Posted by Kevin Huffman
Tech
Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
Just got another care package from Nintendo, and it’s a big one — literally. Nintendo sent us one of its new DSi XL units, and color me impressed. The screens look great, and games look like they should have been on a screen this size in the first place. I don’t even need my reading glasses to play any more! First impressions: It feels larger then a PSP. The screen is clear, and the games really don’t feel stretched out, which was my concern. Web browsing is actually reasonable to do, the experience feels much like the iPod Touch, with the upper screen magnifier helping out for details. As I said before, I haven’t really had a chance to play with it much, but I’m going to make time this evening and tomorrow. It’ll be nice to get a chance to play with the DSi XL, after reading all the reviews .
Posted by Kevin Huffman
Tech
Friday, March 19th, 2010
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
The year 2004 called, and it wants its iPod dock back. (Yes, I know it works with the iPhone , too.) Seriously, do people still buy these things? Inquiring minds want to know.
Posted by Kevin Huffman
Tech
Friday, March 19th, 2010
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
iPod docks are in everything these days, but this leather sectional from Natuzzi actually makes a bit of sense. Think about it. You and yours are chillaxing on the couch after a hard day working for the man. You want nothing more than some relaxing tunes from the Manilow, but the music is stuck on your iPhone and the dock is all the way on the other side of the room. But no worries, you have the Surround sofa so you slap your iPhone in the dock and suddenly you’re drifting off to Looks Like We Made It. Ah, life is good. [ Danish Inspirations via LuxuryLaunches ]
Posted by Kevin Huffman
Tech
Friday, March 19th, 2010
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
Can’t you see this little iPod dock sitting next to your coffee bean grinder and spice rack? It sure looks the part with stanless steel-looking corners and a sort-of utilitarian design theme. Oh yeah, you know you wanna make room on your kitchen counter for the iP39SZC — catchy name, eh? The dock is kitchen ready with a easy-to-clean surface, two indepented timers, and and a convenount iPod/iPhone dock. There’s even a remote and USB port for charging other devices as well. $99 and available now . via SlashGear
Posted by 010081
Tech
Wednesday, March 17th, 2010
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
Apparently it’s illegal in Canada to copy music from a CD you bought to an iPod (or whatever). It’s simply not allowed, even if you’re not breaking any DRM in the process. (In the U.S., it’s illegal to copy a DVD to your computer’s hard drive because you have to circumvent the copy protection in the process.) Solution? Some sort of levy, which would ensure that “artists” make money even though you’re not re-buying their music. The deal now is that an MP up there wants to introduce a CAN$75 “iPod levy” that would effectively legalize copying music from a CD you bought to your iPod. The levy has just been proposed, but if the Canadian legislature is anything like its American counterpart it’s going to be a little while before anyone even raises the issue again. The idea of a levy isn’t new, per se—there’s already a levy on blank media (CD-Rs and the like) that supposedly help to make sure that “artists” get paid. (My hunch is that it goes right back to the record label’s coffers, but whatever.) Granted, you could be buying blank media to backup your PowerPoint presentation, so it’s not a 100 percent fool-proof thing, but it neatly solves the problem in a way that prevents people from having to re-think the entire concept of copyright in the 21st century. This so-called iPod levy could also negatively affect people who buy iPod but don’t put any music on them—people like me, for example. I have an iPod touch and I dare you to find one song on there. (I pretty much just use it for like 10 minutes a day to check WoW.com before going to bed.) Why should I have to pay CAN$75, which is like US$4,000 these days, to subsidize other people’s habits? Yes, I understand that the number of people who buy iPods and then don’t put any music on there is quite small, but I needed to fulfill my daily complaint quota. Let’s turn it around, make it local to our fair American readers. Let’s say Congress, for whatever reason, creates and passes a law that says you’re 100 percent allowed to copy DVDs (legally bypassing the DRM) that you own to your hard drive, but that from now own all commercial DVDs come with a $10 tax on them to cover the “losses,” so to speak. Would you go for that? Flickr
Posted by Kevin Huffman
Tech
Friday, March 12th, 2010
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
There was an interesting debate on today’s Ron and Fez that speaks to a subject we’ve been whinging about for some time now: digital delivery of content, specifically of music. Pink Floyd has won a court ruling that will put an end to places like iTunes selling its songs individually. The band feels that their music can only truly be appreciated in the album format, from start to finish, and it never liked people being able to pick and choose what songs they wanted to download. I will say this right now: I’m not a Pink Floyd fan. I have nothing against them, but when kids were starting to get into bands like Pink Floyd, say around age 13 or 14, I was busy playing Final Fantasy . It’s a case of not being exposed to their music, and at this point, I’m not going to bother. My loss, I suppose. But don’t cry for me, because that’s makes me especially suited to write this story—I have no emotional attachment to the band in question. The gist of the ruling—The High Court in the UK, to be exact—is that EMI, the band’s record label, won’t be allowed to sell individual songs from its catalog online. That means, from now on, you’ll only be able to buy The Wall as a full album online, and not merely “In The Flesh?” and “The Thin Ice.” Yes, I had to Wiki that. Again, I wouldn’t know a Pink Floyd song if [insert cliché here]. That’s the debate: should consumers be allowed to buy whatever song they want without having to buy an entire album? One side says, “Yes, consumers should be able to pick and choose whatever song they want without worrying about what any band says. Just because a band ’says’ its music can only be appreciated in album form doesn’t make it so. Is There Will Be Blood any less valuable when you’re watching the Blu-ray on your 60-inch plasma instead of at an actual movie theater?” (I’d say no, it’s not any less valuable, especially since I can control the viewing environment when I’m watching the Blu-ray—no having to worry about loud idiots texting back and forth with their mates.) The other side says, “Well, Pink Floyd made the music, and only they know how it can be appreciated. If they intended for the songs to be listened to as an album, we as consumers should appreciate their artistic wishes.” While I side with the first opinion, the fact is I really don’t care too passionately one way or the other. The band wants you to buy albums? Fine, whatever. But surely Pink Floyd understands how music is consumed in the year 2010: people put their iPhone or iPod or Zune HD or whatever on shuffle mode, run on the treadmill at the gym for 20 minutes, and hear “ Poker Face ,” “ Run This Town ,” and “ Lay in a Shimmer ” all in a row. Young people ask, “What’s an album? I only listen to my Spotify playlist when I’m writing about what I did on my summer vacation.” Don’t expect to see this trend—going back to album-based music sales—continue beyond Pink Floyd. The music industry knows people are already used to buying this or that song from iTunes, and it’s in no position to say, “Actually, we want album sales now. Sorry.” It’s grateful that people are buying music at all, let alone expecting people to buy entire albums. This is where I throw it to y’all: is Pink Floyd in the right here? Should a band be allowed to dictate how its fans listen its music? Or is this a giant “who cares?” debate?
Posted by Kevin Huffman
Tech
Friday, March 12th, 2010
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
I’m a sucker. It’s true. As much you guys think we rail against Apple , we’re like abused puppies, slinking back to our master’s hard ankles, shivering and awaiting praise. Why did I pre-order the iPad ? Well, first I’m a gadget blogger. Second there is no certainty that mother Apple will grace us with an early review unit so I want to hedge our bets. Third? I want to see where computing is headed. Bear with me here. Apple is not the bringer of fire to a benighted world. Far from it. In my recent writing I’ve been struck by a few parallels with Steve Jobs to Abraham Louis Breguet , a French watchmaker who lived in the 18th century. He was a mechanical genius, to be sure, but he was also a salesman. While the rest of the benighted world was sloshing around in an admixture of feces and mud in the streets of Paris and telling the time by whether the pikemen were stabbing them for being out after curfew, Breguet was selling watches that would not be out of place on the wrist (had they had straps) of a whale in Las Vegas. He invented secret anti-counterfeiting measures but made them part of the allure and not part of a DRM scheme. He designed elegant and beautiful watches in an age of rococo designs but wasn’t above creating a “subscription” watch for the masses who wanted to own a piece of the good life without paying an exorbitant sum of money. Other watchmakers were making commodities and following Breguet’s lead. That’s what’s happening here. Like Steve Jobs, Breguet knew what his hipster, nobler-than-thou audience wanted and he supplied it. Sure it was expensive and sure it wasn’t generally popular but he made a boatload of money and in the end moved on to explore new avenues of inquiry, improve the general perception of scientific precision, create new forms of telegraphy, and his kids even became pioneers in airplane design. Linux and Windows geeks often put Apple down for locking things up but I say I can do more in the OS X command line terminal than I ever was able to in the Windows DOS window. I usually installed Unix tools under XP just to get any work done when I ran Windows. Look at the watch above. It was one of the most complex watches in the world when it was made. It came with two dials – the crystal one you see and a while enameled on that hid the innards. If you put the white enamel dial on that watch, you’d have four visible hands. That’s it. It was as austere and beguiling as an early iPod. You saw it, you knew what it did, but there was nothing to get in the way of reading the time or, the the case of the iPod, playing your bluegrass albums. Behind it – complexity – in front – elegance. I’m also not saying the iPad is the Marie Antoinette Watch of our day. It’s definitely not. I would wager that our current business climate does not allow for the sort of advances in the state of the art that the MA represents. Sure, there are better watches right now, but the MA was finished in 1827 using tools little removed from what was available in the previous three centuries and by 1900 watchmaking was a dead art and is now, at best, relegated to shoe repair bodegas that also specialize in watch battery replacement. The MA wasn’t just a watch, it was that generation’s mechanical moonshot and the ultimate steampunk artifact. Nothing Apple has done is worth that level of praise. Also nothing – and I mean nothing – about the iPad is particularly new or particularly appealing to the geek in me. It’s a slate that I’ve seen countless times running an OS that is underpowered at best with a trade dress that we’ve seen a thousand times. But the whole is great than the sum of its parts. Apple is about to change how I browse the Internet in the bathroom, on the couch, and on the train. I bought a WiFi enabled model because I figure I’ll have WiFi more often than I’ll have 3G coverage with AT&T (HAR!). So anyway, flame on, flame warriors. I’m sticking by my decision. Did you pre-order?
Posted by Kevin Huffman
Tech
Friday, March 12th, 2010
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
In September last year , Sony rolled out the S Series Walkman , portable audio and video players, which are supposed to compete with the iPod Nano. And today, Sony in Japan announced [JP] a branded version of those Walkmans, namely the “Disney Character S Series Walkman”. To be more exact, Sony introduced nine Disney-themed Walkmans, a special case and a Mickey Mouse stand. When purchasing one of the Walkmans (NW-S740/S740K/S640/S640K), buyers will be able to decide if they want to see Mickey or Minnie Mouse on their devices (or both). It’s also possible to add a personal message. Engraving is “free” and can be done on the spot (in the store) or through the Japanese Sony Style website . Depending on the model, prices range from $150 to $220. Sony is also offering a special case for their Walkmans ($19, see above) and a Mickey Mouse stand ($30, pictured below). Sales in Japan started today, but I’m doubting these Walkmans will ever be available outside Japan. Die-hard Disney fans can try and ask specialized import/export stores such as Geek Stuff 4 U or the Japan Trend Shop for help.
Posted by Kevin Huffman
Tech
Saturday, March 6th, 2010
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
Is FIFA the worst organization on the planet? I’d say so. World soccer bigwigs have concluded a meeting in Zurich, and they’ve decided against implementing goal line technology at this year’s World Cup . Yes, why would you want to introduce a legitimately helpful technology into a sport that so desperately needs it? Ridiculous. FIFA’s general secretary, regarding the use of goal line technology at the biggest sporting event in humanity, said, “The door is closed. The decision was not to use technology at all.” It’s not even about whether or not the technology works—two competing systems were vying for FIFA’s attention—but whether or not “the future of [soccer] involves technology or not.” Of course it does! What kind of organization says, “Technology? Who needs that? Now let’s all hop on our private jets, listen to our iPods , read our nooks , go home, then pretend that everything’s OK.”? FIFA does! As I understand it, the technology would have been minimally intrusive. One involves a sensor being placed on the ball, which, granted, may not have been practical given how exact the Jabulani was engineered. The other would have used Hawk Eye , which is used in tennis all the time. And if there’s a “stuffier” sport out there than soccer, it has to be tennis. The point is, you want to believe that the game you’re watching is accurately managed. Referees have a hard enough time keeping up with the likes of Messi and Ronaldo , so why not use a technology that can tell you, instantly and definitively, that a goal is a goal? Don’t give me that nonsense that, “Oh, soccer is a fluid game, you don’t want it interrupted to double-check whether a goal was a goal or not.” Tell that to the people of Ireland . It’s like, what if the IRS wrote you a letter that said, “Yeah, we’re not 100 percent sure you owe us $10,000 in back taxes, but we’re just going to assume you do. Please send a check within the next 30 days to…” !@$@#~! It’s at this point that I should explain why I’m freaking out. Goal line technology would tell match officials, instantly and definitively, whether or not the ball has fully crossed the goal line—whether or not the goal is valid or invalid. It’s not like in baseball where one umpire’s strike zone differs from the next ump’s. No, a goal is: did the ball fully cross the line or not? It’s a binary operation. Did it cross? Yes? Then it’s a goal. No it didn’t? Then it’s not a goal. Simple as. I can think of several scenarios where goal line technology would have been helpful. How about the 1966 World Cup final between England and West Germany—you mean to tell me that the ball fully crossed the line right here? You’re lying through your teeth if you say the ball, indeed, fully crossed the line. More recently, what about that Champions League game between Liverpool and Chelsea a few years ago? Does the ball cross the line here? We’ll never know because FIFA refuses to embrace the one bit of technology that would, overnight, bring more justice to the sport than any other singular change! I cannot wait until a “big” country gets screwed over by a goal/non-goal call during the World Cup. I can guarantee than if England gets knocked out of the tournament based on a dodgy goal, one that could have been correctly called using goal line technology, we will not hear an end to the complaining on Sky Sports, in The Daily Mail, in The Guardian, in The Times, in The Sun (oh, God, The Sun will probably explode if that happens) and in every single pub in the country. Only then will FIFA do something about this garbage.
Posted by Kevin Huffman
Tech
Thursday, March 4th, 2010
&h=&q=90&w=90&h=65&zc=1" class="alignleft" alt="">
Scosche just announced the reviveLITE II. This is the second generation in this series, but the updates might not be clear. Scosche reduced the size of the iPod/iPhone charger while adding an USB charging port. But this model still features the night light just like the original. We found the original to be a great solution but a tad pricey at $40. It seems this model retains all the goods, but comes in at $24.99. That’s a win for sure. The reviveLITE II is available right now on Scosche.com and should hit major retailers this Spring.