Unconventional Updates

I recently received my invite in to the Google Wave Preview Program and I’ve been looking around to see what all the buzz is about.

Google Wave is what Google calls the successor to email. It is a web-based application that combines email, instant messaging, social networking and group collaboration techniques. Rather than emails, you send ‘waves’, which sort of make emails look like telegraphs. Waves are interactive, real-time and have a whole range of functions. You can use them to organise events, share photos real-time, brainstorm ideas, collaborate on reports or notes, or even just send a message. If you enable the function, recipients can edit your waves, and you can later on. Its great for when you send that message you really didn’t mean to send, you can just click delete even though its already been sent, or just edit that spelling mistake.

The application is quite customisable, with all the functions nicely grouped together in arrangable panels. Whilst the primary function of Google Wave is to communicate with others who use Google Wave, there is a sort of ‘backwards compatibility’ option to send  messages to email addresses, and likewise receive emails through a username@googlewave.com email address. This will probably boost the early adoption, seeing as the program wouldn’t be much use without this feature as there will only be a small amount of initial users.

Social networking, whilst present, is limited to just a half-hearted user profile and a sort of creative use of Waves. Its good for communicating socially with friends and such with the integration of email, IM and gadgets, however not so good on the actual networking aspect due to the lack of ways to find new friends. The incorporation of gadgets in to Waves is quite clever. For example if you want to send a Wave invitation to a bunch of friends to your party, you can add a weather gadget for the day. Why? Well mainly because you can.

I think that Google Wave would be brilliant if there was one more thing. Ubiquitous use. Google Wave will need to be a universal email replacement rather than an geeky alternative in order for it to live to its full potential. Otherwise it’ll just be used as a regular email client as only a handful of people will have the capabilities to receive and use a Wave. My opinions of Wave are purely speculation as I have hardly been able to actually use it due to my mediocre friends list, and due to the general computer illiteracy we are surrounded by, it may just stay that way. I think Google really does overestimate the general public with all its ‘revolutionary’ apps.

And the bit you’ve been waiting for. I have 25 Google Wave invitations up for grabs. To win them, all you have to do is write in the comments why you think you deserve one. If I deem you worthy, I’ll send you an invite. So you’ll want to post the comment with your Google Account, or write your email address if you don’t mind being picked up by a spambot.

Renegade

A lot has happened in the last couple of weeks. After several years, Gmail came out of Beta. And Google has announced plans to release an operating system. This OS will be based around the Chrome browser and is due in the second half of 2010

Google has made it clear that this new project is separate from Android. Where Android was designed to work across a variety of devices from phones to set-top boxes to netbooks. Google Chrome OS is being created for people who spend most of their time on the web, and is being designed to power computers ranging from small netbooks to full-size desktop systems.

Based on this information I would assume that Google is simply adding onto their current browser to make it operational as an OS. This would mean making it boot from storage, adding protection, add-on support and the ability to store files on the computer’s local storage. These are necessities for the most basic operating systems. Aside from these changes the main if only program on the OS will be Chrome.

I can honestly see this making a decent sized dent in the netbook market for three reasons.

• Its free
• The hardware requirements will be minimal
• Its everything a netbook user requires

Anyways only time will tell.

Sandmonkey

Anyone sick of this yet? I know I am. If you’ve so much have been on the internet in the past fortnight you’ll no doubt have had to put up with some sort of advertisement for this film. It plays after every single YouTube video. I saw it on a billboard while playing Burnout Paradise. I heard it on the radio. I keep seeing it on adsense banners and it is really starting to irritate me.

Some say this shows really good advertising. I tend to disagree. Mainly as the constant adverts are actually putting me off clicking the links. And even though I must have seen it a thousand times over, all I’ve gathered from it is that its a horror movie where some girl snorts a fly. That and the fact that it was directed by the same director as Spiderman, which is supposed to make me interested in it. I also think its great how it doesn’t say his name, just “From the director of Spiderman”.

Who knows, it might even be a good film. But its annoyed me to the point where I don’t care. I call for a boycott of this film! These people are ruining my internet!

I would also call for a boycott of Google for allowing all this crappy advertising in to YouTube, however that would be difficult seeing as this blog is hosted by Google, we have a YouTube channel, Sandmonkey is addicted to YouTube, and what are we all going to do for searches? Use Bing? Ha! Like that's going to happen.

Renegade

Yeah. Two posts in one day. What are you going to do about it?

 
It looks fairly certain that the one company that has Microsoft scared at the moment is Google. Google has clear dominance over the internet. Something that Bill Gates said there was no future in. Something that every single one of us has come to rely on. I would hazard a guess to say that most of you spend more time in your web browser than you do running applications, and its that area of computing that Microsoft are very late contenders to. Google were the first to make the internet easily accessible. In a way they could be attributed to its success, Google revolutionised the search engine, allowing the average dial-up user to look up what they liked without knowing the exact URL. Since then, Google has grown from a couple of programmers to a multi-billion dollar corporation and now has the Microsoft crosshairs pointed right at them.

Google has done what Apple do. Taken what's already there and made it cleaner and user-friendly. However Google has done two things differently, they don’t charge ridiculous amounts of money and they don’t restrict their software to death. Almost all their software is open source, and their web applications are nearly all free, its great for developers, enthusiasts and casual users alike.

The problem for Microsoft is that everyone knows Google. The word Google has almost become synonymous with the World Wide Web. The term ‘googling’ is part of everyday language. And it doesn’t matter how good Bing is, people are going to stick with what they know. For most people its all they know. But Microsoft are persistent, they recently announced that they will be making a free version of Microsoft Office 2010 available for use through the web browser. The advantage of this would be the increase in collaboration and also the fact a user will be able to access it from anywhere and on any OS, as long as the plug-in is compatible. Direct competition towards Google’s web applications such as Google Docs.

I don’t know how this will take off. We have here two very well known and recognisable services. Microsoft Office, today’s industry standard. Microsoft blew Lotus and WordPerfect out of the picture a long time ago, now Office is the only mainstream closed source Office suite still in the running for Windows. And then we have Google, characterised by large friendly childlike letters instantly recognisable to anyone who’s used a computer. Who is the public going to flock to? Only time will tell.

I personally think that Office will do well with those unwilling to pay for an upgrade. The concept of an Office suite in a web browser is interesting, but I like to keep my applications offline, just because of the unpredictability and the limitations of the internet. But I’ll give it a go, because I’m stingy like that.

Renegade

(Sandmonkey will be back soon for those missing him)

Everywhere I look on the internet I see iPhone. iPhone this, iPhone that. With the release of the iPhone 3GS with amazing innovative ideas such as the compass app, its hard to browse the internet without being constantly reminded about what you cannot afford. I am fed up about constant news and praise for a device that does everything my phone does yet prettier, and I’m fed up with not being able to check news sites without 4 out of 5 articles being about the AMAZING iPhone 3GS! Get over it guys!

Don’t get me wrong. The iPhone is not bad at all, I’d be very happy with one. I would probably get one if I had the money. But I hate this idea that everyone seems to have that the iPhone is now the only Smartphone worth buying. I think this phone has become the most overrated piece of hardware in history, all as a direct result of Apple’s brainwashing advertising campaigns. They have an amazing talent at convincing the public that technology that has been available for years is actually some revolutionary exclusive feature that has “never been seen before”. They also exude the “ooh shiny” effect, the theory that if it looks sleek, small and costs your right kidney, then it must be good.

Anywizzle, my hate for Apple and the dogmatic sheep we call the general public can be found in previous posts. This post is about the HTC Hero. The HTC Hero is a new Google Android powered phone, and whilst Android has never really appealed to me, this phone has caught my attention.

First of all the “ooh shiny” effect hit me. The redesigned GUI of Android looks brilliant. Some other themes I’ve seen seems too cluttered and too much like that horrible Nintendo DS interface, this one seems quite sleek and useable. Of course this has already received criticism for “copying the iPhone’s interface”. Because, y’know, Apple invented and copyrighted the idea of making things look pretty.

Hey look!

But its not just the aesthetics of the OS, the phone itself looks brilliant. Unlike many people, I have no problems with buttons when they let me do things faster. Touch screen is great until the novelty wears off and you realise you have to press 10 virtual buttons to get anywhere. It has a few shortcut buttons and a trackball by the looks of it. It also has a 5MP camera, which is nothing to be sniffed at. Oh, and it supports Flash.

Sorry about that breaking news added as an afterthought. Yes! I said Flash support! You heard it here! All I can say is finally! And it better not be as crappy as PSP flash support.

Anyway, I like the look of this phone. And whilst it will probably be just as expensive as the iPhone, and still out of my price range, I’m looking forward to see what kind of impact it makes in the market. Although I predict that it will be either be tagged an “iPhone wannabe” or no one will have even heard of it. Because if it isn’t Apple branded, there’s no point.

Renegade

Microsoft is a company known to everyone. Nearly everyone runs an operating system built by Microsoft and just as many people use Office. But Microsoft has had some tough competition in the last couple of years. It used to just be Microsoft VS Apple, but I think it is now Microsoft VS Google.

Microsoft’s online services have always been in constant competition with Google’s. Search engines, calendars, translations, blogging and email are just a few of things they compete in. To add to this list, Goggle recently moved in to confront Microsoft’s Office suite with Google Docs. Docs provide web based word processing, spreadsheets and presentations to the everyday user. Google has also moved in on Microsoft’s dominant web browser, Internet Explorer by releasing Chrome. And with the recent ruling by the European Union against internet Explorer being bundled in with new versions of Windows, it seems that it will give Chrome an even greater share of the market.

But Microsoft hasn’t been one to lay back and let others go on ahead. Bing is Microsoft’s new answer to Google. It’s a search engine and I’ve got to say, it not bad. I’m tempted to start using it instead of Google now. The results it brings up are more useful and relevant than Microsoft’s previous ‘Windows Live Search’. The user interface in more engaging than Google’s plain and outdated look. It also offers great related search function, although this differs slightly when you search for images or videos by giving you options on the format and style of the images or videos you want. I also found it useful when Bing gave me a preview of the website, image or video my mouse was hovering over.

As for Office, I don’t know how long Microsoft can keep kidding themselves, but people are not going to keep buying their Office suite when just as good services can be found online. Unless they add some amazing features that can’t be found anywhere else, office just won’t sell nearly as well as it has been. They will be forced to start distrusting it for free or just give up on it.

Will Google end Microsoft’s reign? I certainly hope not. Microsoft is one of those few companies that I don’t look down on. They create decent software and hardware which doesn’t restrict you nearly as much as others, and just generally appeals to me.

Sandmonkey

Apple has, since its conception, positioned itself as the anti-Microsoft.

It has incorporated the Google-like “Don’t be evil” aspect and uses the ever-so-cheesy marketing technique which is that they are in it for you. They don’t care about the billions of dollars they make a year, they are in it wholly and specifically for you. Because you -the customer - is the one that matters. And this gives you that warm fuzzy feeling inside. Because you know that your overpriced laptop and iPod is only overpriced because of the extra amounts of love (that they had to import from China) that they used in the production.

To me, Apple has proved itself to be the exact opposite. Their total disregard for me, the customer, has annoyed me to the extent that I have to write this blog to let loose my fury, instead of crushing my iPod Touch.

Probably the thing I hate most about Apple is their profound arrogance. Steve Ballmer of Microsoft is arrogant, but he hasn’t got anything on the Apple employees and fanboys. Not only do they claim that their products are the best thing since sliced bread, they lie about features and they openly mock other products. I imagine Dell weren’t very happy when an XPS 410 was shown on the Apple website with about 50 unnecessary cables streaming out of the back of it, compared against the angelic iMac. And its no wonder Microsoft has finally begun to retaliate against those ‘Hi, I’m a Mac’ adverts.

I especially find this press release funny, where they inform iPod users that some of the iPods came off of the production line carrying a Windows virus. After informing us all of this, they said “As you might imagine, we are upset at Windows for not being more hardy against such viruses, and even more upset with ourselves for not catching it.”. How arrogant can you be? You let a virus get past your safeguards and you blame Windows. You are essentially blaming Windows for being too popular, because as far as I know, Mac OSX is the easiest OS to create a virus for. Whilst it has a UNIX grounding, it has no anti-virus protection. Linux is bundled with a firewall and anti-virus for a reason. Anyway, why would you write a Mac virus? It has less than 10% of the market share. Macs are only “hardy” against viruses because they weren’t written to target Macs.

Another thing is their desire to squeeze at much money as they can out of you. Whether you are a potential customer, or a current customer. I am the owner of a $329 iPod Touch. I bought it, and it is literally all they gave me. Apart from a USB cable so I can activate it and a pair of earphones, they didn’t waste any extra money on me. They didn’t give me a wall socket charger, and I was required to download and install iTunes (which I also hate) before I was even allowed to turn it on. Now that I do have it, I’ve had to buy good earphones, a battery pack to stop it running out of power every two hours, and jailbroken it. And now I hear they want to charge me extra for the privilege of using the new features in the upcoming iPhone 3.0 OS.

So wait…I went and bought your product, and now you want me to pay extra in order to activate the inbuilt Bluetooth module that I have already paid for!

Their secrecy, protectiveness and restrictive behaviour is something I hate. They never allow third party Macs to be created, creating a monopoly. They only let approved applications to be used on the iPhone and iPod. They only allow certain file types and shun the popular WMA file format, despite its high quality and smaller file size. And then, what they do make is double the price of all its competitors equivalents. But wait…we can’t use them because we can’t use third party hardware on our iPhone and iPod.

Apple represents everything it tries to set itself apart from. It is a money-crazed arrogant mega-corporation that is stuck so far up its own arse that they have forgotten what they apparently stand for. They started off like Google did, claiming that they strive for perfection and will not do they same evil things that M$ does to get its money. Google has so far kept its promise.

Oh, oh, oh, there was something else in my iPod Touch packaging. Where they could have put a manual or a CD with iTunes on, they decided to make enough room to include some Apple logo stickers…

…they made excellent tinder.

Renegade

The world calls for the execution of Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page after Thursday when their websites were unavailable for a full…one and a half hours…

How dare they cut me off from their services for such an obscene amount of time. I pay them absolutely nothing, and this is how they treat me? I am absolutely disgusted that they have the gall to do this to us. What have they ever done for me? I mean, apart from providing us with the easiest way to navigate the web, allowing us 7GB of free email space, and giving us a way to post videos on the internet for free. What have they done for me to allow them leniency? I give no money for the right to use their apps and blogging website, and I pay nothing to gain access to maps from every corner of the Earth. I do not expect to pay nothing for this kind of treatment. I cried non-stop from the moment of the crash to the moment of the fix. I’m never trusting you, or ANY online apps, ever ever ever again. *sob*

Last Thursday, Google had a 90 minute outage at about midday US time. I don’t know the exact problem, but it seems the thousands of computers at the Googleplex decided to act like mine does every day and stick its middle finger up at the employees. Its a good job that they fixed it within an hour and a half, mainly because if they’d left it another 10 minutes, my bet is that they’d have been suddenly overrun by hysterical geeks in tanks out for blood.

I didn’t know anything about it until today, but when I did hear of it I did a search to find out more. Instead of finding actual information, all I can see is rants. Rants on blogs. Rants on twitter. Rants on news websites. Apparently Google is akin to life support, an essential component of our lives. So important that we can’t stand being disconnected for a measly ninety minutes. If Google, Gmail and YouTube really means that much to you, I think you need to rethink your priorities. Sure, Blogger went down too. So this website would have been inaccessible for a while. I wouldn’t have been able to access Analytics to stalk our readers either. So what? It was over in a matter of an hour. This also seems to have “opened the eyes” of many tech experts. It has brought them to the attention of the problems associated with online apples. They seem to think that this is proof that the applications running on external servers are a bad idea. Web based mail, online storage, cloud computing, online stores to name a few have now been deemed unreliable and untrustworthy. But seriously, if one 90 minute glitch within an almost untarnished record can shatter your faith in web-based apps then you are holding back technologic advances. You already depend on the effectiveness of computers, and I don’t know about you but my internet and computer has stopped working many times, a lot more that the Googleplex has. If you want to debate the safety of online apps, then you might as well debate the use of the computer while you’re at it.

I actually feel strangely happy about the news. It seems even Google can’t escape the computer problems that plague me day to day.

Renegade

YouTube is without doubt the most famous and popular personal video broadcasting websites today. Sure there are other websites that let you upload your videos, but none with the same feel or functionality. Because of this, YouTube has become to the hub for all aspiring filmmakers and comedians who can’t get TV airtime. But apparently user content isn’t good enough for YouTube’s owner, Google.

Google’s marketing strategy is pretty simple. They create and buy up new technologies which they release to the general public for free, then they splatter it with advertisements to get some money out of it. When I say some, I refer to the US$21billion they generated in 2008 alone. Which to those who aren’t good with numbers, that’s US$21,000,000,000. That’s a lot. However YouTube doesn’t seem to working out for them. Some of you may have noticed those irritating irrelevant advertisements they’ve just implemented that pop up when you want to watch a video. Do you click on them? I sure don’t, I click frantically on the little X until it goes away. Which is probably why Google isn’t getting much revenue from YouTube.

So, in a radical step, Google plans to revamp YouTube to cater for professional content. Much like Hulu in the US, BBC Online in the UK and ABC iView in Australia. This way Google can persuade corporations, previously unwilling to advertise on user-made content, to sponsor the TV shows and movies that will be uploaded instead. I however foresee two problems:

1. The fate of user content. Will the whole purpose of YouTube fade away in to “just another” internet TV service.

2. Don’t tell me. Viewable in the United States only right?

According to YouTube, users will still have their videos and channels, but it will be in a separate section to the commercial stuff. But if the website changes to the extent that user content is given less importance, it will stop attracting as many aspiring filmmakers. I imagine that all the hardcore video bloggers will carry on, but what about all of the less significant channels on YouTube?

And will they be using the same excuse as every other notable internet broadcasting service? That they can’t show TV shows and movies internationally because of copyright issues. Which really does annoy me. I can’t watch Hulu on my computer, I can’t use Netflix through my Xbox, I can’t download student copies of Microsoft software because I not in the US education system, and if they restrict my access to YouTube too, part of my already broken soul will die. Slowly.

But I could be wrong. This could be the best thing that happened to YouTube. I mean, it could be worse, Apple could have bought it.

Renegade