TechNest Report

The biggest computer company in the world, once known for their ugly and boring “beige boxes,” has been hot in the last month, shipping new products and getting the media abuzz with products in the labs. Here’s what’s been coming out of Dell lately: [Read more →]

Tags: No Comments.

For our first TechNest Report weekly tip, we talk about… hard drive organization the old-school way!

I don’t know about you, but I have a few external hard drives that I use on a regular basis.  Some I use for backing up specific machines; others I use storing ripped DVDs (that I purchased, of course).  And yet others I use for transferring large amounts of data between machines.  Whatever the use might be, I have found it very practical to physically label my drives.  I have given these external hard drive labels the following attributes, as you can see below:

• Drive name
• Capacity
• Format
• Contents (optional)

What’s in a name?

This might seem a little out of the “ordinary”, but I give unique and distinct names to my external drives.  This way, I can call a drive by name and automatically know the purpose that it serves in my digital life.  Moreover, naming my drives and then putting those names physically on them lets my friends and family know exactly which drive to take out of my “tech drawer” when it comes time to watch a movie or when I call home asking to be sent a specific file that’s stored on a specific drive.  (I usually don’t take all of my drives with me, so let’s hope that this is a rare occasion.

The moral of the story is that if you have a multitude of external storage devices and want to easily remember what’s on each drive, give your drives unique names and physically label them.

PS: the physical labeling part is a temporary solution, of course, until technologies like embedded e-ink get to be mainstream.  Until then, I can dream of displays like these taking the place of my Avery 5160 sticky labels.

Follow the jump for some pics of my dear hard drives with clear, bright, and white labels. [Read more →]

Tags: No Comments.

Microblogging services like Twitter, Jaiku, and Pownce are gaining steam, popularity, and new users by the bucketful every day.  This article, however, is not about why I like to use these kinds of applications or how much I look forward to getting Twitter updates by person x.  No, this article is about possible uses of such services that might not have been explored quite yet and can bring these services into the black on the income statement.  What is this untapped use I write of?  Two words: customer service.   [Read more →]

Tags: 1 Comment

The topic of net neutrality has been on the tongue tips of many technology enthusiasts and writers for the last few years.  In recent months, the topic has picked up steam as a few ISPs have begun to implement measures of internet tiering.  For example: in early January, Time Warner Cable (TWC) announced that it will be running “an experiment in improving network performance“.  TWC will be the first major U.S. ISP to set limits on bandwidth and charge users extra for going over them.  The cable ISP’s internet plans that are to be part of the experiment will range from $29.95 per month for a very slow 768kpbs with a minuscule 5GB bandwidth cap to $54.90 per month for a fast(er) 15mbps with a (larger) 40GB cap.  These limits, according to a company executive, will be “an experiment in improving network performance” since “5% of Time Warner’s customers consume as much as 50% of available bandwidth through heavy downloading.”  According to the cable industry, the reason for internet tiering is that doing so is the only way for said companies to keep quality of service high.  That’s a great goal, but it can also be achieved by upgrading the infrastructure used to deliver the service (the internet).  The companies argue that this is cost-prohibitive.  I think there is an underlying reason for such internet tiering - one that runs deeper than that provided by the “PR spinners” at TWC:

The real reason:

It is the goal of Big Cable to keep new media out of people’s lives for as long as possible.

Explanation:

For those not in the know, Time Warner Cable is a provider of cable internet (it’s in the name).  The company also delivers cable (TV) over the same infrastructure.  Let’s make an assumption a fact in our discussion: providing TV services for such cable companies as TWC is more profitable than delivering the internet.

What about phone companies that provide DSL internet service?  Well, glad you asked: “Phone companies are less concerned about congestion and are unlikely to impose metered usage on DSL customers, because their networks are structured differently”, writes AP Technology writer Peter Svensson.

Take a look at Time Warner’s bandwidth caps described above: 5GB for the low-end plan and 50GB for the plan with the most data transfer capacity.  In today’s growing trends of new media distributed over the internet, such bandwidth limitations would first affect content termed “new media”: podcasts, netcasts, and internet-based entertainment.

If you haven’t yet heard of or tried such content as is listed above, I suggest you do: it’s audio and video content brought to you for consumption on your schedule.  Some of the most prominent networks in “old media” (NPR, PC Mag, etc.) have their content available in podcast form for free.  This means their content comes to you as it is released and you can play it either on your computer or on a personal media player such as an iPod, Zune, or even iPhone.  The best part about podcasts (for me) is not the benefits described above, but the fact that the internet allows for the distribution of content that would not otherwise make it (by numbers, for example) on the big screen or to the TV because its ratings aren’t high enough, allowing very small yet interested niches to be reached.  (For full disclosure, we at TechNest Report are in the process of starting up our own podcast).  In any event, by imposing a limit on bandwidth and charging overage fees for using more than their alloted amount, ISPs will be pushing consumers toward consuming less “internet content” and more “traditional content” delivered by the cable company, mainly - the good-ol TV.

This sets up a perfect scenario for a conflict of interest, and here’s why:

1. Only cable companies have an interest in internet tiering.  DSL companies don’t because their networks work differently.
2. Cable companies carry TV signals over the same infrastructure as they do internet signals.
3. Being more profitable, cable companies need to figure out a way to push their customers toward consuming more TV.
4. What better way to accomplish #3 than to set restrictions on the way consumers receive content that competes with TV?  Answer: limit the way such competing content (like podcasts and other types of new media) gets to consumers by setting outrageous limits on how much of the competing content they can consume.
5. Higher profits and margins!

The fact that the “limitaton of internet content consumption” starts at the source - the ISP - is extra “perfect”.  Because of this, a Cable company like TWC can even begin to control the speed of podcast and new media delivery to the consumer.  So if I were to be living in an area with internet tiering and would be downloading/streaming a podcast, it might come to me at really slow speeds and make such content unbearably slow - rendering it unwatchable.  The ISPs are in a a position to implement this measure - they, afterall, “provide the internet”.

Now before you begin typing my email address in the To: field of your email client, let me say these few words:  I am completely in agreement that having 5% of the customers consume more than half of a service is not fair if everybody pays the same price.  If service is degraded for 95% of users because 5% of users are using more than half of available bandwidth something should be done.  In fact, I’m sure you’ve heard about internet services compared to cell phone service usage: use more, pay more; go over your allotment, pay extra.  The same principle can be applied to the many utilities we use today: water and electricity, to name a few more.  If, for example, everybody in South Florida pays $50 a month for unlimited water use and 5% of customers use more than half of available water, this would mean one of two things:

1. A certain portion of the remaining 95% would not get water, or
2. Those 95% would get water, but instead of water coming out of the faucet with good, constant pressure, it would trickle out in droplets.

That’s the argument I’m sure cable companies are to use in their quest to tier the internet.  I think that people should pay for what they use.  But if Time Warner is to succeed in its quest, they have to do a few things:

1. Make it crystal clear to customers what it is they are getting for the amount they are paying.
2. Provide customers with an easy-to-use and live-updateable service of measuring their usage (similar to how cell phone companies provide statistics on how many minutes and text messages customers have used to date.
3. Provide reasonable overage fees for those who go over.

Only after taking such steps will internet tiering work in a beneficial way for the consumer and for the (cable) ISPs.  Why will it be beneficial for ISPs?  Because they won’t be getting a call every thirty seconds from their customers asking the same question: “Why is my bill so much higher than that of last month?”

In the end… the real questions…

Why are ISPs so interested in providing internet tiering services?  That’s the underlying, million-dollar question.  Today’s economic pressures are enourmous: the growth imperative of publicly-traded companies is huge.  CEOs and other executives are required to bring their shareholders value, and the meaning of that “word that starts with V” is beginning to take shapes (multiple meanings).  In the end, what this is is hypercapitalism.  And it’s not so prominent in the scenario I described above.  It is, however, prominent, in other ISP-related stories.  More on this later, probably (since our growth imperative here at TechNest Report is not as high as that of ISPs and other publicly-traded organizations; thank God?  No, thank our founders - me).

Tags: No Comments.

These days, it seems like Microsoft’s business is getting attacked from every angle.  What’s most interesting, however, is that the software giant is being challenged the most in those areas that it holds a significant share of the market.  From the Mac going after Windows on the desktop, iPhone gunning for (and surpassing by years end?) Windows Mobile devices, Linux infiltrating the server market, and OpenOffice along with Google docs chipping away at the all-mighty Microsoft Office - the big M has many companies to pay attention to these days.  As of late, Microsoft has been so busy saying goodbye to Bill Gates chasing its competition, it forgot to show up to a scheduled fight with one of its most feared closest rivals.

“Exchange for the rest of us”:

Let’s see what Microsoft’s identifiable markets are: home users, business users, corporate customers.  In an interview on Windows Weekly a few months ago, a Microsoft executive in the online Live division explained how the company sees corporate users also as home users who want to enjoy their computers and have fun with them when not at work (my paraphrase).  He noted that it was Microsoft’s goal with Live to unify the experiences of such users.  That’s great and all, but just tell me one thing: how does a tech company that has been (incorrectly) relegated by the media to be the best choice for “home users” beat you in making “Exchange for the rest of us”, when Exchange is your own (Microsoft’s) product?  It’s so embarrassing that it overshadows Windows Me (the biggest flop to leave Microsoft labs).

Just in case you have been living under a rock for the last few months, that company with the “home user” target market goes by the name of Apple, Inc.  You know, the company who is known for turning certain industries upside down and re-inventing the business processes within them.  Apple announced MobileMe on June 9, 2008 and dubbed it “Exchange for the rest of us”.  That “exchange” reference, as mentioned earlier, is alluding to Microsoft Exchange - a corporate/large-business email and PIM tool/service.  MobileMe basically does Exchange but for the consumer - on a personal subscription level.  Herein lies the question: how does Apple, a company so focused on the “home user”, roll out something Microsoft should have been selling for the last five years?

You see, somewhere along the lines of Xbox breakdowns, Vista problems/negative PR, and chasing after copying Apple with Zune, Microsoft completely missed the boat.  For a nominal fee to the user, Microsoft should have created “Exchange Hotmail”: a paid-for part of Hotmail that “brings your data with you at the speed of *push*” (my marketing tagline).  It should have been the scaled down, personal version of Exchange that integrated with Hotmail/Live mail in the cloud, integrated with an Exchange-compatible mobile client, and pushed out to Outlook/Windows Live Mail on the desktop.  It would do push email, calendar, and contacts the way Exchange does it, only Joe User would be able to sign up for it himself.  But it wasn’t to be.  Apple brought it first because Microsoft was too busy defending its “server plays”.  Most likely, the big M felt that introducing a personal version of Exchange tied to Hotmail would in some way enroach on its own user base of corporate Exchange users.  But that’s just a load of bollocks, since the two markets using Exchange enterprise and my proposed Exchange Hotmail would be different (a corporation would still run an Exchange server for company-wide email and Joe the employee would simply subscribe to Exchange Hotmail for personal use).

On second thought, the company did roll out a scaled down version of its server product for home users dubbed Windows Home server.  Why could it not have applied the same type of thinking to an email and PIM system?  After all, the new Microsoft is all about software plus services (as described in the linked memo by new Microsoft chief Ray Ozzie).  Exchange Hotmail would have been a perfect play for Microsoft.  So in the end, Microsoft is left with a very popular online mail solution (Hotmail) yet has not made a significant effort to monetize it.  Apple, on the other hand, has beaten Microsoft at their own game and has brought out a kick-butt web service and, along the process, used Microsoft’s “Exchange” moniker in its description - almost as a mokery.

On triple thought, what has Microsoft really done to Hotmail and its consumer online services lately?  Sure, they have copied Yahoo! and made Hotmail “drag-and-drop”.  But what Apple is really great at doing is making an end-to-end solution, as the comapny has done with iPhone and MobileMe.  The latter is the perfect complement for the iPhone user.  Microsoft hasn’t seen the light at the end of this tunnel, and the jury is still out to see if it ever will.

P.S. Throughout the article, I put “home user” in quotation marks because for years it has been thought that “home use” was the best use of Apple Macs.  Though this opinion is beginning to change rather quickly - and as it should - many uninformed tech journalists, “experts”, and those in tech media still wrongly believe this to be the case.

Tags: 2 Comments

This one falls under the “geek” tag: a few months ago I decided to replace the hard drive in my 2004 oldie-but-goody Apple iBook.  The iBook shipped with a 60GB standard Apple drive (probably a Hitachi).  With all the podcasts, music, and video I have been acquiring lately, the need for more storage presented itself in a similar fashion that a running deer presents himself to unsuspecting drivers when the creature runs across 8 lanes of the interstate.  I downloaded and printed the iBook hard drive replacement instructions and screw guides from iFixit.com, an excellent DIY site that has instructions and tips for projects from how to replace an iPod battery to any Mac-related project. [Read more →]

Tags: No Comments.

Update 6/23/2008: two commenters have pointed out to me that the check box is now the entire name of the calendar.  In fact, it is.  False alarm.  Should have been more attentive.

We have been receiving emails throughout the day of withdrawn functionality from Google Calendar.  We have tested the issue and are now confirming that users no longer have the ability to specify which calendar(s) are displayed.  Three staff members and five acquaintances and general friends-in-tech have confirmed our findings.  We have tested using Firefox 3, Firefox 2, IE 7, Safari 3.1, and WebKit r34728 nightly build.

Earlier in the week, this feature was controlled by check boxes next to every calendar name.  This means that as of now, there is no easy way to choose which calendars are shown and which are hidden in the popular online calendaring application (which, for those of us with a multitude of calendars, is a major minus).

If you have any information about this, please comment on this post or send email to getsatisfaction at TechNestReport dot com

Tags: 3 Comments

Just a quick and funny post this time around:

I needed to download a template from Microsoft’s Office 2007 site and upon visiting Microsoft.com, I saw this:

If that doesn’t stike you as funny (or at the very least ironic), then let me put paint a background description.  The notebook pictured above is an Apple PowerBook (titanium).  Unlike current Macs, it didn’t have an Intel processor and didn’t run Windows natively.  Rather, Windows could only be run in a painfully slow virtual mode through the now-discontinued Mac Vitual PC environment.  Moreover, the notebook was released in January 2001 and discontinued in September 2003.

So, it’s a great complement to Apple and their design team that Microsoft would use a notebook no longer in production as their home-page PC image for promoting security downloads.  It’s a testament to the timeless design Apple’s products have.

What else does it mean to you?

Tags: No Comments.

Yes, yes, hurray!  The faster, better, do-it-all iPhone has been announced.  But there are still a few burning questions about the release, answers to which are very important to power users like myself.  So, does iPhone firmware version 2.0 and/or iPhone 3G have the following much-needed features?

1. Cut&paste (or Copy&Paste).
   From what we have seen thus far, the answer is “no.”  And it’s a big let down.  Stick with me here: on stage, Steve Jobs talked about 3G as if it is a major innovasion of sorts, yet what it really is is just an inclusion of a different data chip and some software drivers to support that chip.  The concept of 3G speeds is not new or revolutionary not was it that difficult for Apple to implement.  Nevertheless, about 5 minutes of the almost 2-hour presentation was spent by Mr. Jobs explaining the benefits of 3G.  Why spend so much time of the presentation on 3G speeds when so many have been asking for it since iPhone’s launch?  Yet many an iPhone power user has been clamoring for cut&paste since the launch as well.  And while cut&paste might not be as important or as useful as 3G wireless transfer speeds, it certainly is a feature Apple decided to ignore completely this time around.  Even still, some might say that the development of cut&paste in the iPhone would require less effort and time from Apple, being only a software feature.  So, where is it?  Here?  Nope.  There?  Don’t look like it either…
   Another question about cut&paste is about its implementation code-wise.  If it would have been included in the update, how would Apple justify running what is in all instances a background service, without giving such permission to third-party developers in the SDK?  I’m sure there is a way to implement it if Apple did it, but don’t expect to see it as a third-party application any time soon.
   Verdict: cut/copy&paste is not in the cards for this release of the iPhone.  Let’s hope (with a big “H”) that it is coming as a free software update down the road.  
2. Multiple-calendar support.
   From what we have seen, it’s not clear.  During Phil Schiller’s demonstration at WWDC, there was a minor color difference between appointments in the “Day View” of his iPhone.  Something important to remember is that iCal and consequently the new MobileMe service (as well as Outlook, which works with MobileMe), all have multiple calendar support.  So it would only make sense if the feature made it this (second) time around to the iPhone.
   Verdict: maybe multi-calendar support made it through this release.  It looks like it.
   Update: the calendar section of the iPhone website  now makes it clear that multiple calendars are supported.  Just like in iCal, calendars have their own colors.  Hurray Apple!  
3. Calendar sharing.  (More of a feature for the MobileMe service).
   Speaking of calendars, how about sharing them?  I have made the switch a long time ago from my Mac’s iCal to Google Calendar.  The only reason for my switch was the ability to share my calendars with friends, my girlfriend, colleagues, and clients -all in real time and on the web.  No RSS feeds to manually manage, no problems if my calendar is offline.  It’s always online with Google Calendar, since the web is its home.
   Since switching to Google Calendar, I have purchased BusySync - an OS X plug-in that allows me to perform 2-way synchronization between Google Calendar and my local iCal.  This solution works for Google Calendars I am the owner of as well as for calendars that have been shared with me on Google.  The main reason for using BusySync is that, in the all-to-common situation of not having internet access, I am able to make changes to the calendars offline - in iCal.  As soon as my  internet connection is reestablished, everything synchronizes automatically: iCal changes I have made offline are synced up to Google Calendar; changes others have made to either their calendars or my calendars (that I have shared with them) in the time I was offline are synced back down to my local iCal.  
   It would be very nice, clean, and efficient if Apple provided this service through MobileMe, especially in the “push” way of the new .Mac replacement.  How would they do this?  That’s a question that would require some collaboration between all web calendaring companies (Google Calendar, Plaxo, Yahoo Calendar, Microsoft Live calendars, MobileMe, and many others).  These companies would need to create and implement open calendar-sharing technologies - since current calendar-sharing technologies are proprietary.  Much in the same way that Google is leading the open social networking movement with OpenSocial, an open calendar-sharing movement (by Google?) would need to take place to develop open-standard calendar sharing technologies.  The issue here is not in creating online calendars that look and work the same; it’s how to make all these web-based calendars from different providers work together in the “sharing department.”
   Verdict: As of this point, calendar-sharing goodness hasn’t shone through to MobileMe/iPhone. 
4. To-Do Lists.
   Verdict: looks like that’s not made its way into the new software release or the new iPhone.  That’s fine.  I’m using 37 Signals‘ online Ta-da List and loving it.  The only drawback is that my to-dos don’t have a to-do date and aren’t displayed on my calendar.
5. MMS (Multimedia Messaging Service).
   Right about now, it is getting ridiculous with this feature, or namely - lack thereof.  Why is a free Nokia phone able to send and receive MMS messages, and the super-duper-ultra-useful iPhone isn’t.  Apple fanboys - bring the mail, please do - but I refuse to apologize for Apple when one of the most standard mobile phone features is not supported in the industry’s smartest smartphone.  And the lack of information and Apple’s standard level of secrecy about why the feature is missing are getting plain annoying.
   Verdict: no MMS for you, sonny.  Send your picture of the uber-cool car that just drove by via email (video after jump). 

It looks like Apple has some work to do still with standard features on the iPhone (MMS) and collaborate on bigger issue (calendar sharing) with other companies to improve MobileMe.  We will be keeping our eyes peeled, noses sniffing, and ears listening to every move Apple makes on these issues.  But for now - enjoy what features you have on the iPhone and enjoy their excellent implementation - whether you are getting the 3G version or sticking to your 2G oldie-but-goodie model.  

Tags: No Comments.

‘Tis the time again.  WWDC is coming in less than 12 hours (that’s half a day!), and the Apple fan club here at TechNest Report and around the world is waiting… waiting what shiny new gadgets uncle Steve will give us the opportunity to buy.  What useful, sexy, and Apple-branded products will we learn of tomorrow?  Here is Alex’s prediction run-up so far:

iPhone/iPod Touch:

1. iPhone take 2.
   • New, slimmer form factor with colored back-covers.
   • 3G HSDPA/UMTS, built-in GPS, 16-32GB of storage space.
   • Subsidized through ATT and world-wide partner carriers: $200 (with a contract).  Price unlocked directly from Apple:$400+.
   • Copy and paste, App Store (obviously), and a non-recessed head-phone jack.
   • A2DP Bluetooth goodness for listening to music with a wireless headset (I’m surprised the current iPhone still doesn’t have it).
2. iPhone take 1 and iPod Touch gets the 2.0 firmware and all the features that come with that.
3. Plethora of 3rd party iPhone/iPod Touch software.
4. Rebranded and re-written .Mac service
   • New name: .Me.
   • Over-the-air (OTA) sync of calendars, address book, bookmarks, pictures, documents.
   • Push email
   • Here’s the punchline: avaialble API.  Developers can write their own plugins for the new .Me.  For example: AWS, developers of the great 1Password application will give me an app that will sync my 1Password keychain from my iBook to .Me and to my iPhone, and the other way as well.  What this will do is directly compete with Microsoft’s new Mesh service, which is striving to accomplish the same thing also with an open programming architecture.  By the way, .Me is now also available for Windows.
   • Pricing for the .Me is going to determine its success.  Purchased with an iPhone, .Me is free for a year, discounted yearly rate thereafter.  Purchased separately from an iPhone (with an iPod Touch, for example), users pay a monthly or a yearly fee, one that is less than the current $100 per year (one can only hope that’s the case).  Storage plans for current features of .Mac, such as website hosting and back-up are to increase while keeping plan prices the same as they are today.  For example, Apple will charge $4 a month, $40 a year for .Me when purchased separately from an iPhone.   This basic plan will have 10GB of storage space on .Mac and thus 10GB of bandwidth to sync between devices. For $6 a moth, $65 a year, users will get 30GB of storage and bandwidth space.  And so on.
   • Another feature of the new .Me: the ability to pipe through to your Time Capsule and any Mac/PC on the network.  This way, users can retrieve any file from a home Mac or PC, as well as browse and listen to streaming music/video from an external drive attached to the Time Capsule.

Mac

1. Preview of next version of OS X.
   • Intel only.
   • Not as many new features and changes as Leopard.  The focus of this release is code optimization and efficiency.
   • One of the new prominent features: ZFS.
   • Improved Spaces functionality with the ability to assign a desktop to each space.
2. New MacBook.  This relaunches the MacBook and the MacBook Pro lines.
   • 13, 15, and 17″ models.
   • Aluminum and glass.
   • GPS, WWAN, Wireless USB, WiMax built-in.
   • Price is no longer directly tied to screen size as it is now.
   • Prices start at $999, $1099, and $1199, for the respective screen sizes.
   • Each notebook size is configurable exactly to the liking of the customer.  The Pro versions will have top-of-the-line hardware and will be differentiated by being all black.  This means that I will be able to get a MacBook Pro 13″ with a real GPU - like a GT8800 for ~$1600, and I will be able to configure a 15″ or 17″ MacBook without a GPU for ~$1099 and ~$1199, respectively.
   • There is a enough demand for both of these examples and will introduce the Mac to markets that have been looking at the product but discouraged by the $2000 price tag of the current 15″ MacBook Pro.  The attractiveness of the lower price point of Mac notebooks will far outweigh the lowered margins.  And here is a plea from myself: please don’t charge $2000 for the same hardware that Dell charges $1500 for.  It’s a blatant rip off.  (MacBook Pro 15″ vs. Dell XPS 1530 come to mind).
3. Mac Tablet.
   • iPod touch, but bigger.
   • More than 2-finger gestures.
   • Unlikely for today’s event.

Tags: No Comments.