Digital Daily » application

Chrome OS: "Turning On a PC Should Be Like Turning On Your TV"

John Paczkowski — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:59:51 +0000

Direct from Google headquarters, and liveblogged by John Paczkowski, Google’s Sundar Pichai, vice president of product management and Matthew Papakipos, engineering director for Google Chrome OS, explain some of the advantages of the operating system. This is the second of three segments:

Among Chrome OS’s advantages: Speed, simplicity and security. Every application will be a Web application. There will be no desktop apps. Chrome OS is essentially a browser with a few modifications. All data in the Chrome OS reside in the cloud. Pichai: “We want all of personal computing to work that way….If I lose my Chrome machine, I should be able to go out, buy a new [one] and re-create my previous computing experience easily.” Chrome OS will run completely inside the browser security model, he adds, noting that security is one of Google’s (GOOG) top priorities along with speed. “Turning on a PC should be like turning on your TV,” he says.

Chrome OS is very similar in appearance to the Chrome browser. “Chrome OS is Chrome,” says Pichai. Google made it look like a browser, because the browser is familiar.

And indeed, Chrome OS does look quite a bit like a browser. Multiple apps load into tabs, for example. It also features “Panels,” which Pichai describes as persistent lightweight windows. “All Chrome data resides in the cloud. Anything you put in the machine is immediately available to you anywhere.”

As netbooks become more advanced and battery life improves, they will evolve into entertainment devices, says Pichai, who notes that via Google Books, a netbook can become an e-reader, and through YouTube, a video device.

A quick demo of the user interface, which seems very simple and intuitive. “It just works,” says Pichai in an unintentional nod to Apple (AAPL). An interesting remark: Anyone who writes an app for the Web has written an app for Chrome, says Pichai, joking that Microsoft (MSFT) is already developing for it.

Speed, simplicity and security, says Pichai. We’re trying to make the computing experience delightful.

With that, Sundar Pichai hands the stage over to Engineering Director Matt Papakipos.

Papakipos, too, offers the “we want to make computing delightful” sound byte and notes once again that turning on the PC should be like turning on the TV.

Chrome OS eliminates the bootloader, auto-launching the browser. The OS also auto-updates itself, making sure that it’s always current with security patches, etc. Everything from the firmware to the kernel is secured with a cryptographic signature to ensure a secure boot. In the event malware is detected, the system repairs itself automatically.

The basic application security protocol for current operating systems allows apps the same privileges as the user. This presents obvious security issues. Whenever you install a new app, you’re taking a risk, says Papakipos. But Web applications like those that Chrome OS use are different. They are Web apps so they don’t have system-level privileges. Additionally, all apps run in secured sandboxes that are separate from one other and from the OS. Finally, all apps must be signed and verified before each use.

In terms of file systems, Chrome’s is locked down. It’s a read-only root-file system, obviously quite different from other operating systems. All user data are encrypted and synched to the cloud. Essentially, Google uses the PC for caching. Again, if you should lose your machine, you buy a new one, fire it up and it synchs with the cloud, restoring your previous computing experience.

Google's Chrome OS: "It Just Works"

John Paczkowski — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:51:03 +0000

Speaking at Microsoft’s Worldwide Partner Conference in New Orleans this past July, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said of Google’s forthcoming Chrome OS, “Who knows what this thing is?”

Today, he found out. The operating system, a direct challenge to Microsoft Windows, was on display at a media gathering at the Google HQ this morning.

Sundar Pichai, vice president of product management, and Matthew Papakipos, engineering director for Google Chrome OS, presided over the event, which the company described as a “technical announcement.”

That meant that Google (GOOG) was not releasing a beta of the operating system this week, as had been rumored.

That said, it was an overview of Chrome, as well as Google’s plans for its launch in 2010, so let the Chrome OS liveblogging begin:

There will be no beta today. Pichai says Google is still a year away from an official launch. However, the company is making the code available today.
Pichai says that a year after launch, the Chrome browser has some 40 millions users. He boasts about the browser’s speed, noting that it handles Javascript 39 times faster than Microsoft’s (MSFT) Internet Explorer. There will be three more big Chrome announcements sometime in the future: Chrome for Mac, Chrome for Linux and the debut of Chrome Extensions.
Google’s goal is to ensure that Web applications function as well as desktop apps. Pichai says that the company is figuring out a way for Web apps to safely take advantage of the operating system in the way desktop apps do. A few examples: Graphics, video/audio applications, real-time communication, notification and local storage.

“By 2010 we expect to have all these things built into Chrome,” Pichai adds.
The advent of Chrome coincides with a perfect storm of converging trends, Pichai says, noting the tremendous popularity of netbooks during the recession, the growing acceptance of cloud apps and the rapid innovation in mobile devices. Smartphones are becoming more like laptops, Pichai adds, and laptops are becoming more like smartphones. Is there a better level of computing available for these devices?

There is, according to Pichai, and Google believes it is Chrome OS.
Among Chrome OS’s advantages, Pichai says: Speed, simplicity and security. Every application will be a Web application. There will be no desktop apps. Chrome OS is essentially a browser with a few modifications. All data in the Chrome OS resides in the cloud. Pichai: “We want all of personal computing to work that way….If I lose my Chrome machine, I should be able to go out, buy a new [one] and re-create my previous computing experience easily.”

Chrome OS will run completely inside the browser security model, he adds, noting that security is one of Google’s top priorities along with speed. “Turning on a PC should be like turning on your TV,” he says.
Chrome OS is very similar in appearance to the Chrome browser. “Chrome OS is Chrome,” says Pichai. Google made it look like a browser, because the browser is familiar.
And indeed, Chrome OS does look quite a bit like a browser. Multiple apps load into tabs, for example. It also features “Panels,” which Pichai describes as persistent lightweight windows. “All Chrome data resides in the cloud. Anything you put in the machine is immediately available to you anywhere.”
As netbooks become more advanced and battery life improves, they will evolve into entertainment devices, says Pichai, who notes that via Google Books, a netbook can become an e-reader, and, through YouTube, a video device.
A quick demo of the user interface, which seems very simple and intuitive. “It just works,” says Pichai in an unintentional nod to Apple (AAPL).

An interesting remark: Anyone who writes an app for the Web has written an app for Chrome, says Pichai, joking that Microsoft is already developing for it.
Speed, simplicity and security, says Pichai. We’re trying to make the computing experience delightful.

With that, Pichai hands the stage over to Engineering Director Matt Papakipos.

Papakipos, too, offers the “we want to make computing delightful” sound byte and notes once again that turning on the PC should be like turning on the TV.
Chrome OS eliminates the bootloader, auto-launching the browser. The OS also auto-updates itself, making sure that it’s always current with security patches, etc. Everything from the firmware to the kernel is secured with a cryptographic signature to ensure a secure boot. In the event malware is detected, the system repairs itself automatically.
The basic application security protocol for current operating systems allows apps the same privileges as the user. This presents obvious security issues. Whenever you install a new app, you’re taking a risk, says Papakipos.

But Web applications like those that Chrome OS use, are different. They are Web apps, so they don’t have system-level privileges. Additionally, all apps run in secured sandboxes that are separate from one other and from the OS. Finally, all apps must be signed and verified before each use.
In terms of file systems, Chrome’s is locked down. It’s a read-only root-file system, obviously quite different from other operating systems. All user data are encrypted and synched to the cloud. Essentially, Google uses the PC for caching. Again, if you should lose your machine, you buy a new one, fire it up and it synchs with the cloud, restoring your previous computing experience.
How will Google bring Chrome OS to market? The company is working with vendors to specify reference hardware. You cannot download and install Chrome on just any device, you will have to purchase a Chrome device. Google is looking at a launch window of late 2010, before the holidays.
Google sounds very concerned about the end-user Chrome OS experience. Pichai says the company wants to ensure that the displays, keyboard, etc., on the netbooks that run Chrome are robust and easy to use.
Pichai wraps things up, but before the Q&A, we’re shown a short explanatory video. “The first thing I want to do when I fire up my computer is browse the Internet….If there isn’t any Internet, I might not even use my computer….What if when you pressed on, your PC turned on, what if your operating system was more like a Web browser…what if it was a browser?…Chrome OS is a totally rethought computer that lets you focus on the Internet, which is what most of use our computers for these days anyway.”

Q&A

At this point, Pichai opens the event to questions:

If you’re specifying hardware components, do you must have an idea of what they’ll cost?

A: We expect Chrome netbooks to be in the price range of what people have come to expect….We are not specifying a price target. Price will be determined at the OEM level.

Will the APIs support W3C standards?

A: We’re working very closely with the W3C to standardize as much as we can….In general, we want to see everything standardized across multiple browsers.

Will there be an application store?

A: The Web offers hundreds of millions of applications. Our job is to make people aware of them.

What about desktop applications that are not available on the Web?

A: We expect most of our users to have a second machine at home….Chrome OS is about a delightful experience on the Web….If you’re a lawyer spending your entire day on contracts, etc., this is not the machine for you.

Will you support Microsoft Silverlight?

A: In the case of certain selection plug-ins, we are working to integrate them. No comment beyond that.

Since Chrome is open source, could people build their own variations?

A: Yes. We expect people will do many interesting things with it.

Do you see Chrome running on laptops or desktops?

A: We’re initially focused on netbook-like form factors–clamshells, etc. That said, the OS is being developed to work on other devices.

Is there any level of offline access? What happens when I’m on a plane and don’t want to pay for Wi-Fi?

A: Chrome devices are primarily intended to be Internet-connected. That said, it will have some caching abilities so, for example, you could play a game offline.

Virtualization?

A: Yes. You could run Chrome today on a virtual machine.

Are you working with outfits like Adobe to, say, build a Web-friendly version of Photoshop?

A: We’re very excited by things like Photoshop on the Web and we’re working hard to make that possible.

Will Android apps work on Chrome? Are there plans for third-party apps?

A: [Pichai dodges this one.] If it’s a Web app, it will work on Chrome. The Web works very, very well for our purposes.

Will Chrome work on both X86 and ARM?

A: Yes.

Is there a direct business model for Chrome OS or is this another variation of the-more-people-that-use-the-Web-the-better-for-Google?

A: We are working with partners. No plans for advertising. That said, Pichai notes again that anything that runs on the Web will run on Chrome. And of course, AdWords does, indeed, run on the Web.

[Sergey Brin joins the Q&A]

Do you want Android Apps to run on Chrome?

A: We are focused on creating the use case in which everything is a Web application, but hopefully we can do more in the future.

How does Chrome handle peripherals? Can it print?

A: Most keyboards, cameras, phones, etc., will work. In terms of printing…yes, Chrome OS will print and we’re working hard to make that possible.

What is Chrome’s strategic position for Google?

A: [Brin]: Call us dumb businessmen, but we really focus on user needs rather than focus on business strategies. We believe that the Web platform is a much simpler way of computing for individuals to use, and that’s a very important need in the market right now. That’s what we’re trying to fulfill.

Nokia Buy Palm? Riiiiight.

John Paczkowski — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:39:12 +0000

Palm shares are trading higher today, bolstered by anticipation of the Nov. 15 launch of the Pixi, the company’s second webOS handset and by some silly rumors about a potential takeover by Nokia (NOK). Does the company really need another software platform to add to Symbian, Maemo and Qt? C’mon.

At $12.34, Palm (PALM) is up well over seven percent as I write this, a nice gain that more than offset the four percent drop the company’s shares suffered last week. Clearly, the market is expecting a lot of the Pixi, and according to some analysts, it may get it. In a note to clients Friday, RBC analysts said they “expect positive consumer reception and healthy sell-through,” for the Pixi.

But not everyone agrees with RBC’s cheery assessment. Ashok Kumar, an analyst at Northeast Securities, has a much dimmer view of Palm’s prospects in the months ahead. He says his sell-through checks show a “substantial decline” in recent Pre sales.

“As a fading brand, carriers are likely to see better returns on their promotional and advertising dollars with other vendors,” Kumar writes. “WebOS has negligible smartphone OS share, 0.2 percent per Gartner estimates, and is unlikely to attract any meaningful third-party application support. Palm has bet the farm on webOS and there is a real possibility that they may not achieve critical mass.”

Perhaps. Perhaps not. We’ll see in the months ahead.

Droid: "The Best Smart Phone Not Made by Apple"

John Paczkowski — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:15:31 +0000

Droid, Motorola’s most anticipated cellphone since the launch of the Razr in 2004, arrived at market today, to a warm reception by most accounts. Some 2,000 Verizon Wireless stores opened early this morning, many to lines–though admittedly, the lines are far shorter than those that accompanied the launch of certain rival devices.

According to News.com, 100 people or so lined up outside Verizon’s midtown Manhattan store last night prior to its midnight opening. And various reports posted to Twitter suggest there were queues at other outlets as well, though quite a bit shorter (see below; click to enlarge).

In any event, the fact that there are lines at all must be a welcome sight for Verizon (VZ), which has been looking for a strong rival to Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone, and for Motorola (MOT), which hopes Droid will revive its much-diminished post-Razr cellphone business. As one Verizon subscriber eager to trade up to Droid told me, “it’s the best smart phone not made by Apple.”

With endorsements like this, Motorola should be working a bit harder on branding the device as its own. Right now, the Droid marketing push from Verizon Wireless is so overwhelming that you’d think CEO Lowell McAdam designed it himself. Why aren’t we hearing from Motorola as well?

“Droid is potentially a game changer for Motorola,” iSuppli analyst Tina Teng said in a recent research note. “Motorola now is no longer just emphasizing slick form factors, such as it did with its RAZR handset. The company now has focused on the hottest segment of the global mobile handset market–providing compelling smartphone products that are usable and expandable through third-party applications.”

That being the case, Motorola might want to do a bit more to get its name out there.

Palm: On a Road to Recovery or a Highway to Hell?

John Paczkowski — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:15:15 +0000

With Palm’s shares up more than 900 percent since January, they were destined to suffer a correction someday. And now it seems that day has finally come.

Shares in the handset maker fell some 23 percent last week amid concerns about increased competition from Google’s (GOOG) Android operating system, which is being rolled out on a number of devices at a variety of carriers, including Palm partner Sprint (S).

This morning, analysts at Citigroup (C) cut their recommendations to sell from hold on Palm (PALM) while simultaneously raising their rating on Motorola (MOT) because of its “compelling” new Android handset, Droid.

“Motorola is launching of one of the most compelling offerings at [a] time when many investors have given up on the company’s handsets,” Citigroup analyst Jim Suva wrote in a research note.

“The revolution of product and application service offerings,” Suva added, “is going to start to crack open the enterprise door and could pose a risk for BlackBerry. Major shifts in promotion support creating a promotion commotion in the months ahead favor Motorola and post a challenge for RIMM and PALM.”

Over at CL King, analyst Lawrence Harris is similarly dubious of Palm’s prospects in the months ahead. Noting that Sprint executive David Owens said last week that the carrier plans to peddle a number of new Android devices from HTC next year, Harris sees unfavorable implications for Palm.

“Historically, Sprint has been Palm’s largest customer. Indeed, in the August quarter Sprint accounted for 85 percent of Palm’s revenues,” Harris wrote in a note to investors. “In FY09 (May) Sprint represented 43 percent of total Palm sales. Sprint has a U.S. exclusive on both the Pre and the Pixi through calendar year end. The Pixi will be launched at Sprint on November 15 for $99.99. The Pixi is fairly similar to the $149.99 Pre. Verizon has stated that it will begin offering the Pre in early CY10.”

Expounding on his analysis, Harris notes that “According to a report on Mobile Today, a U.K.-based publication, initial sales of the Pre through Telefonica’s O2 unit in the U.K. have been slow. If this report is correct, than the bulk of Palm’s sales over the next few months will probably continue to be generated through Sprint.”

That Sprint will soon add some slick new Android handsets to its lineup is worrisome, then, indeed. For Palm, it seems, driving conditions on the road to recovery are looking increasingly hazardous.

Sonos All-In-One Music System: There's an App for That

John Paczkowski — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:00:33 +0000

Well, this is a first. Sonos, the company responsible for the wireless multiroom audio system of the same name, is today debuting a new piece of hardware designed for an iPhone app.

Last year around this time, Sonos introduced its Controller for iPhone, a free application that essentially turns the device into a remote control for any Sonos system. The software performed nearly all of the tasks of the $399 Sonos remote and drastically lowered the price of entry for the otherwise spendy wireless system.

A year later, Sonos is building on the success of that app, launching an all-in-one wireless music system specifically designed for it. The ZonePlayer S5, as the company calls it, encapsulates Sonos’s multi-component system in a single device that can be controlled by an Apple (AAPL) iPhone, iPod touch or computer.

It’s a sort of iPodless iPod speaker dock or, rather, an iPod speaker dock where the iPod can be carried with you. The S5 can stream music from the iTunes library of any computer or networked hard drive. And with five speakers–two tweeters, two three-inch midrange drivers and one 3.5-inch woofer–and a 5 Class-D digital amplifier, the sound is likely to fill a room pretty well. Priced at $399, the S5 is expected at market on Oct. 27.

Lawmakers Ask FCC to Probe Google Voice

John Paczkowski — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 21:59:54 +0000

Should Google be able to offer voice services unfettered by regulations that apply to broadband carriers simply because Google Voice is a free Internet application? AT&T certainly doesn’t think so, and it seems at least a few Congressional representatives agree.

Yesterday, A group of House members from rural districts called on the Federal Communications Commission to investigate Google’s practice of blocking calls to numbers that use rural exchanges to charge inflated prices–something regulation prevents traditional telecom carriers from doing.

In their letter to the FCC, the lawmakers–among them Reps. Steve Buyer (R., Ind.), Charlie Melancon (D., La.), Michele Bachmann (R., Minn.) and John Barrow (D., Ga.)–claim that rural consumers will be harmed if Google is allowed to “evade compliance with important principles of access and competition.”

“We understand Google has asserted Google Voice is not a ‘traditional’ telephone service–despite its use of 10-digit telephone numbers and its ability to connect calls between telephones through a local exchange carrier,” the lawmakers wrote in the letter. “Instead, Google maintains it ought to be allowed to block calls to rural telephone exchanges–a position we find ill conceived and unfair to our rural constituents.”

This, of course, is pretty much what AT&T (T) said in September when it slagged Google (GOOG) as “one of the most noisome trumpeters of so-called net-neutrality” and asked the FCC to order it to “play by the same rules as its competitors.” Google, however, insists those rules don’t apply in its case.

“The FCC’s open Internet principles apply only to the behavior of broadband carriers–not the creators of Web-based software applications,” Google telecom counsel Richard Whitt wrote in response to AT&T’s complaint. “Even though the FCC does not have jurisdiction over how software applications function, AT&T apparently wants to use the regulatory process to undermine Web-based competition and innovation.”

Palm's Developer Program Not Nearly So Annoying as Apple's

John Paczkowski — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:05:39 +0000

Development for Palm’s new webOS platform will begin in earnest come winter with the official opening of the company’s developer program. At a small gathering in San Francisco Monday night, Palm said its developer program will open in December, and when it does it will be a different beast entirely from rival programs by Apple, Google (GOOG), et al.

For one thing, Palm (PALM) is waiving its $99 app submission fee for open-source webOS apps. For another, it’s giving developers the option of selling their apps through the App Catalog or via a Web-based storefront.

The first option entails a $50-per-app fee and requires review and approval by Palm. This includes the chance to bid on priority placement in the App Catalog if developers wish. The second option requires neither fee nor review and allows developers to distribute their apps over the Web with Palm handling transactions and fulfillment–assuming the apps conform to Palm’s content and user interface criteria.

“By opening up a web distribution channel free from our review, we are placing a great deal of trust in you–the developer–and the community,” Palm said on its blog. “We want you to embrace these principles, establish a high bar of quality and user experience, and help enforce these rules.”

An interesting strategy–assuming developers do establish the high bar of quality to which the company refers. Certainly, it’s very different from Apple’s (AAPL) approach, which includes an application-approval process criticized as obtuse and byzantine. By offering developers the chance to pay to promote their software in its Apps Catalog or to distribute it via the Web without having to suffer through an approval process, Palm is positioning its program as the polar opposite of Apple’s. Question is, are these enticements enough to win their attention?

Apple: Contrary to Reports, Our Pants Are Not on Fire

John Paczkowski — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:46:53 +0000

Responding to the publication of Google’s unredacted answers to the Federal Communications Commission, Apple insists that it did not reject Google Voice. “We do not agree with all of the statements made by Google in their FCC letter,” Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris told me. “Apple has not rejected the Google Voice application and we continue to discuss it with Google.”

If that’s the case, those discussions can’t be going very well. Presumably, if they were, we wouldn’t have seen the publication of Google’s damning comments to the FCC. Anyway, Google (GOOG) doesn’t seem to have provided any correspondence in which Apple (AAPL) described Google Voice as being “rejected.” Unless Google can do that, this is a case of he-said/Steve-said. And we all know who comes out on top when that happens.

Google: Apple Rejected Voice App; Apple: No We Didn’t

John Paczkowski — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:00:27 +0000

[ See post to watch video ]

Google to Apple: You Lie

John Paczkowski — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:47:05 +0000

Well this is uncomfortable…

Asked by the Federal Communications Commission in August if it had rejected Google’s Voice app from its iTunes App Store, Apple (AAPL) claimed it had not and that the app was still under review.

“Contrary to published reports, Apple has not rejected the Google Voice application, and continues to study it,” Apple explained to the FCC. “The application has not been approved because, as submitted for review, it appears to alter the iPhone’s distinctive user experience by replacing the iPhone’s core mobile telephone functionality and Apple user interface with its own user interface for telephone calls, text messaging and voicemail.”

The FCC put the same question to Google (GOOG) and received a very different answer, which was revealed this morning when Google allowed an unredacted version of the document it submitted to the commission to be made public. Here’s how Google responded to the FCC’s question:

Apple’s representative informed Google that the Google Voice application was rejected because Apple believed the application duplicated the core dialer functionality of the iPhone. The Apple representative indicated that the company did not want applications that could potentially replace such functionality.

… In a series of in-person meetings, phone calls and emails between July 5 and July 28, 2009, Apple and Google representative discussed the approval status of the Google Voice application that was submitted on June 2, 2009. The primary points of contact between the two companies were Alan Eustace, Google Senior Vice President of Engineering and Research and Phil Schiller, Apple Senior Vice President of Worldwide Product Marketing. On July 7, Mr. Eustace and Mr. Schiller spoke over the phone. It was during this call that Mr. Schiller informed Mr. Eustace that Apple was rejecting the Google Voice application for the reasons described above.

Ah, I see. So by “delayed,” Apple apparently meant “rejected.” Interesting. The full document, below.

UPDATE: As I report in a later post on this unfolding story, Apple has denied Google’s assertion to the FCC that it rejected the Google Voice app.

9182009_Google_Filing_iPhone –

Microsoft Zune Team Launches Latest Exercise in Futility

John Paczkowski — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 18:04:40 +0000

Microsoft brought it’s not-so-anxiously-awaited Zune HD to market today. With its touchscreen, Wi-Fi capability and high-definition video output, the device is intended as an answer to the iPod touch, though it lacks the application marketplace that helped make Apple’s device so popular.

And it’s not going to be getting one anytime soon, either, despite rumors that Microsoft is working on one and courting developers to port their iPhone apps over to it. Which is not to say that the company isn’t building an answer to Apple’s App Store–it is. Redmond is just building it for Windows Mobile, not Zune.

“We’re trying to get out of the business of building similar things in the company that don’t work together, and the Windows Mobile team is tackling the challenge of a mobile apps marketplace right now,” Zune marketing manager Brian Seitz told TechFlash. “We don’t necessarily line up perfectly with that, to take advantage of whatever ends up coming out of that from the Zune HD standpoint, but down the line if there’s a way that we can plug into what they’re doing, I’m sure we’ll look into whether that makes sense for the business.”

But by then, of course, it will be too late. Arguably, it’s too late already. As Apple gleefully noted during its annual music event last week, NPD pegs the company’s share of the portable media device market at nearly 74 percent. Meanwhile, Microsoft’s tops out at an estimated 1.1 percent.

Raising that share was already a Sisyphean task for Microsoft (MSFT), and it has only become more difficult now that Apple (AAPL) has introduced not just a new iPod nano with a built-in video camera and FM radio, but also a more inexpensive iPod touch.

Microsoft is pricing the 16GB Zune HD at $219.99 and the 32GB version at $289.99. But you can get a 32GB iPod touch for $299. And you can get an 8GB touch for $199. Now, granted, the touch offers only half the storage of the 16GB Zune HD, but it supports the iTunes App Store. And if you really want that extra 8GB, you can always buy an iPod nano, which shoots video and at $179.00, is $30 cheaper than the Zune HD.

Seeing Is Believing: Bing Gets Visual Search

John Paczkowski — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 18:00:26 +0000

[ See post to watch video ]

Weekend Update: 9.12.2009–Now in Eight Shiny New Colors

Beth Callaghan — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 19:20:43 +0000

While the highlight of the week was undoubtedly Apple’s Rock and Roll event on Wednesday featuring Steve Jobs 2.0, that was only the anodized aluminum, candy-colored, video-shooting cherry on top of another week of tech sector reporting from All Things Digital.

BoomTown was abuzz with Pixis, Plums and power this week as Kara focused on tech that wasn’t Apple, and reminded us that lady geeks hold the power in Silicon Valley.

While Apple was gathering clouds for its Rock and Roll storm, Palm (PALM) released the teeny Pixi, designed, Palm hopes, to steal some of that Apple (AAPL) thunder. The Pixi smart phone, while smaller and thinner, reported Kara, has fewer features and less power than the already available Pre.

Small can be good in the world of tech, and BoomTown reported that a certain Nordic tech behemoth thinks so too. Nokia (NOK) announced that it had acquired “microsocial networking” start-up Plum, whose signature offering allows users to build smaller, more intimate electronic social networks.

Kara did it “like a boss” this week and highlighted the tech sector mavens from Fortune magazine’s annual list of most powerful women. Ursula Burns of Xerox (XRX), IBM-er (IBM) Ginni Rometty and Oracle (ORCL) President Safra Catz were among those at the top. BoomTown will be at the upcoming conference associated with the Fortune list, so look for Kara’s Flip video interviews with these Titanias of tech.

It was nice of Apple to release new iPods just in time for John’s birthday this week, and Digital Daily returned the favor with high-bandwidth, hard-rockin’ coverage of Apple’s music-themed event, complete with live photos and blogging. John liked the video feature of the new iPod nano, but focused on the biggest news of the week–Apple’s upgraded CEO.

Digital Daily’s Apple coverage didn’t stop at The Steve. Ever since announcement of the exclusive Apple-AT&T (T) partnership, current and would-be iPhone freaks have speculated as to what kind of deal will be struck when that contract expires. John reported that iSuppli prognosticators think the agreement may be extended when it runs out in 2010.

John closed out the week with Twitter leaks about the newest incarnation of Microsoft’s (MSFT) Google-toppler (GOOG), Bing. Microsoft showcased Bing 2.0 at the annual company meeting, which some employees took as a green light to tweet away about the unreleased product. Microsoft HQ was more tight-lipped, telling John only that the rollout would happen over the next few months.

MediaMemo followed the money this week–specifically advertising dollars. A year after the Lehman collapse, Peter cited a MediaPost survey that showed some growth in ad spending. In a down market, Peter reminded, sometimes the only place to go, is up. Let’s hope so.

Not to be left out of Apple’s party, MediaMemo covered the release of an iPhone app from RealNetworks (RNWK) that brings all-you-can-eat music for a monthly fee. Wall Street barely blinked at the deal, but changes may come if the service catches on as competitor Spotify has in Europe.

And while the NFL won’t let players tweet from the end zone, it is upping its tech quotient by bringing blacked-out games to your Internet browser. MediaMemo reported that the lower-attendance games would be available to tech-savvy sports nuts–after midnight on game day. Get out the Fritos and espresso, guys, its game time.

True to form as the Lincoln of our very own Mt. Techmore, Walt’s address this week was aimed at helping the wayward get back on track with a bevy of new iPhone navigation apps. This new breed of high dollar apps harnesses the power of the iPhone 3GS to replace those ever present dash top GPS navigation units.

Walt extended his techno-presidential benevolence with another installment of Mossberg’s Mailbox. Networked storage, Quicken for Mac and the ominously impending switch to Windows 7 were all up for discussion.

At the Mossberg Solution, Katie tested Postbox, software designed to bring novel management solutions to your inbox. Developed by some of the guys from Mozilla, Postbox does offer lots of great features, Katie said, even if the switch to the new tools might not be easy for all.

Lots more shiny new tech talk next week. Stay tuned.

FCC Votes Unanimously to Make Wireless Industry’s Life a Living Hell

John Paczkowski — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 11:46:16 +0000

It’s going to be a rough couple of months for the wireless industry.

As expected, the Federal Communications Commission on Thursday approved a broad inquiry into the wireless market. In a unanimous vote, the agency’s five commissioners–three Democrats and two Republicans–approved two so-called notices of inquiry, one that will examine competition and innovation and another that will evaluate truth-in-billing practices.

“I can’t think of a more important moment to be considering these issues,” FCC chairman Julius Genachowski told a hearing in Washington. “Many Americans are learning to do more with less. A surprise charge on a monthly bill, or a new service that does not perform as advertised, can be a major budget-buster, especially as household spending on communications grows ever larger. This FCC will have a relentless focus on innovation and investment, on competition and consumers.”

Genachowski added that these inquiries could lay the groundwork for the examination of other industries such as cable and Internet. “I hope the new wireless competition report will help set a standard for fact-based, analytically deep analysis of the mobile industry,” he said. “It is essential that the commission develop policies that encourage a new generation of innovators, working with new tools, on new platforms, and having an extraordinary impact on our economy and society.”

The wireless industry’s trade group, CTIA, welcomed the inquiry through gritted teeth, saying it “appreciates the opportunity to respond” to the FCC’s questions. “The wireless ecosystem–from carriers to handset manufacturers to network providers to operating-system providers to application developers–is evolving before our eyes and this is not the same market that it was even three years ago,” said president and chief executive Steve Largent. “In this industry, innovation is everywhere.”