Tuesday, May 10, 2005

The future of the iPod

Robert X. Cringely speculates on the future of the iPod:

Looking at the unused iTunes icons that shipped with your new version of [Mac OS] 10.4, you’ll notice icons for currently-not-supported ogg vorbis and Windows Media Audio (wma), as well as several others including a variety of video formats, too.

With this new information we can make a pretty good guess about the evolution of both iTunes and iPod. When Apple feels that the success of iTunes is absolutely assured, which will be shortly, they’ll address the user complaint that iPod only supports AAC and MP3 audio by adding these additional formats, leading to increased iPod sales. And at the same time, the video icons strongly suggest that Apple will also have a video iPod this year.

Apple’s own downward price pressure on portable media players gives us another element of the probable iPod strategy...what Apple wants to do is make its money through iTunes, where the profit margins are better in the long term and the system is easily scalable. It was necessary to create the iPod platform to make this happen...the trick is to know when to switch the business from being a mix of hardware and software to one that is software-only. That switch, which I believe to be inevitable, will happen shortly after Apple begins to license iPod clones.

...If Apple licensed iPod technology, the company would receive from its OEMs a per-CPU license fee of anywhere from $5 to $25 depending on how smooth Steve is as a salesman and how desperate the would-be OEMs are for that license. As Apple’s profit drops on each iPod it makes, eventually the per-CPU figure will approach what Apple might receive from licensees. At that moment it makes more sense for Apple to license clones than it does to make more iPods.

Via Alan Wexelblat at Copyfight.

We need more than yellow ribbons

Last week it was reportedd that the Army missed its recruiting goal for the third month in a row. Today Kos asks:

Where is Rush Limbaugh’s plea to his listeners to enlist? How about Sean Hannity? Bill O’Reilly? Nevermind they passed on serving their nation when they had a chance. Why aren’t they using their influence to encourage military service?

How about President Bush? Where is he in this important issue? Joe Lieberman? Bill Frist? Tom DeLay? Sure, they shirked their duty given the chance. But since they’re cheering the quagmire in the Gulf, shouldn’t they be working balls-out to ensure we have the resources to fight their war?

Kos goes on to say he agrees with this:

In an appeal to the nation’s patriotism, the Army’s vice chief of staff, Gen. Richard Cody, warns this issue is about far more than military service alone.

“This recruiting problem is not just an Army problems, this is America’s problem,” he said. “And what we have to really do is talk about service to this nation - and a sense of duty to this nation.”

I agree with both.

UPDATE: Jonah Goldberg’s reaction, “Yawn.”

The Huffington Post

I have nothing to add to the blogosphere’s reaction to The Huffington Post, but I figured what the heck, join the crowd. I like Jack Schafer’s take at Slate, Arianna’s Echo Park. And Xeni at Boing Boing points to Salon and LA Weekly. I’m not surprised at 8 million hits on the first day. How can that much star power not attract gawkers?

I am surprised to find that Crooks and Liars like it:

I admire all the actors and celebs for partaking in this venture. Whether liberal or conservative, their views will now be heard and they could pay a price for being outspoken in this day and age.

And I agree with Kevin Drum:

Maybe I’m missing something here. My taste is not everyone’s taste, after all. But I read blogs because I enjoy the author’s voice and enjoy seeing them engage with the rest of the blogosphere. An enormous dumping ground of miscellaneous paragraphs parachuting out of the sky, on the other hand, doesn’t seem that appealing.

That’s exactly right. It’s too much. And not enough. I expect there will be interesting stuff from time to time, but others will have to find it and point me there. The way it’s organized and delivered now makes no sense to me.

For my Hollywood fix, I’ll stick with Wil Wheaton.

NY Loves Target

Crain’s New York Business yesterday, Wal-Mart makes an easy Target:

New Yorkers have responded to Target and Wal-Mart in starkly different ways.

Target has opened five stores here over the past eight years--in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx--with virtually no protest. New Yorkers are flocking to the stores. Wal-Mart, which has 5,000 locations worldwide but none in the city, was chased away from Queens last winter by a fierce political and public relations campaign. It remains a lightning rod as it continues to seek an entree here.

Steve Gilliard on why:

Uh, here’s the difference: Target isn’t being sued for a) sexual discrimination, b)not paying workers, c)locking workers in at night.

Target is non-union, but pays their workers better, treats them better and provides a better shopping experience. Sure, they give to the GOP and they aren’t unionized, BUT, they don’t take glee in it...Wal-Mart and Target approach the same issues in VERY different ways.

Here they prefer Wal-Mart’s approach. Wal-Mart is the clear favorite; there is a Wal-Mart culture. It’s very hard to live here and not shop at Wal-Mart. And it’s because of the sensibility and style. Wal-Mart has no pretension, shoppers here like the Wal-Mart shopping experience with its emphasis on nothing but price. There is little awareness of how Wal-Mart works or that Wal-Mart flouts the USA first issues that are held in such high regard here.

As to Target, there’s one in Macon. Target won’t be coming here anytime soon.

Google’s Web Accelerator

The * much * criticized * Google Web Accelerator is the subject of a CNET FAQ today:

Is there a security flaw in Google’s Web Accelerator, and how does it affect me?
Yes, Google acknowledged a vulnerability in the beta software last week, after several online critics spotted the flaw.

The software can serve cached copies of private discussion groups or password-protected pages to people using the software. For example, using the software, a Web surfer might call up a discussion group page and see the name of another group member, making it appear as if the surfer is signed in as that other user…

Apart from the flaw, is my privacy in jeopardy by using Web Accelerator?
It could be, depending on your comfort level. According to Google’s privacy policy, the Web Accelerator retrieves and caches Web pages you’ve visited, and those page requests can include personal information about you. It also temporarily caches third-party cookies that can contain personal data…

What is Google’s responsibility toward me when I use this software?
None, really, if you read and agree to Google’s terms of service…

The scent of attraction

More evidence that sexual orientation is not a preference?

Using a brain imaging technique, Swedish researchers have shown that homosexual and heterosexual men respond differently to two odors that may be involved in sexual arousal, and that the gay men respond in the same way as women.

The new research may open the way to studying human pheromones, as well as the biological basis of sexual preference. Pheromones, chemicals emitted by one individual to evoke some behavior in another of the same species, are known to govern sexual activity in animals, but experts differ as to what role, if any, they play in making humans sexually attractive to one another.