nyquil.org

Netflix Adds More Watch Instantly Titles; People Complain

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2010-01-14T15:28:58Z

I read yesterday that Netflix made a deal with Warner Brothers to delay DVD releases in echange for having access to more of Warner’s library for their Netflix Watch Instantly feature.

Interestingly, people seem put off by this, which, as a long-time Netflix subscriber and a Netflix Watch Instantly early adopter has me a bit perplexed. Anyone who’s ever used Netflix knows that they often won’t get a specific movie when they expect it, and in fact end up altering their movie watch behavior accordingly. Watch Instantly, however, DOES allow people to, funnily enough, “watch instantly.”

D bought me the first Roku box when it was first announced, which allows us to watch Netflix Watch Instantly titles (and now Amazon VOD titles as well) right on our TV, using a remote to navigate. In HD, even. The box keeps track of where you are in each title if you decide to stop watching and finish later, and even keeps track of which episode in a TV series you’re on. Even without the 2-day time advantage the Watch Instantly service has over having a disc mailed to you, there’s value added in keeping track of this stuff. Anyone who’s ever had to figure out which episodes they haven’t seen after a several month hiatus of watching a particular show can attest to this.

Netflix Watch Instantly is now available on Xbo and PS3, as well as a host of DVD players and Blu-ray players, televisions and other boxes you may already have in your home. Soon, it’ll be available on the Wii that you have collecting dust, and there’s a range of different Roku boxes that will hook you up inexpensively if you don’t already have one of those other boxes in your home. Streaming is the future, and getting more titles available for people to stream is a great advantage for Netflix, helping ensure that they’re not only in the game, but at the forefront of it.

So, it seems to me that Netflix is in a win/win situation; not only are their customers already used to delays of new releases, but adding more titles to Watch Instantly will help keep customers like us happier for longer. We use Netflix via Watch Instantly almost exclusively and haven’t even received a disc in probably close to a year. I look forward to a sudden influx of new things to watch.

If a 30-day delay on Batman Begins Again DVDs means I can stream the rest of the Batman franchise, then I say delay it. If I really need to see a title within 30 days, there’s always a Redbox machine nearby.

Thanks, Netflix, for making deals like this.

Wallpaper: Green and Red Sweater

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-12-23T18:20:31Z

Hey horror movie fans, I made you a wallpaper.

Click for full size (2560×1600)

or, if you prefer simpler, cartoonier wallpaper, I made you one of those, too.

Click for full size (2560×1600)

Converting Amazon Kindle For PC Books Now Possible

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-12-23T17:03:58Z

People have been asking me if there’s a way to convert Kindle books downloaded with Amazon’s Kindle For PC application pretty much since the day it was released. Sadly, despite a lot of tinkering on my part, there was no elegant solution^* until now.

A fantastic Kindle For PC conversion tool has been made. And it works really, really well. And it is significantly easier than the old “Kindle-only” method.

Here’s how it works:

1) Install python 2.6 for Windows, from here: http://www.python.org/download/

2) Download unswindle.pyw and mobidedrm.py via this zip file and unzip it somewhere on your PC

3) Open the unzipped folder and double-click unswindle.pyw

Kindle For PC will now open.

4) Select the book you want to convert.

5) When the book loads, simply exit Kindle For PC

A ‘Save’ dialog will open asking you where you want to save your new decrypted .mobi file. And we’re done.

(As it uses mobidedrm, it still won’t work on Topaz/.tpz files, and the first one I tried happened to be one. Still, most books will work.)

*: I did work out a scheme wherein you record video of your desktop, scroll through the book in Kindle For PC, remove all duplicate frames from the resultant video and then convert to PDF, but it was rather unwieldy.

FTC Compliance Post: disclosing freebies

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-10-05T17:17:14Z

In compliance with new FTC regulations, it’s now time to disclose a few things about some of the content on my blog over the last several years.

All that talk about Wilford Brimley a few years back? Yup, I got a lifetime supply of Quaker Oats as a result.

All that talk about Heinz ketchup and mustard? Lifetime supply.

All that talk about celebrity boobs? Lifetime supply.

All that talk about the Lifetime network? Lifetime supply.

All that Google crap plastered all over my site layout and throughout recent blog posts? Lifetime supply.

I haven’t gotten diddly squat from Vicks/NyQuil.

Posting My Homework on My Blog: Pathos, Logos, and Ethos Explained. Sort of.

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-09-30T22:25:43Z

I’m taking an online writing course that has a pretty hefty discussion-board participation requirement. One of the discussion topics was to explain the difference between the different types of argument appeals one can make: Ethos, Pathos and Logos. Considering that the definitions of those things are right out of our textbook, pretty much everyone was basically posting the same things with slightly different wordings. So, being the smart-ass that I am, I decided to try to mix it up a little.

Here, in its entirety, is my poorly written explanation of why one might want to use a particular appeal over the others:

Logos, or “an appeal using logic” is the most effective form of argument. According to a famous study, less than 10% of all arguments made by not using logic-based data and reasoning are effective in changing the mind of someone with an opposing viewpoint. Less than ten percent. That means that over 90% of all arguments that do use logic-based data and reasoning are effective. From this we can infer that the most effective way to argue one's point is to include relevant statistics and numbers — after all, the numbers don't lie. Definitely choose Logos, because it's the best.

Ethos, or “argument from authority,” is clearly the most effective tactic to use in an argument. I've had thousands of arguments with people, and believe me when I say, it's the way to go. In addition to personally participating in thousands of debates — all of which resulted in me convincing the other party that they were wrong — I've also served as an argument consultant to dozens of other famous arguers. Remember the Bud Light “tastes great VS less filling” debate from some decades back? Well, that was never conclusively decided because of the fact that I was coaching both sides on their arguments. This resulted in both sides of the debate having foolproof, undefeatable arguments, so the debate rages on. I'm just that good. So take it from me when I say that you should certainly choose Ethos for your argumentative needs. It's the best.

This brings me to Pathos, or “an appeal to the heart.” I could tell you that this is the best tactic to use when formulating an argument, but I feel that it might be better to mention an argument from the past that didn't use Pathos. Remember that fateful day in September of 2001, when both towers of the World Trade center were spewing black plumes of smoldering death into the skies? Well, people all over the city were warning that those towers would fall, and that all those rescue workers should get out now, lest the death-toll rise exponentially. Sadly, though, those warnings were filled with facts and figures, delivered by civil engineers and mathematicians who didn't have the foresight to attempt to appeal to the emotions of those making the decisions. Unfortunately, as a direct result of this lack of Pathos-knowledge, these early-warners watched with tears in their eyes as the towers indeed collapsed exactly how their facts and figures said they would. If only they had tried to appeal to the hearts of those in power rather than their minds… If they had, then hundreds of people might not have lost their lives that day. Don't let this happen to you; always argue using Pathos, as it is clearly the best strategy in an argument.

Google Apps on Open Source Android: I Propose a Work-around to Google's Licensing

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-09-26T17:01:01Z

Lest everyone think I’m a total Google Fanboy, I’d like to suggest a really, really simple tactic folks like Cyanogen can take to continue Android innovations while complying 100% with the licensing of Google’s “experience” apps.

The crux of the issue is that, without the proper license, it is illegal for Android ROM developers to distribute these apps as part of their ROMs. It’d also be illegal for someone like me to host them myself so that people can simply install them after installing a custom ROM. “Ok,” you might say. “Then how am I supposed to get these applications if it’s not legal for anyone to give them to me?”

Ah, but there’s the catch. There are organizations that are licensed to distribute them. T-Mobile, for instance, is probably the most widely-known, as all our phones will download updates containing the apps whenever a new Android release comes out. Usually there’s a bit of detective work involved, though, in determining the URL for these updates. But you know who else is licensed to distribute them, and makes them extremely easy to find/download? HTC.

What would need to happen is that the user could themselves download the relevant firmware update file from HTC’s website and save it on their SD card — which is perfectly legal. The user could then update to a Google-free firmware from someone like Cyanogen. If this Google-free firmware update happened to check for the existence of the official Google-app-including firmware image as part of its setup procedure, and extracted the Google bits out of it, everyone could have the best of both worlds.

The ROM developer would not be distributing the apps. The organization that is distributing the apps is licensed to do so. Everyone wins.

Another Google Dust-Up: licenses schmicenses

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-09-25T22:46:28Z

If you haven’t heard, there’s been a bit of a dust-up today between Google and its throngs of Android phone users. If you have heard, chances are you heard it post-spin, where Google is painted as being this horrible evil dictator, violating the ‘spirit of open source.’

That couldn’t be further from the truth. Here’s what’s actually going on.

Google’s Android phone platform is, in fact, an open source operating system. Any phone manufacturer who wants to license Android for use on their handsets can do so, completely free of charge — but there are a few caveats. Anyone deploying an Android device has to choose between a few different Android packages, including the “with Google” option, which allows the manufacturer to use Google’s good name to promote their device. However, the “with Google” package requires that you deploy all the software the way Google demands. No deleting GMail and including Hotmail instead, for instance.

If the manufacturer does want to remove GMail and include Hotmail, they can still totally do that — they just can’t use Google’s name to advertise their product. Oh, and they also can’t include some of Google’s popular apps.

While the operating system is open source, some of Google’s applications are not, and are rather restrictively licensed, giving Google a bit more control over how they are used. The idea is they don’t want someone’s crappy modified Android install soiling their good image.

Very soon after the first Android device’s release, clever hackers figured out a way to bypass the security T-Mobile included on it, allowing them to install custom installs of Android, based on newer, better code than what the devices were originally shipped with. Sure, that newer code would eventually be handed out to all devices, but many of us nerds are rather impatient, and would rather use it now. Crashes and all. So a sort of “community” of hackers was born, eventually culminating in several really popular Android distributions that included all sorts of really awesome functionality that was either not “prime-time”-ready — or was flat out barred from inclusion by the carrier. (In this case, T-Mobile.)

This has been going on for roughly a year now, and several people have risen and fallen as the de facto “ringleaders” in charge of assembling the components into updates that mere users can apply to their phones. Many of these updates happened to include all those applications that Google has specifically licensed to be only distributed by those that comply with their licensing demands, and today finally caught the ire of Google.

Google has sent a Cease & Desist letter to the maintainer of arguably the most popular of these Android distributions, citing his inclusion of applications to which he does not have the proper license for distribution as the activity that needs to be ceased. He’s no longer able to include GMail, Google Maps, etc., in his releases, which arguably makes his builds extremely undesirable for most users.

As you might expect, people understand this licensing issue, and completely realize that it’s not good to be in blatant violation of an application’s distribution license. Just kidding! In actuality, people are going “ape shit,” threatening to buy iPhones, yelling obscenities at Google, and being all-around poor sports about the whole thing.

“Google is violating the spirit of open source!” cry many.

Online petitions have been made. There’s an “app” in the Google Market which is currently the most popular Market download of the day, that essentially demands that Google re-license these apps so that people can continue to use them however they want. Facebook groups demanding the same thing are thriving. Twitter has gone nuts.

There’s a funny thing about the “spirit of open source,” though: many, if not most, open source projects are licensed in such a way that the code cannot be used in commercial applications without following the requirements of the license. It is never OK for someone to violate the license. When, as invariably happens, some company does violate the license, people go nuts. Likewise, nobody ever expects to be able to include someone else’s proprietary functionality in their open source app. Yet, in the “spirit of open source,” Google should just throw out their licensing altogether so that these whiny, entitled, whineyfaces can continue to use them on a distribution of Android that won’t, and cannot license them properly?

That’s a bunch of crap. Google is in a bit of an awkward position, having angered a significant amount of its Android user-base, but they are completely in the right here. Does it suck? Yes. But should Google be expected to give away everything for free just because people have been using it illegally for a year? I’ll leave answering that as an exercise for the reader.

(If you’d like to check your answer against the correct one, here it is: “No.”)

UPDATE: Some are suggesting that Google’s inclusion of proprietary apps in an open source environment is a bad thing. This may well be the case, but you knew about it before you bought an Android phone and/or started developing for the Android platform. You chose to accept that fact, and now you have to live with it. Google didn’t suddenly remove the apps from the source tree and ‘closed source’ them; they were closed source from the start.

UPDATE: Someone made this silly Hitler-meme-video, effectively illustrating the attitudes of these whinyfaces:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VZHT389eR4
This may be the first-ever unintentional self-Godwin.

Fine Television Heads-Up: Stephen Fry and the BBC Update 'Last Chance to See'

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-09-22T19:55:58Z

Twenty years ago, author Douglas Adams and photographer/naturalist Mark Cawardine traveled the globe in search of some of the most endangered species imaginable. This resulted in the superb book Last Chance to See, which I highly recommend, due in equal part to the extremely interesting content and the wonderful way that Douglas Adams looked at everything. I had the pleasure of experiencing it originally as an audibook read by Adams himself, which I believe increased the enjoyability immensely. He’s downright hilarious. If you haven’t read it, I suspect you’d like doing so.

In any case, long-time friend of Douglas Adams, Stephen Fry, has set about attempting to revisit all of the endangered species Douglas did twenty years ago in order to see how they’re doing today. He’s joined by none other than Mark Cawardine himself, lending an extremely knowledgeable air to the whole endeavor as he once again attempts to photograph these rare, splendid creatures. The BBC has filmed each leg of the journey, and has been broadcasting the resultant documentary, likewise entitled Last Chance to See. Thus far, it’s been equal parts educational, hilarious and heartbreaking.

The programme is available via iPlayer, unless you happen to live outside the UK. If, like me, you don’t actually have access to all the fine programmes the BBC airs, it can quite easily be acquired via the usual dark underbellies of the Internet to which we all frequently turn in order to acquire content that licensing issues prevent us from accessing legitimately. Three episodes have aired thus far, and it really behooves you to make the effort to track them down. You’ll thank me later.

Android App: RSS to Google Reader

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-09-18T16:51:59Z

Like most of the stuff I’ve done on android, my most recent app, “Send RSS to Google Reader” came out of being frustrated that Google’s Mobile Browser wasn’t smart enough to detect RSS feeds, and also wasn’t smart enough to allow you to subscribe to them in Google Reader’s Mobile interface, except by doing some cut-and-paste gymnastics.

The first version required that you actually display an RSS feed (or find the link to it yourself), and then use the Android Browser’s “Share this page” functionality to pass the url on to Google Reader by way of my little app. This was incredibly cumbersome.

Now, thanks to some Yahoo Pipes magic behind the scene, you can be viewing any web page, hit the ‘Share this page’ menu item, select “Send RSS to Google Reader” and it will auto-detect any RSS feeds that happen to be part of the page. If there is just one, it sends it over to Google Reader Mobile where you can subscribe with a single click. If there are more than one, you are presented with a list of them, and can click any one of them to send it over to Google Reader Mobile.

Here’s a demo video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aFHRbeggaw

I find this incredibly handy, so I suspect that any other Google Android / Google Reader users will find it so too.

“Send RSS to Google Reader” is available in the Android Market for $0.99.

Two Work-arounds for Dialing Google Voice on iPhone

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-08-04T16:10:43Z

Got an iPhone and hate how difficult it is to place Google Voice calls now that Apple has removed all the dialer apps from the App Store? Check out this “simple” howto:

This is a more thorough explanation of a previous post. In lieu of an GV app, I figured out a quick and easy way to dial your most frequent contacts using no more than 2 clicks. All we’re doing is adding a bookmark to your iPhone home page that links to a contact’s unique URL in your GV address book. Ready?

1. Load up the mobile GV site (https://www.google.com/voice/m). It works fine in Firefox — it doesn’t redirect to the non-mobile version like other Google sites.

2. Find your desired favorite in your contact list. Let’s use “Mom” for our example. Each contact has its own unique URL – something like https://www.google.com/voice/m/contact/793238491687864. Copy this link to your clipboard.

3. Use your favorite photo editing software to find the perfect headshot of mom. Crop it so it’s EXACTLY a square (I use Picasa).

4. Resize mom’s picture so it’s 57 × 57, and save as a PNG to your desktop. (I used http://www.resize2mail.com/advanced.php)

5. Fire up http://webclipicons.info/ Upload your 57 × 57 PNG, give it the shortcut name “mom” and paste the GV unique contact URL from step 2 into the “shortcut URL” prompt. Put in your email address, and uncheck “make public.” Hit “create shortcut.”

6. Check your iPhone email. You should receive a message with link — click on it. Safari should launch. Bookmark that page to your home screen. Your mom’s smiling face should appear along with your fart and other useless apps.

7. When it’s time to call mom, click on her face. Her contact page in your GV account will load in Safari. You can then call or SMS any number that you have stored for her.

While I’ve made some round-about howtos for accomplishing time-saving things, this one made me laugh out loud. That’s a helluva lot of work for initiating a call.

A much BETTER solution can be accomplished in just 3 steps:

1) tell Apple to go screw themselves

2) jailbreak your iPhone

3) install GV Mobile from Cydia (Cydia is like AppStore for non-AppStore apps.)

That’s a little bit of work — but you’ll only need to do it once. I guarantee you’ll like your iPhone a lot more when you do.

Another Day, Another Apple Restriction: google voice apps yanked from app store

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-07-27T23:44:02Z

Remember me saying that I didn’t think we’d be seeing an official Google Voice dialer app for iPhone? Looks like I was right.

Today Apple yanked all the Google Voice dialer apps out of the App Store.

Now there’s no official or unofficial Google Voice dialers. Nice one, Apple.

While it’s still possible that an official Google client may turn up at some point, it’s not looking promising; Apple says that the reason they pulled the apps is that they ‘duplicate functionality already found in iPhone,’ namely ‘dialing.’ When Google submits their official app, it will also be ‘dialing’; consistency says that’ll be rejected as well.

Lucky for us, consistency is not high on Apple’s list of things to worry about. You may remember from the other day when they said they rejected Google’s Latitude app because they thought another app that draws maps would be ‘confusing.’ Yet the market is still chock full of GPS/mapping apps. Apps that, as far as I know, nobody’s ever been confused about.

It’s pretty clear that Apple doesn’t want any more Google present on its iPhone platform than there already is. If you want some more, you’re going to have to pick one of the many other platforms that doesn’t reject innovative apps.

UPDATE: Sean Kovacs, author of GV Mobile, one of the “unofficial” Google Voice apps which Apple pulled from their market, is now available via Cydia if your iPhone is jailbroken. Compelling enough reason to finally jailbreak?

HOWTO: Send your Google Voice Calls to your Google Talk/GMail Voice Chat

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-07-26T21:42:33Z

I’ve just discovered something kind of cool: if you want to place and receive free Google Voice calls via your computer, leaving your phone out of the loop altogether, it’s now possible to skip the installation of Gizmo, relying instead on the functionality already present in GMail.

I was playing with the settings for Gizmo while trying to improve my method of making free, minute-less VOIP calls from my Android phone and noticed that it now has the option to forward some or all calls to your Gizmo number over to Skype or Google Talk. If you opt for Google Talk — and if your operating system supports it¹ — you can answer/place calls just using GMail’s chat system. No otherwise-unused software to install at all.

Here’s how:

1a) Create a Gizmo account here (if you don’t already have one)

1b) Configure Google Voice for use with Gizmo following these instructions (if you haven’t already done so)

2) Log into Gizmo’s settings page here.

3) Scroll down to the ‘Forwarding’ section. It looks like this:

4) Select ‘forward all calls’ and put in your GMail username in the appropriate field and Click ‘Save.’

That’s all the configuration that’s required.

Now when someone calls your Google Voice number, in addition to your phone ringing, your GMail (or Google Talk desktop client) will beep at you telling you a call is incoming.

If you want to place a call, you just need to use Google Voice’s web interface. Click ‘Call,’ put in the desired number, and then select your Gizmo number as the callback number. Your GMail will then ring. When you answer it, you’ll hear the number you just dialed ringing.

Have fun.

1: Unless you’re a freak like me running some crazy non-Windows, non-Mac operating system you’ll be fine. If you are a freak like me, you can either keep using Gizmo, or have Gizmo auto-forward your calls to Skype and do it that way.

'Latitude for iPhone': Apple's intention to stifle non-Apple innovation becomes yet clearer

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-07-24T15:25:43Z

For weeks now, there’ve been a number people on Twitter and blogs expressing disappointment with Google over leaving out iPhone when it comes to many of their key properties. One such article, by social media rockstar Wayne Sutton, does a pretty good job of summing up the feelings of many in the iPhone community, but unfortunately, manages to completely get the wrong end of the stick. He seems to be under the impression that Google just doesn’t feel like putting out apps for iPhone, forgetting that it’s Apple themselves who are both the Keymaster and the Gatekeeper when it comes to what iPhone users get to run on their handsets.

Meanwhile, just yesterday Google “finally got around to” — if you listen to the chatter on the Internet, anyway — releasing their Latitude for iPhone app — which is actually not a native app at all, but instead a web app that runs in Safari — along with a lengthy article on their mobile blog which makes it crystal clear that it’s Apple with whom we should be disappointed, not them.

We worked closely with Apple to bring Latitude to the iPhone in a way Apple thought would be best for iPhone users. After we developed a Latitude application for the iPhone, Apple requested we release Latitude as a web application in order to avoid confusion with Maps on the iPhone, which uses Google to serve maps tiles.

I’ve been saying all along that it was Apple’s 3-month+ wait approval queue, and/or the nature of Maps.app as a “core” app (that can only be updated via a firmware update) that’s the holdup, but it never occurred to me that Apple wouldn’t want Latitude on iPhone at all, which seems plainly clear now.

The brewing speculation suggests that Apple’s $99-a-year MobileMe service, which has some location aspects to it now, is going to be expanding to more directly compete with Latitude, Loopt, and other such social/location apps, and thus doesn’t want the early — not to mention free — competition from Google. This is purely speculation, but it’s based on the past times that Apple has rejected iPhone apps with features that they themselves were planning to implement, so I’m going to place my bets squarely on that being truth. We’ll have to wait and see.

This rejection now makes it pretty clear that the other native Google apps that people like Wayne are eagerly awaiting are simply never going to come. Sorry, Wayne :(

The upside to all of this, though, is that, judging by the comments on Google’s Latitude for iPhone announcement post, iPhone users and developers alike are starting to become more aware of how bad an idea it is to tie themselves to a platform that’s actively stifling the innovations its users want. How much time and money did Google spend writing a native Latitude app for iPhone that will never see the light of day? Now imagine it was your time and money down the crapper. Fun.

If you’re dying for a native Latitude app on your iPhone, you shouldn’t give up completely; Apple does have a bit of a track record of caving on stupid decisions under pressure from large vocal minority groups, so it’s possible that they may one day let Google put a native maps app on iPhone. It’s not very probable. There is only Zuul.

'The Case of the Disappearing Orwell' is Not as the Blogosphere Would Have You Believe

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-07-18T21:19:28Z

Yesterday there was much buzz on Twitter regarding “the case of the disappearing George Orwell,” in which it was discovered that Amazon had deleted users’ purchased copies of 1984 and Animal Farm from their Kindles, refunding them the purchase price rather than continue to let them read it. The idea that’s spread through the Internet like wildfire is that this was an action at the behest of this publisher, who decided on a whim that they didn’t want to publish it through Amazon any longer, and that Amazon caved and did what they asked. (This particular bit of speculation, which was repeated by even the mighty New York Times, was sourced to ‘some guy on an Amazon forum.’ Now THAT’s journalism.)

In any case, due in large part to the irony present in a media giant secretly deleting the works of George Orwell, this story caught the ire of many people; there’s the anti-DRM crowd (in which I’m a member), the anti-Amazon crowd (in which I’m often a member), as well as the pro-Kindle crowd (in which I’m sometimes a member). Several of these crowds began blogging/twittering about it, which caused a feedback loop of other people (who aren’t members in any of those groups, but who blindly retweet whatever they see) and it’s now being reported pretty much every where.

The problem, though, is that most of what’s being spread around the Internet on this subject is misinformation. It’s the type of misinformation that, when intentionally distributed by folks like Microsoft as a scare tactic, is referred to as FUD, or ‘Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.’ In this particular case, the misinformation in question doesn’t appear to have been designed with an intent of malice, but more by of a sense of people not really understanding what’s going on.

Anyway: in a nutshell, the following is an attempt to explain what exactly it is that happened. This is not really designed to be in defense of Amazon, but more because I prefer it when the things that people believe are actually true. If they’re not, I like to try to rectify it.

Firstly, very few people really have an understanding of how Amazon’s Kindle Marketplace works. (Including — until yesterday, anyway — me.) Anyone can sell books through Amazon’s Kindle Marketplace. If you’re buying a book via your Kindle, there’s a very real probability that Amazon has nothing to do with the book at all, other than being the means through which it is delivered to you. The people publishing Kindle books include actual publishing companies as well as individual authors, all of whom simply upload their books at which point they’re for sale. There have recently been a few cases where people managed to become a Kindle seller, and then uploaded bootlegged copies of the Twilight books priced at $0.99 in hopes of getting rich quick. Obviously the douchebags in question lacked the legal authority to be selling Mrs. Meyer’s masterpieces, and Amazon rightfully stepped in and shut them down. I don’t think anyone had a problem with this.

Yesterday’s George Orwell fiasco, on the other hand, drew the attention and outrage of the masses, and many people (myself included) quite vocally expressed their problems with it.

The thing is, though: as it turns out, the situation is EXACTLY the same as with the bootleg Twilight books.

See, in most (if not all) non-US countries, Orwell’s works fall under the public domain, and the publisher in question deals almost exclusively in public domain works. They sell them in other countries, and I suspect that their selling them here just sort of slipped through the cracks. Bottom line: the publisher did not have the legal right to be selling those books in the United States, and when the publisher became aware of this, they removed them from all the different eBook distribution companies through which they publish here in the US, the most famous of which is Amazon. There was no malice, and nobody was trying to cheat anyone; it was just a mistake born from the fluctuating publishing rights in various countries. This was not a result of Amazon “caving” to pressure from a publisher.

The idea that’s spread through the Internet like wildfire is that this was an action at the behest of this publisher, who decided on a whim that they didn’t want to publish it through Amazon any longer, and that Amazon caved and did what they asked. That’s just not what happened, and it’s rather unfair to Amazon for people to continue to spread the misinformation that says it is.

Granted, caving to publisher demand is something Amazon has done in the past (see: Kindle 2’s text-to-speech function that ultimately got disabled due to whining publishers), and attempting to use patents to bully their competitors out of business is one of their go-to tactics, soanother bit of douchebaggary is an easy thing to believe. Like as we see with companies like Microsoft, there have been many deservingly negative things said about them, all which contribute to making it easier to jump to these sorts of ideas.

In conclusion, regardless of how one feels about DRM or the capability for a centralized bookseller to remove files from your device, I think most of us will agree that most of what’s being said on the Internet on this subject is misinformed hogwash. Maybe you can help fix that.

Don't Stop Developing Yet: Thoughts on Google's ChromeOS VS Android

nospam@example.com (jer@nyquil.org) — 2009-07-10T20:18:22Z

I pretty frequently monitor what people are saying about Android on Twitter, and something I’ve seen recently is people lamenting the imminent death of Android now that Google’s apparently shifted their interest over to a newer, shinier platform that might directly take on the behemoths in more oft-used hardware platforms, namely ‘netbooks.’ I’ve got a few thoughts.

1) Android is not under any threat of extinction as a result of this. One of the common things people are saying is variations on the theme of “Android hasn’t had a chance to become successful, and now they’re replacing it.” That’s just silly.

Android is, by practically every metric, a rousing success for the little time that it’s been on the market. Worldwide, there’s like 3 different phones available running it, most available for fewer than 3 months to date. The oldest Android phone is like 6 months old. Already a variety of carriers have committed to 18 different Android devices on the market before the end of 2009.

Has there EVER been a year that 18 different handsets have been released running Blackberry, Windows Mobile, MacOSX, or ANY other ‘smartphone’ operating system? Even if you combine all those operating systems together?

The relative clunkiness of HTC’s first Android phone (the HTC Dream, which T-Mobile sells in the US as the ‘G1’) hasn’t stopped it from being amazingly successful, outselling any other T-Mobile device. (I know, faint praise…) The HTC Magic (or T-Mobile ‘myTouch 3G’) is poised to more directly compete with the likes of iPhone in form-factor, sexiness and speed, and it comes out in like a month. It’s already been successful on other carriers outside the US. Also, HTC’s been making waves with it’s new ‘Hero’ device, featuring a significantly sexier new ‘Sense’ UI [youtube] atop Android, and Sony Ericsson just released a peek at their new ‘Rachel’ UI [youtube], also running atop Android. Both of these UIs are eliciting squees of praise on Twitter, many people declaring that they’ll ditch their iPhone for them in a second. (Check out those linked videos, maybe you’ll see why.)

The Android world is just beginning to heat up, but it’s already pretty hard to say that it’s not a success, and that there aren’t people dying to get their hands on devices.

2) Google’s ChromeOS is designed to run (probably) exclusively web-based applications like GMail, Google Docs, Google Calendar, Google Voice, etc, all of which are significantly “heavy” applications, requiring lots of javascript and ajax to function nicely. ChromeOS is essentially a very targeted, slim, Linux distribution — Linux being widely known for it’s effective use on lower-end/legacy hardware. The Chrome browser is designed from the ground up to run these apps, so it will do quite well on netbooks and laptops.

ChromeOS probably won’t, however, find a happy home on any of today’s mobile phone devices. Even the fanciest, most expensive mobile phones are only able to to provide a mediocre web browsing experience, at best, and none of them are going to be able to effectively use Google’s javascript-and-ajax-heavy web apps. I know, because I’ve owned most of them.¹

The preponderance of dedicated apps to read the content from popular sites like Digg, Reddit, MetaFilter, etc., in both Android and iPhone’s application stores, is testament to this. It’s simply faster to pull down a limited feed containing only the data and render it using a native applicaton than to try to let a web browser display the whole page. Even iPhone specific pages are often slower and more cumbersome to use than a native iPhone application dedicated to the same purpose. That’s just the way things are now.

3) In even the best case scenario, adoption of ChromeOS is going to be extremely slow, at least to start. I mean, how many people do you know that have even installed Google’s Chrome Browser, let alone an entire new operating system? I just don’t see the average Google user — fanboy or not — completely switching to a OS that only runs all the web apps they’re already happily using on Windows. It’s just not going to happen.

4) Where ChromeOS stands to make waves, however, is preloaded on hardware. Low-cost netbooks and laptops that are already installed, already configured, without having to include the cost of a windows license, or worry about viruses or any nonsense like that will benefit greatly from having Google’s name attached.

There’s been much talk of netbooks pre-loaded with Android, but at the current state of things, that’s just not really feasable. Most of the Android applications in existence are designed for use on small, touchscreen devices without keyboards. The web browser is a RELATIVELY capable browser for a MOBILE browser, but you’re not going to want to run Google Docs in it.

My netbook currently runs Linux, I’m using Chrome right now, and I do all my work in Google web apps. It works fantastically well. Except for one little thing:

5) The Linux version of the Chrome browser is a LONG-ways from ready for general use. It’s very fast, does many things very well, but can’t do most of the things you’d expect from a browser. You know, like bookmarks, printing, stuff like that. Looking at the state of things now, there’s simply no way they’re going to parlay the Linux version of Chrome into a full fledged operating system any time soon, let alone tackling the other things people are going to want to do, be it printing, scanning, etc.

Android is a full-fledged operating system RIGHT NOW, and there will likely be 20+ devices — not even limited to phones — on the market by the time ChromeOS even begins to be seen by the public. So don’t go abandoning your Android development any time soon; there will be plenty of need for your apps for a long while to come.