Posts tagged ‘Tech’

April 15, 2011

Is Your Girlfriend Cheating? Here’s one way to find out! [Video-Today]

by Avinash Saxena
Advertisements
April 15, 2011

Is Your Girlfriend Cheating? Here's one way to find out! [Video-Today]

by Avinash Saxena
Tags: , ,
April 13, 2011

OFFICIAL First Look at APES from Weta [Video-Today]

by Avinash Saxena
Tags: ,
April 12, 2011

Nokia X7 Coming To Three UK [Video-Today]

by Avinash Saxena
Tags: , ,
April 12, 2011

The new addiction about ipads and android at the work [Infographic]

by Avinash Saxena

Forget the fear: Learning to love iPads and Androids at workThe news of infographic from the bucket of Apple ipads and Android at the time of workthe new addiction from there viewers. The style of ipads and android work are the according to this reporting.”

I’ve been talking to many IT executives in recent weeks at various conferences, and I’m finding a curious bifurcation among them when it comes to how they handle newfangled mobile devicessuch a iPhones, iPads, and Android smartphones and tablets. Some have the attitude “people can bring whatever they want, so long as the devices support our security policies,” while others take the “I’m very leery of how these will compromise my organization’s security if I let them in” position.

Yes, people in IT — many of them, in fact — still register the fear reaction to the new smartphone and tablets whose usage has exploded in recent years. I’m shocked at one level, but not at another.

I’m shocked because any organization that truly has its security threatened because there are iPhones in the building have much bigger problems than any single device: They have fundamentally insecure IT operations that haven’t acknowledged the idea of a physical perimeter is long gone in this era of wireless communications and high usage of outsourced services and contract employees. No device should have unchallenged access to sensitive information just because it’s in the building, and the notion that security measures would let newfangled devices right in is an absurd one.

I don’t believe most of these companies have any basis for their fears. After all, they use virtual LANs, VPNs, permissions-based access, and the like already, and iOS and Android devices have no secret ways to blast through those. If a file server or database requires a password or other credential to gain access, that applies to mobile devices just as it does to PCs and remote computers.

April 8, 2011

Google Bring I/O Direct to you with I/o Live [Gallery]

by Avinash Saxena

The post from recently google official blog After Google I/O sold out in 59 minutes, we gave ourselves a challenge: bring I/O 2011 to as many developers as we could, even those that didn’t have tickets to Moscone Center. So for those of you not joining us in San Francisco or at one of our I/O Extended viewing parties, visit www.google.com/io on May 10-11 from the comforts of your own home, office or anywhere you have a reliable Internet connection for I/O Live.
I/O Live will bring all of the excitement at Moscone Center to our online website, where the keynotes, sessions and Developer Sandbox will come to life for audiences all over the world. Starting on May 10, the Google I/O homepage will become the I/O Live dashboard, where you can:

  • Watch livestream video feeds from our two largest session rooms from 9:00 a.m PST to 6:00 p.m. PST during both days of the conference. This will include streaming of the keynotes, as in years past, as well as—new for 2011—the addition of sessions from Android and Chrome. We’ll also aim to post HD video recordings from sessions that are not livestreamed within 24 hours.
  • Read captions from the livestreamed sessions in real-time. Plus, to make sure all our content is accessible, all remaining videos will also be captioned. For international developers, captions will be machine translated to all languages that are supported byGoogle Translate.
  • Be one of the first to know by getting your news direct from the source. The latest announcements and news will be added to our I/O Live dashboard in real-time.
  • Submit your questions to our Sandbox developers. We’ll post answers for the questions with the most votes.

In the coming weeks, we’ll update our Sessions and Sandbox pages with all the relevant information you’ll need to participate in I/O Live. In the meantime, visit our temporary I/O Livepage, where you can get our new HTML5 badge to display on your website and let us know that you’ll be watching on May 10 and 11.

This year is slated to be our largest Google I/O event to date. So whether you’re joining us in San Francisco, from an I/O Extended event, or even the comforts of your own Shangri-la, we’re looking forward to seeing you at 9 a.m. PDT on May 10 as we count down to 00:00:00:00 and I/O Live.

April 6, 2011

New iPod Nano Leaked? [Video-Today]

by Avinash Saxena
April 5, 2011

Google's Full Focus over Android is Good and Friendly [Review]

by Avinash Saxena

Last week, Google said it would not release the source for its Android 3.0 “Honeycomb” tablet to developers and would limit the OS to select hardware makers, at least initially. Now there are rumors reported by Bloomberg Businessweek that Google is requiring Android device makers to get UI changes approved by Google.

As my colleague Savio Rodrigues has written, limiting the Honeycomb code is not going to hurt the Android market. I believe reining in the custom UIs imposed on Android is a good thing. Let’s be honest: They exist only so companies like Motorola, HTC, and Samsung can pretend to have any technology involvement in the Android products they sell and claim they have some differentiating feature that should make customers want their model of an Android smartphone versus the umpteenth otherwise-identical Android smartphones out there.

[ Compare mobile devices using your own criteria with InfoWorld’s smartphone calculator andtablet calculator. | Keep up on key mobile developments and insights via Twitter and with theMobile Edge blog and Mobilize newsletter. ]

The reality of Android is that it is the new Windows: an operating system used by multiple hardware vendors to create essentially identical products, save for the company name printed on it. That of course is what the device makers fear — both those like Acer that already live in the race-to-the-bottom PC market and those like Motorola and HTC that don’t want to.

But these cosmetic UI differences cause confusion among users, sending the message that Android is a collection of devices, not a platform like Apple’s iOS. As Android’s image becomes fragmented, so does the excitement that powers adoption. Anyone who’s followed the cell phone industry has seen how that plays out: There are 1 billion Java-based cell phones out there, but no one knows it, and no one cares, as each works so differently that the Java underpinnings offer no value to anyone but Oracle, which licenses the technology.

Google initially seemed to want to play the same game as Oracle (and before it Sun), providing an under-the-hood platform for manufacturers to use as they saw fit. But a couple curious things happened:

  • Vendors such as Best Buy started selling the Android brand, to help create a sense of a unified alternative to BlackBerry and iOS, as well as to help prevent customers from feeling overwhelmed by all the “different” phones available. Too much choice confuses people, and salespeople know that.
  • Several mobile device makers shipped terrible tablets based on the Android 2.2 smartphone OS — despite Google’s warnings not to — because they were impatient with Google’s slow progress in releasing Honeycomb. These tablets, such as the Galaxy Tab, were terrible products and clear hack jobs that only demonstrated the iPad’s superiority. I believe they also finally got the kids at Google to understand that most device makers have no respect for the Android OS and will create the same banal products for it as they do for Windows. The kids at Google have a mission, and enabling white-box smartphones isn’t it.

I’ve argued before that Android’s fragmentation, encouraged by its open source model, was a mistake. Google should drive the platform forward and ride herd on those who use it in their devices. If it wants to make the OS available free to stmulate adoption, fine. But don’t let that approach devolve into the kind of crappy results that many device makers are so clueless (or eager — take your pick) to deliver.

So far, Google’s been lucky in that the fragmentation has been largely in cosmetic UI areas, which doesn’t affect most Android apps and only annoys customers when they switch to a new device. The fragmentation of Android OS versions across devices is driving many Android developers away, as are fears over a fractured set of app stores. Along these lines, Google has to break the carriers’ update monopoly, as Apple did, so all Android devices can be on the same OS page.

It is true that HTC’s Eris brought some useful additions to the stock Android UI, serving as a model for future improvements. But the HTC example is the exception, and Google’s apparent new policy would allow such enhancements if Google judges them to be so.

More to the point is what the tablet makers such as ViewSonic, Dell, and Samsung did with their first Android tablets. Their half-baked products showed how comfortable they are soiling the Android platform. For them, Android is just another OS to throw on hardware designed for something else in a cynical attempt to capture a market wave. The consistently low sales should provide a clue that users aren’t buying the junk. But do they blame the hardware makers or Google? When so many Android devices are junk, it’ll be Google whose reputation suffers.

Let’s not forget Google’s competition, and why Google can’t patiently teach these companies about user experience: Apple, a company that knows how to nurture, defend, and evangelize a platform. Let’s also not forget the fate of Microsoft and Nokia, who let their Windows Mobile and Symbian OSes fragment into oblivion. And let’s remember that the one company that knows how the vanilla-PC game is played, Hewlett-Packard, has decided to move away from the plain-vanilla Windows OS and stake its future on its own platform, WebOS, for both PCs and mobile devices. In that world, a fragmented, confused, soiled Android platform would have no market at all.

If Google finally understands that Android is a platform to be nurtured and defended, it has a chance of remaining a strong presence in the mobile market for more than a few faddish years. If not, it’s just throwing its baby into the woods, where it will find cruel exploitation, not nurturing or defense.

 

April 5, 2011

Google’s Full Focus over Android is Good and Friendly [Review]

by Avinash Saxena

Last week, Google said it would not release the source for its Android 3.0 “Honeycomb” tablet to developers and would limit the OS to select hardware makers, at least initially. Now there are rumors reported by Bloomberg Businessweek that Google is requiring Android device makers to get UI changes approved by Google.

As my colleague Savio Rodrigues has written, limiting the Honeycomb code is not going to hurt the Android market. I believe reining in the custom UIs imposed on Android is a good thing. Let’s be honest: They exist only so companies like Motorola, HTC, and Samsung can pretend to have any technology involvement in the Android products they sell and claim they have some differentiating feature that should make customers want their model of an Android smartphone versus the umpteenth otherwise-identical Android smartphones out there.

[ Compare mobile devices using your own criteria with InfoWorld’s smartphone calculator andtablet calculator. | Keep up on key mobile developments and insights via Twitter and with theMobile Edge blog and Mobilize newsletter. ]

The reality of Android is that it is the new Windows: an operating system used by multiple hardware vendors to create essentially identical products, save for the company name printed on it. That of course is what the device makers fear — both those like Acer that already live in the race-to-the-bottom PC market and those like Motorola and HTC that don’t want to.

But these cosmetic UI differences cause confusion among users, sending the message that Android is a collection of devices, not a platform like Apple’s iOS. As Android’s image becomes fragmented, so does the excitement that powers adoption. Anyone who’s followed the cell phone industry has seen how that plays out: There are 1 billion Java-based cell phones out there, but no one knows it, and no one cares, as each works so differently that the Java underpinnings offer no value to anyone but Oracle, which licenses the technology.

Google initially seemed to want to play the same game as Oracle (and before it Sun), providing an under-the-hood platform for manufacturers to use as they saw fit. But a couple curious things happened:

  • Vendors such as Best Buy started selling the Android brand, to help create a sense of a unified alternative to BlackBerry and iOS, as well as to help prevent customers from feeling overwhelmed by all the “different” phones available. Too much choice confuses people, and salespeople know that.
  • Several mobile device makers shipped terrible tablets based on the Android 2.2 smartphone OS — despite Google’s warnings not to — because they were impatient with Google’s slow progress in releasing Honeycomb. These tablets, such as the Galaxy Tab, were terrible products and clear hack jobs that only demonstrated the iPad’s superiority. I believe they also finally got the kids at Google to understand that most device makers have no respect for the Android OS and will create the same banal products for it as they do for Windows. The kids at Google have a mission, and enabling white-box smartphones isn’t it.

I’ve argued before that Android’s fragmentation, encouraged by its open source model, was a mistake. Google should drive the platform forward and ride herd on those who use it in their devices. If it wants to make the OS available free to stmulate adoption, fine. But don’t let that approach devolve into the kind of crappy results that many device makers are so clueless (or eager — take your pick) to deliver.

So far, Google’s been lucky in that the fragmentation has been largely in cosmetic UI areas, which doesn’t affect most Android apps and only annoys customers when they switch to a new device. The fragmentation of Android OS versions across devices is driving many Android developers away, as are fears over a fractured set of app stores. Along these lines, Google has to break the carriers’ update monopoly, as Apple did, so all Android devices can be on the same OS page.

It is true that HTC’s Eris brought some useful additions to the stock Android UI, serving as a model for future improvements. But the HTC example is the exception, and Google’s apparent new policy would allow such enhancements if Google judges them to be so.

More to the point is what the tablet makers such as ViewSonic, Dell, and Samsung did with their first Android tablets. Their half-baked products showed how comfortable they are soiling the Android platform. For them, Android is just another OS to throw on hardware designed for something else in a cynical attempt to capture a market wave. The consistently low sales should provide a clue that users aren’t buying the junk. But do they blame the hardware makers or Google? When so many Android devices are junk, it’ll be Google whose reputation suffers.

Let’s not forget Google’s competition, and why Google can’t patiently teach these companies about user experience: Apple, a company that knows how to nurture, defend, and evangelize a platform. Let’s also not forget the fate of Microsoft and Nokia, who let their Windows Mobile and Symbian OSes fragment into oblivion. And let’s remember that the one company that knows how the vanilla-PC game is played, Hewlett-Packard, has decided to move away from the plain-vanilla Windows OS and stake its future on its own platform, WebOS, for both PCs and mobile devices. In that world, a fragmented, confused, soiled Android platform would have no market at all.

If Google finally understands that Android is a platform to be nurtured and defended, it has a chance of remaining a strong presence in the mobile market for more than a few faddish years. If not, it’s just throwing its baby into the woods, where it will find cruel exploitation, not nurturing or defense.

 

April 4, 2011

Apple – iPad 2 – TV Ad – We Believe [Video-Today]

by Avinash Saxena
%d bloggers like this: