Magazines: Still Ripe for Digital Reimagining

We don’t even know for sure whether Apple will ever release a tablet–although there’s lots of compelling evidence that it will–and already there’s a lively debate about whether the company is interested in using said tablet to do to printed reading materials what iTunes has done for music.

Until recently, the smart money seemed to be on Apple staying out of the e-reader fray–cue references to Steve Jobs saying that nobody reads anymore. But over at Gizmodo, Brian Lam is reporting that Apple has been in talks with publishers of textbooks, newspapers (the New York Times, specifically), and magazines–presumably as it gets ready to announce its tablet. Maybe the company is interested in catering to those of us who do read after all.

I hope so–and as a former magazine guy, I’m most interested to see what Apple might do with the medium I left behind but for which I’ll never lose my affinity. For all the things that are right with Amazon.com’s Kindle e-book reader, its treatment of magazines is pretty horrible. It may have signed deals to offer thirty-six well-known titles, but every Kindle magazine I’ve seen has been stripped of most of its formatting, graphics, and…life. There’s no particular benefit to Kindle magazines except for saving some trees and space on your coffee table, especially when far more dynamic, engaging, interesting versions of most of the same content is available for free on the Web.

And ultimately, I don’t think largely static downloadable magazines such as those offered by Amazon (as well as PDF-like print replicas such as Zinio versions) are going to revolutionize anything. We don’t need new formats for magazines that compete with the Web–we need to use Web technologies to create more compelling digital versions of traditionally pulp-based publications. An electronic version of, say, the New Yorker shouldn’t be an entirely different beast from NewYorker.com. It should be a variant that can be pushed to a device (be it from Amazon or Apple) and read even when you’re offline, with slicker type, graphics, and overall presentation than the Web currently permits. And what the heck–it should retain the wonderfully browsable, print-oriented concepts of a cover, a table, of contents, and a sequence of pages from beginning to end. (In this case, it should also involve cartoons interspersed throughout, which you can choose to read first.)

Like Web pages, these magazines should work on multiple devices from different manufacturers–if Newsweek is available in slightly different, incompatible variants for the Kindle and Apple’s tablet, it’s just going to drive everybody crazy.

Oh, and whoever solves this problem needs to figure out issues of screen orientation–one of the big gotchas with Zinio magazines is that they’re portrait-oriented publications in the mostly landscape-oriented world of computer displays.

I don’t know if Brian’s story is right on the money–and if it is, I have no idea what Apple has in mind. But I do know that even though I don’t currently subscribe to any digital magazines, I’d happily plunk down my money for ones that got the format right. So far, nothing’s come close. I’m a happy optimist, so I’m assuming this will get solved relatively soon–if not by Apple, by somebody.

Twitter to Get Lists

For a service that’s famously slow to add features, Twitter is being awfully public lately about its to-do list. It says it’s working on a fully integrated way to retweet other folks’ items. It’s spoken of geolocation features. And now it says that it will soon add lists–basically groups of Twitter users that any Twitter user can create, and which are public by default. The Twitter API will let developers of Twitter applications, sites, and services get access to lists, too.

It sounds like at least a partial solution to a major problem with Twitter: The service provides no good way to find interesting people to follow other than its Suggested Users List, which is dominated by people who happen to be really famous. (Here’s Robert Scoble’s entertaining rant about the SUL.) If Twitter has no immediate plans to compile more sophisticated, diverse lists of smart users, why not let the users do the job themselves?

AOL Can Be Yours for a Cool $4.2 Billion

It’s a far cry from the $20 billion value that Google placed on AOL when it invested $1 billion for a five percent stake in the company in 2005. But $4.2 billion is what JP Morgan analyst Imran Khan now speculates the company is worth as Time Warner gets ready to spin the company off by the end of this year, close to a $4 billion valuation put on AOL by Pali Research analyst Rich Greenfield.

The company’s value has apparently declined since the beginning of the year: when Google wrote down it’s stake in the company in January, it placed a value of $5.5 billion on the company.

AOL doesn’t have much to blame other than itself: the company was slow to change with the times, and the transition from dial-up to broadband left the company without a major source of revenue. It’s try at selling advertising, while not a failure by any means, certainly did not fill that void.

Not everybody is down on AOL’s chances. Let us remember that the company still has a large traffic base to its properties, and Greenfield says that “there could be meaningful valuation upside – not to mention, the upside if M&A speculation surfaces” if AOL’s new CEO Tim Armstrong can play his cards right.

I’m no expert on mergers and acquisitions, but I don’t see the company being a merger target for anyone anytime soon. AOL’s still existing dial-up business is a costly one to take on, especially considering its all but certain that part of the company’s bottom line is all but set to disappear over the next few years.

Then again, stranger things have happened…

“Barrelfish”: Microsoft’s Latest Future OS Project

Last Friday, Network World reported that Microsoft’s research labs in Cambridge (UK) has previewed an experimental operating system code-named ‘Barrelfish.’ However, it is just one of many fish in Microsoft’s barrel, and is not nearly as close as Microsoft’s project “Midori” is to becoming an actual product.

Barrelfish and Midori tackle a similar problem that Microsoft has determined cannot be met by evolving its existing technology. They run on multi-core systems, and are designed for heterogeneous hardware environments, where applications and resources can exist in separate places.

Beyond sharing a similar mission, there are major technical differences between the projects. Midori is rooted in a research project called Singularity, which is constructed using Microsoft’s .NET Framework; Barrelfish uses some open source components.

Barrelfish, like Singularity, is just a research project. Midori is differentiated, because it an offshoot from the Singularity lab work. Microsoft has placed Midori under the control of Eric Rudder, senior vice president for technical strategy at Microsoft and an alumnus of Bill Gates’ technical staff.

The company has also mapped out a migration path away from Windows to Midori, but there was still a lot of hand-waving in the memos that I reviewed last year. Microsoft has since placed all information regarding Midori under lock and key on a “need to know” basis.

After I wrote my Midori expose, I was told by a source at Microsoft that I had just scratched the surface. Microsoft is a big company that has a lot of resources, and I will not pretend to know everything that is going on in its skunkworks. What I do know is that Barrelfish is just research–for now.

Five Killer Microsoft Word Tricks

Microsoft Word: I can’t think of another application I’d like to have re-written to meet my needs. I’ll kvetch some more another time. Today, I have five tricks to fire up the way you use Word.

Tabs for Word. Cool!

You know how quickly you got used to opening multiple tabs in browsers? It’s a smart way to quickly move among Web pages; without it, browsing is lots like running applications in DOS.

Office Tab is a freebie that works in 2003 and older versions of Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. Double-click on the tab bar to open a new a document in a new tab; double-click a tab to close it. A right-click brings up a useful menu where you can save or close all your documents; the Options menu lets you change the look and color of the tabs.

You can save or close all your docs with one click, or right-click the tab to close

Have multiple tabs any way you’d like in Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Access

The program is from a Chinese developer (his name might be wangminbai) and the Baidu.com site is confusing even using Google’s translation. The program, however, is entirely in English. Read the product description, browse through the FAQ, and download the Zipped Word tool.

Continue reading this story…

Gaming in Theaters Sounds Cool, Won’t Be Easy

As a gamer, I’m enamored with the idea of playing a shoot-em-up on a 50-foot screen, surrounded by Dolby audio. And I can’t be the only one.

Unfortunately, these incidents are rare, but on Monday and Tuesday, the stars will align, and Sony will let people in four U.S. theaters try the upcoming (and universally lauded) Uncharted 2: Among Thieves for the Playstation 3.

If you don’t happen to live in Rosemont, Ill., Bellvue, Wash., San Francisco or Thousand Oaks, Calif., there’s good news: In a Reuters interview, Mike Fidler, Sony’s senior vice president of Digital Cinema Solutions and Services, suggests that this isn’t a one-off thing. In explaining that he wants more theaters to go digital, Fidler said that gaming “will be an important part of that equation.”

From Fidler’s remarks, it’s easy to dream up gaming nights, or perhaps the ability to rent out a theater for an evening of Killzone 2. A Canadian chain already does this during off-peak times, for the totally reasonable price of $169 for two hours and up to 12 people (a movie ticket doesn’t cost that much less at that rate).

Not to be a party pooper, but I see a major roadblock here. The best big-screen games — shooters and racing games — can at most be enjoyed by four people at a time, and even splitting the screen reduces the coolness factor. Given that a movie theater is designed to entertain lots of people, you’d be looking at minimal playing time with any more than a dozen participants. And let’s face it, most games aren’t that fun to watch from the sidelines.

If Sony does get the Playstation 3 into more theaters, I’m sure the Uncharted 2 event won’t be the last of its kind, but for most of us, I have a feeling that any significant gaming time in a theater will remain a fantasy.

AT&T’s A-List Leaves Out Its A-List Customers

Expanding unlimited calling to off-network phone numbers is one of the wireless industry’s newest ways to attract customers. Alltel was one of the first major carriers with its My Circle (which now has been rolled over to Verizon Wireless with the merger, called “Friends & Family”), then T-Mobile followed with myFaves. Sprint’s also doing something with “Any Mobile, Anytime” on select plans.

Now AT&T is getting into the game with a service called A-List. Like its competitors, the gist is the same: customers add their five most frequently called numbers. These are then treated like mobile-to-mobile calls, which are typically unlimited.

I will give kudos though. AT&T does not mess with the rest of the plan when you use the service. Neither your normal mobile to mobile or rollover minutes will be affected.

There is a catch. Like Verizon Wireless, you must have a $59.99/mo. or greater voice plan in order to use the service. This is somewhat troubling to me, as a large segment of AT&T’s growing iPhone population is from the get go excluded from the service.

Almost all of my iPhone-equipped friends are on the $39.99 monthly voice plan. The reasoning for this is simple: on top of that, a $39.99 $30 monthly data plan is required, already pushing the bill to nearly $70 a month. Add the fact most of us are texters, so we’re already now pushing that bill to near $90 a month even before taxes and fees, or any other service we might be inclined to add.

If we’d bump up to the next plan, there’s a good chance our monthly wireless bill would exceed $110, which in most cases is just too much to justify for. But through AT&T’s policies, none of us would qualify for A-List.

This seems rotten to me. I’m willing to place money on the fact that the average iPhone users bill is probably on the order of 50% or so higher than that of a non iPhone user. Look at AT&T’s ARPU (Average Revenue Per User) for the second quarter: $60. That is already about $10 below the base cost of owning an iPhone, without texting or anything else added.

Yes, iPhone users put a strain on the AT&T network. But at the same time, they are the basis of the company’s bottom line. The least the company could do here was include its “A-List” customers in on the deal.

Hopefully, the carrier reconsiders the requirements and allows for iPhone users who are already paying a lot every month to benefit from this new feature.

Update: I had the data plan cost wrong here, as well as T-Mobile putting back M2M with myFaves now (it wasn’t at first) so I’ve tweaked our math and wording here. Thanks to commenters for catching this.

Death to QWERTY?

TechCrunch’s MG Siegler has a thought-provoking post up which discusses the multiple rumors and other bits of info out there about upcoming devices with touch interfaces–the fabled Apple Tablet, of course, but also Microsoft’s Courier dual-screen concept device and scuttlebutt about an Apple touch remote control and  multi-touch mouse. MG ponders all the evidence and comes up with a sweeping conclusion:

While it may be hard to imagine right now, eventually there will not be physical keyboards.

My first instinct was to dismiss the idea. I’ve written in praise of physical QWERTY; I’m not ready to give it up; I see no immediate scenarios that involve it disappearing. And hey, Steve Jobs himself told me that Apple couldn’t figure out how to make a Mac with a pleasing touch interface. (Yes, I know that Jobs saying that simply means that Apple doesn’t have anything it’s ready to roll out just yet.)

But with tech predictions, the safest strategy is often to avoid being safe. We’ve already seen the death of the floppy, and it’s clear that desktop PCs are on their way to being archaic, niche products. And I’ve frequently predicted that it’s not going to be very long until most people think of the PC as something you can put in your pocket. So I’m not ruling out the possibility that MG’s prediction is right–although I’m guessing that the decline, fall, and disappearance of physical QWERTY will take a decade or two if it happens at all, and that it’s contingent on smart people inventing better ways to enter text via touch interfaces and/or voice input.

What’s your take?

Device Stage Gets Short Shrift

Microsoft blogged today about the compatibility logo program for hardware and software devices that will work with Windows 7. It’s in sync with Windows 7′s overall spirit of simplicity: There’s just one logo (“Compatible with Windows 7″) vs. the two that Microsoft came up with for Windows Vista. (“Works with Windows Vista” indicated basic compatibility; “Certified for Windows Vista” was more rigorous.)

Simplicity is good–especially since nobody who doesn’t work at Microsoft and who isn’t involved in manufacturing hardware or developing software really knows the specifics of what the logo indicates. As the “Compatible” in “Compatible with Windows Vista” indicates, the emphasis this time around seems to be on ensuring that products will function reliably with all versions of the OS, including the 64-bit ones. It’s not claiming that a product is a shining example-the equivalent Windows XP logo had the loftier-sounding name of”Designed for Windows XP”–but just that it works.

But I’m sorry that Microsoft didn’t institute one additional requirement for hardware products: mandating that they support Device Stage, the OS’s new system for putting a bunch of features related to a peripheral in one place, such as a camera’s charge level, storage capacity, and tools for importing and transferring photos.

Continue reading this story…

Wize’s New Shopping Search: Wiser, Still Room For Improvement

Wize, a shopping research site that attempts to be a one-stop resource for finding out what folks think about products of all sorts, officially unveiled a major redesign on Tuesday. It’s a useful upgrade to a powerful reference tool, although I encountered a number of quirks as I explored the wealth of information it contains.

Wize reminds me of Retrevo, but that site goes deep on a specific range of consumer electronics products, and Wize covers stuff of all sorts, including a broader range of tech items, video games, home appliances, food and wine, toys, baby products, perfume, toys, and more. It aggregates millions of user reviews (and some professional ones) from all over the Web, coming up with overall ratings, letting you browse individual reviews and find merchants, and letting you see how products compare–including Wize Choices (well-reviewed items) and Unwize Choices (poorly-reviewed ones).

Continue reading this story…

What’s a Game Demo Worth, Anyway?

Peter Molyneux, the ever-mouthy creator of the Fable video game series, is spouting off about video game demos and why they’re worthless.

“I hate demos,” Molyneux told Official Xbox Magazine. “I think demos are the death knell of experiences.” He then explains that most demos either show too much, don’t show enough or confuse the player. His solution? Tease people with the first 45 minutes of a game, then pitch them on the full version.

That’s not a groundbreaking idea, as pretty much every Xbox Live Arcade title lets you download the whole game and play a small portion, then charges you to “unlock” the rest. Some PC game portals, such as Big Fish Games, let you download any game and play for an hour.

But Molyneux is alluding to a bigger issue, that downloadable games are more conducive to demos than boxed retail titles.

Partly, that’s because boxed games are often greater in scope than downloadable games. After 10 minutes of an Xbox Live Arcade title, such as Braid, you can get the gist. But 10 minutes wouldn’t do justice to the massive environments of Fallout 3, which is why the developers of that game said a demo was simply not possible. Demos of downloadable games are also more attractive to publishers, as it’s easier to make an impulse purchase when all you need is a credit card nearby to keep playing.

Molyneux’s Fable II is an anomaly, because it was once a boxed title, but it’s now being chopped up into downloadable episodes. A 45-minute demo gives Fable II the best of both worlds, as players will have already downloaded the full game, and will be able to experience a significant chunk before deciding whether they want the rest. Molyneux can be somewhat arrogant with his public statements (see: rating his own game a 9 out of 10), but he may be onto something here.

Should Windows Come With Anti-Virus?

Today, Microsoft released Microsoft Security Essentials, a basic security suite that competes with such established anti-virus freebies as Avast Home Edition and AVG Free. BetaNews’s Joe Wilcox raises an interesting question about it:

The question: Should Microsoft offer free security software to consumers? Absolutely. There is no choice, and Microsoft would do customers better by fully integrating security software into Windows 7. But Microsoft has enough antitrust problems in Europe to make including antivirus risky business.

Security issues have bedeviled Windows users for around a decade and a half now. And while Microsoft bundles an anti-spyware utility with Windows and tried selling anti-virus software before deciding to give it away.

At first blush, Microsoft giving away Windows anti-virus feels a little like a car company offering airbags as a complementary but optional upgrade rather than simply making them standard. Ultimately, though, I think it’s the right way to go about things: If Windows had built-in anti-virus, it would likely slaughter the market for third-party anti-virus. And years of history tell us that Microsoft products tend to fester when they don’t have active, successful competition (and sometimes even when they do).

Then there’s the matter of anti-trust issues: Even if Microsoft wanted to build anti-virus into Windows, it might be very, very nervous about legal action by Symantec and McAfee and all the other companies who don’t wanted to get Netscaped.

I am, of course, leading up to a T-Poll here:

1984 All Over Again

As TechCrunch’s Jason Kincaid has reported, DoubleTwist–a media manager application that, among other things, serves as a bridge between iTunes and non-Apple devices–is promoting a new version that debuts on October 6th with an ad that looks…eerily familiar:

Yup, the ad is an animated remake of Apple’s legendary “1984″ commercial, directed by Ridley Scott, which introduced the Mac–except this time the scary overlord (who seemed to represent IBM the first time around) bears a striking resemblance to Steve Jobs:

DoubleTwist isn’t saying what the new feature is, but in general, the company’s product is on the side of the angels–it lets people who don’t own Apple devices participate in the iTunes ecology in a way that makes way more sense than Palm’s USB spoofing. DoubleTwist founder Jon “DVD Jon” Lech Johansen is a kind of a genius, and I’m curious what the company has up its sleeve.

That said, I don’t think much of the ad. It doesn’t take much creativity to remake somebody else’s commercial, and this particular remake is less than artful. Then again, I also think that of Apple’s version. It may be universally regarded as one of the greatest TV ads of all time, but the Orwellian overtones were as hyperbolic in 1984 as they are in 2009. And what potential customer wants to watch a commercial that depicts him or her as a compliant zombie? (I’d like to see Apple open up iTunes myself, but I don’t feel like I’m part of an army of lobotomized drones when I use it–nor do I think that Steve Jobs is any more of a terrifying Big Brother than whoever was running IBM in 1984.)

On the other hand, DoubleTwist’s first anti-Apple prank–getting a huge ad seemingly displayed on the outside wall of one of Apple’s flagship stores–is one of the greatest practical jokes ever played by anyone on anyone. May whatever DoubleTwist releases next week live up to the imagination it showed with that bit of guerilla marketing…

AT&T Manages a Successful iPhone MMS Launch

I will eat my words, somewhat at least. After launching MMS for the iPhone on Friday, it appears AT&T has managed to launch the functionality without much of a problem after all. Yes, there were some hiccups and glitches, but nothing widespread from what we can gather.

My own personal experience with MMS has been positive. Friday was bumpy from time to time, including one or two messages that seemed to take minutes to send. But none of them failed, and to my knowledge every one of them made it to their destination. I could complain about Apple’s implementation of MMS, but hey that isn’t AT&T’s fault.

I’ve received some reports from my Twitter followers (shameless plug: @edoswald) which reported some problems early on:

User @CanonThom:

“An MMS message sent to a non-updated iPhone disappears. Sent to a non-iPhone but still AT&T seems to work. Non MMS texts work fine”

User @walter_theman:

“my signal is fading in and out, mms will send on occations and others get the red !”

AT&T’s Facebook page is also abuzz with some problem reports, but nothing that seems overly serious, here’s a roundup of the most common issues:

- Problems with receiving MMS from Verizon
- Problems sending MMS to Verizon (I have received/sent fine here)
- Intermittent failure to receive or send MMS
- Slowness in sending (I’ve seen this)

In the interest of fairness, AT&T contacted us shortly after my initial post asking to be able to respond. I have been in contact, however I haven’t received any official response as of yet. When it comes I’ll be sure to update this post.

I’ve also asked for some idea on the added strain on the network, which was apparently one of AT&T’s chief concerns when MMS was first announced for the iPhone earlier this summer.

Are you having problems at all? Have they been resolved? Let us know in the comments.

5Words: Microsoft’s Release Security Freebie

Microsoft’s free security suite ships.

More stuff about Microsoft Courier.

Newton guy back at Apple.

Dell’s cord-free charging Latitude Z.

OEM prices for Windows 7.

CNN releases an iPhone app.

Apple, swipe Zune HD features.

T-Mobile’s poised to sell Cliq.

More folks get Google Wave.

Google Docs caters to students.

Wize product search engine redesigned.

________________________

Like 5Words? Subscribe via RSS.

More “Details” on the Apple Tablet

iLounge has a story with what it says are ten new details about the impending Apple tablet device. None of them are shockers, and most repeat tidbits that have already been out there: The site says that the gadget has a 10.7″ screen, runs iPhone OS, will be available in 3G and non-3G versions, has seven times the screen resolution of an iPhone, and will be announced on or before January 19, 2010 and ship in May or June. (It also says that it hasn’t been approved yet and the chances of it shipping are 80 percent–sounds a little iffy for a product that’s supposedly going to be announced less than four months from now.)

Assuming that iLounge is right that there will be an Apple tablet with built-in 3G networking, there’s an eleventh detail it’s not reporting: The wireless carrier that will sell the device. You gotta think that it’s going to be AT&T or Verizon–and there have been rumors for months about Verizon selling a tablet from Apple.

The part about the delay between announcement and shipment also sounds logical: Beyond any issues with wireless certification, wouldn’t Apple want to give the developers of those tens of thousands of iPhone OS apps a bit of time to make tablet-ready versions so the gizmo ships with a library of software already in place?