The Far Side of Tech » Hardware

Windows Mobile 7 with Zune Integration Coming Soon?

Devindra — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:00:16 +0000

Today has seen a swell of news that makes me think that Windows Mobile 7 won’t be a complete bust after all. MobileCrunch is reporting that Microsoft may debut the new mobile operating system, along with new hardware, at the Mobile World Congress on February 15. If not then, AllThingsD predicts that they could be revealed at the CTIA Wireless convention in March.

Regardless of when the details are actually announced, both sites seem to be running with the assumption that the new WinMo 7 phones will be released shortly afterwards. Not only does this mean that we could see the OS far ahead of its previous release timetable (we expected it towards the end of 2010), but both sites are also claiming from different sources that WinMo 7 will see aspects of the Zune HD’s user experience — which lends credence to all of the Project Pink phone rumors.

MobileCrunch’s tipster also laid down some potential details on WinMo 7 and the new hardware:

It’s “essentially a copy of the Zune HD’s kernel”, and the UI is very much like the Zune HD
Microsoft is regimenting screen size and RAM amount, and minimum processor speeds
Expect no background processes, system resource access, and no threaded processes (very iPhone-like)
It won’t run Windows Mobile 6 code
They’re aiming for gaming and multimedia consumers with Xbox Live integration, instead of the business types
There will be an MS app store with a simple approval process

Aside from the potential lack of multi-tasking, WinMo 7 looks to be falling in line with the predictions I made back in October. We haven’t heard much about what will be powering these potential new devices, but Microsoft will surely want to stick with nVidia’s Tegra technology which drives all the UI goodness in the Zune HD.

If MS had continued along with their end of 2010 release for WinMo 7, they likely wouldn’t have stood a chance in the mobile market. Now they could potentially build some buzz and release their new phones before Apple’s next iPhone revision, and be in a good place to compete with the rising Android threat. It’s a shame MS didn’t make these big announcements at CES, because they could have easily ruled that event much like Palm did last year. Most likely they didn’t have much to show at the time, and they’re probably burning the midnight oil to make a big splash at one of these upcoming events.

Windows Mobile 7 with Zune Integration Coming Soon?

Similar Posts:

What nVidia’s Tegra Means for Mobile Devices, and Why You Should Care

Devindra — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 05:03:04 +0000

Note: I wrote this post back in September 2009, before Tegra started showing up in many devices. I think many of my points still stand, so I’m reproducing it here for archival purposes. Enjoy.

The first device to feature nVidia’s much-hyped “Tegra” technology, the Zune HD, has been out for a few weeks now. I figured it’s worth spending some time reflecting on the technology, and what it means for the future of mobile computing. I’ve been eagerly following Tegra since 2008 because of its potential to revolutionize mobile devices; it promised to deliver powerful computing, video and 3D performance all with a very low power footprint. And given its relatively smooth implementation in the Zune HD, I believe nVidia has accomplished what they initially set out to do.

What’s behind Tegra?
In short, the Tegra is what’s referred to as a “system on a chip”. It’s the combination of a processor, graphics chip, memory, and several other components that go into a typical computing system — the difference being that Tegra fits all of those components onto a single chip. Its minuscule size, along with its impressively low power consumption (it can decode HD video while only drawing 1w of power!), makes Tegra an ideal technology for mobile devices. You can check out the further technical details on Wikipedia.

How is it different than other solutions?
Their currently isn’t any other technology that can take on Tegra toe-to-toe. Due to its system on a chip design, Tegra can be placed in cellphones and similarly sized portable media devices like the Zune HD.

The closest competing solution would probably be Intel’s Atom line of processors–however, Atom still requires a separate chipset to handle graphics, memory, and storage. This currently makes it impossible for Intel to get the chip in mobile products, but it remains ideal for netbook-sized devices. Intel is eventually planning to go with a system on a chip design for future Atom products, so nVidia won’t be alone in this segment for too long.

Why should I care about Tegra?
The biggest draw for Tegra is its ability to do a lot of work while drawing very little power. Since improvements on battery technology move at a far slower pace than other tech, hardware manufacturers are often forced to figure out ways to get more performance while not killing battery life. Tegra accomplishes this by consolidating many components onto one chip. It’s also what allows the Zune HD to be so generous with its use of 3D (among other visual flourishes) while not taking a huge battery hit.

The Zune HD also provides a glimpse at what Tegra is capable of when power isn’t an issue–in particular, when its connected to a dock and used as a media center for HDTVs. We’ve also seen demos of netbooks running Tegra that can handle HD video without issue, even when sending the video to a large HDTV. In comparison, my Intel Atom-based netbook can’t play 720p video without occasionally hiccuping. Tegra will ultimately allow for more capable mobile devices, and will give us computing power to spare.

What do other companies need to do to compete?
The mobile space forces hardware manufacturers to think smarter, because they can’t simply increase the processor speed to get more performance — they also have to consider battery life and the portability of the hardware. Tegra has made nVidia king of the hill, and now everyone else has to catch up. As I mentioned above, Intel’s looking at upgrading Atom to a system on a chip design to compete with nVidia, but there hasn’t been much word from other potential players. AMD, the rival processor company to Intel (and owner of ATI), has been mum on this segment.

With rumors swirling that Nintendo may be using Tegra in its next DS, coupled with the fact that Microsoft will surely want to stick with it for their future portable devices (phones, or otherwise), it’s clear that nVidia is onto something. I just hope other chip manufacturers sit up and take notice; as I’ve written about before, competition is always a good thing.

What nVidia’s Tegra Means for Mobile Devices, and Why You Should Care

Similar Posts:

Did You Hear? I Think Apple’s Releasing a Tablet!

Devindra — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 05:25:15 +0000

One of many Apple tablet mock ups (via Gizmodo)

The hype surrounding Apple’s potential tablet release this year has gotten to be pretty unbearable over the past few weeks. The ever-contentious Joe Wilcox argued that the world doesn’t need tablets, John Gruber wrote that it may potentially be “Apple’s reconception of person computing“, while many others are treating it like the coming of the Messiah.

Now many sources are reporting that Apple is set for a “major product announcement” on Jan. 27th, and that a French developer has received a beta of the iPhone OS4 SDK, which includes options for scaling applications to tablet screen sizes. The Wall Street Journal also lends further credence to the tablet news by reporting that Apple is set to unveil the tablet device later this month, with a release in March. Hopefully once we get some concrete info on this thing, the tech blogosphere will calm down a bit.

Over the past few months, I’ve written a bit about tablets over at Royal Pingdom. In December, I asked “Who needs tablet computers anyway?” While my title may sound similar to Wilcox’s above article, I approached the question in a very different way. I don’t deny that tablets will eventually become a widely useful computing segment, but I think it’s going to take some time for them to find their place in our computing lives.

Several months ago, I also wrote about how great it is that Microsoft’s Courier device is taking a completely different approach from what we hear about the Apple tablet. Personally, I want a Courier more than any other tablet I’ve seen thus far.

Did You Hear? I Think Apple’s Releasing a Tablet!

Similar Posts:

Looking Forward to the Android Takeover

Devindra — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:50:47 +0000

The Archos 5 Android Tablet

Om Malik wrote up a great post today on the “Androidification of Everything” which served as a reminder that 2010 is truly going to be the year of the Android. I offered some predictions on what we’ll see from Android in 2010 over at Royal Pingdom, and Om’s post serves as an elaboration on one of my previous points. I wrote:

Part of the beauty of Android is that it’s not just limited to cellphones. Google has crafted a lightweight operating system that could do well on many other devices. We’ve already seen Android implemented on the Archos 5 portable media device, as well as the Barnes and Noble Nook eBook reader. In 2010 we can look forward to it showing up on netbooks (Acer already has one planned), and I wouldn’t be surprised to see it popping up on Internet tablet devices either.

Om mentions that both chip companies and semiconductor firms are excited about the possibilities for Android hardware. In terms of making Android ubiquitous, this is something that is possibly more important than Android phones eventually defeating the iPhone in marketshare. Smartphones are just one segment of Android’s importance. Android’s ubiquity among all mobile devices (e-book readers, tablets, netbooks, etc.) will be far more significant in the long run.

Read: The Androidification of Everything

Looking Forward to the Android Takeover

Similar Posts:

Asus Starts the USB 3.0 & SATA 6Gb Hype Train

Devindra — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 16:04:49 +0000

The next generation of high-speed transfer interfaces is on the horizon, and Asus is first on the block with the announcement that their upcoming Xtreme Design P7P55D-E Series motherboard is including both USB 3.0, and support for 6Gbit/s SATA. In short, it’s very fast–the board is capable of transferring a 20GB file in less than 70 seconds. This would take 2-3 minutes on a typical desktop today.

I’m particularly excited for USB 3.0 because it has an effective transfer rate of around 3Gbit/s, compared to USB 2.0’s current theoretical max of 480Mbit/s. Real world usage with USB 2.0 often sees around 300Mbit/s transfers, which makes USB 3.0 ten times faster. Of course, to see the added speed benefit you need to use USB 3.0 compatible devices which will be slowly trickling out soon.

The new SATA 6Gbit/s speed doubles the current SATA maximum from 3Gbit/s, and you’ll need newer hard drives to see the increased speed.

This motherboard has all sorts of other interesting features going for it, but I’m more interested in the speed boosts. I’ve already mentally added USB 3.0 and next-gen SATA to the list of things I’d want in a new board whenever I upgrade next.

[Source: Far East Gizmos]

Asus Starts the USB 3.0 & SATA 6Gb Hype Train

Similar Posts:

The Nanda Alarm Clock eBay Fail

Devindra — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 18:26:33 +0000

You’ve probably already heard about the Nanda Clocky alarm; it’s the alarm that has wheels so that it can race around your bedroom when it goes off in the morning, forcing you to get up and be more alert instead of just hitting snooze. I’ve followed the product since the creator, Guari Nanda, acquired a lot of press when she first showed off her idea as an MIT grad student. But while it seems that the product has found success, it also appears that the company has become a bit restrictive towards users who attempt to resell the product on eBay. Tech Dirt has the equally infuriating/hilarious tale of a family member who tried to sell their Clocky on eBay, only to be struck down by a trademark violation notice.

It sounds as if the user was trying to sell the Clocky as a new product, and perhaps Nanda was mistaken and thought he was trying to become some sort of unauthorized reseller. Ebay’s process for clearing up these misunderstandings isn’t easy: You have to get the “violated” company to approve your specific product listing. This user did that, but somehow still ended up getting another violation notice the next day.

I agree with Tech Dirt when they say that this sort of faulty trademark protection could conceivably harm the market for second-hand products. Ebay needs to find a way to handle faulty complaints–perhaps by punishing companies that make excessive incorrect violation requests? Until this is resolved, the user should just go ahead and sell it on Craigslist already.

The Nanda Alarm Clock eBay Fail

Similar Posts:

Cheap Dye-Sensitized Solar Cells Coming to a Backpack Near You

Devindra — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:39:33 +0000

Among the many emerging solar technologies out there, dye-sensitized solar cells are perhaps the most interesting due to their incredibly low cost, coupled with their fairly high ~11% efficiency (at least among thin-film panels). According to Technology Review, backpacks coated with the cells for portable gadget recharging were recently unveiled at the Hong Kong Electronics Fair. The cells are based on the tech invented by a chemistry professor, Michael Grätzel, who mentions that they work well at wide light angles, are less susceptible to degradation in sunlight, and also work efficiently with indoor lighting.

As someone who’s always fretting about the battery life of their portable devices, I could definitely see the value in having recharging capabilities right out of my backpack–assuming it doesn’t cost a fortune. There’s little word on pricing for these backpacks, but as the first of their kind to market I don’t suspect they’ll be on the affordable end of the spectrum.

Cheap Dye-Sensitized Solar Cells Coming to a Backpack Near You

Similar Posts:

Sony’s Idea of Corporate Synergy: Smashing PS3s into Bravia TVs at 50mph

Devindra — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:08:40 +0000

I’m not sure if there’s a point to this video at all, but for the sake of stuff getting smashed, here goes: Gizmag is reporting on a recent Australian Sony press event held at a crash test facility, wherein they propelled shiny new slim PS3s into 46″ Bravia televisions. The stunt was apparently part of an Australian promotion that sees Sony giving away 25,000 120GB PS3s with certain Bravia models.

Sony’s Idea of Corporate Synergy: Smashing PS3s into Bravia TVs at 50mph

Similar Posts:

Why The Magic Mouse is the Most Important Apple Announcement Today

Devindra — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:08:36 +0000

I suppose its no surprise that Apple’s latest hardware announcements have taken over the tech news waves today. After all, the announcement of sexy new 27″ iMacs, coupled with the future availability of Intel’s next generation Core i5 and i7 processors, is sort of hard to ignore. There were upgrades across the board for the Macbook, Time Capsule, and Mac Mini as well–but strangely enough, the most compelling announcement to me was that of a lowly input device: The Magic Mouse.

In general, I don’t hold too much fondness for Apple input devices, specifically their mice. Ever since the release of the “hockeypuck” Apple USB mouse with the original iMac, it seems as if Apple has aimed to purposefully torture their users. The Apple Pro mouse was an improvement (insofar as you could actually use it without wanting to harm yourself and others), but it was still stubbornly one buttoned–a trend Apple didn’t waver from until the two-buttoned Mighty Mouse in 2005. And yet, the Mighty Mouse remained far from ergonomic, and the rubber nipple scroll-ball was more a novelty than a true competitor to the scroll-wheel.

Basically, it seemed as if Apple was almost willfully ignoring the advances being made by the likes of Logitech, Microsoft, and other input device manufacturers. I’m honestly not sure why Mac users never raised a stink about it, but then I suppose it’s similar to how most people don’t realize how much the standard iPhone earbuds suck.

In contrast to their dubious history, the Magic Mouse appears to be much more ergonomic, and it eschews the rubber nipple for multi-touch capabilities. Wireless connectivity via Bluetooth is also the standard now. Just two weeks ago we saw some info trickle out about multi-touch mice being developed by Microsoft–but of course they were years from ever hitting the marketplace. As is often the case, Apple has leapfrogged the competition by releasing today what many considered years away.

The multi-touch gestures seem intuitive, and as a PC user the functionality actually makes me a bit jealous. I know that Windows 7 has multi-touch built in as well, and I’m hoping that someone eventually releases drivers to bring the Magic Mouse across the OS pond.

Check out a video demonstration of the gestures below:

The Magic Mouse will have a resounding impact on input devices moving forward–more than anything announced today. We’re going to see many different attempts at bringing multi-touch to the desktop, but once again we can thank Apple for being first and giving everyone else a swift kick in the pants to speed up their own innovation.

The Magic Mouse will be included with the newer iMacs announced today, and will be available separately for $69 at the end of October. You can hear me discuss the Magic Mouse, along with Apple’s other announcements, on episode 15 of the Symbiotek Podcast (coming soon).

Why The Magic Mouse is the Most Important Apple Announcement Today

Similar Posts:

The Lucid Hydra 200 Makes Multi-GPU Gaming Across Video Card Vendors a Reality

Devindra — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:54:00 +0000

If there’s one thing that’s annoyed me most about PC gaming, it’s all the work that goes into keeping up with the hottest video cards on the market. It’s sort of a crazy experience, especially for average consumers, and it’s something that I’ve always felt has kept significant portions of the PC gaming market far too exclusive to survive in the long run.

The Lucid Hydra 200 doesn’t solve all of these problems, but it makes it possible for people with less hardcore computer rigs to throw in any video card they choose to get a bit more power. Effectively, you could have an ATI and an nVidia card running in tandem without having to worry about their multi-GPU nonsense (Crossfire or SLI). It also seems like it’s not that expensive for motherboard manufacturers to implement this feature, which means we can see adoption spread quite quickly. Over time, perhaps the costs could even be driven down to fit the $100-$150 motherboard market.

Moreso than PhysX, this is the sort of innovation we need to see in the PC gaming segment.

The Lucid Hydra 200 Makes Multi-GPU Gaming Across Video Card Vendors a Reality

Similar Posts:

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

Devindra — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 05:09:03 +0000

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.

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

Similar Posts:

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

Devindra — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 05:07:29 +0000

I’m always one for the underdog, and I’d be lying if I said that wasn’t a big part of why I chose to purchase a Helio Ocean last winter. At the time, I was looking for a slick smartphone that wasn’t a Blackberry, had 3G (so the iPhone was out), and generally appealed to my geeky sensibilities. The Ocean, Helio’s flagship phone, fit the bill quite nicely–so I eagerly made the jump.

(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…

Update: Helio’s official announcement is now online. Cnet also has coverage of the deal.

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

Similar Posts:

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

Devindra — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 03:21:56 +0000

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.

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

Similar Posts:

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

Devindra — Wed, 28 May 2008 03:39:35 +0000

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.

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

Similar Posts:

Intel’s New "Atom" Chips Bring Us Closer to Ubiquitous Mobile Computing

Devindra — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 04:15:34 +0000

Intel’s latest mobile processor offering, the Intel Atom, is one powerful little beast. It measures around 25mm, but still manages to fit in the Core 2 Duo instruction set and speeds up to 1.8Ghz. While these tiny trooopers certainly won’t be able to compete with a 1.8Ghz Core 2 Duo processor, they shouldn’t really have to. The chipset housing this new processor, Centrino Atom, will also feature low-powered integrated graphics and wireless capability.

You can read more about the technical specifics of the Atom platform over at CrunchGear or Intel’s press release, what I’m more interested in is what this new processor represents. Obviously, Intel is aiming to create small and inexpensive devices which still offer the amenities of larger notebook and desktop chips. But the devices these chips will be headed to will most likely be far smaller than anything we’ve seen Intel tackle before.

We’ll surely see them show up in newer versions of the Asus Eee and similarly inexpensive ultra-portable laptops, but the introduction of the Atom line also leaves the door open for Intel to step into the handheld computing market. Next generation Pocket PCs may actually be able to compete notebook and desktop PCs. It also means that we’ll see Intel further perfecting this market, and moving closer towards the mobile processors that have ruled cellphones and mobile devices until now.

In a few years time, we’ll probably see some massive innovation leaps in the realm of tiny CPUs, and I for one can’t wait. While the battle for desktop and notebook processor domination will continue for the foreseeable future, this unseen battle among small-yet-powerful CPUs has a greater potential for changing the way we interact with technology in our daily lives.

The concept of ubiquitous computing comes to mind; wherein our computer interaction will not only occur between dedicated computing devices like desktops, laptops, and PDAs, but also more mundane devices like refrigerators, clothes, and pretty much anything you can think of. With processors both tiny and inexpensive, the computing possibility of our environment becomes limitless.
I for one welcome our tiny and omnipresent computing overlords.

Intel’s New "Atom" Chips Bring Us Closer to Ubiquitous Mobile Computing

Similar Posts:

Apple Air versus Asus Eee: A Comparison

Devindra — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 04:48:03 +0000

I think we all agree: The Macbook Air is a gorgeous machine. During his keynote presentation, Steve Jobs whipped the entire Macworld audience into a fervor with his trademarked Apple enthusiasm for this new member of the Macbook family. With the Air we have an insanely light computer that still manages to fit in a 13.3″ screen and a screaming fast Core 2 Duo CPU.

But while it’s undoubtedly a singular machine, is it really worth the $1799 price tag when you can get much of the same functionality with Asus’s $400 Eee? I understand that the Air is more in competition with Sony’s TZ line that Jobs mentioned in his keynote, but it seems foolish not to compare this sleek new laptop to Asus’s wunderkind subnotebook.

[Note: Please take notice that this article was written in January 2008 and is a comparison of the original 7" Eee, not the later models. Although I would argue the later models prove my case even further.]

Here’s a quick rundown of how they compare:

	Macbook Air	Asus Eee
Size (H x W x D)	0.16” – 0.76” x 12.8” x 8.94”	1.38″ x 8.82″ x 6.5″
Weight	3lbs	2lbs
Display	13.3″ LED-backlit LCD	7″ LED-backlit LCD
CPU	1.6-1.8Ghz Core 2 Duo	900Mhz Celeron Mobile
RAM	2GB	512MB
Hard Drive	80GB 1.8″ (or 64GB solid state flash)	2-4GB solid state flash
OS	Mac OSX Leopard	Custom Linux Distro
Price	$1799	$300-$400

Let’s go over some of these topics to further inspect the differences between these two tiny titans.

Size

The Air is being advertised as “the world’s thinnest notebook”, and for good reason. The machine is certainly going to draw its fair share of stares when it starts popping up in coffee houses in a few weeks. Its paper-thin design has set new standards for industrial design, which is not at all unusual for Apple. Unfortunately, that thinness has also led to all of the compromises that Apple has had to make for the machine.

The Asus Eee is nowhere near as thin, but its smaller screen allows it to be significantly smaller than the Air overall. When it comes to choosing ultraportable computers, the key of course is portability. The Air, while thin, is still going to require you to carry around a laptop sized sleeve, case, or bag throughout the day. Its thinness can also be a problem if you’re carrying it in the same bag as heavy textbooks.

The Eee, on the other hand, can be treated more like a paperback. Its small size means you have far more options when carrying it around, and as we’ll discuss later, it also has many hardware features which should make you worry less about jostling around your bag all day.

Weight

Here’s one area where the Eee has a considerable advantage over the Air. It’s also something that may make a significant difference to someone considering an extremely portable laptop. While it may not sound like much, the difference between 2lbs and 3lbs in your backpack is the sort of thing that’s noticeable over the course of a day.

Display

This may end up being a deal-breaker for some. The Eee admittedly has a small screen which may be too difficult to use for some users. It also has a tiny resolution compared to the Air, which means it would be less ideal for multitasking and working with photos and other media. Still, for web browsing, word processing, and other productivity-related tasks, the Eee’s small screen is adequate.

If you absolutely need a high resolution display, either for watching movies or for the breathing room when working with media files, then the Air is the clear choice for you.

CPU

The processor differences is another area where the Air has a clear advantage over the Eee. Sporting a custom Intel Core 2 Duo processor that is the “width of a dime” and “as thick as a nickel”, the Air packs a lot of power into a minuscule package. While it’s nearly a full gigahertz slower than the chips in the Macbooks and Macbook Pros, it’s still fast enough to handle media encoding and high-definition video playback.

The Eee, on the other hand, has a processor that’s often belittled among technophiles. The Celeron was never a very strong chip, but what it lacked in processing capabilities, it made up for in low power usage and cost. For the simple purposes of the Eee the Celeron chip is more than enough. In addition, using this chip is one of the best cost-saving decisions Asus made when developing the Eee.

RAM

The Air comes with 2GB of RAM standard, compared to 512MB of RAM with the Eee. The Eee is upgradeable to 1GB of RAM, however. While these numbers may sound like the Air is trouncing the Eee memory-wise, the truth is not that clear cut. The Eee needs less RAM to perform optimally than the Air due to its Linux operating system, whereas OSX Leopard eats up quite a bit of memory on the Air.

In addition, I’ve stressed that the Eee is meant to do less than a fully-decked out laptop or desktop. Since the practical use of the Eee is more limited than the Air, it’s a given that less RAM is required.

Hard Drive

The difference in hard drives is another wide disparity between the Air and the Eee. The Air uses an 80GB hard drive that is also found in Apple’s 80GB iPod Classic. There is an optional 64GB solid-state flash disk available, but at a $999 premium, it’s not worth the cost just yet. The Eee uses a 2-4GB solid-state flash disk, depending on which model you buy.

The size difference is certainly significant, but as I’ve stressed already, the Eee’s purposes are very different than the Air. For working with small documents, the Eee’s solid state disk is more than enough space. In addition, you can always expand the amount of available space by using a separate USB flash disk. With the rise of online office suites, I also suspect we’ll start keeping far less data on our computers than before.

The other benefit of the Eee’s disk is that it has no moving parts, which means less of a chance for data corruption when traveling around with the computer. In addition, the Eee’s flash disk is a much faster storage solution than the Air’s 1.8″ hard drive. As this Tom’s Hardware article shows, there is a significant performance penalty in using these sorts of hard drives.

While the Air seems like a clear choice for multimedia work because of the larger hard drive space, its 1.8″ hard drive may end up being too slow for people looking to do advanced multimedia editing and encoding.

Operating System

The Air is running Apple’s latest operating system, OSX Leopard. The Eee is running a customized version of Xandros Linux. There’s a lot written online about Leopard already, but simply put, if you’re a Mac lover your mind is probably already made up. If you want an operating system that’s well-known and compatible with a variety of popular hardware and software, then Leopard is the clear choice as well.

Asus’s chosen operating system, on the other hand, is more fine-tuned to take advantage of the particular strengths of the machine’s hardware. It consists of open-source applications like Mozilla Firefox and Open Office, and other useful software like Skype. You can install some other programs using the Eee’s rudimentary package manager, but it appears as if the choice of new applications is currently slim.

Both the Air and Eee are capable of running other operating systems as well. Techie types can still use Boot Camp to run Windows on the Air as well as take advantage of Mac Linux distributions. As for the Eee, you can easily wipe out the included operating system and install any version of Windows or Linux that you’d like.

Price

Here is where the Eee clearly triumphs over the Air. For a smaller, albeit less powerful, computer, you end up spending at least $1300 less for the Eee than you would for the Air. The Eee is clearly a much better value, especially if you only need basic computing capabilities in an ultra-portable format.

The Air’s $1799 retail price also puts it in competition with Apple’s own Macbook and Macbook Pro. For $1099, you can get a Macbook with a faster processor, faster hard drive, and a weight gain of only 2lbs. For $1999 you can get an even faster overall machine, the Macbook Pro, with a dedicated 3D graphics card, bigger and faster hard drive, and a weight gain of only 2.4lbs.

In short, it seems that the Air is a bit of a luxury item that I honestly wouldn’t recommend to any of my friends on value alone. On the other hand, I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend the Eee to someone looking for a cheap ultraportable laptop.

In the Air’s defense, it is priced competitively with the lowest priced Sony TZ ultraportable laptops while offering a bigger screen.

other considerations

I’ll throw the Air a bone and take some time to discuss its features that don’t fall into the above categories. Perhaps most importantly, the Air features a full-sized keyboard, which is a rarity among ultraportable laptops. While I know I can get used to typing on the Eee’s small keyboard, I could see it being a showstopper for some folks.

And let me just be frank about the Air: It’s a dead sexy machine in ways the Eee could never hope to be. If you’re the sort of person with money to spare and a penchant for high fashion, I’m sure you’ve already preordered your Air. The Eee is a cute machine, but it simply does not exhibit the sort of commitment to industrial design and drool-worthiness that Apple has built its reputation on. Then again, the Eee is also a truly amazing machine in its own right given what it offers for the price.

The multitouch trackpad is also another noteworthy feature of the Air, but I assure you it will be popping up in future revisions of the Macbook and Macbook Pro. If that is at all a major factor in your decision to purchase the Air, then I suggest waiting a few months until it’s transitioned to the other members of the Macbook family.

Final Words: Eee for value, Air for style

After comparing the Macbook Air and the Asus Eee, it’s clear that Apple’s new notebook is not that great of a value compared to Asus’s surprise hit. The Air wins in overall sex appeal, raw horsepower, and a bigger screen. At the same time, the Eee is simply a more practical machine for those who only need a secondary machine to word process and browse the internet on the go.

CrunchGear is running a great article on the “uselessness” of the Air which boils down many of my issues with it succinctly:

The MacBook Air is not a subnotebook. The Eee and Everex, and Redfly are subnotebooks. They are tiny, basic, and are designed from the ground up to be micro-sized and limited. The Air is trying to be a regular notebook but failing – what Apple has done is take a regular notebook and flatten it (very well I might add), while simultaneously crippling it.

In addition, it doesn’t fair that well compared to other ultraportable laptops like the Sony TZ series because it lacks an optical drive, and many connectivity options.

I’m a practical person, and the Air is simply not a practical choice. Your money is better spent with the Macbook, or Macbook Pro if you’re looking for a dedicated computer. And if you’re just looking for something to accompany your desktop, then the Asus Eee is by far the superior choice.

Update: Battery Follow-Up

It’s been pointed out countless times that I forgot to compare the battery differences of these two machines. Silly me:

In the comments below, Wing pointed out the biggest difference between the two battery-wise:

One big thing that some sites mentioned was that the Air doesn’t have a user-replacable battery. [Emphasis mine] It can be switched by an Apple tech but that’s only for when it dies. The eee on the other hand has a user-switchable battery. I can imagine it being very useful when you;re on the road (where you will be taking these things) and need an extra battery or two. Asus is also coming out with six-cell batteries which will probably last quite a bit.

It sounds like Air users will run into the same inconvenient issue as iPod users whenever their batteries die.

As far battery life, this Laptop Magazine review of the Eee reports that it gets around 3.5 hours of uptime. Ars Technica reports 5 hours for the Air, which seems to be on par for other ultraportable laptops. Since the Eee’s battery is user replaceable though, you could easily take along an extra charged battery for double the battery life. This is a common strategy among road-warrior types and is unfortunate for Apple since they’re also the perfect target market for the Air.

Apple Air versus Asus Eee: A Comparison

Similar Posts:

The Forgotten Format War: Toshiba’s "DVD-Audio" vs Sony’s "Super Audio CD"

Devindra — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 05:35:06 +0000

All this talk about the HD DVD and Blu-ray format war being over has reminded me of a similar situation involving two other competing media formats. Not many people realize that the current format war was not the first “high-definition” war between Toshiba and Sony. The battle for high-definition audio supremacy has actually been going on for some time now, long before we ever caught word of these new-fangled HD video formats.

Toshiba’s DVD-Audio format, along with Sony’s Super Audio CD, both fought to be the evolutionary high-definition standard from the now ubiquitous CD. Sporting support for higher resolution audio quality, surround sound, and a wealth of features that would make any audiophile woozy, they were both fitting contenders for the next great audio format.

But don’t be surprised if you’ve never heard of them.

The Contenders

First up is DVD-Audio (DVD-A), a standard that’s obviously connected to the DVD video discs we all know and love. Launched in 2000, DVD-A was developed by the DVD Forum, a group which includes Toshiba, Philips, Pioneer, and surprisingly enough, Sony. The discs hold up to 8.5GB of data, just like your average DVD. The format supports a bit depth of 24-bit, 5.1 audio tracks encoded up to 96kHz, and 2-channel stereo tracks up to 192kHz.

In comparison, CD Audio resolution is 16-bit at a sample rate of 44.1kHz. Even if you have no idea what the numbers mean, just trust that those higher numbers make DVD-A a significant leap beyond CDs.

Super Audio CD (SACD), on the other hand, comes from Sony and Philips, the two companies behind the audio CD. It appeared in 1999, also uses a standard DVD disc as its vehicle, and is available in stereo and surround sound configurations. SACD is stored in a format called Direct Stream Digital (DSD). Unfortunately, I think it may be nearly impossible to break down the technical specifications of DSD because the only explanations I can find sound like this:

DSD is 1-bit, has a sampling rate of 2.8224 MHz, and makes use of noise shaping quantization techniques in order to push 1-bit quantization noise up to inaudible ultrasonic frequencies. This gives the format a greater dynamic range and wider frequency response than the CD.

Source: Wikipedia

Given that sci-fi sounding explanation, I’m fairly certain it sounds significantly better than standard CDs.

Fans of these formats, myself included, praise them for their record-like warmth and incredible resolution and dynamic range. If you ever get a chance to demo one of these formats in an ideal listening environment, do so. It will instantly make sense of all the technical nonsense in this section.

Backwards Compatibility

Both formats take their earlier siblings into account and offer some level of backwards compatibility. Many DVD-A discs offer Dolby Digital and DTS tracks which are playable in standard DVD players. “Hybrid” SACDs, the most popular kind, include a CD audio track on one layer of the disc, while the high resolution SACD audio content sits on another.

I guess that sort of makes up for both formats being horribly incompatible with one another. Sort of.

DualDisc, another audio disc format, aimed to introduce the benefits of higher resolution audio to consumers gradually by offering a standard CD on one side of the disc with DVD content on another. The DVD content was never standardized, which led to confusion when marketing the discs. It could include documentaries and music videos, or, it could include a DVD-A version of the album. Interestingly enough, Sony is one of the labels putting out DualDisc albums, although they make sure not to step on the toes of SACD by never including full resolution DVD-A content on their DVD sides.

You Call This a War?

Is a war fought if nobody cares? That’s what we would have to ask ourselves when considering the epic battle between DVD-A and SACD. Released at a time when most people hadn’t yet realized the full surround sound audio potential of DVDs, these formats were the answer to a problem nobody noticed.

Consumers were more than satisfied with CDs, few had the speaker and audio receiver setup to utilize these formats to their full potential, and the formats were simply too expensive and confusing. A few years after their launch, the iPod was released and the face of music changed forever. The music-going public clamored for lower-quality portable music instead of “clunky” optical discs.

Subsequently, neither format truly took off. The format war is now at a stalemate as combo DVD-A/SACD players are becoming more common. The Creative Audigy 2 sound cards supported playback of DVD-A discs, and recent versions of Power DVD on PCs support it as well. There is currently no way to play SACDs on any sort of computer.

Sony also included SACD support in the Playstation 3, although it was removed from the recent 40GB version for cost-cutting reasons. PS3 owners take note: At this time, you can only listen to SACDs if you’re using an HDMI connection to your receiver.

Parallels with the HD DVD/Blu-ray war

In reading this article, I’m sure you’ve recognized some parallels between the DVD-A/SACD fiasco and the format war we’re facing today. Some similarities I’ve noticed include:

Forcing of next-generation formats on an unwilling public
Formats required many consumers to buy much more equipment than just the DVD-A/SACD players
Lower-quality digital media formats (iTunes store, online video streaming) steal much of the thunder from the higher quality formats
Hybrid-discs are released to ease adoption of the new format
Draconian DRM worries make the formats more restrictive to consumers
Combo-players bring the war to a stalemate and the formats co-exist happily ever after

I’ll dig into these and other similarities in a future post, but for now, I think it’s enough that we recognize they exist. It’s probably not that unusual that there are so many similarities, after all, we should probably expect this sort of technological samsara by now. After a point, the cycles of death and rebirth that our technological formats face will become all the more predictable.

Where to Go From Here

Obviously, neither DVD-A or SACD have been wildly successful, but I wouldn’t write them off just yet. Remember that the audio CD was originally launched in 1980 and it took about a decade for it to truly take off. When it comes to traditional audio formats, it can simply take a while for the public to accept it.

Now that more consumers are considering surround sound in their home theaters, they’re also unwittingly optimizing their setups for DVD-A and SACD. If these formats can cement themselves in more players, publicize their benefits, and make the discs cheaper and more readily available, consumer adoption is sure to follow.

Let’s just hope they accomplish this before a high-definition successor to MP3 appears.

Update 1:

Just an update for anyone interested in hearing me discuss this further: My friends and I will be covering this format war and its parallels to the HD DVD/Blu-ray mess on the second episode of our podcast, The Watchers. Check it out early next week if you’re interested in this post, or just film and television in general. I promise you’ll be entertained!

The Forgotten Format War: Toshiba’s "DVD-Audio" vs Sony’s "Super Audio CD"

Similar Posts:

The Drobo: Finally, Personal Data Backup Done Right!

Devindra — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:42:15 +0000

Ars Technica has a review of the Drobo, a device which I’ve been following for quite some time. It is essentially a personal backup system that allows you to easily plug in four separate SATA hard drives and take advantage of their combined storage. The kicker is that the Drobo does this while also reserving some space for data protection purposes. So if for some reason one of your drives happen to fail you can just yank out the faulty drive and replace it with a new one. The Drobo, through its automagic processes, will then restore the lost data to the new drive. Even better, the device still allows you access to data on the other drives during the restoration process!

To computer support folks like myself, this is the holy grail of personal data storage. It offers all of the benefits (and then some) of RAID, the typical go-to backup technology for technophiles, while remaining much more flexible and user friendly.

Despite all of it’s great features, the Drobo is still very much a first generation device. It only supports USB 2.0, which many (myself among them), consider inferior to Firewire 400 in terms of speed and efficiency. I also can’t imagine how fast this device would be if it supported the newer Firewire 800 standard.

Since it lacks an ethernet port, the Drobo also falls short of becoming the perfect NAS (network-attached storage) solution. These devices plug into your home network and are accessible to any computer within it. This deficiency could be minimized if you share the Drobo over your network through a computer, or attach it to one of those rare routers that support external hard drives, but it’s in no way a replacement for having the networking feature built in.

If you need any of the features that the Drobo lacks, then it may be worth waiting for version 2.0 of the device. For most others though, the Drobo will probably suit their needs.

At $499, it isn’t a cheap device, but for people who deal with tons of data every day it’s a life saver. It’s also a much better option than those exceedingly large external hard drives I’ve written about previously, which just offer a load of storage space but no backup mechanisms.

Note: Engadget also reviewed the Drobo in June.

The Drobo: Finally, Personal Data Backup Done Right!

Similar Posts:

Why You Should Never Buy Dual Drive (RAID 0) External Hard Drives

Devindra — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 03:05:22 +0000

I came across this seemingly typical Engadget story today, announcing yet another 1 Terabyte external hard drive solution that utilizes dual hard drives, when I realized it was time to speak out out against these inane devices. These external hard drive setups have been marketed for the last couple years as a foolproof storage solution, but I would recommend them as the last place you’d want to store your precious digital wares.

The Trouble With RAID 0

The key to their troubling nature lies in their “ingenious” method for increasing disk capacity: Literally sandwiching hard drives together. External solutions such as these rely heavily on a geekilicious technology known as RAID (Redundant Array of Independent Disks). The technology is typically found in servers and desktops. It’s used to make several smaller hard disks appear as a single entity by “striping” the data across all the drives, something which also gives a boost to their overall performance. But it can also be used to insure the integrity of the data by automatically building a recovery structure within the array of discs.

This latter function, known as “Raid 1″, allows you to easily swap out a broken hard drive from an array of discs for a working one. Once a new hard drive is installed, the RAID array instantly repopulates all of the data that formerly resided on the old drive. This is what the paranoid geeks consider the good sort of RAID.

The former function of RAID (”Raid 0″) is less beloved among geeks. Performance enthusiasts like it for the speed boost, but overall those in the know would steer general users away from a RAID 0 array. This is because when they crash, they crash hard. Losing a single drive from a RAID 0 array makes it nearly impossible to recover any data because the data is shared across all the drives. Therefore, if you have a RAID 0 array with several drives and one happens to die–you can pretty much forget about the data on all the working drives as well.

Unfortunately, these external hard drives are of the RAID 0 variety. And not only that, these drives are often so closely sandwiched together in the external cases that they end up having a higher failure rate than normal due to the increased heat.

Recovering RAID 0 Data? Think Again!

As I mentioned above, it’s nearly impossible to recover data from any RAID 0 array — one used in an external hard drive is no different. I’ve written about recovering data from trashed hard drives in the past. It’s usually just a matter of finding a decent scanning tool (in my case “Handy Recovery 3.0“) and letting it seek through the remains of your hard drive to find any salvageable data. Sadly, the process is not so simple with RAID 0. If it dies, your only option is to send it to some sort of professional drive recovery outfit and be prepared to absorb the $1000+ repair fee.

And yes, you read that right. These recovery companies can often reclaim some of your data, but their prices vary depending on how much data is being recovered. Recovering much of a 1 terabyte era may very well cost you the same as a decent used car!

Avoiding Raid 0 External Hard Drives

Now that I’ve thoroughly struck the fear of the hard drive gods in you, let me leave you with some tips on avoiding these sorts of external hard drives in the future.

If an external drive is 1TB or more, it is probably running RAID 0. At the time of this post, only one internal 1TB drive is publicly available. This means that the technology is very new, and most external hard drive manufacturers haven’t yet included this drive in an external case on its own.
The above tip is not necessarily true any more since individual 1TB drives are actually common now.

If the external drive weighs 5-6lb, it is probably running RAID 0. A typical external hard drive running a single hard drive is only about 2.5-3lbs. Logic would have it that anything twice that weight is probably that way for a reason ;)
Research the drive. Most often you’ll find a review explaining the innards of the external drive.

Why You Should Never Buy Dual Drive (RAID 0) External Hard Drives

Similar Posts:

Why It’s A Perfect Time to Upgrade Your RAM If You Have DDR2

Devindra — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 15:11:20 +0000

If you’ve bought a computer in the past year or two, it is most likely running on a type of RAM referred to as “DDR2“. If you’re purchasing a new computer soon, then you’re pretty much guaranteed to be using it. You can click the link if you’d like a more technical explanation of the memory, but a through explanation of the technology is not necessary to grasp the meaning of this post. What is important to know is this: DDR2 is currently dirt-cheap, making this an excellent time to upgrade your computer’s memory at a minimal cost. For users moving towards Windows Vista and Mac OSX Leopard with new or upgraded computers, this is especially important news!

I’ve purchased several dozen memory modules in the past few weeks and I was literally shocked at the prices. Simply put, you can now buy 1 gigabyte of DDR2 for around $35-45 for your desktop or laptop. The prices have actually been this low for quite some time, but it was only when I made these recent purchases that I actually realized it on my own. All it takes is a quick glance at Pricewatch’s desktop and laptop memory sections to prove it. Take note at how the prices for DDR2 modules are anywhere from 30-50% cheaper than their DDR1 counterparts.

I’m sure the folks who frequent hardware sites like HardOCP have been taking advantage of this for months, but I haven’t seen anyone really advertise this fact to mainstream users. Consider this post a massive endorsement: If you can use it, buy DDR2 RAM now!

Why exactly do I need to upgrade my RAM?

The benefits of RAM upgrades are too numerous to mention in the space of this post, but you can get an idea with this excellent overview from Computer Memory Upgrades. Simply put, more RAM equals faster performance for many tasks on your computer. This could affect everything from system startup, to programs launching, to general computer use. If you’ve noticed any slowdown with your computer recently, or find that your computer doesn’t meet my recommended minimum RAM amounts (mentioned below), then I highly recommend that you take this chance to upgrade your RAM.

Personally I recommend at least 1 gigabyte of RAM for a modern computer running Windows XP, and 2GB if you’re running Windows Vista. While 2GB may seem somewhat extravagant for Vista, I’ve found that it performs much better at higher RAM amounts than XP ever did. This, coupled with the fact that Vista is admittedly a bit of a RAM hog, makes it clear that 1GB of RAM can potentially limit the capabilities of Vista.

For Mac users, all of the OSX versions up until the most recent one (10.4, Tiger) run very well with 1 GB of RAM. There are rumors, however, that the upcoming 10.5 (Leopard) version of OSX will need 2GB of RAM to run best.

How do I know if I have DDR2 RAM?

If your computer is from a name-brand company like Dell, Apple, or Sony, you can figure out the exact type of RAM your computer is using by searching for your computer’s model number at Silicon Mountain’s Memory Matchmaker. (Note: You don’t have to buy memory from Silicon Mountain to use this service) DDR2 debuted in 2003, and quickly became the dominant memory type by 2005 due to increased support by chipset manufacturers like Intel. Therefore, if you bought a laptop or desktop in 2005 or beyond, you are most likely using DDR2 memory. And just to reiterate, if you are buying a new computer you are most certainly using DDR2.

Where do I buy cheap DDR2 memory?

First off, I don’t recommend buying memory from any retail store. If you still hesitate to buy things online, I highly recommend getting over that fear unless you like paying twice as much at retail. Honestly folks, buying stuff online is infinitely safer than handing out your credit card info to delivery or catalogue people over the phone.

Among online stores, I recommend looking for RAM at Newegg and ZipZoomFly. Both are excellent sources of computer hardware as well as other items. I have a particular affinity for Newegg–chiefly because I’ve been a loyal customer since 2000.

Looking for RAM can be somewhat confusing, which is why I’ll recommend once again using Silicon Mountain’s service for determining exactly what sort of DDR2 RAM you need. Pay special attention to type of DDR2 memory it lists. For example, you may see something like “667MHz (PC2-5300)”. This refers to a specific speed that the memory is rated for. It’s best to stick with what the Silicon Mountain service recommends to you for compatibility reasons. This is especially important for Apple computers.

Whenever purchasing things from internet stores be sure to take close look at their return policies should anything go wrong. Pay close attention to restocking fees and return policies. I’ll tell you this though, I’ve had many a good experience with Newegg’s customer services whenever a piece of equipment malfunctioned, and I can only assume their services has grown stronger since I started using them.

How do I install RAM?

If you have a desktop, it’s simply a matter of opening your case and looking for the currently installed RAM modules on your motherboard. A great guide for replacing RAM on your desktop, complete with pictures, can be found here. You can also find instructions in the “support” section of your computer manufacturer’s website.

For laptops, things get a bit trickier because the RAM modules are accessed differently for every laptop. In this case, your best bet is to search the manufacturer’s website for clear directions on how to upgrade the RAM.

What if I don’t have DDR2?

If you bought your computer in 2004 or before, then you’re most likely running the predecessor of DDR2, which was simply called DDR. Prices have fallen a bit for DDR memory, but sadly it looks like the ubiquity of DDR2 led to its cheaper prices today. There is a glut of DDR2 in the market today, and the same simply isn’t true for DDR RAM.

Why It’s A Perfect Time to Upgrade Your RAM If You Have DDR2

Similar Posts: