Posts by SuccessCase

HTC 'dismayed' by Apple's bizarre patent allegations

So that will be Apple and Microsoft

Getting licensing fees from Android device manufacturers. They will end up bennefitting more than Google who currently make nothing from Android itself and only charge licensing fees for key apps like the AppStore and maps. Both of which are replaceable.

Google are currently getting badly mauled by analysts in their earning calls over their complete lack of diversified revenues (basically, as near as damnit all their revenues are down to advertising, even Android revenues, which are fir the most part simply ad revenue classified as due to Android. On the same reasoning they could have a category in their annual report "revenues due to iPhone").

I seriously predict Google will soon back-peddle (further than they already are by delaying Honycombe release) on their commitment to keep Android Open Source. Of course it will be difficult for them to do, and the developer community will have a right to be annoyed, but the raw economic facts are clear. Google are a hugely significant number two in the tablet OS space. A market that is exploding with growth. Apple are making billions from it. Meanwhile Google are making near as dammit big fat zero. The market analysts, bless their moral cotton socks, are starting to see Google's stance as stupidly and beligerently Hippy. The development community doesn't agree and sees a longer term strategy, with OS an assurance of longer term relevancy. But unfortunately the market tends to win out. Brinn hasn't performed well in the Google earning calls. He is on the spot. I predict continuing to go in to them with nothing to say on diversified revenues will no longer be an option after the next one. If there is not significant diversification or at least indication diversification is happening, Google's share price will be hit hard after the next call.

Let's face it. There won't be a change. Google don't suddenly have new revenue earning sources. If there is a small increase in licensing revenues, it will simply highlight the current approach doesn't properly (as the moneymen will see it) exploit the potential. The realization MS and Apple stand to make more than Google in direct licensing fees will really bring the point home.

Google+ will provide a welcome diversionary message and will give him something positive to say, but it won't save his arse from the heat that will be applied over revenue diversification. Ergo, Android's "freedom" will be increasingly curtailed so it can be converted into licensing revenue in the hear and now.

Sorry to prick this particular bubble of indignation

There's plenty else to get indignant about without misinterpreting the case. The claim you have quoted has little bearing on the scope of the patent. You need to look at the independent claims. The process is like a logical "AND". To infringe, a system would need to implement at least all the features in one of the independent claims and the thread of dependent claims up to and including the dependent claim you have quoted.

Reading the independent claims, the scope of this patent actually sounds, at first, quite narrow. the first independent claims 1-3 would only cover a device like DEC's Itsy - which was demoed only shortly after this application was made.

http://www.hpl.hp.com/downloads/crl/itsy/index.html

Scrolling / navigating content by changing the orientation of the device isn't actually that useful (though it might feasibly affect some games and the odd weird app).

However then we get to the most important claim in the context of iOS/Android; claim 4, which basically describes changing displayed screen orientation in response to changes in the physical orientation of the device. Which of course all iOS and Android devices do. So unfortunately, if this patent is held to be valid, it very much looks as though Android ( and by using Android HTC) will be said to infringe claim 4.

Be aware this patent has a basis in hardware (e.g. Relates to use of accelerometers to detect physical device orientation). As such it's not a pure software patent. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but hardware patents are generally much stronger and more likely to be found to stand up.

Apple patent: 'Pour' your data from iPhone to iPad

That's not prior art

Though it is a highly typical example of the desire people seem to have to cite prior art where there is non. I suggest reading the article again and asking yourself what is different between what you have linked to and the patent application this arrticle relates to. The fact all the interactions on itsy take place on *one device* might give you a clue.

Apple users complain over MobileMe 'censorware'

Great !

Disagree away. That's kinda the point of comments. I don't think anyone expects everyone to agree. But that makes it all the more interesting the Register feels the need reject a comment that wasn't profane or insulting and now feels the need to redefine the meaning of censorship. What other possible explanation is there for rejecting the comment, that doesn't match the very definition of a censorious act ?

Yes Soviet style censorship is bad

But then this article being posted by The Register is extremely hypocritical. You see a while ago, the Register ran an article titled "Apple: iTunes ascends to the heavens this Spring" it was run at the time it was announced Steve Jobs serious health condition had caused him to move away from the front line. It was run with the picture of Steve Jobs, The Register always use, the one with the X through it. In other words, given the way The Reg always look for an angle and double meaning on their titles, the title was a bit sick. So I wrote a comment to that effect:

"Register, seeing as you are always looking for a twist and double meaning on every Title of every article, isn't the title of this one, well, a bit sick. I suppose you're going to say using the title along with a picture of Steve Jobs has unintended meaning. I'm all for edgy controversy - but there is overstepping the line - even for a deliberately controversial online news site."

The Register saw fit to ban the comment even though it was in no way profane or insulting. I notice there were very few comments against that article and the article was quickly demoted from the front page, so drew my own conclusion that there were many such banned comments pointing out the same thing. Statistically far fewer comments than there had been for any equivalent post. So Register, I'm calling you out on this due to rank hypocrisy. This is the Internet, ban this comment again, if you like. Though do consider I have some degree of reach and regularly contribute posts to an influential blog and I will also call you out on it on Twitter. If you have any intellectual credibility you will let this comment stand (doing so will be an admission of your previous attempt at censorship was misguided and hypocritical).

Let's see what stuff the Register is made of and if you can bear the same criticism you regularly put on others.

@Syren Baran

You sent a single mail. Send it 1,000 more times and get concerned if it is still getting through then.

Apple to out-ship HP in 2012, say pundits

The strongest prison by far is the mind

If you don't believe you can do something, you sure as hell won't try. Of course there's room for disagreement over individual arguments whether x, y or z is really the case but it can hardly be disputed The Reg attempts to put a patina of cynicism on pretty much everything. So I would dispute they are always simply being realistic.

If you make cynicism your realism, you're not going anywhere fast. By all means comfort yourself with the view they are always being realistic. But if that's the case I believe you are choosing to live in a smaller world, with fewer opportunities and less to be excited about than me my friend.

Certainly:

"Forecast Alert: PC Forecast Is Lowered as Consumers Diversify Computing Needs Across Devices"

http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?ref=clientFriendlyUrl&id=1558714

Details on the report if you can't access it:

http://macdailynews.com/2011/03/03/gartner-lowers-pc-forecast-sees-apples-revolutionary-ipad-redefining-pc-market/

The Catch ?

So innovating in a new mass market product category and successfully outselling all and sundry is a catch now is it? So if you successfully redefine the market taking customer's away from the traditional notebook segment, that's a catch ? Saying there is a catch makes it sound like there is something sneaky going on to fluff up the figures when the truth is much more spectacular - long established traditional markets are being turned on their heads. Sheesh Reg, when are you ever going to say the straight out obvious - that Apple have done a good job? It doesn't hurt to provide a bit of acknowledgement every now and then. It doesn't mean you've gone all soft and lost all critical faculties. It actually means you will be trusted more to tell it how it is.

Many of our American friends probably think you have bad judgement when in fact The Register, along with journals like Private Eye is in a long tradition of English cynicism applied uniformly to everything - which has it's place. A good bit of cynical reporting provides a useful balance to corporate marketing spin. The problem is if you are not careful, cynicism becomes the lens through which everything is seen (very bad) and also dampens innovation. So I'm not surprised you are falling so far behind Tech Crunch for video and and editorial variety. Do you really want to be no more than a bunch of undifferentiated mini-Hislops ?

One per cent of world's web browsing happens on iPad

Your not in marketing nor do you do trends analysis

That's for sure. If you did either you would understand just how significant this statistic is. You're talking about a world of devices attached to the Internet, from multiple suppliers and in multiple countries rich and poor. Devices representing a significant portion of the population of the entire planet. From a standing start to 1% of WB traffic for one device from one manufacturer, in little over a year, is staggeringly huge.

'Lion' Apple Mac OS X 10.7: Sneak Preview

And also the comment about cursing

when the continual save function overwrites your good file, straight after remarking how the feature is remodelled on time machine !!! Er missing the entire point of what Time Machine is about !!!

And the "It's not all bad news" comment. FFS Register, it's almost as though the loss of some legacy features support is what you were most eager to talk about (when all users can stay put with Snow Leopard if they wish) and the actual long list of great new features is of little significance to you, except to provide a platform to seek out where the OS has adopted Windows or Ubuntu features, with one sentence descriptions of all the superbly implemented and well executed new stuff.

Insider says doom looms at RIM

Almost complimentary

By reprinting the first bullet point, Rik you were in danger of posting something complimentary about Apple that makes complete business sense (albeit by proxy). But then i see you later restored business as usual by questioning the veracity if the point.

I'm sure Basillie and Lazaridiris are telling themselves the same thing.

"it's only because Apple customers are f*****g Zombies and don't understand real products that we're doing so badly"

"Maybe Apple are have perfected the secret to making Zombie Juice and somehow got their customers to drink it ! "

"I know, I've got it figured out. They must have managed to perfect a process of getting Zombie Juice in their products so their cutomers just get infected through contact with them. My god ! This needs further investigation ! bring in the CIA, there must be something evil going on here. Why doesn't everyone see?. Apple are making products which once you have contact with them, make you want to buy more. Whew at least RIM and those solid journalists at The Register can be relied on to see through and counteract this evil action. I'll never let our products be used that way"

RIM cuts PlayBook sales forecast, report says

It is, of course, a biased source

However, having said that, they have a very good reputation for sound reporting. Despite the name they are a lot more analytical and objective than many alternative sites (no names mentioned).

You are correct in your analysis as far as it goes, but the problem is, due to this limitation RIM have not created a native email client, which means there is no email client with direct IMAP or exchange users for non Blackberry enterprise server customers. So essentially through pride (e.g. not wanting to create a standalone app that *only* supports non Blackberry enterprise server interfaces), they are shooting themselves in the foot.

So the options are:

1. Make a native app which doesn't support your flagship product but which ensures your tablet has widest appeal to the general non-Blackberry using market

2. Take the Blackberry bridge only approach, but massively limit your market.

I think, as painful as it may be for them, the Tablet market has such great potential and is so important for RIM to stay in the game and expand into new markets they should have taken option 1. However I can also understand why they won't. It's a big ask and would generate negative publicity for their flagship product. Vested interests within the company are tightly bound to the email product it would be difficult if not impossible to do. Also in many ways the negative publicity would be unfair. The constraint has turned out to be a nasty one, but the product is terms of it's original use case is highly competent and successful.

It's worse

Cult-of-Mac Have reported the reason for the blackberry bridge constraint and lack of native email app is because a single Blackberry email account can't be run on two devices simultaneously. This is apparently a backend constraint of a now aging email service. The end to end email system needs an overhaul to resolve the constraint and it is a big ongoing project. So the upshot is it seems there will be no native email app for some time. This is a huge constraint on sales. Currently Playbook is a fail for non Blackberry owners. Google mail using students and non-corporate webmail using business users might be able to get by, but not business users who need Exchange integration. RIM have really got to up their game.

Apple lets slip Time Capsule update

Actually there is likely something new here

Cult of Mac reported "a reliable source" has told them the updated Time Capsule will be integrated with the cloud service, so you can keep your data stored locally and the Apple cloud servers to all the service connection. So it seems Apple are making a "keep full ownership of your data" play.

If they are indeed doing this, as a philosophy this will stand in stark contrast to Google, who have built the ability to see into your documents and review their fundamental structure into the way Google Docs works. Why? because they want to process your content to target ads at you. Personally I feel there are serious privacy and ethical concerns about this approach.

Google are essentially pushing the concept of the thin client, which has been a perfectly feasible technical possibility for years. But the customer didn't ever previously bite, primarily due to the unease we have with the rental model, that is built into the human psyche.

There's no doubt thought that Google have done more than anyone else to date though. And also running a system where the customer doesn't feel the pain of the cost of their service (e.g. being advertising driven), means they may well win out where others failed (IBM, Oracle to name two).

So this is something of a fundamental battle of computing philosophy.

Google, who say "you can have cake for free," just give me sight of your data and trust us, or Apple who say "we will charge you a healthy price but you retain control."

Personally I prefer the latter. I feel I can trust the model more. The fair exchange of money for a product or service a company has built to be the best value it can achieve appeals to me. But many will feel differently. I've said it before in these comments, but I feel both Apple and Google are perfectly sincere in their philosophical differences.

Things are set to get very interesting indeed.

Open barbarians poised to storm Apple's gate

At least...

... I have an app for my circle-jerk and it builds to a great smooth experience. Even if you have one it will, blow with a jarring jolt and give you a nasty virus.

There you go again Matt

The truth is there is much more of a balance between commercial and open source. Your using the one way street metaphor that has been consistently missaplied for years. You've conveniently forgotten it can equally be said it was iOS and mobile in general that kicked the shins of Open Source, totally turning around the misguided perception in the Open Source community the whole world would inevitably turn Ubuntu (I love Ubuntu BTW, but also realistic about adoption), while the Open Source world stayed fixated with PC's the commercial world nimbly revolutionized where computing was at. Even sticking with PC's wind back five years and the Open Source community were still talking about the inevitable demise of commercial software. But today last I checked, most people still think Gimp is a some form of sexual perversion and Adobe still charges a small fortune for Photoshop.

These are the factors you are not taking into account when pushing with the one-way street metaphore (despite all the evidence to the contrary). Bear in mind I'm not arguing the supremacy of commercial over open here, but that there remains a balance. The "one way street" metaphor you push is simply wrong:

1) OS Contributors contribute to solve their use cases. They are by nature technical, so don't produce consumer focussed solutions

2) Google who you cite as evidence for the enevitability of the trend ARE NOT OPEN SOURCE. They are a closed centralized database. They are footing the bill for android on the back of a resolutely closed commercial operation and that is the reason it has a reasonable consumer focused UI. Ie it isn't the Open Source dynamic you allude that supports the production of Android. It hhas a dependency on a closed tech business. Indeed Google are now realizing there is so much money in what they have done, and getting so desperate for diversified revenue streams, they are rapidly backpedaling and making it as near as dammit closed to bump up licensing revenue (the levels of which are direct function of how closed they can make it). Some of the more blinkered worker bees pierced by cupids arrow don't want to see the truth of this, but true it is.

3) Even where there is what is much closer to a pure wiki based Open Source community dynamic; Ubuntu; we find it has a good UI because it has been bankrolled by a billionaire space tourist, (other open source Linux solutions of course also have very good UI's - but they are naturally for *for the tech users they serve and who put time into their development* not the far larger general market).

4) Much commercial software is being delivered joined to cloud solutions. The cloud doesn't run for free. Google take advertising (the cost is hidden from the end user but that should ring alarm bells for this who value freedom and privacy "here eat lot's of cake for free at my table, party all you like, there 's no cost" he says while rubbing his hands together.) Open source will make slow progress in the cloud due to the need for commercial business to foot the infrastructure bill.

I think you are right about there being a never ending trend to subsume established software designs but this is what makes the "one way street" metaphor so beguiling. It ignores how the OS ecosystem either has large dependencies on commercial sponsorship or remains focussed on a technical clique. It definitely works best with back end systems and in that area does have the most impact in terms of providing an alternative to commercial software. It remains in balance because the world is always moving on.

Apple iMac 27in

I'm interested to know

What do you actually use the modularity of your tower for these days? In my view it used to be an advantage 10-15 years ago, but is it really now (genuine question) ? I used to add in USB cards (yep USB was once non standard), modems, games controllers and in later years wi-Fi and 3D graphics cards. But non of those things are really needed now. Granted non Apple HDD upgrade is a no no with the iMac. Also i guess games officionados might like the option to upgrade the graphics card (personally i'm no longer in that set, though I still do have a go with the console every now and then) though grahics card upgrades have always been a bit of a chimera; when that spiffy new card is released it invariably needs the spiffy new bus to run without constraint. And I guess CPU upgrades are easier in a more accessible system. But, especially with the new Thundebolt port, general ad-hoc expansivity is covered pretty well I would think for 90% or more of use cases.

Aunty squirts serendipity into TV apps

I'm not sure your interpreting the assertion correctly Jedidiah

It's not about how many tv's and tablets you have in your house. It's about media consumption. Tablets are very effectively competing for what is called entertainment time. It's in that context they are becoming or indeed have already become the "second tv." There are now many market research reports backing this up. So it's not that the tablet is being propped up somewhere and being used like it's a TV, it's that people are getting their entertainment through tablets, which includes a multitude of media including video.

The claims have good foundation

Tablet growth is phenomenal. The iPad alone is the fastest selling consumer device in history, bar the Kinnect before this last Christmas. But the difference being, accepting expected seasonal variation, tablet sales are continuing to ramp up and the rate of increase will be sustained. They are by far the biggest earning. By the end of this year it is predicted there will be as many iPads sold as xBoxes over from it's launch up to today (and that for a device costing significantly more). And up to 68 million in 2012. And that's just iPad. With Android and the rest you can near enough double those figures.

http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1626414

http://broadstuff.com/archives/2480-Cord-Withering-and-The-iPad-as-Driver-for-OTT-TV-Adoption.html

The rate of iPlayer usage amongst tablet users is far higher than with PCs - can't find the citation for that one now, but I can guarantee it's true.

Whilst the Reg do often headline grab

Here Andrew is just reporting what the New Media Chief at the BBC has said. If he said this conversationally then it's hardly Andrew's fault there isn't more qualifying data, but it is still news that this guy rates tablets only as second to PC's even if there is no unambiguous qualifying data. It's news simply because of who has said it. But yes it would be nice to get the underlying data. It's probably backed up by the numbers because these kind of BBC execs live by the numbers.

Malware abusing Windows Autorun plummets

I remember when first seeing HTML email in Outlook

Yes, I'm that old. I remember it well.

My very first thought was "wow, that's cool," and then immediate next thought "surely they won't have been so stupid as to have left JavaScript enabled."

Yep.

Bitcoin slump follows senators’ threats

@Timothy. Agree with your sentiment but flawed premise

The Banks and the rich don't have control over money now in the way you are implying. It's not as though there is a little radio receiver on every coin and banknote with which the banks and rich people tell money what to do - though it may seem like that to those who don't have any. As far as a banknote is concerned you and I can have as much of it as the rich and the banks if we work at getting it the same way.

Bitcoin will make no difference to the fact wealth is distributed amongst people on a normal distribution curve. There will still be the rich the poor and the middle. I think you will find bitcoin will be no more a currency of the people than any other currency. It will be a currency outside of government control, sure. But then governments don't really control money now (witness the UK crash out of the Euro exchange rate mechanism). They have levers to regulate how much can be minted and so are more (or less) trusted to regulate it's value to maintain trust in it's value (which many see as an oxymoron) but they can't determine it's value beyond anything than the extremely short term (and so consequently no longer try). Bitcoin replaces those levers with a cold incorruptible algorithm and thereby in many people's eyes, can be more trustworthy on the money supply side of things. But other than that it will flow around in the same way as any currency. Only it won't, because governments everywhere will block any official places of exchange. The inconvenience and risk of unofficial exchange will undoubtedly (and in my book unfortunately) reduce its application footprint to the underworld. Really it won't be very much different to cash, except it will be thoroughly unofficial, probably gain a better international status and will allow the equivalent of cash transactions between parties in remote locations. Kind of indicates what it will he used for.

So while I agree entirely with your sentiment, I don't think practically it will make a jot of difference in the balance of power between the rich and poor, bankers and working folk.

iCloud: Big step for content management, but not for the cloud

Flawed article

The Register has just confused the terms "cloud service" and "thin client"

There is no mandated design pattern for the cloud or what a cloud service has to look like. Apple are using the cloud to offer synchronization services allowing the user to keep more control over his or her data. Google Docs by contrast is fundamentally designed to ensure the structure and content of your documents are visible to Google. They aren't developing it from the good of their hearts, they are developing it because in exchange for using it, they are getting you to sign in to a permissions model where they can target ads at you better because they can see your documents. This has some serious privacy and ethical ramifications.

Over time i believe more and more users will recognize Apple's approach allows the user to retain better control of his / her data. Cult of Mac ran a good article just prior to WWDC saying a reliable source has leaked that Apple will be upgrading Time Casule to work with their cloud solution, so the cloud service can provide you with roaming access direct to your data - but you can retain the data under your own control.

For many people there is immense appeal to Apple's proposed model. Yet again the Register have missed the real story, the legitimate differences of Philosophy and have instead taken a blinkered view of Apple's technology so they have a platform for cynicism. What the Register miss due to their cynicism is that both Google and Apple are sincere in their philosophies. While Apple retains tight product control, they make it consistently subservient to creating a software experience they think the customer will love. So consistently no crapware on new machines nor the equivalent attempt at socially engineering sales as e.g, printer manufacturers do who deliver anti customer printer driver designs like hiding the option to switch off printing in color. The Register consistently attempt to cast Apple in the same mould as these attempts at social engineering for profit, which means they miss the very reason for Apple's success. Apple of course charge and make profit, but the secret to their success is it is always in exchange for what the user feels is their best effort to make something of value. That is a fair exchange.

Personally, though I think Google are sincere, I trust a company less who tells me I can have cake for free, so long as I sign over access to my personal data, than one that is unashamedly a commercial business, who deliver the best goods they are able to design in exchange for a healthy price. The later model to me, is clean and simple and ultimately, by not positioning itself as a free social good (with the string attached that I have to sign over access to my private data), one I feel I can trust more. Many will feel the same way as me and many won't, but Register, try to be a bit more analytical and less cynical.

LTE iPhone 5 coming this fall?

Design compromises...

...Was more likely to refer not to cost of parts but size - though I acknowledge that pretty much amounts to a straight trade-off with the point Rik did raise - battery life.

Personally I'm not at all convinced 4g is going to really prove to be a godsend. For me, I would much rather trade speed for increased reliability. If the choice is between 4G with 3G patterns of reliability / robustness or universal, reliable, 3G speed I can be sure of, then give me the greater reliability any day. I find I'm in wi-Fi zones frequently enough I'm rarely inconvenienced by any need to do heavy lifting over 3G, but I am continually inconvenienced by not being able to simple web page loads or Google map loads when moving through areas with patchy coverage. I'm aware 4G tech gives better capacity for the available over the air spectrum, but that is offset by faster access speeds. Maybe they should aim for lower speed but increased reliability. It's all a trade-off. Perhaps an expert out there can tell us if 4G will bring improvements on both axes?

Apple iCloud: Same old cage, new height

So does my iPhone

Everything right now synced wirelessly over the net. My password manager, contacts, schedule, files, to do list. The point is now there is a unified one stop shop built in to the OS. So it will be even easier. What is it that is so hard to get ?

Whitebox tablet sales surge smacks down iPad

In an office somewhere

"Damn, Apple's strategy is looking pretty good, we've got nothing negative to say."

"Yes things are looking dire, people will think we're losing our edge."

"I know, I'll buy a an iPad for my Grandma and rig the battery so it blows up. Then we'll have a huge health and safety story."

"good idea, in the meantime i'll run with the story about White box tablet sales increasing, if we twist it just right we can even use the word "smack-down" in the title, that will grab some attention."

"great we've got a strategy again"

"hmm maybe we shouldn't run the grandma story, that would be going a little bit too far."

"yer suppose your right, we'll just stick with the white box story for now then, but we'll have to keep out thinking caps on. We can't let Apple run a successful WWDC and not get a couple of shots in."

Apple iOS 5 and iCloud examined

@cloudgazer

"iMessage will screw carriers a bit"

correction:

"iMessage will stop carriers screwing their customers"

Re: iMessage

Reg, you've missed the point. The messaging service is integrated so sending SMS or using Apple iMessage is not a choice users need to think about. There is one messaging centre, so when sending a message to a friend with an iPhone, the message is transported using Apple's protocol, when messaging a friend on a non iOS phone, SMS is used. It's difficult to see how this can be a fail, it will simply be used when it's appropriate. Users aren't going to neglect to use it. It won't whither and die. Indeed it is seamlessly integrated with the only universal messaging service available across all mobile devices - SMS.

Apple worth more than Microsoft and Intel combined

I do feel slightly better disposed to MS

... Now that I don't have to use any of their products. But the hours (days/weeks) of pain sorting out god-awful system problems have left scars that are too deep to heal. The relative bliss of OS X is still fresh in my mind, even though come to think of it, I switched probably now 4 years ago. The day I moved from one Mac to another and found to my surprise, everything just transferred. documents, applications, settings, the works and all on to a fresh OS install without a hitch (e.g. The data and applications separated from the system and installed on top of a fresh system) . I was blown away and my years of it experience on Windows had lead me to think such just would't be possible. Windows had "taught me" (or so I thought) There must be an incompatible library (.dll) dependency or some bad state data (don't utter the words " registry" in front of me) a hitch somewhere.

Nope.

@steve, thank you

For that well put informed opinion. Sense at last. Re: MS share price. MS's PE at the 9 something mark. I agree with your analysis. They are either undervalued, or the market simply cannot see the strategic upside. But these things can change quickly. MS are currently in a lull with being behind the curve re: tablet devices and in between OS releases. How much is this currently the Balmer effect.

I wonder where the index would be tomorrow if it was announced Bill Gates would be coming back to take charge. Not that I'm a Bill Gates fan, but there can be no doubt he had a real edge and drove the company places. At least he was prepared to make "bet the farm" decisions.

True to an extent

I for one always argued office was hugely undervalued. When mac fans used to go on about the superiority of the Mac OS (and i am now a user of OSX myself) i used to point out how, though Windows provided a vital foundational layer, the greatest stand out successful product wasn't Windows but Office. For years it wasn't just more powerful, but offered by far the most innovative user experience (MS for example, really made autocorrect work in a way Mac software still struggles to match).

But they are being outflanked. I think the most important trend has been away from long document production. Now business is, far more than before, conducted with small bites of information sent by email and instant messaging. There are far fewer long documents in day to day business transactions (at least it seems that way to me). I used to worry about office compatibilty far more than I do today. It just seems to me I am getting fewer and fewer documents with sophisticated formatting that require office. I'm being somewhat facetious saying this but sometimes it does seem like the only thing keeping MS ahead with office is pivot table capabilities of Excel. In the networked world the iPad really isn't so far off being a viable business device for many (though, of course, by no means all) classes of office work.

Reg hack applauds asinine augmentation

Don't make the mistake...

of turning this into an online poll to decide the name. Greenpeace did that with a competition to name a wale. They seeded the list of names, to start things off, whe usual PC claptrap with "Star", "Atlantis" that sort of thing. But the the wise wide web had other ideas with the winning name by a margin of about 4:1 ...

"Mr Smartypants"

Only it didn't win because Greenpeace, with three days to go before the end of the competition, quietly dropped it.

Think PCs will drop in price? Think again, warns Intel

@xj25vm

I suggest dropping Steve Ballmer a line. You'll get on well, have a similar ability to predict winning technologies, and he'll soon be at a loose end with a lot more time on his hands, so he'll probably be happy to find a soul mate he can chew the fat with.

Google Chrome OS: Too secure to need security?

@Cameron Colley

Yes but let's not forget there are always those other smug gits who like to dramatise the misfortune of others because it makes them feel better about their own inadequate lives.

Microsoft gets five bucks for every HTC Android phone

Wow

That's possibly more than Google gets, bearing in mind much of the revenues Google currently has attributed to Android are coming from advertising, not licensing. If Google had anything significant in terms of license revenues they would have announced it on their last earning calls especially since the lack of diversified revenues has become something of an issue for the analysts.

RIM PlayBook strikes back at Jobsian internet dream

@chris 3

Chris

You are damned right Flash will be a major contributor to battery drain. What is often missed by tech publications is that Apple's tighter control over multitasking and ban on third party code interpretation ensures they can maintain a very tight control of the run loop. Their policy on video ensures pretty much all video viewed on the device is hardware accelerated which is much more power efficient. The multi-tasking design ensures apps which fail to conform to a tightly defined multi-tasking profile get terminated. The profiles whilst constraining still however allow you to do pretty much anything you would want to be able to do with multi-tasking, you just have to obey the rules and design your app to be a good citizen. And the policy on third party code interpreters (e.g. They aren't allowed) ensures Apple maintain adequate control over the application run loop. If the run loop is a black box running on a thread, as it would be for e.g. Flash, there is no way to be able to balance performance with control, which leads to either a bad user experience or a drain on the battery because apps don't have to obey the power and performance efficiencies Apple mandates.

The design of iOS recognizes a simple truth in life. If you put a bucket of money in the middle of the street and put a sign over it saying, this is a common resource which everyone can use, but please be respectful and only use what you need - people don't. This should be born in mind by end users whenever they read any developer criticism of Apple's constraints. Developers are on the side of taking resources from the bucket. But the bucket owner isn't Apple. It's you. It's your tablet.

Escape route overdone

Very good review, except for over-playing of the playbook somehow offering of an escape route from proprietary tech. I sense the argument here was motivated by ideals rather than reality. The only advantage the Playbook offers in terms of additional openness is Flash, which is er, closed. And the argument that Flash makes it somehow closer to Tim Berners-Lee's vision of the open data web because it is ubiquitous is simply a bad argument. I don't think on the same argument, the iPad for example, is going to become magically more open just by virtue gaining market share. Also the other argument about the benefit of Kobo is a non argument since Kobo also is available on iOS, so I'm not sure how less choice and a subset of iPad functionality re:eReaders can be argued as a benefit. But these are minor quibbles and the sentiment that "open is good" isn't, I think, a bad thing, even if the arguments given don't quite make the case that the Playbook is more open than the market leader in any truly meaningful way.

Of course we've all (most of us reading tech blogs anyway) heard of the Blackberry bridge constraint. The most surprising other negative to have jumped out from reading this review for me though is the limited battery life. RIM really have to get that sorted. For me that tips the balance to the point where the Playbook becomes a clear fail. It's a shame, because from what I've seen there is a lot in there to love. Blackberry are going to have to work really hard to get version 2 hardware out. The B-Bridge restriction can be repaired with an update. Not so battery life.

So in summary It sounds like a supermodel with a severe case of acne, bad breath and the clap. Lot's of potential, but come back a bit later love.

Ballmer: Time up for 'stuck in the past' Microsoft CEO?

@Jim 59

"Microsoft's problems are largely brand related."

A brand's value is a measure of how the customer feels about the company, it's products and service. So just who is it you think is responsible for ensuring the brand is held in high regard?

Dear Dell and Microsoft: You're not Apple

Yes they were never that great, but

That's a little like saying "the only sense in which they were successful as a company was in having the biggest market share" - doesn't really damn them does it.

BT cheerfully admits snooping on customer LANs

The answer is simple: recording customer identifying information

Apple sharpen their database of cell tower and Wi-Fi hotspots through crowd sourcing location data and have confirmed they retain no customer identifying data (such as IMEI or any other unique to the person data). They contend they have not ever and never will use the report back mechanism to keep or retrieve a log where the costumer has been traveling. Plus the data sent back is publicly broadcast data and so cannot be said to compromise privacy (though the cache of data stored on the phone for the purpose of allowing rapid triangulation of the users current location was a problem for anyone who's phone fell into malicious hands - and Apple have said they have fixed this weakness now). BT, on the other hand, are proving they have taken data about their customer's network kit and must be storing it against the customer record for at least as long as it has taken them to get the letters out (though as some commenters have pointed out their examination and reporting on your network may go no further than checking if the questionable power line kit has made a DHCP request of the Home Hub router). So there is a clear difference and an important line BT have crossed. Personally my concerns about Apple pale into insignificance when compared with the personally identifying data all ISP's and the mobile carriers retain. For ISP's a log of every network request (e.g. Including the actual http URL requests you make) and for mobile carriers, the same plus a detailed log of everywhere you have travelled, which can be cross referenced with the http requests made whilst on the move. And all that regardless of which checkboxes you may have ticked. Scary stuff.

HP exec: WebOS tablet will trounce iPad

So your saying...

...if the third best device can develop enterprise integration tools quicker than the market leader with the best OS and user experience, who also has a 60 billion dollar cash pile, and is already in the market improving their enterprise integration tools, HP might stand a chance.

Plausible, if challenging. But I know who I'm betting on.

Apple defends iOS devs from patent holder

Great !

I'm going to place a prominent notice on my website, proclaiming my business is an authorized Apple partner.

El Reg iPhone app rated a flaccid 12+

That's fortunate

You can avoid the obligatory comment from an Opera user that nobody else is interested in or cares about.

Survey shows slab-fondlers are loving their iPads

@Turtle_Fan

I can understand why you don't like the phrase "post pc" era, but you or I don't get to choose if a meme takes off. Given it has taken off, it's important to look at why. The answer isn't in all the negatives "tablets can't do this but PC's can" but in the out the box simplicity, convenience and ease of use they provide. Look to compare for things a PC doesn't do and tablets do you won't find anything. But that isn't what defines this new era. Amongst the things they don't do is catch viruses, have hdd drive crashes slow to a crawl over time and/or end up in an inconsistent or bad state. As this article underlines, currently they looking set to be the primary "go to" device for most adopters.

Apple seeks patent for keyboard that sucks

Yes, model m, very good.

But I bet you haven't tried tried "Das Keyboard." I promise you, it is better, (but expensive)

Femtocells, not 4G, will solve spectrum crisis

More base stations

Means less honey bees.

It may sound trivial to many people and I've never been an eco-activist or publicly posted anything eco related before in my life. But the link between wireless base stations and honey bee loss is now proven and is apparently currently devastating the bee population. We really need to understand it more before increasing the density of cells. The Reg's back of an envelope figures imply a 50 fold or more increase in mast density. If bee populations have already dropped alarmingly, (which they have) what will a 50 fold increase in cell density do? Much more study is required and urgently (there are other factors which may be more or less responsible than wireless signal - the point is we know the bee population has dropped alarmingly and we know wireless either shares or is wholly responsible for the decline) It's not just eco clap trap either. Bees really are understood to be vital for pollination to take place and so are vital for flora around us, everywhere. Maybe it's possible to implement wireless in a way which doesn't affect honey bees. No one currently knows what it is in mobile phone signals in particular, that so disturbs them.

Google won't open source fondleslab Android before 'year end'

@DrXym: Wrong.

You don't have experience reading finical statements do you. If you did you would know:

1) you only have to show the books balance, you don't have to give a granular breakdown of how your business units are earning their revenues. There is no doubt Google are reclassifying advertising revenues under as many heading as possible including android.

From their Q1 2011 report:

"Advertising revenues made up 96% and 97% of our revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2011. We derive most of our additional revenues from offering display advertising management services to advertisers, ad agencies, and publishers, as well as licensing our enterprise products, search solutions, and web search technology."

So read that again 96-97% advertising with the rest coming from advertising management services. If they had anything at all significant to say about Android licensing don't you think they would have mentioned it? You can be sure if there were significant alternative revenues they would let the world know (they were criticised for it on their last earning call). No the android line in their annual report gives no detailed breakdown because it is still advertising, just advertising they are attributing to android. And you can be sure their accountants will have been instructed to attribute as much to Android as can conceivably, legally, be attributed.

2) Apple have earned 7.4 billion on iPad sales over the last two quarters, and that's also with the constraint of a huge order backlog and reduction in sales due to customers waiting for the iPad 2.

I say again with full justification, Google are number two in the tablet market, a market exploding with consumer spend, and yet are earning no (appreciable) money from all their efforts. That's the reason for their change of policy to source code release, pure and simple. The realization they are sitting on a goldmine but aren't earning from it because they have already made themselves a hostage to fortune with their public statements about supporting OSS.

How about the much more simple explanation

Google is making no money outside of advertising. In revenue terms it's a one trick pony. They are delaying open sourcing Honeycomb because they have worked out, they are now number two in the massively exploding tablet market, where the PC industry is being turned on its head, and for all their investment and for all the massive consumer spend, they are making NO MONEY (except for by see below). Meanwhile Apple are raking it in. It's all too apparent the opportunity cost of keeping Android Open Source as opposed to closed and proprietary is so staggeringly huge, to investors they are begining to look a bit, well, like a bunch of impractical idealists who don't have what it takes to create they diversified revenue streams the market is crying out for. So they are getting cold feet about Open Source and, rather than do a full "we admit it, we're as evil as the rest" about-face, they are attempting to leverage value by keeping it closed and making money through charging for key add ons like the app store and preferred partner agreements and hope no-one notices they have how they have displaced the more usual in-your-face closed propreitary revenue stream into a form they think sounds less capitalist driven and more cuddly. In other words they are trying to play it both ways. Trying to have their cake and eat it.

Meanwhile all the Fandroids, like brides left at the altar, are wandering around lost, coming up with every excuse as to why their beloved Google has abandoned their ideals, except for the reason that's bleedin' obvious to everyone else who isn't pierced by Cupid's arrow.