Honestly, it might be too late to save mobile TV, at least in the U.S., where the broadcast network for mobile devices has yet to catch on like it has in Asian countries such as Japan and South Korea. The competition is fierce, and growing almost daily, and mobile broadcast TV service offers few benefits over its competitors.
The first question you might ask is: what is mobile TV? Right now, most mobile TV devices sold are cell phones, and the carriers have shot themselves, and Qualcomm, in the foot over this option. Carriers have for years been pushing their concept of mobile TV, which until recently was really streaming video clips, not true broadcast TV. By the time Qualcomm finally decided to bring its own personal television device to market, the market was so confused about what to expect that nobody bought one. It’s a portable device with a rate plan and a subsidy, but it doesn’t make phone calls? Carriers had been pushing their lousy on-demand streaming clip service so hard, by the time a real broadcast device hit the street consumers wouldn’t trust the mobile TV promise.
The second question you might ask is who needs mobile TV? Obviously it’s not something you’d use in your house, not while the big TV is sitting right in front of you. Mobile TV has caught on among commuters. If you’re in a country where people take long train rides and wait in line to get on the bus, you’re probably going to find mobile TV. In the U.S., many of us drive to work, and plenty of subway commuters find themselves underground more than above it, where reception is weaker. We use planes, not bullet trains, to get from state to state. So, mobile TV already faces some hurdles in simply finding an audience, but these are not insurmountable.
The final question you might ask is why someone would pick mobile TV as their entertainment of choice. Here’s the biggest problem mobile TV faces. Chances are, if you have TV reception, you also have cellular network reception. Why watch video on a dedicated mobile TV device when you can simply use a device you already have? I’m not even limiting this argument to cell phones, either. Tablet computers, laptops and portable media players all have plenty of options for streaming video. Between Hulu, Netflix, YouTube and the many network-supported apps hitting the market, it’s easy to find television shows to watch. Even last night’s TV is available today on the right app or Web site.
Furthermore, pre-recorded videos are even easier. If you can load videos onto your iPad or laptop, why watch mobile TV? If you can bring along a portable DVD player, why bother bringing a mobile TV device, as well?
Mobile TV is better than streaming services because the quality is much better. It’s not perfect, but it beats the hell out of streaming clips. If you want to watch a television show, on mobile TV you start watching at the time the show starts, and you watch the entire show all the way through. Unlike clips, which require multiple 5-minute downloads, mobile TV keeps running, and since it uses its own network, it doesn’t hog your data plan. This could be a benefit, but it’s also the first problem that needs fixing.
Mobile TV could use an on-demand service, but it absolutely needs DVR capabilities. The lack of DVR features is the main reason I would never watch mobile TV. There are commercials. The shows don’t start when I want them to start. If I miss something, it’s gone, I can’t rewind, start over or pause the show. Mobile TV is an anachronism because of all these issues. It’s a new (in the U.S. at least) video service, but it behaves like a 60 year old TV.
It would be easy to add real DVR features to a mobile TV device. Just add a few gigabytes of storage and a solid DVR interface, and I’d be much more likely to carry a mobile TV in my pocket. This is an opportunity that TiVo has sorely missed. You can transfer TiVo programs to a mobile device or portable computer, but the process is long, slow and difficult. It’s not automatic, it requires separate apps, a powerful computer to encode the video for a mobile and a huge amount of storage space. If I want to watch last night’s Jimmy Kimmel or the finale of Lost that I’ve been saving, there should be an easy way to sit on the train on my morning commute and watch my shows. A mobile TV device with a built in video recorder would be a fine option, offering my saved shows and fresh programming if I get bored of my saved choices. If TiVo offered a portable device with their own interface and features that worked on today’s mobile TV networks, then I might consider buying one.
The best way to save mobile TV would be to make customers feel like they need one. There is a limited program selection on mobile TV. It’s not simply a rebroadcast of what the networks are showing, it’s usually a different lineup. Sometimes it’s intelligent, like when the networks rerun last night’s late night talk shows in the morning. Often, it’s kind of dull.
Mobile TV needs appointment television. If there were one or two fantastic shows that were only available on mobile TV, it would be a real coup for the technology. I’m talking about a water cooler show. Something that makes you feel like you’ve missed out if you haven’t seen it.
I subscribe to HBO not for the movies, but for the couple of original shows that I love. The Sopranos, Six Feet Under, Bill Maher’s show; these are shows worth paying an extra few bucks a month. Mobile TV needs that kind of programming. A few original shows to get people talking would broaden awareness of the technology, and more importantly, get the TV press talking more about it.
Mobile TV also needs to improve quality dramatically. While it’s already better than the streaming services, that’s a low bar to set. The video quality needs to be as good as, preferably better than, pre-recorded movies. High definition quality would obviously be a bonus. If I can stream Netflix in high-def on my laptop, I certainly wouldn’t want to watch a smaller, mobile TV device that wasn’t even DVD quality.
I don’t think mobile TV is dead in America, but I don’t think it’s taking the competition seriously. People will not simply adopt mobile TV because the technology is there, but that’s been the attitude of mobile TV broadcasters so far. There has been no real argument for mobile TV against the myriad forms of video content already available. The recent Hulu Plus announcement should only light a bigger fire under the mobile TV movement, because Hulu is now bringing real, network television to mobile devices. If mobile TV can’t offer a service that is better than what we already have, there’s no reason for it to exist.
Yesterday, Hulu made waves with the announcement of the much-rumored Hulu Plus. A brand new subscription-based methodology to stream your favorite TV shows, whenever you want. For just $9.99 per month, you’ll get your hands on the “Season Ticket,” which will let you watch any episode of a particular season, with no expiration date (which is the general rule of thumb on Hulu right now). And, with that announcement, came the revelation that Sony’s PlayStation 3 would be getting support as well in the near future. But, there could be some very important fine print not quite revealed.
Based on some source code dug up by Technologizer, which they found on the Hulu Plus page, it looks like you may need a subscription to PlayStation Network+ to get your hands on the Hulu Plus subscription service. As the code says: “The instructions below will help you install Hulu Plus on your PS3. Note: you must be a subscriber of the PlayStation Plus Network.” That means you’ll be paying the $49.99 per year for PSN+, as well as the $9.99 a month for Hulu Plus.
This can mean a couple of things. First, it could mean that considering it’s not actually on the Hulu Plus page, means that it may not actually come to fruition at all, and the reason it’s not showing up now, is because it’s not going to show up at all. However, on the other end of the spectrum, Hulu and Sony could be holding off on announcing that little morsel of information until the service actually launches on the PS3.
As of right now, Hulu Plus is available on the iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad, and Samsung Internet-enabled HDTVs. However, it’s an invitation-only platform right now, so there’s not that many people making use of the new subscription service quite yet. As for Xbox 360 owners, would the standard yearly/monthly subscription LIVE owners already take part in be enough to get them access to Hulu Plus? More questions, but hopefully it all gets cleared up soon.
Apple hasn’t been shy about dropping support for older hardware and software in recent years, and it looks like the iPhone and iPod touch are no exception: according to a short note on the iPhone developer site encouraging devs to get ready for iOS 4, the App Store will no longer affect apps that target iOS 2. That doesn’t really mean much right now — apart from a few iPod touch owners who didn’t pay the $10 iOS 3 upgrade fee, we doubt there are many people out there still running iOS 2 — but we can see Apple dropping support for iOS 3 apps next year when iOS 5 and a new iPhone are announced, and that’ll effectively be the end of the original iPhone and touch, which can’t be upgraded to iOS 4. That’s a four-year shelf life, which isn’t too bad considering the insane pace of mobile development, but we can still shed a tear — especially since we paid $599 for the damn thing on contract way back when.
Not feeling hot about the trouble-proneiPhone 4, but still tempted by its optional iMovie app? Now you have a choice! Turns out to run said app on other devices (including iPod touch, supposedly) running iOS 3.0 and above, all you need are a jailbroken iOS device, iMovie for iPhone from the App Store, and two quick edits in the app’s info.plist file — change minimum system version to “3.0.0″ and front-facing-camera to “false.” Sounds easy enough, although we’ve yet to see the hacked app actually running on devices other than the 3GS demoed in the video after the break. And sorry, Redmond Pie’s already confirmed that this sucker doesn’t work on the iPad… yet.
When Apple announced earlier this month that it was releasing a new Mac mini that featured an improved design and far better specs than what was previously available, I was excited. As a long-time Apple customer, I have everything from an iMac to an iPhone to an Apple TV running in my house. But as Apple continues to call the Apple TV a “hobby,” I’m left wondering if it’s really true.
I’ll be the first to admit that I use my Apple TV more than any other device connected to my television. It’s my entertainment hub for when I want to watch some of my favorite video casts, listen to music, or watch some movies that are made available for rent. But in those moments when I want to check IMDb for an actor’s name or Google something related to a show I’m watching, the set-top box isn’t the device I use. I’m forced to put my Apple remote down, pick up my iPad, and check the information out on that instead. It’s a major issue that Apple, for the past few years since the Apple TV has been available, refuses to address. And it’s about time that it did.
But rather than wait on the company, I’ve decided that it’s time to replace my Apple TV. Although I understand that the Apple TV is designed specifically for my entertainment needs, Google’s promise of Google TV, its platform that’s expected to run on several devices later this year, makes me wonder why I’m even considering running the Apple TV anymore. After all, if there are so many other options available to me that will perform all the tasks I expect, rather than just a few, why should I keep using the hobbled alternative?
And that’s where the Mac mini comes in. Although I can pick up home-theater PCs from Dell or Acer, the Mac mini is far more viable. Not only does it run Mac OS X, which would preclude me from needing to worry if my virus definitions are up-to-date, it will work seamlessly with my expanding iTunes library. And thanks to its new HDMI-out port, it’s effectively Apple’s answer to Google TV and all the set-top boxes, like the Logitech Revue, that will be making their way to store shelves over the coming months.
But there is more than just entertainment to like in the Mac mini. The device provides a full-fledged Mac OS X experience. Rather than be forced to only use the applications Apple allows me to on the Apple TV, the Mac mini affords me nothing but opportunity. I can run Microsoft Office on it, and have easy access over the Web to any site. Plus, thanks to its browser, I can view any Web content that I want right on the device.
That could be a key reason why the Mac mini is so appealing to me right now. I can access all the content available to me on the Apple TV through iTunes, plus I can view Web content. I can even go to Hulu and watch some television shows I might have missed for free, rather pay per download on iTunes. It’s a major step forward for those of us who spend so much time in front of our televisions.
It goes beyond the Apple TV. A Mac mini is a far better device than anything Google can muster with the Google TV. It can search the Web just like Google TV and access content like the search giant’s software. But it adds full computing functionality that Google TV devices won’t be able to muster. Simply put, the Mac mini is the best of all worlds. And its functionality is second to none in the HTPC market.
So, I’ll be buying a Mac mini soon. It’s not that the Apple TV isn’t a great device — it is — but it doesn’t provide all the functionality that I need. And I’m unwilling to wait for Apple to finally improve it.
Enough is enough, it’s time to move on. And I’m moving on with the Mac mini.
You didn’t think the folks at iFixit would simply teardown the iPhone 4 and call it a day, did you? They’ve now gone the extra mile and done a detailed teardown of the iPhone 4′s gyroscope with a little help from Chipworks. That’s of course a MEMS (or microelectromechanical system) gyroscope and, according to Chipworks, nearly identical to an off-the-shelf STMicroelectronics L3G4200D gyroscope, which is actually what they used for the teardown. What’s more, they also went even further and put another gyroscope (not used in the iPhone 4) under an electron microscope just to illustrate how incredibly complex and minute the structure of MEMS gyroscopes are. Head on past the break for a glimpse of that, and hit up the link below for the complete teardown.
Blue Microphones, as their name suggests, are generally all about the audio, and they’ve a strong reputation among musicians for the quality of their hardware. The Blue Microphones Eyeball 2.0 takes the distinctive Blue Snowflake and discretely adds a pop-out 2.0-megapixel webcam; once we’d finished popping the lens in and out of its spring-loaded silo we set to work reviewing it.
You’re unlikely to mistake the Eyeball 2.0 as anything other than a microphone first. The shiny mesh-covered ball rotates on its twisting mount, and has a sturdy U-shaped metal bracket that – depending on orientation – either hooks onto the top of your laptop display or stands the Eyeball 2.0 up on the desk. On the back is a regular miniUSB port which you can use with the three foot USB cable Blue supply or any you might already have lying around. There’s also a plastic case section which slots onto the back of the Eyeball 2.0’s stand and gives you a place to tuck the cable for transport, together with a rubber disk that, slotted over the rear of the stand, acts as a counterbalance of sorts for using the webcam on top of CRT monitors.
At first glance you could miss the webcam functionality altogether, since the tiny lens is hidden in a spring-loaded nub at the side. Installation didn’t require any specific drivers; we simply plugged the Eyeball 2.0 in and both OS X and Windows recognized it straight away. From there it’s a matter of choosing the appropriate input in whatever app you’re using; on our MacBook Pro we were able to toggle between the Eyeball 2.0 and the built-in iSight webcam through the camera menu in Photo Booth.
In comparison to the iSight, color balance was roughly on a par but the Eyeball 2.0 tends toward over-exposure. Still, there’s more detail and contrast, though fast moving subjects still lead to blurring when you’re recording video. The Blue webcam also has a slightly narrower field of vision.
As for audio, however, the Eyeball 2.0 comes into its own. More sensitive than the in-built microphones of the PC and Mac laptops we compared it with, it also boasts a more balanced range and less of a tendency to lose the bottom end to crunchy mess. Blue are positioning it as ideal for amateur musicians and podcast recorders, and we’d have to agree.
Problem is, the Snowflake offers the exact same audio performance without the somewhat underwhelming webcam functionality, and saves $20/£15 off the list price. With an MRSP of $79.99/£74.95 versus the $59.99/£59.95 of the Snowflake, we’d plump for Blue Microphones’ core skills with the latter and look elsewhere for our video needs.
That didn’t take too long, did it? That pulled EVO 4G update promising a handful of fixes for WiFi, Exchange, and battery life (no Froyo yet, sorry) is back online according to our contacts at Sprint — and indeed, we’re getting prompted on our own unit, so that’s that. Go forth, readers; get your update on, now with less brick than ever before.
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
Update: To be clear, you don’t need to apply this update if you already have done so successfully — the only change that we’re aware of here is that attempting to apply the update multiple times won’t kill the phone.
New Android 3.0 Gingerbread details have emerged, courtesy of notorious mobile industry insider Eldar Murtazin of mobile-review and his Russian-language Digestive podcast. According to Murtazin – handily translated by UnwiredView – we can expect Gingerbread in mid-October 2010 with the first handsets preinstalled with the new OS arriving in November/December. They’ll be impressive beasts, too; minimum hardware requirements are apparently a 1GHz processor, 512MB of RAM, and a 3.5-inch screen or larger, with up to 1,280 x 760 resolution displays supported on 4-inch or bigger handsets.
Meanwhile the UI as a whole will be updated, with Google apparently looking to the Nexus One’s gallery app for their inspiration. Expect plenty of animation and transitions throughout, which should tax those CPUs a little.
As for positioning, Google are apparently set to officially split Android into two tiers, with 2.1 and 2.2 Froyo co-existing alongside 3.0 Gingerbread. The 2.x OSes will serve the mass-market devices – and give HTC, Motorola and others a place for their customized UIs – while Android 3.0 Gingerbread will cater for the high-end flagships.
Update: Guess we could’ve spoken too soon. Murtazin is backtracking on his earlier comments, claiming that Gingerbread and Android 3.0 aren’t in fact the same thing and that the Q4 release may be more like Android 2.3.
SEOUL, Korea (AVING) — Samsung Electronics announced ‘N230′, the latest addition to its N-Series netbook range in Korea market. With a sleek profile, stunning premium black finish and ultra-convenient features, the N230 will appeal to design-conscious consumers looking for the ultimate experience in mobile computing.
No effort has been spared in designing the exclusive N230, with its well-harmonized finish of glossy, mat and patterned black surfaces. Weighing less than 1kg and just 23.2mm thick, it is a super-slim and ultra-portable netbook, perfect for the go-anywhere mobile user. It also features an ergonomic island keyboard, increasing the stylish looks while reducing users’ wrist strain when typing for extended periods.
New Android 3.0 Gingerbread details have emerged, courtesy of notorious mobile industry insider Eldar Murtazin of 
