One of America’s funniest comedians was a fellow named Rodney Dangerfield whose one liners where legendary but his funniest lines almost always started with “I get no respect.” The folks from AMD know just how he feels. For years, they felt that they were on par technologically with Intel and, in many cases, had even better technology, but the industry gave them no respect. But that perception seems to be changing. Their thrust into 64 bit computing that allows for backward compatibility with 32 bit apps is starting to catch on, and the last major hold out on adopting AMD chips, Dell, has finally admitted that AMD’s chips are really good and that Dell will soon be using them in their servers and computers in the coming year. Even more interesting is the fact that Intel has concluded that AMD was correct in creating a 64 bit platform with backward compatibility to 32 bit apps and is now scrambling to follow in AMD’s footsteps.
Add to that Intel many blunders over the last year and all of a sudden, AMD looks good to a lot of customers who spurned their advances in the past.
I recently met with AMD officials at their annual analysts briefing and was pleasantly surprised to find that their 64 bit chips are finding their way into all types of servers and applications. They are especially being welcomed in engineering and scientific applications and at the event, officials from Ferrari’s racing team showed how AMD’s high speed 64 bit processors gives them an edge when it comes to designing Formula One race cars. While I am encouraged to see them make serious strides in the industry and gaining acceptance even from folks like Dell who have been long time holdouts, for them to really be successful, they need to see more software vendors supporting 64 bit apps as well as Microsoft speeding up their development of a 64 bit OS that supports this new computing platform.
Although AMD’s advance in high speed computing is important and exciting, there is another product that they showed that I am even more excited about.
For many years, I have been a major proponent of creating a very low cost computing platform that could be used to bring poorer and developing nations into the information age. Last fall, AMD introduced a product that I believe is very important in the quest to bring the rest of the world into this digital age. The product is called the Personal Internet Communicator (PIC) and with keyboard and mouse, it sells for $185.00.Add a 15 inch monitor and the total cost of the package is $285.00. This is not a high powered computer by any means of the imagination and uses only an AMD Geode 500 MHz processor and has a puny 10 gig HD and basic 56K modem. However, to people in India, Mexico and other developing nations where their yearly incomes are extremely low, this computing device is a God send. AMD’s first major partnership for the PIC is Tata in India, which is a $15 billion dollar technology company that will handle the selling and distribution of these systems within India. AMD says that they will soon have partners in Mexico, China and other countries where this type of computer will be attractive due to its bare bone pricing yet real world Internet connectivity and PC functionality.
The PIC marks what I consider a serious milestone for the PC industry. At Comdex in 1999, just as the PC industry was really discovering the value and potential of the Internet, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison and a telecom partner, held an unscheduled press conference to announce what he called the “Internet PC.” He argued that the PC itself was too expensive and too hard to use and that what was needed was a low cost system that had a connection to the Internet. And, more importantly for him, he was going to be the one to champion this concept and get the Internet PC out so even developing countries could afford to be a part of the information age. At the time, the median price of a PC was about $1700. But an interesting thing happened after Ellison complained about PC pricing and its lack of affordability for use and adoption in developing countries.
The PC industry started to squeeze their own margins and beat suppliers down on costs and within two years, they had fully loaded PC’s out the door for under $1000. And since then, prices have continued to slide, so much so that Ellison’s own quest to create a sub $500 PC with only Internet connectivity was squelched altogether. He also made two assumptions at the time about the Internet PC that turned out wrong. He believed that high speed connectivity was just around the corner and that would mean that applications could reside on the Internet and not on the PC itself. Consequently, he also concluded that there would not be any need for local storage since all applications and info would come directly from the Internet. Well, it turns out that we are still years away from ubiquitous broadband and, in some developing nations, they don’t even have telephony connections. But there are at least another 2 billion people in the world that, although they have low incomes, could find away to buy a PC that is at this price point and thanks to even a basic modem connection, can be brought into the digital age and reap the benefits of the Internet with its links to information and communication.
With that in mind, the PIC from AMD and their partners, which include Microsoft, Samsung, Seagate and others, is well on the way to help them in their quest to create what AMD calls their “Global Planetary Computing” platform.
There is another twist on this low cost concept that could be even more powerful in the future. The PIC is a great entry level device and I believe will be successful within the markets AMD is targeting. However, there is another school of thought that says that there will be a device that sits next to the TV and yet has all the functionality of a PC. But, the missing link is a DVD playback system that is not in the PIC as of now. The reason that this is important is that it could potentially become not only a person’s gateway to the Internet but could also become their digital entertainment system. Of course, in higher income markets this device could take the form of a game system or even a next generation set top box, but there are companies developing a device that has been dubbed a “digital entertainment center” and while it does get info and data from a PC to display on a TV, its real purpose in life is to become the hub of a person’s digital entertainment experience. A recent announcement of a partnership that includes, Zoran, Transmeta and Zedeon is proposing such a system. Although aimed at American and European markets at first, this sub $400 product includes a DVD, PVR, 40 gig HD, audio subsystem and X86 based OS and consumer user interface that is optimized for a TV. While clearly an up market device now, at this price, it could be attractive to even markets like China and other parts of Asia where DVD’s are an important part of a family’s entertainment experience today. And if the TV is the monitor, its sub $400 cost is not that far off from the $285 PIC with even more value being provided to the final customer. The bottom line is that the activity of creating a low cost PC or PC derivative for the under-developed world is now in full swing and the potential of bringing billions of more people online may be a reality sooner then many think.
http://www.csinsights.com/index.php?action=pg_article&id=54
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Command and Control: New A/V Receivers
Receivers have come a long way from their humble two-channel stereo receiver roots. A modern audio/video receiver serves as the central hub of a technologically advanced home theater system, and it does a lot more than power a set of speakers. In addition to amplification, an A/V receiver performs video switching, digital processing and a host of other essential functions, and some even serve as a powerful control center for satellite radio and digital audio playback. A/V receivers are available in a wide range of capabilities and prices to meet just about anyone's needs and budget.
Pioneer VSX-816-K
Surround-sound home theater receivers originally provided five channels of amplification plus a passive subwoofer output, but today's receivers now have as many as seven powered channels. One affordable seven-channel receiver is the Pioneer VSX-816-K, with an MSRP of about $300, which produces a generous 110 watts of power per channel and throws in a few surprises. This black unit is also available in silver as model VSX-816-S.
Satellite radio has exploded in popularity in recent years, and the VSX-816-K capitalizes on this by offering XM Satellite Radio compatibility. With the addition of an XM tuner, antenna and paid subscription (all available separately), the VSX-816-K lets you listen to XM's 170-plus channels, including 69 commercial-free music channels. This receiver even supports XM HD Surround, giving you a five-channel radio listening experience that must be heard to be believed.
Pioneer VSX-816-K seven-channel A/V receiver
Pioneer VSX-816-K seven-channel A/V receiver
The VSX-816-K includes Pioneer's MCACC (Multi-Channel Acoustic Calibration Circuit) system, which automatically configures speaker levels for your particular listening environment. For a powerful and easy-to-use A/V receiver that is easy on the wallet, take a look at the Pioneer VSX-816-K.
Panasonic SA-XR57S
The Panasonic SA-XR57S (with an MSRP of about $400) offers a host of advanced features for a very appealing price. This seven-channel home theater receiver uses precise digital amplification for a clean sound, and at 100 watts per channel, it is no slouch in the power department.
Panasonic includes its HDAVI Control system to make operating the SA-XR57S and associated components an effortless task. For example, if you want to watch a DVD in surround sound, simply hit the play button on the HDAVI remote control. With the help of user-configured macros, the SA-XR57S will then switch to the proper source input. Your TV will turn on and go to the correct input, and your DVD player will power up and begin playing the disc. It doesn't get any easier than that.
The SA-XR57S also features HDMI switching, giving you direct digital-to-digital connections with your compatible home theater components. The Panasonic SA-XR57S delivers high-end A/V receiver features without the high-end price.
Yamaha RX-V559
While the RX-V559 is the only six-channel A/V receiver in this round-up, that is no reason for this versatile Yamaha unit to hang its head. In addition to a very respectable 95 watts of power per channel, the RX-V559 (with an MSRP of about $450) proves to be an ideal control center for iPod audio.
With the addition of Yamaha's iPod dock (model YDS-10), you can control your iPod via the RX-V559's remote control. Even better, when connected to a TV, the RX-V559 lets you navigate your iPod content through an on-screen display. This home theater receiver also has an advanced processing mode that restores audio details lost during the digital audio compression/decompression process. Your digital music library has never sounded so good, and the dock will even charge your iPod for you.
The RX-V559 is XM-ready, so with an optional tuner, antenna and subscription, you can listen to XM Satellite Radio in your family room. This unit is even compatible with XM HD Surround, so you can hear certain XM stations in full multichannel glory. For all this and more, check out the Yamaha RX-V559.
Onkyo TX-SR603X
Onkyo's TX-SR603X is another A/V receiver to offer XM compatibility, but this unit does a lot more than just play satellite radio. The TX-SR603X (with an MSRP of about $500) provides 90 watts into its seven channels of amplification, and with 32 digital processing modes and adjustable crossovers, it gives you exacting control of your home theater experience.
As we mentioned, the TX-SR603X is XM-compatible. Unlike many similar receivers, however, this unit has an integrated XM tuner, so all you need is an antenna and a subscription to get you going. With an optional adapter, you can also interface your iPod with the TX-SR603X for a sound that blows away any compact iPod speaker system.
With Onkyo's Auto Speaker Set-Up and the included microphone, the TX-SR603X will automatically calibrate speaker levels and delays for optimal sound at your preferred listening position. You can even use this A/V receiver to power two rooms at once, so the kids can watch a DVD in surround sound in the family room while you listen to XM Radio in the den. With all these listening options, it's no wonder we like the Onkyo TX-SR603X.
http://products.howstuffworks.com/command-and-control-new-a-v-receivers-article.htm
Pioneer VSX-816-K
Surround-sound home theater receivers originally provided five channels of amplification plus a passive subwoofer output, but today's receivers now have as many as seven powered channels. One affordable seven-channel receiver is the Pioneer VSX-816-K, with an MSRP of about $300, which produces a generous 110 watts of power per channel and throws in a few surprises. This black unit is also available in silver as model VSX-816-S.
Satellite radio has exploded in popularity in recent years, and the VSX-816-K capitalizes on this by offering XM Satellite Radio compatibility. With the addition of an XM tuner, antenna and paid subscription (all available separately), the VSX-816-K lets you listen to XM's 170-plus channels, including 69 commercial-free music channels. This receiver even supports XM HD Surround, giving you a five-channel radio listening experience that must be heard to be believed.
Pioneer VSX-816-K seven-channel A/V receiver
Pioneer VSX-816-K seven-channel A/V receiver
The VSX-816-K includes Pioneer's MCACC (Multi-Channel Acoustic Calibration Circuit) system, which automatically configures speaker levels for your particular listening environment. For a powerful and easy-to-use A/V receiver that is easy on the wallet, take a look at the Pioneer VSX-816-K.
Panasonic SA-XR57S
The Panasonic SA-XR57S (with an MSRP of about $400) offers a host of advanced features for a very appealing price. This seven-channel home theater receiver uses precise digital amplification for a clean sound, and at 100 watts per channel, it is no slouch in the power department.
Panasonic includes its HDAVI Control system to make operating the SA-XR57S and associated components an effortless task. For example, if you want to watch a DVD in surround sound, simply hit the play button on the HDAVI remote control. With the help of user-configured macros, the SA-XR57S will then switch to the proper source input. Your TV will turn on and go to the correct input, and your DVD player will power up and begin playing the disc. It doesn't get any easier than that.
The SA-XR57S also features HDMI switching, giving you direct digital-to-digital connections with your compatible home theater components. The Panasonic SA-XR57S delivers high-end A/V receiver features without the high-end price.
Yamaha RX-V559
While the RX-V559 is the only six-channel A/V receiver in this round-up, that is no reason for this versatile Yamaha unit to hang its head. In addition to a very respectable 95 watts of power per channel, the RX-V559 (with an MSRP of about $450) proves to be an ideal control center for iPod audio.
With the addition of Yamaha's iPod dock (model YDS-10), you can control your iPod via the RX-V559's remote control. Even better, when connected to a TV, the RX-V559 lets you navigate your iPod content through an on-screen display. This home theater receiver also has an advanced processing mode that restores audio details lost during the digital audio compression/decompression process. Your digital music library has never sounded so good, and the dock will even charge your iPod for you.
The RX-V559 is XM-ready, so with an optional tuner, antenna and subscription, you can listen to XM Satellite Radio in your family room. This unit is even compatible with XM HD Surround, so you can hear certain XM stations in full multichannel glory. For all this and more, check out the Yamaha RX-V559.
Onkyo TX-SR603X
Onkyo's TX-SR603X is another A/V receiver to offer XM compatibility, but this unit does a lot more than just play satellite radio. The TX-SR603X (with an MSRP of about $500) provides 90 watts into its seven channels of amplification, and with 32 digital processing modes and adjustable crossovers, it gives you exacting control of your home theater experience.
As we mentioned, the TX-SR603X is XM-compatible. Unlike many similar receivers, however, this unit has an integrated XM tuner, so all you need is an antenna and a subscription to get you going. With an optional adapter, you can also interface your iPod with the TX-SR603X for a sound that blows away any compact iPod speaker system.
With Onkyo's Auto Speaker Set-Up and the included microphone, the TX-SR603X will automatically calibrate speaker levels and delays for optimal sound at your preferred listening position. You can even use this A/V receiver to power two rooms at once, so the kids can watch a DVD in surround sound in the family room while you listen to XM Radio in the den. With all these listening options, it's no wonder we like the Onkyo TX-SR603X.
http://products.howstuffworks.com/command-and-control-new-a-v-receivers-article.htm
Monday, June 4, 2007
Chips with Everything
In 2007 the computer gave up taking over the world. Instead the world took over the computer.
2007: The word computer disappears from the Apple company, the founders of the personal computing world. Instead Steve Jobs waxes lyrical about his new iPhone: a mobile megamedia merger of phone plus camera, plus Wi-Fi, plus Apple, plus Google, plus AT&T—and minus the “computer.”
Bill Gates has mysteriously forgotten “computers” too. His new hobbyhorse? “An entirely new class of robots,” Gates states in Scientific American, “that are essentially mobile, wireless peripheral devices.” These aren’t your great-great-grandfather’s girl-shaped 1927-style robots from the film Metropolis. Gates’s visionary robots are virtual-actual hybrid machines that wade around the world in pools of wireless connectivity. Their brain is a PC hooked to the Internet.
Steve’s ultracapable iPhone, whose screen can be squinched with your fingertips as if it were Play-Doh, bids fair to become Apple’s “remote control for reality.” With the Web in your purse or pocket, applied to physical reality via Google mapping services, you own the ultimate Reality Distortion Field! For Gates, the computer is transforming itself into Microsoft on wheels, a Zune that walks: with brand-new software supporting Microsoft for Robots, a PC can ramble all over your house photographing, scanning, listening, grabbing, and gripping—maybe even fetching a beer! Where does Microsoft’s Wireless Robot want to go today?
Forget the wires, and you can forget the computer too. The computer just fades into the Internet cloud. That network-as-cloud enables a new class of amphibious virtual-actual products. Cut the wires—and shoes can talk to iPods. Doors and windows get wireless remote controls. Light switches pop up wherever you care to stick them. “Industrial Wireless” appears on the scene: heavy-duty applications in factory command and control. Cut the wires—and automated buildings and factories beckon. The Internet’s wireless towers become the church steeples for tomorrow’s City of Bits!
It’s the logic of the Digital Great Chain of Being: from the ancient monster mainframe isolated in its glass cage to the brisker midsize computer to the whizzing desktop, the luggable laptop, the portable palmtop, the screeching, chirping cell phone that nobody can escape down to the silent, invisible radio-ID chip—sometimes injectable—that is scarily described as “the size of a grain of rice,” there’s plenty of room at the bottom.
In 2007 the computer gave up taking over the world. Instead the world took over the computer. The Internet became a wholly owned subset of Reality 2.0. When the actual world invades the virtual world, it scatters the computer into tiny physical pieces, some no bigger than dust. “Intelligent printing,” another modern darling, is semiconductor ink sprayed on cardboard. There’s never been a humbler, cheaper “computer.”
It’s the foggy dawn of an Internet of Things. In 2007 wireless isn’t just for phones and global satellites, it’s become domestic and personal. The new and improved 802.11n Wi-Fi standard is fast enough to ship wireless video around the house, but it is corny compared to WiMAX, a single giant tower that can drench a city in Internet traffic. There’s an explosion of methods for machines to connect to machines, and a crash in the price of a signal. A host of wireless standards competes for every niche: ZigBee, Z-Wave, HDMI, Wibree, GSM, CDMA, Bluetooth. Hooked up to physical objects, tiny local Internets assemble themselves into “stars, meshes, clusters” with “self-forming, self-healing” networks.
Knowledge is power, data is power—but power is power too, and in 2007 electrical power is the planetary crunch issue. The iPhone will have its little dock where it slots in, gasping for fossil voltage. The Microsoft Web robot will clank over and plug itself into the wall, and woe betide the competitor who gets in its way. Every other wireless chip still needs battery power; otherwise the Internet of Things becomes one giant lethal macramé of power cords. Putting chips in everything is the fast track to a greenhouse doom: you’ll be in an automated town that wirelessly watches itself catch fire and wash away in high tides.
Except, what if there were wireless chips so small and clever that they sucked renewable energy right out of the environment? To survive as truly native components of the actual world, wireless computers would have to become power plants so nifty and thrifty that they’d live off free ambient energy: the heat in a hot-water pipe, the passing glow of sunlight. Being so small yet fiercely capable, the tiniest chips need only a fleabite of power to thrive. Green chips: the smaller they get, the closer they are to a zero-footprint.
It’s still only 2007. Apple has not yet shipped a single iPhone. We don’t have Windows with Wheels and Eyeballs either. But self-powered green chips? The Germans, in the unlikely global stronghold of wind and solar, are very busy on ambient power: unlike Apple and Microsoft, nobody’s ever heard of EnOcean. It’s a start-up specializing in wireless doodads that can harvest and store the tiniest traces of environmental energy: a flux in daylight, a change of air pressure. Green-powered micronetworks—no more batteries.
Fast, cheap, wireless, inky, self-powered, and out of control: at a price point like that, every product is an Internet site. Even a stick of gum isn’t safe.
http://www.metropolismag.com/cda/story.php?artid=2614
2007: The word computer disappears from the Apple company, the founders of the personal computing world. Instead Steve Jobs waxes lyrical about his new iPhone: a mobile megamedia merger of phone plus camera, plus Wi-Fi, plus Apple, plus Google, plus AT&T—and minus the “computer.”
Bill Gates has mysteriously forgotten “computers” too. His new hobbyhorse? “An entirely new class of robots,” Gates states in Scientific American, “that are essentially mobile, wireless peripheral devices.” These aren’t your great-great-grandfather’s girl-shaped 1927-style robots from the film Metropolis. Gates’s visionary robots are virtual-actual hybrid machines that wade around the world in pools of wireless connectivity. Their brain is a PC hooked to the Internet.
Steve’s ultracapable iPhone, whose screen can be squinched with your fingertips as if it were Play-Doh, bids fair to become Apple’s “remote control for reality.” With the Web in your purse or pocket, applied to physical reality via Google mapping services, you own the ultimate Reality Distortion Field! For Gates, the computer is transforming itself into Microsoft on wheels, a Zune that walks: with brand-new software supporting Microsoft for Robots, a PC can ramble all over your house photographing, scanning, listening, grabbing, and gripping—maybe even fetching a beer! Where does Microsoft’s Wireless Robot want to go today?
Forget the wires, and you can forget the computer too. The computer just fades into the Internet cloud. That network-as-cloud enables a new class of amphibious virtual-actual products. Cut the wires—and shoes can talk to iPods. Doors and windows get wireless remote controls. Light switches pop up wherever you care to stick them. “Industrial Wireless” appears on the scene: heavy-duty applications in factory command and control. Cut the wires—and automated buildings and factories beckon. The Internet’s wireless towers become the church steeples for tomorrow’s City of Bits!
It’s the logic of the Digital Great Chain of Being: from the ancient monster mainframe isolated in its glass cage to the brisker midsize computer to the whizzing desktop, the luggable laptop, the portable palmtop, the screeching, chirping cell phone that nobody can escape down to the silent, invisible radio-ID chip—sometimes injectable—that is scarily described as “the size of a grain of rice,” there’s plenty of room at the bottom.
In 2007 the computer gave up taking over the world. Instead the world took over the computer. The Internet became a wholly owned subset of Reality 2.0. When the actual world invades the virtual world, it scatters the computer into tiny physical pieces, some no bigger than dust. “Intelligent printing,” another modern darling, is semiconductor ink sprayed on cardboard. There’s never been a humbler, cheaper “computer.”
It’s the foggy dawn of an Internet of Things. In 2007 wireless isn’t just for phones and global satellites, it’s become domestic and personal. The new and improved 802.11n Wi-Fi standard is fast enough to ship wireless video around the house, but it is corny compared to WiMAX, a single giant tower that can drench a city in Internet traffic. There’s an explosion of methods for machines to connect to machines, and a crash in the price of a signal. A host of wireless standards competes for every niche: ZigBee, Z-Wave, HDMI, Wibree, GSM, CDMA, Bluetooth. Hooked up to physical objects, tiny local Internets assemble themselves into “stars, meshes, clusters” with “self-forming, self-healing” networks.
Knowledge is power, data is power—but power is power too, and in 2007 electrical power is the planetary crunch issue. The iPhone will have its little dock where it slots in, gasping for fossil voltage. The Microsoft Web robot will clank over and plug itself into the wall, and woe betide the competitor who gets in its way. Every other wireless chip still needs battery power; otherwise the Internet of Things becomes one giant lethal macramé of power cords. Putting chips in everything is the fast track to a greenhouse doom: you’ll be in an automated town that wirelessly watches itself catch fire and wash away in high tides.
Except, what if there were wireless chips so small and clever that they sucked renewable energy right out of the environment? To survive as truly native components of the actual world, wireless computers would have to become power plants so nifty and thrifty that they’d live off free ambient energy: the heat in a hot-water pipe, the passing glow of sunlight. Being so small yet fiercely capable, the tiniest chips need only a fleabite of power to thrive. Green chips: the smaller they get, the closer they are to a zero-footprint.
It’s still only 2007. Apple has not yet shipped a single iPhone. We don’t have Windows with Wheels and Eyeballs either. But self-powered green chips? The Germans, in the unlikely global stronghold of wind and solar, are very busy on ambient power: unlike Apple and Microsoft, nobody’s ever heard of EnOcean. It’s a start-up specializing in wireless doodads that can harvest and store the tiniest traces of environmental energy: a flux in daylight, a change of air pressure. Green-powered micronetworks—no more batteries.
Fast, cheap, wireless, inky, self-powered, and out of control: at a price point like that, every product is an Internet site. Even a stick of gum isn’t safe.
http://www.metropolismag.com/cda/story.php?artid=2614
Finding Time for My Toys
Reading Paul's article about video games up there, I'm wondering how he does it, how he finds time in his busy writing schedule to become fluent in three new gaming consoles and their associated games. He's got two kids, is a devoted husband and father, and churns out articles with a wildly prolific abandon—and yet he's intimately familiar with every game title I can throw at him. He also has appreciable DVD and music collections. And he's always tinkering with new products, which are tossed at him from every corner of the tech market. I'm beginning to think that the man never sleeps. Or maybe he has some kind of time machine.
I'm also a father of two, and I have my own home and workplace responsibilities and joys. I do my job and try to be the best parent I can be, and yet, in the evening hours and on the weekends, I have to scrounge to find time to enjoy my toys. After getting all hot and bothered about my new Xbox 360 early this year, I now find that I haven't played a game in a few weeks. I have a nice DVD collection, but these days I rarely get the chance to sit down and enjoy a film and peruse the disc's extras. I have an iPod filled with kickin' music and informative podcasts that I want to devour. There are a few computers in my house, networked and enjoying wireless broadband Internet access, so that's an obvious seduction. No time! There are too many tech toys and gadgets clamoring for my attention! Necessarily, some get forgotten as the narrow focus of my attention alights on one at a time.
I've often thought the answer is to go "tech ascetic." Turn my back on all electronic temptresses, move higher up into the wilds of the Rocky Mountains, hole myself away with my family, and read. You know, actual books. There's a certain attraction to that thought: Slow down the lifestyle, disconnect, commune with nature, find God.
Then I laugh. I laugh and laugh. I could no sooner give up my tech toys than start collecting Barry Manilow CDs.
But what's the answer? How do you live a good life and make room for the avalanche of tech wonders crashing down on your head? From Paul's example, I know some of you are getting away with it. You're working hard and playing hard. You're finding the balance, and you're enjoying the heck out of all of it. How do you do it?
http://www.connectedhomemag.com/HomeTheater/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=95519
I'm also a father of two, and I have my own home and workplace responsibilities and joys. I do my job and try to be the best parent I can be, and yet, in the evening hours and on the weekends, I have to scrounge to find time to enjoy my toys. After getting all hot and bothered about my new Xbox 360 early this year, I now find that I haven't played a game in a few weeks. I have a nice DVD collection, but these days I rarely get the chance to sit down and enjoy a film and peruse the disc's extras. I have an iPod filled with kickin' music and informative podcasts that I want to devour. There are a few computers in my house, networked and enjoying wireless broadband Internet access, so that's an obvious seduction. No time! There are too many tech toys and gadgets clamoring for my attention! Necessarily, some get forgotten as the narrow focus of my attention alights on one at a time.
I've often thought the answer is to go "tech ascetic." Turn my back on all electronic temptresses, move higher up into the wilds of the Rocky Mountains, hole myself away with my family, and read. You know, actual books. There's a certain attraction to that thought: Slow down the lifestyle, disconnect, commune with nature, find God.
Then I laugh. I laugh and laugh. I could no sooner give up my tech toys than start collecting Barry Manilow CDs.
But what's the answer? How do you live a good life and make room for the avalanche of tech wonders crashing down on your head? From Paul's example, I know some of you are getting away with it. You're working hard and playing hard. You're finding the balance, and you're enjoying the heck out of all of it. How do you do it?
http://www.connectedhomemag.com/HomeTheater/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=95519
Saturday, June 2, 2007
Apple's iPhone: Who Really Wins?
I can't recall when there has been more anticipation built up about the release of a cellular phone -- or any consumer device -- than now, with the Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) iPhone. The buzz has been incessant and almost as long-lasting as the ringing in my ears.
Yet all the talk and speculation has got me thinking -- even if the iPhone only partially lives up to the hype, who really benefits from it? Of course, we could look at who builds the guts of the iPhone and buy stock in those companies. But beyond this, who will profit the most from the supposed "sea change" that the iPhone is ushering in?
Getting a little crazy
In case you live on Venus, have no communication with the outside world, or simply don't know why everyone is talking about the iPhone, look here, here, and here. Its pending release has caused markets to gasp, has forced competitors such as Motorola (NYSE: MOT), LG, and Samsung to push out "iPhone killers," and has carriers scrambling to offer them. The only thing the iPhone buzz hasn't done yet is change the earth's magnetic polarity.
Even smartphone manufacturers that haven't yet built a media device to go directly mano a mano with the iPhone have commented on its impact on sales of their devices. Everyone from Research In Motion (Nasdaq: RIMM) to Palm (Nasdaq: PALM) to Nokia (NYSE: NOK) has had to assure investors and the general public that they will not implode under the weight of a giant apple with CEO Steve Jobs' smug profile beaming on the side.
You phone, iPhone, we all phone
And I agree that the iPhone story is not so much about who or what it will squash, displace, or otherwise somehow render moot. I'm much more interested in what the iPhone will increase, multiply, and magnify -- and I believe investors should be as well. Thus, the story I'm most interested in is that of the iPod, where an entirely new, thriving ecosystem was built on the back of a smash-hit consumer device.
To this end, much has been said about the high price the iPhone will supposedly command -- $500 even for the cheapest version -- and how that will affect its popularity. Certainly, a high price will keep it out of the hands of millions, but given time, the price should come into a range more digestible to the mass market, just like with the iPod. On this point, I agree with my Foolish colleague Tim Beyers that a premium price for the device may be the smarter move in the long run.
A premium product also sets up a more lucrative value chain for companies that will eventually build products or services around the iPhone. So while the exclusive provider of the iPhone -- AT&T (NYSE: T) -- won't see a huge crush of new subscribers on the back of a cheap device, the premium pricing of the iPhone will place it a level above the competition and attract big spenders. And I believe consumers will pay for a higher-quality device and service, even if this is only in perception and not fact.
A question of control
One of the biggest debates around the iPhone, and one with large, long-term consequences, is whether the device will change the balance of power between mobile device manufacturers like Motorola and Ericsson and wireless service providers such as AT&T and Verizon (NYSE: VZ). Historically, the carriers call the shots and largely dictate what features and services they want to offer consumers. Additionally, carriers want to control the branding and distribution of products and services, to achieve the maximum benefit of paying subscribers sticking with them, rather than another member of the value chain.
While many pundits have offered the opinion that Apple will finally break the carriers' control over wireless services and devices, I don't buy it. The same was said about offering the Internet on mobile phones and how it would destroy the carriers' "walled garden," where consumers are captive mostly to carriers' product pages. While Apple and other manufacturers of high-buzz products will get preferential treatment, carriers will not go so far as to sabotage the value chain that keeps them growing.
Not only do I believe carriers will maintain their position, I actually think they all stand to benefit tremendously from the "iPhone effect." Devices with cool new features bring more media applications into the mobile realm, where carriers can bill for them -- even considering the potential that carriers may lose billable bandwidth to services carried over the iPhone's Wi-Fi connection. Carriers will reap not only the benefits of iPhone and iPhone-like device sales, but also the new revenue generated by mobile applications on all those devices.
It's a win-win
Of course, Apple itself should do well with the iPhone -- it's really only a matter of how well. And I really have to hand it to Steve Jobs and the Apple team -- no matter how well or how badly the iPhone is received in the market, Apple hit pay dirt with the amount of press and "free" advertising it has received.
So, in my mind, Apple has already won. Even if the iPhone gets raked over the coals as a high-priced, over-hyped glam device, it will still garner more attention and promotion than any massive marketing budget could have bought. And I believe the wave of euphoria is a tide that will eventually lift all boats, even the ones that many have pegged as losers.
For related Foolishness:
* This iPhone Would Be Worth $600
* Great Investments For Busy People
* Avoid the VoIP Value Trap
Palm is a Motley Fool Stock Advisor selection. To find out which other stocks are currently making the cut with Fool founders Tom and Dave Gardner, check out an all-access 30-day free trial today.
Fool contributor Dave Mock is betting the iPhone will top Tickle Me Elmo as the "must have" item this year. He owns shares of Motorola. Dave is the author of The Qualcomm Equation. The Fool's disclosure policy thinks you're a winner no matter what.
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2007/05/31/apples-iphone-who-really-wins.aspx
Yet all the talk and speculation has got me thinking -- even if the iPhone only partially lives up to the hype, who really benefits from it? Of course, we could look at who builds the guts of the iPhone and buy stock in those companies. But beyond this, who will profit the most from the supposed "sea change" that the iPhone is ushering in?
Getting a little crazy
In case you live on Venus, have no communication with the outside world, or simply don't know why everyone is talking about the iPhone, look here, here, and here. Its pending release has caused markets to gasp, has forced competitors such as Motorola (NYSE: MOT), LG, and Samsung to push out "iPhone killers," and has carriers scrambling to offer them. The only thing the iPhone buzz hasn't done yet is change the earth's magnetic polarity.
Even smartphone manufacturers that haven't yet built a media device to go directly mano a mano with the iPhone have commented on its impact on sales of their devices. Everyone from Research In Motion (Nasdaq: RIMM) to Palm (Nasdaq: PALM) to Nokia (NYSE: NOK) has had to assure investors and the general public that they will not implode under the weight of a giant apple with CEO Steve Jobs' smug profile beaming on the side.
You phone, iPhone, we all phone
And I agree that the iPhone story is not so much about who or what it will squash, displace, or otherwise somehow render moot. I'm much more interested in what the iPhone will increase, multiply, and magnify -- and I believe investors should be as well. Thus, the story I'm most interested in is that of the iPod, where an entirely new, thriving ecosystem was built on the back of a smash-hit consumer device.
To this end, much has been said about the high price the iPhone will supposedly command -- $500 even for the cheapest version -- and how that will affect its popularity. Certainly, a high price will keep it out of the hands of millions, but given time, the price should come into a range more digestible to the mass market, just like with the iPod. On this point, I agree with my Foolish colleague Tim Beyers that a premium price for the device may be the smarter move in the long run.
A premium product also sets up a more lucrative value chain for companies that will eventually build products or services around the iPhone. So while the exclusive provider of the iPhone -- AT&T (NYSE: T) -- won't see a huge crush of new subscribers on the back of a cheap device, the premium pricing of the iPhone will place it a level above the competition and attract big spenders. And I believe consumers will pay for a higher-quality device and service, even if this is only in perception and not fact.
A question of control
One of the biggest debates around the iPhone, and one with large, long-term consequences, is whether the device will change the balance of power between mobile device manufacturers like Motorola and Ericsson and wireless service providers such as AT&T and Verizon (NYSE: VZ). Historically, the carriers call the shots and largely dictate what features and services they want to offer consumers. Additionally, carriers want to control the branding and distribution of products and services, to achieve the maximum benefit of paying subscribers sticking with them, rather than another member of the value chain.
While many pundits have offered the opinion that Apple will finally break the carriers' control over wireless services and devices, I don't buy it. The same was said about offering the Internet on mobile phones and how it would destroy the carriers' "walled garden," where consumers are captive mostly to carriers' product pages. While Apple and other manufacturers of high-buzz products will get preferential treatment, carriers will not go so far as to sabotage the value chain that keeps them growing.
Not only do I believe carriers will maintain their position, I actually think they all stand to benefit tremendously from the "iPhone effect." Devices with cool new features bring more media applications into the mobile realm, where carriers can bill for them -- even considering the potential that carriers may lose billable bandwidth to services carried over the iPhone's Wi-Fi connection. Carriers will reap not only the benefits of iPhone and iPhone-like device sales, but also the new revenue generated by mobile applications on all those devices.
It's a win-win
Of course, Apple itself should do well with the iPhone -- it's really only a matter of how well. And I really have to hand it to Steve Jobs and the Apple team -- no matter how well or how badly the iPhone is received in the market, Apple hit pay dirt with the amount of press and "free" advertising it has received.
So, in my mind, Apple has already won. Even if the iPhone gets raked over the coals as a high-priced, over-hyped glam device, it will still garner more attention and promotion than any massive marketing budget could have bought. And I believe the wave of euphoria is a tide that will eventually lift all boats, even the ones that many have pegged as losers.
For related Foolishness:
* This iPhone Would Be Worth $600
* Great Investments For Busy People
* Avoid the VoIP Value Trap
Palm is a Motley Fool Stock Advisor selection. To find out which other stocks are currently making the cut with Fool founders Tom and Dave Gardner, check out an all-access 30-day free trial today.
Fool contributor Dave Mock is betting the iPhone will top Tickle Me Elmo as the "must have" item this year. He owns shares of Motorola. Dave is the author of The Qualcomm Equation. The Fool's disclosure policy thinks you're a winner no matter what.
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2007/05/31/apples-iphone-who-really-wins.aspx
Foleo Isn't Much of a Foil
That's it? Really? Really?!?
Sadly, that was my reaction when Palm (Nasdaq: PALM) yesterday introduced the Foleo, a laptop lookalike that runs Linux but lacks a hard drive and, if the press release is to be believed, is built primarily to handle email.
Palm, however, calls it a "smartphone companion." Um, aren't smartphones supposed to be smart so that they don't need a companion? (Sigh.)
Color me disappointed. And, honestly, a little bit sad. I'm a huge fan of Foleo designer Jeff Hawkins. As creator of both the original PalmPilot and the Treo, he's a first-ballot Hall of Famer in the world of tech, no matter what happens with his latest creation.
Yet he'll reap criticism anyway. That stinks. My apologies for piling on, Jeff.
But, alas, I must. Prerelease hype for the Foleo, which began as far back as November, suggested something so groundbreaking that it would at least challenge Apple's (Nasdaq: AAPL) iPhone and put to shame anything now available from Research In Motion (Nasdaq: RIMM), Nokia (NYSE: NOK), or Motorola (NYSE: MOT).
On that basis, the Foleo is very likely to be a disappointment.
Consider its features. The device can synchronize via Bluetooth, turn on and off instantly, and -- oh, yeah -- did I mention wireless email? Really, it's just a small laptop that's going to sell for $499 until a limited-time $100 rebate expires.
Having said all that, there is one scenario in which the Foleo could make Palm look brilliant. Assuming Hawkins is right, and users want the form and function of a laptop but in a smaller, smartphone-friendly package, the Linux-based Foleo, which is capable of synchronizing with most devices, could attract customers who've never before purchased a Palm product.
But that's probably a long shot. Even gadget geeks like me have limited budgets, and there's already too much competition for our attention.
With Foleo, the competition will be intense -- first from smartphone makers and then from laptop makers such as Dell (Nasdaq: DELL), who'll take it seriously enough to mock it as its designers plot to destroy it. You know what they'll say, too:
"That's it? Really? Really?!?"
Yep, really. (Sigh.)
Related Foolishness is just a click away:
* Mourn the death of this PalmPilot.
* Fast cash is in Palm's hand.
* Get the third-quarter numbers.
* Palm made Wall Street's Wish List in early March.
Palm and Dell are Stock Advisor picks. Get 30 days of free access to the entire portfolio, which is beating the market by nearly 38%. There's no obligation to subscribe.
Dell is also an Inside Value selection.
Fool contributor Tim Beyers, who is ranked 4,160 out of more than 29,500 rated players in CAPS, still owns a Treo 600. He's planning to beat it up till it dies. Tim owned shares of Nokia at the time of publication. Tim's portfolio holdings can be found at his Fool profile. His thoughts on Foolishness and investing may be found in his blog. The Motley Fool's disclosure policy wonders whether there will be a folio for the Foleo. No? Why so ... Leo? (Just checking to make sure you're still there.)
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2007/05/31/foleo-isnt-much-of-a-foil.aspx
Sadly, that was my reaction when Palm (Nasdaq: PALM) yesterday introduced the Foleo, a laptop lookalike that runs Linux but lacks a hard drive and, if the press release is to be believed, is built primarily to handle email.
Palm, however, calls it a "smartphone companion." Um, aren't smartphones supposed to be smart so that they don't need a companion? (Sigh.)
Color me disappointed. And, honestly, a little bit sad. I'm a huge fan of Foleo designer Jeff Hawkins. As creator of both the original PalmPilot and the Treo, he's a first-ballot Hall of Famer in the world of tech, no matter what happens with his latest creation.
Yet he'll reap criticism anyway. That stinks. My apologies for piling on, Jeff.
But, alas, I must. Prerelease hype for the Foleo, which began as far back as November, suggested something so groundbreaking that it would at least challenge Apple's (Nasdaq: AAPL) iPhone and put to shame anything now available from Research In Motion (Nasdaq: RIMM), Nokia (NYSE: NOK), or Motorola (NYSE: MOT).
On that basis, the Foleo is very likely to be a disappointment.
Consider its features. The device can synchronize via Bluetooth, turn on and off instantly, and -- oh, yeah -- did I mention wireless email? Really, it's just a small laptop that's going to sell for $499 until a limited-time $100 rebate expires.
Having said all that, there is one scenario in which the Foleo could make Palm look brilliant. Assuming Hawkins is right, and users want the form and function of a laptop but in a smaller, smartphone-friendly package, the Linux-based Foleo, which is capable of synchronizing with most devices, could attract customers who've never before purchased a Palm product.
But that's probably a long shot. Even gadget geeks like me have limited budgets, and there's already too much competition for our attention.
With Foleo, the competition will be intense -- first from smartphone makers and then from laptop makers such as Dell (Nasdaq: DELL), who'll take it seriously enough to mock it as its designers plot to destroy it. You know what they'll say, too:
"That's it? Really? Really?!?"
Yep, really. (Sigh.)
Related Foolishness is just a click away:
* Mourn the death of this PalmPilot.
* Fast cash is in Palm's hand.
* Get the third-quarter numbers.
* Palm made Wall Street's Wish List in early March.
Palm and Dell are Stock Advisor picks. Get 30 days of free access to the entire portfolio, which is beating the market by nearly 38%. There's no obligation to subscribe.
Dell is also an Inside Value selection.
Fool contributor Tim Beyers, who is ranked 4,160 out of more than 29,500 rated players in CAPS, still owns a Treo 600. He's planning to beat it up till it dies. Tim owned shares of Nokia at the time of publication. Tim's portfolio holdings can be found at his Fool profile. His thoughts on Foolishness and investing may be found in his blog. The Motley Fool's disclosure policy wonders whether there will be a folio for the Foleo. No? Why so ... Leo? (Just checking to make sure you're still there.)
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2007/05/31/foleo-isnt-much-of-a-foil.aspx
Apple Partners With YouTube
Apple today announced it's giving its floundering Apple TV something it has yet to gain, besides an audience: content. The company struck a deal with Google's YouTube video streaming service to provide originally-created content on Apple TV.
Separately, and perhaps because of the YouTube deal, Apple (Quote) announced it will offer a second line of Apple TV units, this time with a 160GB hard drive. The original Apple TV unit with a 40GB drive will remain on the market.
The 160GB unit means a quadrupling of storage capability, so it will be able to hold up to 200 hours of video or 36,000 songs or 25,000 photos or a lesser combination of each. The 40GB version of Apple TV will continue to sell for $299 while the 160GB version sells for $399.
Apple will offer a free software upgrade to Apple TV subscribers in mid-June. Once the device is patched, Apple TV will wirelessly stream videos directly from YouTube and play them on a user's TV. Thousands of the most current and popular YouTube videos will be available on Apple TV at launch, with YouTube adding thousands more each week until the entire YouTube catalog is available this fall.
Apple TV is already integrated with Apple's iTunes digital download service to play content off the user's PC or Macintosh computers. iTunes offers Apple TV users more than 500 movies and 350 TV shows in near-DVD quality, more than five million songs, 5,000 music videos, 100,000 podcasts and 20,000 audiobooks.
"This is the first time users can easily browse, find and watch YouTube videos right from their living room couch, and it's really, really fun," said Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO, in a statement.
The quality of Apple TV content remains to be seen. Most YouTube video is grainy and blocky when watched in a window on a PC, to say nothing of what it would look like on a high definition TV. An Apple spokesperson contacted by internetnews.com declined to comment on whether any special, high definition content would be available for YouTube.
Apple TV needs all the help it can get. Fortune magazine is the latest to call it a failure. Analyst Rob Enderle of The Enderle Group said Apple TV has been "a spectacular failure" and wonders if the YouTube deal will help.
"The YouTube deal is nice but they don't have any high def content and that's what counts," he told internetnews.com. "The problem with the player has always been content. That box has to get a lot of decent content for that device to recover. To make all that hoopla on HDMI connectors and not have any HD content was ridiculous."
Apple broke its own model that made the iPod a success: easy to use, a good service and lots of applicable content. Apple TV needs high definition video to make some headway, said Enderle.
http://www.internetnews.com/wireless/article.php/3680621
Separately, and perhaps because of the YouTube deal, Apple (Quote) announced it will offer a second line of Apple TV units, this time with a 160GB hard drive. The original Apple TV unit with a 40GB drive will remain on the market.
The 160GB unit means a quadrupling of storage capability, so it will be able to hold up to 200 hours of video or 36,000 songs or 25,000 photos or a lesser combination of each. The 40GB version of Apple TV will continue to sell for $299 while the 160GB version sells for $399.
Apple will offer a free software upgrade to Apple TV subscribers in mid-June. Once the device is patched, Apple TV will wirelessly stream videos directly from YouTube and play them on a user's TV. Thousands of the most current and popular YouTube videos will be available on Apple TV at launch, with YouTube adding thousands more each week until the entire YouTube catalog is available this fall.
Apple TV is already integrated with Apple's iTunes digital download service to play content off the user's PC or Macintosh computers. iTunes offers Apple TV users more than 500 movies and 350 TV shows in near-DVD quality, more than five million songs, 5,000 music videos, 100,000 podcasts and 20,000 audiobooks.
"This is the first time users can easily browse, find and watch YouTube videos right from their living room couch, and it's really, really fun," said Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO, in a statement.
The quality of Apple TV content remains to be seen. Most YouTube video is grainy and blocky when watched in a window on a PC, to say nothing of what it would look like on a high definition TV. An Apple spokesperson contacted by internetnews.com declined to comment on whether any special, high definition content would be available for YouTube.
Apple TV needs all the help it can get. Fortune magazine is the latest to call it a failure. Analyst Rob Enderle of The Enderle Group said Apple TV has been "a spectacular failure" and wonders if the YouTube deal will help.
"The YouTube deal is nice but they don't have any high def content and that's what counts," he told internetnews.com. "The problem with the player has always been content. That box has to get a lot of decent content for that device to recover. To make all that hoopla on HDMI connectors and not have any HD content was ridiculous."
Apple broke its own model that made the iPod a success: easy to use, a good service and lots of applicable content. Apple TV needs high definition video to make some headway, said Enderle.
http://www.internetnews.com/wireless/article.php/3680621
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)