photo credit: MobileBurn

I’ve come to the realization that I desperately want the T-Mobile G1. Last year I was itching for a new phone, and ended up grabbing a Helio Ocean in November. But, let’s face it, the Ocean is so 2007 by this point–not to mention that Helio has since been bought out by Virgin Mobile, which makes their future (along with that of a potential Ocean successor) somewhat murky. Along comes the G1–which retains the Oceans oh-so-necessary QWERTY slider keyboard–and, conveniently enough, seems to improve on all the features of the Ocean.

Evolving from Dual Sliders

The defining characteristic of the Helio Ocean is the phone’s dual slider configuration. Slide up vertically and the phone reveals a standard number pad. Slide horizontally, and you get a QWERTY keyboard. While ingenious (it required the invention of a new type of triangular spring), this configuration also makes the Ocean a bit bulkier than some other phones. [Technology Review ran a large feature covering the Ocean's design in 2007, and it's well worth their site's annoying registration.]

The G1 improves on this design by foregoing the number pad (which I never use anyway), and instead relies on a larger, touch-enabled screen. Unfortunately for Helio, the first generation iPhone was released only a few months after the Ocean, which rendered the Ocean’s slider configuration almost instantly obsolete. Since the iPhone, touch screens have become the new milestone for cellphone manufacturers. Word is that the Ocean 2 is retaining the dual slider configuration, and won’t feature a touch screen. If that’s the case, then Helio has truly learned nothing from the iPhone’s success.

Open to Third-Party Applications

Helio kept the Ocean’s appplication development even more restricted than Apple did for the iPhone. At least Apple developed a system whereby independent developers could get their third party apps approved–Helio only made software by large companies available, and offered no solution for independent developers. Of course, as is usually the case when artificial limitations are placed on a platform, a homebrew scene eventually formed around the Ocean, and power users were able to take more advantage of the Ocean’s capabilities.

The open nature of the Android operating system is one of it’s biggest selling points, and while I’m sure we’ll see a fair amount of useless applications, I’m more excited about the potential for truly great independent software coming from the community.

It’s Still Ahead of the iPhone 3G in Some Ways

Some of the most satisfying “features” of the Ocean were those that the first generation iPhone conspicuously lacked; specifically, 3G network access and GPS. While that’s no longer the case for the iPhone, the G1 continues the trend of braggably better features like the 3 megapixel camera, the previously mentioned open application philosophy, and copy and paste functionality (I’m sad I have to list this too). That the G1 is directly integrated into all of Google’s services is also a plus for some, myself included.

Wrapping Up

My main issue with the G1 right now is T-Mobile–a company that unfortunately doesn’t have the most robust 3G network in America. Looking at their 3G coverage map, it turns out that I only have Edge coverage in the places I would use the phone the most. Sure, Wi-Fi is always an option, but I’m not quite sure if that inconvenience is worth giving up the 3G speeds I’ve been so spoiled with this past year. Hopefully T-Mobile will get their act together for 2009, or Google will get the G1 and other Android phones on other carriers soon.

I know I’m not alone in my technolust for the G1, and this is definitely a good sign for Google. They’ve pulled an Apple, and have shown significant clout in an unfamiliar market. Let’s face it, Apple needs competition in this sphere–because they’re certainly not going to get it from Microsoft. That the T-Mobile G1 has already made me justify paying the $175 fee to get out of my Helio contract speaks volumes. I just hope Google, along with the Android cellphone carriers and hardware manufacturers, can keep this up.

Update 10/15/08: Dean Takahashi offers a great overview of the G1 over at VentureBeat. MG Siegler is also reporting that some preorder customers may be getting their G1 this Friday, October 17.

a

The Android T-Mobile G1 is the Real Successor to the Helio Ocean

• Lamenting the Death of Helio, and How the iPhone Helped Kill It
• The iPhone 3G is a Call to Arms for Mobile Computing
• iPhone: A Tag-Team Discussion
• Quad Core Macbook Pros, Seriously? Why Quad Core Laptops Are a Joke Today
• On Apple’s Industrial Design

In a recent post over at CNet Digital Home,  Don Reisinger argues that Microsoft should make Xbox Live free. To an extent, I actually agree with him. Of course, I don’t think the situation is as clear-cut as Reisinger believes. Yes, Xbox Live will eventually be free, but that won’t happen until Microsoft has a legitimate reason to do so. And no, the current multiplayer implementations by Nintendo and Sony in no way compete with XBL.

Wii vs 360

First off, let’s just forget about Nintendo. It’s clear from their ridiculous friend code system that they have no interest in achieving the same sort of seamless multiplayer integration that Microsoft has done with Live. Nintendo is far too steeped in their irrational “family friendly” corporate philosophy–to the point where I don’t believe they want to help gamers connect with one another.

Case in point: Nintendo made a big announcement last year declaring that they were going to simplify Wii online play by using Gamespy’s technology. But for some strange reason, I can’t find any further reference to that partnership besides the initial press release. And even if they did secretly start implementing Gamespy’s technology, it’s still based on friend codes–the biggest part of Nintendo’s multiplayer failure thus far.

PS3 vs 360

So Nintendo is out, but what of Sony? I’ve written recently about their underwhelming E3 showing, and my biggest complaint was that Home was nowhere to be seen. Sure, the latest PS3 updates let you have game-specific friends lists on certain games, but that’s a far cry from Microsoft’s XBL friends implementation. Friend list support needs to be standard, not a developer option, and it needs to be universal. Home has the potential to correct these mistakes for Sony, but given that it’s release is still undetermined somewhere in 2009, it’s evident that PS3 users will be stuck with sub-par multiplayer for some time.

The failure of Home and the PS3’s overall multiplayer strategy is really the biggest argument against making Xbox Live free. After all, why would Microsoft make XBL free when so many 360 users have made it clear that they’re willing to pay $50 a year for the privilege, and there is no real competition to the service?

Breaking it down, Xbox Live costs $4.17 monthly, and that rate is reduced even further if you get a discounted 12-month card online. To most people who want to play online, it’s simply a drop in the bucket. That money also leads to better development and an overall more stable service as well. And of course, it also helps to weed out annoying kids (not that the service is free from jerkwad teens and adults).

When Will Xbox Live Be Free?

Once Sony (or in some bizarro-world, Nintendo) offers a legitimate competitor to Xbox Live, then Microsoft will be able to justify making the service free. Of course, another possibility is that we start to see MS slowly giving benefits to Silver members, while also adding goodies to Gold members. Perhaps Silver members could be restricted to unranked player matches, and actual ranked games for Gold? In my opinion, that would actually be a more than fitting compromise–at least until they were forced to make XBL completely free.

For now though, I’m content with spending money on a service that I can rely on, and one that’s clearly a cut above the rest.

a

Why Xbox Live Can’t Be Free… Yet

• Will Sony Ever Stop Playing Catch Up with the Playstation 3?
• 360 Wins 2007, Says Kotaku
• Why The Nintendo Wii Is A Glorified Board Game
• Why I Decided to Go HD-DVD
• Who is the oFone really making fun of?

In an attempt to move in a different direction from the rest of the blogosphere, I was going to write something about how strange it was that the ill-fated search engine Cuil was covered so widely in mainstream press. Unfortunately, it looks like ReadWriteWeb beat me to it.

I encourage you to read their piece, because it pretty much covers everything I had in mind. But I will say this: Cuil was the first story I heard on NPR when I woke up Monday morning, and I was constantly asked about it throughout the day by non-tech folk who had read about it in other mainstream sources. That sort of coverage truly surprised me because, for the most part, Cuil seemed like many other geeky startups that the blogosphere adores, but average internet users generally ignore.

The Trouble with Tech Bloggers…

But enough has been said about Cuil’s fail whale of a launch. Instead, check out this recent post by Sarah Lacy, who uses the Cuil launch to discuss a problematic trend in the technology blogosphere. She believes that the obsessive rush to break news before other sites, coupled with the obcenely short hype-cycle of online tech journalism, is ultimately not very useful readers:

At some point, the tech blogosphere has to break itself from the junky-like addiction of having to get a story two seconds before the competitor. Can it really drive that much traffic when every other blogger got the same pre-brief? Isn’t it better to wait a bit, use the service and write something smarter?

If we’ve got a 20-second hype cycle in the Valley, that’s not Cuil’s fault. And I don’t think it’s serving readers well either. If we write something is amazing in the morning and then total junk in the afternoon, does anyone looking to tech blogs for analysis keep coming back?

Specifically, Lacy points to many bloggers (including herself) giving a generally favorable preview to Cuil without actually using it, and then having to turn around and be extra nasty when they realized how little it lived up to the hype they helped create.

…And how we can move forward

This isn’t an entirely original criticism, but I think the Cuil case is fairly indicative of these larger issues facing the tech blogosphere. To her first point, I certainly agree that the rush to be first has led to some shoddy work, but at the same time it appears to be a logical evolution of competitive print journalism. The problem is that with online journalism a story can break any second, whereas print journalism generally works on a monthly, weekly, daily (and sometimes twice daily), news cycle.

photo credit: Steve and Sara

It would certainly be nice for tech bloggers to worry less about being first to post, but since being first tends to directly correlate to success on Digg, Reddit, and other social media sites, I don’t see that trend ending anytime soon. Sites like TechCrunch and Mashable aren’t ever going to get away from that grind, but it does leave the door open for bloggers of a different sort to offer more thoughtful analysis, a potential answer to her second criticism.

While these bloggers may initially miss out on the blink-and-you-miss-it relevancy cycle generated by the bigger tech blogs, social media sites, and Techmeme–I believe they could eventually prolong the cycle by daring to cover stories that (gasp) several days old. Even more shocking, they could even cover content that’s sometimes routinely ignored by the bigger tech and social media sites. (Scoble has an interesting response to Lacy’s post that offers some similar thoughts.)

Of course, my feelings on this matter come from personal experience. With this blog, I know that I can’t always break news like the big sites, but I can still attempt to create interesting content that isn’t necessarily beholden to their manic relevancy cycle or the gods of social media. I know there are many other aspiring tech bloggers who are working towards similar goals as well, so whenever someone mentions the decline of tech blogging I can’t help but think they’re just not looking hard enough, and that may be the real problem.

Few are.

a

Cuil and The Trouble with Tech Blogging

• Changes on the Horizon
• How Price Comparison Site Results in Google Hurt Consumers
• Uncovering The Web2.0Effect.org Hoax: How Virante Marketing Solutions & Burton Hosting Fooled the Web
• Del.icio.us Link Stroll: Getting Buried is OK, Harry Chooses HD-DVD…
• Why We Owe Al Gore for the Internet

As I’ve stated before, Sony’s main competition this generation is Microsoft. Nintendo is clearly off in their own territory with the success of the Wii, and neither Microsoft nor Sony would gain much by competing directly with the Wii’s low price, motion controls, and mainstream appeal. Instead, they need to scrap it out for dominance among the more regular and hardcore gaming crowds.

In this particular fight, it seems the Playstation 3 will always be left behind. Sony started off a year after the 360, and they also didn’t have the benefit of a strong online platform in the PS2 generation like Microsoft did with the Xbox 1. MS learned a lot from the original implementation of Live, and in doing so they were able to craft a much more polished product for the 360. We may take it for granted now, but I’ll always consider the 360 Live’s focus on online multiplayer to be a major turning point for console gaming.

The notion of just being a few clicks away from gaming with your friends, aided by Microsoft’s uncharacteristically wise implementation of an easy-to-use global dashboard, is something that should now be considered standard for all future gaming consoles. That Sony has yet to mimic the experience is inexcusable. And no, I don’t care how “revolutionary” Playstation Home may be. The multiplayer experience should have been sorted out first–not tied to an unproven Second Life clone.

Microsoft (and arguably Nintendo) have also succeeded at building up strong game libraries this generation, something which the PS3 is still currently struggling with. While they’ve had their share of very good titles, the only real system seller that the PS3 has had so far is Metal Gear Solid 4. Final Fantasy XIII was another important exclusive (and potential system seller as well), but of course Microsoft put an end to that on Monday when they announced that FFXIII is coming to the 360 this Fall in North America and Europe.

At this rate, I suspect Sony will announce a similar Netflix deal as MS next year, but of course by that point many people would have already invested in 360’s and Roku boxes instead. And while it’s cool that your PSP can also play downloaded PS3 videos, that’s really only going to benefit the folks who actually have PSPs. It’s also yet another move by Sony that takes the PSP away from its core gaming functionality, and brings back dirty memories of their failed UMD platform.

Thus far the only great success from the PS3 continues to be its Blu-ray functionality, but of course that comes at the expense of all other similarly priced Blu-ray devices. The 80GB PS3 price drop to $400 is clearly a sign of desperation by Sony, given that most console price drops occur at about $50 every year. The loss of backwards compatibility from that 80GB model is also not a good sign, but considering their consistent efforts to diminish the importance of BC, I suppose it was inevitable.

I believe all of Sony’s current issues with the PS3 stem from their confused direction for the product. Is it an entertainment center, or a game console? I suppose the same can also be said for the PSP, but given how long that device has taken to really find its stride, this similarity is not exactly heartening. Despite all of the 360’s many features, it never felt as if MS ever strayed too far away from the goal of making it a console first, and an entertainment device second.

That’s a lesson Sony would do well to learn.

There is nothing I hate more than a foregone conclusion. Beneath every vicious (that is to say, factual) statement I have ever made regarding the company, there has existed the indubitable truth of their ultimate victory. This certainty extends, yea, even unto the company itself, which is why they have done so little to earn your love. The rumble-free controller with built-in batteries, the one that turns off while you’re updating your console every other week, that one that inexplicably loses signal from time to time but everyone is too chivalrous to discuss it, the one that is now obsolete because two years ago they tried to save money on something they knew they would have to pay anyway - this “six axis” is the icon of a system coasting on global brand inertia.

Announcing features that your competitors have had for coming up on two years does not a riveting presentation make. Exclusive PSN content (like a movie length Ratchet and Clank game, or thatgamecompany’s Flower) is still the company’s most compelling asset.

a

Will Sony Ever Stop Playing Catch Up with the Playstation 3?

• Why The Nintendo Wii Is A Glorified Board Game
• The Wii, Revolution, and Beyond
• 2007: Year of the Xbox 360?
• 360 Wins 2007, Says Kotaku
• Why Xbox Live Can’t Be Free… Yet

(Honestly, I was waiting for the release of Google’s Android phones, but knowing that they wouldn’t show up until the end of 2008 (at the absolute earliest), I decided that the Ocean would tide me over for the next few years.)

But, like every underdog tech product/company I’ve loved (see: HD-DVD, the Rio Karma), it looks like Helio is ready to call it quits. They’re selling to Virgin Mobile, who will be getting rid of the Helio brand and making all Helio customers Virgin subscribers.

Honestly, I can’t say that I’m entirely surprised. While Helio has offered some great software improvements since the Ocean launched in May 2007, and they’ve even released a new handset recently (the Mysto), Helio simply couldn’t compete with Apple’s massive influence in the cellphone market. Sure, it took Apple until the iPhone 3G to match most of the Ocean’s features, but it was the iPhone that became a cultural phenomenon due to its groundbreaking user-interface.

(This is actually very similar to how the iPod took over the MP3 player market, even though Rio led the initial portable player charge.)

Now that the iPhone 3G is on its way, and practically every cellphone manufacturer is aiming to catch up to the iPhone’s innovations, Helio just can’t seem to do the same. Sure, they’ve got the mystical Ocean 2 on the way (some good spy coverage here), but it simply looks like a slimmer Ocean. Unless it has a bigger screen, along with touch capabilities, it won’t fair too well against the post-iPhone smartphones/mobile computing devices.

It’s a shame that Helio was never that successful. Their initial phone offerings weren’t all that great, but I appreciated their mission–to bring the high-tech phones from Korea to the America’s barren cellular marketplace. With the release of the Ocean, they succeeded in doing just that. 

I know many knock the Ocean for not looking “sexy” enough–which I suppose is true if you consider sexy to be an anorexic nightmare like the Motorola Razr–but the Ocean is sexy to me as a geek. It screams of well thought out industrial design with its unusual oval shape, the infamous dual slider design (which still gets me “wows” to this day), and the gorgeous screen. Hell, I even love the Ocean’s every-so-satisfying thunk when closing the phone. For those interested in an in-depth look at the Ocean’s fascinating industrial design process, check out this excellent cover article from Technology Review (registration required).

Software-wise, the Ocean launched with a decent feature set, but it is the upgrades that came later that really make the phone shine. Helio has since added a great mobile Youtube interface, push e-mail, and, taking a cue from user hacks, support for Mobile Opera. It aimed to compete with T-Mobile’s trendy Sidekick, and it put up a heckuva fight–the only problem was that they didn’t see the iPhone coming.

For now, I’m not itching to get out of my Helio contract just yet. Assuming Virgin doesn’t start disabling Helio services, and doesn’t start charging me more for my monthly bill, I still think I can ride out my contract and wait for an Android phone.

If anything, Helio’s demise has shown me that I truly have a knack for liking scrappy technologies. I’m not quite sure what to make of this yet…

a

Lamenting the Death of Helio, and How the iPhone Helped Kill It

• The Android T-Mobile G1 is the Real Successor to the Helio Ocean
• The iPhone 3G is a Call to Arms for Mobile Computing
• On Apple’s Industrial Design
• iPhone: A Tag-Team Discussion
• Who is the oFone really making fun of?

I realized then something I should have noticed long ago: I could never abandon Firefox. This isn’t out of some illogical fanboyism, or a naive belief in the almighty nature of open source code. No, I could never abandon Firefox because of one key feature that no other web browser can compete with: Extensions.

Yes folks, I’m a Firefox extension addict.

While I can certainly use other web browsers for light browsing while remaining clearheaded, when it comes to getting some actual work done I find myself going through some major extension withdrawal. My palms get sweaty when faced with the inefficiency of accomplishing certain tasks without extensions, not to mention when I remember that many things are impossible to do without extensions–like blocking an annoying flash ad, or completely integrating my del.icio.us bookmarks into Firefox.

Internet Explorer and Safari don’t have anything to compare, and Opera’s widgets serve another function entirely. While you could argue that Opera does a decent job of integrating many useful features into the browser itself, somewhat negating the need for added functionality via extensions, that still makes it incredibly difficult for Opera to cater to the needs of all users, not to mention the time it takes to add new features to the browser.

The modularity of extensions makes it easy for users to customize Firefox lego-like, and without much effort make the browser suit their needs. They’ve also spawned a massive user community who have created everything from generally useful extensions that appeal to many, to extensions that serve more esoteric niche functions. While niche extensions may not seem that important, it is somewhat heartening to know that whenever you run across an annoyance or missing feature in Firefox, there’s a good chance an extension exists that could help.

I know I’m not alone in my extension addiction–just look at all the Firefox users publicly complaining about extensions that don’t work in Firefox 3 yet. I just hope Mozilla realizes how effective extensions are at locking users into their browser. It’s an age old adage of marketing; create a special feature that your competitors don’t have to attract customers, and then lock them in by making them addicted to it.

Special editions of Firefox like their Campus Edition are a good way to ingratiate new and less tech-savvy Firefox users to extensions, but they honestly need to do much more publicity for these sorts of projects (and for extensions in general). I just learned about Campus Edition last week, and it would have been nice for me to hear about it when it was released last August seeing that I work in IT at a college. Unfortunately, it seems the Campus Edition has been discontinued as of Firefox 3’s release (though they may just working on upgrading it from Firefox 2).

Mozilla really needs to focus more on extensions if they intend to continue battling the browser wars against Internet Explorer, Opera, and yes, even Safari. They’ve practically saturated the techy market already, so now they need to work on grabbing general users away from other browsers. Extensions, being among the most visible and functional features Firefox has to offer, could certainly help them do that.

Update: I just ran across a review of Firefox 2 that I wrote in 2006, and found it a very interesting read now that Firefox 3 is out. I found this section in particular poignant, given that I think Mozilla needs to start marketing better to general users:

Given that many of the tweaks in Firefox 2 are under the hood, it probably won’t do much to encourage new users to move away from IE. Mozilla may have some new marketing in the works, but for now Firefox 2 seems to be a release made more for the loyal than anything else. We may even see fewer people jumping to Firefox with the release of IE7 because Microsoft’s new browser already sports many of Firefox’s trademark features. This latest browser war may end up being fought over subtleties rather than significant differences.

a

I’m a Firefox Extension Addict, and Why That’s Good for Mozilla

• Del.icio.us Link Stroll: Getting Buried is OK, Harry Chooses HD-DVD…
• On Windows Vista (Final Build)
• After HD-DVD Demise, Toshiba CEO Says DVD For the Win!
• Lamenting the Death of Helio, and How the iPhone Helped Kill It
• The Connection Between Gaming and Violence

photo credit: _Andrish_

The iPhone 3G announcement has come and gone, and it seems like the main take-away for many is the $199 price, along with the new 3G and GPS capabilities. Of those three, I think the surprisingly low price for the 8GB iPhone 3G is the most important. Let’s face it, while 3G and GPS are new features to the iPhone, they’re not exactly fresh technologies in the cellphone market.

But while I’m all for a cheaper iPhone, I’m personally more interested in the iPhone software announcements from the WWDC than anything else. Everything from the SDK, to the application store, to the new MobilMe synching all cement the iPhone as a major mobile computing platform. And now that Apple is actually taking enterprise users into account, it has the potential to trump Microsoft’s Pocket PC platform and become a major competitor to RIM’s Blackberry domination.

Saul Hansell at the NY Times Bits blog (someone who I’m finding myself linking to a lot these days) seems to agree. In a recent column, he writes:

The most important battle here isn’t between the iPhone and the latest from Samsung or Nokia. The fighting now is over what will become the dominant platform for mobile computing. In that fight, Apple is competing with Microsoft, Symbian, Google’s Android, Palm and R.I.M. The company’s play is to make the iPhone, and the tools to develop for it, very closely related to the platform it uses on the Mac and on the Apple TV.

Indeed, it seems that the hardware changes to the iPhone 3G are practically irrelevant compared to Apple’s improvements to the iPhone platform. This is especially true if you consider that all of the software improvements will also benefit users of the original iPhone. I wouldn’t be surprised if this is the tactic Apple takes for the next few years–minor hardware updates to the iPhone itself (next year, expect a better camera, faster processor, more RAM, etc.), all the while spending more energy on solidifying the iPhone platform.

The iPhone was such a fresh take on cellphone hardware upon its launch that other manufacturers are still struggling to catch up. This head start allowed them to coast on the hardware for this past year, and give us features that honestly wouldn’t have been difficult to implement at launch. But it’s obvious from their platform announcements that Apple wasn’t just twiddling their thumbs–they’re aiming to dominate mobile computing, and frankly doing a damn better job at it than Microsoft’s “Origami” ultramobile PC project.

When it comes to mobile computing, the only other competitor to Apple that has the potential to compete with the iPhone’s features and ease of use is of course Google’s Android platform. Check out the video below to see one of the many ways I think Android will outdo the iPhone. You can find more Android videos and images over at Android Community.

a

The iPhone 3G is a Call to Arms for Mobile Computing

• The Android T-Mobile G1 is the Real Successor to the Helio Ocean
• Lamenting the Death of Helio, and How the iPhone Helped Kill It
• Quad Core Macbook Pros, Seriously? Why Quad Core Laptops Are a Joke Today
• Intel’s New "Atom" Chips Bring Us Closer to Ubiquitous Mobile Computing
• Who is the oFone really making fun of?

photo credit: markhoekstra

How sad it is that the biggest news to come from the Zune front in the past few months is anything but positive: Word is out that Gamestop has stopped selling Zunes.

Honestly, I’m surprised it took this long, not because the Zune 2 is a worthless player (despite what some other news reports seem to love implying), but because it was a dumb idea to sell the Zune 2 in a freaking video game store in the first place. I’m sure some genius marketing drone figured it was a good spot because 1) Gamestop fit the target Zune demographic, 2) they could easily market it as a companion product with the Xbox 360, and 3) they didn’t have any iPod competition. The rest of us saw the futility in that move from the very beginning.

I can only assume that the Gamestop deal wasn’t a large part of Microsoft’s Zune strategy, if only because it would be truly dumb if it was. And let’s not forget the fact that the Zune is still readily available in major stores.

But come to think of it, I haven’t heard much regarding the Zune 2 ever since Microsoft launched Zune Originals program, a service which lets you customize your Zune 2 with artwork by famous hipster types. While it’s certainly cooler than the bland metallic backside of the iPod, it’s certainly not a feature that will convert the iPod faithful or lure away first-time customers to the portable music player scene.

The Zune Store is finally beginning to shape up by adding some television content, but it’s still playing a desperate game of catchup with Apple’s iTunes Store. While MS has always had the $14.99 monthly music subscription model to lord over Apple, it’s simply a matter of time before Steve Jobs decides to implement something similar.

So I suppose the question to ask now is clear: What the heck is Microsoft doing with the Zune?

It’s clear to me that the device still has loads of untapped potential. Microsoft could easily add a rudimentary web portal utilizing the device’s Wi-Fi connection, and it could eventually be used to stream music and video. Honestly, the portal should have been a part of the Zune from the first generation of the device, but they couldn’t even see fit to include Wi-Fi syncing back then.

A Zune portal could easily allow users to stream and purchase music right from the device. Think the Amazon Kindle, but for music. Other devices, such as the MusicGremlin and the Sansa Connect, are already doing just this, so it’s simply inexcusable that Microsoft couldn’t manage the same by now.

The Zune Wi-Fi connection could also be used to update your podcasts directly on the player whenever you come across a friendly Wi-Fi connection. This is something I’ve been waiting for patiently ever since portable music players started adopting Wi-Fi, and it’s yet another feature that makes too much sense for Microsoft to implement.

Despite my many complaints about the product’s handling though, I still want a Zune 2. Being a Windows user and iTunes hater, it’s simply the best choice for me right now. It would also be a logical upgrade from my Toshiba Gigabeat S60, a device which was basically the proto-Zune. The current Zune software is an upgraded version of the Gigabeat software, and it’s honestly one of the best portable player interfaces I’ve ever used.

I’ll willingly buy a Zune 80, but until Microsoft starts to tap into the latent potential of the product, I’ll always consider it yet another half-handed MS attempt at being adequate rather than innovative.

a

Gamestop Dropping Zune, What Exactly is Microsoft’s Zune Strategy Now?

• Who is the oFone really making fun of?
• On The Palm Foleo (What the Hell Were They Thinking?) & Asus Eee
• ABC First to Launch HD Video Streaming Online
• After HD-DVD Demise, Toshiba CEO Says DVD For the Win!
• Lamenting the Death of Helio, and How the iPhone Helped Kill It

Today Netflix announced the full details on their long-awaited set top box. Developed by Roku, a company which already has some experience in the streaming media arena, the device is meant to offer an easy way for Netflix subscribers to access their streaming Netflix media on their televisions. While the device is a logical step for Netflix, it’s also a significant evolutionary step for in-home media as well.

I’m certainly not the only one to recognize this device’s potential; Saul Hansell at the NY Times Bits blog is already calling it the “first shot of the [video] revolution”. He lays out some compelling points on why we should care about this ugly box:

1. It has mainstream appeal because it accomplishes exactly what it sets out to do, and does it well at only $100.
2. It leaves the harder task of browsing through thousands of Netflix entries up to computers. The user need only select from the “Watch Instantly” items on their queue.
3. It proves the hardware for streaming video is cheap, so we’ll probably see it in many other devices soon.
4. It’s easily upgradeable to do much more than just play Netflix films in the future.
5. It represents the future of internet video — streaming to the television.

In particular, I believe pricing the Roku at $100 was a brilliant move by Netflix and Roku — one that will most likely guarantee the success of the device. It’s significantly cheaper than the Apple TV, the Roku’s nearest functional neighbor, and it leaves the door wide open for easy integration into other devices. Saul mentions that the Roku uses a processor also found in many digital TVs, so direct TV integration is certainly possible at low cost. I also wouldn’t be surprised to see it pop up in many inexpensive DVD players similar to the way many started supporting Divx.

I am surprised to see him mention the fact that you can’t browse the entire Netflix streaming library from the device as a plus, but I suppose I can see his point. After all, most people in the market for this device already have a computer that they can easily use to update their instant Netflix queue, and I’m not sure it’s actually possible to make a likable UI for browsing thousands of titles. I’m sure something will eventually come in time, however.

I also wholeheartedly agree that the future of Internet video lies in streaming to the television. There’s simply a huge disconnect between the content we watch on our computers and that which we have access to on our televisions. The Apple TV was an excellent start towards this integration, especially since it added Youtube support, but it wasn’t a streaming-centric device. The Roku has no hard drive, so users need not worry about managing their libraries and conserving disk space. After all, why should they?

Another plus the Roku has over the Apple TV is that it’s based entirely on your Netflix subscription, whereas the iTunes Store is still very much an a la carte service. While I’m all for owning my content, buying content individually does restrict the amount I actually experiment. There’s a freedom to subscription-based services that’s practically liberating, and that feeling is palpable when browsing the thousands of titles Netflix currently has available for streaming.

I’ve personally been viewing Netflix streaming media on my television for a while now, due to the convenient proximity of my computer. It’s definitely added significant value to my Netflix membership. Thus far I’ve watched The King of Kong, season 1 of Dexter, and quite a bit more. While the quality is certainly not up to DVD-levels, it’s perfectly serviceable for dramas, comedies, and documentaries.

What’s most surprising to me is that the streaming works well, and without much issue. This is shocking to someone who still has fresh memories of the horrors of Real Player “streaming video” just a few years ago. That Netflix was able to get the streaming right is laudable — but getting a simple and affordable player to the market is downright extraordinary.

Hopefully, Netflix will take care of the remaining deficiencies in the service (primarily, lack of a quality title selection) before Apple strikes back with their own subscription model. Netflix will still have the upper hand with significantly cheaper hardware and tons of subscribers, but I can’t imagine Apple is going to let them rule this market without a fight.

For now, Netflix subscribers will soon find themselves with even less reason to leave the house.

a

The Roku Netflix Player, The Shape of Things to Come

• Netflix, You’re Breaking My Heart
• ABC First to Launch HD Video Streaming Online
• Will Sony Ever Stop Playing Catch Up with the Playstation 3?
• After HD-DVD Demise, Toshiba CEO Says DVD For the Win!
• Gamestop Dropping Zune, What Exactly is Microsoft’s Zune Strategy Now?

According to NPD, sales of Blu-ray standalone players plummeted 40 percent from January to February, then rose a scant 2 percent from February to March. The general consensus was that once Toshiba dropped its support for the HD DVD format early this year, sales would increase.
In fact, sales of Blu-ray standalone players remain so low that NPD has not yet released actual numbers, for fear that it would be easy to identify individual retailers. The research group will start to give actual figures later this year, said Ross Rubin, director of industry analysis at NPD.
Emphasis mine

Somehow, I’m not surprised. Even though I was slowly buying into the hype that having one high-definition format was better for consumers in the long run, despite my reservations about the chosen format, I’ve also had the nagging feeling that simply trouncing HD-DVD wasn’t enough. Sony had to prove why average consumers needed Blu-ray. And since HD-DVD hardware was consistently hitting sub-$200 towards the end ofits lifespan, they also had to prove why their players were worth twice the price of Toshiba’s.

Having failed to do that, Sony is now the king of a small early-adopter mountain. They’re left with an average movie-going public that finds HD upscaling DVD players a much more palatable option. And why shouldn’t they? After all, there still aren’t any Blu-ray players consistently dipping below the $400 range — and why would anyone buy a standalone player at that price anyway when they can just get a PS3? They can continue to use their existing DVD library, and they don’t have to worry about rebuying films either.

Bits mentions that upscaling DVD players have seen a 5% rise in sales since the beginning of the year, compared to sales from the same time last year. They also noted a 39% decline in DVD players that don’t upscale.

I recently wrote about Toshiba’s new focus on upscaling player technology, and now it seems that decision may actually pay off for them. Given that decent upscaling DVD players can be had in the $50-$100 range, along with the fact that most consumers don’t really care if the image they’re getting is truly HD or not, it’s clear that the battle is not yet over between Sony and Toshiba.

If Toshiba transplants their excellent upscaling technology from their HD-DVD players to standalone DVD players, they’ll definitely give Sony a run for their money. Perhaps this pseudo-competition will finally force Sony to lower their ridiculous Blu-ray player prices.

a

Surprise? Bluray Adoption Slows, Upconverting DVD Players Find Success

• Is it Time to Give Up on HD-DVD?
• Why I Decided to Go HD-DVD
• The Good and Bad from the HD DVD Defeat and Blu-ray Triumph
• After HD-DVD Demise, Toshiba CEO Says DVD For the Win!
• What the Warner Move to Blu-Ray Means for HD DVD