Gregarius » BetaNews.Com » avril 5, 2010

BetaNews.Com (9 non lus)

Live TV on the iPad coming soon

Publié: avril 5, 2010, 11:15pm CEST par Tim Conneally

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Qualcomm's mobile broadcast television service called FLO TV existed for about five years under different wireless carrier brand names: Sprint TV, Verizon V Cast TV, and AT&T MediaFLO TV. But the carriers didn't push it very hard, so it did not break through into the public's consciousness.
But then Qualcomm began advertising FLO TV on its own, with its own smartphone-sized pocket TVs made by HTC, and it looks like it is finally beginning to stick.
At CES 2010, Qualcomm announced it had partnered with Mophie on an external battery pack that contains a FLO TV chip so iPhone users could tune into FLO TV without the need for a cumbersome dock, external antenna or anything other than what they have shown an interest in already.
The juicepack TV receiver slips onto the iPhone like any other mophie battery pack, and works in conjunction with a FLO TV app to let users tune into their FLO TV subscriptions. It has not yet been released, but is expected to hit the market soon (first half of 2010.)
I got a hands-on experience with the juicepack TV at CTIA 2010, and while the experience is great, there is one aspect to the system that is absolutely brilliant. The 30-pin connector inside of the JPTV unit does not have to be connected to the iPhone for signals to come through.
All of FLO TV's signals are streamed to the iPhone via a Wi-Fi connection, and the 30-pin connector is used to supply the additional battery power.
Since a physical connection between the JPTV and the handheld device is not necessary, this means users could conceivably connect an iPod Touch or an iPad to the juicepack if they have an active FLO TV account and the iPhone OS-based app. A source close to both companies confirmed that iPod and iPad compatibility does exist, but did not say whether the functionality will be restricted when juicepack TV is released later this year.
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2010
Is iPad really just a proof-of-concept device?

Publié: avril 5, 2010, 9:50pm CEST par Joe Wilcox
By Joe Wilcox, Betanews

Today, Apple announced modest launch-day iPad sales of 300,000 units, which include preorders. On March 26, in post "Of course media bias favors Apple," I put launch sales at about 330,000 -- based in part on over-widely reported rumors. Five days earlier, in post "Be smart, don't buy into iPad hype," I warned that bloggers, journalists and Wall Street analysts had gone bonkers over the device, losing some common sense along the way. Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster is among them. Over the weekend, he revised first day iPad sales to 600,000-700,000, leading to today's admission he got it wrong. Munster also lowered full year sales estimates to 4.3 million from 5.6 million. Forrester Research forecasts 3 million iPad shipments.
Modest initial sales aren't surprising, even though some Apple watchers will wonder if 300,000 units live up to the hype. As I explained on April 2, modest early sales follow the pattern of most other new-category Apple products, including Macintosh, iPhone, iPod and iTunes Store. Distribution is limited to the United States and the 3G model isn't yet available, which also mitigate early sales.
In looking at iPad early sales -- and having seen the device closeup at Apple Store -- one question comes to mind: Is this a proof-of-concept device? My answer is "Yes!" (Please share your opinion, particularly if you bought an iPad, in comments.) My reasoning:
1) The v1 device is a misfit, fitting uncomfortably between smartphone and laptop (or even netbook). The iPad replaces neither. Something more is needed.
2) The primary usage scenario is content consumption, which is closer to consumer electronics devices than to smaller PCs. A future iPad with more powerful graphics and bigger storage could conceivably replace a netbook or laptop; that's where Apple should take the device. Something more is needed.
3) Apple has done some remarkably transformative work on the user interface design and user experience (UX). From that perspective, iPad is just a starting place, extending from iPod touch and iPhone. Last week, Forrester Research analyst Sarah Rotman Epps expressed that "in three years, we'll look back and marvel not at how many units Apple sold, but at the way Apple changed computing." Concepts for you as the natural user interface are in place, but something more is needed.
Proof-of-concept isn't necessarily negative, as some readers might assume. I'm not saying that it is. For years, a so-called "version 3 syndrome" has followed Microsoft -- the idea being the company gets products right on the third try. For example, Windows 1.0 clearly was a proof-of-concept. Windows 3.x got it right. Internet Explorer 2 was another proof-of-concept product -- for version 4 (v1 was proof of nothing).
Companies have to start somewhere with new product categories, and Apple's development objectives clearly are much larger than the actual v1 slate. Among them:
- Moving computer users to a new portable PC/device paradigm
- Establishing a new platform for consuming professionally produced content
- Transforming how people interact with personal computers and related devices
Based on those goals, iPad is a work in progress -- a proof-of-concept. By getting out the device now, Apple can secure publisher and other content creator relationships, give developers time to create and extend applications, build sustainable mindshare through marketing and iterate iPad improvements over a couple generations.
The question: Should you pay for proof-of-concept iPad? I consider the original iPhone to be another proof-of-concept device, for which early buyers paid more than those coming later on. The v1 device initially sold for between $499-$599. Apple quickly lowered the v1 price and, again, to $199-$299, when releasing iPhone 3G. The iPhone 3G is still available, for just $99.
At Fast Company, Gina Trapani asserts: "First-generation Apple products are for suckers. Only lemmings with no self-control and excessive disposable income buy first generation Apple products, especially in a new gadget category. When they do, they pay the double the price for immature hardware and software."
Is that you?
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2010
Second site: Making the Web more accessible to the visually impaired

Publié: avril 5, 2010, 8:50pm CEST
By Denise J. Deveau, CRM Buyer

As the population ages, financial institutions and other service providers will have to learn to adapt their marketing approaches to appeal to a sector that has high disposable income and substantial spending power. In some cases, they will also have physical limitations that will impede online activities, including vision loss.
Besides the fact that an aging population brings with it a growing number of people with vision loss, the business and legal case for making Web content accessible to the visually impaired is becoming increasingly strong.
There are 3.3 million Americans over the age of 40 who are blind or have low-vision, according to the National Eye Institute. In the next decade, that number is expected to surpass 5 million. In addition, the American Disabilities Act now includes online access for the visually impaired within its accessibility parameters.
"The American Disabilities Act was passed in 1990, obviously before the commercial Internet really grew and definitely before the Web," noted Paul W. Schroeder, vice president of programs and policy for the American Foundation for the Blind. "There have been extensive discussions around whether the accessibility requirements applied to the Web, including access to statements and to consumer level information," he told CRM Buyer.
Visually impaired groups are not idle in their demand for accessibility. HSBC Card Services, for example, found itself on the line following a complaint from a blind credit card holder and subsequently announced that it would include a fully accessible Web site among enhancements to its policies and systems. Target, Priceline, Ramada, and AOL have all been under the gun at some point for having inaccessible Web sites.
To aid the accessibility cause, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) has developed Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) for technology products. These state that Web sites, software products and electronic documents should be built to work with assistive technologies (AT).
"What organizations need to do is build navigation behind the scenes that will drive screen readers to different pages," explained Peter Ganza, director of product marketing for Xenos Group. "Visually the site remains the same, but tagging will provide the screen reader with top level navigation, while pushing irrelevant information into the background."
Financial institutions, retailers, government agencies, and other enterprise-level organizations have, for the most part, made significant progress in their accessibility efforts. The one sticking point that could become a major focus as visually impaired numbers grow is PDF files.
"When these forms are one-offs, you can tag them manually," Ganza said. "But if you are looking at high volumes per month -- such as banking or credit card statements -- the economies of scale can be overwhelming."
By way of example, assume that 1% of a financial institution's 2.5 million customers have a visual impairment, he explained. "It would therefore have 25,000 users that require accessibility services, and would have to generate almost 1 million accessible documents a year -- based on three statements per month per client. The costs of contracting third-party agencies to produce statements in large print or Braille format can be staggering."
The banking industry has done a "pretty decent job" of improving Web access for managing accounts, Schroeder conceded, "but they are not as clear where they are in terms of statement availability. Those that do enable access to statements online use HTML or XML. Those that rely on PDFs -- it's safe to say it's all fairly iffy, because they don't have appropriate tags and other information to enable screen readers to read them."
Software vendors, for their part, are doing what they can in terms of enabling tools, added Schroeder. "Adobe's done most of the work that needs to be done with their toolset on the consumer side. What needs to happen is that content developers follow the requirements for document construction and tagging."
Not all tagging is created equal, however, explained Adam Spencer, an accessibility specialist with Accessibil-IT.
"A site might be compliant for accessibility, but it doesn't mean that the content is delivered in a usable fashion," Spencer told CRM Buyer. "Don't assume that if you run a tag wizard in Adobe, it's automatically accessible. And it's certainly not usable. If it's not coded properly, you can end up with mind-numbing loops that continuously read links. Without giving context and understanding for different things like graphics or charts, a lot of information gets lost."
Businesses should therefore be extra conscious of how they're coding their sites for the visually impaired, he added. "Often, they forget to code it when they make a change or add content. I see a lot of that happening with forms where only certain parts are accessible. Essentially, you could be withholding information from a segment of users -- and that can be a huge legal problem."
The PDF/UA Working Group, for one, has been developing appropriate tagging requirements for businesses to follow, including the following:
- Read order - Information such as account numbers, overdue notices and charts can interfere with a reader's ability to clearly state the contents in an order that is useful to the consumer.
- Language specification - Tags should tie to the screen reader to allow it to revert to the appropriate language.
- Alternate text - A PDF should be tagged to provide alternate text for links, logos and graphics that is useful to the user.
- Tables - Readers typically do not understand how to read and interpret boxes and charts. The right tagging will notify readers that information is presented in rows and columns so it can be properly delivered.
Although PDF is getting its due share of attention, there are still issues that have to be addressed, Ganza added. "Of the three types of PDF documents -- unstructured, structured, and tagged -- only tagged PDF files are optimized for accessibility. However, few authors are currently creating tagged PDF files, either because this requires additional effort or because of lack of awareness."
Despite the problems, "there is no reason a site can't be accessible," said Spencer. "Yes, it's an extra step, but a conscious one that needs to be made. In the grand scheme of things, the cost to roll it out is significant, but not something that will break the bank for any large organization. With millions of people experiencing vision loss, that's a pretty hefty segment of the population to miss."
Originally published on CRM Buyer
© 2010 ECT News Network. All rights reserved.
© 2010 BetaNews.com. All rights reserved.
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2010
End of the road in sight for Windows on Itanium

Publié: avril 5, 2010, 8:40pm CEST par Scott M. Fulton, III
By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

It was perhaps one of the most drawn-out, painful launches in Intel's long history: the introduction last February of Tukwila, the latest generation of its Itanium 64-bit processor architecture. Not everyone in the Itanium Solutions Alliance hung on for the five-year ride, with Unisys having been its most prominent drop-out last year, citing competitor HP's dominance in the field. Microsoft held on for the entire stretch; but last week, the company announced it would not lend its support to whatever the generation after Tukwila might become.
In a blog post last Friday, Windows Server Senior Technical Product Manager Dan Reger said that his company will continue to support existing Itanium architecture, including Tukwila, for another eight years. But Windows Server 2008 R2 will be the last version of the operating system to support IA-64.
After a delay of officially two years, and unofficially longer, the dual- and quad-core 65 nm Itanium 9300 series was launched last February 8 to somewhat muted fanfare. The newest Itaniums ended up following, not leading, many of Intel's latest process innovations, with the company's 32 nm Xeon 5600 series, including a six-core model, premiering just last month. Itanium can no longer claim power savings as a selling factor, with the new Xeons also boasting 130W TDP at clock speeds superior to the new Itaniums'.
Five years ago, the drive toward industry-wide adoption of IA-64 architecture was started by the Itanium Solutions Alliance, steered somewhat by Intel (of course) as well as HP, the architecture's most prominent vendor. But Microsoft was also a very vocal charter member -- at the time, seen as more influential than charter member Red Hat. The reason was that, from 2001 up until 2005, the factor keeping enterprises from investing in Itanium was the lack of a clear migration path. Windows compatibility was perceived as the substance of a bridge.
Here's how I covered the Itanium Solutions Alliance in a January 2006 article for Tom's Hardware:
The Alliance's efforts go to the heart of what had been characterized as Itanium's chief deficiency: not its architecture, which after a rough start, actually has proven itself very capable. It is an altogether different platform, not because it's truly 64-bit, but because it would have its developers embrace a concept called Explicitly Parallel Instruction Set (EPIC). It is the industry's first CISC-based multithreading architecture, based on a simple concept to explain but a difficult one to implement: the idea that when processes fork and parallelism begins, it's because the code of the program tells it to. It's this concept which most starkly distinguishes Itanium from x86 (x64) architecture, which actually has no parallelism principles of its own. The ability of multithreaded x86 processors to fork processes into separate cores is based mainly on their ability to ascertain for themselves when such forking is permissible. One of Intel's most ambitious tests of this capability has been hyperthreading, which is a parallelism technique for single-core processors. But HT is an experiment that will probably come to an end as dual-core and multicore processors become mainstream. As they do, they will undoubtedly bring Intel's version of 64-bit x86 architecture (EM64T) as well as AMD's (AMD64) into the mainstream even in high-performance categories.
I was wrong about one thing: Hyperthreading does live on in Intel's current Core microarchitecture. Nevertheless, the fork in the road we saw in early 2006 has only grown wider today, and three major influences have changed the scenario for Itanium over that period:
- Linux is finding a comfortable home among high-end servers, because it's lightweight and has lower up-front costs (assuming businesses don't buy premium support licenses), and Intel is embracing Linux more and more.
- The hyperbolic growth in virtualization means that enterprises don't have to run Windows Server just to enable their clients to run Windows 7. Exchange, Office Communications Server, and SharePoint remain important, but any more, Windows Server exists to support them rather than the other way around.
- Heterogeneity in server design means businesses that require high-performance computing servers can now purchase Itanium in more limited quantity, leaving Windows Server to handle high-availability segments of the network.
In some ways, many of the factors standing in the way of the Itanium Solutions Alliance's goals five years ago, have actually been removed through the natural course of the industry's evolution. But that evolutionary course has not exactly favored Microsoft. So it's noteworthy that, in announcing its "transition" away from Itanium support last Friday, Microsoft's Reger (or at least, the blog post from Reger, whose opening had one tone and his closing another) took a parting shot at Itanium, aiming squarely at what the Alliance had touted as one of the architecture's key features: scalability.
"The natural evolution of the x86 64-bit (x64) architecture has led to the creation of processors and servers which deliver the scalability and reliability needed for today's 'mission-critical' workloads," Reger wrote. "Just this week, both Intel and AMD have released new high core-count processors, and servers with 8 or more x64 processors have now been announced by a full dozen server manufacturers. Such servers contain 64 to 96 processor cores, with more on the horizon. Windows Server 2008 R2 was designed to support the business-critical capabilities these processors and servers make available. It supports up to 256 logical processors (cores or hyper-threading units), so it's ready for the ever-increasing number of cores."
Or to put it another way, six is greater than four. Of course, Reger's comment (perhaps intentionally) ignores one important element: After Itanium finally included the QuickConnect memory bus (the equivalent of AMD's DirectConnect architecture, developed years earlier), and with Itanium's brand of parallelism being implicit (built into the code) rather than explicitly stated as with x64, three dual-core IA-64 processors should bear little performance difference from one six-core processor.
In a May 2005 interview, HP's representative to the Alliance, Stephen Howard, told me IA-64 architecture was noteworthy for having "very high-RAS features: reliability, availability, scalability. Those hooks are built into the chip architecture itself, and the operating systems can make use of those features, and the individual companies and software vendors can build on the most highly reliable system. So you get up into the mainframe replacement and high-end RISC replacement classes of servers, and anywhere that this kind of equipment is used is going to be an ideal spot for Itanium."
At present, Microsoft remains a member of the Alliance, and may conceivably continue to do so until the next edition of Windows Server, perhaps in two years' time. But one of the Alliance's goals, Howard told me five years ago, was to create a single point of contact for customers wanting to purchase Itanium hardware and software all in one stop. That isn't exactly what happened, but perhaps Intel's continued embrace of Linux, along with Red Hat's continued membership in the Alliance, could actually promote that goal in Microsoft's absence.
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2010
Skyfire is coming very soon to Android

Publié: avril 5, 2010, 8:33pm CEST par Tim Conneally

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Third-party mobile browser Skyfire is regarded by many to be the best way to consume the Web on the go. With its support for all of the major browser plug-ins, and full server-side rendering, it can provide access to more sites than any other mobile browser, and do it quickly.
It was officially released a little less than one year ago on Windows Mobile and Symbian S60, and has seen one major update since that time. It has not, however, managed to be released on any new platforms, there has been a very early version for BlackBerry, but that has not progressed to the release stages.
Last February, Skyfire acquired kolbysoft, the developers of the Steel browser for Android, a browser which borrowed heavily from Opera and Safari.
At the time of the acquisition, Skyfire's Jeff Guleck said, "Users of the existing version of the Steel browser will still be able to use the current version, but will be offered upgrades to Skyfire Android edition once it is released. We can't share any timing or more details at this time, but I promise you'll like it."
The Skyfire team began admitting testers to the Alpha of the new Android browser last week, and unlike Skyfire for S60 and Windows Mobile, the Android version will reportedly be Webkit-based, and do the page rendering in-device instead of in the cloud. It is unknown how the browser will differ from Steel if this is the case.
The Skyfire team said the response to the alpha program was so overwhelming last week that they had to immediately stop taking email requests from interested parties. Further information about the program has not been supplied.
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2010
Less than a week after launching iPad, Apple to show iPhone OS 4

Publié: avril 5, 2010, 6:46pm CEST par Tim Conneally

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Now that the iPad is no longer a mystery, Apple is sparking up its magic machine to get people talking and rumoring again.
In classic fashion, Apple has sent out invitations to an event it will be holding this week, which contain only a little detail but a lot of room for speculation and excitement.
So this Thursday, April 8th at 10:00am, Apple will give the world a "sneak peek of the next generation of iPhone OS software."
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2010
California Inventor who sued Apple over the iPhone sues over the iPad

Publié: avril 5, 2010, 6:30pm CEST par Tim Conneally

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

In October 2008, Californian Elliot Gottfurcht was granted a patent for "Apparatus and method of manipulating a region on a wireless device screen for viewing, zooming and scrolling internet content."
One month later he sued Apple for infringing on that patent.
The complaint was over 76 different ways that Apple's iPhone displays Internet content. According to Gottfurcht's attorneys, the patent claims include the way HTML is reformatted to XML on mobile devices, and the way the iPhone browser zooms and scrolls.
That case is still open in the District Court, Eastern District of Texas, but Gottfurcht's company, EMG Technology LLC, announced today that it will expand the suit to include the iPad, along with the iTunes Store, iPhone, iPod Touch, and Apple TV.
"Apple refuses to pay reasonable royalties for its use of EMG's patents relating to navigating Internet mobile websites and applications, which were filed in 1999, several years before Apple's mobile patents were filed," Gottfurcht said in a statement today. "Perhaps the reason lies in a statement Steve Jobs made in the 1996 documentary called Triumph of the Nerds, "We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."
The trial date is set for September 12, 2011.
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2010
Obama vs. Congress on radio's royalties exemption

Publié: avril 5, 2010, 4:42pm CEST par Scott M. Fulton, III

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

Perhaps the word that best describes the atmosphere in Washington this year is "showdown," with respect to every political issue imaginable -- even those around which there's technically no disagreement. The debate continues over whether terrestrial radio broadcasters (the ones with the big transmitters and the public airwaves) should begin paying the same performers' royalties as Internet broadcasters like Last.fm and Pandora, even though it often seems drowned out by the noise over the just-passed health care reform act, and ongoing legislation on jobs protection and banking reform.
Now, the US Commerce Dept. has come down squarely on the side of the recording industry and rights holders. In a letter sent April 1 to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D - Vt.), Commerce Dept. General Counsel Cameron F. Kerry urged Congress to pass legislation that would apply Pandora's royalties to radio stations.
"At the national level, establishing a public performance right in sound recordings and eliminating the exemption for terrestrial broadcasters follows principles of US copyright law," wrote Kerry, the brother of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman and former presidential candidate. "In the words of the Supreme Court, 'The encouragement of individual effort by personal gain is the best way to advance public welfare through the talents of authors and inventors...' Consistent with this historic rationale for copyright, providing fair compensation to America's performers and record companies through a broad public performance right in sound recordings is a matter of fundamental fairness to performers. It would also provide a level playing field for all broadcasters to compete in the current environment of rapid technological change, including the Internet, satellite, and terrestrial broadcasters. In today's digital music marketplace, where US performers and record labels are facing both unprecedented challenges and opportunities, the Department believes that providing such incentives for America's performing artists and recording companies is more important than ever."
Kerry's comments continue the policy set forth in June 2008 by his predecessor from the Bush administration, Lily Fu Claffee. Both Claffee's letter two years ago and Kerry's last week effectively preached to the choir, with then-House Internet Subcommittee Chairman Howard Berman (Claffee's recipient) and Sen. Leahy both having co-authored this legislation several times already.
But the choir is not the congregation, as a majority of House members from both parties have already signed their name to pledges sponsored by the National Association of Broadcasters opposing the legislation. If it's to pass the House this term, it may need to be attached to a bill that's popular enough to pass with mere perfunctory debate.
The problem is, in this term of Congress, hardly any such bill exists. "NAB was aware this letter was coming, which is a position taken previously by the Bush Commerce Department," reads the response from NAB Executive Vice President Dennis Wharton. "We're disappointed the Commerce Dept. would embrace legislation that would kill jobs in the US, and send hundreds of millions of dollars to foreign record labels that have historically exploited artists whose careers were nurtured by American radio stations. The good news is that 260 members of the House of Representatives and 27 US Senators are standing with hometown radio stations and against the RIAA."
Wharton's comments come at the start of a potential tidal wave of public sentiment, in response to the US Copyright Royalty Board's call for public comments on royalty rates for both broadcast and Internet radio, for the term starting January 1, 2011 and ending December 31, 2015. The CRB is taking those comments by e-mail sent to crb@loc.gov.
Two terms ago, then-Sen. Majority Leader Trent Lott was notoriously successful at getting an unpopular Internet anti-gambling measure passed and signed by the President by attaching it as a rider to a bill that was certain to get Mr. Bush's signature: one authorizing increased anti-terrorism security for US shipping ports. Perhaps in an effort to forestall a repeat of the Lott Maneuver, the NAB this morning pointed press sources, including Betanews, toward an op-ed article in TVNewsCheck by noted broadcasting strategy consultant Tom Wolzien.
Ostensibly about broadcasters' reactions to the FCC's Broadband Plan, the article suggests that if broadcasters continue to be weakened by US policy and new legislation (evidently including the performers' rights bill), citizens would start relying on broadband services on their phones for public safety information, rather than the radio system that works so well today. Or, put another way, weaken the broadcasters and the terrorists might win. Wolzien writes, "As the nation considers a broadband policy, it has the opportunity to solve the challenge of simultaneous emergency communication to a fractionalized populous. It is a need that we hope won't come, but for which we know we must be prepared. The complementary strengths and weaknesses of broadband and broadcast must be considered, as though our lives depended on understanding those differences. They may."
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2010
Apple announces first day iPad sales

Publié: avril 5, 2010, 3:49pm CEST par Tim Conneally

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

If you were sucked into the black hole of iPad hype, you may have guessed that Apple sold half a million or more of its new tablet on the first day, but really it was about average when compared to iPhone launches.
Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster first predicted Apple would sell between 200,000 and 300,000 iPads on its first day of availability, but then after his team gathered data and compared it to previous Apple device launches, he bumped up his first day sales estimate to between 600,000 and 700,000.
With sales like that, it would have meant the iPad was selling at about twice the rate of the iPhone 3GS, which reached 1 million units in about three days.
Today, Apple announced that "over 300,000" iPads sold on the first day, confirming Munster's original estimate, and showing the iPad to be just about on par with Apple's other handhelds.
Apple also announced software sales related to the iPad launch, which brought down 1 million apps in the iTunes App Store and 250,000 e-books in the iBookstore.
"It feels great to have the iPad launched into the world -- it's going to be a game changer," Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO said in a statement to the media. "iPad users, on average, downloaded more than three apps and close to one book within hours of unpacking their new iPad."
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2010