The Professor's Notes

For Episode 52 we had a special event–Tony was in PA, so we recorded our first episode together.  I drove up to University Park, dragging the equipment with me, and Tony and I sat down with my brother in front of a “live audience” and talked tech.

Sadly, one of the problems with moving the equipment around, and doing something for “the first time” is that I make “first time mistakes” and this was no different.  I tried to use the Zoom H4 recorder, but ran out of room.  Luckily we caught it early, but sadly you will hear the difference.

Let us know what you think of the podcast, though, and please, share it with your friends!

==================

Live From Penn State

Click Here to listen to Real Tech 52

Click here to subscribe via iTunes

Boxing Great Mayweather arrested for stealing iphone:
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/news/story?id=5554683

WINDOWS TIP: Spread a Windows desktop image across two monitors:

• Follow these steps in to display a large image across multiple monitors:
• Right click on the background and select Personalization.
• Click on Desktop Background
• Select a background image that is at least as wide as the combined resolution of both of your monitors. For Example, I have two 19â€� monitors that have a resolution of 1280×1024. I need an image of 2560×1024 or greater so that it can be displayed across both monitors.
• Next, this is the step that most users would never even think about trying: Select the Tile picture positioning option as shown below. This is the only option that will display your background image across multiple monitors.

GOOGLE VOICE AND SKYPE Read the rest of this entry »

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

According to various sources (my favorite being MacRumors for this story) Apple has reversed their previous (non) decision to dis-allow any Google Voice apps on the iPhone. The question is: is it too late?

I was a generally happy iPhone user when I first got my 3G. I was also a very happy Google Voice user (still am) and was quick to install the Google Voice apps when they arrived. I became rather reliant on the app, since the Google Voice number is the only one I give out. Then the app disappeared. I was not happy.

So I joined the ranks of people who “jailbroke” their phones. I only jailbroke when I had a need–and for me that need was Google Voice access. I then found the use of settting up a 3G wifi hotspot using the MyWi app.

Of course, as I mentioned in my previous post, I recently switched over to the Android OS and the Samsung Captivate and again, part of the move was the tight integration with the Google Voice service. There are many other useful applications that make the Android attractive to me, but certainly the Google Voice app was a significant draw.

I am glad to see that Apple is letting Google Voice back in, but I am not sure that it will mean much any more. Will it be enough to bring people back into the fold? Will they reconsider switching to the Android, because Apple is being (potentially) more open, or has Apple lost some people–perhaps permanently?

As reporters say when they have nothing else to say…. “Only time will tell…”

My first thought when reading the headline “Google Maps cars pull some user data” was “*YAWN.* Another story about ‘do no evil’ Google being caught accidently being evil.”

It at first seemed a rehash of the old story.  As Google’s street mapping cars drive by the apparently record your WIFI address and map it to the GEOLOC (GPS) coordinates to enhance navigation. ¹  But then the story got, well.. interesting.

It turns out that they’ve also been collecting and storing data from those unsecured hotspots.  Anything that was being transmitted during the time those cars were driving by may have been picked up by Google’s software and stored.²

So, as if to prove to people that they should be encrypting their wifi networks, the Google car has been capturing the actual DATA being transmitted.  Now keep in mind, this isn’t just the data that is being sent out over the internet. Oh, no.  This is everything you are doing over your wifi network.

Saving homework to a network drive?

GOT IT.

Moving pictures or music from one computer to another?

GOT IT.

Updating your business’ financial spreadsheets on the network drive?

GOT IT.

But we shouldn’t worry, because Google doesn’t want to do evil, and so they are doing everything they need to do.  They will make adjustments to their software to stop “eavesdropping” on your digital “in home” conversations.  And then, at the end of the article, they tell us this:

Google says it will work with local authorities to show what information was collected and make sure it is disposed of properly.

Yup–have no fear.  Whatever information they have “accidentally” collected will be given to the local authorities to dispose of “properly.”

Honestly, I am more concerned about my financials getting handed around than I am anything else, but does this strike anyone else as… well…. odd?  And remember, you don’t have to be doing something “illegal” to have information that could be embarrassing or personally destructive if  released.  ^{3   4}

Usually the local authorities need a warrant to tap into your phone and data lines.  They certainly need a warrant before they can go into your homes. (Just ask Jason Chen) but what happens if someone “just happens to give them information?”  Can that information be used?  I mean, it essentially has the same weight as “we received a tip from a citizen that…”

Should we be worried?  What are your thoughts?  Big Brother, or a “Tempest in a Teapot?” ⁵

We saw Google tell the story of romance through searches during the Super Bowl (It wasn’t a new ad then, but it was the first time many had seen it.)

Google has now made storytelling through searches available for the masses!  I decided to throw together a VERY quick story, about the marriage of Apple, Best Buy and the iPad.  There is very little control over the story, in that it only shows search results, so through trial and error you may be able to come up with the PERFECT story.

In fact, some have done AMAZING work (go see the examples for the Winter Games for instance).  Try it.  Let me know what YOU like.

I caught in Twitter today a “retweet” from @MacsFuture where they said that the Nexus 1 isn’t selling well. There was a link to the full comment on posterous, where the author writes:

I wanted to tackle this for a minute.¹  I would have to agree that the NEXUS is not selling as well as, well, most other smart phones on the market right now, but on the other hand let’s balance the assessment by pointing out a couple things contained in the short post above.

1.  The forecast anticipates selling 1 million units by the end of 2010.   This is actually quite a  significant figure for a phone that really only works best (for now) with T-Mobile.

2.  The Nexus is only “sold directly by Google.”  In fact, let’s be more pointed with this: it’s only sold by Google, through an online purchase.  Imagine if the only way to get an iPhone was through the Apple Store site.  Would they still have sold millions? Yes, undoubtedly, but one cannot discount the tremendous boost Apple received by having their products in the hands of thousands of people nationwide, simultaneously.  Not to mention the tremendous press coverage of the “long lines waiting to get their hands on their first iPhone” that we saw in every news media market.

Now, a million units sold in 1 year is relatively trivial compared to the numbers of even the iPhone 1st generation phone.  That said, consider the deck that Google has elected to stack against itself.

T-Mobile is a good and worthy network, so I am told.  But more often than not, people talk about it as if it is the little sibling of the  ”big 3″ when people talk about their cell-carriers.  I think I can count on one hand (without resorting to binary)  the number of friends and colleagues that use T-Mobile.  Selling a million units for a phone that is, out of the box, tied to a company with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-Mobile_USA is “not too shabby.”  (This compares right now with AT&T having approximately 85 million wireless customers.)  Given the large numbers of people who are locked in to their existing contracts, I don’t see many people switching carriers, especially since they are not afforded the opportunity to “try before they buy.”  (See next point)

Additionally, the decision by Google to only sell the Nexus online, through their website, has to hamstring their sales.  I may like tech, but when it comes to dropping $500 or more on a phone (and/or getting a long term contract) I want to be able to touch it first, see how it feels and responds in my hands, and feel like I was an informed consumer when  I make  my decision.  I suspect I am not alone.  More than once I have driven past our local T-Mobile store thinking that, if only they had a Nexus in the store, I would stop and at least test the waters.  I suspect that, if I could go in to a T-Mobile and not only play with the phone a bit, but talk with them about the affordability of switching from AT&T to T-Mobile, I would make the switch.  And again, I suspect I am not alone.

Finally, early reports of lack-luster customer support by Google has most likely scared off a number of would-be consumers.  Take away the store front/salesperson access, and market your phone on a network that would require me to switch carriers, and I am going to want, nay expect, a rather significant online and “on phone” support structure.   Unfortunately, Google has grown a culture based around offering “free” and “Beta” services.  Expectations of support for “free” services are far lower than expectations when one spends a significant amount of cash.

And make no mistake–$500 is significant.

In the final (as of today) analysis, I would say that 1 million units sold is actually a remarkable number given that Google has left the confines of their “core competency” (which I will describe as creating free and innovative software-based experiences) and ventured in to the world of offering “for sale” hardware products.²  Additionally, they seem to be wanting to “play by the rules” of traditional retailing instead of breaking new ground in the cellphone industry (as was speculated prior to the offering of the Nexus).

What does the future really hold for the Nexus line?  It is now a waiting game, I suppose.  Imagine Google addressing even 1 of the issues above. An expansion to another network (such as a Verizon or AT&T) or even the opening of sales at T-Mobile stores could make a significant difference for the phone.  Or, perhaps they utimately will rewrite the rules for cell-phones, offering free phones to those that actively use Google services, extending the Ad Revenue model to a whole new domain.

Considering the mis-steps one can only conclude that the Nexus succeeds, despite itself.

The attentive reader of Kindle News knows that the Kindle (much like the Apple Mac) seems to imply hardware, or software, or both.  By this I mean we first heard about the Kindle as the digital ebook reader now known as the Kindle 1 (and then the Kindle 2 and Kindle DX)  Then Amazon announced the Kindle app for the iPhone, separating the Kindle reading experience from the Kindle hardware device.  That was recently followed by the release of the Kindle reader software for Windows PCs.  A Mac version is coming soon.

Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, said essentially that the reading of Kindle books, and the hardware that we know as the Kindle are separate businesses.  In that article Bezos specifically described the competitive environment inside the Kindle world:

The device team has the job of making the most remarkable purpose-built reading device in the world,” Mr. Bezos said. “We are going to give the device team competition. We will make Kindle books, at the same $9.99 price points, available on the iPhone, and other mobile devices and other computing devices.

Jeff Bezos saw the need to create a competitive environment inside Amazon for the Kindle device design team.  As we all know, there are now more outside competitors, with the Barnes and Noble Nook making a strong run towards toppling the Kindle as the preferred eReader.  Many have called it “Kindle killing,” or a Kindle incinerator (cute play on words there) and suggest Nook will “eat Kindle’s lunch.”  All strong words, and so far most of the reviews seem to indicate the Nook lives up to the hype.

One interesting feature of the Nook is that it runs on the Google Android platform.  So what, you might ask?  Good question. Read the rest of this entry »

A few posts back I wrote that Google Voice won’t “Kill Skype” because unlike Skype, Google Voice isn’t what we all know and love as a VOIP, or Voice over Internet Protocol, system. My argument really centered around the customer experience of the tool.

Well, TUAW and Apple apparently agree:

Apple goes on to agree with AT&T that the carrier did not engage on any level regarding the GV apps.

Question 4. Please explain any differences between the Google Voice iPhone application and any Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) applications that Apple has approved for the iPhone. Are any of the approved VoIP applications allowed to operate on AT&T’s 3G network?

Apple does not know if there is a VoIP element in the way the Google Voice application routes calls and messages, and whether VoIP technology is used over the 3G network by the application. Apple has approved numerous standard VoIP applications (such as Skype, Nimbuzz and iCall) for use over WiFi, but not over AT&T’s 3G network.

As we noted in some of our original coverage of the GV controversy, Google Voice is not a VoIP service in the same way that Skype or Gizmo are, since it continues to use the cell network for voice connectivity to the device. Apple’s response to the FCC inquiry shows that they are on the same page.

So there you have it.

Simply put:  They aren’t the same thing!

I am reminded of the old BASF motto “They don’t make the things we use, they make the things we use better.”  That fits Google Voice to a “T.”

I have read over the past few months many articles warning that Skype (and even the cell phone) is doomed, and that Google Voice will replace it.  Most (like How Google Voice can kill Skype ) simply miss the point.  Google Voice is not a phone service.  It is not VOIP.  Google Voice connects existing phone numbers through a Universal number.  But it does not actually make the call for you through the internet.

Skype, as a VOIP (or Voice Over Internet Protocol) actually makes the call through the internet.  I use a computer (which may be  a desktop, a notebook/netbook, or even a cell phone that has WiFi) to make the call.  And yes, Skype lets me receive calls by allowing me to “purchase” a SkypeIn number, and allows me through SkypeOut to call real numbers.  But it is still VOIP.  I am calling from a computer, using the internet to make the call.

Google Voice doesn’t do that (although Google Talk might someday fill that gap).  Google Voice lets me route calls to and from my existing phones using my existing service providers.  Therefore, I can send an receive calls using my cell phone and AT&T, my work phone through Verizon, my home phone (again, Verizon) and yes, even my “SkypeIn” phone number.  But it, in and of itself, isn’t providing the call.

So I ask you–why can’t these “techy people” seem to figure this out?

NB:  Google has added voice and video chat to gMail, which does target Skype.  And because I can can send and receive SMS through a web interface, I can step away from certain aspects of my cellphone (at the loss of portability).  But at it’s heart Google Voice is still more of a turbo charging kit for your phone use than a replacement.

Flash » Epic 2015

Care to know what the future holds, for news agencies, google, Amazon, and Microsoft? This is an interesting look into the future of media convergence, done in documentary style. Of note is that it must have been created in 2004 since the timelines (predictions) begin diverging in 2005.

I particularly like the fact that this actually has Google Ads running at the bottom–real ads, I believe!