as well as some more info on your selected article.

But of course, there is a far more sinister side to all this. The two-step process between preview and story means that it has opened a whole new world of options. Options that aren't so great for us, the consumers.

One of the reasons Google put the effort into creating this, and also into changing into a preview-view operation lies in the Internet's very nature. Online press is notorious. It is almost impossible to make money out of online press. More than that, it takes revenue from more traditional sources. Why buy a magazine or a newspaper if you can just jump on your iPhone and look at all for free, on the fly. So far, neither have publishers been able to find a way to successfully monetize the online press, because either your readers run away from costs to someone else who happens to be free, or you can't generate enough money to cover your costs, or that there just isn't an efficient way of visitors paying for their content without too much hassle.

However, it's been reported that much of the Fast Flip architecture has been designed with future options to monetize the story, if you want to move past the article preview. On top of this is the fact that another part of Google Labs ongoing work is the Google Checkout, a payment method similar to PayPal, which we assume forms part of the underlying structure behind Fast Flip.

The implications of this aren't exactly great. It means that soon, not even Internet news will be free. We could all be paying for our news, even from our (almost) entirely free friends at Google.

What is the world coming to when you have to pay to know what the world is coming to.

Google hits back...

Some time ago, I may have said some things on how everyone was beating up on Google and yet, it was all actually a complete waste of time. And now, i get to show you all why!

So, in the last little while, there was Wolfram|Alpha, there was/is Microsoft/Yahoo, there was some piece of forgettable drivel with a crap name like Bing, or Bong, or CRAP or whatever it is. But now, Google has returned to its original famed position at the top of the pile.

Google has done a couple of things. Like Google Squared. Like Chrome. Like Chrome OS. Like Android improvements. Like everything. And so everyone loves them again.

But now lets get into my attitude part of things. All these tools like Wolfram Gamma, or whatever, are a complete waste of everyones time. I'm happy to report that in the interval between its release and now, I've used it once and it failed me. There are also a couple of other bits and pieces that have come along and tried to claim the throne, but lets look at what has actually happened in the meantime. Firstly, and well, lastly too, nothing.

Has any regular Google user actually decided: "yes. I think Bing is better." and actually started using it. And before you all jump on my arse in the comments about god-knows-who, I don't care if your best mate's dog's previous owner's second cousin's ex-girlfriends niece twice-removed's grandmother's parrot's friend's owner's fiance's grandfather's brother's uncle's best friend has started using Bing. Nobody cared. Not even the grandmothers parrot.

Since then Google has made many announcements. They launched Google Squared, a new search tool which enables users to compile a lot of information on a number of things in one easy format, all using Google's amazingly freakish technology. They have also announced that Google Chrome will become Google's second OS, alongside the more lightweight Android. Interestingly, both OS's have claimed they're aimed at the netbook market, which already has two OS's vying for control. Bizarre. They have also announced and showcased one of my most anticipated Google features in ages: Google Wave. A form of realtime collaboration, it appears to solve the perpetual problem of there being so many conflicting and co-existing standards and networks by bringing all the mediums (text, images, video, web) together onto one place (the Wave) and allowing anybody to use it (but still allowing control over who joins the Wave). Cool, no? And this is the first time that I think I'm going to find a collaboration tool useful, if not because Google are the people to do it, and this is the first all-in-one solution...

Of course, there have also been a number of controversies. One of the biggest was after Apple rejected Google's Google Voice from its App Store for reasons of "duplicating functionality" which really just means: Google were freaking us out! This little blunder got Apple yet more publicity for its archaic App Store rejection policies and its continual refusal to cite reasons for its many and varied rejections. As well, Google got a lot of publicity for its tribute to HG Wells, which confused most of the interwebs for a long time, complete with bizarre Twitter posts referencing GPS co-ordinates and the iconic "All your bases are belong to us" reference, which should be in every geek joke.

Of course, this series of doodles which had people confused for quite some time, shows exactly what I'm talking about, and what I have been saying the whole time: Google is huge. Just from the Guardian, a fairly respectable publication, a search about Google's little joke returns 96 results. Searching on Google News returns 182 separate publications with articles on the "Google Crop Circles". A comprehensive search on Google News for Google hits me with a staggering 1.66 million results. And that's just the news articles from Google News...

Google is now so large, it actually is a part of our society. If you ask someone on the street for 5 words relating to the Internet, Google is almost guaranteed to come up. And that's my point, if you could find it somewhere in that incredibly difficult to follow, attitude-ridden, information-starved and generally non-sensical stream of absolute nothingness...

What's it all About: iPhone file storage

Welcome to 'what's it all about', the newest section of FerretTech. In these posts, I will attempt to be a bit more detailed than any of myother usual ranting gibberish posts and help you, my dear readers,with something. This week, I've been working on something personally,and it's annoying me, so I thought I'd save you the trouble that I've gone through to his point. That something is this: iPhone filestorage. By the way, a lot of this will be at least a bit applicablefor other applications in your dreary, probably geeky lives.

Most owners will know that Apple has disabled the Enable Disk Useoption in iTunes, or I'm pretty sure they have. So as a workaround,how else can one carry files around on their iPhone. Also note, thebiggest criteria: it's gotta be free...

I'm stingy. Anyone who knows me, knows it. So I don't want to have tofork out my cash for something that my first-gen Nano can do. If I've got a 32GB iPhone, I should be able to use it's space for FREE.

So, there are a couple of options still in the free domain. There aretwo main options: one is to have files on the iPhone accessible by acomputer. The other to have files on the cloud, accessible by the iPhone.

To the first of these, the local files. I have found two very goodapps that make a good solution. The first is Discover. Discover isavailable for the iPhone but also for Android as aFile. It involves afairly simple interface with viewing capabilities for all the major iPhone compatible file types, and a quality feel. Connection is byWebDAV, a relatively new protocol, much better than FTP or manyothers. Simply ensure that you are connected to the same network asyour iPhone, then enter the given IP address into any browser and youget another quality interface with many options and capabilities,right within your browser. This is one of those really good iPhoneapps that everyone should get.(Special Note to fellow BGS attendees: WebDAV doesn't work on schoolcomputers...)

The other good one is FileAid. This app has a slightly differentinterface with separate screens for computer connections, and for fileviewing which can be annoying. But the major difference is that thisone uses FTP for file connections. It has a separate sharing screenfor compute connections, and detailed instructions for connecting toFTP, which is probably a but superfluous consdering that anyone who islooking at this kind of app probably knows their USB from their PCI,and thei IP from their TWAIN… Anyway, this would be great except thatFTP is such an outdated protocol. I tried backing up my venerable USBflash drive and gave up after it gave me so many error messages andthen stopped that I considered punching a hole through my laptop screen. Of course, you can't simply replace a file already on thedrive because you get Error: File exists, or you'll receive an Error:File name too long, or any of a number of other problematic problemsuntil you inevitably become so annoyed you will do what I did and putsuch a curse upon the designer of FTP that he will never restpeacefully again. If it wasn't for this, FileAid would be a great app.You can view documents, sort them by folder, name, type, colour of theflying elephant who wrote it, whatever. But it's FTP, and FTP is crap,so FileAid is a case of 'missed by that much'.

There is, as I've mentioned before, also the Web-based solution. I'llbe quick with this, because I've only managed to make one work, andits quite good. Zumodrive is a cloud-based storage service, with 1GBfor free. You can access it from the Internet and you can access it from the iPhone, but since it's on the Internet, you need an Internetconnection, only here you can probably use 3G data. Not that I would,but you probably can.I've tried to make MyDisk.se work, and it does from the web, but notby using an app like Disks. Using MyDisk, you get 2GB free, as opposedto Zumodrive's 1GB. Still, if anyone can make MyDisk's WebDAV work with anything, that would be useful...

Okay, so now for the bit where I pull it all together and tell youwhat you should use. Unfortunately for you, I'm not going to do that.You make up your own mind. I, personally have all three, just so I'mready for any occasion, but I'm personally favouring Zumodrive at the moment.

So, the biggest things that we can take from this is two things: one,there aren't any really good solutions to this problem. The other: I am way too stingy...

The Return: Yahoo and Microsoft evokes flashbacks

Sorry to all my readers for the long hiatus, but I've had a lot of work on, and then I took a 3 week trip to France, and then had more work, but I'm back and hoping to return to my previous semi-regularity of posting.

Now this one is a little out of date, because it's been sitting here waiting to be published for a while. Enjoy anyway ...

But now, to the post proper. As is the buzz on every vaguely tech-interested news service, Yahoo and Microsoft have finally clinched some sort of deal together. While nobody has any strong details, it appears that Microsoft is the big brother in this little relationship, with some speculating that it could be the end of Yahoo. I, for one, believe they won't die out, but it won't be a good omen for Yahoo, who are already struggling against the friendly giant Google, and who are about to have half of their business stolen out from under them by Microsoft.

There is another question that is annoying me, and one that crops up so often i may as well rename the blog: Why?. (But FerretWhy just doesn't have the same ring...) Microsoft is not exactly short of a penny or two with the world's most heavily populated OS smothering the Earth, and they've just gone and put God-doesn't-even-know-how-much effort into creating, broadcasting, publicising and (as Microsoft tends to do) smothering everyone and anyone with "Bing!", which seems to be Live Search but with a new face, a less dorky name, and options to verbify it later. Although I doubt anyone's going to walk around saying, 'Why don't you Bing it', if not for the potential of horridly inappropriate mispronunciations, but more because Google is just sooo good, and soooo everywhere. And works so well as a verb...

So why, then, has Microsoft spent a good part of that fortune on buying a company that is being beaten silly by a certain company with one more letter in its name. And quite a lot larger than 1% of the market. Critics have suggested that its just for the advertising money, but this still just doesn't quite fit. For me, it evokes flashbacks of that wonderful tech match-up between AOL and Time Warner. Wow. I'm not sure I've seen a more woeful sop story from a company other than this one. If you're wondering what I'm rambling on about now, it's creatively discussed here)

As far as anyone can tell, nothings been set out about what's going to happen, or even what is happening. Only that Microsoft and Yahoo are getting together and what odd bedfellows they make

As usual, I could be wrong about all of this (which wouldn't be the first time) and it could just be money-hungry Microsoft trying to grab Yahoo's pathetic little share of the online advertising market. After all, they are feelng more than a little pressure from Google lately...

Is it really necessary?

Everyone. And i mean, everyone feels the need to hate the big guy. It's even more apparent in the tech world. Microsoft. Huge. Hated (although that might be for a different reason, something to do with their products being, i don't know, can't remember, maybe someone can help me in comments...). And the latest casualty to the We Hate the Big Guy Syndrome (WHTBGS) is Google. Everyone was just fine, using Google every day, it had become one of the most used verbs in the English language, and then, BANG, everyone hates it, and everyone should use Bing, because, well, it's not Google.

To the first of Google's new rivals (and probably the worst): Microsoft's Bing.

(That name could only have come from a Google wannabe, hoping to have a new verb entered into the dictionary: "to Bing". No chance, mate. Sorry about that.)

Microsoft's first disastrous attempt at a search engine Live Search, failed. No doubt about it. It Failed. The only traffic it received was from people who accidentally typed something in the IE search box, forgetting that they hadn't changed the default yet. That, and people living under a rock for the last 10 years, and/or those who live in the suburbs, have huge armchairs, are over the age of 75, and do crochet for a hobby. They don't know what that Internet thing is, but it scares them.

Anyway, the point is that while for Microsoft they couldn't just abandon the huge search sector of their business, but i think their usage stats are going to be a bit misleading, since everyone will use Bing, just cos they don't want to use Google. It's just not that good...

And now to Wolfram Alpha. I am no huge fan of Wolfram Alpha. There has been no secret hates, or shady commenting. I admit. I don't like Wolfram Alpha. I have near to zero use for a computational engine like this. I like Google. I like Google Squared. There is very little i would use Wolfram for, that i couldn't do in my head, have no use for, or want to know more about (i.e. Google it). When in want to know how fast 5mph is in m/s, Google tells me, followed by links to tell me exactly why. When i enter it into Wolfram Alpha, it accompanies it with 5mph in kilometres travelled per year, and a small series of increasingly useless data. I will admit that Alpha has its uses, but all those idiots claiming it is some kind of Google-slayer are just idiots. Alpha is for a different audience, and a different kind of search, where being limited to a small database, rather than a huge index doesn't matter. It may be good, but it's no Google beater, as much cos it's not even taking Google on (you'd be mad to! *cough* Microsoft *cough*)

There is also no getting around the fact tha Wolfram Alpha was made by some dude in his basement with too much time on his hands.

To the bigger issue here: The need to demolish Google. Google is incredibly useful, and it has transformed the Internet. There is no getting around it, and there probably never will be, just like there probably never will be an engine quite like Google. Do we need to fight it so harshly? Can't we all just get along?!!

To my devoted followers: This (suitably attitude-ridden) post also happens to be my blog's 50th post! Right from the start , through the shaky start , then the 10th post , the 25th , the 40th , and now the 50th.

I hope to continue well into the next 50 and beyond, with similarly high-quality, highly-objectionable, and highly-attitude-filled posts, to maintain my standards of awesomeness (unlike a certain other blog , which turned into absolute drivel, and was suitably rejected). Happy Birthday FerretTech!

The diverse (and often pointless) face of mobile computing...

I'm a pretty big fan of mobile computing and technology. It always seems better to be able to keep doing "stuff" without having to be tethered to your house. And so, i watch mobile computing trends come and go with eager interest. Okay, so i'm not an eager kind of person, but i pay some idle interest, which is a departure from the norm.

At the moment, it seems like there are a couple of different ways into the mobile computing brand:

1. The JTIO mob. (The Just Tack It On Mob). Their ideology is simple. Find a device. Put internet on it. Everything from camcorders to e-book readers. Generally a useless waste of perfectly good internet.

2. The BIFTG mob. (The Build it From the Ground mob). Not so simple. Biggest example is the netbook, which was built as a laptop, but the makers were too lazy to do it properly, so they just ripped some stuff off the internet and made it seem local, and BANG! The netbook is born.
(This whole category is made worse by the fact that whenever you take it away from the Internet, it becomes a useless pile of crap. I've seen bricks with more functionality.)

3. The RATPFMS mob. (The Re-Align the Product for More Sales mob). This is where we have a perfectly good product, but for the sakes of making it better, they suddenly add a whole new dimension, and feature set, just cos its useful. Generally, results in some of the most useful stuff around. Anything from PlayStations to TV's have had this treatment, and all have come out the better for it.

However you want to do it, everyone can see it coming. Some want to embrace it, some won't touch it with a barge pole. But everyone knows it's going to happen. Everything will be connected. The future is with the Internet as the centrepiece of a connected society, or to steal Cisco's ad slogan a "human network".

Me, I'm looking forward to it!

The (Apple) Empire Strikes Back...

Apple has had their developer conference, and has delivered what everyone was expecting (which was a fair bit), plus a bit more to compensate for the over-zealous early advertising.

And so, i hear you ask, (No, I'm not standing at your door, listening to you mutter to yourself because you think this particular ferret may have finally 'lost it'. I'm just guessing. Legal Note: You may not in fact actually ask this question at all. The Publisher waives all liability to any losses, physical or otherwise that may have occurred due to misinterpretation of the abovementioned statement.) (to continue from above) what happened?

In a few short words, quite a lot. Just not all of it would be particularly interesting to you. The biggest thing that everyone was looking for was the new June 26 iPhone 3GS. It is not quite an overhaul, but more an answer to what users have been demanding for ages. Things like:

• Autofocus camera
• At last, real photos, kind of. It's now also 3 megapixel
• Video Recording
• Also useful, and something my old Motorazr V6 has been doing for a long time...
• It's faster
• Useful. As always, there is no such thing as a too fast processor. And the iPhone's was getting pretty far from that imaginary boundary, if you get my drift
• It's battery lasts longer
• Not just useful, it's about bloody time. The battery wasn't pathetic, but as with everything else about the iPhone, it wasn't as good as some of it's competitors
• Voice Control
• Useful. Sort of. I've never run into a situation when i thought "I wish i had set up Voice Control". And i don't think i'm going to yet. Still, the voice control even extends into the iPod functions and everything. Cool.
• A Compass
• A Compass? You mean one of those spinny things. Yes, the iPhone has a compass, but it's not just about telling which way north is, (which you can do with any analog watch), but enabling far better Google Maps, and thanks to TomTom, turn-by-turn satnav. Yay!
• Lower prices
• Always good, especially when they cut old model prices too!

As always, there is still a considerable list of stuff that isn't there. Anything from user-replaceable batteries (when Hell freezes over) to USB Storage support is still missing. Oh well, it's still good.


Now to less important news, and because i'm lazy i'm going to let my good friends over at Crave do the work for this bit:

• MacBook range revamped
• iPhone 3.0 software
• OS X update
• Safari 4
• and some other useless stuff
• see here: http://tinyurl.com/Crave-WWDC

Anyway, that's it for my WWDC coverage, but have a look around Crave for more info (they are disturbingly interested in the WWDC coverage game)...

E3 continues...

Having had Nintendo and Sony present their anticipated press conferences, it thought it apt to refresh my E3 coverage. They had big targets to meet after the Microsoft bombshell, and they were impressive, but was it enough...

We'll start with the Sony camp. One of the biggest unveilings (and the worst kept secret) was the PSP Go! Official details were released which was pretty much the same as the pre-release specs. Lighter, smaller, no UMD, now with Bluetooth, slide-out controls, and still no second analog stick. Also interesting was the online-style features. A partnership with eMusic for PSP-based music on the go, PS3 inter-operability, and a couple of other nice bits, apart from the obvious DLC-only gaming.
The PS3 has also been hit with a possible future revolution, with Tretton premiering not just an incredible volume of new games, but also a motion senitive controller, that is even capable of doing soft touches, such as knocking over dominoes. Impressive, and definitely a Wii-hunting move.

Now with Micorsoft and Sony going Wii-hunting, what would Nintendo's response be?
Pretty much nothing as it turns out! Their biggest announcement was a couple of DLC titles for the DS platform and the improved Wii Motion Plus. Yawn!

So that's it for the big three for this year. Let's hear it, who do you think won it? Who was most impressive? Who was an absloute dud?

UPDATE: I almost forgot. Nintendo released a heart-rate monitor for the Wii! Yes, i know it's pretty weird, but they were struggling...

E3 is here!

E3 2009 has started, and some of the big guns have already thrown in bombshells on the first day!

Biggest news of the day was, of course, Microsoft's big press conference. They were starting to look a touch like the lame duck of the console business, but they've just delivered a whopping great slap to the Wii! The next Xbox 360 add-on is based on the idea of your body controlling the game. Details are still a little on the sketchier side, but it seems that rather than having something like a Wiimote, the Xbox 360 add-on, codenamed Project Natal, uses a bar setup with camera, motion, sound, and even suggestions of 3D perceptions. If it works as well as they claim, it should be really impressive. But it still has no name, no price, no release date, no specs, no (or barely any) compatible games, and not really anything concrete at all. Crave even thinks that it won't be ready for E3 2010! My bet? When the Xbox 360 gets replaced, Natal will be ready and waiting.
Microsoft also announced a swag of new games for their soon-to-be-reborn console. Not too many gorundbreaking titles, but interesting nonetheless. Many sequels. Rock Band, Tony Hawk, Final Fantasy, Crackdown, Left4Dead, Splinter Cell, Forza Motorsport, and Halo (two of them) are all current franchises about to be given a boost. In fact, there was really only two new games, and one of those was a lightweight online-only game...

Yet more suprising Microsoft news :  Facebook and Twitter are coming to Xbox Live. Now i've always thought that Sony would throw in a port of either Facebook or MySpace (or new kid Twitter) into the PS3's PSN capabilities. But i've stopped waiting. And now Microsoft has jumped in and is (to be brutally frank) holding Nintendo and Sony by the balls. Only sign of light on the horizon is the Facebook Connect Standard which may yet make the jump to the PlayStation family. Wouldn't it be awesome to have Twitter on a PSP!

There are some other nice games from the likes of Ubisoft, but none seem earth-shatteringly new or particularly attention-grabbing, so i won't waste your time now.

Keep your ears (and/or eyes, unless you are somehow text-to-speeching my blog which is just weird) peeled as i try to keep you updated as Nintendo and Sony hit back tomorrow at 9:00 and 11:00 respectively (American time)...

The future of Computing?

I've been having a bit of a think, which is always dangerous, and as i see it, the current model of computing can't last the next decade. My vision: Distributed cloud computing.

to the first part of my divine epiphany: Distributed computing. I think this is definitely going to happen, for two reasons. One, PS3's have got it. PS3's know everything before it happens. Reason Two, Quad-core processors. As most of my readership would probably know, quad-core processors are everywhere. On a more technical side, quad-core processors have no real increase in actual CPU speed. But, can they multi-task or what? They can do everything,at once. They can run multiple different games of Unreal Tournament. They can be editing twenty-five PowerPoints at once. They can even run mutiple OS's (Macintosh, yay!). And yet, nobody actually uses four processors worth of power at any one time. So what are the other three cores doing. Jack all. Why not, in this ultra-connected world, let the freakin huge network that is the rest of the world, have a bit of your processor. This way, if any computer slows down for a little bit, it nicks a bit of power off someone else who's not using it and KA-BOOM everyone's computer goes way faster.

And if everyone's connected up anyway, why store anything locally? Or on a USB disk. Or on a Portable HDD, or even on an iPod (i've seen it happen waaay too many times). Why not just store it on the biggest cloud in the entire blue sky (i'm pretty sure it's the biggest): the InterWeb. What a great place to store it. Drop it off at one place, pick it up again three continents later and it's still good. You don't need software, there aren't any file types. Everything, just, works. So my opinion might be a little skewed by the fact that 80% of the computers i use won't remember me or anything i save on them after i log out, and the other 20% have no veritable means of connecting with the 80% except for a tired old USB key that tends to randomly disconnect and connect again. Not fun. Whereas, the internet can hold anything, anywhere. There is already a bit of work on this front, especially with online documents. Some are brilliant (Google Docs), some nothing short of dismal (Windows Live Workspaces), but there is still a lot of untapped potential there.

I think if tech keeps advancing at the veritably rapid pace it is at the moment, it can only go closer toward the internet...

It's not that my guess is any better than yours, but i've got the blog...

Portable World: Comms: The top-end phones battle it out

The iPhone is huge and i mean absolutely, disturbingly huge. And I don't mean physically. Almost everyone seems to have one, everyone else badly wants one, but i'm not one of them. Apple's OS is pretty good, but overly proprietary. The lack of certain functions irk me, and the Apple-only world the iPhone needs, is just a bit too restrictive. Call me non-conformist, but i'll go for the Android OS everytime.

But, for the time being, there are virtually no Android phones and not many more Android apps (even if some of them are soooooo cool) and so we look the other camp, the Windows Mobile Smartphones. There are plenty of good ones and CNET ran a small comparo a while ago, but it had some notable rivals missing. One of the MIA's was my personal favourite the HTC Touch HD.

Physically, their dimensions are all similar within about a half a centimetre, so not much to distinguish them there. Visually, they are similar, with screens of about 3.5" on a nice gloss black finish, with the odd hard button here and there.

The Touch HD's biggest feature and its namesake, is that screen. Just to set the benchmark, the iPhone has a 3.5" screen running 480x320 pixels. The HD uses a 3.8-inch screen with a whopping 800x480! This actually has a slightly different aspect ratio, the iPhone with a standard 1.5:1, the HD running a tall 1.666:1.

Now to cameras. The HD runs the proper 3G set-up: VGA cam on the front, 5-megapixel on the back. The iPhone? Just the one 2.0 megapixel jobbie.

The touch HD still runs WinMob 6.1, but with HTC's much acclaimed touchFLO system, which is (as i've said before) one of the best ones around, while the iPhone's is quite good, but not to my personal tastes.

Here are some of the more interesting tidbits. The iPhone gets the amazing Apps Store, but the Touch HD? Any app ever written for mobile Windows since the old CE days!

The Touch HD gets real bluetooth, not just basic connection management. The Touch HD has an external memory slot, removing the need for internal flash memory. It has WiFi, and 3.5G internet. It has a 3.5mm jack (about time) and normal USB connections. No proprietary crap here.

And here is one of the big killers for the iPhone. The HTC is sexy, no doubt about it, and anyone who knows their chips can see it's a very similar, if not better machine. But one of the Touch HD's best features. It's not an iPhone...

It doesn't come pre-packed with a superiority complex. People won't earmark you as a non-conformist, a conformist, a geek, an idiot or just about anything else they can think of every time you whip out your HD.

It's not trying to save the world from themselves, and I love it for that if nothing else.

And so i announce the Touch HD becomes recipient of a world first:

PS. It also has a proper virtual keyboard. Hurrah!