Microsoft appears to be considering a different angle in regards to future software sales and pricing models. At least that’s what a new patent recently submitted by the computer giant would indicate. Their newly applied-for patent would essentially have them charging users for software on a new pay-per-use [...]]]>

Microsoft appears to be considering a different angle in regards to future software sales and pricing models. At least that’s what a new patent recently submitted by the computer giant would indicate. Their newly applied-for patent would essentially have them charging users for software on a new pay-per-use system.

For example, instead of doling out a large amount of cash to say, tinker with Photoshop or the suite of Microsoft Office applications, users could try out the products on a per-use basis. Now, normal, full purchases of software would still need to be available, unless Microsoft has lost their sanity as well as a solid business model.

A lot of folks seem to be doubting whether the new system indicated in the patent will ever see the light of day, but it is something interesting to ponder. I can certainly see the cost-benefit to it, especially for those looking to try out a new software. Perhaps some will even stop downloading software they can’t afford from torrent sites, as paying a per-use fee may be easier.

Also, it’s speculated that if the new system is implemented, there could be a very inexpensive range of PCs launched, which would include only a very small amount of full-version software.

Google is bringing ancient Rome to modern-day life by opening a detailed virtual tour of the city, for history and tech buffs alike to explore.

The Ancient Rome offering is brought to us via the popular Google Earth software, and allows users to view ancient Rome as it is thought [...]]]>

Google is bringing ancient Rome to modern-day life by opening a detailed virtual tour of the city, for history and tech buffs alike to explore.

The Ancient Rome offering is brought to us via the popular Google Earth software, and allows users to view ancient Rome as it is thought to looked in 320 AD, complete with over 6,500 buildings that stood at the time. Some even offer interior views.

As with regular Google Earth cities, users have the ability to zoom in and out, enjoying the city at a variety of levels. Google also provides informational blurbs for users to read in regards to a variety of the structures.

It will be interesting to see if this is a one time thing for Google, of if they will continue to build more online ancient cities in the coming months. Personally, I’d be interested in seeing an ancient Chinese city.

Google has officially unleashed their Android source code for the world to see! They unabashedly proclaim that “this is probably the largest repository of open source code that has been released at any one time” – with the code being a very large 2.1GB, that could certainly be true.

In case [...]]]>

Google has officially unleashed their Android source code for the world to see! They unabashedly proclaim that “this is probably the largest repository of open source code that has been released at any one time” – with the code being a very large 2.1GB, that could certainly be true.

In case you were wondering (and out of the loop), the iPhone is a closed-book kind if gadget, with Apple taking a completely opposite approach from Google. In fact, this is the only instance where a mobile’s complete OS code has been released. Geeks are certainly rejoicing.

The code is all-inclusive from the Linux built OS to the Java applications, which include a web browser, email, and instant messaging clients. The Android website provides further details and instructions.

What is it? Search Perks is Microsoft’s latest stab at a paid search program, and features a toolbar that rewards users with “tickets” for every search performed. When the program ends in April, users will be able to redeem their accumulated tickets for prizes. Of course, users will need to continue with the program [...]]]>

What is it? Search Perks is Microsoft’s latest stab at a paid search program, and features a toolbar that rewards users with “tickets” for every search performed. When the program ends in April, users will be able to redeem their accumulated tickets for prizes. Of course, users will need to continue with the program in its entirety in order to redeem their tickets.

The toolbar does not collect personal or sensitive information, but simply keeps track of the number of searches performed. Each user is awarded 500 tickets at sign up, and can earn up to 25 tickets a day, depending on how many searches they perform.

It’s not as easy to abuse as first meets the eye, as Microsoft is limiting the amount of eligible searches to 250,000. The most valuable prize available appears to be a Microsoft Xbox controller, so don’t sign up expecting to receive a big screen plasma television in the mail.

The rules? You must be located in the US and sign up by January 1st to enjoy the perks. Also, you’ll need IE 6 or higher to use their toolbar.

The G1 Google Android

wireless phone is certainly a rising star, hitting Sarah Palin levels of interest this week. I’m not sure which one is garnering more interest, but it’s clear in either case, that people want to know more. I’ll leave the political news media to pursue Palin, while I consider the [...]]]>

The G1 Google Android

wireless phone is certainly a rising star, hitting Sarah Palin levels of interest this week. I’m not sure which one is garnering more interest, but it’s clear in either case, that people want to know more. I’ll leave the political news media to pursue Palin, while I consider the Android Google “Gphone” cell phone.

The G1 device, which is being produced by Taiwan’s HTC and sold in the US by retail wireless carrier T-Mobile, surely appears to be serviceable mobile, but with all the hype surrounding the G1 device, that’s hardly going to be enough to win over many critical tech-fanatics – which are, of course, used to the Apple iPhone’s sleek design and abundance of features.

Gphone features include a good sized touch screen, (hidden) QWERTY keyboard, 3G, Wi-Fi, 3-megapixel camera, navigation ball, dedicated internet button, and built in web apps. To build on this foundation, many more applications are offered through Google’s Android marketplace.

The heart of this endeavour and the hype going a lot with it, is Google’s open-source Android software, which is a Linux-based, open-source operating system for wireless phones that will work with Google applications. Google has promised that it will be free for manufacturers to work with, though there has been some debate throughout the blogosphere on whether that is entirely accurate or not.

As for cost, the price tag is a lot more decent than previously speculated, at $179 with two data plans available for $25 and $35 respectively. Currently, the G1 phone is only available to current T-Mobile customers through their website, however look for the new device to be featured at all T-Mobile locations by the end of October.

For a retro viewpoint, check out our previous Gphone update here.

Google G1 Phone

What are your thoughts? Is this a home-run, [...]]]>

This one is over four minutes long, but I must say – I found it much more entertaining than the previous commercial. However, the general feel from around the blogosphere is that Microsoft is still missing the mark with this ad. Check it out for yourself:

What are your thoughts? Is this a home-run, total dud or somewhere in between?

Some people apparently enjoyed this ad, but, really, I have never seen Jerry Seinfeld so unfunny. The whole time watching, I was waiting for a rib-tickling line, or at least [...]]]>

                                                    
If you haven’t had the opportunity to check out Microsoft’s new commercial, featuring Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld – check it out below:

Some people apparently enjoyed this ad, but, really, I have never seen Jerry Seinfeld so unfunny. The whole time watching, I was waiting for a rib-tickling line, or at least a smirk-worthy barb, but neither was to happen, and it’s sorely disappointing. Was this really the best they could do to compete with Mac’s popular ad campaigns?

You could say I’m bipartisan in the whole Mac versus PC debacle, but I found this new Microsoft ad to be simply sub par – especially after so many tech blogs abound spent time hyping up the Seinfeld-Gates partnership.

Well, watch it for yourselves. Am I wrong? Is it good?

Yahoo had its annual meeting this past week. In case you missed it, not much happened. Yahoo is pretty determined to go it alone and apparently has some wowy-zowy plan for making a comeback. Whether or not the comeback will amount to the $20 billion it gave up [...]]]>

Yahoo had its annual meeting this past week. In case you missed it, not much happened. Yahoo is pretty determined to go it alone and apparently has some wowy-zowy plan for making a comeback. Whether or not the comeback will amount to the $20 billion it gave up is unknown at this point. My personal take is that this is an example of how the Wall Street financial system is broken. Whatever the case, Yahoo got what it wanted (well, at least what its board members wanted).

A recent post of mine about Firefox and my general view of corporations and organizations caused a bit of a stir. It even caught the attention of Asa Dotzler, a prominent Mozilla employee. In Mr. Dotzler’s rebuff of my post he said something that has really bothered [...]]]>

A recent post of mine about Firefox and my general view of corporations and organizations caused a bit of a stir. It even caught the attention of Asa Dotzler, a prominent Mozilla employee. In Mr. Dotzler’s rebuff of my post he said something that has really bothered me. He said “It’s really hard for me to believe that either [Microsoft or Adobe] have the free and open Web at heart when they’re actively subverting it with closed technologies like Flash and Silverlight.” But are they really subverting it? Where exactly is the line between serving the consumer and subverting the web?

Standards behind the “free and open Web”

This isn’t the first time I’ve heard this statement, but using a term like “free and open” is such utopian propaganda. After all how could you be against “free and open” right? A brief look at the web standards groups might illustrate the real root of the problem though.

The W3C (World-Wide-Web Consortium) is the main standards body for the web. To say that they have a reputation for being slow is an understatement; their last XHTML/HTML recommendation (XHTML 1.1) was in 2001. That was seven years ago, or almost eternity in Internet or dog years.

Eventually it got so bad that some people from Apple, Mozilla, and Opera forked off into their group called WHATWG (Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group) in 2004. They started, and are still working on, the draft of HTML 5 which has finally been adopted as the starting point for the W3C’s new HTML working group. Unfortunately, according to the WHATWG editor for HTML it doesn’t look like HTML 5 will be done until 2012; eight years after the WHATWG was formed, and eleven years after XHTML 1.1. That sounds like a rapid pace of innovation to me.

The real culprit

This may seem like a forgone conclusion to many of you after seeing the W3C’s development timetables, but the real reason Flash and Silverlight exist is because the “open-web” people dropped the ball. HTML simply can handle what Flash and Silverlight can do. It has become increasingly stale for modern web development needs.

Here is some perspective, HTML5 has finally added a tag for handling video. Flash 6 came out in 2002 with video support! Where is the HTML version of Line Rider? It is in Flash and Silverlight now. If you want to see something really interesting check out Hard Rock Cafe’s memorabilia page (Silverlight 2 required) and tell me if you’ve ever seen something like that with HTML.

I actually hate Flash, but I’m not going to blame Adobe for the fact that so many people and companies have decided to use it. It isn’t like Adobe is paying people on MySpace or bloggers to use Flash widgets. Youtube could have really only happened using Flash too.

AJAX to the rescue?

What about AJAX and all of those Web 2.0 sites though? They seem pretty sophisticated. In short AJAX is a kludge of various technologies that were never intended to work together in this manner. It can work, but AJAX development is a pain. It gets even more complicated when you start to mix in other aspects of the “free and open” Web like SVG or CSS. It is anything but a cohesive set of technologies.

The real weak spot is in the development tools for “free and open” technologies. There are no AJAX development environments that can compare to the tools available for Flash and Silverlight, and the latter has only been out for one year. It is so bad that people made a big deal over a framework to make AJAX development a little easier.

Honey and Vinegar

I’m not against the idea of a “free and open” web, but obviously there is an increasing demand for a richer experience than that offered by the W3C’s dated technologies. After all there isn’t just one, but two major competitors to them.

If the web is going to steer clear of these proprietary environments the proponents of the standards are going to have to create the technologies that enable innovative new online experiences instead of just copying implementing features that have already been done before elsewhere. Complaining about the proprietary web won’t do anything, after all you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

Note: This article is cross-posted at PseudoSavant.