Global Nerdy

I had hoped that these three entries chronicling my troubles with installing Release Candidate 1 of Microsoft's Vista operating system would mark the last of the annoyances I'd encounter, but that wasn't to be. My new problem: registration.

Vista would nag me time and again: “You have to register this software, otherwise it's going to stop running! You have x days left!” As Murphy's Law would have it, the OS would always nag me when I had something more important to do.

The period during which I could run Vista without registering with the mother ship in Redmond passed while I was away at ISPCON. When I returned, my PC desktop greeted me with a dialog box telling me that if I wanted to use the computer again, I would have to register. I clicked the button to start the registration process, and that's where the trouble began.

“You are not connected to the internet,” said a dialog box. This wasn't true: I'd been using the machine to surf the net before I left, and I hadn't changed any settings nor any of the cabling leading to the machine.

I decided to be thorough and eliminate the obvious culprits first. I took the network cable from the PC and plugged it into my PowerBook, and I was still able to connect to the net. I checked to see that the ports on my network switch were working, and they were. After going through a few more simple checks and fiddling with the cables, the only conclusion I could come to was that the machine was in fact connected to the net and that Vista just didn't realize it.

One of the options that the Vista dialog box gave me was to try to alter my internet connection settings. I chose this option. The only connection option it offered me was PPPoE — typical for home DSL and cable modems, but completely wrong for the office network. I might have been able to fix this by going to the internet or networking control panels, but I was effectively locked out of them until I registered Vista.

Another option offered by Vista was to register via modem. This was a non-option, as the machine didn't have one.

I was left with one final option: registration by phone. I dialed the toll-free number, where a voice activated system suggested that I try registering using the online method, as it's the easiest one. It then asked me to read eight or nine groups of numbers displayed on the screen and then asked me to enter eight or nine groups of numbers. The whole process took about five minutes and was as painless as a process like that could be.

Once the registration was complete, the system showed a dialog box informing me that I should reboot the machine, which I did. When the reboot was complete, I fired up a browser and found that the machine was connected to the 'net again. Even though I was relieved, I groaned — why did it mangle the 'net connection after my “trial period” had ended, only to restore it after I'd registered?

Experiences like this are why I find myself using Windows less and less.

Over at the blog that I'm paid to write — the Tucows Blog — I've posted a podcast of the ISPCON Fall 2006 keynote featuring Doc Searls and Tucows CEO Elliot Noss, Internet Service: The Fifth Utility?, in which they talk about the 'net as a utility on par with things like roads, water, electricity and waste management. The podcast runs nearly 59 minutes, which is good if you've got a long commute home tonight.

Link

Microsoft's Zune wasn't the only gadget to hit the street this week. The New York Times has this story on the launch of Sony's PlayStation 3:

Angel Paredes, who otherwise lives in a Manhattan apartment, spent three nights this week on a sidewalk at 56th Street and Madison Avenue. That is the price he paid to be first in line at Sony Plaza to buy a new PlayStation 3 — that and the $600 cost of the video game console.

“Everybody in my family thought it was pretty crazy,” said Mr. Paredes, a 31-year-old stock-market day trader. It could have been worse, he said: Sony left the bathrooms open.

And at least he had company. Die-hard video game players began standing in line over the last few days in New York, San Francisco and elsewhere to be among the first owners of the Sony PlayStation 3 when it went on sale at midnight last night.

Sony may be a minor player in PCs, and a has-been in portable music, but they've still got a massive franchise in console gaming, so they too have a strong position in the battle for the digital living room.

The pricing of the PS3 looks like a giant weakness: Microsoft's Xbox 360, which has had a year-long head start, sells for $399 (the Xbox 360 Core doesn't have a hard drive, and goes for $100 less), and Nintendo's Wii (to be released this Sunday) undercuts them both at $249. Moreover, Microsoft has had a year to get their production to scale and for their component prices to drop. At this point, iSuppli estimates that Microsoft's costs per Xbox 360 are actually lower than the retail price. Sony may get there in time, but the same iSuppli teardown report has Sony losing $241 on every 60GB unit they sell for now.

On the other hand, it sure makes the PS3 look like a bargain: $840-worth of computing power for only $600.

Hey, kids! Go tell Mom and Dad about the great bargain you found them!

Link

Tags: Sony, Playstation 3, Xbox 360, Microsoft, Nintendo, Wii

While we're on the subject of mythical iPhones, why don't we address some of the other fantasy features? Once again, AppleInsider has (more) scoop about Apple's forthcoming Nokia-killer:

Apple Computer's much anticipated iPod cell phone will include a 2.0-megapixel digital camera when it arrives late first quarter or early second quarter of next year, according to a new report out of Taiwan.

The China Times said Thursday the device, which will merge traditional cellular capabilities with Apple's legendary iPod digital music player technology, has been finalized and released to manufacturing.

Neat.

It will also feature a case made from unicorn hide speckled with pixie dust.

Link

Tags: Apple, iPhone, camera

One might say that for Aaron Swartz, one of the people behind Reddit, the honeymoon resulting from their purchase by Conde Nast/Wired is over. The problem is that one would be wrong — judging from some earlier entries in his blog, there wasn't a honeymoon at all, at least from Aaron's point of view.

Here's a snippet from his latest blog entry, Office Space, in which he describes what it's like to work at his new digs, the Wired offices in SOMA:

You wake up in the morning, take some crushing public transit system or dodge oncoming traffic to get to work, grab some food, and then sit down at your desk. If you're like most people, you sit at a cube in the middle of the office, with white noise buzzing around on every side. We're lucky enough to get our own shared office, but it's not much better since it's huge windows overlook a freeway and the resulting white noise is equally deadening.

Wired has tried to make the offices look exciting by painting the walls bright pink but the gray office monotony sneaks through all the same. Gray walls, gray desks, gray noise. The first day I showed up here, I simply couldn't take it. By lunch time I had literally locked myself in a bathroom stall and started crying. I can't imagine staying sane with someone buzzing in my ear all day, let alone getting any actual work done.

While I'd rather have my own office, I can't complain too loudly about the open office space at Tucows. It's not ideal, but I've worked in worse setups, and it's possible to be productive in such an environment. It may have helped that I've done my time at computer labs back in University, back when home machines didn't have the muscle to run Unix and could only hook up to the network via a 14.4 modem. I understand the bit about the noise from the highway; I worked in a San Francisco warehouse building near the same highway back in 2000 and 2001 and know how noisy it can get.

As for distractions from co-workers, I don't mind. I often welcome it, but that's my ENTP personality type, and talking to people is part and parcel of holding the title of technical evangelist.

While I would bristle at some of the the technology diktats set by Conde Nast (standard-issue old iBooks, only one approved email client, the administrative website is accessible only via the standard-issue machines), I don't think I'd have as big an issue with the Wired office environment. In fact, I'd probably say “Whoa! I work at Wired!” every few minutes for the first month.

I'm not as inclined as some commenters to Aaron's post to dismiss it as whining; I hung out with him quite a bit at the first O'Reilly Emerging Technologies Conference back in early 2002 and consider him a friend. I don't think that writing such a blog entry so early in his tenure as a Conde Nast/Wired employee is going to make management feel happy, but it does make for some interesting reading.

I wonder how long he's going to stay there.

Perhaps his entry should lead you to ask yourself this question if you're an office worker: Is Aaron having a “who moved my cheese” spell or unsuited to office life? Or is he right, and have you swallowed the Big Lie?

It looks like Bloomberg has started to dig into the rumor that a Taiwanese contract manufacturer, Hon Hai (which does business as Foxconn) has secured contract to make 12 million iPod mobile phone handsets for Apple.

Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., the world's largest contract electronics manufacturer, declined to confirm or deny a newspaper report that it will make mobile phones with iPod music-player functions for Apple Computer Inc.

The company won a contract to make 12 million iPod handsets, the Commercial Times reported today, citing unidentified industry sources. Taipei-based Hon Hai doesn't comment on market rumor, spokesman Edmund Ding said, while Vincent Tong, at Hon Hai's handset-making unit, also declined to comment.

I ignored this rumor when it surfaced yesterday, since it originated (or rather, it's translation originated) with the less-than-dependable DigiTimes. We'll see, I guess.

At any rate, this rumor has taken on some more heft as a few Wall Street analysts have plugged the handset numbers into their revenue models for AAPL, seeing some significant new cash flowing to One Infinite Loop. This story from AppleInsider quotes Bear Stearns' Andy Neff's take on the Foxconn rumors.

"Extrapolating the news reported by Commercial Times in Taiwan (of Hon Hai shipping 12 million Apple iPhones in the first half of 2007), we ran some numbers to get a sense of the incremental impact," Bear Stearns analyst Andy Neff wrote in a research note to clients Wednesday morning.

The analyst, who had been modeling the Cupertino, Calif.-based iPod maker to earn $3.07 per share on $24.5 billion in revenue during 2007, said sales of the new device could add an additional $0.70 in earnings-per-share and $6 billion in revenue.

"Our estimates include 30 percent potential cannibalization of total (current) iPod unit sales by iPhone introduction," he wrote.

Neff's other assumptions (which are probably of more interest to buyers of Apple phones than buyers of Apple shares) are that the phone itself would be priced at $300 without a carrier subsidy.

Which raises the question of just how Apple would decide to break into the phone market? In the US and Canada, mobile phones are sold largely as a subsidized accessory to your wireless service contract. The carrier absorbs some of the cost of the handset in exchange for a one or two year commitment. As a consequence, they control the user experience (electing to disable features that might conflict with their business strategies) and the branding to some degree (my Motorola handset has T-Mobile logos on it). If there are two things Apple guards with intense passion, they're the user experience of their products, and their branding. Seems like the conventional way to sell mobile phones doesn't apply to Apple.

Some have speculated that Apple might start their own mobile phone service, leasing the wholesale wireless network from one of the large carriers to create a Mobile Virtual Network Operation (MVNO). Virgin Mobile is an example of the MVNO business. Unfortunately, it's one of the very few examples of a successful MVNO: Disney, ESPN, MTV, and many others have tried, and failed, to create MVNOs that are extensions of their core brands.

Wired's Leander Kahney took a look at this situation a couple of days ago, and raised an interesting third possiblity:

The most likely scenario, as Jupiter analyst Ian Fogg has pointed out, is that the iPhone will be a stand-alone device that will accept a standard SIM card. You'll pop the SIM card out of your current cell phone and plug it into the iPhone. It'll be just like buying an unlocked handset from Asia, except you'll buy it at an Apple store instead of on Craigslist.

An iPhone with no provider strings attached would be better for the online iTunes store than selling tunes over the airwaves, as some cell companies are trying to do.

Instead of cutting deals with carriers, Apple stays neutral. It also stays in control of the user experience, branding, and selling, keeping Apple front-and-center with the customer.

Could that work? Well, there's a small population of gadget freaks who will buy imported, unlocked handsets at a premium for their exclusive features (their size, finish, software, etc), but that's not a large enough market for Apple to care about. What may be on Apple's mind, however, is the number of people willing to spend $250 for an 8GB iPod nano. Might they be willing to spend, say, $50 more to have that iPod nano come with a phone? That's a pretty interesting possiblity. Where it's difficult for someone to justify buying a mobile handset from Nokia or Motorola when it's available for less when bought through a carrier (after all, it's the same handset regardless of whether it's subsidized or not), Apple's working with a very different value proposition.

Apple may be one of the few companies who can end-run the carriers, since they're not selling a phone; they're selling an iPod that happens to have a phone feature.

Link

Tags: Apple, iPod, phone, MVNO, Bear Stearns, Foxconn, Hon Hai, iPhone

By now, you've probably seen the news splashed all over Techmeme about the decision by Google, Microsoft and Yahoo! to support SiteMaps. In case you haven't, you can check out these articles:

   
• Microsoft's Live Search Blog

   

• Yahoo!'s Search Blog

   

• Search Engine Watch

   

• Official Google Webmaster Central Blog

   

• Google Blogoscoped

The news of the agreement is everywhere. What you won't find easily is a layperson-friendly explanation of what SiteMaps are. That is, unless you happen to be a Global Nerdy reader.

What is a SiteMap, Anyway?

A SiteMap is an XML file that contains information about one or more URLs on a site. The information on the URLs is for the benefit of search engines and other applications that crawl or index the site.

The minimum information that a SiteMap must provide is a list of URLs. Normally, a search engine would have to explore all the links on your site to build a map of it; a SiteMap listing all the public URLs on your site would ensure that your site got indexed more quickly and that no URL got missed.

If you're so inclined, you can provide the following additional information for any URL in your SiteMap:

• “Last Modified” date and time. This is the date and time on which the page corresponding to the URL was last updated.
• Change Frequency. This describes how likely the page corresponding to the URL is to change. This value can be one of:   
         
  • always (Used to describe pages that are different every time they are accessed)

         

  • hourly

         

  • daily

         

  • weekly

         

  • monthly

         

  • yearly

         

  • never (Used to describe pages that are archived)

     

  Note that these are hints to the search engine and not commands — a search engine may be programmed to very occasionally crawl a page whose change frequency is declared as “never”.

• Priority. The priority of the page corresponding to the URL relative to other pages in the site, on a scale of 0.0 (lowest) to 1.0 (highest), with the default being 0.5. Note that this is a relative scale; giving all your site's URL a priority rating of 1.0 simply tells the search engine that no page on your site is more important than any other.

Keep in mind that SiteMaps are simply a way of giving search engines a listing of URLs and few bits of information about them. They're not directives to be followed by the search engines or their spiders. What each search engine does with the information in your site's SiteMap will vary from engine to engine.

That's really all there is to SiteMaps if you choose to ignore the XML gobbledeegook (and if you really want that gobbledeegook, see the SiteMaps Protocol page). Like the last agreement between the major search engine players — the agreement to support the “nofollow” attribute for links — the technical component is incredibly simple; the notable thing is the cooperation between the major players.