I find this pretty cool. Paul Thurrott over at the Super Site for Windows has finally come out with something he's been hinting at for a few weeks. Windows 7 Professional and Ultimate versions will have "XP Mode". This is basically an integrated virtual machine running Windows XP. No virtual desktop needs to be run, all the XP applications will be able to run alongside none XP Mode applications. This is a good move I think. According to Microsoft, this means that Windows 7 will be able to run virtually any XP compatible software.
I'm sure they're doing this for business. XP was around so long that business became entrenched with it. They have applications that work on XP, but maybe not on Vista. XP Mode seems to solve that problem without requiring IT staff to manually configure a virtual machine.
You can read a full workup and see some screens over at the Super Site.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Thursday, April 23, 2009
A quick thought about twitter.
So there's all this stuff about business models, right? No one knows how twitter is supposed to make money. Thus far it hasn't mattered. Everyone with cash to throw around is anxious to throw money at twitter. At some point they're going to have to make money though. But how? Ads? I hope not.
I was tweeting the other day and for some reason, I kept bumping up against the API limit. For the uninitiated, the API limit is basically the maximum number of requests an account can make to the twitter servers from a third-party client in an hour. So if you're using Tweetdeck to tweet, you can only ping the twitter servers 100 times per hour. Searches, refreshing your stream of tweets, sending tweets... everything. The requests are account specific, so using another app won't help.
That's why you see a lot of copmany reps and other heavy users using the web interface a lot. The web interface is not great. So here's my proposal. Offer the ability to pay for access to a higher API limit. I have not looked into this. Maybe they already do this in some capacity. If not, they should.
The word 'tweet' has lost all meaning to me now...
I was tweeting the other day and for some reason, I kept bumping up against the API limit. For the uninitiated, the API limit is basically the maximum number of requests an account can make to the twitter servers from a third-party client in an hour. So if you're using Tweetdeck to tweet, you can only ping the twitter servers 100 times per hour. Searches, refreshing your stream of tweets, sending tweets... everything. The requests are account specific, so using another app won't help.
That's why you see a lot of copmany reps and other heavy users using the web interface a lot. The web interface is not great. So here's my proposal. Offer the ability to pay for access to a higher API limit. I have not looked into this. Maybe they already do this in some capacity. If not, they should.
The word 'tweet' has lost all meaning to me now...
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Why is Dell failing?
Okay, maybe not failing, but things aren't looking very rosy. Quarterly sales figures for PCs came out recently, and there was a bit of a shocker. Dell, who had been the top PC seller for a number of years, has lost the top spot to HP. They've basically lost about 15% of their market share. The real question here is, do they deserve it? Well, maybe. Dell has made some mistakes in the last few years. Don't get me wrong, every time I use a Dell computer, I really like it. They make solid products. But there's always the possibility that things could go wrong. If you've ever had to deal with Dell customer support, you can see why they're going down.
I remember back in the day, when Dell was a really great company to work with. That's what set them apart. As the demand for PCs has increased, the prices have been pushed down. The market has largely become a race to the bottom. So in a way, we're all to blame for this. How does Dell make up for the price cuts? Apparently in the customer service department.
Barely a week goes by when The Consumerist doesn't have a horror story about Dell's poor customer service. I had a Dell a few years back as a second PC, and my experience was... not stellar. They have a serious problem with their image. Consumers often don't realize how much those calls to Dell cost them. If you have to call more than a few times, Dell has effectively lost money on the transaction. So where does Dell go from there? They get cheaper representatives. That's why when you call Dell, you get routed to India. I'm sure there are plenty of tech savvy people in India. But they don't work for Dell.
Above: The perils of tech support
I feel like this strategy has backfired. I really have to wonder how much they are really saving. Even paying someone a fraction of what you would pay in the US, is it still saving that much? If you call with a simple problem, but the rep on the phone is poorly trained and just follows a script, it's likely to take much longer to fix. Maybe it isn't even fixed. Maybe you get transferred around. Maybe you accidentally get cut off and you have to start all over. Maybe when all is said and done, Dell would have saved money having a well trained individual answering the phone. I have my fingers crossed Dell, I actually like your computers.
Oh, and get rid of those weird mouse buttons on the Mini 10. Seriously.
I remember back in the day, when Dell was a really great company to work with. That's what set them apart. As the demand for PCs has increased, the prices have been pushed down. The market has largely become a race to the bottom. So in a way, we're all to blame for this. How does Dell make up for the price cuts? Apparently in the customer service department.
Barely a week goes by when The Consumerist doesn't have a horror story about Dell's poor customer service. I had a Dell a few years back as a second PC, and my experience was... not stellar. They have a serious problem with their image. Consumers often don't realize how much those calls to Dell cost them. If you have to call more than a few times, Dell has effectively lost money on the transaction. So where does Dell go from there? They get cheaper representatives. That's why when you call Dell, you get routed to India. I'm sure there are plenty of tech savvy people in India. But they don't work for Dell.
Above: The perils of tech support
I feel like this strategy has backfired. I really have to wonder how much they are really saving. Even paying someone a fraction of what you would pay in the US, is it still saving that much? If you call with a simple problem, but the rep on the phone is poorly trained and just follows a script, it's likely to take much longer to fix. Maybe it isn't even fixed. Maybe you get transferred around. Maybe you accidentally get cut off and you have to start all over. Maybe when all is said and done, Dell would have saved money having a well trained individual answering the phone. I have my fingers crossed Dell, I actually like your computers.
Oh, and get rid of those weird mouse buttons on the Mini 10. Seriously.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Why download caps suck.
It's been said before, but not by me in such a formal way as a blog post. Capping internet traffic on residential customers is a terrible idea. End of story. If you're a light user, I can see why you'd neglect this issue. What does it matter to you if the guy down the block can't download all his torrents? Screw that guy, yeah? That's fine for now. But if you get behind this course of action, you're Pigeonholing yourself for two reasons.
Firstly, you are probably expecting that if some users pay more, you pay less. That would only make sense. But it's not likely to go down like that. ISPs don't make a lot of money being a dumb pipe for bits. No, it's the premium services you see in all in-one-providers like Comcast. High internet usage is just something else they want to monetize. It isn't about giving you a better experience, it's about how to cash in. The argument is that higher usage is forcing more upgrades. But where are they? Why am I still getting my internet through copper wires coming into my house? Where's the fiber? Recently, The New York Times wrote about how the largest ISP in Japan upgraded customers to 100Mb/s internet. In case you're wondering, the average speed in the US is 6.2Mb/s. How much did it cost for the Japanese upgrade? About $20 per home. Now take another look at your bill and decide if they should be charging you more for your measly 6 megabits.
Above: Your possible future
The second reason you're screwing yourself by not objecting to this bunk, is that the future of entertainment is online. Already we see this starting with the likes of Hulu and the new Youtube "Shows" section. I will wager that most people are smart enough to work Hulu. But how many of them can reliably monitor their bandwidth? How many even know the difference between bits and bytes? It's a great opportunity for ISPs to nickle and dime their way to a big payday.
As technology changes, we'll all want more bandwidth. If we let these companies start doing this now, it won't stop. It will become part of the business model, and we won't be able to go back. Right now, streaming video is a fairly low bitrate. In the future, however, we will expect HD streaming to be more common. A 1080p video stream uses about 1.25MB/second. That works out to about 4.4GB per hour of content. If you have a 40GB cap like Time Warner was trying to pull, you could watch a little over 9 hours of content per MONTH. That's if you do nothing else. This is where things are headed content-wise. Those that have bundled cable packages especially are fighting tooth and nail against it.
If we give our tacit approval to this now, they won't stop. We already have to complain to get faster speeds, do we really want to have to fight on another front to keep our caps high enough that we can enjoy internet innovation? Your call.
Firstly, you are probably expecting that if some users pay more, you pay less. That would only make sense. But it's not likely to go down like that. ISPs don't make a lot of money being a dumb pipe for bits. No, it's the premium services you see in all in-one-providers like Comcast. High internet usage is just something else they want to monetize. It isn't about giving you a better experience, it's about how to cash in. The argument is that higher usage is forcing more upgrades. But where are they? Why am I still getting my internet through copper wires coming into my house? Where's the fiber? Recently, The New York Times wrote about how the largest ISP in Japan upgraded customers to 100Mb/s internet. In case you're wondering, the average speed in the US is 6.2Mb/s. How much did it cost for the Japanese upgrade? About $20 per home. Now take another look at your bill and decide if they should be charging you more for your measly 6 megabits.
Above: Your possible future
The second reason you're screwing yourself by not objecting to this bunk, is that the future of entertainment is online. Already we see this starting with the likes of Hulu and the new Youtube "Shows" section. I will wager that most people are smart enough to work Hulu. But how many of them can reliably monitor their bandwidth? How many even know the difference between bits and bytes? It's a great opportunity for ISPs to nickle and dime their way to a big payday.
As technology changes, we'll all want more bandwidth. If we let these companies start doing this now, it won't stop. It will become part of the business model, and we won't be able to go back. Right now, streaming video is a fairly low bitrate. In the future, however, we will expect HD streaming to be more common. A 1080p video stream uses about 1.25MB/second. That works out to about 4.4GB per hour of content. If you have a 40GB cap like Time Warner was trying to pull, you could watch a little over 9 hours of content per MONTH. That's if you do nothing else. This is where things are headed content-wise. Those that have bundled cable packages especially are fighting tooth and nail against it.
If we give our tacit approval to this now, they won't stop. We already have to complain to get faster speeds, do we really want to have to fight on another front to keep our caps high enough that we can enjoy internet innovation? Your call.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Not just a novelty anymore
I'm going to gush about my iphone a little. So if you don't care about the iphone, just move on. I find myself playing a lot more games on it. At first, it just seemed like a novelty. You've got this neat phone with all sorts of neat apps, and it plays games... sort of. A lot of them were just ported from existing flash games. There is scarcely a bigger slap in the face than buying a game, and seeing that you could have played it online for free. Unless the format brings something new with the capabilities of the iphone, it ends up a bit of a waste.
Now, though? Now there are a multitude of really interesting games. Things designed specifically for the iphone. The multitouch screen and accelerometer have really been taken advanage of by developers. A lot of them place controls like two analog sticks on the screen. It actually works amazingly well. Driving and flying games often use the accelerometer. And goddammit Apple, you make it so easy to blow money. Oh what's that Apple? You'll save my credit card info and allow me to just click a button and buy all these fun $2 apps? Neat! How much could I blow on $2 apps?
Turns out a lot.
But the some of these games have really grabbed me. I just spent an hour playing a game called "The Void". It's a totally passable space shooter that uses the accelerometer for manuvering. It feel like using a handheld console... oh and did you know the iphone is a phone too? Yeah, I know... it's easy to forget sometimes (especially those times that you're madly tilting it and tapping at the screen to kill something or another). I hearby decree that the iphone is a gmae console. No, I don't have the authority to decree things like that, but it's true.
Now, though? Now there are a multitude of really interesting games. Things designed specifically for the iphone. The multitouch screen and accelerometer have really been taken advanage of by developers. A lot of them place controls like two analog sticks on the screen. It actually works amazingly well. Driving and flying games often use the accelerometer. And goddammit Apple, you make it so easy to blow money. Oh what's that Apple? You'll save my credit card info and allow me to just click a button and buy all these fun $2 apps? Neat! How much could I blow on $2 apps?
Turns out a lot.
But the some of these games have really grabbed me. I just spent an hour playing a game called "The Void". It's a totally passable space shooter that uses the accelerometer for manuvering. It feel like using a handheld console... oh and did you know the iphone is a phone too? Yeah, I know... it's easy to forget sometimes (especially those times that you're madly tilting it and tapping at the screen to kill something or another). I hearby decree that the iphone is a gmae console. No, I don't have the authority to decree things like that, but it's true.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Snoodio gone from the app store?
It appears that as of 10PM-ish Central time, Snoodio is no longer available from the Apple App store. Snoodio is an iPhone puzzle game based on Snood. The website is also gone. It appears to just be a squatting site. What happened? If I had to guess, I'd say there was some problem with licensing. Perhaps the Snoodio people didn't have the permission of whoever owns Snood. Maybe it will just come back... we'll see.
Still developing...
11:00PM: I just noticed that the @snoodio account on twitter is "suspended". That's the word tweetie used, don't know if that's actually the case.
11:15PM: Yeah, I don't have anything better to do. It looks like the people from Snood (the original) have been tweeting/facebooking about making an iPhone app. Coincidence? I think not.
Still developing...
11:00PM: I just noticed that the @snoodio account on twitter is "suspended". That's the word tweetie used, don't know if that's actually the case.
11:15PM: Yeah, I don't have anything better to do. It looks like the people from Snood (the original) have been tweeting/facebooking about making an iPhone app. Coincidence? I think not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
