While Verizon customers have been feeling the Android love lately with updates for both The carrier announced via Twitter on Friday that it will offer an Android 2.0 update for both the HTC Hero and the Samsung Moment, which is great news
Unfortunately, the update won't come till the first half of 2010 (no specific date was given), but hopefully it'll be on the earlier side of the new year like the Droid Eris so you won't have to wait too long.
The new Google phone makes an appearance on Twitter.
(Credit: Cory O'Brien via Twitter)Updated at 5 p.m. PST with additional details and at 10 a.m. PST December 13 with photo of the phone.
A blog post from a Google executive on Saturday morning dropped hints that the company would release a Google Android phone of its own.
In the post, Mario Queiroz, a Google vice president of product management, said the company had developed a "mobile lab" device that "combines innovative hardware from a partner with software that runs on Android." According to Queiroz, Google has distributed the device to Google employees worldwide so that they could test the new technology and help improve it.
Quieroz's announcement came only a few hours after reported sightings of the device. CNET TV Associate Producer Jason Howell, who had a very brief hands-on with the gadget Friday night and first relayed the news on Twitter, confirms that the "mobile lab" device is an HTC phone running the Android 2.1 operating system.
"I knew it was an HTC device," Howell said. "It looked like theTouch, but was a lot thinner...it was a slick-looking thing and very nice." He also spotted a trackball and four standard Android menu controls, and he said the display was "supersharp" and rivaled that on the Motorola Droid.
Howell didn't get a chance to dig into the handset's specs or detail the changes from the 2.1 update, but he noticed animated wallpapers, slight visual enhancements to the user interface, and a camera on the rear face that resembles the HTC Touch Pro 2. Curiously, Howell said he didn't see any Google logo on the handset.TechCrunch published additional, though unconfirmed, details, including a Snapdragon processor, an OLED touch screen, and a voice-to-text feature, while TheUnlockr posted leaked photos.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the handset will be called the Nexus One. Although HTC made the hardware, the software and user interface is all Google, from the applications to the "look and feel of each screen."
The Journal also said Google will begin selling the device early next year, directly to consumers, thus bypassing the traditional carrier channel. As an unlocked GSM device, the Nexus One could be used with T-Mobile or AT&T, though it's unclear which carrier's 3G bands the handset will support. During his brief tour, Howell wasn't able to test the performance, but he said that the Nexus One he handled was running on an AT&T SIM card.
Reports that Google would release its own Android phone first appeared earlier this year. The move is significant, as it could pit Google against the carriers that it so far has used to distribute existing Android phones. Also, without a carrier contract and subsequent service rebates the Nexus One could cost a few hundred dollars. For those reasons, I was a little skeptical when I first heard the rumor, so count me wrong on this one.
Since its launch three years ago, Sony's PlayStation 3 has always been more expensive than its rivals, Microsoft'sXbox 360 and Nintendo's Wii, in large part because the components in the PS3 cost so much to assemble.
At launch, for example, the console cost Sony about $805 to build, according to technology research firm iSuppli, with the highest-priced version selling for $599.
According to a report, the component costs of the Sony PlayStation 3 may finally mean the company is closing in on break-even for the console.
(Credit: Sony Computer Entertainment of America)But now, a new iSuppli report issued Friday suggests that Sony may finally be nearing the break-even point with the PS3. It said that its teardown analysis service estimated that the design cost of the new 120-gigabyte PS3 Slim comes in around $336, while it sells for $299 in the U.S.
That means that while Sony is still losing about $37 per unit--plus somewhat more for marketing, royalties, box contents, and other expenses--it is for the first time closing in on breaking even with the console itself.
A Sony representative said Friday the company has a policy never to comment on the cost structure and breakdown of its hardware.
According to iSuppli, its 2008 analysis of the PS3's component costs showed that the then-$399 console was losing at least $50 per unit. So it's notable that even at the lower price, Sony is losing less money. Further, the analysis firm suggested that with component costs dropping rapidly, Sony could soon find itself making money on the PS3.
To be sure, companies like Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo are willing to subsidize the cost of their video game consoles because they make their real money on sales--and royalties--of games. The more consoles they can put in consumers' living rooms, even if they take losses on them, the more they can make on the games.
But Sony took a beating in the media in the early days of the PS3 because it was losing so much on each PS3, not to mention that the high cost of the console made it an unattractive buy.
Now, with the August release of the PS3 Slim, and its reduced price, the console is finally coming close to matching its rivals' sales numbers. In September, the PS3 even won its first-ever month, as measured by total console sales. In November, however, the benefits of a great deal of pent-up demand for a lower-priced PS3 seemed to have been played out, and once again, the PS3 came in third, trailing the Wii and the Xbox.
Still, the PS3 was only marginally behind the Xbox in units sold in November, and there certainly seems to be renewed enthusiasm for the console at the lower price.
And when Sony finally sees a profit on each PS3 sale, there will no doubt even be smiles in the company's board room. Stay tuned to see when that actually happens.
Advanced Micro Devices is not the only large Intel competitor to rail against Intel's alleged strong-arm tactics.
Nvidia has also complained loudly for years about Intel business practices in the graphics chip market, where Intel commands about 50 percent of the market.
Nvidia is the world's leading supplier of "discrete," or standalone, graphics chips but takes a distant second place in overall market share to Intel, which supplies "integrated" graphics built into the chipsets that accompany all of its processors. Mercury Research estimates the total market for graphics chips, including integrated graphics, at almost $10 billion in 2009.
In the third quarter, Intel had 53 percent of the graphics chip market, up from the 49 percent share in the same period last year, according to Jon Peddie Research, which tracks the graphics chip market. Nvidia took about 24 percent, down from the 28 percent in the third quarter of last year.
These figures get even more lopsided for Intel when the market is segmented into integrated graphics only. "Put your seatbelt on. They've got 80 percent of the notebook integrated market," said Jon Peddie, president of Jon Peddie Research. Though this is a much smaller and more segmented market than overall PC processor market, , it still shows the level of Intel's dominance, according to Peddie.
Nvidia has taken to lampooning Intel. Here, CEO Paul Otellini is the object of satire on Nvidia's 'Intel's Insides' Web site.
(Credit: Nvidia)Nvidia claims these latter market share figures reflect Intel's "bundling" tactics--the same carrot-and-stick tactics that AMD has cited for years and that were spelled out in a complaint filed by New York's attorney general which was at the center of this week's $1.25 billion settlement between Intel and AMD earlier this month.
Intel is trying to impede competition on two chipset fronts, according to Nvidia. One front is the burgeoning market for chipsets in Netbooks--tiny, inexpensive laptops that are typically priced around $350. In this market, Nvidia sells its Ion chipset, which competes with Intel's integrated graphics product.
"Intel's tactics with Ion have been the most aggressive we've seen from a competitor. They have offered the Atom [a total of three chips] for $25, but when the one-chip Atom is used with Ion, it sells for $45," Nvidia CEO Jen Hsun Huang said in a statement provided to CNET. "A customer can't even choose to resell the chipset and use Ion instead. What's the point of Nvidia getting an Intel bus license if it's impossible to overcome Intel's pricing bundles?" he asked, referring the licensing fee that Nvidia pays Intel.
"We'll keep growing as a company, but further action needs to be taken to protect consumers," Huang said.
Intel disputes this. "He's playing a trick of numbers, said Intel spokesman Chuck Mulloy. "He's giving you a $45 list price--that nobody pays--for a part and then a negotiated price (which is more realistic). He's mixing apples and oranges. We have scrubbed and continue to scrub our pricing practices as it relates to chipsets and processors. It's all above cost. And that meets the legal standard worldwide."
In Netbooks, Nvidia has made some headway this year; its Ion chipset has been used in Netbooks from Hewlett-Packard and Lenovo, among others--and Huang concedes this. But Peddie said Nvidia still faces a formidable challenge. "They're nibbling away it at. But it's a pretty big hill to climb," Peddie said.
In the second front of Nvidia's most hotly-contested feuds with Intel, the former has halted development of chipsets for Intel's new "Nehalem" processor technology (marketed as the Core i series of chips), following a complaint filed by Intel in February--which Nvidia then countered in March. Intel alleged in its motion for a declaratory judgment that the 4-year-old chipset license agreement with Nvidia does not extend to Intel's future-generation processors with "integrated memory controllers," which includes Intel's newest Nehalem Core i processors.
"It's meant to get Nvidia to cease and desist from citing that they have a license," Peddie said. "That's an interesting tactic because if the court rules in favor of keeping Nvidia from saying they have a license, it also creates the burden on the OEMs [PC makers] of not wanting to get in a crossfire between Nvidia and Intel," he said.
Intel again disputes this. "It's not seeking to prevent them from doing anything. For well over a year and including mediation, we argued with Nvidia about their rights under that agreement. And we tried multiple times to reach an agreement. And we could not," Mulloy said. "We asked the court to tell the parties what the agreement means. At the end of that process, we'll work with them and try to figure out what to do next.
The Cray XT5 supercomputer known as "Jaguar" has finally clawed its way to the title of fastest computer in the world.
Sitting back at No. 2 on the Top 500 list of supercomputers for more than a year, Jaguar overtook IBM's "Roadrunner" according to the twice-yearly list that will be unveiled Tuesday at the SC09 Conference in Portland, Ore., this week.
Jaguar beat out the competition by showing it can process 1.75 petflop/s, or quadrillions of floating point operations per second, according to theTop500 Linpack benchmark IBM's Roadrunner was pushed back to No. 2 by posting a processing speed of 1.04 petaflop/s, a dip from the 1.105 petaflop/s it reached in a June 2009 test. The slower performance this time around is apparently due to a repartitioning of the system.
Every six months when the Top500 List is released the threshold to grab a place on it gets higher. The slowest supercomputer (No. 500) on November's list posted a speed of 20 teraflop/s, up from the 17.1 teraflop/s of six months ago. In other words, what is the slowest computer this time around would have been No. 336 in June.
Kraken, another Cray XT5 system, jumped up two places from its former No. 5 position by posting a processing performance speed of 832 teraflop/s. IBM's BlueGene/P, from Forschungszentrum Juelich in Germany, came in at No. 4 with 825.5 teraflop/s. At No. 5 is China's Tianhe-1, the highest ranking ever for a Chinese supercomputer.
The top 10, while still dominated by supercomputers housed in the United States, had just one newcomer. That would be Sandia National Laboratories' "Red Sky," a Sun Blade system that posted a Linpack performance of 423 teraflop/s.
Just as the last time the list was released, the Top500 list is made up mostly of Hewlett-Packard and IBM computers. HP accounted for 210 of this year's 500, and IBM 185. In terms of processors in use, Intel still enjoys the lion's share, with 80 percent. The most popular operating system is Linux, with 90 percent of the Top500.
Here's the Top 10:
Jaguar, Cray, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (1.75 petaflop/s)
Roadrunner, IBM, Los Alamos National Laboratory (1.04 petaflop/s)
Kraken XT5, Cray, National Institute for Computational Sciences (832 teraflop/s)
JUGENE, IBM, Forschungszentrum Juelich (825.5 teraflop/s)
Tianhe-1, NUDT, National SuperComputer Center in Tianjin (563.1 teraflop/s)
Pleiades, SGI, NASA Ames Research Center (544.3 teraflop/s)
BlueGeneL, IBM, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (478.2 teraflop/s)
BlueGene/P, IBM, Argonne National Laboratory (458.61 teraflop/s)
Ranger, Sun, Texas Advanced Computing Center (433.20 teraflop/s)
Red Sky, Sun, Sandia National Laboratories (423.9 teraflop/s)
With Electronic Arts' recent $400 million dollar purchase of playfish, social games are all the rage in today's tech industry. That's no surprise: lightweight games on social networks (which people usually play while they're goofing off at work) and social games have attracted huge player numbers with the biggest titles boasting 20 million to 60 million regular players.
City of Eternals.
(Credit: Ohai)But here's the worst kept secret about the genre: most social games aren't very, well, fun. They offer limited interactivity, game play challenge, and graphics. Consequently, players aren't invested enough to spend much money on them, especially compared to "hard-core" massively multiplayer-online (MMO) games. Even with the better social games,average revenue per user is less then a $1 per person.
By contrast, millions of World of Warcraft players willingly pay $15 a month in subscription fees alone. But, what MMOs like WoW have in revenue, they lack in growth due to the high technical hurdles and subject matter. WoW seems to have tapped out at around 12 million players, far less than the largest social games. And while the sustained revenue is great, attracting new players remains a challenge.
Enter City of Eternals, a Web-based MMO with a modern vampire theme from a new start-up called Ohai. After a long conversation with company CEO Susan Wu, a pioneer in the online gaming and virtual goods space, there are a number of reasons I think Ohai has the potential to succeed in the sweet spot between social games and hard-core gamer MMOs, and why the shift to social connection could become gaming's next big thing.
Ease of play
The biggest game platform isn't the Nintendo Wii or the iphone, it's Flash, a browser plug-in installed on more than 99 percent of the world's PCs. An estimated 200 million people already play casual Flash-based games.
And while most MMOs require a huge client install, Ohai CTO and game industry veteran Don Neufeld (Everquest II, PlanetSide), and his development team (Free Realms, Lord of the Rings Online, Star Wars Galaxies, Dungeons and Dragons Online) have re-engineered Flash into an MMO platform that pretty much anyone can play, without having to install additional software or hardware upgrades. As Wu put it, this means Ohai can build "Games for your aunt who plays FarmVille on Facebook and your cousin who can't play World of Warcraft on his school PC."
Deep social network integration
City of Eternals is fully integrated with Facebook and soon Twitter, but that doesn't mean the game is only playable within the social network. Players' Facebook profiles follow them into the vampire world, so whenever you're curious, you can click on a fellow vampire, and check their Facebook profile. This is the first time I've seen this feature in any MMO, and it brings in some new possibilities--making it much easier to socialize (and of course flirt) within the game. Wu told me City of Eternals' gender spread is 50-50 (extremely rare, compared with male-dominated MMOs), so I wouldn't be surprised if it became a major online hotspot for socializing. Especially since the game isn't about geeky elves and orcs, but far more popular vampires--see below.
Subject matter
The Twilight book series has sold more than 85 million copies worldwide; the underworld movie franchise has brought in more than $300 million in theatrical sales; and TV's True Blood and Vampire Diaries both have huge cult followings. Vampires are obviously pervasive throughout popular culture, but there's yet to be a full-fledged vampire MMO.
Still in Alpha stage, Wu told me that players average 12 logins per day in the game, with an average session length of 5 to 6 minutes, fulfilling one of the company's goals of making a "bite-sized MMO."
City of Eternals is Ohai's first of many of what they call "MMOs for everyone." Of course, there's still a lot of unknown variables. The vampire craze may wane too soon, and as the Electronic Arts purchase suggests, the competition is huge. Maybe I'm crazy, but by next year, I think there's a good chance the most popular MMO on the market won't be World of Warcraft, but City of Eternals, or another game that crosses the boundaries between MMO and socialized gaming.
A judge has ruled in Apple's favor in its copyright-infringement case against Psystar, which has been selling Mac clones running Mac OS X.
U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup on Friday granted Apple's request for a summary judgment, while denying Psystar's counterclaim.
"In sum, Psystar has violated Apple's exclusive reproduction right, distribution right, and right to create derivative works," Alsup wrote in the ruling (PDF), which was posted by legal site Groklaw.net.
Apple filed a suit in July 2008, a few months after pysytar started selling MAC clones. The case revolved around Psystar's contention that it could run Apple's Mac OS X operating system on non-Apple machines. Apple denied this, stating that its Mac OS X end user license agreement allows people to install the OS on Apple computers only.
Both Apple and Psystar had a requested a summary judgment, which is a determination made without trial based on the merits of a case.
Neither Apple nor Psystar could immediately be reached for comment.
One of Psystar's contentions was fair use. The judge rejected this, stating the company "does not even attempt to address the four factors used to determine fair use." Another of Psystar's claims was "first sale" doctrine, which allows someone who buys copyrighted material to sell it. But Alsup said this doctrine applies only to legal copies, not to the "unauthorized copies" that Psystar produced.
The judge also ruled in favor of Apple's claim that Psystar violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. "Psystar has violated the DMCA by circumventing Apple's protection barrier and trafficking devices designed for circumvention," Alsup said.
In addition, the judge rejected Psystar's claims that Apple had misused its copyright and that Apple's licensing agreement was unduly restrictive.
Alsup's ruling did not include a permanent injunction against Miami-based Psystar because, he said, Apple has not requested one yet.
There are other claims Apple has made that could still go to trial, including breach of contract, trademark infringement, and trademark dilution. A hearing to determine remedies is set for December 14. The trial has been scheduled to begin in January.
A post on the Twitter status blog late on Wednesday morning reads that it was "working on (a) high number of errors." The Next Web dug up some discussion from Twitter's developer IRC channel and found that "retweet is temporarily unavailable while we deploy a bug fix." There is not yet word on when it will be back.Sometimes you take a wrong turning in life and, Wednesday, a slight concussion led my eyes to fall upon the pages of PCR.
It is a little more intelligent than my normal reading matter, but I am very grateful for its interview with Simon Aldous, Microsoft's partner group manager.
He was quoted, for example, as saying: "One of the things that people say an awful lot about the apple MAC is that the OS is fantastic, that it's very graphical and easy to use."
Perfect harmony?
You're waiting for the punchline, right? You know, the one about how he was kidding.
Wait away because he continued: "What we've tried to do with Windows 7--whether it's traditional format or in a touch format--is create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics."
I know that such words might cause some entrenched foot soldiers in both of the fanchildren camps to hoot, hiss, sigh and reach for the nearest farming implement.
However, isn't it rather charming to hear someone admit that a competitor's product isn't overly expensive or overly pretentious, but that it has something about it that is good and that real people who buy real products actually appreciate?
 |
| Provided by website-hit-counters.com . |
