Apple iPad

Well after months of hype and half rumours, Apple have now announced their entrance to the tablet computing and net book sector. The missing device from the world of computing is to be called the iPad. UK betting operator Paddy Power had iSlate as the most likely name so I got odds of 7/4 on the iPad name and turned a £2 flutter into £5.50!!

I do like the iPad. Unlike the original iPhone, the very first version appears to be reasonably priced and a comprehensive and complete piece of hardware. There were a number of anticipated features like a multi-tasking operating system that were not shown, but these can all be added via a basic software upgrade. In contrast the first iPhone did not support 3G mobile networks meaning no amount of software upgrades would allow fast mobile internet or photo messaging.

The question everyone will be asking is "Do I actually need a touchscreen device to hold in my hand and use to browse the internet?" Personally, I have no issue with sitting at my fixed desktop computer when I want to go online.

However when one looks into trends for computer sales, I think it is true that consumer outlets like Dixons or Comet sell a very high percentage of PCs in laptop form factor rather than desktop models. People clearly like being able to put the computer in a cupboard and reuse the space of their computer desk. They like to be able to use the laptop anywhere in the house that is convenient, for example in the garden, or while watching television. Far more business staff require mobile working from customer sites or from home for which a laptop is ideal.

Very gradually, battery life of laptops has ebbed away. When laptops entered the mainstream they would last all day on a single charge. As screens have grown in size, and processors have increased in speed and number of cores battery life has slowly dropped. Last time I went laptop window shopping on the web I would be doing well if the latest laptops would last more than 5 hours on a single charge. So benefit number one of the iPad is it sports an incredible battery life of 10 hours of continuous use!

Next I will discuss what is best called the 'iPhone OS ecosystem'. Recall a recent TV campaign from Apple with the punchline of 'There is an app for everything'. There is no doubt that software drives the sales of hardware. For example I am sure some customers have browsed through the App Store in iTunes and bought an iPod Touch or iPhone because they have seen applications that they wanted to use, or games they wanted to play. This is not the main reason I bought my iPhone, but I did have an urge to use some of the apps before I had my iPhone.

I have also talked to customers in business who have become frustrated because the software they needed for their business was not available on the computers they already owned. They chose the software first, then bought hardware on which to run it.

So my point is that people who see apps in the iTunes app store they want now have an additional choice of hardware device that will execute the app - an iPad. One custom app for example a point of sale application for use in a bricks-and-mortar store like the Apple Store to enable staff to complete sales with customers will be a big driver of sales - the iPad may be the better platform in the ecosystem for this purpose.

This leads me to my next major advantage of the iPad.... it's screen resolution. I have written applications for the iPhone. The first point that hits you as a developer is how small the screen is. When PCs graphics adapters first launched they ran at VGA or 640x480 pixels resolution. The iPhone is half this size, 480x320, or 460x320 after the status bar showing battery charge and signal strength etc. I was investigating writing a TV Guide app, but quickly realised there was no way to show information from many channels on screen at once. A Sky subscriber would want at least 200 channels available. At five per screen this would mean an unfeasible amount of scrolling.

Have you noticed that apps on the iPhone have a very small set of options? Microsoft Word has hundreds of features available from its menus. No iPhone app comes close. I believe the reason for the lack of features and customisation is due to the lack of screen space to show the options. Apps have to be well designed, and features trimmed due to restriction with the user interface.

By comparison the iPad has a resolution of 1024x768 (also known as XGA). This is two steps of development ahead of VGA, the first step was 800x600 or SVGA. With this large increase in screen real-estate and the faster custom-designed Apple processor, the possibilities for developers are now much much greater. It is my opinion that apps (not forgetting games) for the iPad will be an order of magnitute better than all the existing iPhone apps. To conclude, benefit number two is the much larger screen that will bring with it far more potential for application developers.

A second benefit of the physically larger screen is multimedia viewing - lets face it the iPhone is too small to use as a serious device for watching TV or movies. Maybe Apple should revamp their Apple TV to enable recording, syncing those recordings to iPad and even remote control and viewing of your TV? The larger screen will allow more of a web page to readable without the need to zoom. As Apple have advertised, the larger screen is now usable as an electronic book reader.

To conclude I think the iPad will be successful. When consumers replace their present PC or laptop they will be able to consider the iPad instead. Apps on the device will be an order of magnitude better than any existing iPhone apps. Specific apps for specific business needs will drive sales of the unit to businesses. People who require an ebook reader or web and video on-the-go have no better option than iPad at the moment. Also at $499 or I guess £399 in UK this will not break the bank for most people as a fun lifestyle gadget or games device.

There are so many possibilities for this new device....

The hype and rumour mills have already moved on to the next version of the iPhone!

Chris

Google Chrome - web 2.0 starts today....

Back in April 2007 I wrote a blog post about all the hype around web 2.0. My opinion was "You can't call something Web version 2 without changing some infrastructure (Ie hardware), protocols (Ie http) and/or browsers."

Well today Google have launched a new browser, named Google Chrome!

If anyone knows anything about the Internet, where it is going and how to make it better this company does.

The browser is simple, well designed and has a new architechture to protect our computers from the nasties on the net. And I believe it (unlike when Microsoft make the same claim with every new release of their software).  Each web site and plugin is in a process of its own, which is a kind of virtual box. Whatever happens inside that box only affects the box.

This is my shortest post ever because the software has been released within the hour. Get this browser now. Today the internet has changed. I need to add this browser is still in testing and is classed as Beta, but Google always do this. I'll bet a Google beta works better than any Microsoft final release!

I have never been so excited about the future for computing. What with the Apple iPhone which will be expanded into a laptop form building on the success of the touch interface, and now Google evolving the web browser which could morph into a replacement for Microsoft Windows.

Chris

Update: I use this for normal surfing, but there are more than a few sites that are not properly compatible with this browser.  If you like a browser to store your logins for all the websites, Chrome is poor in this area.  Unfortunately one still needs to use Internet Explorer for some tasks.

BATTLE OF THE YEAR: Can HTC beat the iPhone??

I am referring to the HTC Touch range of new mobile phones. The Diamond is the consumer model which has a joystick, 4 buttons and a touch screen (no keypad). The Pro which will be out in the next couple of months has a sideways sliding full qwerty keyboard.

I have tried the HTC Touch Diamond as on paper it beats the iPhone, plus it runs Windows Mobile operating system which I have used before and really liked. The main benefit is full synchronisation with Outlook contacts and calendars.

The adverts all show off the screen with a selection of album covers to choose from to play your music, and some very nicely animated weather program.

I will cut to the point - it does not work. Trying to use this handset to make calls and text is next to impossible. Windows Mobile v6.1 cannot cope with a touch screen. There is one simple flaw that they have not addressed. If I am on the contact screen and flick the screen from the bottom to the top to scroll the list the phone will on about 30% occasions dial the contact on whom your finger first touches.

As for texts there is a nice HTC front end to the text inbox. However to view old texts or to compose a new text you have to revert to the standard Windows Mobile interface.

The album covers that are in the ad are only available within the playlist. This device has 4Gb internal storage so can hold a decent amount of music. This is impossible to flick through and select from the text list (and there is no other way). Lastly you have to buy a third party adapter if you wish to use anything other than the bundled hands-free kit to listen through.

When I said the HTC beat the iPhone the main point was the screen resolution. iPhone boasts 480x320 over 3.5". The HTC has a physically smaller 2.8" screen (allowing the handset to be much smaller than iPhone) but has twice as many pixels (640x480). The "minor" problem is that the processor in the phone can't process a movie anywhere near that resolution. I uploaded a 480 line mp4 and was lucky to see 1 frame per second. And it downsized that to view in portrait - couldn't get it to use landscape...

Which brings me on to my next issue. Not only is use of the accelerometer restricted to the flashy but useless album viewer and opera mobile, but most apps do not have a setting to tell them to put the screen in landscape. For example Windows Remote desktop took over my PC but with a screen res of 480 pixels across and 640 down!!

Lastly the internet experience - there are two browsers loaded. Opera was the easiest to use, but couldn't use the bookmarks sync-ed from your PC. IE could see the bookmarks but had problems rendering a lot of websites and had poor support for the touchscreen.

To sum up this phone has a lot of features and a large amount of apps are available to customise the phone with it being Windows based. I chose this phone thinking it was a cross between a phone and a laptop - against the iPhone which is a cross between a media player and a phone. But it simply doesn't work. There is no point having a phone if you feel like throwing it everytime you try to ring someone.

The last problem for HTC is simply that iPhone is "the iPhone". Doesn't matter what anyone else launches it will not BE an iPhone. The iPhone is from Apple. It has the press coverage. Everyone has heard of it just because it is!

Chris heads to the Apple store........

PS. When you go to the store to buy the iPhone the O2 website will not work in Mac OS. They boot their lovely Mac into Windows XP before they can process the order lol.

iPhone 2.0 on the way...

I have posted a review of the first iPhone when it was released last year. This review comprised a very long list of things the iPhone 1.0 could not do. I dismissed it as an extremely expensive device (including the 24 month contract) that was very lacking in some modern functionality most others phones already had.

A couple of months after the launch O2 revised their tariffs - giving more minutes for your money, and allowing an 18 month rather than 24 month agreement.

Back to the new model that launches July 11th, there is a new £30 a month tariff on the way for light users, and a pay-as-you-go option has also been promised at some point.

The best news is the price of the handset has been significantly reduced. The 8Gb version starts at £99 and the 16Gb version starts at £159. On the more expensive tariffs the iPhone will be available free of charge.

The iPhone itself has had a limited amount of hardware changes. Most important it is now compatible with the faster 3G networks. It now includes a GPS radio receiver for accurately pinpointing your location. The camera and headphone socket are now flush which means at last you can use any set of headphones you choose.

There are numerous software changes, which can also be installed on the old iPhone if you havn't illegally unlocked it. There is support for third party applications, a new application store, better Microsoft exchange integration and 'hopefully' the addition of picture messages and video capture.

I will be very tempted to get one when they are launched. I would recommend buying on the £45 a month contract to get a discount of £100 on the device. After 9 months you can call O2 and ask to downgrade to a cheaper tariff! My only remaining mini-gripe is that 16Gb is a bit small for music - and no where near enough to carry round a selection of videos as well. Hopefully a 32Gb version will be along soon.

Chris

Update: Still no picture messaging or video, unless you can find an email gateway.

New Satellite TV launches in UK - Freesat

In my last post I mentioned that a new TV service in the UK would be launching soon. This launched on Tuesday. This service is available to most households in the UK via a satellite dish.

The name of the new service is Freesat. This is extremely confusing because there was already a free satellite TV service available from Sky with the same name. The Sky offering is normally now referred to as 'Freesat from Sky'. The new Freesat service is owned by the BBC and ITV. I am amused the word Sky is completely absent from the Freesat website and literature!!

If you have a Sky dish you can buy a Freesat set-top box (STB) at most large electrical retailers and just plug it in. Both systems use the same satellite signal for receiving channels. Freesat do have their own TV guide and interactive services that are completely separate from Sky.

In my last post I concluded the new service was a branding exercise and that it was pretty pointless. There have since been a couple of developments.

1. ITV HD will not be available on the Sky HD service. It will be exclusive to Freesat.
2. There will soon be televisions on the market that can receive Freesat without a separate STB.

Sky have been complaining about Freesat saying they already offered such a service and the new one is a waste of money. Given that Sky holds 17.9% shares in ITV it is very interesting that ITV HD will not be on Sky. The chairman of ITV was quoted as saying 'they would not give the channel to Sky for nothing'.

A number of broadcasters have been complaining about Sky's monopoly and business practices. Recently Sky withdrew their Sky One channel from the Virgin cable network because Virgin would not pay a massive price increase for the channel. Some small channels have been challenging the cost levied by Sky for carrying their channel.

There is more to this than meets the eye!

I would love to know how much is payed and in which direction for the channels on the Sky service. My hunch is Sky is used to charging content produces to transmit their channel on the Sky network. And ITV HD have told them to get stuffed! Sky is now playing catchup because their status as the only network with all available HD services is at risk. They are getting a taste of their own medicine! As a Sky HD customer I hope this is resolved and ITV HD will be on Sky soon.

The game I think ITV are playing is to get access to channels that have an exclusive contract with Sky - namely Channel 4 HD and Five (Both of these are absent from Freesat). Sky are going to be in trouble when they come to re-negotitate most of their contracts with content providers now they have competition! They are already at the limit of what most customers will pay to view a subscription TV service.

Where I really believe the new Freesat is justified is that anyone can make receiving equipment for the new service. The Sky receivers were only available from Sky. It was not possible to integrate these with televisions and recorders. This was a real headache if you did not subscribe to Sky+ - recording a weeks programmes meant setting your Sky receiver and your video device for each programme. The Sky programme guide is locked and can only be decoded by Sky - whereas the new Freesat system will be open to all.

Today the free service from Sky is better than the free service from Freesat. If both STBs cost the same I would choose a Sky one because I then have the option of paying for TV channels if my needs change.

If any more channels go Freesat exclusive Sky will have problems. I hope we don't get to a situation where consumers will need a STB for the Sky service and an STB for the Freesat service in order to get all the channels they want - not a desirable situation.

Chris

UPDATE: My imagination has been running on high since I wrote this article. Think of all the possibilities now there is an innovative new TV service. While the Sky service works - there have been no innovations from them for years. While the HD receiver has a network port and numerous USB ports - like the interactive card slot featured on all systems since launch they don't do anything.

Imagine if the new Freesat service allowed you to access your recorded shows as you wished? Maybe the box could have a built-in DVD burner? You could copy programmes onto an iPod or a PSP to watch on the move. You could watch live TV on your PC by connecting a web browser to your satellite receiver. You could manage all your recordings from anywhere on the internet! I hate having to turn my TV on just to set a show to record.

At present on Sky all the time-delayed and Hi Def versions of normal channels exist as separate channels. Imagine if the box could merge them into one. You press a button to switch between the current or the 1 hour delayed version. If there is a recording clash the system could automatically pick up one of your programmes from the time delay channel if possible. How user friendly would that be?

Also your satellite receiver could stream video files from your PC, and could connect to all the new TV over IP services such as the iPlayer or BT Vision.

Lastly what if more channels that are currently subscription only on Sky changed their business model as numerous newspapers have? If they gave them free they would have more viewers and could charge more for advertising. More and more choice of free TV channels would be wonderful!

HD TV keeps getting better!

If you havn't made the jump to Hi-definition television yet things are certainly improving!

At the moment the only option is from Sky. A handful of new channels have recently launched, with another 2 expected within weeks.

My favourite channel is BBC HD. It only broadcasts each evening but the picture quality is always exellent. They are running shows like Torchwood, Last of the summer wine, The green green grass plus various nature programs like Tiger Spy in the jungle, Planet Earth and The power of the planet.

Discovery HD and National Geographic HD are also favourites of mine. History HD also carries interesting stuff about space and the universe. Sky Arts is also available in HD.

There are now 3 HD sports channels if you subscribe to Sky Sports. A third movie channel has just launched in HD. Previously there were 2 channels showing movies in HD. There was often a wait of a month or two before new movies on Sky Premiere were available on the HD channels. We now have the Premiere channel broadcasting simulcast in HD. There are also 2 box office movie channels in HD.

Sky one HD and Channel 4 HD are a waste of time. They are simulcast of the SD channels, and 90% of programmes on the HD versions are not broadcast in Hi-def.

Lux HD launched a couple of months back but seems to be permanent repeats and I have not worked out its intended subject.

Some of the best programmes I have seen on National Geographic have been about outdoor pursuits - kayaking, surfing, base jumping etc. There is now a new HD channel called Rush HD that is devoted to programmes like this. I have seen nothing in the press about this amazing new channel - which has prompted this posting on my blog.

The 2 I mentioned that are due any day are FX HD (I don't ever remember watching the normal FX channel, but it has things like family guy) and ITV HD. Hopefully the ITV channel will be a different schedule to the normal ITV but with plenty of programmes actually in HD.

If you are not prepared to pay Sky the extra £10 for the HD content I have some good news. Within the next couple of months a new satellite TV service will be launching called Freesat. This will carry BBC HD, ITV HD and eventually Channel4 HD that can be received completely free. Freesat receivers are fully compatible with an existing Sky dish.

Getting accurate technical information about the new Freesat is difficult because Sky also have a free service they market as Freesat. At present it is my understanding that the new Freesat service uses exactly the same satellite signal as Sky. By this I understand that if the Sky transmitters that beam TV to the satellite were to go offline, all satellite TV services would break. Basically Freesat is a brand. They will sell you a different set-top box that will have a Freesat logo on the screen instead of a Sky one! Pretty pointless!

The choice is to get a Freesat box that cannot decode the Sky services, or get a Sky box without a subscription. At least with the latter option you can add a Sky subscription if you so wish in the future without buying a new box.

Having said that the more HD programmes I can receive the better - so I shouldn't complain!!!

Will update this if I get any more info:
1. Freesat will launch on 6th May. As I thought they are only broadcasting their own 'metadata' which is the tv schedule and teletext type services in english. Unconfirmed prices are £50 for SD or £120 for HD set top box, plus installation if required.

Last thing - there are a few pictures on the net of a new version of the Sky TV guide that will be pushed to the HD boxes in the next couple of months. Will keep my ear to the ground if I find any more details of the changes! (Here it is - link)

Chris

HD Format War Over

We have a winner in the format war to be the next DVD! It will be official next week.

HD-DVD, the format designed and promoted by Toshiba is dead and buried. Rumours surfaced last week that Toshiba will be launching a range of Blu-ray players shortly.

Blu-ray designed and promoted by Sony is the winner. And mostly because of the Playstation 3. There are about 10 million of the beasts in people's living rooms, compared to about 100,000 other Hi-def players.

In terms of sales the HD-DVD separate players have sold better, solely because they are cheaper than Blu-ray separate players.

Numerous studios and more importantly large retailers have thrown their support behind Blu-ray since the new year. Their selection has been driven solely by consumer demand. Blu-ray movies are significantly outselling HD-DVD movies.

According to What Hi-Fi the Playstation 3 is the best Blu-ray player on the market. It won all their reviews on the basis of picture quality. It also supports the latest version of Blu-ray. Lastly it is the cheapest Blu-ray player. You basically get the games and media console for free!

If you are buying a Blu-ray player make sure it can be upgraded to the latest version of Blu-ray compatibility. As the versions evolve better interactive features are becoming possible. If you are after a damn good player for normal quality DVDs there are some absolute bargain HD-DVD players out their that will do a brilliant job!

Chris

Review of iPhone UK

Today I have had my first experience with an iPhone. It is definitely in the Bleading Edge Technology category because it has plenty of serious shortcomings.

To summarise the only reason I would buy one is pose value - everyone who sees it will notice you have got the latest and greatest gadget to hit the phone market for ages. In my opinion it is a very nice gadget that will really raise the bar in terms of mobile handset design. Let it do its job and see what the competition release in response.

There is no such thing as a perfect mobile phone. I am of the opinion designers deliberatly leave features out so they can add them to the next version and you will part with more cash to upgrade. If the iPhone really did everything you would only buy one. The range will evolve and features will be enhanced.

The first problem with it is that it is not a 3G handset. If all you want to do is make voice calls this phone will do that perfectly on the 2G networks. In such an allegedly advanced phone this is unforgivable!

3G networks enable 3 very important enhancements.
1. Video Calling. 3G phones normally have a camera on the front of the phone so when you are in a call you can see your other party and they can see you.
2. Mobile TV. This is basically up to 15 special only-for-mobile channels from Sky including News Sport Music and Soaps. The channels are broadcast on demand to your handset - which would look great on the iPhone with its massive screen and with it being built for video.
3. Broadband speed Internet. The maximum speed internet connection possible over 2G is called GPRS. This is the same speed as an old fashioned dial-up modem: 56k. 3G enables 10x faster Internet access.

The touchscreen interface system is not as revolutionary as the hype makes out. It was actually annoying. I could speculate as to why, but I won't. About 1 in 4 times I touched a link or an icon the phone ignored my request and I had to try again - touching for longer or pressing more gently and more specifically on the link or icon. On a couple of occasions I would touch one place and the phone would sense my touch about an inch away from where I pressed.

I sampled all the ring tones in the shop and found myself having to move the phone nearer to my ear so I could hear them. If the phone was in my pocket there is no way the ring is loud enough for normal use - even on maximum volume. Fortunately there is a vibrate mode.

You must have heard all the hype about 'Cover Flow'. When browsing your music you tilt the phone 90 degrees and it shows all the cover artwork for your music. You can flick left and right through these to pick the album you want. When you find a track there was no way to do a 'add to playlist' feature, like holding the button on the normal iPod would. If you go through to the special screen for editing playlists the cover flow feature does not work. Common sense would also say if you were browsing your contacts and turned the phone round you could look through all the photos of your friends to find the picture of who you wanted to call. This does not happen. Cover flow cannot be used to pick between the photos and videos on your device. I am positive this will be added soon. It is such a serious short-sight. You cannot use good quality headphones with the iPhone - you have to use the supplied Apple in-ear headphones.

And there is more....... The camera is like a cheap point and shoot - reviews say the 2MP photos are poor quality. The ones I saw in the shop looked OK on the iPhone screen. There are no options at all. Most now have options like white balance, shoot mode, night settings etc. It also cannot shoot video. The iPhone does not support multi-media messaging. It cannot send MMS multi-media text messages with photos and videos etc. It only receives MMS as links which you have to open in the internet browser.

The devices come with 8Gb internal memory - which is very poor for a video device. I have outgrown my 15Gb iPod with just music! The memory cannot be replaced or upgraded for example with a memory stick as seen on most other phones and digital cameras. The battery cannot be removed - if you are on the move and it goes flat, you are goosed. You can't even get your SIM card out to put in another phone without the special tool.

Next - most gadget lovers that have high monthly phone bills travel around and need internet access anywhere. When you buy your iPhone the 18 month contract you have to sign to activate your phone includes internet data. Say I am on a customer site or in a hotel with my work laptop. It is not possible for your laptop to connect to the internet through your iPhone and the O2 network.

That's all my gripes after 2 hours with the unit in the shop - thanks to the guys at O2 in the Arndale Manchester for not throwing me out!

Last I have to mention the cost. £269 for the handset. Cheapest contract is 18 month @ £35 with 200 inclusive minutes. Total Cost of Ownership over 18 months £899 plus insurance.

My advice: Buy a PSP for games and videos @ £130. Buy an 80Gb (iPhone is 8Gb) Ipod Classic for music (can do videos but screen is a bit small) @ £150. For calls, email, internet, laptop connectivity and photography buy a Sony Ericsson W880i free on Vodafone 18 month contract @ £25 with 225 inclusive minutes. Oh and you don't really need the ipod anymore too - this is an amazing MP3 player. Total Cost over 18 months £730.

But I still came away from the store thinking I like the iPhone and it has potential - I will wait for a couple of evolutions like the addition of 3G and hope for one on a cheaper contract.

Chris

Home Automation

Did you ever see programmes on the television in the 1980s and 1990s like Tomorrows World and some science fiction series? The prediction was that by the early 21st century our homes would be automated to make our lives easier. By easier I mean you wouldn't need to use a light switch to turn the lights on. After you left the room the lights would turn off automatically.

The basic concept of home automation is that your house would 'think' and know what you were doing and how you needed it to respond to any events.

Before I gave the situation any thought I assumed it would be very easy to make it happen. Burglar alarms have successfully detected movement for years. It should be easy to switch a light on instead of setting of an alarm! Right?

Well no. In an outbuilding or garden this solution would probably be enough. Someone walks into the shed at night and the lights comes on. 5 minutes later the light would go off, because the person has got the item they wanted and gone away. If movement is detected in front of your house it is nice to have a super-powerful floodlight turn on for a minute so any prospective intruder is exposed.

Now lets complicate things a bit and set up a system in a bathroom. There are two options for a sensor. One that detects the door opening, or one that detects movement in the room (please no puns). So you enter the bathroom and it is easy for it to decide it needs to put the light on. How long do you wait before switching the light off? Is the person washing their hands for 30 seconds or having 30 minutes in the bath? The movement detector isn't a very good system here. You could have a movement detector in the hall so it knows you moved in the bathroom then moved in the hall. Success you think! Problem is the computer doesn't know who moved if there is more than one person in the house.

In the lounge the problem gets worse. There is the same issue about a lack of movement. Have you gone to the pub, or are you talking or reading? But think about turning the light on. You are settled down to a good movie in the dark, and you reach on the table to pick up your drink. The system may detect the movement and turn the light on just when you didn't want it to!

One could get round this issue with more intelligence. The processing unit needs to have numerous modes. One for watching the tele when it does not turn the light on if you move. One for if you need a bath so the bathroom light doesn't time out. But hang on, now I have a switch to control the system and tame the intelligence. That means the switch behaviour wouldn't be as predictable as when it just turned a light on and off. You have to think even more 'I am about to watch the tele so I need to set the automation to TV mode'.

So you have paid £hundreds for an intelligent system. You have to think a lot more about how to use it AND you still have to control it manually.

What I havn't mentioned is the installation. All the components of the automation system need to be powered and linked together. Running special cables to all lights and sensors would be a big job. There are wireless options that use radio or mains wiring to communicate, but most of these only do one way communication. The processor will send a signal saying bathroom light on and assume it got there. To be reliable it needs to wait for a reply saying the light has been turned on, and if this is not received it must resend its instruction.

My last point is latency. I walk into the kitchen. The movement sensor picks me up when I cross its zones. It tells the computer there is movement. The computer thinks what time it is, has the sun set and what mode am I in. It decides if it needs to turn the light on and sends the signal. The light then comes on with a cool soft fade-up. Problem is by the time this is done you have got your beer out the fridge in the dark and are walking back to the lounge.

Don't get me wrong it is extremely cool to bring someone home after a lucky night in the pub and all the house lights fade on as you enter each room. You can amaze your friends by texting the system from the street to turn a light on. But it does not work. It doesn't save any hassle. It will probably save some electricity but is it worth it for the inconvenience of the lights going off three times during your evening meal?

When everybody has an embedded electronic chip in their body the system will be able to get a bit smarter and would probably work well. In the meantime assuming you don't want all your family to be chipped steer clear! You would have to wait years to save enough electricity to make a return on the investment!

Chris

Playstation 3 revealed

I reviewed the PSP in a post on here in November 2006 and concluded it was wrongly marketed as a games machine. Sky told me unofficially then they wanted to embrace the PSP and the deal with Sony has been confirmed in the last week.

No surprise then that I would be investigating the Playstation 3. I am not one of these who pays through the nose for brand new technology the day it is available. I like to wait for a few updates to add vital features and the first round of price cuts. Hence when I found a cheap deal in Argos for a PS3 with 2 controllers and 2 games I went out and put my birthday money towards one :)

Why given that I am not a fan of games? Most only entertain me for a couple of days as I have mentioned elsewhere when complaining about the pricing. It is a blu-ray disk player. One of the cheapest and best you can get. It has an internal disk on which to store downloaded games, photos, video and music. And it talks to the PSP. On the game front it is the most powerful and the only one with proper full hi-def 1080p support. The Xbox 360 can only do 1080i and has no HDMI socket.

So what have I found out that the Sony marketing department have not shouted from the rooftops? Soooo much.

Firstly, all the sales figures for the next-gen games consoles are putting the Wii up front because people like the new way to play with a motion sensitive controller. No-one seems to know the PS3 wireless six-axis controllers are motion sensitive in 3 planes!!

Second, blu-ray. What a silly name for a format. I told my mum I was going out to buy a blu-ray disk and she looked at me thinking I was about to buy an X-rated blue movie. So the HD-DVD versus blu-ray format war.... Everyone except Universal are releasing on blu-ray (90% of movies). Two studios will be releasing on both formats giving the HD-DVD camp about 50% of movie availability. Universal players are starting to hit the market that can play either format, so chances are eventually the consumer won't need to know what format the movie is on. The Sony Playstation 2 was one of the driving factors in takeup of the DVD so it makes sense the PS3 could help drive blu-ray, as Blockbuster in America have found. It's looking quite good for blu-ray - except as one salesman told me Sony have a bad track record with formats backing Betamax, Minidisk and UMD.

The PSP interactivity allows the PSP to access the PS3 via your wi-fi or any internet hot spot. At present you cannot access the games, a DVD or a blu-ray movie. You can play videos, music and photos that can be accessed by the PS3.

The PS3 can access multimedia stored on other computers on your home network running the DLNA protocol (Eg Windows XP or Vista). This massively enhances the available storage. It also supports USB hard disks and incorporates a memory card reader.

The biggest plus for me is the online Playstation Store. Were you aware that you could connect to a Sony store via your broadband connection? This allows access to lots of free movie trailers, game demos and chargeable games. These chargeable games are downloaded from the net to the PS3 hard drive - no CD is available - and they cost from £3 upwards. Chris is happy - some good and cheap games (Eg Lemmings and Gran Tourismo HD)!!

The last point is online gaming. Did you know that if you wish to play other people over the Internet on a Microsoft Xbox you have to pay £10 a month subscription for ever? With the Playstation these features are available for free.

For the techies it is officially supported by Sony to plug in any USB keyboard and mouse, partition the hard disk then dual-boot a guest operating system. I have installed Ubuntu Linux and can use the console as a normal PC that can run OpenOffice or any other open source or home written programs. It can't run Microsoft Windows properly yet. The processor is a new design called the Cell/BE. It has a dual-core 'normal' processor and 8 extra specialist processors or 'SPUs' that are managed and controlled by the main processor. In some cases the SPUs can each perform 2 operations at a time. This gives it far more number crunching power (18 simultaneous instructions) than any current PC processor.

So the PS3 is the most fully featured, powerful and cheapest next-gen games machine to own in the long run. It is capable of playing latest generation DVDs and has the best quality video and sound outputs. Not bad for £400. You won't get a gaming PC with blu-ray drive for anything like that - but the games console can be a PC or a DVD player as well!

My only concern is that the motion sensitive controllers and the new processor design have not yet been understood and used to their full ability by developers. I hope it isn't because the designers have made things too complicated or that they do not actually work in practice. There are not yet many specific games, but all the PS2 back catalogue will work and can be upscaled to hi-definition. Watch this space...

Chris

The Sony PSP is NOT a game console.

Oh all right, PSP does stand for PlayStation Portable - and it does play games extremely well, but my point is it is wrongly marketed.

Let me talk about the latest trend in MP3 players. Yes I have already sung Apple's praises in another article, but their iPod really has created a market for high capacity music players. As competition increases where is the iPod progressing to keep ahead of the competition? A nice colour screen and photo and video capability are where it has moved.

Enter the PSP.

I am aiming this article at PSP virgins. The main menu on the PSP, assuming you have never seen one in the flesh, contains submenus for Photos, Music, Videos, Game and Network in that order.

The first time I saw a PSP in HMV the quality of the screen and graphics took my breath away. Everytime I pick my PSP up and switch it on I still smile as it comes to life and shows the title screen.

To cut to my point, the PSP is too good to be classed as a games machine. Buy a reasonable size memory card (1Gb Memory Stick Duos are now about £17) and install a few movies on it and this is the perfect machine for watching videos 'on-the-go'. It is designed to be held with two hands, the screen is 16:9 ratio and the size, contrast, brightness and quality are all perfect.

If you havn't held and seen one yet, and you have an MP3 player and would use movies on the go, don't buy anything until you've seen the PSP. In case you need any more evidence to support my argument, most chart movies are available on the native PSP media, the UMD!

Update: Location-Free player is now for sale in the UK. Plug this into the back of your tele then connect your PSP to it anywhere you can access wireless broadband. Viola live TV on a PSP. Sky have also told me personally, but unofficially, they are looking to embrace the PSP and bring Sky to more people in more places.