Gregarius » BetaNews.Com » septembre 18, 2009

BetaNews.Com (6 non lus)

Could Microsoft Tag augment Windows Mobile reality?

Publié: septembre 18, 2009, 11:28pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

By Joe Wilcox, Betanews

Microsoft is promoting its Tag barcode system over at its PressPass this week. The PR is a big marketing pitch showcasing brands like Ford and Proctor & Gamble; it's a sensible approach for the technology. But I see another: Making augmented reality more real, and in so doing recover Microsoft's botched handset strategy. AR isn't new, but it's all the geek rage now that iPhone has a compass: BBC, CNET News, Robert Scoble and Telegraph UK, among many others.
A quick AR primer: Augmented reality is essentially the overlay of additional visual information onto something real. American football is great example, where during TV broadcasts yellow lines and other information overlay the field of play. What? You thought those lines were really there? You experienced augmented reality.
AR's future potential on mobile devices is huge, and it's one of the many applications that has me asserting once more that mobile phones will supplant PCs in the not so distant future. Pew Internet says 2020, but I predict 2015 (I really think sooner, but who would believe it?).
A handset with accelerometer, camera, compass and GPS can orientate its position relative to objects as well as geographic location. This orientation, and through the camera ability to identify specific objects, makes it possible for software or service providers to augment reality, perhaps with educational or marketing information.
Informational example: Jack Consumer takes his kids to Washington, DC. Perhaps he uses the phone's GPS to navigate from a Metro station to the National Mall. Along the way, the mapping program offers additional information about historic sites -- even videos or, gasp, special events going on in the area right then. All this overlays the GPS map on the screen. Jack points the phone's camera at the Washington Monument and sees overlay of information about when each portion of the structure was completed, its height and what the heck those flashing lights mean (Jack slept through American history class).
Marketing example: After a hot and humid day walking in the city, Jack's family wants to see Hayao Miyazaki film Ponyo, which Disney recently released in the United States. Jack points the cell phone's camera at a movie poster in the Metro, and the image overlays with theatre locations and showtimes. He then taps the screen for the theatre in Union Station. Based on information contained on the movie poster and gathered from the handset, the mapping service brings up a Metro map. That's augmented reality. Jack conducts a sophisticated search without ever having to launch Bing or Google and type in keywords. But wait, Jack sees another option -- to buy tickets with the tap of the screen.
Making Augmented Reality Real
It's hard to understate augmented reality's potential on mobile devices and, in succeeding, for disrupting keyword search. Yes, keyword search. People will need to manually search less, if the information indirectly comes to them through the mobile software or service or directly by the consumer pointing the camera at something.
I predict that mobile augmented reality will displace mobile keyword search, which is lots worse for Google than Microsoft. I'm assuming it will succeed, just not necessarily as envisioned by all the augmented reality freaks -- eh, geeks -- pining over iPhone's compass: Edible Apple, Fast Company and O'Reilly, among many others.
For all the buzz about iPhone and augmented reality, Apple is a latecomer, following Google and Nokia, among others. Big support came with iPhone 3.1 software, which Apple released last week.
Google Sky Map, for Android phones, is augmented reality for the stars. The software uses a Google phone's accelerometer, compass and GPS to correctly display the right map of the night sky, overlayed with constellation names. Nokia's three year-old MARA (Mobile Augmented Reality Applications) project adds the camera to accelerometer, compass and GPS for overlaying information.
For mobile augmented reality to be most meaningful, it must be real time. Google Sky Map is a good example of real-time augmented reality. But like other augmented reality mapping services, the user is real-time but not necessarily the overlaid information. Augmented reality apps that show, say, friends or Twitter followers in physical relationship to you or local traffic laid out onto a mobile map are much more real time.
The real-time value shouldn't come from disparate apps only tied to the phone's positioning functions but to broader services, or even a software-services platform. There, Nokia's MARA approach, which also utilizes the phone's camera, makes loads of sense. AR can provide information about landmarks, etc. by what the camera sees. The Wikitude Browser for Android phones is product available now for doing just that.
But positioning and landmark/scene recognition are still early stages development and their third-party commerce potential is somewhat limited. For example, Jack Consumer sees where the nearest McDonalds is by way of Nearest Tube. Location is one thing, but where is the menu or today's specials? Additionally, GPS accuracy isn't good close to buildings and essentially useless inside them. The camera can make up where other phone positioning features fall short.
Tag, You're It!
By using the phone's camera, tagging is one way to broaden mobile augmented reality's commercial and even informational appeal. Things tagged with 2D or 3D barcodes could provide much more information, which could be updated real time on the backend service without necessarily changing the tag. Additionally, positioning information from the phone could allow, say, Sony Pictures to distribute the same barcode tagged movie poster nationwide while providing local movie times. Parental control information from the wireless carrier also could ensure that Sandy Teen views the PG-13 and not the R movie trailer on her phone.
Search is a multi-billion business because of keywords. Barcodes/tags could open up the commercial and informational replacement on handsets. Think tagwords or, ah, codewords. I don't suggest that tagging is the only way for mobile augmented reality to go. I'm saying it's a way to, ah, augment augmented reality -- to extend its reach and also to provide a commercial backbone; as search is today for the Web browser.
Like search keywords, competitors could go after tagwords, too. My daughter likes to shop at Forever 21. Price tags with barcodes could bring up competitive prices at other stores when viewed through the cell phone camera. It's comical to think about -- young women leaning over dresses, jeans and tops with their cell phones.
There is yet no mobile barcode economy. Google doesn't control tagwords. Microsoft Tag has potential to become the barcode development and services platform. The Bing and Windows Live teams should be all over Tag. Microsoft isn't exactly early barcode adopter, but there is yet time as there is no widely adopted standard. There are competitors, like Nokia Mobile Codes. Google isn't sitting idly by, either. For example, the aforementioned Sky Map Web page has a ZXing barcode. Just point your Android phone camera to download the application.
Microsoft is building the services infrastructure to do much more, if company executives have the wherewithal. Tags could be the commercial backbone for mobile information, with no manual search necessary. They could build economy into mobile augmented reality.
I say to Microsoft: Don't wait for third parties. Tag it! Tag everything. Microsoft Tag already is available for most mobile platforms, not just Windows Mobile. I would start with Windows Live Maps, augmenting reality in the browser as well as the device. Even do some augmented augmented reality, by overlaying mapped rooftops with Microsoft Tags. The user clicks or touches the Tag to get more information. Sure, you could overlay name of the store, but a mobile barcode could access so much more information tied to a database service.
Building out infrastructure will take years, and Google is sure to push its own technology if Microsoft does. Microsoft cofounder Bill Gates built the company by selling stuff cheaper than competitors and by controlling key file formats and technology standards. The mobile barcode is a technology standard Microsoft shouldn't want any other company to control, particularly Google.
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009
Windows Mobile + Palm: 2005-2009

Publié: septembre 18, 2009, 9:53pm CEST par Tim Conneally

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

During yesterday's quarterly earnings call, Palm CEO Jon Rubenstein confirmed that webOS is going to be the sole operating system coming from Palm as the company goes ahead.
"Due to importance of webOS to our overall strategy, we've made the decision to dedicate all future development resources to the evolution of webOS. Which means that going forward, our roadmap will include only Palm webOS-based devices," Rubenstein said.
Windows Mobile Treos, we hardly knew you.
The four year partnership between Palm and Microsoft yielded only four devices: the burly but beloved Palm Treo 700w, then the streamlined, antennaless Treo 750w, followed by the Windows Mobile 6.1-equipped Treo 800w, and most recently, the ill-timed Treo Pro.
Now that Palm has retired all of its previous Treo operating systems, we are left wondering what the future holds for the company's productivity lines.
Despite the popularity of touch-based smartphones, the dominant form factor for workplace deployments continues to be the BlackBerry-style "e-mail phone," tightly integrated with enterprise software and equipped with more complex PIM features and productivity applications such as document, spreadsheet, and presentation editors.
While webOS is certainly a beautiful and capable operating system, it is simply not designed for the business user. If you're a pessimist, it could mean Palm is vacating the businessphone space. But if you're an optimist, this could mean Palm is working on a business-oriented version webOS.
As one commenter on Pre Central put it, "Maybe they should stop fooling around with iTunes sync, and concentrate on adding real functionality. Listening (or maybe re-hiring) some of the people who worked on the PIM apps for P-OS would be a good start."
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009
Google to FCC: Apple and AT&T lied

Publié: septembre 18, 2009, 8:46pm CEST par Tim Conneally

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

The text of a letter from Google to the US Federal Communications Commission dated last August 21 -- the un-redacted contents of which were only made available today -- directly contradicts information given by Apple and iPhone partner AT&T, regarding the apparent rejection of a key Google mobile app from Apple's iTunes App Store.
Google Voice is a beta project which allows several phone lines to be united under a single new number, accessible from any phone. Earlier this year, Google submitted to Apple an app that would make the service usable on the iPhone. The fiasco over Apple's rejection of the Google Voice application from the App Store came to a head when the FCC began a formal inquiry into whether the relationship between AT&T and Apple is fair and encouraging to innovations in communication.
The FCC sent letters of inquiry to AT&T, Apple, and Google last July 31. Responding to the inquiry, AT&T stated its position that it had nothing to do with the rejection. Apple said it had "not rejected the Google Voice application, and continues to study it," and confirmed that AT&T was not involved in the iTunes App Store approval process.
Apple went on to suggest that Google could potentially compromise users' private data, "In addition, the iPhone user's entire Contacts database is transferred to Google's servers, and we have yet to obtain any assurances from Google that this data will only be used in appropriate ways. These factors present several new issues and questions to us that we are still pondering at this time."
Google's response to the FCC last month appeared to be the least straightforward of all those involved in the inquiry, and large sections of the text were redacted.
"When we submitted our letter on August 21, we asked the FCC to redact certain portions that involved sensitive commercial conversations between two companies -- namely, a description of e-mails, telephone conversations, and in-person meetings between executives at Google and Apple," Richard Whitt of the Washington Telecom and Media Counsel posted in Google's public policy blog today.
But certain individuals filed Freedom of Information Act requests to make the FCC release the information, and the full seven-page letter is now available for public consumption.
Within the letter, Google says nothing of continuing investigation, but rather that the app was rejected outright.
"...The Google Voice application was rejected because Apple believed the application duplicated the core dialer functionality of the iPhone. The Apple representatives indicated that the company did not want applications that could potentially replace such functionality."
To prove this, Google listed with whom it had spoken (Apple SVP Phil Schiller, no less) and the various meetings Schiller had with Google's Alan Eustace, Vice President of Engineering and Research, over the rejection of Google Voice and Google Latitude, an application which was later converted into a Web app.
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009
WiMAX not living up to customers' expectations

Publié: septembre 18, 2009, 7:46pm CEST par Tim Conneally

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

In the midst of my own Comcast outage today, I began to contemplate the alternatives to my current cable Internet connection and the satisfaction of customers elsewhere. Being a Baltimore native, I'm fortunate enough to have a number of options at my disposal, including WiMAX. It's a technology that I've frequently covered here at Betanews, and one which we've been following for a long time.
For a little while, we had a WiMAX connection in our headquarters and I was using it without even being aware of a difference. I probably wouldn't have even found out if Nate hadn't asked me what wireless network I was connected to one day and informed me that it was actually our Sprint/Xohm WiMAX test line.
Unfortunately, WiMAX users in the rest of the US are acutely aware of their connection, DSLReports noted this week. Sprint's joint WiMAX partner Clearwire has launched networks in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Georgia, Nevada, and Texas; and users from each of these areas has expressed disappointment on DSLReports' forums.
Even though we'd get a consistent 2 Mbps downstream signal from our Baltimore WiMAX network, A number of Clearwire users are reporting much lower speeds and much more inconsistent coverage. Have a look at some of the Speed Tests that users submitted:
These speed tests came from users on their home networks, which Clear.com says has average speeds of 3 to 6 Mbps with bursts over 10 Mbps (with the very clear caveat "Actual Performance May Vary.")
Some users report solid speeds in Atlanta, Amarillo, and Las Vegas, but users with poor connections and low speeds are certainly speaking out more vociferously.
How's your connection?
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009
Free Office Web Apps: Brilliant ploy or desperate move?

Publié: septembre 18, 2009, 6:15pm CEST par Scott M. Fulton, III

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

The problem with sleeping giants in recent years is that "terrible resolve" hasn't necessarily gotten them very far. Of course, this applies outside the information technology industry as well. But not even the Internet -- the biggest revolutionary IT technology since the personal computer -- is creditable to any one major player or allied force. Historians will note that almost every company or group to attain success through the Internet did so either 1) completely by accident, and/or 2) without any substantive plan as to what to do with that success once it attained it.
But the last great "sleeping giant" episode in the history of the IT industry was one of absolute, intentional, and steadfast resolve. The landscape of our lives and work has been shaped by this chain of events. It was triggered by WordPerfect, and the terrible resolve was manifest in Microsoft Office. I watched from very close range as, within a span of mere months, the axis powers that commanded respect and even awe -- WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3, dBASE, and Harvard Graphics -- deflated to mere also-ran status. Their manufacturers, in an often comical display of poor timing and miscommunication, self-destructed. As a result today, when you ask businesses worldwide why they use Microsoft Office, the majority of responses you'll get say it's because it's the productivity suite for Windows. And when you ask those same businesses why they use Windows, the answer is because it's the operating system that runs Office.
The first absolute sign that the shockwaves from that 1986 turn of events were at last subsiding, came yesterday. Microsoft announced that Office Web Apps -- which will convey the essence of the productivity tools used by tens of millions of customers today -- will be hosted from its servers for free. A tremendous chunk of the company's revenue, and one of the pillars of its highly successful business plan, is being sacrificed. Office 2010 will continue to be sold, and new business revenue models will be constructed for hosting Office Web Apps. But a major chunk of a business that provides Microsoft with $16 billion in annual revenue, is being chucked in an effort to retain the strength of the brand, and recover lost ground for another business that has never seen that much revenue in its history, and may never hope to.
What triggered this move is obvious: Google attacked Microsoft's home turf, and with a Web applications suite whose quality makes Novell's final WordPerfect for Windows seem downright satisfactory. There's considerable wisdom in the argument that Google did this not so much to attain power in the applications segment, as to make Microsoft devote resources to defending its power base, which would divert resources away from its efforts to build a competitive online advertising revenue structure. Tying Chrome OS to Google Apps would create a two-pillar revenue structure similar to how Windows and Office are intertwined -- a formation which in and of itself must have made Steve Ballmer's skin crawl.
It seems like a logical enough theory until you realize that Microsoft's most strategically plausible retort, thanks to the curious geography of the IT industry, runs right through Google's home turf: To defend Office as a brand, Microsoft must make Windows Live more powerful. The only way to amplify Office is through the Internet; and right now, the only company with the resources and wherewithal to turn Google into the Ashton-Tate of 2012 is Microsoft.
Yesterday's move by Microsoft was a total surprise, including to me. This is not because I had predicted that Microsoft would only make Office Web Apps available to paying Office 2010 customers, and I was wrong. This is because I was explicitly told by Microsoft's people that it would only make Office Web Apps available to paying Office 2010 customers, and they were wrong. Make no mistake about it, yesterday's decision was a change of course.
Should Microsoft's bold act of self-defense be successful, Office Web Apps could become the leading center of productivity resources on the Web. Office Web Apps could be tied to Windows Live the way Office is tied to Windows. And that will mean more subscribers to Microsoft's cloud storage services, and that the company can build a center of online activity around Office Web -- something like what MSN has always tried to be, except without having to live with the dark stain of being MSN.
But what would have been gained through all of this, and what will have been lost in the process? If you ask consumers why they use Windows, the reason you'll get most often is this: It's the operating system that came with their PC. The two reasons they chose that PC were to get on the Internet, and to use Office (Word/Excel/PowerPoint). As of 2010, neither of those reasons for choosing the PC will absolutely necessitate buying Windows, which leaves only the fact that OEMs choose Windows.
In a world whose functionality is delivered online, will there be a need for Windows, the monolithic operating system whose Registry is designed to record the state and specifications for thousands of applications installed on hard drives? My answer is a mostly technical one: Yes, there will, because something needs to be capable of providing an homogeneous platform in a PC industry with infinite combinations of hardware. That's what OEMs want, and that's what Microsoft will very likely continue to deliver. When Google says the Web is the platform, it means the haphazard collection of planks, nails, and duct tape on which it's currently dancing; it's the hardware platform that keeps the IT industry moving, and right now, it's Microsoft that's greasing the gears and fueling the drivetrain. Google really wouldn't want to trade places.
Microsoft's role as the principal provider of the interoperability platform for computing devices is probably safe and secure for at least the next five years. It's knowing this that makes me wonder whether the company really needed to sacrifice one, if not two, of its consumer revenue channels, just to ensure that Google Apps -- which really is for productivity what the Ritz Brothers were for comedy -- doesn't gain a toehold in a market no one is really certain it even needs. Maybe the sleeping giant has been awakened, but its actions -- at least at present -- lack the signature of resolve that we've seen once before, so terribly and so brilliantly.
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009
Palm is still losing money

Publié: septembre 18, 2009, 12:31am CEST par Tim Conneally

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Palm limped toward the launch of the Pre, relying on cash and short-term investments to pull it through eight consecutive money-losing quarters in an attempt to turn things around. And now that the Pre has been turned loose, and Pixi, Palm's second WebOS, device is on the way, the struggling company's long-term outlook remains modest, and it continues to post losses. Yet it doesn't want to get too specific about numbers.
For the quarter ending on August 31, Palm reported a loss of $161.1 million with revenues that dropped 82% to $68 million.
The release of the Pre caused a 134% quarterly surge in shipments, with more than 823,000 units shipped against Q4 2009 when 351,000 shipped. The annual growth this represents, however, is much less dramatic. When weighed against the first quarter of the last fiscal year, Palm only shipped 30% more units.
Furthermore, the number of units actually sold to customers is 21% lower than last year.
John Rubenstein, Palm's CEO said today, "With the launch of the Pre, we accomplished one of our most crucial milestones, now we're focused on growth. We're confident we're on the path to success."
But the company didn't say exactly how many Pres it had sold. Sprint, for example, still sells the popular Centro, which has sold 3 million units so far (and now goes for only $29), the Treo 755, and the Treo Pro; all of which cannibalize the Pre's market. There's really no indication of how much longer investors will wait before Rubenstein's company can be officially declared successful again.
However, the company is anticipating revenue between $1.6 and $1.8 billion this year, which actually beats out Wall Street's expected $1.58 billion, so maybe it won't be that long. After all, how much longer can the company keep this up?
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009