The European Parliament today overwhelmingly voted in favor of a resolution compelling participants in multi-national negotiations over the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) to report on the status and substance of those negotiations, first to Parliament and eventually to the general public. This after a groundswell of public concern arose in the wake of documents purporting to be official ACTA material, the latest leaked by Wired last November (PDF available here from Wired), spoke of US negotiators' requests to include terms in the final Agreement that would force Internet service providers to police the content trafficked over their pipelines, or else face penalties.

A statement issued from Parliament this afternoon records the final vote as 633-13-16 in favor of the resolution, the motion for which (DOC available here) was drafted just yesterday on behalf of six of the continent's political parties and alliances, including Greens/EFA. That motion referred to the leaked documents by name, effectively confirming their legitimacy.

The motion warned that those documents referred to the institution of measures among ACTA members, including the EU, of criminal penalties for those accused of violating, or assisting in the violation of, intellectual property rights. The leaked Wired document, dated August 30, 2009, entitled simply "ACTA negotiations," indicated that US negotiators were not in a position to discuss even among other trade negotiators the substance of consultations with "a number of private stakeholders (bound to strict confidentiality clauses)" -- a group which presumably includes publishing and recording associations.

Rather than provide colleagues with written documents, the August 30 document stated, US representatives were free to give an oral summary of their requested proposal, which would be an abbreviated version of the existing US-Korea Free Trade Agreement. Clauses of the ACTA as US representatives proposed would narrow the legal definition of "safe harbor" as it pertains to ISPs, which today are protected from liability for IP violations under laws recognized as high up the chain as the Supreme Court. The ACTA, as discussed at the time, would only provide safe harbor to ISPs that instituted policies and installed technologies to deter IP violations, including the illicit trading of unauthorized files.

Later clauses would clearly classify the stripping of rights management provisions from any software as an IP violation, punishable with both civil and criminal penalties. And in a telling bit of legalese whose economy of phraseology speaks volumes as to its intent, the leaked August 30 document included this provision: "'Fair use' will not be circumscribed."

Last year, in an effort to diffuse growing public criticism (before legislators caught wind of it), the Office of the US Trade Representative issued a brief (PDF available here) discussing what it said could be discussed in public about ACTA negotiations. As to the matter of publicly revealing little things about, say, overriding the Supreme Court, the Office diplomatically gave credence to objections, while at the same time attempting to place them in a little box over to the side somewhere.

"A variety of groups have shown their interest in getting more information on the substance of the negotiations and have requested that the draft text be disclosed," the USTR document reads, referring indirectly to groups including the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Public Knowledge. "However, it is accepted practice during trade negotiations among sovereign states to not share negotiating texts with the public at large, particularly at earlier stages of the negotiation. This allows delegations to exchange views in confidence facilitating the negotiation and compromise that are necessary in order to reach agreement on complex issues. At this point in time, ACTA delegations are still discussing various proposals for the different elements that may ultimately be included in the agreement. A comprehensive set of proposals for the text of the agreement does not yet exist."

The USTR paper went on to mention the need to empower judges to impose stricter penalties for IP violations, though by its authors' own admission, it leaves a gaping hole with respect to the broadening of the definition of what an IP violation is. Trade negotiations throughout history have been, by definition, confidential, and their secrecy has been mutually observed for centuries. However, the EP took issue today with the whole notion not only that certain elements of the negotiation should be kept secret from lawmakers, but that negotiators should continue -- as the leaked August 30 document and the USTR brief indicate -- to keep certain elements secret from themselves.

According to this morning's EP statement, the resolution as adopted takes a strong stand specifically against the adoption of "three strikes" rules against IP violators, such as those being tested now in France; and also against the enablement, perhaps through deliberate imprecision (see "circumscribed"), of restrictions on access to media. Parliament now says the final ACTA "should not affect global access to legitimate, affordable and safe medicinal products, including innovative and generic products," according to the resolution.

The USTR brief also refers to negotiations for a clause that would empower customs agents patrolling borders to seize any material believed to infringe upon intellectual property. Without being specific, "any material" could include a hard disk drive...or the computer or MP3 player containing a hard disk drive.

The EP resolution took a stand against that as well, calling upon trade negotiators to provide "full clarification of any clauses that would allow for warrantless searches and confiscation of information storage devices such as laptops, cell phones, and MP3 players by border and customs authorities."

The problem with today's resolution is that it may not be legally binding. While it takes a very public stand, trade negotiators may very well continue to argue that it's their duty to continue to safeguard the intellectual property of the private stakeholders who developed that IP...to protect the IP of the private stakeholders. While the resolution reminds European representatives of their duty to uphold the terms of the Lisbon Treaty, which include keeping Parliament abreast of negotiations, that treaty was only fully enforced last December 1. Since the ACTA negotiations began earlier, participants could argue that they've been "grandfathered in," for reasons which, to borrow a phrase, may not be circumscribed.

Google Maps now generates bike routes

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Google Maps with bicycle directions

Different modes of travel often require different routes to be taken. If you're walking somewhere, for example, you're not likely to take a highway to get there, and you have the distinct advantage of being able to go through certain structures that cars cannot. The same goes for biking. When someone is planning to get somewhere by bike, they're going to demand different routes. This is why the Google Maps team today announced that it has added bicycling directions to Google Maps.

Shannon Guymon, product manager for Google Maps said, "We wanted to include as much bike trail data as possible, provide efficient routes, allow riders to customize their trip, make use of bike lanes, calculate rider-friendly routes that avoid big hills and customize the look of the map for cycling to encourage folks to hop on their bikes. So that's exactly what we've done."

Google has taken more than 12,000 miles of bike trail data from the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy's TrailLink.com database. The Washington, DC nonprofit has been collecting trail data since 2000, and has maps, pictures, descriptions, and listings for more than 30,000 miles of bike trails.

"The demand for trail maps and information has never been higher, especially as more people recognize biking as a viable, inexpensive and healthy alternative to driving," said Rails-to-Trails President Keith Laughlin today.

But simply having the data on hand is completely a different matter from the whole business of machine-suggested routes. Google had to incorporate trail data into its routing algorithm, include metropolitan areas with designated bike lanes, and include roads that have been recommended by other cyclists, all the while taking into consideration the business about certain roads. All that is just to determine the most biker-accommodating paths according to safety. There's also the whole issue of hills.

"Our biking directions are based on a physical model of the amount of power your body has to exert given the slope of the road you're biking on," said Google software engineer John Leen. "Assuming typical values for mass and for wind resistance, we compute the effort you'll require and the speed you'll achieve while going uphill. We take this speed into account when determining the time estimate for your journey, and we also try hard to avoid routes that will require an unreasonable degree of exertion." Likewise, the algorithm avoids routes that have too much downhill travel as well so the ride is balanced.

Today's launch of Google Maps for bikes is sort of the opposite of a development from last year, an Android app called My Tracks which targeted runners, hikers, and cyclists. Instead of suggesting routes, My Tracks collected live GPS statistics from the user's smartphone and mapped out total/moving time, (average) speed, distance, and elevation profile on Google Maps as the trips were being made.

Google Maps for bicycles is live right now.

Google unveils its cloud-based Apps Marketplace, wants 20% revenue share

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

Tuesday evening, during an event televised over YouTube called Google Campfire One, Google executives lifted the curtain on its cloud-based Apps Marketplace for PC-based applications, with the promise of opening its online store with 50 charter vendors later in the evening. The Marketplace is designed to feature applications that integrate with the company's existing Google Apps, Gmail, and other cloud-based services.

Google Vice President of Engineering Vic Gondotra told attendees at the company's headquarters that the company plans to utilize very simple terms of service. Think of a garden, but more with clearly marked paths as opposed to walls. Extending the concept of the Android Marketplace from handsets to computing devices, the company is inviting developers to build applications using its Studio tool, then deploy those apps by way of the Marketplace. Each developer is asked to pay a $100 sign-up fee, and then give Google a 20% revenue share for sales, at whatever price the developer charges. (We have not seen yet whether there will be a price cap.)

The front page of Google Apps Marketplace, as presented for the first time during a Google Campfire One presentation, March 9, 2010.

Google Vice President of Engineering Vic Gondotra, during a presentation of Google Apps Marketplace March 9, 2010. 11:10 pm EST March 9, 2010 · "The Google Apps Marketplace...[is] a great way to discover, to find, and install applications into your business. But not just any applications -- applications that are deeply integrated with Google Apps...that enable a single sign-on, that enable different kinds of cloud-based software to share data," explained Vice President of Engineering Vic Gondotra to the Campfire One attendees. "Applications that integrate with the navigation, integrate with the user interface of the tools that your employees already know and love and use every day."

The integration Gondotra spoke of will take place through a relatively simple XML-based manifest, the typical length of which is promised to be not very long. An actual Google Apps manifest (not the abbreviated version used in Google's slides) is pictured below.

A screenshot of a complete XML-based app manifest for enrollment in Google Apps Marketplace.

Each category in this manifest represents a point of integration with the Google Apps environment -- actually, with any online service that Google Apps is capable of reaching. Gmail is one of these places; tonight, the company's director of engineering, David Glaser, promised a theoretical level of integration with Gmail that would enable business apps developers to create Gmail plug-ins that would appear to match, or maybe rival, the functionality available in Microsoft Outlook.

Glaser demonstrated the creation of an app manifest, which would also contain the "pages" (actually resources identified with URLs) that link to Google Apps' various points of integration. Perhaps the one that will be most often used is single sign-on, which will enable the identity of the Google Apps user to be shared with that of the custom app. Through the OAuth-based authentication protocol Google will use, developers will be able to deploy databases for their cloud apps using their own clouds, if you will, and then let Google's authentication pass through to the developers' clouds to validate users and enable the granting of permissions.

David Glaser, Director of Engineering, Google, during a presentation of Google Apps Marketplace, March 9, 2010. Glaser outlined another point of connection: "If you've ever used Google Apps, you've noticed at the top left of the screen, right above your mail or your calendar, there's a nav bar. That means you're a click or two away from getting at any of the other apps in the Google Apps suite...Well, if you have an application, you probably want it to be a part of the same navigation model, part of the same nav bar, so your users are a click or two away from not only the built-in Google Apps, but also from your app. How do you do that? You put an entry in the manifest -- a few lines of XML, you tell us, 'Here's the string that I want to have show up in the menu, and here's the link that it should go to when somebody clicks on it.'"

Google Apps' online development studio for the creation of applications to be deployed in Google Apps Marketplace.

The keyword here again from Google is "simple," which is what will distinguish its cloud-based apps ecosystem from Microsoft Windows Azure in almost every respect. An app in Google's environment would appear to be leveraged on an existing Google App or service. As Glaser explained, a custom app will have its own home page, if you will; but as Gondotra explained, what makes the app usable in the first place is its connectivity with the existing hub that Google has in place. So the development studio for such apps (itself a Web application, pictured above running in Firefox on Google's favorite PC operating system, Windows XP) is specifically geared to generate this manifest and plug apps into the existing hub.

Intuit Online Payroll, one of the first brand-name apps to appear in Google Apps Marketplace.

That's not to say apps won't or can't stand alone on their own, or even pre-exist, as Gondotra told the audience: "We're not mandating that you have to build on a particular platform. You don't have to use App Engine, although we'd be delighted to see that. You may already have an existing app built on your own infrastructure, your own tools, your own hosting environment...It's very easy to integrate even that existing app into Google Apps."

The ability for apps to stand on their own was exemplified this evening by charter partner Intuit's first entry into the Marketplace. It showed an online payroll application for small business that enables office managers to keep track of employees' payrolls, using tools that are also integrated into Google Calendar. (It's hard not to notice that Google's app development platform runs on Firefox, while it prefers to run the apps themselves on Chrome.)

Among Google's list of 50 charter developers, we noted, was Zoho -- a company whose existing cloud-based apps had actually competed against Google Apps, while using many deployment resources actually created by Google.

The exact terms and conditions that apply to Google's developers' agreement -- a $100 one-time up-front fee to enroll per developer (not per app), and a 20% cut of the revenue -- are not known as of this evening. Vic Gondotra did say, however, that Google will enable online resellers to promote and sell apps from the Marketplace, with 20% of the cut from resold apps also going to Google and the rest to their developers.

"Remember, with that rev share, you not only get to reach the 25 million customers, but you also get to take advantage of over 1,000 resellers who are not only going to be able to resell Google Apps, but may, in fact, be able to drive business directly to you," stated Gondotra. He did not say whether this resale operation would actually take place as part of Google's existing advertising platform, which may be why the early number of resellers (one thousand) is so high.

A few years ago when Google premiered its online apps on a mostly free business model (with some subscription revenue attached for upper-level apps more recently), folks wondered how Google would turn this into a revenue center. Now we know the answer: The company wants to earn its cut not from its core apps, but from a substantial slice of your apps.

Samsung launches its eReader, connects with Barnes & Noble

By Jacqueline Emigh, Betanews

After showing a prototype of its first electronic reader at CES in January, Samsung on Tuesday officially rolled out the new device, spilling all the details about the final feature set while also unveiling a new partnership with Barnes & Noble.

The Samsung eReader, marketed in partnership with Barnes &amp; Noble.

Unlike other gadgets in the increasingly crowded field, the Samsung eReader lets people make notes in the margins of e-book pages, pointed out Vickie Cullen, a Samsung spokesperson, at a press event in New York City where the company launched a number of CE products including this device, 3D TVs, and a 3D Blu-ray player.

Users of Samsung's eReader can modify the electronic pages by underlining words, for example, and they can use built-in voice recording functionality to produce audio memos and annotations. It's also able to read text aloud, but only with electronic books that support text-to-speech (TTS) technology.

A reader can make notes in the margins through the use of a special electromagnetic resonance (EMR) stylus pen. In a demo at the event, we saw how you can easily make the brushstrokes wider or narrower or even turn the pen into an "eraser" by touching the tip of the pen to icons at the bottom of the screen.

The Samsung eReader, marketed in partnership with Barnes & Noble. The eReader comes in a slider form factor with a six-inch E-ink screen displaying at 600x800 resolution in eight shades of grey.

Cullen said that you can import drawings and photos in JPEG and BMP formats as well as other files downloaded from the Internet to a PC, using the eReader's mini-USB port. Other supported file formats include e-pub, PDF/a, and TXT.

Slated to ship this spring for $299. Samsung's new device offers 26 GB of internal memory, plus an external Micro SD slot capable of increasing storage by another 16 GB.

The product also comes with built-in speakers and Bluetooth technology for playing back music or TTS translation, she said.

Readers can use the gadget's built-in Wi-Fi, together with Samsung's proprietary EmoLink technology, for sharing content -- including notes jotted in e-book margins, for instance -- between two devices.

Samsung has also joined the growing list of e-reader makers now partnering with Barnes & Noble -- the arch rival of Amazon.com, the pioneer of the field. Through a new deal between Samsung and Barnes & Noble, users of Samsung's new eReader can use either a Wi-Fi or PC connection to browse, sample, and download content from B&N.

Get your glasses ready: Samsung soars into the third dimension

By Jacqueline Emigh, Betanews

At a press conference in New York City on Tuesday, Samsung unveiled new 3D products that include six HDTV series, a Shrek 3D movie, and a DVD player designed to handle 3D along with regular Blu-ray and standard DVD disks.

Samsung's initial 3D TV line-up -- which requires 3D glasses for viewing - ranges from the LED 7000/8000/9000 Series to the LCD 750 Series and the Plasma 7000/8000 Series.

Samsung also debuted the 3D-capable BD-C6900 Blu-ray player, a 3D-enabled release of Dreamworks' Monsters vs. Aliens along with the entire Shrek series, and a large set of Internet-downloadable applications for the 3D Blu-ray player and some of Samsung's 3D TVs.

Kicked off by an ad campaign broadcast during Sunday's Academy Awards show, the first two 3D TV models from Samsung -- the 46" and 55" editions of the LED C7000 -- are already available in stores, said Dave R. Das, director, Visual Display Marketing, in an interview with Betanews at the event.

So, too, are the first 12 apps for Samsung's 3D gear, with others slated for completion by the end of March, said Jason Han, senior manager, content partnership, CE Division.

The remaining 3D TVs -- and the 3D Blu-ray drive, priced at $399 -- are expected to roll out over the next few months.

Internet applications available for downloading to Samsung's new 2010 line of HDTVs.

The widget-enabled 3D apps will run not just with the new Blu-ray drive, but also the LED TVs, all of which are IP-capable. The first dozen apps include Rovi TV Listings, Yahoo, and streaming video movie apps from Netflix, Blockbuster, and Vudu, along with several games. One of the applications due out later this month is a Skype video conferencing app that will use a custom camera. The camera is slated to sit on top of a Samsung TV and to be sold by Skype.

Although all of the apps released in March will be offered free of charge, Samsung plans to start selling "premium" apps over this summer, Betanews was told.

A grid of Samsung 3D video displays showing a scene from a 3D Shrek movie.

Samsung dubbed the press conference "3D Wonder," and the name turned out to be apt for more reasons than one. Many of the journalists did marvel at the quality of the Samsung-supplied 3D experience, particularly during an airing at the event of a 3D Dreamworks' Shrek movie displayed on a huge "cube" of LCD panels.

Yet some also wondered aloud whether, during the current deep recession, all that many consumers will be willing to invest in the 3D ware, which Samsung is pricing at the rate of $150 for a pair of 3D glasses and about $1,599.99 to $6,999.99 for a 3D TV.

American cities fight for Google's attention

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

One month ago, Google put the word out that it was looking to build and test its own fiber-to-the-home networks in a couple of cities. The speeds would be up to 1 Gbps and the reach would initially be about 50,000 homes.

Immediately, hundreds of cities began making pitches to attract Google's attention, some earnest, some outlandish.

Topeka, Kansas unofficially renamed itself "Google" for the month and garnered a considerable amount of attention; Sarasota, Florida quickly followed suit and re-named its City Island "Google Island".

Duluth, Minnesota's mayor Don Ness jumped into a 35 degree Lake Superior as a dual-purpose media event for Google Fiber and the Special Olympics; and 1,000 Morgantown, West Virginia residents last week held up signs saying "We Want a Gig" at the WVU-Georgetown basketball game.

But the majority of the cities interested in getting Google Fiber haven't resorted to cheap publicity stunts, and are hoping that their answers to Google's Request for Information will be much more convincing.

"I think we're going to draw the line at silly stunts," Madison, Wisconsin alderman Mark Clear said today. City officials there are hosting a public meeting to gather ideas for their pitch and show the community's interest in the project.

Juneau, Alaska has made the case that its isolated, mountainous location will serve as an ideal testing ground since it is both environmentally challenging and populous.

Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley reminded us of Baltimore's historical significance as "that place from which our nation's railroads emanated, and the place that was the source of the first telegraph message ever sent."

Kalamazoo, Michigan is using health care as its wager. The Kalamazoo Gazette's Editorial board argues that its modern health care facilities and its major medical corporations Pfizer and Stryker could benefit greatly from the fiber network.

In just under three weeks, we will be able to see which approach worked. March 26 is the last day Google will accept submissions for its fiber optic trial, and it will announce which cities it has chosen shortly after.

Almost #3 now: Dell's decline is Acer's gain

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

Dell With the economic sinkhole of 2008-09 now a figment of many technology companies' past, most PC manufacturers are back on their regularly scheduled growth curve. Last month, Dell had indicated to investors that it was returning to that curve as well, reporting "product shipments...up at double-digit rates year-over-year" during its end-of-fiscal year 2010 earnings report.

According to iSuppli, which tracks worldwide PC unit shipments, that Dell claim -- which not a single analyst even questioned at the time, according to Seeking Alpha's transcript of Dell's February 18 earnings conference -- gives "plus or minus" a whole new meaning. The market analyst firm's statistics on full-year unit shipments, published today, show Dell's numbers declining by 9.946% during calendar year 2009. Dell's fiscal 2010 began in February 2009, so iSuppli's numbers cover most of that period plus January 2010 -- in a quarter where Dell actually recovered slightly.

Dell shipped just under 39 million PCs, which is beneath the psychological benchmark of 10 million units per quarter. In the last quarter, Acer topped Dell for the first time in quarterly units shipped; and this last quarter, put some distance between itself and Dell, gaining 1.5% of worldwide market share in the last quarter of 2009. Acer shipped 11.86 million PCs during that quarter -- almost 29% more units than for the previous year's final quarter -- and 38.48 million for the full year.

Estimates of PC unit shipments for calendar year 2009, based on figures supplied by iSuppli.

What's Acer's secret? According to the breakdown by iSuppli principal analyst Matthew Wilkins, Acer doesn't waste its time selling desktop PCs in markets that don't want them. As a result, four out of every five units Acer ships are notebook PCs, and it can concentrate on selling those notebooks in heavier volume in markets such as North America.

Dell's breakdown is a little fuzzier, with iSuppli only being able to ascertain that its mix of desktop PCs to notebook PCs has declined at a lesser rate than the rest of the industry. (Again, nobody asked.) Last February, Dell executives credited higher shipment rates in the storage systems segment (a non-consumer division) as contributing to the company's generally better revenue numbers. Perhaps that's the double-digit gain Dell was referring to. But the second quarter report credits the Mobility division with 31% of net revenue for fiscal year 2010, versus 25% for desktop PCs. Gross margin for Dell in its last fiscal year slipped to a minuscule 16.6%.

That wasn't supposed to happen: IE usage share steady since choice screen

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

The window of opportunity may be closing for the first test of government mandated fairness and equal choice among Web browsers, with neutral results. There are a number of studies recently that say computer users in general have a tendency to automatically distrust notices that pop up on their screen. More attention was paid to those studies since last March, after Microsoft's deployment of Internet Explorer 8 over Windows Update was followed by a general downtrend in IE usage, interrupted by a brief respite in early October, according to global tracking data from analytics vendor StatCounter.

If what Microsoft's security representatives have said is true -- that the key window for adoption of an update or patch usually comes a few days after Patch Tuesday -- then StatCounter's tracking data for IE usage in Europe could count as sweet revenge. Since Microsoft deployed its browser choice screen for European users, in compliance with European Commission directives, on March 1, StatCounter reports European usage share for all versions of Internet Explorer has stayed steady at about 46.6%, with negligible gains since the beginning of the month.

This while Mozilla Firefox continues an unusual decline of about two points of European usage share since the first of the year, and relative newcomer Google Chrome ticks up at about one point per month.

So far, Internet Explorer 6 usage remains rock solid at 6.37% as of yesterday, tied with Chrome 4 in usage share for Europe. This as the adoption rate of Firefox 3.6 among former users of version 3.5 has tapered off somewhat. Worldwide usage share of IE6 continues to decline at the almost invisible rate of a tenth of a point per week.

Source: StatCounter Global Stats - Browser Market Share

Thus far, there's no indication from StatCounter's charts that the browser screen has impacted the usage rate of any browser on the continent, one way or the other. The trends that had been in place, including the tapering off of Firefox 3.6 adoption, appear to be continuing.

Anyone looking for a technical reason for this lack of a trend may not be able to point to faulty algorithms anymore. In recent days, Microsoft implemented a fix to the randomization of browser choices on its browserchoice.eu Web site, in response to a discovery that was validated last week by IBM's Rob Weir, that the JavaScript function Math.random used by IE wasn't shuffling browsers' positions fairly. The revised code now clearly employs a random shuffling algorithm, which creates arrays of pointers that exchange places with one another like shuffling cards -- an alternative that Weir and others had suggested.

As Weir posted on Saturday, Microsoft's revised code is now about as fair as it gets, with each of the top five browsers getting 20% placement, plus or minus only a few thousandths of a point. As a suggestion for the future, Weir pointed out the irony of searching for proper programming methodologies using, ironically, Google Search.

"Several commenters mentioned that if you search Google for 'javascript random array sort,' the first link returned will be a JavaScript tutorial that has the same offending code as Microsoft's algorithm. This is not surprising," Weir wrote. "As I said in my original post, this is a well-known mistake. But it is no less a mistake. If you use Google Code Search for the query "0.5 - Math.random()" lang:javascript you will find 50 or so other instances of the faulty algorithm. So if anyone else is using this same algorithm, they should evaluate whether it is really sufficiently random for their needs. In some case, such as a children's game, it might be fine. But know that there are better and faster algorithms available that are not much more complicated to code."

Sony proves PS3 is still a movie machine with HD content from all major studios

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Sales of Sony's PlayStation 3 have lagged behind Nintendo's Wii and Microsoft's Xbox 360 for most of this generation, and the PSP and PSP Go now face a serious threat from Apple's iPhone OS-based handhelds. Despite these factors, though, Sony has managed to set up one of the strongest Web-based storefronts for digital content distribution to its consoles. Offering full downloadable games, add-ons, XMB customizations, game trailers, and HD Hollywood feature films and television episodes for rent or purchase, the PlayStation Network is an attractive and easily navigable repository for media on Sony game machines.

It's a shame that setting up and hosting online games for the PS3 isn't as simple as its store.

Today, Sony announced the "Movies" section of the PlayStation Network has finally been completed, and HD content from all six major US movie studios (20th Century Fox, Walt Disney Pictures, Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Universal Pictures, and Warner Bros.) is now available.

"PlayStation Network is the first and only service to deliver high definition home entertainment from all six major studios, directly to consumers for download," said Peter Dille, SCEA senior vice president of marketing and PlayStation Network.

Sony did not give a number today of how many titles are available from these studios, but instead listed 19 releases that hit the US PlayStation store in High Definition today.

The "completed" store will launch next in the UK, France, Germany, and Spain.

Samsung reveals just how expensive 3D in the home is going to be

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

At CES this year, every major consumer electronics company involved in the HDTV market had floorspace dedicated to 3D TVs. They were convinced that 3D in the home is ready for widespread adoption, and the popularity of James Cameron's Avatar would kickstart adoption.

Samsung today announced its full 2010 3D TV lineup, which shows just how expensive it's going to be to upgrade your home theater to the third dimension.

Samsung's 2010 3DTV and HDTV pricing chart

The 3D TV lineup includes the LED 7000/8000/9000 Series (starting at $1,999.99, about halfway down the chart), the LCD 750 Series, and the Plasma 7000/8000 Series. The 46" and 55" LED C7000 will be available this month, and the rest will roll out at different points during the spring.

But the TV is only one part of the whole setup. You will need at least a 3D-capable Blu-ray player, one pair of active shutter glasses for every viewer, and, of course, the 3D discs. Samsung will be selling its 3D Blu-ray player for $399.99, and its Blu-Ray home theater system for $899.99 this April.

With the immediate point of entry at $2,400, Samsung could at least throw in some stitches to close the wound to your bank account. So the company announced a promotion program where customers who buy a 3D TV and 3D Blu-ray player will get two pairs of active shutter glasses and a 3D Blu-ray copy of Monsters vs. Aliens for free.

Tomorrow, Panasonic is expected to unveil its 3D offerings for the year with a similar promotional tie-in with Best Buy.

Welcome back to the big leagues: Opera denies severity of 10.5 exploit

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

12:02 pm EST March 9, 2010 · A spokesperson for Opera Software provided Betanews this morning with a summary of a complete blog post on the alleged exploit of Opera 10.5, published moments ago:

"The original report about the Windows-only malformed Content-length header problem is not a security issue, but a variant of the issue, brought to our attention by Secunia, has a theoretical possibility of allowing arbitrary code to run. We have developed a fix for the problem, which is being tested, and are planning to release an update of Opera soon. Until then, if Opera crashes on an untrusted site, you should avoid visiting that site again."

11:52 am EST March 9, 2010 · Though Opera, like all Web browsers, has never been immune to exploits, the news of the first serious exploit to affect its new and groundbreaking version 10.5 now has the company's representatives taking time away from shoring up the final Mac version of 10.5, to respond to what security firm Secunia is calling a "highly critical" exploit in the new product.

Last Wednesday, purported PHP server-side exploit code for Opera appeared on a "gray-hat" Web site where such exploits are commonly found. The author's name is credited as Marcin Ressel -- who, contrary to blog reports, does not appear to be an engineer either with Secunia or Vupen Security (it could just be a made-up identity, for all anyone knows). In his code listing, Ressel left contact information for an e-mail address using the Polish .PL domain, along with a playlist of favorite music from a Polish streaming site.

In the comments section of the code, Ressel describes the exploit as, "Integer overflow leading to out of bounds array access R/W [read/write]." The overflow is apparently triggered by a maliciously malformed HTTP response header; specifically, the Content-Length property is replaced with a bunch of '9's.

An examination of the code indicates, by the author's own admission, it may not be very sophisticated. For example, the statement that generates the malformed header is capped with the comment, /*Generated by my own fuzzer*/ -- which could mean that he wrote a fuzzer, or that he happens to own an effective fuzzer. The code does appear to try to establish a stealth socket connection with the client, which the code presumes is Opera (it does test for operating system, but does not appear to test for browser brand).

So the question is whether the exploit code, after generating an exception, delivers a malicious payload to the Opera browser. In a statement last Friday, Opera Communications Director Tor Odland told the Norweigian tech news service Digi.no all of one sentence: that Opera had confirmed the exploit was not harmful. And in a follow-up statement this morning on Twitter, Opera engineer Haavard wrote, "Our security guys are working on proper public information on Secunia advisory 38820." This after having tweeted earlier that no one on Opera's development team has been able to actually deliver a malicious payload using the exploit.

The Secunia advisory, published last Thursday, states, "Successful exploitation may allow execution of arbitrary code." The keyword here could be "may," as opposed to "does" or "will."

Ressel's comments indicated that while the exploit affected Opera version 10.5 for sure, he felt confident that it probably affected version 10.1 or earlier. The Secunia advisory made the same claim, effectively that older versions were possibly impacted. And while Vupen's advisory claimed its team had confirmed only that 10.5 was vulnerable, the term "prior" was used under "Affected Products." It might, or may, or will be nice for someone to actually try that out and see.

Latest HTML5 working draft published despite claims of 'sabotage'

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

W3C accompanying graphic (300 px) Should the next version of HTML, the Web standard that embodies how pages are laid out and constructed, include explicit specifications for inline, 2D dynamic graphics? There's valid arguments on both sides. One side believes that the ability to plot charts and animations would have been part of the original HTML standard anyway, had the technology existed on the back end in the beginning; giving HTML 2D graphics now, they say, plugs a hole left open for too long. Another believes the HTML5 standard should simply specify an API for plug-ins, to let separate groups of engineers evolve a methodology for plotting graphics at their own pace, and on their own track.

From one angle, the debate appears as innocuous as this: Should graphics be considered within the scope of a markup language, or not? But any debate on the topic of Web standards development has never sustained continued viewing from one angle alone. From another angle entirely, one can't help but notice that the principal advocate of letting the so-called Canvas element be developed separately, is an engineer with Adobe, which has more than the average stake in the outcome of Web graphics development.

When the Adobe stakeholder appears to agree with the co-chair of the working group, who hails from Microsoft; and the author of the would-be Working Draft document has ties to Google, it's not long before someone from Opera Software, quite literally, cries "Sabotage!"

Last month, among members of the W3C's HTML5 Working Group, a dispute arose over whether the Working Group had the authority to declare the specifications for the Canvas element (not just the plug-in, but the component itself) part of HTML5. Adobe engineer Larry Masinter raised the point that he believed the decision had already been made to split Canvas 2D into its own First Public Working Draft (FPWD).

Indeed, there was evidence to back Masinter up on this point, as other W3C participants were either working under the belief that Canvas 2D was on its own track, or noting that a dispute on that issue had yet to be resolved. During a W3C presentation last month, long-time project leader Philippe Le Hégaret acknowledged that a specific difficulty remained before the Last Call Working Draft -- the next-to-last stage on the diagram he was showing the audience -- could be completed.

"If you take a specification like the HTML5 specification, it's still in the Working Draft status," reads Yahoo's official transcript of the presentation. "We still have several open issues opened against the document. In particular, several accessibility issues that need to be resolved before we can move the document to Last Call."

By "accessibility," Le Hégaret was using a keyword in the argument in favor of breaking Canvas out from HTML5: that letting a separate group handle it at its own speed, would make Canvas more accessible to its own developers.

In an interview published by the W3C just last Friday, Le Hégaret corresponded with HTML5 Working Group Co-chair Paul Cotton, who also manages Web Services Standards Strategy for Microsoft Canada. In an obviously leading question (like I've never asked a leading question myself), Le Hégaret asked Cotton to explain what HTML5 has evolved to become, in the broad sense. "I agree that many of us use the term 'HTML5' very loosely," began Cotton's response, obviously agreeing with someone in the room.

"First, I believe that most people use the term 'HTML5' to refer to the HTML5 specification currently being worked on by the HTML WG," he continued. "The HTML5 specification defines the syntax and the semantics of the elements and attributes in the HTML markup language and several of the APIs that are used to process HTML documents. Recently the HTML WG has started to break the HTML5 specification into more modular and separate Working Drafts -- e.g., HTML+RDFa, HTML Microdata, and HTML Canvas 2D Context. The HTML WG is also publishing two additional documents to aid users of HTML5: the HTML5 differences from HTML4 specification and HTML: The Markup Language which is aimed at developers that produce HTML5 output. Each of these additional Working Drafts are still part of 'HTML5' and are all on track to become separate but related W3C Recommendations or Working Group Notes. I believe that the content of these WDs taken together will define the part of 'HTML5' being worked on by the HTML WG."

That's how Microsoft's participant described the situation just last Friday. Last February 5, in the Working Group's public mailing list, Adobe's Masinter made it clear he believed Canvas 2D was being split into a separate Working Draft document, and that he disagreed with others' assessment that the WG's own director could somehow also include it concurrently within HTML5.

A diagram of the typical evolutionary process of a W3C Working Draft, from a February 2010 presentation by HTML5 Working Group member Philippe Le Hegaret.

A diagram of the typical evolutionary process of a W3C Working Draft, from a February 2010 presentation by HTML5 Working Group member Philippe Le Hégaret.

The following Monday, it appeared as though Le Hégaret sided with the gathering consensus that Canvas is essentially already part of the understood scope of the broader document. However, he did suggest a kind of intermediate solution: the document modularization concept. "The scope of the [Working Group] charter says: 'This group will maintain and produce incremental revisions to the HTML specification,' and the deliverables indicates: 'a language evolved from HTML4 for describing the semantics of documents and applications on the World Wide Web.' I don't think it sets boundaries on what ought to be part of the HTML specification. Whether the figure, video, or data-* is inside the HTML5 specification or in an adjunct doesn't make a difference. We've been encouraged on several occasions to modularize the HTML specification itself, in fact. The Context 2D API was part of the HTML5 specification even before the creation of the charter and was accepted as such by the Working Group."

As the minutes of the public meeting of the Working Group from the following Thursday, February 11, indicate, when one of the meeting co-chairs -- Microsoft's Paul Cotton -- stated that the requested changes (the "diffs") were being worked into the Call for Consensus document -- implying that all was going swimmingly -- Adobe's Masinter interrupted. "Do I need to repeat objections?" he asked. "The co-chairs are aware of the formal objection," Cotton responded.

The other co-chair was IBM engineer and Apache contributor Sam Ruby. "It would be helpful to repeat the objection," Ruby said. "It would be helpful to people who aren't reading w3-archive e-mail," Cotton added, referring to the administrative mailing list for private issues among members -- usually points of order.

But here, Le Hégaret made a bold statement: "We won't approve the [First Public Working Drafts] until the [Formal Objection] is resolved." What formal objection? Wasn't there a dispute over whether there even was an objection? Cotton asked Masinter and Le Hégaret to forward their objections to the public list for everyone to read; they agreed.

Next: The search for a conspiracy theory...

The search for a conspiracy theory

So how deep was this problem? According to the HTML5 document's designated author, Ian Hickson, it was the standards world's equivalent of a Senate filibuster: "The latest publication of HTML5 is now blocked by Adobe, via an objection that has still not been made public (despite yesterday's promise to make it so)," Hickson wrote. He cited a source who apparently wished to remain anonymous, for reasons he said had to do with belonging to "one of the secret W3C member lists," implying that the Working Group had a public agenda and a private one. This despite the fact that the differences between Masinter's and Cotton's perception of the matter may have been trivial at best.

Later, in a blog post entitled "Sabotage!" obviously intended to raise the eyebrows of would-be news aggregators, Opera Software engineer Anne Van Kesteren essentially alleged Adobe -- the manufacturer of Flash, a proprietary graphics technology -- was blocking the forward progress of HTML5 on a technicality: "The objection to HTML Canvas 2D Context is spurious in particular since it has been part of the W3C draft of HTML5 since the very beginning," Van Kesteren wrote. "The scope question for that API has been raised two years ago and was resolved back then, involving all the layers of W3C, including its Director. That it is now decided to publish it is a separate document does not change the resolution of this decision on scope."

But while the "sabotage" story was raging, the creator of the Web himself, Tim Berners-Lee, called upon the W3C to implement an "annotation" to the Working Group charter to enable the modularity that Cotton referred to. "I agree with the WG chairs that these items -- data and Canvas -- are reasonable areas of work for the group. It is appropriate for the group to publish documents in this area. On the one hand, they elaborate areas touched on in HTML4. On the other, these elaborations are much deeper than the features of HTML4, but also they form separate subsystems, and these subsystems have strong overlaps with other design areas. It is important (a) that the design be modular; (b) that the specifications be kept modular and (c) that the communities of expertise of the respective fields (graphics and data) be involved in the design process. I am asking the domain lead to annotate the charter in place to make these points clearer to newcomers."

Calling the entire substance of the blocking/filibuster allegation "hooey" in a personal blog post two weeks ago, Larry Masinter revealed not only that he followed through with his procedural objection, but he essentially got what he wanted: a change in the charter of the Working Group so that it did encompass Canvas 2D, rather than having a charter that appeared to contradict its own work. But then Masinter's retort took on the broader, and more timeless, topic of what the devil is going on here anyway.

"Updating the charter to say these things were in scope was always a way of bringing them into scope," Masinter wrote. "That W3C wanted to save face and call it an 'annotation' and skip the normal W3C rechartering process -- well, so many exceptions were made for HTML in the first place, that's fine. What makes a 'standard' process 'open' isn't just 'everyone can read the mailing list.' Trying to follow the HTML standard requires withstanding a 'denial of service' attack; thousands of e-mails, messages, posts, edits to track every single month. No one person can really follow what's going on.

"I've worked on scores (more than 20 and probably more than 40) different working group charters," Masinter continued. "I think I really understand why working groups have charters, how the words in a charter are chosen carefully, and why it's important to keep things in scope. Is that being nit-picky? Yes, but that's what I do. And, I claim, it's what makes good standards: Follow process, pay attention to details. My perspective is that what makes a good standard is very different than what makes a good implementation guide. Many otherwise good software engineers (even those with a great deal of experience) really don't see it, since their experience and intuitions have served them well in building complex software systems, or leading open source projects."

As of now, the HTML5 Working Drafts are officially published, with Canvas 2D among a handful of specifications broken out into modular drafts of their own, as Berners-Lee advised. And that prompted a note of applause last Friday from Microsoft's Internet Explorer 9 Program Manager Adrian Bateman: "Just like good software design, loose coupling and high cohesion are good principles for defining web standards. That doesn't make them easy to apply and there is still more work to do to reduce the coupling between drafts. The group is working on improving the tools used to generate the documents to improve the cross-references, which will help towards this goal."

Bateman's comments have contributed to blog posts today pointing to "rumors" that IE9, and Microsoft in turn, would come around to supporting HTML5. This despite the fact that its own man may be to thank for getting the whole draft put together prior to Microsoft's MIX conference next week.

PC gaming service Steam ported to Mac, lets users buy titles on both platforms at no extra cost

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Valve Corporation's Steam is the leading digital distribution channel for PC games. With over 1,000 titles available for purchase, an integrated social network and database of open game servers, Steam has attracted more than 25 million users since launching in 2003.

Today, Valve officially announced Steam will be coming to Mac in April, along with Source, the 3D gaming engine used in popular games such as Half Life 2, Team Fortress 2, and Counter-Strike.

Jason Holtman, Director of Business Development at Valve said, "Our Steam partners, who are delivering over a thousand games to 25 million Steam clients, are very excited about adding support for the Mac. Steamworks for the Mac supports all of the Steamworks APIs, and we have added a new feature, called Steam Play, which allows customers who purchase the product for the Mac or Windows to play on the other platform free of charge. For example, Steam Play, in combination with the Steam Cloud, allows a gamer playing on their work PC to go home and pick up playing the same game at the same point on their home Mac. We expect most developers and publishers to take advantage of Steam Play."

John Cook, Director of Steam Development said, "We are treating the Mac as a tier-1 platform so all of our future games will release simultaneously on Windows, Mac, and the Xbox 360. Updates for the Mac will be available simultaneously with the Windows updates. Furthermore, Mac and Windows players will be part of the same multiplayer universe, sharing servers, lobbies, and so forth. We fully support a heterogeneous mix of servers and clients."

10 things Microsoft did right in 2010 (so far)

By Joe Wilcox, Betanews

It's throw-Microsoft-a-bone Monday, not that I can promise much meat on it. Microsoft may have fallen behind in mobile, been talking about a three-screen strategy off of two screens, and clumsily competed as usual, but some early 2010 actions deserve at least a little praise. So here's where I give it.

First, some context. There's doing right -- and there's doing right. Some of the stuff here I'll assert Microsoft did right I previously dinged the company for getting wrong. That's because what's right for Microsoft might be wrong in a greater competitive landscape, like taking right action A too slowly or not soon enough. With that introduction, here are 10 things Microsoft has done right in 2010 (so far), presented in no order of importance. Microsoft...

1. Started over with Windows 7 Phone Series. Microsoft was right to start with a fresh new mobile operating system (if it's really as new as claimed). Windows Mobile -- now called Windows Phone Classic -- had run aground. I called Windows 7 Phone Series a "lost cause" because new supporting handsets aren't expected until around the holidays. The time horizon is simply too long. But matters would have been much worse had v7 been a makeover v6.x and delivered (as rumored) next year. Microsoft made the tough decision of building new.

2. Put user experience before backward compatibility with Windows 7 Phone Series. I do hope this is a sign of more changes to come. For decades, Microsoft has prioritized back compatibility, often hobbling new products -- and so the developer and customer experiences. With Windows Phone 7 Series, existing 6.x devices will not be upgradable. From a Windows 6.x device sales perspective, the no-upgrade policy is nothing short of disastrous. That's a short-term sacrifice Microsoft makes now for possible long-term gain -- assuring a better user experience for Windows Phone 7 Series devices. Like many of the things in this Top 10 list, something done wrong also is something done right.

3. Took down the Waledac botnet. In late February, Microsoft wrangling gained a court order to shutdown nearly 230 Internet domains alleged to have been used by cybercriminals. Microsoft scored a major triumph against a major botnet.

4. Released Outlook Social Connector beta. Outlook is rapidly looking outdated, even with the spruced up user interface coming with Office 2010. Outlook Social Connector beta for Office 2007 mimics functionality built into v2010. The People Pane is a nice start, but Microsoft has got to expand its social circle beyond LinkedIn and in-company or outside-organization relationships exposed through Outlook (and other supporting Microsoft corporate software).

5. Filed a complaint -- and encouraged others to do so -- against Google in the European Union. Google is rapidly becoming a dangerous monopoly, more so than Microsoft in the 1990s. While the EU's investigation is at best preliminary, the complaints are potentially more dangerous than some Microsoft Watchers suggest. A single complaint, made by Sun in 1998, led to the Europe's Competition Commission 2004 ruling that Microsoft violated local antitrust laws. A second ruling followed, leading Microsoft last week to offer a browser ballot box in Europe. Microsoft's own experience is lesson enough how potentially beneficial a competitive complaint can be.

6. Killed Essential Business Server. EBS was a great idea in 2008 -- to offer midrange, midpriced server software for midsize businesses. But the weak economy and loss of the project's originator (from Microsoft to to the Federal Communications Commission) changed everything. Perhaps if Steven VanRoekel had stayed at Microsoft, EBS' fate would have been different.

7. Extended .NET, Silverlight and XNA development across three screens, including Windows Phone 7 Series. Microsoft already had development pieces in place for two screens -- PC and game console. By supporting Windows Phone, Microsoft creates opportunity for developers to create games or other applications one time for consumption on multiple devices.

8. Demonstrated Skinput. During last week's TechFest, Microsoft researchers showed off skin -- on the forearm -- as a natural user interface. Microsoft Research paper "Skinput: Appropriating the Body as an Input Surface" offers a wonderful overview of the concept. My teenage daughter writes reminders on her arm nearly everyday. In California, seemingly everyone under the age of 35 has several tattoos. Why not use the skin even more functionally? The technology takes advantage of the varying acoustic properties of skin and bones. Skinput is the kind of out-of-the-box thinking that gives hope about future Microsoft innovation.

9. Launched Mediaroom 2.0. Microsoft's living room strategy is a work in progress -- and has been since the debut of Windows Media Center nearly a decade ago. Slow progress is still progress -- and Mediaroom 2.0 offers much for telcos looking to deliver a television programming experience better than cable (as an AT&T U-verse customer I can attest to the better-than-cable experience). Then there is the coming Mediaroom support for Xbox. As aforementioned in No. 7, Microsoft already is preparing developers for delivering games across three screens.

10. Set Office 2010 business launch for May. The timing is just about right for the first big wave of enterprises to deploy Windows 7. Traditionally, larger businesses deploy new versions of Office and Windows at the same time whenever possible. Microsoft simultaneously released Office 2007 and Windows Vista. But slow -- or no -- enterprise Vista migrations meant that simultaneous Office and Windows release didn't equate to simultaneous deployments. By offsetting Office 2010 and Windows 7 business launches by about 8 months, Microsoft gave business customers time enough to test and qualify Windows 7. Meanwhile, a very public Office 2010 preview allowed for additional testing, too. Many more businesses will now have the more logistically viable option of deploying both products simultaneously or around the same time.

Verizon claims 5-12 Mbps 4G LTE service in 25+ markets, but where's the hardware?

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Still racing for an LTE launch in the second half of this year, Verizon Wireless has been testing its trial 4G Long Term Evolution (LTE) networks in Boston and Seattle since last August.

Today the wireless network operator says it will be able to deliver speeds between 5-12 Mbps downlink and 2-5 Mbps uplink at launch.

"Our LTE rollout plan positions Verizon Wireless to be a global leader in 4G LTE deployment. We are on track to deliver an outstanding wireless data experience to customers in 25 to 30 markets covering roughly 100 million people by year's end," Tony Melone, senior vice president and chief technical officer at Verizon Wireless said in a statement this morning. "As device makers, manufacturers and others around the world begin to introduce newer and faster products to take advantage of these incredible new speeds, Verizon Wireless will be positioned to offer our customers new and exciting products on the nation's first 4G LTE network."

The first commercial deployments of LTE belong to TeliaSonera in Norway and Sweden, which opened for business last December. However, consumer equipment that can take advantage of the increased bandwidth continues to be seriously limited. Nokia announced it was the first to make an LTE modem, and TeliaSonera partnered with Samsung to offer a USB LTE dongle, but there are currently no smartphones or consumer devices utilizing the technology.

Last year, Verizon CEO Dick Lynch said LTE laptop modems and handsets won't be out until a year after the LTE network launches.

Meanwhile, the United States' fifth largest network operator MetroPCS expects its LTE network to be completed in the second half of 2010 as well. Like TeliaSonera, MetroPCS has partnered with Samsung for its first consumer LTE device.

WiMAX radios aren't the business for Cisco any more

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

In late 2007, Cisco Systems Inc. acquired a WiMAX company called Navini Networks, consuming the smaller competitor's 70 commercial WiMAX deployments, all of the network hardware, and its portfolio of Radio Access Network (RAN) patents. Though Cisco was never exactly hot on WiMAX as a wireless standard, the company saw that the 4G standard was maturing, and made its move into the WiMAX base station business.

At the time, Cisco senior vice president Tony Bates said, "Recently, the WiMAX radio systems to deliver broadband wireless have matured, customers are deploying live networks, and overall investment and demand has increased. Therefore, Cisco views this as the proper time to add licensed WiMAX products to our broadband wireless offer."

Not two years later, though, Cisco says it is halting that business to shift its focus away from radios.

A company spokesperson told FierceBroadbandWireless, "After careful review, our mobility strategy is to focus on providing a radio-agnostic IP end-to-end mobile multimedia services network. Cisco will continue to focus on the packet core and to also focus on investment in radio technologies such as femtocells and Wi-Fi. As part of this decision, we have decided to discontinue designing and building new WiMAX base stations. We believe the best way for Cisco to serve our customers is by delivering value at the edge and the core of our customers' networks."

Rather than focus on a single, isolated radio technology, Cisco is going to push the network-agnostic IP core technologies it acquired last October when it bought Starent networks. Starent's technology supports a much wider range of access technologies such as GSM, CDMA, UMTS, LTE and even WiMAX, and already has a significant number of customers. This way, Cisco can offer technologies to whichever network standards are out there without suffering if one becomes less popular than another.

Sai Subramanian, Director of Product Marketing for Cisco's Wireless Business Group recently said, "We expect to continue to be a significant player in the WiMAX market... just not in the access part of the network."

Who should buy the iPad? Hint: People of a certain age (and that's not you)

By Joe Wilcox, Betanews

"Who will buy?" is the question to ask now that Apple has turned on the advertising spigot. I saw the first iPad commercial three times during yesterday's Academy Awards program. No one should underestimate the power of Apple marketing for generating millions of initial iPad sales. Advertising will differentiate iPad from ebook reader or tablet competitors.

For years, Apple advertised iPod unchecked. Competitors simply didn't aggressively advertise their MP3 players. So from about 2002 through end of 2004, iPod owned media player advertising -- at least in the United States. For a short time, Creative had a campaign, then nothing after 2005. No wonder so many people bought an iPod -- it seemingly was the only choice.

What other competitor will offer another choice to iPad through such aggressive marketing? You tell me. The first commercial is very benefits oriented, putting common PC-like functions in the lap instead of on the tabletop. Apple should be wary of consumer confusion. Some potential buyers might not easily understand the difference from iPhone or iPod touch. Whom that might be will become more apparent in a few paragraphs.

I predict that within a few months of release, unless there is a shortage of storage cards, Apple will reconsider the 16GB model -- as it did the original 4GB iPhone; 16GB is the new 4GB, but for different reasons. From the start, summer 2007, 8GB iPhone quickly outsold the lower-cost 4GB model. Buyers wanted more storage. At $499, I expect the 16GB iPad to easily outsell the $629 16GB 3G or 32GB WiFi model. But in short order, many iPad buyers will find that 16GB storage is inadequate. They'll want more storage, which they didn't get at first because of price -- how affordable is $499 compared to $629. There are reasons why retailers use prices like $19.99 or $599. The six in $629 seems so much more than $499. I expect Apple to make price adjustments by summer. Latest. But only after an iPod touch price reduction or introduction of 128GB model at $399.

All this meandering finally leads to the question posed by this post's title: Who should buy iPad? With no backing data -- but a good sense about marketing -- I can see four consumer demographic groups that should buy iPad. I'm ignoring institutional segments like education or training; none of the four groups would fit nicely into analysts' survey spreadsheets. They are:

People Steve Jobs's age or older. Apple's CEO may run a company producing hip products, but Jobs is middle aged. Jobs turned 55 on February 24. He's a Baby Boomer, and iPad is for his generation and that of his parents. It's computing made easy, with all the basics covered in a device simply and comfortably handled.

Yesterday, a friend asked if his 85 year-old dad should buy an iPad. "Absolutely," I said. He was surprised because of my post "12 reasons why I won't buy an iPad." The iPad will get the dad on the Web with email and other connected features, serve up ebooks and provide applications that are easily chosen, purchased, installed and used.

Apple's tablet isn't right for me, or many other people comfortable with technology and used to multitasking. In its first iteration, iPad is more a single-task device, which is right pace for many older folks (Hey, this isn't agism just the reality of aging). Among the Boomer-plus set, I expect iPad will appeal most to digital immigrants, meaning those people who didn't grow up with computers and aren't all that comfortable with them (Gen Xers tend to be digital resident aliens and the Millennials digital natives).

The iPad as a device for the old (55 and older) could be quite good for Apple. According to a recent AdMob report, 65 percent of iPod touch users are 17 or younger. By comparison, 72 percent of iPhone users are between 18 and 54. Neither device has much pull with those 55 or older, 14 percent and 5 percent, respectively. The 55 and over crowd is a desirable market segment. Marketers assume this group has more discretionary spending power because of savings and less pull by outside factors -- children, for example. Then there is the large number of Baby Boomers (in the United States about 77 million still living out of 309 million total population, according to Census data). The oldest Boomers reached retirement age in the Noughties.

The Mac faithful. It's often called the cult of Mac for a reason. Anecdotally, this group can be relied on to buy pretty much anything new with an Apple logo.

Mac wannabes on a budget. From a marketing perspective -- looking at Apple computing products as a range of features and prices -- iPad fills a gaping hole in the Mac product line between the $399 iPod touch and $999 MacBook. More importantly, iPad lets people pining for a portable Mac get one for less than $500. Suddenly, the cheapest, functional Mac portable is $499. The average consumer doesn't care about the operating system, whether iPhone OS 3.2 or Snow Leopard. Mac wannabes will care more about what the device can do for them. Apple has packed most of the basic, most appealing functions of the Mac portable -- including iWork -- into iPad. Then there's the App Store offering loads of fun applications that are cheap and easy to install.

Niche buyers. Singly, niche buyers won't amount to much. Combined, they could be a sizable buying segment. Among them I see people interested in ebooks, gadget collectors (especially those obsessed with geek envy) and artists.

To many artists, iPad should be a desirable canvas. Anthropologically, used together, the mouse and keyboard are an unnatural user interface. Human beings are tool users. We experience and interact with the world through five senses. The best tools are really extensions of the hands; the mouse and keyboard UI is neither. Hands, fingers and touch are especially important for experiencing and manipulating objects or surroundings -- and for artistry. Apple's tablet is the canvas for which many artists' hands will create. What will the hand and finger create on the touchscreen? Who knows, the answer might be a future iPad commercial.

Cablevision and local station battle could signify coming cable rate hike

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

The dispute between Cablevision, the United States' fifth largest cable company, and New York ABC affiliate WABC-7 was tentatively resolved yesterday evening in time for the Academy Awards telecast, and the ABC blackout for Cablevision subscribers did not last 24 hours.

"ABC7 and Cablevision have made significant progress and have reached an agreement in principle that recognizes the fair value of ABC7, with deal points that we expect to finalize with Cablevision. Given this movement, we're pleased to announce that ABC7 will return to Cablevision households while we work to complete our negotiations," a statement from WABC-TV said yesterday.

Though resolved for the time being, this heated disconnection and re-connection is another example of the much larger-scale fight between content owners, local station affiliates, and the cable monopolies.

There are many who believe this fight will only result in all of our cable bills going up.

Broadcasters want to brace their weakened advertising revenue and shrinking viewership by negotiating higher retransmission fees from cable companies. These fees are frequently expressed as a per-subscriber charge, and the negotiating price thus far has been $1 per month per viewer.

That's the retransmission price that Fox tried to get from Time Warner Cable late in 2009, and reportedly the same price WABC sought from Cablevision. On New Year's day, Fox and Time Warner reached an agreement on the fees, but the amount of money was not disclosed.

Analysts at the time said the deal opened the door for a $5 billion increase in overall cable fees.

According to the Federal Communications Commission, "Every three years, broadcast stations must decide whether to demand carriage on local cable systems without receiving compensation or elect to negotiate a retransmission consent agreement. In return for allowing a cable system to carry its signal, a television station may require the payment of a fee or other consideration (for instance, carriage of another programming service or advertising time). Any new or additional costs incurred as a result of retransmission consent agreements may be passed through to cable subscribers."

Over the weekend, when it still appeared the Oscars would be blacked out for some New Yorkers, President and CEO of the American Cable Association Matthew Polka issued a statement, reading in part: "The Federal retransmission consent regime is a badly broken system that permits signal pulling and flagrant price discrimination against smaller cable companies that consumers should not be forced to tolerate."

China denies it's in any talks with Google, wonders why

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

After a Reuters report on Friday cited China's Industry and Information Minister, Li Yizhong, as having told an indeterminate parliamentary body that the government was in talks with Google over its claims of having been hacked in early February by a Chinese malicious source, a vice minister for the same government agency issued a statement through China's Xinhua news agency denying any negotiations have taken place at all.

The denial was covered by Reuters as a request by the ministry for more information, so that China could prosecute Google's complaint. The Xinhua report itself (not a Google English-language translation of the report) states the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology's position that Google never filed a complaint in the first place.

Last Tuesday, Xinhua quoted a spokesperson for a key Chinese political advisory body, Zhao Qizheng, as strongly denying Google's allegations of Chinese malicious hacking, specifically the implication that the government was involved. But being consistent, Qizheng and the Xinhua report were careful not to call Google's accusation a "charge."

If one reads the Xinhua reports at face value -- putting aside Reuters' interpretations of them -- they could represent China's attempt to call Google's bluff. Ever since the incident, the state-run news agency has reiterated that Google has threatened to pull out of the country, but has not done so. And a political cartoon published by Xinhua last Friday, entitled "Google and the Spooks," depicts the political association it would prefer Chinese citizens draw in their minds. It shows the familiar Google search page, with the logo embellished with Nixonian eyes and an American flag necktie bearing a National Security Agency seal.

The prevailing theory, put forth last month in The New York Times, is that the perpetrators of the alleged incident may have been vo-tech students of a certain Ukrainian professor who has been suspected of online mischief before. While on the surface that might appear to exonerate the Chinese government, the Times' source, a noted intelligence research analyst, warned readers not to draw that conclusion too quickly, saying the Chinese "have a different model" for exploiting targets. That source may have helped the Times uncover that Google had been working with the NSA to determine the source of the incident.

Suddenly Apple hates Wi-Fi

By Carmi Levy, Betanews

Because removing porn from the App Store wasn't enough, now Apple's taking aim at software that helps iPhone, iPod touch and, soon, iPad users find Wi-Fi hotspots. Forgive me for cynically choosing to disbelieve the company's excuse -- that all of these apps use undocumented or private APIs and consequently must be removed for the sake of the platform's future. If Apple actually had a workable, believable strategy for approval, it wouldn't have approved any of these apps in the first place.

The apps are -- or, rather, were distributed under the trade names Sekai Camera, Wifi-Where, and yFy, among others; and they made it easier for owners of such devices to find Wi-Fi networks and thus avoid using their more costly and often congested 3G connections. In the bad old days of wardriving, we simply walked or drove along a public thoroughfare and constantly refreshed our network lists to identify convenient and often free hotspots. The process was manual and tedious, and these packages automated the process of discovery just in time for Wi-Fi to become table stakes on handheld devices. With more end users than ever before seeking safe havens to avoid busting their carrier-imposed 3G data caps, Wi-Fi finders, scanners, and stumblers had finally hit the big time.

Herding the subscriber sheep

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to conclude that Apple and its carrier-partners weren't particularly pleased with this trend. I'm going to assume the wizards at AT&T didn't much appreciate the potential long-term thinning of subscriber revenue, and quietly encouraged Apple to squash it before it became rampant. I'm singling out AT&T because it's such an easy target of consumer discontent, but this may as well apply to any other carrier in any other country. They're all cheering Apple's move because it tilts device traffic back onto their own wireless networks.

Carmi Levy Wide Angle Zoom (v.2) Never mind that developers have been begging Apple to open up the API so that they don't have to get in through the back door. Never mind that tech-savvy consumers now have another reason to jailbreak their devices. Never mind that this is yet another example of near-Draconian (or maybe full-on Draconian) control over a platform that, despite its extreme popularity, remains a prime example of the risks of leaving too much control in the hands of one provider.

What's to stop Apple from summarily choosing another category next week, or next month, or whenever, as a candidate for pruning? What's to stop Apple from deciding that developers, whose only option up to then was to creatively work around deliberately baked-in limitations in the SDK to bring consumer-friendly offerings to market, have gone too far and need to be taught a lesson?

To be blunt, no one can stop Apple from doing whatever it wants. I've said before that this is Apple's playground, which means it can make the rules, interpret them as it sees fit, and change them on a whim. And developers and other stakeholders have no say in any of this. They simply have to hope that the elephant they chose to sleep with doesn't roll over in the middle of the night and crush them.

I don't say this with malice or anger. It simply is what it is, and despite the platform's overwhelming success over the better part of the past three years, it leaves consumers and developers with a choice to either put up with Apple's model or seek alternatives.

Please hold that thought for a second.

A case of non-coincidental timing

All this comes just as Apple gets set to begin shipping iPads to an adoring public. Retail availability in the US is now set for April 3, and sometime toward the end of April in Canada. This means potential buyers are already deciding how much hard-earned cash to bring along when they wait in line overnight to buy one. Will they cheap out for the basic Wi-Fi version, or will they go full-on for a 3G-enabled iPad?

The timing of the latest app takedown is no coincidence: Apple and AT&T clearly want to influence potential buyers to stretch for a 3G-capable version to at least hold out the potential of ongoing subscription-based revenue. Think of this latest move as a scorched-earth strategy for wannabe-Wi-Fi-only iPad users. I'm betting that around this time next month, Wi-Fi-only iPads will be only slightly more difficult to find than two-headed Lincoln pennies, as Apple's carrier-friendly/consumer-unfriendly supply chain strategy snaps into focus.

Which brings us to the alternatives. As Microsoft is painfully learning, no platform remains dominant forever. Sooner or later, the conditions that allowed the market leader to become the leader in the first place will shift, and in so doing, will allow challengers to lay down roots and eventually outflank them. The incumbent's vulnerability to defeat in this manner can be influenced by how it treats its market. Do so with cooperative partnership and you stand a better chance of getting stakeholders -- namely developers and consumers -- to stick with you a bit longer. Do so with a cynical sense of arrogant protectionism, and they'll happily dance on your grave.

The crack in Apple's foundation?

Does this mean Apple's latest App Store move will lead to its ultimate demise? No. But does it shift a few more grains of sand in a different direction? I strongly believe that it does. And we all know how massive tectonic market shifts can begin with a few simple moves. It could be years before the rats begin to abandon any sinking ship with an Apple logo on it, but don't think for a second that seemingly small acts like this won't play an eventual role.

The iPhone/iPod touch/iPad universe remains the place to be if you're looking to build mobile apps. Google's Android is a distant second fiddle, and RIM is barely out of the gate. But Google's approach -- open source and decidedly less school marm-ish in its definition of what developers can and cannot do -- may yet be the kind of landscape that developers will target if Apple's mercurial form of relationship building becomes too onerous. Apple's Wi-Fi move is pushing things with this sensitive audience yet again. At some point, they may yet decide enough is enough.

Carmi Levy is a Canadian-based independent technology analyst and journalist still trying to live down his past life leading help desks and managing projects for large financial services organizations. He comments extensively in a wide range of media, and works closely with clients to help them leverage technology and social media tools and processes to drive their business.