Paul O'Flaherty

Where’s the consistancy Google?

Google have released two new pieces of software recently. One is a the upgrade to the popular Google Desktop Search and the other is the new IM client Google Talk. I’m not going to go into a review of the merits of both programs as that has been done to death over the last few days by every other blogger and technology columnist out there. What I want to look at is the stark contrast between the two pieces of software.

Having spent time with Google DTS 2 (Beta) I was left confused. Between the “news”, “web clips” and “whats hot” it soon becomes difficult to track what’s actually going on, and to track what you actually want to track. Out of the box the software automatically adds feeds from visited sites, which, if you surf a lot of irrelevant sites in search of material or whatever, quickly makes the web clips box a mess of stuff you have no interest in. You can fix this in the options, but it’s not the default.

The design of the sidebar in DTS 2 is good. The interface is smooth and clean, and it’s relatively easy to manipulate the information and view the information once you’ve set it up properly. Unfortunately, the team behind the program seem to lack focus, or vision or at least some sort of clear goal as to where this piece of software is going. They’ve bundled in module upon useless module, many of which are redundant in what appears to be the hopes of appeasing everybody.

I’ve always seen Google as a company with a clear vision, and it’s generally accepted that that vision is one of making all the information of the internet available to the consumer through a seamless Google experience. The team behind DTS 2 have lost sight of this! Maybe they should go hang out with the guys that banged out Google Talk, because that rocks.

Google DTS is THE benchmark for IM clients as it things stand! Okay, I know it’s feature weak at the moment, simply providing IM and PC to PC only VoIP, but just look at that design. It’s clean, crisp, simple, and not bloated with advertising. It’s a measly 900k download, perfect for those still afflicted with Dial Up syndrome, and thanks to the use of Jabber as it’s protocol anybody on any computer can chat on the Google Talk IM network without using the windows client. The choice of Jabber was pure genius here, as Google have only had to release one piece of software, and won’t be under immediate pressure to get Mac and Linux clients out. If your like me, you’ve already set up your GAIM IM client to use multiple Google Talk accounts.

So where is the consistancy? How in one week can Google release two pieces of software, DTS which is awkward enough to confuse not only me, but the likes of Molly Wood of Cnet.coms Daily Buzz, and also such a simplistic, clean, crisp and focused IM client like Google talk? Where is the quality control? I know both products are in beta, but doesn’t quality control also deal with things like consistancy and vision? Is this a sign that things are getting a little sloppy over there, now that all the moneys come in, or is it just a little bump in the road?

Urine powered battery? You must be taking the piss!

The Reg is reporting that researchers in Singapore have developed a paper battery that is powered by urine. These batteries promise to become a cheap and disposable power source for home health tests for things like diabetes.

How long will it be before I find myslef peeing into a slot on my laptop?

One thing Linux has that Windows does not!

There’s one thing that the Linux desktop has that Windows doesn’t! It’s the ability to scale the background image to a maximum size for the screen while keeping the aspect ratio of the image.

Windows just stretches the image to fill the screen and warps it in all directions. What I want in windows is to have an irregular size image and when it’s stretched have it fill the screen from top to bottom with a border on the sides, or from side to side with a border on top and bottom, all depending on the size of the image.

So when am I going to have this Microsoft? Am I going to have to wait for Vista? Or can you add this functionality as a power toy or something?

And you idiots still want software patents?

I just saw this over on /. and I think it just sums up how wonderfully screwed up the US Patent System is:

“InfoSpinner/epicRealm holds two patents that basically describe every dynamic Web site in existence and is now using them to sue companies like eHarmony. This patent seems to describe a standard web/application server setup. This one describes ‘dynamically generating a Web page in response to the request, the Web page including data dynamically retrieved from one or more data sources.’ If enforced, these patents could shut down almost every dynamic site on the Internet, including the USPTO.”

I can’t believe that their are still idiots who still want to bring this kind of a patent system to Europe!

Update: Edited to remove broken link.

OPM: The next DRM insanity

I’ve never heard of OPM before I saw it on Engadget, however, if it’s true then I hope Microsoft wakes up and realizes that when faced when upgrading their computer most people don’t have infinitely deep pockets. The majority of people try to keep as many of their existing peripherals as possible, such as their monitor, keyboard and mice, so that they can either save a few bucks or pour the extra cash into getting a slightly better PC.

Microsoft already have a difficult enough time getting people to upgrade to a new OS, without forcing them to upgrade all their hardware at the same time.

If Microsoft go ahead with OPM, it will be the most amazingly stupid move they’ve made in a long time.

Here’s an excerpt from the Engadget article::

So what is OPM? The successor to Microsofts rarely-mentioned COPP (Certified Output Protection Protocol), PVP-OPM (Protected Video Path Output Protection Management) is the first play in Microsofts game plan to ensure that protected content stays protected. PVP-OPM performs two main functions. First, it detects the capabilities of the display devices attached to the computer. For instance, does the DVI LCD monitor that youre using have HDCP (High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection)? Second, it manages what, if anything, gets sent to those devices.
If youre one of those rare people whose display is equipped with HDCP, youre fine. However, in the world of computers, those users are few and far between. While HDCP has become the de facto standard for display copy-protection in televisions, its penetration in the computer display market would be pleased to merely be called anemic. Whether youre plunking down money for one of the new ultra-fast LCD displays with 4ms response times or youre becoming the envy of neighborhood with Dells UltraSharp 2405FPW widescreen display, youre buying a monitor that wont play nice with premium content in Longhorn.
So what will happen when you try to play premium content on your incompatible monitor? If youre lucky, the content will go through a resolution constrictor. The purpose of this constrictor is to down-sample high-resolution content to below a certain number of pixels. The newly down-sampled content is then blown back up to match the resolution of your monitor. This is much like when you shrink a JPEG and then zoom into it. Much of the clarity is lost. The result is a picture far fuzzier than it need be.
Thats LUCKY?
It sure is when the alternative is a black screen. If OPM determines that your monitor falls below the security restrictions (i.e. isnt DVI or HDMI w/HDCP), you could be greeted with a polite message explaining that [your monitor] doesnt meet security requirements.

Now, as I was writing this I just noticed that Microsoft have responded to this saying:

“Our fundamental goal governing our content protection efforts is to ensure that “content flows”. This requires coordination across multiple – and intimately related – dimensions. As a platform provider, we provide the technology that allows these partners to test and implement new business models and scenarios. It remains up to “the market” to determine the equilibrium that drives any free-enterprise system.”

Bullshit! If Microsoft thinks they can pass this one off by simply saying their the platform provider and just giving the content providers the tools they demand, then they have another thing coming. A response like this is as good as saying we don’t give a shit about the consumer, but we do care about the content providers who will line our pockets.

This is the kind of attitude that could potentially end up as a loose, loose situation for Redmond, because if the consumers really don’t want this (and we don’t) then we won’t migrate to Microsoft Vista. If we don’t migrate then Microsoft won’t make money from the content providers using their technology, or us buying their OS.

It should be very obvious that people have had it up to the front teeth with DRM, and all the restrictions and extra costs it’s been putting on our purchased content. On what we’ve bought and own. I hope that Microsoft decides to scrap this, and stand up for the consumer, as ultimately, without us, Microsoft has no business.