It’s been a pretty busy week for Dell – word is that they’re creating a new iPod killer.  And this fact might’ve slightly overshadowed a more immediate occurrence – the arrival of Dell’s new desktops: Dell’s family-friendly Inspiron 518 and its stylish Studio Hybrid.  I think that the Studio Hybrid is an excellent device to show off in your living room (as opposed to a clunky typical-looking computer).  And, the importance placed on form-factor is noted – a leaf taken out of Apple’s book, perhaps?

With computer makers stepping the form-factor up, I think that this can only be a positive for the integration of computers into living rooms – something that I thought would have happened a lot sooner.  It started with PS3′s and Xbox 360′s being “media centres”, but Dell steps it up by connecting an actual PC to the TV.  However, I’m certain that I missed something – where is the TV tuner card?  Without it, the Dell Studio Hybrid certainly misses one major convenience – the ability to schedule and record TV shows onto your computer.  Asides from that, I can see few appealing reasons to house a computer in the living room.

Starting at $499 USD and $529 CDN (reasonable dollar matching, I suppose), the Dell Studio Hybrid is an affordable and interesting product.  It’s extensible, but only through Dell – after all, you’re taking a huge risk if you’re going to personally try fitting something in such a tiny and unique machine.  And although I don’t guarantee its commercial success, I’m certain that it’s a step in an interesting direction.

Press Release: http://www1.ca.dell.com/content/topic…&s=corp

It’s been said – repeatedly – that Windows Vista is a step down from Windows XP.  I’ve already taken my own stance on this – and as a user of Windows Vista, I think it’d be great if people stopped listening to what others did for a second and tried it on their own.  You know, independent thinking.  Apparently, Microsoft’s been thinking along the same lines, and launched the Mojave Experiment.

Users that have never tried Windows Vista were introduced to it under the disguise of Windows’ next operating system, codenamed Mojave.  Surprisingly enough, the users trying Vista for the first time actually liked it – and were then told it was Windows Vista.  They still liked it.

I think this was a great idea on Microsoft’s part, but I don’t want to come off as a Microsoft fanboy.  So I’ll stop endorsing Vista, and just leave you with a link and a few words: stop letting other people decide what you think, and decide for yourself.

Enjoy:

http://www.mojaveexperiment.com/#

There’s been huge buzz about Canonical and Ubuntu as of late, and I must say that I’m pretty impressed.  Mark Shuttleworth is emerging as a charismatic leader worthy to lead Ubuntu to battle, the blogosphere is going crazy, and Ubuntu is well on its way to hitting retail shelves.  I think that even though Ubuntu is a great product and operating system, it’s still not going to be enough as of yet – namely because of the lack of mainstream awareness.

Source: http://upload.wikimedia…_NASA.jpg

I realize that Canonical might not have the financial resources that Apple or Microsoft does, so I guess we can count the example of iPod ads out of the picture (I still feel that those iPod ads with dancing silhouettes are a huge factor in how they sold so well).  Still, if Ubuntu somehow manages to find their way to the front page of a huge mainstream newspaper or the main story on CNN, I’m sure that they would have reached many consumers that otherwise would never have heard of it.  Now, I’m not saying that Canonical has to work out a publicity stunt, but perhaps Shuttleworth could do a presentation or press conference that finds its way to G4 or something (start small, think big, right?).

Ubuntu is ready for mainstream, but we have to ask ourselves, is mainstream ready for Ubuntu?  Have a look at the success of Apple, the lack of general dissatisfaction and consumer reaction with Vista (not to say I personally don’t like Vista – I think it’s fine), and I think you’ll know the answer.

Microsoft’s got their work cut out for them. With a flopped operating system – by flopped, I mean not widely accepted nor comparably commercially-successful, not that it sucks – and the expectations of Windows 7 being of titanic proportions (it’s revolutionary, and it’s to be done in the next couple of years), Microsoft is going to have to completely blow us away, or lose customers by the flocks.

I’m not going to lie, I thought modular Windows was the best way to go. The article Ars Technica published really shook me up. All hope is not lost, however – Ars Technica assumed just one tiny thing that would make modular Windows suck: people would have to pay for it.

Free is the future of business, as Wired has stated. However, the only way I could see Microsoft actually implementing “free” would be giving away Windows and then charging subscriptions as Ars Technica had already suggested.

Thus, you might think I took it a bit out of context, but I think that it’s clear there are tons of other methods for companies like Microsoft to earn their money. The first one that struck my mind would be…

Advertising in Windows

It still might suck to some – but not as much as paying per module. Charge for that little banner at the corner of Windows 7, just like Microsoft charges for the little banner already implemented in Windows Live Messenger. It’s not going to be pretty, but everyone’s going to get used to it.

Just how much are they going to earn? Not enough – if the banner was as small or as un-intrusive as Windows Live Messenger’s. How about sticking one on the boot screen – it’s a pretty boring fifteen seconds without something to read, anyway. Or having Windows Sidebar’s gadgets flash around with bells and whistles? I’m sure that advertisers would be clawing by the dozens to try to get an advertisement on a certain region’s computers.

This also negates the possibility of pirating Windows. No more piracy – because you can really get the full-out version of Windows 7 for free. No CD-keys, no Microsoft “genuine” software crap. Sounds good, right?

The Solution:

Pay. You’ve got the power to turn off those damn bells and whistles, pay a hundred dollars just like you ordinarily would have for Windows 7. No more bells, no more whistles.

Charge the Developers

Make applying for developing a module for Windows go under two categories – the first for companies that will pay Microsoft a (possibly huge) premium and get free advertising banner boxed in their own application. The advertising banner thus introduces a medium for the developers to earn their own money.

The second category goes for freeware applications – which will be dominant in the sense that they are free, but still don’t have any advertisements on them. The freeware developer would then receive the credit he deserves, and probably a lot of donations too (even if it’s for something as simple as a school project).

Different Types of Modules

By now, you might’ve realized that I don’t see modules the same you might – I see every single application out there as a module. That might not be what Microsoft is up to, but I still think it’s an idea definitely worth thinking through. It’s going to be hard, and it’s going to be tough, and it’s definitely got the makings to stir up controversy, but it’s still an idea for free Windows that might not suck.

Actually, in retrospect, this all does sound kind of…dreary. Everything is controlled by Microsoft, as opposed to freedom that modules should be bringing. And people can dispel all that with just a $100 fee – is that enough to offset the revenue that advertising could bring in?

After all, it’s just an idea

The real world is leading the virtual world by example, and the virtual world could learn a few useful lessons. This banner/billboard idea is nothing new, but I think is still great solution for users that can’t afford (or don’t want to pay for) Windows and don’t mind advertising.

…err, the idea might not be too kind to developers though, it sounds kind of restricting.

I haven’t actually been paying much attention to Samsung due to all the attention I already give brands such as Sony Ericsson, Microsoft, Apple, et al. However, I’ve been noticing a lot of beautiful Samsung products cropping up lately, like the YP-P2, and now the Instinct announced by Sprint. What do these two items have in common? I have absolutely no idea…

…except for the fact they are both directly competing with Apple’s iPhone and iPod Touch. The Instinct is to be supported by Sprint, the iPhone already to AT&T. Why does Samsung choose to be the thorn in Apple’s side?

They’re Trying to Take Over

Let’s face it – Samsung’s come a long way from the 90s till now. From its unreliable reputation to its now glowing and competitive products, we saw the drive to compete against the huge players such as Sony and Toshiba. All I can assume is they are also trying to take Apple on, as they are the biggest of the big when it comes to the gadget market (around 70% of mp3 players out there are iPods!).

Can they do it? Can they actually surpass what Dell, Sony, and Creative have failed to do? The only piece strategy that I think they might need to bolster would be their marketing campaigns – where are they? Sure, you’ve got a video on Youtube. But, unless you want to stay second, you’re going to have to air way more commercials, Samsung! They’ve got the product. They’ve got the money.

Conclusion

Analysts always overlook that little fact that the iPod’s marketing campaigns were golden. And unless Samsung really puts some more “oomph” into its marketing campaign, add some creativity and heavy rotation, it’s never going to take a painful bite out of Apple.

What is going to happen to Samsung? I have no idea – but I think that I will be supporting both sides. I do believe Samsung’s products are very innovative and interesting – but Apple always seems to be a few jumps ahead of them (the iPhone was released way before the Instinct was announced, but the Instinct is a cooler name). Besides, I’ve got an iPod Video, so I can’t talk until it gets replaced. Maybe with a Samsung product.

Drawing more information from the well of Dailytech, I’ve discovered to my delight that Motorola will definitely remain in the mobile phone game.  In fact, Motorola’s so dedicated that they’ve decided to split into two separate companies – one dedicated to mobile phones and the other focused upon broadband and mobility services that the corporate companies and governments are just eatin’ right up.

This is great news.  A few months ago, I wrote about this predicament mostly with pessimism and regret because of the seeming lack of hope for the company.  However, I must say that I’m awed by Motorola’s resiliency and dedication to the business.  Damn, I feel good.

Now I don’t mean to be rude, but I hope they finally succeed this time around.  They need a revolutionary product like the original RAZR, one that challenges everything that we’ve come to define a cell phone as.  Sure, they can improve upon the products and step the camera’s megapixels up all they want – but I think all that has already come to a peak.  Someone out there is going to figure out an excellent idea, and once they do, they’re going to make their company extremely rich people.

Source: http://d.yimg.com/…fault-512×365.jpg

Visit:

http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detail.jsp?globalObjectId=9430_9359_23

Apparently so, according to Dailytech.  The latest version of SlySoft AnyDVD HD came with the ability to rip the Blu-ray DVD’s movie in high-def.  As both a tech enthusiast and a pretty stereotypical asian, I must say that I’m pretty interested in such a piece of news.  However, let it be known that I don’t pirate.  After all, if I started pirating, it could wreck the delicate balance between the two worlds of legitimacy and piracy.

Source: http://img.infotropic.com/i/061224_1g.jpg

What does this mean?  Since Blu-Ray’s defense has been cracked before, I suppose that Sony will be forced to invent a third method of encrypting the data.  And they’ll have to do it soon – because if they let this go as rampant as the forging of fake DVDs do, the Blu-Ray market will be saturated with cheap, fake copies of movies in their original high-definition format.  What a nightmare for the movie industry.

As a loyal movie fan (not a fanatic, just a fan), I suggest that you be very careful about which side you decide to take.  Sure, the piracy might seem much more affordable, but if everyone thought like that on a larger scale, we wouldn’t have any new movies to watch because the companies would all go broke.  They’re still fatcats – for now, but let’s face it: they’re not as fat as they once used to be.

2008 has been a huge year for Ultralight PC’s.  First and foremost, we saw the Asus EEE PC hitting store shelves and selling like hotcakes.  Their success has motivated Asus to create a whole line of computers based on the EEE branding, actually.   Then, at MacWorld ’08, Steve Jobs announced the coming of the Macbook Air.  Now, Lenovo’s hyped-up X300 is seeing its debut.

Source: http://gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2008/01/x300.jpg

The Lenovo X300 isn’t exactly the most well-hidden surprise of the year.  The picture right above this paragraph is one of the few that had been leaked and publicized by blogs such as Gizmodo a couple of months ago.  Many a critic had complained that the Lenovo X300 doesn’t look as “sexy” as the Macbook Air – and I find myself agreeing.  However, contrary to skepticism, I find myself thinking that the Lenovo X300 doesn’t have to look pretty to sell.

Source: http://www.product-reviews.net/wp-content/userimages/2008/02/x300_small.jpg

It’s a corporate product – simple as that.  In fact, since when was the last time Lenovo (or IBM for that matter) popular with the mainstream consumer world?  Probably around the same time you purchased your old beige IBM box – around eight years ago, when StarCraft was still popular.  In fact, I’ve got very vivid memories of purchasing it, one of the most exciting and defining moments of my life (I was wow-ed by the fish and maze screensavers on the Windows ’98 though, I feel obligated to admit).

Back on topic – thanks to its business appeal, it doesn’t have to look good.  All it has to do is perform, be affordable, and work.  That’s it.  The two products are directed towards different crowds, which is why they look so different event though they’re both ULPCs.  Hopefully I didn’t come off to angry, I just felt the need to express my own opinions urgently.  Besides, my first computer was an IBM – so get off their backs (ha ha, just kidding – hate them all you want, I assure you that I don’t mind).  Also, its got an optical drive: a DVD-burner, in fact, for copying those secret documents.  Oooh, aaah.

Source: http://www.stuff.co.nz/images/706311.jpg 

What this does mean, though, is that Lenovo has made a strategic move in capturing the market.  With Apple focused on the mainstream markets, Lenovo snuck around them and went straight to the corporations, and this will perhaps decrease the number of Macbook Airs being bought for company purposes.  Even though they do fit into the Manila envelope.

I haven’t explained the Lenovo X300 much, so I’ll let the official site do the talking.  Who knows, maybe you’re one of the few ordinary consumers that want one.

Visit:

http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/…

So far into the series of iPod Touch competitors, I’ve taken a brief look at four alternatives and how well they stack up against the iPod Touch. They’ve all been very tough competitors, but I think that this one is the toughest and most promising of the bunch. Released at around the same time as the iPod Touch, Samsung looked to capitalize on the same niche of the market with their product, the P2. From what I’ve found, there are three things that make the Samsung P2 exceptional.

Source: http://www.gadget-paradise.com/news_images/000071_samsung-p2.jpg

Aesthetics

The Samsung P2 definitely succeeded the most in this department in contrast to the rest of the iPod Touch competitors – it’s arguably the darker, sleeker, smaller twin brother of the iPod Touch. Its GUI looks great – typical Samsung quality (which is meant as a good thing, although some can interpret otherwise). It sports a 3″ screen – smaller than the iPod Touch’s 3.5″, but larger than the iPod Video’s 2.5″; the resolution is similarly slightly smaller in comparison to the iPod Touch (480x272px vs. 480x320px). The Samsung P2 is definitely a looker.

Video

I know that the Archos brothers play movies very nicely on their 800x480px screens, but the Samsung P2 is no wimp. Sporting a 480x272px screen, as mentioned a couple of sentences ago, it’s got a nearly perfect 16:9 resolution. With all this talk of widescreen and hi-def nowadays, the Samsung P2 sounds more like a device from the future than the norm.

Source: http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1159/1406111980_f6b6c5ce29_o.jpg

The Future of the P2

It’s got Bluetooth 2.0 integrated into it, which allows it to connect it to wireless headsets – ones similar to the headsets used with cellular phones. And that’s only the tip of the iceberg – rumour is Samsung plans to incorporate file sharing, between other P2s and PCs, which is actually a very feasible addition (all they’d have to do is mod the firmware, since the hardware is all ready to go).

A Couple of Cons

There’s only eight gigabytes of storage on the Samsung P2 – comparable to the cheapest version of the iPod Touch, but the difference is vast when the full potential of the iPod Touch is acknowledged (the maximum storage on the iPod Touch is thirty-two gigs – whopping, eh?). Also, there is no wi-fi incorporated into the P2 – I’m dearly hoping that Samsung retains the sleek shell of the P2, but incorporates wi-fi connectivity and more storage the next time around. All-in-all, it’s not too bad.

If you’re serious about how your gadgets look on the outside, or if you need something that just plays music or has a touch interface and you’re on a budget, the Samsung P2 is for you. However, if you desperately need wi-fi connectivity or have a huge multimedia collection, move on up the list of iPod Touch competitors, because this is the last.

[youtube j_2d32qkyIw]

It’s been great writing this series, but I’ll probably be leaving the runner-ups alone. To be honest, I’ve gotten pretty sick of writing about personal media players/digital audio players, and I’m pretty sure you’re just as sick of reading so many of them in such a short time. It’s ok – I’ve got a more broad variety of material planned for the next week or two.

Other iPod Touch Competitors:

1. Olympus M:Robe 500i
2. Archos 605 Wi-fi
3. Cowon Q5W
4. Archos 705
5. Samsung P2

Runner Ups:

• Cowon iAudio X7
• iRiver Clix 2
• Microsoft Zune

If there’s anything I’ve questioned doing (speaking in context to my blog articles, of course) recently, it would be possibly giving the Archos 605 Wi-fi less credit than it deserves. I concluded with the statement that it made a great personal media player, but its design simply wasn’t good enough – or “acceptable”, as the chief-reviewer over at APH Networks would say of my photos (I’m working on improving). Perhaps Archos themselves already had seen such a statement coming, and so created the Archos 705 Wi-fi – basically the Archos 605 Wi-fi, with a few more perks. In comparison to the iPod Touch, I think it’s got three advantages.

Source: http://www.pmptoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/official-archos-705.jpg

Aesthetics

Where the Archos 605 Wi-fi failed (epically, arguably) the Archos 705 picks up. Featuring a sweet, practically button-less design, the Archos 705 Wi-fi is a bit bulkier dimension-wise, but it’s still button-less. In case you were wondering, it’s button-less. Comparable to, oh, say…the iPod Touch. To true gadget-lovers, this is an important feature, as superficial as it sounds – aesthetics and industrial design mean everything when it comes to a good piece of gadgetry.

Storage

I can hardly put more emphasis on my point here – who cares about drive speed (enthusiasts, please skip the next few sentences as I know you will most certainly disagree) in personal media players? I won’t lie to you – the differences are certainly noticeable even for regular consumers like myself, but does an 80GB-outfitted Archos 705 Wi-fi sound better, or would it be a measly 32GB iPod Touch? Earth to consumer – the Archos 705 Wi-fi costs less, too (at Future Shop, anyway). The only difference being that the Archos 705 Wi-fi might be a bit slower when it comes to loading songs or videos, but we’re talking in seconds here, nothing near the minute range. If you want value, go for the Archos 705 Wi-fi.

Source: http://www.pmptoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/archos_705_review.jpg

Screen

Practically everyone’s been gushing about the iPod Touch’s screen – so what, the Archos 605 Wi-fi’s got a bigger screen – and that’s only around two-thirds the size of the Archos 705 Wi-fi’s screen. Sitting at a whopping 7″, it dominates the front end of the Archos 705 Wi-fi and ensures an excellent movie-watching experience – much better than killing your eyes on a cell phone or an iPod screen (not that it still isn’t harmful to the eye – just somewhat less).

The Archos 705 Wi-fi does stack up pretty well against the iPod Touch, and thanks to its competitively-beautiful design, it can even compete with the iPod Touch in the aesthetics category. Whether you’re a movie-goer, just want to get something different, or are not a big fan of Apple, the Archos 705 Wi-fi is an excellent alternative (not to mention it’s got all the standards, such as wi-fi, a friendly GUI, downloadable flash widgets, etc, etc).

Other iPod Touch Alternatives:

1. Olympus M:Robe 500i
2. Archos 605 Wi-fi
3. Cowon Q5W
4. Archos 705
5. Samsung P2

Runner Ups:

• Cowon iAudio X7
• iRiver Clix 2
• Microsoft Zune