Testing out Axis, Yahoo’s search-centric browser

Yahoo is taking a baby step into the browser wars with the release of its own search-centric browser. Known as Axis, it comes in the form of a plugin for HTML5compliant browsers on the desktop and a full-fledged browser for the iPhone and iPad.

Two concepts take center stage in Axis: instant responses and visual search. As you type in a search term, Axis returns results instantaneously based on what it thinks you may be searching for. The results appear as thumbnails across the top of your screen in iOS, and across the bottom on the desktop. You can scroll back and forth through these results to find the result you are looking for.

Visual search done right

On iOS, swiping across the page takes you from one result to the next. This is a nice shortcut for those of us who like to quickly search through multiple sources. There is a similar shortcut on the desktop: move your mouse to the sides of the browser windows and navigation arrows will appear. The visual search component of Axis is its most compelling feature, and is much nicer to look at (and usually tells you more) than looking through a list of links and text.

Given that Axis is multi-platform, Yahoo baked in a feature that allows you to continue browsing between devices. The last page you access on a device is sent up into the cloud, and then displayed on the Axis home page. Click on it on the other device, and you can continue where you left off.

This is a great feature for those of us that move from device to device frequently, although some may not like the fact that Yahoo is inherently tracking our every move.

The visual search and multi-device browsing are the two most compelling reasons to give Axis a shot, but also consider here is that Axis really isn’t a browser in the true sense of the word: it’s built upon pre-existing ones. This is important because pages will render as you expect them to, and only affect how your interact with your browser and not the way it works.

On iOS, Axis is more like a browser, but is really Safari within a skin due to Apple’s stringent controls on apps. That said, based of the time I spent testing I’d argue Axis is a better browser for iOS users than Safari due to its extra features.

Microsoft wins too

While Yahoo might have scored a win here with Axis, it was a big day for Microsoft as well. Remember that Bing powers Yahoo’s search results. If Axis takes off on mobile, it will be cutting into a fairly sizable chunk of Google’s search share.

One of the reasons that Google has been able to maintain dominance is its near stranglehold on mobile search. The two major mobile platforms — iOS and Android — both default to Google when it comes to search. If these folks now turn to Yahoo’s Axis, obviously that traffic’s going somewhere else.

It’s going to be interesting to watch — Axis is already 23rd on the top apps in the App Store in just its first day of release with not much in the way of promotion.

Source

Can cable companies keep the dream of municipal WiFi alive?

Municipal WiFi may be a dream yet realized thanks to a new deal between the nation’s five biggest cable operators. Comcast, Bright House Networks, Cablevision, Cox Communications, and Time Warner Cable have agreed to let customers roam on about 50,000 hotspots owned by the respective companies nationwide.

Comcast, Cablevision, and Time Warner have made a deal that shares hotspots in an area spanning from southwestern Connecticut through the New York City and Philadelphia metropolitan areas, including portions of the Jersey Shore. Today’s announcement expands that same concept nationwide, and should start appearing later this year.

Users will connect to the network “CableWiFi,” and be asked to enter their respective ISP usernames and passwords. There are plans to allow for automatic connections, which may use a platform like WiFi Alliance’s Passpoint.  That uses device identification features — like SIM cards — to automatically connect and authenticate compatible devices.

While the initial rollout includes the 50,000 hotspots currently in existence, it appears the cable companies plan to aggressively roll-out WiFi connectivity nationwide. They hit on a sore subject for the wireless carriers in the announcement — bandwidth and capacity — as a reason for the partnership. In other words if your cellular carrier isn’t cutting it, “come on over to our network, we can handle it!”

It does work quite well: using Comcast’s network here in the Philadelphia metropolitan area, I can say that service is generally quite good, and you can find a connection in just about every public place in the city. While its not a replacement for the cell phone, it’s good enough for most tasks. Don’t try to stream high quality movies over it, but you’re golden on just about everything else.

I do see privately owned municipal WiFi as the only way to make the vision of the urban-jungle-as-a-hotspot a reality. Many cities — Philadelphia included — hatched plans in the middle of the last decade to offer residents WiFi connectivity. As the US economy tanked, so did these plans. They hemorrhaged money, and since most were built on the concept of “free,” politicians balked. With the cable companies, offering WiFi is a value-add: all the money is made on the cable services, and it is not a primary business. Plus, they don’t have taxpayers to worry about, just shareholders (sometimes equally as bad).

It is a shame that municipal WiFi and its core concept of “internet access for all” was never realized, but it was an idea doomed from the start. Nothing’s worse to some American’s than government waste. At least the cable companies are trying to bring it back in some form, even if those most underserved (who don’t have a cable account) may be locked out.

[Photo credit]

Source

Google acquires Motorola Mobility, rolls the dice with Android

Some 9 months after Google’s announcement that it would rather like to make a subsidiary of Motorola Mobility, the $12.5-billion acquisition has finally been approved by the US, EU, and China. All eyes are now on Google to see what it will do with a bunch of software platforms under its belt — Android, Chrome OS, and Google TV — and its new-found top-notch hardware division.

Outwardly, we are promised, except for a new CEO — Dennis Woodside, former president of Google’s Americas operation, replaces long-time Motorola CEO Sanjay Jha — very little will change. The last 9 months have basically seen Google promising Android partners such as HTC and Samsung that Motorola Mobility will not get preferential treatment when it comes to future versions of Android or Nexus devices. The Chinese regulators even went as far as saying that they would only approve the acquisition if Google keeps Android free for other device makers for at least five years.

Beyond that, though, is for Google’s execs to know, and for us to find out. Officially, all we have to go on is a mysterious line in the acquisition press release that says Motorola will “enable Google to supercharge the Android ecosystem and will enhance competition in mobile computing.” In reality, there are two equally likely (but diametrically opposed) paths that Google could take. It is possible that Google simply wanted Motorola Mobility’s 24,500-strong mobile device patent portfolio to protect Android from further patent litigation. In this case, Motorola Mobility will continue to function exactly as before, but with new leadership. There are rumors floating around that Google will proceed to lay off a large number of Motorola employees, which would reinforce this speculation.

The other option is that Google will begin producing its own line of Android, Chrome OS, and Google TV devices. In this case, Google would effectively begin a transformation into a company that resembles Apple — but with Search under its belt, it might even have the edge on Apple. The main problem with this, though — putting aside Chrome OS and Google TV for the moment — is that Android devices are commodities. For Googola to compete with Samsung and other device makers, it would need to somehow differentiate itself. Selling “vanilla” devices won’t be enough, and I can’t see Google developing a custom skin, a la TouchWiz or Sense.

If Google does go the hardware route, I suspect it will fork Android — perhaps to create a commercial, non-free version that flawlessly integrates with Chrome OS, and other devices such as Android@Home and Google Glasses. Forking the codebase wouldn’t violate the Chinese stipulation that Android remains free for five years — but even so, is it really the best thing for the Android ecosystem as a whole?

For more, read David Cardinal’s take on why Google should sell Motorola as soon as possible.

Source

Why Diablo 3′s always-online DRM is a good thing

Diablo 3 has now been available worldwide for a week. In true, zealous, Blizzard-super-fan style, the end boss on the hardest difficulty setting has already been defeated. We don’t know the exact number of Diablo 3 sales, but with some 2 million pre-orders, we’re talking about one of the fastest-selling games of all time — and probably the fastest-selling PC game of all time (beating out the World of Warcraft expansions and Starcraft 2, which are also Blizzard titles).

By almost all accounts, Diablo 3 is a fantastic game. It has received almost perfect scores from the top game critics, hardcore gamers, and casual players alike — except for one niggling issue: Diablo 3 requires an internet connection to Battle.net to play.

It’s not like this is news — Blizzard announced that the game would require an internet connection last year — but unfortunately it was brought into sharp relief by a flurry of server issues and extended maintenance downtime over the past week. If there hadn’t been any login difficulties, the always-online thing probably would’ve faded into the background, obscured by legendary-tinted glasses — but because some 2+ million people have spent the past week battling with heinous lag, Error 33, Error 37, and Error 3003, critics and gamers have focused their ire on what they perceive to be the issue: Diablo 3′s always-online DRM.

Now, while it’s true that D3′s reliance on Battle.net does act as a form of DRM, this is just a value-added extra as far as Activision-Blizzard are concerned. Really, given the faith that Blizzard has garnered from its users over the last 20 years, I’m surprised that fans have been so quick to label this feature as crippling DRM, or worse, the hellspawn of Blactivision’s CEO, Bobby Kotick. In reality, Diablo 3′s connectivity requirement exists for a handful of compelling reasons that actually make the game better.

Gameplay

Users and critics are quick to draw comparisons to Ubisoft’s aborted use of must-remain-connected-to-the-internet DRM, but Diablo 3 is really very different. To begin with, it helps if you think of Diablo 3 as an online game. In fact, think of Diablo 3 as an MMO, like World of Warcraft or Star Wars: The Old Republic.

Unlike Diablo 2 or other offline games, all of your D3 characters reside in the cloud — in one of Blizzard’s huge database servers, just like your WoW character. Every time you loot or equip an item, that change is automatically saved to Blizzard’s database. Because of this, your characters will survive a hard disk crash, and they’re accessible from any internet-connected computer — you can log into D3 from a friend’s computer (or your office computer) and continue from where you left off.

Once you actually log in, Diablo’s gameplay is a piece of seamless mastery. Joining a friend’s game takes one click — and then porting directly to them takes one more. All your characters share a single item stash. With the BattleTag and Real ID systems, you can set up a new game with two or three clicks — and of course, like SC2 and WoW, you can chat to any of your friends, no matter which game they’re currently playing, from the chat window.

None of this would be possible without permanent Battle.net connectivity.

Security

One of the biggest problems with offline games is that all of the game logic and game saves must be stored locally. Game saves are historically very, very easy to crack — outfitting your character with a full set of end-game legendary items can be as simple as loading up a hex editor and changing a few values. With decompilation and memory interrogation hacking, a game’s inner workings — boss mechanics, loot generation, and so on — can be laid bare.

In offline-only games, these factors aren’t a big issue — but in Diablo 2, which featured offline and online play, so much data was available in the game client that hacked characters and map hacks were rife.

Diablo on the left, WoW on the right — the look similar because they are

To put it another way: Can you ever imagine an MMO like WoW storing character data locally on your hard drive? No. Just apply the same logic to Diablo 3. Blizzard wants to keep hacking and exploitation to a minimum — and hacked games and characters were one of the biggest complaints in Diablo 2 — and so it isn’t all that surprising that the company is keeping as much data and logic server-side as possible.

The real-money auction house

The jewel in Diablo’s crown — and one of the most exciting experiments in online/MMO history — is the real-money auction house (RMAH). When it launches at the end of May, players will be able to sell items for actual dollars and pounds, with Blizzard taking a flat $1 cut on unique items, and 15% on stackable commodities (health pots, gems).

The real-money auction house is Blizzard’s attempt to monetize (and legalize) the rampant, gray/black market buying of gold and items from “Chinese gold farmers” using real money. Similar approaches at stemming gray/black market trading have been tried before — most notably, Eve allows you to buy your monthly subscription with in-game currency — but Diablo 3′s RMAH is by far the highest-profile attempt yet. The intricacies of virtual world economies are beyond the scope of this story, but put it this way: It is actually more efficient for someone in China (or another developing country) to farm gold in WoW and sell it to rich Westerners, than to work in manufacture or agriculture.

Diablo 3 real-money auction house

It is likely, if Diablo 3 attracts enough players, that a huge real-money economy will develop around the game, making Blizzard (and players!) millions of dollars in the process. For a game without a monthly subscription, this is obviously a rather attractive proposition for Blactivision.

For the RMAH to work, though, Blizzard needs absolute security. Dupe bugs and hacks — where players can magically conjure up duplicates of the same item — could ruin the legitimacy of the RMAH overnight. This isn’t to say that MMOs are perfectly secure (almost every big MMO has fallen victim to a dupe bug), but they’re a lot more secure than offline games. As we mentioned previously, every action that you perform in Diablo 3 is recorded and saved in one of Blizzard’s databases. It might be possible to dupe some gold or items, but Blizzard will have built in plenty of protections that allow it to track the duped objects and remove them from the game. There is almost certainly a team at Blizzard that is tasked with hunting for exploits and exploiters 24/7.

Epilogue

In my opinion, these three factors are a large part of what make Diablo 3 so damn enjoyable. With that said, though, there is simply no avoiding the fact that requiring an internet connection to play is ultimately very lame. DSL connections are finicky beasts, after all — and what happens if Blizzard gets DDoSed, or it goes bankrupt? As internet connections improve, though, these concerns will slowly vanish.

In many ways, Diablo 3 is almost the first step towards cloud gaming. While I can’t confirm this, I suspect that the D3 artwork is the only real asset that is stored on your computer — everything else is either downloaded, or streamed while you play. You will notice that, despite the tumultuous first week, Blizzard hasn’t issued a single patch for D3. It’s entirely possible that, when you log in, item stats, monster attributes, spell effects, and even game mechanics are downloaded from the Battle.net servers. It also seems that Blizzard has the capability to change items, monsters, and spells while you play the game. In effect, you are streaming everything from the cloud — except the art.

I think this is the real reason that Diablo 3 completely forbids offline play. Blizzard could make it so that you could download a complete version of Diablo 3 for offline play, but a) that would give hackers easier access to data that Blizz would rather keep locked up; b) the ability to continually fine-tune the game after launch is very desirable; and, finally, who are we kidding: As far as the accounting bods are concerned, online-only play is the single best way of cutting down on piracy and generating more income — at least until someone reverse engineers the Diablo 3 server, of course.

Read more about Diablo 3, or the awful DRM in Batman: Arkham City

Source

Windows 8 kills off “dated and cheesy” Aero

In what must surely be the longest Windows 8 treatise yet, Microsoft has spent 11,048 words describing the birth, evolution, and future of the Windows user interface. Hidden within the morass of design notes and historical navel gazing there is one notable change: The final build of Windows 8, due this fall, will feature a rejigged, Aero-free Desktop (pictured above).

Unlike most Building Windows 8 blog posts, the essay — titled “Creating the Windows 8 user experience” — is surprisingly triumphant. It begins by detailing Windows 1.0, a GUI for DOS. Released in 1985, just a few years after the first IBM PC, the computer mouse was still completely unproven and considered (by critics) to be gimmicky and a production killer. Then, of course, Windows 3 came along in 1990 and changed everything — almost every computer from that point on would be sold with a mouse. Windows 95 followed, introducing the Desktop paradigm, and the Start button and menu.

Windows 1.0

Eventually the saga reaches Windows Vista and the introduction of Aero, a user interface that espoused shiny, glossy, translucent, specular surfaces above all else. Everything was see-through, drop shadows ruled supreme — and according to Microsoft, Aero “represented the design sensibilities of the time.” Later on, though, MS goes on to say that it looks “dated and cheesy now.” This is why the final release of Windows 8 will do away with Aero. As you can see above, the Windows 8 desktop is flat, square, white, and really rather beautiful. Gradients are gone, glows are gone, rounded corners have been squared, and transparency is severely curtailed (only the taskbar is slightly transparent now). Even drop shadows — an operating system stalwart that has haunted us since Windows XP — have been almost completely gutted. It now looks like there’s a tiny drop shadow beneath the active window, but that’s it.

Now, if you’re a big fan of Aero, don’t worry too much: For those who don’t like change, Microsoft is historically very good at providing optional “classic” interfaces (thank God, in Windows XP’s case). This isn’t confirmed, but we’d be surprised if Windows 8 doesn’t ship with Aero as an optional theme.

As for why Aero is being removed, the reasoning is probably twofold. First, while the Desktop paradigm can never be shoehorned into a Metro-style touch-friendly interface, these changes definitely go some way towards unifying the Desktop design with the Metro Start Screen and apps, Windows Phone 7, and the Xbox. The second answer is much more direct: Microsoft is simply trying to save on CPU and GPU cycles, thus making Windows 8 devices faster and more power efficient. All of those drop shadows and transparencies add a significant resource overhead to Windows Vista and 7, which is OK for a high-power desktop computer, but crippling on a laptop, netbook, or tablet.

Which brings us neatly back to the other thread in Microsoft’s 11,000-word opus: The desktop is dying. After the launch of Windows 95, the mouse slowly began losing out to other pointing devices — first the laptop touchpad (though this is of course inferior to the laptop nipple), and now touchscreens. In 2012, according to Microsoft, 61% of PCs (Windows and Mac) sold worldwide are laptops — in the US, where Apple is disproportionately popular, laptop sales will account for 76% of all PCs sold. In absolute numbers, tablets will outsell desktop PCs. And then there’s smartphones, which outsell everything.

It’s very clear that computing is going mobile — and, after reading through what amounts to a novella, it definitely sounds like this is the primary drive behind everything in Windows 8, from the new Metro Start Screen to the live tiles to the split-screen Metro apps. It explains almost everything — except for the abolition of the Start button. I still can’t work that one out.

Read a lot more at Building Windows 8

Updated @ 8:40: It isn’t explicitly declared, but I assume (hope) that “Aero Peek” (thumbnail previews from the taskbar) will survive the cull.

Source

Network Vision: Sprint’s path to domination

Over the last year, Sprint has constantly touted its Network Vision upgrade as the way forward for the company to compete effectively against the likes of AT&T and Verizon Wireless, as well as T-Mobile USA and other smaller carriers. But what is Network Vision? How does it affect Sprint subscribers? Is it the silver bullet that Sprint portrays it to be?

History

Before we dive into answering those questions, a little history on Network Vision is in order. The history will help put into perspective why Sprint is even doing this, and why it believes it will save them. The concept of Network Vision begins with Sprint-Nextel Corporation, at the beginning of 2010. It had just had yet another successful year selling its 4G WiMAX phones, but it had trouble keeping up with all the networks it runs.

Over the last two years, Sprint has suffered considerably over the maintenance of its iDEN, CDMA2000, and WiMAX networks. Network performance on the CDMA side has been consistently falling over the last two years. Analysts and various stakeholders in Sprint-Nextel have been pressuring the company to eliminate the Nextel iDEN platform and migrate subscribers to the Sprint CDMA platform after badly managing the integration of the Nextel platform following the merger in 2005. Finally, nearly everyone has ragged on Sprint for its choice in using Clearwire’s WiMAX for its 4G platform after Verizon Wireless and AT&T announced that they would use LTE back in 2008. Never mind that if Clearwire and Sprint had not deployed WiMAX, then Clearwire would have lost the licenses to the TDD 2.5GHz spectrum that WiMAX resides on due to the build-out requirements described in the licenses.

Since 2008, Sprint has consistently made known its desire to simplify its network architecture and offer a unified platform that is cheaper to maintain and offers the same quality of service that Sprint has always offered. In December 2010, Sprint announced that it had begun a radical new project to rebuild its entire network, called Network Vision. The announcement of Network Vision came shortly after Verizon Wireless launched its 4G LTE network in October 2010.

Initially, Sprint announced that Network Vision would just be a replacement of the separate infrastructures for the 2G (iDEN), 3G (CDMA2000), and 4G (WiMAX) networks. The idea was to use new multi-mode network infrastructure that could handle all three different network technologies. While iDEN would remain separate, CDMA2000 and WiMAX would live on the same infrastructure. iDEN would then be phased out after Network Vision build-out completed in favor of a push-to-talk solution over CDMA2000.

When queried about the lack of LTE in the original Network Vision infrastructure design, Sprint noted that it could easily run any network technology it wanted with the new Network Vision equipment. Sprint also mentioned that it can easily migrate to LTE from WiMAX because they are both very similar at the tower level, so it can reuse most of the equipment at the tower for LTE.

In October 2011, Sprint made a new announcement about Network Vision. It had revised its plans after securing a deal to offer the iPhone to its subscribers. The new Network Vision project is far more ambitious than the original one. WiMAX was dropped from the architecture of Network Vision. Instead, Sprint would deploy LTE on its exclusive nationwide PCS G-block spectrum. It would also shut down iDEN while deploying Network Vision, with iDEN spectrum eventually being used for a second LTE channel to bond with the G-block PCS LTE network.

Enough about history, what exactly is Network Vision?

Network Vision, as a whole, is Sprint’s last ditch effort to bring its network up to handle the demands of its subscribers in terms of data usage. CDMA2000 and LTE would be hosted in the same cell using new multi-banded multi-mode radios. Using these radios, CDMA2000 would be re-deployed on PCS and deployed on former iDEN spectrum as CDMA2000 1X Advanced with EV-DO Rev. A. With CDMA2000 1X Advanced, Sprint will be enabling HD Voice so that capable devices on the network can offer higher quality voice calls. VoLTE will also be supported with the LTE Release 10 upgrade to the network in 2013. Additionally, equipment for activating LTE at a cell would be installed with the rest of the Network Vision equipment. Each cell would be capable of offering CDMA2000 and LTE initially. Since the same radio will be handling both CDMA2000 and LTE, coverage breadth in areas upgraded to Network Vision will be exactly equal for both CDMA2000 and LTE.

However, the Network Vision architecture has some additional flexibility. By design, Network Vision cells are technology independent. That means that Sprint can simply plug in new radio network technologies through certain specified interfaces and essentially be able to add another network to Network Vision. For example, if a network operator decides to contract Sprint to host an HSPA+ network over Sprint’s PCS band, then Sprint can easily configure the network to offer HSPA+ alongside CDMA2000. That is what Sprint calls network hosting.

Additionally, Network Vision supports all major FDD and TDD frequency bands certified for use in the United States. If a potential network operator wishes to lease its frequencies to Sprint in order to use Sprint’s infrastructure to host its own network, Sprint and the operator can work out an agreement to lease the spectrum to Sprint and have it operate as a component of the network managed by the operator. This is what Sprint calls spectrum hosting.

While network and spectrum hosting are separate concepts, they are not mutually exclusive. It would make far more sense for spectrum hosting to be a component of network hosting. Sprint hopes to use the inherent flexibility of the Network Vision infrastructure to create new business models that would help Sprint generate much more revenue than the traditional mobile network operator and internet backbone provider businesses provide it. While it can offer network hosting with technologies other than CDMA2000 and LTE, it is quite likely that Sprint will not offer such services since it is far more expensive to deploy. Though if it did decide to offer network hosting of HSPA+ and other wireless communication technologies, Sprint could feasibly request that the costs of deployment be shared by the company requesting the deployment of the technology.

The Network Vision architecture is much more compact than the traditional network equipment that is used by Sprint. As a result, Network Vision cells take up a small fraction of the space of the older equipment and are extremely energy efficient. This will allow Sprint to eliminate large external air conditioning facilities required for the old equipment and cut back on the costs to power the equipment. This alone eliminates massive costs to Sprint’s current operating expenditures, and Sprint is expected to benefit from this almost immediately after deployment is complete.

The new multi-band multi-mode antenna equipment attached to the base stations for Network Vision cells will be able to push out stronger signals with less energy due to newer, more efficient radio designs. This means that Network Vision cells will have much higher ranges, which means more complete coverage in a given area. At the base station level, the cell will be able to support far more backhaul (connections to the internet) than it was previously capable of supporting. With more backhaul, Sprint subscribers will be able to get higher throughout and lower latencies over CDMA2000. It also means that subscribers will likely be able to experience the same kind of high speed LTE service that AT&T and Verizon Wireless offers to its subscribers.

Network Vision sounds amazing, but will it save Sprint?

The Network Vision platform that Sprint has developed is truly amazing. By developing a modular, yet minimal architecture for its network infrastructure, Sprint has pushed the boundaries of efficiency with cellular radio technology. Being able to integrate disparate network technologies onto a single system allows Sprint to manage all of it much more effectively than if it was several independent networks.

By rebuilding its network from the bottom up with Network Vision, Sprint will drastically reduce its costs over time. This will hopefully allow it to continue to afford the massive payouts required to keep offering the iPhone on its network and keep Clearwire afloat so that it candeploy TDD LTE to augment Sprint’s own FDD LTE network.

However, Network Vision alone is not going to be the silver bullet that Sprint often portrays it as. Having a totally new infrastructure for its network will require a lot of training and management changes. Sprint will also have to continue to pay Ericsson to manage the network (built out by Ericsson, Alcatel-Lucent, and Samsung), since Sprint does not manage the network itself. Sprint subscribers will need new devices to take full advantage of Network Vision, but some of the benefits can be felt with Sprint’s tri-band CDMA2000 devices. Dual-band CDMA2000 devices (which can only use Sprint’s PCS CDMA2000 network and Verizon’s 850MHz CDMA2000 network) will not get much of a boost in terms of coverage.

The quality of service will also depend heavily on the quality of backhaul that Sprint uses. Historically, Sprint does not have a lot of backhaul attached to its base stations. Going forward, Sprint will hopefully improve the situation. But if nothing changes in terms of backhaul, Sprint subscribers will only get a marginal performance increase over the CDMA2000 network, and the LTE network will only be somewhat faster than AT&T’s HSPA service.

Sprint will also need encourage device makers to start seeding the market with LTE devices that support its unique frequencies. Since its low band frequencies for LTE are a superset of the traditional Cellular 850MHz band and its high band frequencies for LTE are a superset of the traditional PCS 1.9GHz band, Sprint should not have too much trouble getting device makers to offer devices that support its bands along with the international Cellular 850 and PCS bands. Without a breadth of devices to offer, all the effort put into Network Vision would become a total waste.

If Sprint works to improve all aspects of its service, then it will be rewarded with a much higher quality of service to offer subscribers. Subscribers will be very pleased with the improvements and will likely continue to stay with Sprint. But it does not stop there. Sprint must be vigilant and continue to aggressively improve its service in accordance to what its subscribers and potential subscribers want. As a first step, though, Sprint is definitely on the right track.

Source

MIT’s Brainput boosts your brain power by offloading multitasking to a computer

A group of American researchers from MIT, Indiana University, and Tufts University, led by Erin Treacy Solovey, have developed Brainput — pronounced brain-put, not bra-input — a system that can detect when your brain is trying to multitask, and offload some of that workload to a computer.

The idea of using computers to do our grunt work isn’t exactly new — without them, the internet wouldn’t exist, manufacturing would be a very different beast, and we’d all have to get a lot better at mental arithmetic. I would say that the development of cheap, general purpose computers over the last 50 years, and the freedoms they have granted us, is one of mankind’s most important advancements. Brainput is something else entirely though.

Using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), which is basically a portable, poor man’s version of fMRI, Brainput measures the activity of your brain. This data is analyzed, and if Brainput detects that you’re multitasking, the software kicks in and helps you out. In the case of the Brainput research paper, Solovey and her team set up a maze with two remotely controlled robots. The operator, equipped with fNIRS headgear, has to navigate both robots through the maze simultaneously, constantly switching back and forth between them. When Brainput detects that the driver is multitasking, it tells the robots to use their own sensors to help with navigation. Overall, with Brainput turned on, operator performance improved — and yet they didn’t generally notice that the robots were partially autonomous.

Now, it’s easy to see how this could be extrapolated out into the real world. We already have steering wheels that detect when we’re falling asleep — with Brainput, your car could automatically drive itself during that split second where you turn around to shout at your kids, or twiddle with various dashboard knobs. The same goes for airplane pilots, or indeed anyone seated behind the controls of a large, dangerous vehicle. As you can see in the picture at the top of the story, fNIRS is lightweight and doesn’t require a lot of hardware — and there are wireless systems available, too.

Moving forward, Solovey now wants to investigate other cognitive states that can be reliably detected using fNIRS. Imagine a computer that increases the size of buttons and text when you’re tired, or a video game that slows down when you’re stressed. Your Xbox might detect that you’re in the mood for fighting games, and change its splash screen accordingly. Likewise, Firefox could detect that you’re feeling amorous, and automatically load up Private Browsing mode. Menu buttons could move around and change in size — or disappear entirely. Eventually, computer interfaces might completely remold themselves to your mental state.

Read more at Erin Treacy Solovey’s website (or jump directly to the paper [PDF])

Source

Microsoft bans third-party browsers from Windows on ARM

In a twist that’s very reminiscent of Microsoft’s naughty nineties, Mozilla has revealed that Windows RT — aka Windows 8 on ARM — will only support one web browser: Internet Explorer. While Firefox will technically be able to run in Metro mode on Windows RT, it will be so crippled as to be unusable; in “classic,” Desktop mode, third-party browsers such as Firefox won’t be allowed to run at all.

Updated @ 8:00am: The issue seems to revolve around API access in Windows RT. Third-party developers (and apps) will only have access to the WinRT (Metro) API, while Microsoft’s own software will have access to the low-level (and old school) Win32 API. This means that Mozilla can build Firefox for Windows on ARM, but without access to Win32 it will be very hard to compete with Internet Explorer.

At first blush this sounds like a classic ploy to stymy the opposition and regain market share — and for all I know, maybe it is — but there are also a few logical reasons for Microsoft’s decision. From the get-go, Microsoft has been leery of developers porting x86 code to ARM, in case these ported apps don’t have the efficiency and stability that a low-power (and battery-powered) ARM tablet requires. It’s for this reason that Microsoft didn’t offer some kind of OS- or hardware-level x86>ARM translation.

Browsers are also one of the juiciest attack vectors for malware — and also one of the most “visible” aspects of a modern operating system. If a user installs Firefox (or Opera or Chrome) on a Windows RT table, and then it gets bogged down with malware and toolbars, you are likely to walk away with a sour taste for Windows RT; “It’s just like Windows 7 damnit!” By only allowing Internet Explorer, Microsoft should be able to keep Windows RT running smoothly for longer. (This is the same reason that Apple doesn’t allow third-party operating systems on its iOS devices, incidentally.)

Finally, moving away from the logical and more towards legal and ideological wrangling, Windows RT isn’t Windows 8. We always wondered why Windows 8 on ARM was suddenly renamed to Windows RT, and this is probably the reason. With one fell swoop, Microsoft may have escaped the the antitrust ruling that forced European versions of Windows to offer alternative browsers, and done an end-run around the DOJ-Microsoft antitrust settlement in 2001.

Irrespective of the reasoning behind the restriction, we should discuss the heinous implications forusers. First up, this means there won’t be any browser add-ons on Windows ARM tablets. There also won’t be any HTML5 web apps (either from the Chrome Web Store, or Mozilla Marketplace, or fancy WebGL-powered websites. If tablet computing turns out to be as big as Microsoft and Apple are anticipating, then this restriction will seriously hamper competition, and thus the continued, rapid advances being made to web browsers and underlying technologies, such as HTML5, JavaScript, and HTTP.

I think it’s unlikely, but if ARM tablets beat out x86 tablets, this could mean a return to the mid-’90s digital dark age, where more than 90% of web surfers used Internet Explorer — a fate worse than death itself.

Read more at Mozilla, or for more technical details hit up Asa Dotzler’s blog

Updated @ 6:30am: It seems Google shares the same concerns as Mozilla.

Updated @ 8:00am: Here’s some more technical details behind the ‘ban’ (it’s more of a massive roadblock than a ban, though)

Source

Demystifying semantic search

Web searchers these days are a sophisticated bunch. We expect more from our search results, and sometimes a list of links just doesn’t cut it. Plus, who wants to muddle around those results trying to find precisely what you’re looking for? Shouldn’t a search engine know what you want? That’s why search engines, including heavy hitters such as Google and Bing, are beginning to look for ways to get you the information you want more quickly.

The latest attempt to make search results more relevant is by peering into the meaningof your search query itself. This is called semantic search.

What is semantic search?

Semantics is the study of the meaning and relation of words together. When applied to search, it allows a search engine to return results to a query based on what it believes the searcher is intending to find. For example take a search for “Philadelphia.” While the standard search may return the city’s official website, its tourist bureau, and other information, a semantic search goes further.

These results are a little more abstract: for example the city’s location, its population, the climate, and other facts about the city. In some cases, search engines are already providing semantic results. A Google search for “population of Philadelphia” displays the result — 1,528,306 — along with a graph of historical population data. Searching for “xanax” brings up a short description of the drug aprazolam and its uses.

Search companies in essence are hoping that they can answer your question without ever leaving the site. This strategy may not be beneficial to those sites who depend on Google and others to drive traffic to their own sites, but it certainly means more page views for the search engines and more chances to sell advertising.

Who’s using semantic search?

Arguably the core concept of semantic search itself and the desire on the part of consumers for such functionality could be traced back to Ask Jeeves. When the search engine debuted in 1996, it brought with it a whole new way of searching the web. Instead trying to figure out the right search terms to use, users were told to phrase their searches in the form of a question. While it was not truly semantic search, this changed the way people interacted with search engines.

True semantic search did not appear on a larger scale until 2005 when Google introduced Q&A. From the search terms entered into the search box, Google attempted to anticipate what the user was looking for across a variety of subjects, such as celebrities, movies, and the elements. WhenMicrosoft debuted Bing in 2009, the company leaned heavily on semantics to differentiate itself from competitors. The company argued that searchers are looking for more than just a list of links.

Wolfram Alpha takes Bing’s concept even further. Instead of combining traditional with semantic search as Google and Bing have done, Wolfram Alpha is completely semantic. Entering queries into the search box returns results from preexisting sets of data. Like Ask, you enter your query in the form of a question but Wolfram Alpha attempts to answer the question directly.

How will it change traditional search?

As long as search has existed, web denizens have played the game known as “search engine optimization.” The goal of SEO is to design websites in such a way that it can be easily parsed by search engine web crawlers, and make it so that the content of that site is optimized to appeal to the engines. Emphasis is usually placed on writing text in such a way that keywords associated with possible search queries appear prominently and repeatedly.

Semantic search changes the way SEO works. Website managers can no longer pack sites with keywords in the hope that Google’s algorithms will look favorably upon it for higher ranking. Additional emphasis is placed in the content surrounding those keywords. Does the text play well with those keywords, anticipating the intent of person searching? In other words, the game will be over — ranking high on a search engine that properly uses semantics will not be easy and will require a good deal more work.

Websites will also be competing with the search engines themselves. Part of the goal of incorporating semantic results into traditional ones is answering the searcher’s question before needing to go elsewhere for it. This means more page views for the search engine, and less for those who may have relied on Google, Bing, and others for a good deal of referral traffic. SEO takes a backseat as the content itself becomes much more important.

For users, semantic search changes the way we interact with search. Instead of being a stop along the way of looking for what we might need, the search engine becomes a destination. Why search around the web when the answer is right there? Search companies like this for the reasons I just mentioned, and users will appreciate it because it drastically simplifies the search process.

Is semantic search the “holy grail?”

Google and Bing (and Wolfram Alpha, too) are embracing semantic search in a big way, but there are limits. While it is nice to enter a question into a search engine such as “What’s the weather going to be in New York City tomorrow?” and get an answer right away, not all searches need to be so specific. Sometimes there’s a need for more vague research when you’re searching, and the standard list of links works well.

Another issue is accuracy. Search engines will need to stay on top of the data they lean on to respond to semantic queries. What if the data is wrong? They search engines won’t just be linking to the data, they’ll also be presenting it. Sometimes it’s good to have that list of links, because one site may be telling you one thing, and the rest something completely different. What if these sites use Wikipedia? Many of those articles aren’t always 100% right. Semantic results will require a great deal more oversight on the part of the search engine itself to ensure accuracy.

Then there’s the issue of playing favorites. With traditional search, getting listed costs you nothing other than time and effort. With semantic search, that result has to come from somewhere. Semantic search could arguably become just another type of sponsored result, a very effective and prominent method of advertising for those who can afford it. Google already sells those top spots to advertisers. Why not make those results semantically aware. That weather could be “powered by The Weather Channel” for example.

It might not lead to a click per se, but that visual reinforcement goes a long way the next time somebody’s looking for weather information. Who might they think of? Hopefully The Weather Channel first.

Semantic search shows a lot of promise to change the way we search. For the webmaster, it changes the game of getting your site high up in search results. For the user, it will hopefully make our searches more relevant as it will attempt to guess our intent rather than a literal interpretation of every search term we type in. Will it also change the search giants’ stance against pay-for-play when it comes to search results? That remains to be seen, but the groundwork has certainly been laid.

Source

Firefox Australis: One browser interface to rule them all

Before you read on, make sure you’re seated comfortably. If you’re wearing a tie or belt, loosen it. Usually you’re told to brace in such instances, but I find it easier to just kind of just, like, go limp. Ready? Firefox is receiving yet another interface overhaul. Dubbed Australis, the new UI (and UX) will span, embrace, and unify the desktop, tablet, and smartphone versions of Firefox.

The last year or two has seen Firefox experience something resembling an identity crisis. You will all remember when Firefox 4.0 introduced a wildly different interface (called Strata) with The Big Orange Button, but Mozilla has also been experimenting with different tablet and smartphone UIs since Firefox for Android’s inception. For a variety of reasons, Mozilla never tried to bring Strata to the mobile platforms, resulting in a very fragmented user experience — mobile Firefox had almost zero resemblance to desktop Firefox.

Australis, rather sensibly, is an attempt to build a user interface/experience model that works and feels the same across every platform; Windows, Mac, Linux, and Android. Starting with the premise that Firefox is “soft, friendly, and human,” Australis is as curvy as a curvy thing. While the desktop version of Australis obviously has more browser chrome (buttons/widgets) than the smartphone and tablet versions, all three share one recurring feature: Rounded corners everywhere. Tabs are positively swoopy (their curves are likened to those of an aerodynamic supercar). The bottom left and right corners of the browser window will be rounded. The tab thumbnails (when switching tabs on Firefox for Android) have rounded corners. Pop-up dialogs, such as Settings or Downloads, have rounded corners. The address bar and search bar are no longer rectangular: They’re roundedrectangles.

A lot of attention is being paid to the Metro version of Firefox, which will hopefully be ready in time for Windows 8′s release this fall. For the most part, the Australis version of Metro Firefox looks a lot like Metro IE10, but with a few more rounded corners (pictured above). The timeline for Australis on Windows 7 (and Windows 8 desktop), Mac, and Linux is probably similar to the Metro version (i.e. towards the end of 2012). The current Nightly build of Firefox 15 has a few Australis-like features (cleaner, simplified buttons, and the new Download pane), but the swoopy tabs are yet to be seen.Firefox for Android already has a few Australis elements. For the time being, Mozilla has provided interactive, web-based demos of the Australis theme (Windows/Mac/Linux).

In other news, it looks like Firefox for Android (and probably Metro) will soon have a Reading Mode, which — much like Instapaper, or Safari’s feature of the same name — strips away a web page’s cruft so that it’s easier to read (pictured below).

For more information about Australis, and some of Mozilla’s other UX efforts, hit up the Firefox User-Experience slides, which were presented by Madhava Enros at the Firefox Workweek in Toronto.

Read about Firefox’s New Tab Page and Home Tab (which are in Firefox 13 beta)

Source