Point to Point

Technology and Me

Archive for category Consumer Electronics

Hacking Your Studio XPS 16 to Work With Any Universal Remote

Aug 13

Posted by Brad in Bad Business Ideas, Consumer Electronics, Hacking, Programming | No Comments

Including the Harmony-series. Tested on Harmony 880 and Windows 7 64-bit

So I have this really sweet, lesser-deity-of-a-computer; a nearly maxed-out Dell Studio XPS 16. I’m very happy with my purchase, in all respects but one: some marketing jack-off with a title eerily similar to mine has decided that letting customers use any old Media Center remote on their computer was a bad plan. This includes any universal remote (like, say, the Harmony series of remotes) or standard Media Center remotes (like these). I guess it added value to the purchase, but not $$ to the bottom line, and was thus deemed a liability. Short-sighted A-hole.

One of the guys over at the notebook review forums (ejohnson0547, Notebook Enthusiast) showed how Dell used their stupid little installer to actually REMOVE support for standard MCE remotes in Windows (Vista and 7), including my Harmony 880. Since that pissed me right off, I thought I’d make it even easier on other people to un-break this little “feature”. I rolled up my hacker sleeves and “broke” the Dell driver installer for ya.

Feel free to download it below. It is a modified version of the standard Dell ITE Infrared Receiver driver installer (from 9/23/2009, Version 5.1.0000.1, A8). The drivers themselves aren’t modified, just the part of the install process that removes support for standard MCE remotes.

image

Those of you with a Stuido XPS 16 can happily download and run this to enable standard “RC6”-style remotes. Those of you with other models should refer to the earlier post on how to do this yourself. I tested it out and it worked fine on my machine, but your mileage may vary. Since it’s just a single driver, worst case you have to remove it and try again.

Oh, and hey — Dell Marketing Guy? This is for you:

fuckyounicorn

Source: http://www.mymodernmet.com/photo/the-fuckyounicorn

Tags: , ,

The iPhone Killer: Time

Nov 24

Posted by Brad in Cellphone, Consumer Electronics, Internet Technology | No Comments

As the iPhone has grown, every new Smartphone has been simultaneously lauded as an iPhone killer (by eager supporters), then blasted for failing to do so (by cynical bloggers). But that’s okay, I’ve finally figured out what I think will be the iPhone Killer. As you may have guessed from the title – Time. Time takes its toll on all things, and I think the iPhone is rapidly nearing the end of its position of prominence.

First off, the facts. While the iPhone is a popular device, depending how you slice your market demographics it ranges from “unquestioned overlord” to “mid-volume runner”. Yes, it has sold more than any single model, but most manufacturers don’t make only one model. In fact, may people are lying with statistics, treating the iPhone as only one model when in fact six exist in the US. There’s the 4gb and 8gb versions of the 2G, the 8 and 16gb versions of the 3G, and the 16 and 32gb versions of the 3GS. Blending all of these into one number, spanning multiple model years and often duplicate customers is misleading at best.

Apple’s competitors in the space aren’t exactly doing poorly, either. Many other mobile OSs have GROWN in size since the introduction of the iPhone. Symbian, Blackberry, and Windows Mobile have all increase their sales volume and revenues since 2007. On top of that, the removal of Palm’s PalmOS models from the market and the introduction of the Sprint-only WebOS models has left a gap filled largely by Apple and RIM. Even the aging Windows Mobile has grown, despite no major changes to the OS since the May 12 ‘05 release of Windows Mobile 5.

But all of that is not to discount the impact Apple has had. Devices are more powerful, rich application libraries are a requirement, and let’s not forget that their rapidly-dissolving relationship with Google gave rise to Android, which is already making significant gains in Apple’s tech-savvy elite, attracting developers and power-users and leaving Apple to scrape the bottom for new customers.

Take a look at the three images below. See what they say about the iPhone’s perception in the market. All images come from BrandIndex, via AppleInsider.com

att_customer_perception

First, this graph shows the perception of AT&T vs. Verizon, following the launch of the iPhone 3GS. Notice the sharp downturn in both companies, with AT&T’s being noticeably sharper. After the launch of the 3GS on June 18, people began to notice the struggling impact of a data-intensive device on AT&T’s aging, poorly-managed 3G network. Many users reported losing 3G coverage even while in areas AT&T was supposedly offering great coverage. While voice worked, AT&T’s data network was sorely lacking.

brand_perception_index

Next, take a look at the brand perception of Apple vs. Motorola leading up to the Droid launch, specifically among men aged 18+. Droid’s

 brand_recommendation_index

Lastly, look at the perception of AT&T vs. Verizon in the weeks leading up to the Droid launch. AT&T was never “liked”, but it hasn’t historically been much worse off than Verizon. Now there’s an almost 40 point difference – most likely attributable to the numerous “There’s a map for that” and “Droid does” ads. AT&T, the only source of the iPhone today, is tanking in popularity and public perception among adults. Why would you want a cool phone if it’s on the nation’s worst network?

When you put all these together (as I’m sure someone at Apple has) you see a pattern emerge: the iPhone isn’t really seen as a cutting-edge device anymore. It hasn’t fundamentally changed in 3 years. Sure, memory bumps are nice and getting the features that have existed on other phones for a decade is a welcome addition, but it’s not revolutionary anymore. In fact, for the tech-elite, the cutesy, childish UI is no longer a novelty, but a frustration. For top-tier developers, having a locked-down platform with an unpredictable, often irrational gatekeeper is unforgivable. And for everyone else? AT&T sucks more than the iPhone can make up for any longer. AT&T has not invested in its 3G networks (coverage or infrastructure), and iPhone users once proud of their device’s web-surfing capabilities are now behind, from a data coverage, screen resolution, and technology standpoint.

Will any one device crush the iPhone? I don’t think so. I’m pretty sure it’ll die the way Apple’s OS did – the death of a thousand tiny cuts. You’ll have a small group of users who are willing to trade the simplicity of a locked-down, highly limited environment for poor quality coverage, a less capable device, and a single form-factor.

If I had to guess though, Apple will probably react by trying to diversify, but it’ll be too little too late. The iPhone exclusivity contract will last a few more years, and they’ll release one or two more devices. Maybe one with a keyboard, maybe one with a bigger, sharper screen, but once they do that, the simple elegance of “every app on every phone” is gone.

Then they’ll release a CDMA version to Verizon and Sprint, but no one will care. Sure, there will be blog hype (as their is around a lot of what Apple does), but for the average consumer it won’t matter, and it won’t translate into big numbers. Mostly, you’ll get people who hate AT&T jumping back to their original provider (Verizon), or switching to Sprint for the unbelievably cheap internet coverage they offer.

Tags: , ,

FCC Proceeding 08-82: Selectable Output Control

Nov 11

Posted by Brad in Bad Business Ideas, Consumer Electronics, Television and Movies | 3 Comments

Here’s a copy of a letter I recently sent to the FCC. Since they said it was part of public record, I felt like posting it here, too:

I am writing to express my concern about Selectable Output Control. SOC represents a struggling industry’s attempt to block consumer choice and limit the usefulness of products already purchased. Disabling the ability to use analog outputs is an absurd leap, for the sake of “protecting content”.

And let’s be honest: this will do next to nothing to stop piracy. One copy is all it takes, typically leaked from within the studios themselves, or by one of the many content partners. A federal involvement will only devalue the hardware and software already purchased and in use by consumers, harming innovation and damaging consumer confidence at a time when our country needs it most.

Imagine a parallel: what if the highway billboard industry claimed that in order to offer full video billboards (with sound!), highway speeds must be limited to 20mph or less, so that users could receive the full benefit of the new ads. In such a situation, the governing body would be severely harming a large number of consumers to protect the interests of a private industry.

I strongly urge the FCC not to agree to the MPAA’s request for SOC. SOC would represent an industry artificially limiting customer choice, and negatively impacting a much larger industry (consumer electronics) for their own favor. It does absolutely nothing to benefit the consumer in any way, increase the value of new and existing technologies, or grow the industry in a meaningful way.

And now, a little backstory, if anyone’s curious:

Selectable Output Control is a technology that the movie industry developed to cripple your TV. Basically, the idea was that while watching Pay Per View (or anything else) on your TV, the MPAA should be allowed to, at their discression, disable any and all of the analog outputs from your television (audio and video). The idea was that this would “limit piracy”, by making it harder to record something and later distribute it. Since digital connections (DVI, HDMI, DisplayLink) all conform to a High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP) standard, the recording device can’t actually record “protected” content. That means that if you plug your HD cable box into your BluRay burner, it won’t let you record anything. Sounds just fine right?

But what happens when I have a legitimate reason for wanting to do this? Suppose I buy a PPV event and want to record it onto my computer so I can watch it on my laptop on my next flight. With HDCP, this is impossible (and even trying is a felony). I used to be able to use the component outputs and plug it into one of these or these. These products could happily collect data, record it, and let me do with it what I please (you know, the exact reason people BUY products like this).

SOC is bad for consumers and bad for the electronics industry. Pretty much the only people it benefits is the MPAA, who wants to do everything in its power to stop users from recording TV, since it means you can skip commercials, share with friends, etc. Trouble is, all it’ll do is push more and more users to the illegitimate services, since they won’t have any of these restrictions.

I think that’s something the MPAA forgets: they’re not fighting piracy, they’re competing with it. Right now, pirated movies offer a better experience to the user: they’re cheaper, I can do whatever I want with them, I can re-format them to put on a mobile device (iPod, phone, etc), and they never expire. I’d be perfectly happy to buy such things if I could, because I’d be guaranteed quality and a virus-free file. Since the MPAA insists on trying to fight piracy, it ends up exhibiting all manner of destructive behavior, and SOC is just the latest.

Limiting consumer choice has never been good for the consumer, and in a world where there are more and more options, locking down my TV’s outputs will probably never directly affect me. I’ll just hop to a technology that isn’t restricted, and one that the MPAA gets no money at all from. What it will do is create a headache for legitimate users (like those that still get HD cable over component video), an expense for the FCC, and a burden on consumer electronics companies, especially their support departments.

It sure as hell won’t stop piracy though!

Rise of the Home Server

Feb 24

Posted by Brad in Computing, Consumer Electronics, Internet Technology, Web 2.x | 2 Comments

So there’s this interesting pattern I’ve observed in the distribution of technology – things generally trickle down to consumers. What used to be expensive and elite will, over time, become inexpensive and commonplace. Cellphones, computers, digital sound systems, etc. I know that’s not much of a surprise to most of you, so here’s what I think is going to happen.

Media storage is getting cheaper and easier all the time: the rise of the home server. Over the next few years (certainly by the end of 2020) most homes will have some kind of centralized storage. Just like 10 years ago people didn’t have routers and switches in their homes, now almost everyone does. With a home network comes multiple comptuers. Multiple computers leads to all kinds of problems – syncing files between machines, duplication of data, ease of access, usage location, etc. All of this adds up to a solution early adopters are starting to notice. Why put music on every computer when you could just store it on some low-powered, high-storage computer? Why set up complex mechanisms for downloading, transferring, and storing content on a laptop when you could just as easily store it on some server you own?

The obvious solution is to store it on a remote server someplace, up in the “cloud” for easy access anytime. The problem is that people don’t trust the cloud yet – data gets lost, privacy and security aren’t well explained, and retreival times are limited. Sure, you’ll keep things you explicitly want to share with others, but not most things. You’ll never keep your collection of tax records, illegal mp3s, adult entertainment and pirated movies up on a server someplace. No, you want it in a little box, tucked away in your house.

Ideally, it’ll be the size and shape of a router. It’ll plug in and have a bunch of storage for local use, and you’ll be able to expand it anytime. Why not?

Routers with extensible RAID file systems: the next big thing in home networks.

Tags: , , ,

How Apple Controls Perception, Reality

Aug 14

Posted by Brad in Computing, Consumer Electronics | No Comments

So I’m not really an Apple guy. It isn’t that I dislike their products, or even have a particularly strong opinion on the whole “Now you’re an Apple user” cult that seems to happen. I think it really comes down to me seeing past the advertising veil. They’ve managed to take an industry where you have almost limitless consumer choice and reduce it to “us vs. them”

And they’re great at it.

Who is Apple’s biggest competitor? If you answered “Microsoft”, you’re wrong. But that’s OK, it’s what they want you to think. And they spend untold sums every year to make sure you keep thinking it.

When you really get down to it, Apple competes with other systems integrators and hardware companies; Dell, Sony Computer, Lenovo, HP, etc., companies that are, in many ways, not terribly different from Apple. They take all the same parts (even processors!) and stick them together in the same kind of boxes. They offer a range of similar products at similar prices, dip their toes into other markets, offer similarly built gear, and so on. So why play on a level playing field, when you can stack the odds?

The greatest myth that Apple has maintained is that you are choosing between Apple and Microsoft. This allows them to draw comparisons that feature them in an extremely positive light, and severely limit your choice as a consumer. When you have a problem with your Apple computer, you call your Apple help line, visit an Apple store, or send it to an Apple repair center. Ever try to get Microsoft on the phone to help you with your Dell? Apple marketing has convinced users it is because the software giant doesn’t care about them, and pawns off support and responsibility. Every comparison they make in their commercials builds on the idea that your choice is Apple or MSFT. Because if you were really choosing between Apple, HP, Lenovo, Dell, Sony, Eee, Asus, and a handfull of other companies, you’d pick Apple a lot less. They effectively shrunk the market to two players: Apple and “everyone else”.

Let’s get a quick fact out of the way, because it is difficult to really delve much deeper into this without it. Apple has about 4% of the computer market. That’s it. They’ve heald steady at that number (+ or – 1%) for the last decade. Through all their ups and downs, they’ve never crossed 5% and never dipped much below 3%. They’re a small player. But they have one thing that Dell and HP and the rest don’t: the brand.

Apple has arguably the most powerful brand in computing and consumer electronics to date. They have managed to make their users feel better for using Apple products, superior to those who do not. Take a look at their long-running campaign, the “I’m a Mac, I’m a PC” ads. Have you ever wondered why those ads exist? Is it to introduce a new product? Is it to recruit new users? No. It is to fluff up the egos of Mac users, reinforcing the idea that they are in an elite and select group (one that is larger than it really is), which has somehow seen beyond other computers to the perfection that is an Apple product. They are not just the overweight middle manager in a suit: they are the freedom loving, college-dropout pothead on the right. They are young, fasion conscious, and popular.

Apple ads are also a forum to spread misinformation about competitors and half-truths about Apple. Vista crashes a lot? Sure. Apple is immune to computer viruses? Why not? The ability to run Windows on a Mac is a feature, but the inability to run OSX on a PC is a shortcoming of Windows? Wow, I guess so! Apple commercials are strictly about building an emmotional relationship with the consumer and increasing the preceived value of a product. $2k for a computer you can buy anywhere else for $1500? That’s a hard sell. But $500 to feel like you’ve made the “smarter” choice? Well that’s just a good deal.

I could go on and on, but I’ll leave you with one last point: Apple prides itself on a minimalist approach to design, because complex computers are “scary” and unfriendly. This limits the things you can do with them. But as an entire generation grows up around computers, do you think Apple can maintain “simple is better” forever? Or will an OSX machine seem too “childish” by the time you hit 15? Only time will tell, but I think they have a big problem on their hands in the next few decades. That is if they make it that far.

Tags: , , ,