After conquering the ether with their wildly successful search engine, Google was not content. This was not enough. And so Google accomplished a feat most other companies can only comprehend the notion of fathoming, even in their wildest chemically-induced slumbers. Not only do they make their brand a household name, but the company now lives on forever as part of... the dictionary. No, not that dictionary, this one.
But the never ending checklist of despotism was nowhere near completion. The two gaping holes in gOOgle had to be filled. Where to start? How about buying YouTube, the 3rd most visited website in the world (guess what's at number one?). *tick* And what about revolutionising webmail with the miraculous Gmail? *tick* Preponderating the online world's thoughts by acquiring their blogging service? *tick*.
Yet the hungry beast can not be satisfied. It wants to dominate the browser market, the ad market *tick*, the phone market, the OS market and Schmidt knows how many others. Wait...no. No it couldn't be...is it?.
Will Google monopolize the web and ergo the world like it has monopolised search?
I have no idea.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Friday, May 28, 2010
WWDC 2010
When the iPhone was first announced, it shocked the world with its extortionate pricing and lacklustre enterprise features. When it first came out, it shocked the world once more. It was mind-blowingly complex, yet miraculously intuitive. In a word, thaumaturgical. And so began the saga.
A year later and the 3G brought a desperately needed update for our spec hungry minds, though its cheap plastic back sacrificed a little of our hearts to do so. And it also brought the revolutionary app store, the seemingly final knock-out blow aimed squarely at the solar plexus of all contenders to the iThrone.
Another year past and the 3GS was a punily unnecessary upgrade over the 3G, opening up a gap in the market which the aforementioned competitors thought might never come. Android gained momentum, market share and features (*cough* multitasking *cough*) that the iPhone lacks even now.
And here we are today. In a week and a half, Steve Jobs will take to the stage and announce the rumoured iPhone HD. It will propel Apple and the iPhone back to their rightful place as undisputed smartphone kings. Or it will dump them in the dust by the side of a newly paved and freshly patented Android highway. A highway to the future.
A year later and the 3G brought a desperately needed update for our spec hungry minds, though its cheap plastic back sacrificed a little of our hearts to do so. And it also brought the revolutionary app store, the seemingly final knock-out blow aimed squarely at the solar plexus of all contenders to the iThrone.
Another year past and the 3GS was a punily unnecessary upgrade over the 3G, opening up a gap in the market which the aforementioned competitors thought might never come. Android gained momentum, market share and features (*cough* multitasking *cough*) that the iPhone lacks even now.
And here we are today. In a week and a half, Steve Jobs will take to the stage and announce the rumoured iPhone HD. It will propel Apple and the iPhone back to their rightful place as undisputed smartphone kings. Or it will dump them in the dust by the side of a newly paved and freshly patented Android highway. A highway to the future.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Thoughts on 3D
Will 3D TV ever catch on? That is the million dollar question. Or, rather, the 31,010,000,000 dollar question if Sony's current market cap is anything to go by.
At the helm of a technology behemoth with nothing to lose, Welsh/America Sony CEO Howard Stringer has made the ultimate gamble. If he wins, he and Sony will go down in the record books as the people who first the paved way into a new dimension of immersion, metaphorically and literally. If he loses, they disappear off the face of the planet.
Pulling out all the stops, funds and chutzpah, Sony has taken literally every single department's resources and thrown its collective might at trying to convince the public that they want 3D. Because, at heart, they don't. Yet. In the past, present and foreseeable future, 3D has been met with a certain amount of hostility, nausea and regurgitated popcorn. Why should now be any different? The technology is by no means still in its infancy. 'Old' 3D (the red and blue filmed cardboard glasses) is a decades old. In recent times, however 3D has re-emerged, stronger than ever, spurred on by meticulously rendered blue aliens scantily clad in leafy fatigues. Here's the lowdown:
Currently, in the 'new' generation of 3D, there are two main types of technology being pioneered.
1. Something called 'active shutter' technology, these hefty glasses require charging but deliver (marginally) superior picture, clarity, and no ghosting because they flick on and off dozens of times a second to match the also flickering displays. Cost? Anywhere from £50-£100. Read more here
2. RealD 3D, or passive glasses. You'll be familiar with these already if you've gone to see Alice In Wonderland, Avatar or another 3D movie in the past year or so. The dirt cheap (5p ish), plastic sunglass lookalikes are the regular fare for the less discerning viewer. Read more here
Sony currently backs both options, RealD in movie theaters and Active Shutter for its home viewing Bravia series. Both technologies present several problems - On one hand you have the Passive Shutter glasses (RealD 3D). Cheap, light, and nowhere near as good as its counterpart in terms of pure viewing experience. On the other you have the Active Shutters. Expensive, heavy, yet excellent where it counts.
Neither technology is perfect, yet there is currently nothing else out there. And there lies the catch. "Outrage!" I hear you shout. "I've just blown hundreds (possibly even thousands) of pounds or dollars on your shiny new 1080p Plasma, LCD or LED and I've gotta go buy something new! Not only that, but if I plan to watch a movie with more than two people I need to spend hundreds more to even get a good picture out of my television?".
Well.....yes. And it gets worse. "Worse!?" you shout "What could possibly be worse?". If you go ahead and buy that TV, be prepared to buy another one in about five years. But this time, it'll be glasses-less. Yep. No clunky, inconvenient, expensive, easily losable glasses. This technology is still very much in R&D, but if it works it could spell the end for all the companies, like Sony who have thrown their weight behind the risky current tech.
At the helm of a technology behemoth with nothing to lose, Welsh/America Sony CEO Howard Stringer has made the ultimate gamble. If he wins, he and Sony will go down in the record books as the people who first the paved way into a new dimension of immersion, metaphorically and literally. If he loses, they disappear off the face of the planet.
Pulling out all the stops, funds and chutzpah, Sony has taken literally every single department's resources and thrown its collective might at trying to convince the public that they want 3D. Because, at heart, they don't. Yet. In the past, present and foreseeable future, 3D has been met with a certain amount of hostility, nausea and regurgitated popcorn. Why should now be any different? The technology is by no means still in its infancy. 'Old' 3D (the red and blue filmed cardboard glasses) is a decades old. In recent times, however 3D has re-emerged, stronger than ever, spurred on by meticulously rendered blue aliens scantily clad in leafy fatigues. Here's the lowdown:
Currently, in the 'new' generation of 3D, there are two main types of technology being pioneered.
1. Something called 'active shutter' technology, these hefty glasses require charging but deliver (marginally) superior picture, clarity, and no ghosting because they flick on and off dozens of times a second to match the also flickering displays. Cost? Anywhere from £50-£100. Read more here
2. RealD 3D, or passive glasses. You'll be familiar with these already if you've gone to see Alice In Wonderland, Avatar or another 3D movie in the past year or so. The dirt cheap (5p ish), plastic sunglass lookalikes are the regular fare for the less discerning viewer. Read more here
Sony currently backs both options, RealD in movie theaters and Active Shutter for its home viewing Bravia series. Both technologies present several problems - On one hand you have the Passive Shutter glasses (RealD 3D). Cheap, light, and nowhere near as good as its counterpart in terms of pure viewing experience. On the other you have the Active Shutters. Expensive, heavy, yet excellent where it counts.
Neither technology is perfect, yet there is currently nothing else out there. And there lies the catch. "Outrage!" I hear you shout. "I've just blown hundreds (possibly even thousands) of pounds or dollars on your shiny new 1080p Plasma, LCD or LED and I've gotta go buy something new! Not only that, but if I plan to watch a movie with more than two people I need to spend hundreds more to even get a good picture out of my television?".
Well.....yes. And it gets worse. "Worse!?" you shout "What could possibly be worse?". If you go ahead and buy that TV, be prepared to buy another one in about five years. But this time, it'll be glasses-less. Yep. No clunky, inconvenient, expensive, easily losable glasses. This technology is still very much in R&D, but if it works it could spell the end for all the companies, like Sony who have thrown their weight behind the risky current tech.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
An 'Open Letter' to Mr Steve Jobs
In New York City during my school's Easter Break, I, an avid Apple fan decided to get an iPad. There is no justifiable reason I needed one; yes, my 4 year old MacBook is barely useable, but I would have been much better served in that regard simply getting a new laptop. I have a 32GB iPod Touch, so my app cravings are easily satiated.
What compelled me to spend 700$ on a device I don't need? Perhaps the famed Reality Distortion Field, perhaps the excitement of waiting on line overnight at the Apple Store side by side with fellow Apple cult members. Maybe even a certain degree of iLust. Answer? None of the above. In all my 14 years of existence, I and many others have come to expect something magical inside those iconic white boxes. And thats exactly what I got. All of the above was typed at 37,000 feet, on my iPad.
Thank you Mr. Jobs
- Sam
Sent from my iPad
What compelled me to spend 700$ on a device I don't need? Perhaps the famed Reality Distortion Field, perhaps the excitement of waiting on line overnight at the Apple Store side by side with fellow Apple cult members. Maybe even a certain degree of iLust. Answer? None of the above. In all my 14 years of existence, I and many others have come to expect something magical inside those iconic white boxes. And thats exactly what I got. All of the above was typed at 37,000 feet, on my iPad.
Thank you Mr. Jobs
- Sam
Sent from my iPad
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)