Enterprise Mac | Tom Yager » May 2007

May 31, 2007 | Comments: (0)

AppleTV's YouTube, 160 GB upgrade kick off direct-to-broadband support

TAGS: Consumer and lifestyle, Design and engineering, New Products

At present, AppleTV requires the use of an on-LAN iTunes Mac or PC client for access to music and video content. AppleTV can sync with the content on an iTunes client for standalone playback later, but the only content that AppleTV can stream directly from the Internet is a limited selection of iTunes movie previews. I posited in my initial writing on the subject that the streaming previews were a proof of concept for direct-to-Internet streaming access to commercial content, and that AppleTV would, through a software upgrade, eventually be equipped to purchase content from the iTunes Store, eliminating the need for an iTunes client.

Apple has taken two steps toward becoming a direct broadband streaming receiver/recorder. Apple is now selling a $399 build-to-order configuration that upgrades the standard 40 GB hard drive to 160 GB. For now, this eliminates the need to winnow down your Mac or PC-based iTunes library to fit AppleTV's tiny hard drive. It'll dissuade some people from taking power tools to their AppleTV units to perform homebrew disk upgrades.

I think that the 160 GB BTO option sets AppleTV up to be a broadband DVR that you can use to indiscriminately suck in everything that you might want to watch later without worrying about whether you've got room for it.

Supporting this notion is Apple's other AppleTV news of the day, access to YouTube videos directly from the AppleTV unit. I had to get Apple to verify that access to YouTube videos would not require that the videos be downloaded to an iTunes client first, and I'm told that yes, AppleTV can go straight to YouTube from its on-screen menu.

Is YouTube going to sell AppleTVs? Maybe not, but if you have AppleTV now, the next automatic software update will give you direct broadband access to YouTube that you didn't have the day before. Apple's tossing out a hint to prospective AppleTV buyers that it can push a button in Cupertino and add channels to AppleTV at will. And it will. It's just a matter of time before AppleTV taps directly into, or even becomes, a Wi-FI gateway to the Internet with no need for an iTunes client.

Posted by Tom Yager on May 31, 2007 12:58 PM

May 18, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Using a T-Mobile BlackBerry 8800 to link OS X to the Internet

TAGS: Desktops and notebooks, New Products, Software

I carried a T-Mobile BlackBerry 8800 with me on my last two trips, one of which involved a 90 minute limo ride from Monterey to San Jose. This ride gave me lots of time to contemplate what I could have done had I been on line, so once I got to the airport and hooked into the 'net (for some reason, it's free at SJC; it might have been a fluke of the day), I went hunting for experiences using BlackBerry 8800 as a Bluetooth Internet gateway for OS X.

I've been down this road before with Nokia phones, but back then, the best connection one could finagle with T-Mobile was GPRS at 9,600 bits per second. With the 8800, you can fish for hours and see a lot of wild guesses and tales of non-helpful interactions with T-Mobile tech support. Cut your search short: The instructions shown on the Fibble.org forum hit it right on the head. Just follow the instructions pointed to by the preceding link and you'll be on-line in a couple of minutes. You must follow them to the letter or you'll waste a lot of time.

The secret sauce is the modem script. The author has done an excellent job of equipping it to write connection status to Internet Connect's log window.

The T-Mobile plan you'll need to make a data connection is BlackBerry Unlimited. With that, the 8800 will hook to the Internet using the carrier's EDGE network. It's not remotely like 3G, but it's a kick compared to GPRS. I tested it several times and found that it averages 128 kilobits/second downstream and 31 kilobits/second up. Latency stinks. However, I was able to carry on real-time ssh sessions with the Xserve in my lab using the open source midpssh terminal. The menus are a bit fiddly, but once you get connected be sure to select "Type" from the menu to get an interactive session. Otherwise, you'll get an annoying buzz every time you press a key.

Posted by Tom Yager on May 18, 2007 10:21 AM

May 04, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Developers can't target iPhone?

TAGS: Consumer and lifestyle, Design and engineering, New Products, Software

I came across a story about iPhone that claimed it didn't qualify as a smartphone because it wouldn't support custom applications. I certainly agree that open development is a requirement for a smartphone. But iPhone, closed to developers? Would Steve dare to face developers at WWDC to unveil a phone that wouldn't run user-developed software?

For a chance to be among the first to own an iPhone, a Mac developer, even the truest, bluest open source believer, would not only overlook iPhone being a closed platform, he or she would pay an extra $50 to get it a week before it goes retail. There is no outrage over iPod remaining closed to developers despite the fact that Apple is selling games for it. Apple TV is a hacker's dream toy, two thirds a Mac, but there again, there is no SDK.

That ought to make us mad, but Apple owns its customers and developers and we're all content to have it that way, a fact that will always mystify everybody who doesn't own a Mac. It mystifies me sometimes, too.

Apple wouldn't open iPhone or anything else because developers like things open. But iPhone will be open, or else, because all of its competitors' platforms support user-developed applications. Why do they all support custom apps? Because. Sometimes, somebody other than Apple gets to say, "because." Open is just how phones are done, and not just smart phones.

Three platforms dominate smartphones: Java, Symbian and Windows Mobile. Symbian (Nokia, Samsung, others) phones don't need to be very smart to be development targets. A Nokia Series 30 dispos-o-phone is as programmable as Series 60, 80 and 90 devices using Nokia's free tools and documentation (forum.nokia.com). Symbian developers can use C++ and Java across all device classes. More capable devices are programmable in Python, and Nokia will shortly release a downloadable plug-in that adds a subset POSIX (UNIX) C API layer to Series 60. It'd be a pity if iPhone came up short next to a candy bar handset that costs $99 with a 1 year contract. And if Symbian+Nokia turns out to be more POSIXy than iPhone is, well, you'll read it here first.

BlackBerry is the only competing mobile platform mentioned by name during Steve Jobs' introduction of iPhone. BlackBerry is pure Java, with free tools straight from the vendor. The company is having a show next week called Wireless Enterprise Symposium at which third parties will exhibit their wares, and there's some impressive stuff that you'd love to see on iPhone. I'll tell you all about it in my review, with follow-ups in Ahead of the Curve. And did I mention that BlackBerry 8800 has GPS and ships with navigation software? It plays audio and video, too.

Windows Mobile is obviously developer-friendly. The tools (Visual Studio) are anything but free, but a one-year membership in Microsoft Developer Network will net you all the goods you need to develop end-to-end mobile solutions in BASIC, for pity's sake. Windows Mobile 6 will be making its first major commercial appearance, quite by accident, right around iPhone time. Treo and Blackjack will be front and center with it.

Wouldn't it be a gas if Microsoft's new mobile platform turns out to be more developer-friendly than Apple's? Hiss at Microsoft all you like, but Windows Mobile sets a high bar for programmability.

I'm tingling with anticipation.

Posted by Tom Yager on May 4, 2007 05:20 AM

May 03, 2007 | Comments: (0)

MacBook Pro update update: Battery fix?

TAGS: Desktops and notebooks

Apple just called to alert me to the battery firmware update that went out shortly after I laid my sorrows before you. I just installed the firmware fix and rebooted.

Before Apple called, I was set to relate the last straw in the battery saga: Yesterday, I picked up the MacBook Pro to find its on-battery gauge doing the rapid blink of impending death. I put it on its charger for about an hour to give it just enough juice to do a quick post while untethered. Half an hour later, the external gauge showed almost fully charged.

"Were you lying then, or are you lying now?", I asked the gauge.

"Guess," it smirked to itself and extinguished after I pulled the charger.

I opened the lid and the display lit up with the battery icon showing 99 percent. Over the course of about three minutes of active use it counted down reassuringly. 98...97...96...1...dark.

I hope this fix takes. I'll let you know.

Thanks, commenters, for all of your suggestions.

Posted by Tom Yager on May 3, 2007 06:21 PM