More of my sites

WinInfo Daily News
SuperSite for Windows
Windows IT Pro Magazine
Connected Home
Thurrott Dot Com
Windows Weekly at TWIT


About this site

For six years, the Internet Nexus served as my technology blog, but I've since started blogging at the SuperSite Blog instead. If you're looking for the blog, please head there. --Paul



Saturday, May 28, 2005

Microsoft Vs Unix: Its a tie for the first time

Financial Express:
Windows computer servers tie with Unix in revenue.

The worldwide computer server market grew 5.3 per cent to $12.1 billion in the first quarter, with revenue for servers running the Microsoft Corp Windows operating system equalling that of Unix servers for the first time, market research firm IDC said on Friday.

Revenue for Windows servers grew 12.3 per cent to $4.2 billion in the quarter while unit shipments grew 10.7 per cent. Unix servers saw 2.8 per cent revenue growth to $4.2 billion while unit shipments increased 5 per cent.
[ Posted at 1:34 PM | Permalink ]

 

MPEG-4 vs. Microsoft VC-1: why high-definition video software standards are irrelevant

Silicon Valley Watcher:
About a year ago, Microsoft made great strides in legitimizing its technology for broadcasting by getting its Windows Media 9 video codec (now grandly titled Video Codec One, or VC-1) accepted by the industry's standards body SMPTE.

And both the HD-DVD and Blu-Ray groups, representing the two competing High-Definition DVD hardware formats, have agreed to support Microsoft's codec as well as the MPEG-4 Advanced Video Coding standard in their new hi-def players.

This presents an interesting question. The Windows VC-1 and MPEG AVC camps are fighting over which is the "best hi-def codec". But with the future media players supporting both codecs, does it matter which one content producers choose? I think the software doesn't matter anymore.

Modern video codecs are also very similar to each other, and use similar mathematical techniques. They all break the picture into a lot of squares, and then use fancy mathematics (like those used in JPEG pictures) to represent these small squares with the smallest amount of bits.

They are all roughly comparable in quality, and the the VC-1 vs. MPEG AVC battle is a technical stalemate; the differentiating features have much more to do with implementations, price, and of course politics.
Related: A Comparison of MPEG-2 Video, MPEG-4 AVC, and Windows Media 9 Video/SMPTE VC-1 (PDF)
[ Posted at 1:28 PM | Permalink ]

 

HP Photosmart R717 review

MacWorld:
The R717 feels well-constructed, with a stainless-steel front, subtly sculpted for a comfortable grip. The 1.8-inch LCD is bright and clear, and menus are very easy to read and navigate. Like many of the new HP cameras, the R717 includes a system designed to help beginners along.

The R717 excels at taking panoramic images. In panorama mode, the camera provides a transparent overlay of the left third of your previous image to help you align it with the next shot.

I didn’t have a problem with red-eye, but an in-camera feature is supposed to let you fix red-eye-ridden shots after you take them.

The color in the images I took with the R717 was very good, and the detail was good.
I've been using this camera for over a month and I'm not horribly impressed. The picture quality is so-so and often show pixelization. The red eye is horrific, way worse than my last camera. The video quality is lousy, at just 320 x 240, 1/4 the resolution of my previous camera (which was just 3.2 megapixels.

I got this camera because its predecessor, the R617 (I think), was very highly rated. The R717, which offers higher resolution, seemed like an obvious choice. It wasn't, and it's reviewed more poorly than its predecessor (except for in this review I'm quoting).

Overall, I don't recommend it at all. I'll look at the highly rated Canon SD400 next.
[ Posted at 1:23 PM | Permalink ]

 

XBOX 360 Prices Leaked

XGP Gaming:
Earlier today, XGP Gaming received word that the price(s) for the XBOX 360 were 'leaked' around the net. As we expected, there will be two 'versions' of the XBOX 360 available for purchase. Start saving now!

The first package consists of the basic console, one controller, cables, etc. and is set to sell for $299.99(US).

The second version contains the 360 controller(s?), remote and the HDD loaded with extra content. There's no word yet on whether or not this package may include the camera. The price for this package is...wait for it...$360(US).
Not bad. Not bad at all. I was thinking closer to $500 for the Xbox 360 Full Meal Deal.
[ Posted at 1:21 PM | Permalink ]

 

Thursday, May 26, 2005

Now, Fortune is corroborating my OS X on Intel report

Add Fortune to the ranks of major business publications that are verifying what I had previous written about Apple's OS X running on Intel hardware:
FORTUNE has learned that Apple, Intel, and several PC companies already have the Mac OS X operating system working on Intel chips in their labs.
OK, that's a little too similar for comfort. I wonder if he learned that from me? :) He does later quote my blog.
If it switched to Intel chips or allowed PC makers to build Intel-based Macs, Apple could benefit from the enormous economies of scale Intel achieves with its dominant market share, and from the x86’s constant advances. Apple could also bring its costs—and possibly its products' prices--down substantially. And that could boost its sales.

Even if the Journal report is right, it could simply mean that the wily Jobs is positioning for the upper hand in negotiations with IBM. He isn't saying anything. Then again, if you were Jobs, wouldn’t you want your legacy to be a company with a 20% market share—or more—rather than one with only 2.3%?
Look, this is an interesting debate, no doubt about it. But again, the only reason I have any stock in this at all is that I had independently broken the story in April and have three separate sources for the information. Will it ever happen? You know what, I hope it does. But just as Apple almost bougth TiVo and then walked away at the last second, anything can happen. That's true now as well.
[ Posted at 7:20 PM | Permalink ]

 

Music-subscription services can be a good deal

And another hold-out wakes up to the reality of subscription music services, in this USA Today article:
I remain an unabashed iTunes junkie. But an alternative model — the "portable" music subscription — is growing on me. Now, with the addition of RealNetworks Rhapsody To Go service — and especially with the debut this month of Yahoo Music Unlimited — I imagine it'll grow on others, too.

Overall, both Yahoo and Real left a melodious impression. Each claims more than 1 million songs in its catalogs — though they're light on classical. (Apple says iTunes exceeds 1.5 million tracks.)

I'm guessing that Apple will eventually introduce a subscription service of its own.

Why? Under a subscription or rent-a-tune model, you can listen to a boatload of music for a lot less loot than on a buy-only download site. And you can carry those tunes in your pocket, via compatible portable digital music players. Buying 2,000 songs on iTunes would cost nearly 2 grand.
[ Posted at 4:42 PM | Permalink ]

 

Wednesday, May 25, 2005

Mad as hell, switching to Mac

Network World:
I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore.

The WinTel platform represents the greatest violation of the basic tenets of information security and has become a national economic security risk. I do not say this lightly, and I have never been a Microsoft basher, either. I never criticize a company without a fair bit of explanation, justification and supportive evidence.

I want my computer to function every time I turn it on. I want my computer to not corrupt data when it does crash. I use a handful of applications: Microsoft Office, e-mail, browser, FTP client and some multimedia toys. Regardless of format, they should work without crashing.

In the WinTel world I need an assortment of third-party tools to try to keep my PC alive. That's just crazy.

Why does WinTel have these problems? I have heard all sorts of explanations, and I don't subscribe to any of them.

Here's my answer to the WinTel problem: We need an open Simple Operating System (SOS) that meets the needs of the majority of people who buy PCs for everyday home and enterprise tasks. Get rid of the complexity and simplify the interface between SOS, BIOS and hardware. In other words, KISS. You know what it means. KISS SOS.

Because SOS doesn't exist yet, my company has given up on WinTel. We have successfully moved to Mac in less than two days. Think about it: a security-friendly alternative that works and doesn't require gobs of third-party utilities to safely perform the most mundane tasks.
Interesting.

And I understand where he's coming from. Windows can be frightfully stupid. However, his list of reasons why WinTel will "hopefully" fail is childish:
1. Windows is complex, trying to be everything to everyone. This complexity comes at a terrible price: downtime, help desks, upgrades, patches and the inevitable failures.
Windows is complex, that's true. However, Mac OS X, arguably, is just as complex, and is based on a system that is even older than Windows. Much older, actually. That said, Mac OS X is more streamlined than Windows, because it's aimed at technical users only, and not everyone, as is Windows. If you're an advanced users, and can live with OS X's many limitations, it's certainly an option.
2. When a new operating system or service pack is released, there are tons of changes to the functionality.
And... what? That's often true of OS X as well, actually, though Apple uses different naming techniques. As I've documented on this site, Apple releases many, many OS updates for OS X too. Some of them are more easily digested than others.
3. WinTel machines use different versions of BIOS. They are not all equal, nor do they all have the same level of compatibility.
I have no idea where that's going.
4. Some Windows software applications are well written; others take shortcuts. Shortcuts may work in some environments, but not all, and ultimately the consumer pays in lost time, availability and productivity.
Again, this is true of all OSes. Some apps are just better written than others.
5. Hardware. There are hundreds of "WinTel-compatible" motherboards, each claiming to be better than the next. Whatever.
Again, not sure what his point is. There are more PCs types too. More peripherals. More software. There is more of everything on the PC. That is the platform's greatest strength. If you want less choice, the Mac is certainly a great option.
6. Memory. Not all RAM is equal. Some works well. Cheap stuff doesn't.
This is not Windows/WinTel specific at all.
7. Hard disks. Same problem: cheap or reliable. Your call.
Ditto. This has nothing to do with WinTel.

So let's recap. Of the 7 issues he raises, only one or two are Windows specific. He has switched the Mac, which is fantastic. For him. But it's unclear how this experience relates to the rest of the world. Most people have different needs than this guy. And if he was serious about security, he'd be busy making sure he was experiencing what others experience, so he could actually help them. The ivory tower stuff he's doing is both uninformative for whatever readers he has and non-applicable to most of his clients' real-world issues. What was the point of this experiment again?

I'm not dumping on the guy's decision per se, just his need to make it seem like what he's done is something everyone can do. In many ways--more than you may realize--I wish I could "switch" to the Mac. But I can't. Too many applications I want are PC-specific. Too many of my readers use PCs. Too much of my technology investment is PC-based and non-reproduceable on the Mac. Heck, I'm even more productive on a PC than I am on a Mac. And so on. The real world has a funny way of getting in the way when you try to make a point, or do the "right" thing. I can't honestly say the Mac is "better" than Windows for most people. I can say that it is an excellent alternative in certain situations. That's a lot more honest than this Network World baloney.

Just a thought.
[ Posted at 8:23 PM | Permalink ]

 

Quake leaps into next generation

BBC:
One of the top sci-fi shooters, Quake, is getting a new lease of life as a next-generation console game.

It was one of the titles announced for Microsoft's Xbox 360 during last week's E3 games expo in Los Angeles.

The game promises to be an ultra-violent experience, judging by the demonstration shown behind closed doors at the show.

The date has not been set for the release of Quake 4 yet, which is also being made for the PC.

Quake is one of those games that fans speak of with awe. The first one in the series was published for the PC in 1996.

Since then, Quake and its two sequels, Quake 2 and the multi-player Quake 3: Arena, have sold more than four million copies.

The title is being made with the software behind last year's Doom 3 game - and it shows.

The sequences shown at E3 bore a striking resemblance to Doom 3, with parts of the environment seemingly identical.
Quake 4 looks great. I'll have a full screenshot gallery up on the SuperSite for Windows later this week, but for now, here is a small preview:




[ Posted at 8:58 AM | Permalink ]

 

Tuesday, May 24, 2005

Winamp iPod Plugin 1.20

ml_iPod:
The winamp ipod plugin (aka ml_ipod) is a plugin for winamp. It allows you to manage your iPod from within the winamp media library. It supports all kinds of iPods, from the classic first generation iPods, to the iPod shuffle and the latest models.

Whats New in version 1.20:

* Autofill for iPod Shuffles
* Advanced naming of files copied to iPod
* Sync now updates modified songs
* Last played and playcount updated when playing songs via mlipod
* Reads play counts from the iPod Shuffle
* Optionally detect "Fake" iPods
* Switched to a better random number generator for playlist shuffling
* Fixed send-to from playlist (and associated length error)
* Fixed hitting Cancel during a transfer
* Fixed ratings sync
* Fixed ipod size statistics

You Can Download the Latest Version of the iPod plugin Here
[ Posted at 5:10 PM | Permalink ]

 

Monday, May 23, 2005

Apple and Intel: A tale of rumors and truths

Everyone has an opinion about the Wall Street Journal report that Apple may be moving to Intel chips. The most common opinion is that Apple is foisting this rumor itself in a bid to pressure IBM, its current chipmaker. Apple, these people say, is upset that IBM can't deliver the 3 GHz chip that Steve Jobs promised two years ago, and it's jealous that IBM is spending so much time working on chips for video game systems.

It all makes a lot of sense. There's just one problem. In the past, when rumors of Apple jumping ship to a different chip architecture came up, I just reported on them like everyone else. This time, I'm involved personally. I was the first to report it was happening, for starters. And I now have three sources that have independently provided me with information about these developments. That doesn't mean that Apple isn't playing Intel off of IBM of course. But I have to wonder.

One of my sources is a Microsoft evangelist who heard that Apple was moving to Intel from two senior Apple executives. The second is an Intel engineer I met at WinHEC last month, who told me that Intel then had OS X running on Intel hardware in its labs. The third source is a Tablet PC enthusiast and expert who regularly provides me with Tablet PC information.

The first two were unequivocal: Apple is porting OS X to Intel--not to x86, but specifically to Intel--and abandoning IBM's PowerPC architecture. The third noted this week that he's hearing that the Intel work is related to Apple's much discussed Tablet device. Too, there's a hidden display option that lets you orient the screen in landscape mode in Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger," a clue that such a device is on the way, I was told by others. (However, I can't get this secret option to work because my PowerBook doesn't support it.)

So what does all this mean? I'm not sure. It may happen. It may not. But this is the first time I've actually been involved, and I'm not sure what to make of it.
[ Posted at 11:00 PM | Permalink ]

 

More on Apple/Intel

Now I'm hearing that the Apple/Intel work may be related to an Apple Tablet announcement, which is apparently due soon. Regardless, the Intel talks apparently involve some sort of power management technologies for Sonoma-like Powerbooks and/or Tablets. It's not anything ARM or XScale related, my sources tell me.
[ Posted at 4:07 PM | Permalink ]

 

Sweet vindication: Wall Street Journal confirms my report about Apple using Intel chips

Vindication can be fun. During WinHEC, I reported that two sources had told me that Apple was moving to Intel chips. Today, the Wall Street Journal had this to say in a report titled, "Apple Explores Use Of Chips From Intel For Macintosh Line":
Apple Computer Inc. has always blazed its own trail, a tack that has helped turn the company into a stock-market darling lately. But a pivotal step toward the mainstream could be in the offing.

The computer maker has been in talks that could lead to a decision soon to use Intel Corp. chips in its Macintosh computer line, industry executives say, a prospect that may shake up the world of computers and software.

Two industry executives with knowledge of recent discussions between the companies said Apple will agree to use Intel chips ... Talks between Apple and Intel could founder, as they have before, or Apple could be engaging in negotiations with Intel to gain leverage over IBM.

One of the two industry executives said Apple isn't likely to market OS X for other PCs. Besides hurting its own hardware business, such a path would put Apple in more direct competition with Microsoft, whose application programs are important to the success of the Macintosh. Instead, the company is likely to package its modified software with its own Intel-based hardware, though it is not clear how the company will prevent users from shifting the software to other machines, the executive said.

Assuming that plan goes forward, consumers would need to get new versions of their application programs for Intel-based Macs. Software companies would have to convert those products, though that procedure should be relatively simple for companies familiar with OS X, former Apple engineers say. The industry executive said Mr. Jobs could announce the new strategy as early as June 6 at its world-wide developers conference in San Francisco, a place the company typically informs software and hardware partners of future directions.

Apple sells only about three million computers a year -- a small portion of the 200 million or so machines sold globally -- so a new relationship with Intel wouldn't increase that company's sales much. But Intel, which has long courted Apple, could benefit by an association with Apple and its hit iPod device, which may be luring more Windows PC users to consider Apple computer products.

In a sign of how small a player Apple remains in the PC market, the strong sales have translated into only minuscule market-share gains. Apple rose to 2.3% of new world-wide PC sales in the first three months of the year from 2% the prior quarter. Windows PCs account for the vast majority of the rest of the market.
Ah yes.

On April 26, 2005--about a month ago--I wrote in a blog entry during WinHEC 2004 that "Apple is unhappy with the PowerPC production at IBM and will be switching to Intel-compatible chips this very year. Yeah, seriously." The claim was met by derision and scoffing by Mac fanatics who assumed I was making something up. But one of the sources--an Intel employee--even had details, claiming that the company already had OS X running on Intel hardware in its labs. I had to mention it.

And now, it seems, that was a good call.
[ Posted at 9:08 AM | Permalink ]

 

STAR WARS Breaks Box-Office Records

New York Times (free registration required):
"Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith" became the year's first movie blockbuster while setting some historic benchmarks, as it rode a record-breaking debut on Thursday to the biggest number ever for a four-day opening.

In the United States, the movie took in an estimated total of $158.5 million in 3,661 theaters, a figure that bested the last four-day record, set for "The Matrix Reloaded" in 2003, of $134.3 million. "Episode III" also opened almost everywhere around the world, and took in and additional $144.7 million overseas. International box-office records are difficult to calculate because of the myriad countries involved, but the figure was certainly a huge success for the film, whose total box office was $303.2 million for the first four days.

"We set records domestically, internationally and intergalactically," said Bruce Snyder, Fox's distribution president. "A big part of the success, and the continuing amazing grosses, is that people are coming out of the auditorium and are getting back on line to buy more tickets for future shows."
Related New York Times reviews:

STAR WARS Episode IV: A New Hope (1977)
STAR WARS Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
STAR WARS Episode VI: The Return of the Jedi (1983)
STAR WARS Episode I: The Phantom Menace (1999)
STAR WARS Episode II: The Attack of the Clones (2002)
STAR WARS Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005)
[ Posted at 8:57 AM | Permalink ]

 

Sunday, May 22, 2005

iCannot Believe I Read this Crap

OK, I admit it. I had high hopes for iCon: Steve Jobs. However, I've probably read more computer industry books than anyone, and I have to say, this book is utter crap. I read it a bit differently than most books, starting with the end of the book (the return of Jobs to Apple) because that was the part of his life that's been described the least so far. Oddly enough, however, large parts of it were oddly familiar, including descriptions of how Jobs' biggest early successes at Apple--returning the company to profitability and the iMac--should, in fact, be credited to Jobs' predecessor, Gil Amelio. OK, fine.

Then, I started reading the book normally. The parts dealing with Jobs' early life, and his first run at Apple through 1985, were well known to me, and this book offered no new information. But when I got to the part about Jobs' years at NeXT and Pixar, that odd feeling returned. I'd read this stuff before. I mean, I had read exactly this stuff before.

Turns out I was right. And Alan Deutschman, author of the excellent The Second Coming of Steve Jobs, explains why in his well-written review of iCon. It turns out iCon's authors--Jeffrey S. Young and William L. Simon--have not only heavily plagiarized Deutschman's book, they've even plagiarized On the Firing Line, Gil Amelio's autobiography, which was, not coincidentally, actually written by iCon co-author Simon. Incredible, simply incredible.

In his review, Deutschman gives excellent examples of the plagiarism, so I won't repeat any of that here. But check out the review. And skip this steaming turd of a book. If you're looking for a good biography of Jobs, by an author who actually talked to people very close to the man himself, The Second Coming of Steve Jobs is the way to go. Which brings up an interesting final point: Though the subtitle of iCon declares that Jobs is the "greatest second act in the history of business," Jobs is really in his third act. His second act--as CEO of NeXT--was an almost utter failure (though one might successfully argue that he atoned for that somewhat by selling NeXT to Apple and then taking over the company). iCon stinks.

Related: Buy The Second Coming of Steve Jobs at Amazon: Hardcover | Paperback
[ Posted at 7:42 PM | Permalink ]

 



Nexus Home | Nexus Archives | Email Paul
Copyright © 2001-2008 Paul Thurrott. All Rights Reserved.