Spring Cleaning

I still have not had a chance to read my blog comments (sorry to all of you), but I'm determined not to miss a day so early in the month, so I'll just mention that I have a new post up on Open for Business contemplating the advent of the large hard disks we are using these days.

I'll return soon.

Sony, the PlayStation 3 and the PC Market

I forgot to mention this on my blog yesterday. My latest commentary on Open for Business analyzes Sony's need to reanalyze its PC strategy in light of the PlayStation 3.

With the launch of the PlayStation 3, the fate of one of the world’s best-known brands, Sony, hangs in the balance. Although the technology, and the price tag, of the new system will likely lead to it moving at least partially into the realm of home theater enthusiasts rather than just gaming enthusiasts wanting the latest game system, presently Sony is staking much of its future on that market. For true security, it needs a complete digital ecosystem, and for that, it needs to change its PC strategy.

You can read the piece here.

Mac OS X Server

I'm doing a test run of Mac OS X Server (Tiger) — not for hosting, just for general server duties on my network. So far, so good. It is nice that OS X server is essentially as pleasant as Tiger normally is, it just has a bunch of servers ready to be activated and slick GUI administration tools to keep the system in line.

I'll be writing on how I like it quite a bit more in the coming weeks.

Stupid Comment Spammers

Spambots are continuing to attack the old OFB archive (which runs PHP-Nuke). The new OFB site runs SAFARI, but I left the old site up as an archive of the first five years worth of articles. I ended up having to turn off comments because spammers were adding hundreds of spams to the articles.

While they are no longer able to add actual comments, these spammers also seem to hope to spread their names by using bogus referrer data when accessing the site (since many sites list what sites are linking to them). So, I still see hundreds of page views show up in my logs each day that try to access the comment pages that no longer exist and leave referrer links to insurance, pharmacy and poker sites. It is making it hard to gather relevant statistics with so much “noise.”

To combat this, I've moved some things around while trying to make it so real human visitors can still find the pages they want without additional hassles. We'll see if what I've done actually helps.

Apple and Intel

I should probably work this into a larger piece sometime, but I think a quick observation is worthwhile. I've noticed with the Intel switch, some Mac advocates have suddenly realized that Dell does make a cheaper computer than Apple, while many PC users who would never have considered an Apple now find Apple enticing.

It is amazing how a little CPU could inspire people to swap positions. Yes, Apples with Intel processors do not have the mystical quality that Apples with PowerPC did. PowerPC was a RISC processor and that made Apple seem a bit more exotic. I liked it well enough. But, I care more about my apps and speed than I do about how “cool” my processor sounds. If, as most will now admit, Intel's Core microarchitecture blows the consumer variants of POWER out of the water in most ways, why not enjoy that and keep on using your beloved OS? Frankly, if I wanted to go with Dell's $399 special, it was just as valid to do so against a PowerPC G4 PowerBook as it is against a Core Duo MacBook. And anyway, if you compare Apple against other premium brands with very thin metal enclosures, lighter weight units, etc., I think the MacBook family still comes out favorably.

The reverse switch to being intrigued by Apple is a lot more explainable. Macs are now the only computer that can run the three biggest desktop OSes legally. With Parallels well designed virtualization, they are also really decent at running Windows applications. And, since Windows can replace Mac OS X if desired, there is far less risk in taking the plunge than before. I think that helps a lot. Even die hard Mac haters like how Apple is squeezing the latest PC technology into sleek, small machines.

The latter group does not mystify me, the former does. Personally, I think the days of processor brands defining how much awe a system should get are fading away quickly.

Happy Birthday, iPod

It is hard to believe that it has been five years since Apple launched the iPod. When I first heard that Apple was going into the music player business, I thought maybe Steve Jobs had finally gone off his rocker (hear Jobs launch the product over on Engadget). Although he had guided the struggling computer maker back into the black, ironically, with colorful computers, did he really think Apple had any place in the music player business? I was among the group that was hoping that day's announcement was to be the return of an Apple PDA, but no such “luck.”

Five years later, I cannot think of a more brilliant move by Jobs. Using the iPod as a launching pad while the Mac continued its slow progress toward ditching Mac OS Classic for Mac OS X, suddenly Apple became the cool brand again. And more than just what it did for Apple, consider what this product launch did for the consumer electronics industry? Suddenly, it was desirable to have an “MP3 Player,” something that previously had simply seemed geeky — portable CD players were now so 1990's. Suddenly a new business in making iPod accessories appeared. Suddenly, a word as strange as “iPod” would be part of everyday language. Notice the key phrase “suddenly:” the iPod's growth has been “steady,” but it has been anything other than “slow.”

Few product launches have single handedly altered a market as much as the iPod did. The iPod is to electronic music storage what the Model T or the Beetle were to cars — something that redefined the industry. And just as those two illustrious models are unlikely to be passed up in single model sales ever again, I suspect that if the iPod brand ever falls, it will be unlikely that there will be such a clear dominance in the music player market again.

Really, the iPod is a lot like the Beetle. Like the Beetle, it looks a lot like it did at its launch. Things keep changing to keep it competitive with flashier models, but it never really rejects its essential look and feel that makes the iPod an iPod. And what could be better than a New Beetle + iPod?

I wonder what we will be using to listen to music fifty years from now?

Not Likely to Make Penguins My Friends

Don't think I've given up on GNU/Linux when you read my latest piece on OFB, I do intend to highlight some good things about Linux in coming weeks. Nevertheless, this must be said:

Those of us observing GNU/Linux over the past decade have spent so much time talking about how “next year is Linux’s year on the desktop” that it has become more of a humorous cliché than a useful statement. Nevertheless, while every year the Penguin has disappointed us in not quite readying itself to compete against Apple and Microsoft’s systems, at least in the small office and home office market, we can always cling to the eternal hope: next year. Or can we?

GPS and Photos

I haven't ironed out all of the bugs, but I've started geotagging my photographs. Using the wonders of technology, I can match the date stamps hidden inside each digital photo (using JPEG's EXIF data) against my waypoint log on my new Garmin Foretrex 101 GPS unit. Doing so allows my photos to get fairly precise coordinates that can then be used to show them on Google Earth. “Say, where's that photo I took down on the Katy Trail by the Page Ave. bridge? I'll just look in Google Earth.” I also understand Apple's Spotlight search can do some geographical searching, though I've not tried it yet.

The easiest to use Mac program for the job crashes on my main computer and another one requires taking over iPhoto's job as my photo organization tool, so for the moment I'm using a Perl script to handle the geocoding process of matching the GPS's GPX log to the JPEG files. Hopefully I can get my preferred application choice to quit crashing (it doesn't crash on my Mac mini), but even with the added hassles of my current temporary solution, it is really amazing to get to look in Google Earth and see where I've walked and what photos I took along my path.

I'm sure I'll be posting more on this in the coming days. If you haven't yet figured this out, getting the data off my new GPS unit was why I was complaining about serial devices the other day. I had to buy a serial to USB adapter to get it to work on my “legacy free” computers. sigh

Serial devices...

…are so much more trouble than USB devices.

iSee iPod iNfringement

Point 1: Acronyms and Revisionism. My friend Mark countered my earlier arguments with the suggestion that the “pod” in Podcasting refers to “portable on demand.” I'd never heard it in that sense, except for in reference to the storage units, but that doesn't mean it isn't true. The Wikipedia had someone add this reference to the beginning of the podcasting article the other day, however it was removed, which makes me suspect that the editors saw it as a suggestion of questionable quality, just as I do. That does not seem to be what people typically mean when they use the term. Is this really anything other than a revisionist change in defense of fears that Apple would cry foul? The Guardian, the publication that first used the term “podcast” has this to say on the matter:

According to Creative Labs, it stands for “Personal On Demand broadCAST” (from www.zencast.com/about). However, that interpretation differs significantly from that intended by web developer Ben Hammersley. He first used the phrase in an article in the Guardian on February 12, 2004, as a synonym for the unwieldy “audioblogging”. He meant it as a contraction of “broadcasting” (because the content is sent over the net) and “iPod” (as a byword for MP3 players).

The article continues with some serious support for the assertion that podcast usually doesn't mean “portable on demand audiocast.”

Says Hammersely [the coiner of the term]: “Creative are talking rot. The pod in 'podcast' was obviously and blatantly meant to refer to the iPod. The accusation that I'd use such a clumsy acronym invites another one: […censored…].” We're sure Creative will spell out what that means.”

Now, there is no denying Creative and just about anyone else can say “but wait, now when we use the term we mean this, that, and the other thing.” What must be recognized however is that in this case such a claim is revisionist. If people could get away with such claims, I could start using Cokemachine to refer to my fancy new soda dispensing system and, when Coca-Cola tried to sue me, say, “I'm not referring to Coca-Cola, I'm referring to 'Cola Out of a Kool Electronic MACHINE.'” I think everyone knows that we'd have something other than “podcast” as the name of audio/video blogging if not for the fact that the iPod name has become synonymous with the MP3 player. If such a weak defense was accepted in cases of trademark infringement, virtually anyone could weasel out of trademark infringement.

If we rule out the “but, but, but, I don't mean iPod!” defense, we still have to deal with two other parts of my premise. First, that perhaps podcasting and iPods are so different the trademark is not an issue and, second, perhaps Apple wasn't first to use the term (unlike my earlier claim).

Point 2: Different Sectors. Apple argues that it is not infringing on the Apple Corp. trademark on the principle that no one is confusing Apple Computer with the Beatle's Apple Corp. record label. They are two companies in very different markets, and even now that Apple sells music, it doesn't do so in a way likely to confuse consumers. Does this apply to the iPod versus “podcasting”? This is admittedly somewhat subjective, but I would say no. “iPod” refers to a “digital audio player” (DAP), “podcasting” refers to an audio-blog that is typically could be played back on a DAP. Note that while the two are not the same thing, podcasting is something that is directly related to the iPod in such a way that it seems logical that “I have an iPod, so something broadcast from it would be a “podcast.” Just because my Cokemachine isn't a soda in and of itself does not clear it of infringement.

That leaves us with one point, and this is the one I think you'll want to challenge if you want to show that “podcasting” isn't infringement.

Point 3: Prior Art. If “podcasting” or “pod” existed as references to DAPs and activities involving DAPs prior to the iPod, this would clear “podcasting” from infringement. For example, I used the name SAFARI for my CMS before Apple used it for its web browser. If Apple decided to sue me for “infringing” on its common law trademark claims to “Safari,” I could easily (albeit expensively) counter that I used it first. I have plenty of archived proof showing I used the name as early as 2000 on the web and even earlier — 1999 — in private correspondence. Can anyone show that “pod” was associated with a DAP prior to the Fall 2001 launch of the iPod? Better yet, prior to the development of the iPod?

I have tried to be fair with the points listed above. I challenge anyone to show that any of them (or all of them) are unreasonable. If you cannot, I would suggest it is disingenuous to continue to insist Apple is legally wrong to do what it is doing. This doesn't mean you can't continue to argue that Apple is making a bad business decision in suing over this term, of course. I'd find myself in agreement with such a view, but that is a story for another post.