Guardian Own-goal

I've written on many occasions about the Guardian and Observer - their inability to call the right shots on Apple, the MMR scandal of the Observer and a few other gaffes, but I had to write this one down for posterity demonstrating that their sports correspondents also seem to be a bit weak.

On Sunday in the last game of the season, Everton beat Fulham by 2-0, (well done Everton by the way and particularly congratulations to David Moyes and Bill Kenwright for an amazing year), and the Guardian report by Jamie Jackson on the match had the following gem (no doubt it's been fixed in the link UPDATE - yes it has, but here's the quote anyway):

Sir Alex Ferguson's Manchester United are Everton's opponents in Saturday's FA Cup final.

This will no doubt come as a shock to Everton, who felt that beating Manchester United in the semi-finals would have been enough to eliminate them from the competition. Chelsea may also feel aggrieved having been ousted after legitimately beating Arsenal in the other semi-final.

This is such a basic mistake, it's hard to imagine anyone even remotely qualified in football making it. But perhaps, Mr Jackson just wanted to get United mentioned a few times in the short report on the match? Perhaps the article gets more hits if this team is mentioned, even though the link to this game was tenuous at best?

Anyway guys, time for a root and branch clean up of your writers?

I'll be winding this blog down even further over the coming months as no one is really interested, and I'm so short of time nowadays (those that know me will understand why, those that don't are free to ask!). But I will try to take the opportunity to revisit some of the posts and see if Hobsblog called the shots better than the British press. (hint: I think we did!)

Tags: Guardian, Everton, Fulham

New Forest Donkeys waiting for bus

Just got back from a brief trip to the New Forest which despite being grey and rainy was still spectacular. I can certainly recommend the New Park Manor Hotel and Spa which - on a Sunday night deal - is great value. But my favourite moment is captured here (trying a new camera incidentally as well) while cycling round the area.

I'll definitely be heading back for a spring visit with hopefully better light.

Funny thing is nobody had told the donkeys that the bus doesn't run on Sundays!

New Apple store in London White City

I queued up to get into the new Westfield Centre in White City this morning, then queued up to get into the new Apple Store (not helped by none of the centre staff knowing where it was - it's on the 3rd floor).

Anyhow, here's a photo of it. It's certainly not London Regent Street-size but bigger than some I've seen.

The Westfield Centre is quite an amazing experience - not exactly my cup of tea - but as the 3rd largest of its kind in UK (and largest inside a city), it is worth a visit.

I wonder now if London has more Apple stores than any other city? With Regent Street, Brent Cross and now Westfield/White City, that's as many/more than Manhattan I believe. Then Kingston, Lakeside and Bluewater would all count as Greater London by virtue of being in or around the M25. Can any large city beat 6 as of Nov 2008?

Tags: Apple Store, Apple, White City, London

GIGO - Garbage In Garbage Out Example

Happy New Year reader(s)!

I was most impressed yesterday to see how IT has revolutionised marketing. In my postbox was a fully-personalised full-colour brochure from Thomson Holidays with every page trying to be personal (eg. The Surname Holiday Brochure 2008 - A range of personally selected holidays for my name).

Page 2 showed photos of the Roman Epic Cruise I went on last year including a nice photo of the Thomson Destiny cruise ship. It reminded me when I had departed Gatwick airport (May 2007 in case I'd forgotten). It suggested I might want to cruise the Eastern Mediterranean this year based on last year's selection. Great fuzzy logic, guys!

However, as the character Kryten would say from the Red Dwarf TV Series, "There's just one small problem with that, sir".

Despite having my address entirely correct, the brochure was addressed to a Mr Johnson. Hobson/Johnson, understandable, perhaps? But more notable is the fact that I certainly did not depart Gatwick in May 2007 to join the Thomson Destiny. Indeed, I have never, ever been on a Thomson holiday in my life (what do you take me for, dear reader?).

And in case you thought perhaps they just got the address slightly wrong, there are only 2 flats at this number, and the other flat does not have a Mr Johnson either. There are no other flats at nearby numbers, and certainly none at this postcode (a postcode it took me 10 years to get the Royal Mail to accept - another story, however).

Nice idea, Thomson, but if you really can't get the data right, a complete waste of money. It made me wonder about the quality of their whole database and the thought crossed my mind that they might have sent an incorrect brochure to everyone on the list. It also made me think of the bank (urban myth perhaps but funny nonetheless) who sent a mailing to every one of their customers addressed "Dear Rich Bastard" after the programmer had left some of his testing code in and used his test database customer - a Mr Richard Bastard - against the production address file.

At least the brochure suggests recycling, which it will quickly succumb to.

O2 and iPhone Fair Usage Policy

A conversation with an O2 store manager, fresh back from iPhone training:

Me: "So, what IS the fair usage policy for the 'unlimited data plan' going to be on the iPhone accounts?"
O2: "40Gigabytes"

Me: "Really, that actually seems quite high to me and not what I had read. I had even heard that it might be as low as 200MB. Are you sure?"
O2: "Oh, no, sorry, the 40GB is for our new home broadband package. But it's very high for the iPhone, definitely."

Me: "Er, so, what actually is it?"
O2: "Um, er..." rummaging around various papers, and the website (which said nothing other than "fair usage policy applies"). "...I'll call a guy who's sure to know".

O2 guy on phone with other O2 guy: "A customer here wants to know the iPhone fair usage policy amounts". pause and more pause. Quite clearly the guy who's sure to know doesn't actually know.

Slightly embarassed O2 guy to me: "He thinks it's either 70MB or 200MB. Either way, that's a huge amount of data on a phone."

Me: "Really, as low as 70MB? That doesn't seem to be too much for what is described as unlimited data".

O2: "For email, it's all text and there's not much else you'd get that is large".
Me: ??? (too gobsmacked to contradict him).

So, I leave non-the-wiser, except that I have confirmed that o2 retail is just as poor as I expected. The only thing the store manager (post training, remember) knew that I didn't is that the sales opening time is not 6pm, but 6.02pm. (geddit?). He was very proud of that. Oh, he also knew (or thought) they would have 60,000 on sale in the 400 odd o2 stores, and that they might get delivery that day (Friday) for the week ahead - (hope their security is tight).

Nevertheless after 10 years with Orange and Nokia, I have my PAC number and will be in line on Friday (mercifully at an Apple store), with no qualms whatsoever about switching. While I was impressed with the last Orange rep I spoke to, I have had a very poor year with them at every level with a completely defective handset (Nokia N80) that was essentially unusable for the things it promised, and poorer than any recent phone I've had in terms of basic interface and even for the job of making calls and sending texts. Despite my 3G plan, I have almost never used the web browser, and I would not countenance emailing with it. The Wi-Fi feature was so badly implemented as to be worse than not having it as it could not be disabled. I have a list of fundamental problems with the phone, some of which should have been addressed by firmware which never came. While the N95 successor may have fixed some of these shortcomings, I have generally heard negative things from most recent real users of these devices after a short time of actually using them. (An interface requiring 16 different button presses before you start typing the body of an sms is completely ludicrous.)

I do wish Orange (a lesser company than they were imho), or Vodafone, had won the rights, but I have known from the minute I saw the announcement that I would get one (did you imagine anything else?). Having briefly played with an unlocked one, that decision was vindicated.

While clearly a cost of around £900 over 18 months is a lot, it is not much different than the plan I had with Orange including the upgrade cost for the N80, which did not include wi-fi hot spot access and had severe caps on data and SMS. I know that I will use the features of this device, which I would not (and could not) on the N80. The equally expensive N95 would not have rectified most of the N80's shortcomings in my mind.

However, somebody please at O2, sort out what "unlimited data plan" and "fair usage policy applies" really means. And, the latest wording on the website "All usage must be for your private, personal and non-commercial purposes" does not inspire confidence in that regards. Nor does "(not) use your SIM Card or iPhone to allow the continuous streaming of any audio / video content, enable P2P or file sharing or use them in such a way that adversely impacts the service to other O2 customers". C'mon, are you serious? In reality, any usage of a shared service like a cell causes degradation to the others on that cell.

While I do not expect to use the iPhone as a replacement broadband + computer device, I don't see that "unlimited" and "70MB" go together, nor restrictions about zero business/commercial use. These clauses are both stupid and unenforceable.

I am, perhaps, trusting too much in the regulator to intervene if such ridiculous limitations are in reality applied. Nevertheless, I will be in-line somewhere off Regent Street starting Friday afternoon. Hope to see you there!

Tags: iPhone, Apple, O2, Fair Usage Policy,
Unlimited data

Blogging hiatus and ChargeBox

Just a quick note as to my recent blogging silence. Hopefully you've all (the two of you that is) not gone away.

I've been working increasingly long hours and that is only going to get worse for a while longer. For the last 36 months (the last 18 months of which in a part-time consultant FD role) I've been involved with an exciting company called ChargeBox®, and as of the 1st November, I will be taking over as MD - even if just for a year or so until the founder, Toby returns from an extended sabbatical helping Oxfam in Nepal.

ChargeBox® is a kiosk for the 21st century - in our case charging mobile phones, smartphones, mp3 players and portable game consoles in a secure locker. We've designed the ChargeBox®, got it manufactured in the UK (yes!) and are developing a global brand with kiosks now in France, Iceland, Spain, Ireland, Turkey, South Africa and, soon, Papua New Guinea. You can also find them in 14 high street phone stores of a certain mobile phone company I couldn't possibly mention. Our ChargeBox is equipped with a GSM module allowing 2-way SMS and GPRS data connections for monitoring purposes and even a payment-by-SMS function. Our web-based IT system allows us to monitor the performance of every ChargeBox® around the world with a SIM card. We were featured on BBC Click earlier this year.


We're still very small, and we have a lot of challenges, but we're hoping for some major progress soon, both domestically and internationally. If you use a ChargeBox®, let me/us know what you think.

Visit our website at http://www.chargebox.com to find out more, to look at maps of where they are and instructions on how to find a chargebox when you're out and about.

I will look to bring back some blogging around this subject and my usual rants in the months ahead. Unfortunately, much of what I'd like to say about growing a small company has to remain confidential (because of our clients), so that makes some topics off-limits. Do keep subscribed, and do let me know your thoughts on ChargeBox® if/when you get a chance/need to use one.

Inevitable iPhone post coming up (in case you thought I'd gone soft)....

Tags: ChargeBox®

Wales looks to the future...

I came across this article today with Plaid Cymru (the Welsh political party) banning wi-fi in its schools. Lots of comments from ignorami, and none from anyone knowledgeable.

Added to this story from last week where a school governor and Labour party researcher called the Welsh language "practically brain dead" on an internet chat room (He later claimed he meant to say "dead" not "brain dead"). He was forced to quit for his honesty and reality. I don't have a problem with Welsh being taught and people electing to learn it. But to pretend that making this compulsory does not reduce learning of some other subjects of more vocational use is just plain delusional.

In this day and age of globalisation and competitiveness, it strikes me the Welsh are heading towards being the Amish of the EU with these sorts of attitudes. I find it particularly sad that in both cases the stories are reported as if there is only one side - the side of the Luddite. No wonder Wales is a permanent drain on the UK and EU taxpayer to subsidise its industry.

Tags: British Press, Welsh, WiFi

Life Returns to Normal? (humour)

I posted about the devastating floods in Herefordshire, Worcestershire and Gloucestershire a couple of weeks ago. Hundreds of thousands of people have been affected with no electricity and no water for almost two weeks. Thousands of businesses have been devastated through damage or the by-product of the economy as it normally is, just coming to a halt. (Of course, our experiences next to South East Asia are themselves relatively trifling).

So, it was good to see, while on a cycle ride through Herefordshire today, that life has obviously returned to normal as witnessed by THE major news in the Hereford Times which I was able to snap for your benefit. Note that The Hereford Times is THE key local newspaper for one of the areas most affected by these floods.

I continued to suffer fits of laughter for the rest of the bike ride, wondering for instance whether the reporter thought that seagulls should be able to distinguish between guide dogs and ordinary dogs (presumably fair game for seagulls), or whether the reporter felt that SOMEBODY had to act - perhaps by issuing ASBOs to the anti-social seagulls? Or maybe, seagulls have a code for divebombing which awards additional points for getting guide dogs or blind people as in the 70's film Death Race 2000? Unfortunately, I cannot answer these questions as I couldn't bring myself to buy a copy.

But in the end (sadly and humourlessly) the sheer inanity of this headline is just another tiny bit of evidence in my slowly growing dossier on the patheticness of the British press (and perhaps its readership). While a troubling incident to, er, the blind person and indeed the guide dog, after such devastation, and indeed, even without it, are there not more public interest stories in Herefordshire deserving of our attention than this? (Yes, there are, fortunately the BBC has many).

Tags: British Press, Hereford, Hereford Times, July Floods

Holding the Observer to account (again)

Back last year, the (Sunday) Observer newspaper - sister to the Guardian - ran a truly amazing full-page article entitled "Why the iPod is losing its cool" by David Smith, supposed technology correspondent.

In this article, Mr Smith, claimed that

Sales are declining at an unprecedented rate. Industry experts talk of a 'backlash' and of the iPod 'wilting away before our eyes'

This article was written as a factual piece not an opinion piece. I made mention of it in this blog post, but decided not to attack it then. After all, perhaps David knew something I didn't and that iPod sales WERE in freefall?

I further chose not to comment on it after Apple's first quarterly announcement post the Smith article when they demonstrated once again iPod sales had risen 35% over the previous year. I again avoided the urge to comment after the December quarter when sales rose an astonishing 50% over the previous year (a year when both the iPod video and iPod nano had been introduced to much acclaim). I chose not to comment on it after Apple's Q2 announcement in April, when sales were up 24%. But now, a full 4 quarters of reporting has passed, and really, I can't let it sit any longer.

In the quarter just gone, iPod sales were up again - 21% in fact over the same quarter last year. In that 12 months, Apple's iPod sales were 35% up on the previous year. In that last year, Apple has sold over 50million iPods which represent 47% of all iPods ever sold. In other words, Apple has in the last 12 months sold just about as many iPods as it did in the previous 5 years COMBINED. Furthermore, in the iPod's history, it has never suffered a sales decline on a year-over-year basis on any measurable financial quarter.

That doesn't sound like a product that is either "losing its cool" or suffering from "declining sales at an unprecedented rate". I haven't seen too many analysts dissing the iPod either (though there's always a few media boys).

What was the reason for Mr Smith's article? Was it to try to create a backlash? Was it influenced by another company about to launch a product? Was he hoping to be able to claim when a possible iPod decline came along that he was first? Or was it just absolute stupidity and ignorance?

Would Mr Smith or the Observer like to apologise and to admit they have been wildly wrong? Would they care to write a similar full page article gushing about the apparently unstoppable iPod phenomenon? Given how the Observer can not even bring itself to apologise about a life and death issue it has got blatantly wrong, I'm not holding my breath.

(I'd like to think there ISN'T a conspiracy here and that it is plain ignorance. I suspect Mr Smith used two sequential quarters of iPods sold to point to a decline. That's a pretty poor way to use statistics that surely anyone at school is taught about. It was also an "unprecedented rate of decline" because there had never been a decline (and there still hasn't unless you believe consumer products exhibit no seasonality).

How about owning up, David, and saying you were absolutely and completely wrong? Or are you going to try getting the same message out again in the hope that at SOME point in the future, you will actually be right?


Tags: Apple, iPod, Observer, Sales, Guardian

Pathetic Observer non-apology

I posted about this a couple of weeks ago.

Today, buried well inside the paper and after the editorials and most commentaries was a "clarification."

Really, this is just not good enough. Speaking with friends last night, they are strongly influenced by such reporting (which was of course copied and run by the other mainstream press groups). We have trusted our newspapers to give fair and balanced reports based on fact. This article and its subsequent coverage in the other press has set back public understanding of this subject by several years and unreasonably made the public question science even more, ironically when it is proper science that is the only way to truth in this, rather than the mumbo-jumbo "science" practised by Wakefield. Will The Observer make an apology over their sycophantic piece on him from the same edition after he is found guilty of professional misconduct by the BMA, as he surely will be? There are serious consequences of this public misunderstanding.

I will leave it to Ben Goldacre (Bad Science columnist at the Guardian) to give his verdict on the Observer "clarification", with suitable links to the whole sorry story. (Ben, I don't think they made a hash of apologising! They didn't apologise at all for the article and the mistakes - only a weak apology for not trying harder to contact one of the people they quoted! Surely, an apology for actually quoting somebody you didn't speak to wouldn't have been too difficult would it as a start?)

I am still considering abandoning my subscription to the Observer over this. Today's article makes that more likely not less. They had a chance to set the record straight, but all they've done is to compound their mistakes and demonstrate that they either don't get it, or don't want to get it.

UPDATE: I have indeed cancelled my subscription for the Observer. It doesn't save me very much - just about £10 per year, as I will now revert to just a Guardian subscription. I have also complained to the Readers' Editor. I feel better!

Tags: Autism, The Observer, MMR, Andrew Wakefield, Ben Goldacre

Surreal Experience

On Friday, we witnessed the most torrential rain I've ever seen in the UK - a truly massive amount of water descending in London in just an hour or so. We spent several hours sorting out the problems caused by an overflowing gully to the flat downstairs.

Having checked traffic reports which seemed to be generally ok (c'mon Highways Agency/AA/RAC/BBC etc can't you do better than this?), we headed off for the weekend at 7pm on a journey that usually takes us 2 hours. We arrived 6 hours later, but at least we arrived. We passed possibly 300-400 vehicles which had been left stranded at the side of the roads all the way from Swindon to Ross-on-Wye. We went under the M5 motorway, which at almost midnight was at a complete standstill. While we had numerous in-water experiences of our own, we probably didn't have anything worse than about 300mm. I think had we been earlier, we'd have been stranded like many of the others.

Here's a link to some photos on the BBC site by local people, the first one being the M50 motorway very close to us. Look also at number 37 to see it getting even worse! Here are some from Gloucestershire - including underwater Cotswold villages which we passed close to.

As my partner Sue pointed out, weather is a great equaliser. Among the stranded cars was a rather distraught Bentley!

What a summer this is turning out to be!

Tags: Flood, London, Hereford, Photos

Hobsbog....An Admission

I have been overcome with admiration for the string of Cabinet ministers who have come out today and admitted they smoked cannabis. What guts to come out right after the first admission from Jacqui Smith (who at least came out first). I'm 110% sure that opportunism was not a factor in these new admissions - just honesty and integrity.

I would therefore like to take this opportunity to admit that I, too, have smoked cannabis on one occasion in San Francisco, and on one occasion in Amsterdam. I did this purely to ensure the smooth conclusion to business deals by showing my empathy with the real criminals who were obviously addicted and probably dealers in their spare time. I absolutely did not inhale, and I was not affected by it in any pleasurable way. I would never do it again, and I hope those that do now are put away for a longtime as they should know better, especially now as the Independent has told them it's a BAD thing.

< /sarcasm> but unfortunately not < /end mass hypocrisy from mainstream media and political establishment>

The British Press...(continued)

I've run a number of posts here about how badly our newspapers report on certain subjects. Yesterday, however, we reached a new low, with two sickening articles in the Observer about MMR and autism, including a cringing interview with the person who has done most to spread FUD, and consequently led to increased deaths and serious disabilities via higher (perhaps quasi-epidemic) measles and rubella infection rates. The main article was the front page headline.

I almost cancelled my Guardian/Observer subscription on the spot, but then how would I get my regular dose of ire?

I will not go into this subject in too much detail here, as there are far more qualified people, and better writers to boot covering this development.

I will instead first link to Ben Goldacre's Bad Science post which covers the developments pretty well, links to other stories, and has some interesting developments (including one of the two scientists the Observer quoted as "privately supporting an MMR link" apparently accused the Observer of fabricating comments, and therefore presumably leaving the Observer with just one of the seven academics thinking this way. Evidence shown on Ben's post seems to show this "academic" as somewhat unhinged and unprofessional at the very least.

Other links to follow include:
A reasoned article at Breath Spa for Kids
Or have a look at the journalist's qualifications for writing about this subject!

Also look out for articles at The Holford Watch
- an anti-dote site to one of the more ridiculous "media nutritionists" who pass themselves off (to the gullible press) as scientists.

MMR WAS a valid idea to be researched as involved in (some cases of) autism. But it has been researched ad nauseam and shown not to be involved AT ALL. The damage done because of the insistence on this link is severe around the world and especially in this country. What is so sad to see is how the supposedly-intelligent broadsheets run with this stuff.

Perhaps, those who believe in good science reporting should complain to the Press Complaints Commission?

Incidentally, if anyone dares to say the Observer is balanced because Goldacre writes a column for the (sister) Guardian, then please also show me when he's been on the front page, or where an editorial has taken up his piece to correct an earlier sare and FUD article?

Tags: Autism, The Observer, MMR, Wakefield, Bad Science

British press reaction to EMI/Apple

I've stuck by my pledge to steer clear of British newspapers' technology sections. And a slight decrease in blood pressure has ensued.

However, I couldn't help come across the Guardian Editorial's curmudgeonly and ignorant commentary on the EMI/Apple announcement I covered yesterday.

Who gains from this deal? Well, the public does — a bit (my emphasis).

The public is the LARGEST beneficiary of this deal, although perhaps that is only strictly true if it is repeated by most/all of the other labels. The significance of this deal to the public is HUGE. The whole DRM edifice has had a key structural pillar removed and it will surely crumble. The key beneficiary from this has to be the law-abiding, music-lover. The secondary beneficiaries are those who innovate to make the most of this development. Apple and EMI may be two of those companies, and the bricks and mortar retailers may be the losers. But those outcomes are far from certain.

Until now, what are called digital-rights management (DRM) restrictions meant that you could buy an EMI track from Apple's music store — but you didn't really own it.

You owned it then as much as you owned it now. You could in theory (and legally) do the same with it then as you can now. Just now, it will be easier and potentially with a higher quality.

Some will not be happy at paying a premium for the privilege, especially as many smaller labels and online shops already sell music free of copy protection — and cheaper, too.

You have a choice. And if you buy an album, you pay no premium. If you buy a single you have both flexibility AND better quality. And you can move from lower quality to higher quality/noDRM by paying the difference (no additional penalty), just as you can move from buying one or two tracks to buying the whole album at no penalty (due to recent "Complete my album" feature). I am over the moon that both the restrictions are removed AND the quality is improved (the latter I did not expect).

Mr Jobs has only recently joined the chorus calling for DRM-free tracks, but this deal makes him look like a consumer champion.

Of course, Jobs' actions for Apple should be in Apple's interests as a business entity. But please name me someone/anyone in the entrenched music industry who has made this issue clearer? Do you ignore his claims that this is the way Apple wanted to do it from the start? The apparent DRM lock-in to iPod came only because of the runaway success of the iTunes/iPod phenomenon. Plenty of other companies could have made this happen then. And of course, it is not a lock-in. Jobs pointed out the futility of operating 2 business models - physical and download - in which the physical is unencumbered and the download has been loaded with restrictions.

Jobs IS a consumer champion in that he has done more for the music-loving public than any other CEO involved in the business. He has been rewarded for that by the public who have overwhelmingly chosen his products. He has been pilloried by a select group of press (concentrated somewhat in UK and Europe) who somehow resent this success. Please score Jobs next to Gates, Bronfman (Warner), Vivendi/Universal, Sony (home of Rootkit), etc. Please suggest an industry figure who should be added to that list ahead of Jobs?

Apple probably will lose some sales from iTunes, but its iPods are the real money-spinner.

I guarantee that Apple will increase its sales from iTunes as a result of this arrangement. This announcement is about levelling the playing field between physical and download. Apple's marketshare of downloads MAY decrease, but it's share of the overall music market will undoubtedly rise as barriers to buying download vs digital (or pirated of course) have been significantly changed. This one statement proves how little the Guardian understands the business it's writing about.

Furthermore, the move does NOTHING directly to help iPod sales. In fact, if anything it gives people a freedom to move away from iPod if they have (in rare cases) a substantial investment in music downloaded via iTunes. It will help iPod sales ONLY if the public perceive that the extra freedoms justify more iPod purchases either absolutely or at the expense of other players. Jobs is brave enough to see that anything that benefits the consumer CAN benefit his company if they can react well. Compare that to our Redmond-friends who take the view that the more they benefit the established oligopolies, the more they will benefit.

And, as Jupiter Research has pointed out, the format the unprotected tracks will be sold in is not supported by many digital-music players. Mr Jobs was very keen yesterday to point out that DRM-free music can be played on non-Apple machines. But that requires other manufacturers to license the technology first. So the iPod, which has already sold 90m worldwide, keeps its chokehold on the music industry for now.

Again this is just bollocks. Here is what the premier Jupiter analyst Michael Garten berg had to say. My interpretation of Michael's views are far closer to what I've written here, than the Guardian have interpreted (and I see no mention of what they quote in Michael's post).Perhaps the Guardian were the "media outlet" referred to in Michael's later post - When reporters set agendas which is truly hilarious (if not frightening)? Michael of course was a (brief) Microsoft employee, and is considered the leading Jupiter analyst in this area.

The Guardian has also written in such a way that it implies Apple is the one that grants that license or (at the very least) that there are restrictive issues involved in getting that license. It confuses the issues of the format of the tracks, the restrictions involved and the technology of the players. From a player perspective, there are many players that support the MPEG-4 Advanced Audio Codec standard (note lack of word Apple there), that Apple has CHOSEN to support and LICENSED to offer. I do not know what the licensing terms are for AAC and how they compare for instance to either MP3 or WMA. But AFAIK, anyone can license AAC should they wish to. My last 2 Nokia phones do that, so does much Sony and Sony Ericsson equipment. Even the Microsoft Zune will play AAC! Companies that have chosen not to, have made that decision deliberately and they are the fools.

If Apple had chosen to use MP3, it would have been dropping the quality of material or increasing file size even further by using 16 year old technology. AAC is the logical and approved heir to MP3. It would be like Apple bringing back the 5 1/4" floppy drive to support the laggards.

If Apple had chosen to use WMA, it would have been choosing a proprietary (though licensable) format locking people into the business practices of that well-known and convicted monopolist that is Microsoft. WMA has also been shown in numerous tests to be inferior to MPEG-4 AAC (indeed only WMA Pro which is not used by most players comes close to AAC in quality). You can find links to this on Wikipedia as easily as I did and make your own mind up. Apple has successfully taken on the proprietary WMA standard and defeated it to our long term benefit. Not by imposing it's own proprietary standard but by choosing an open standard. Try to imagine the parallel universe that is WMA-dominated (Microsoft rights, viruses, incompatibilities, etc) and you will surely see this significance. Apple was ALONE in this fight. The competition authorities should be turning on the companies that insist on licensing a proprietary standard. Any music sold in WMA format for instance should be pounced on as anti-consumer whether DRM'd or not.

In 5 years time, people will all be using the open MPEG-4 AAC with just legacy use of MP3 and maybe WMA. We will all have benefitted from that. It will be because of Apple's choices that this is the result. No other company has done more to push that better, open standard than they have (watch the same happening for MPEG-4/AVC/H.264 video).

With this move (and assuming others follow), Apple has broken the tight linkage between the selling of music online and the iPod. They had earned that linkage through doing a great job, and they have not abused that position (yet). The opportunity is out there now for other companies to innovate and offer great download services. Or, for others to innovate and offer great players that allow people to use everything they'd already bought on iTunes or used on their iPod. Or for others to provide an even better service than iTunes/iPod. There are now far less restrictions at least as far as iPod/iTunes goes. I will be able to buy my music from anyone who supports MP3 or MPEG-4 AAC and use it on my iPod or other device that supports either MPEG-4 or MP3 (you should be easily able to downconvert from AAC to MP3 with imperceptible quality loss from a 256kbps AAC file, compared with from CD). I will also be able to enjoy my purchased music from anyone who provides a player which supports these (open) standards. Sorry about the WMA-retards. You got what you deserved.

Apple has offered others the opportunity to get into the iPod world. Sure you could do that through eMusic and a few others. But they were limited by the major labels insisting on DRM. Without DRM, anyone is free to offer iTunes OR iPod users material if the licensee agrees. And this is what it has always been about - the licensee. Apple has opened the download market to anyone and there are no restrictions for those people entering the market - at least any that are governed by Apple (contrast this with Microsoft/WMA). It has done that because it has its sights set on the music market as a whole. As I said in the previous post, this is about having 30% of the music market rather than 70% of the music download market which itself is only 10% of the overall music market.

It is up to the consumer to vote with their wallets. They can support EMI's choice - either with Apple or without, and send a message to the other major labels. If enough consumers withhold support from the other labels by refusing to purchase that material (remember to boycott the CD's too if you really want change!), then perhaps the others will get that message. I, for one, will support EMI's move by choosing some of their material to buy online (it's a pity that it's so difficult with this label's rather poor roster of artists!).

I applaud Jobs and Nicoli for their actions. Sure they are self-serving. But they are self-serving because they embrace change and innovation, not because they preserve the status quo. One (Apple) is done from strength, the other (EMI) from weakness, perhaps. But they are still bold moves. WE are the main beneficiaries. Let's seize that. And, to the Guardian, perhaps if you can't comment gracefully or accurately on news you seem to have no grasp of you should perhaps just keep quiet?

Tags: Apple, EMI, DRM, WMA, AAC, iPod, Guardian

Government, its (Cycling) Citizens, and the Internet

In my experience of our government's use of the internet to improve services, the scorecard is pretty low so far. Just yesterday I noticed that my favourite rail information site operated (strangely) by Wandsworth council could no longer be found. This site used to be incredibly fast, and give you information on any route in the UK including stops, and including all the stops the train took on each journey, the trains ultimate route etc. It was timetable nirvana. Only missing were prices. Why Network Rail could not take on this brilliant piece of work I don't know.

However, I have a good example finally of how a service can be delivered to everyone's benefit, and on my sample size = 1, appears to do the job.

A curse for cyclists is the state of some roads where subsidence, damage etc can result in a serious jolt and in fact be quite dangerous. We have been powerless to do much about this unless you have mountains of time and inclination to pursue through letters or waiting in phone queues.

Just recently, the CTC introduced FillThatHole.org which allows anyone to create a problem report for any road in the UK, including identifying it on a map and even including images. The report is then filed with the appropriate authority.

I thought I'd give it a try for one I noticed in Kensington and Chelsea, not expecting much. I got a confirmation back that it had been received, and another one that it had been forwarded on (yeh, so what!). But I was genuinely surprised that within 10 days or so, the repair had been made quite thoroughly. Even better, I got an email back within another day telling me that the hazard had been reported as fixed. Very cool.

Now, I have given credit to government for this, when in fact most of the credit goes to the CTC. And, I repeat, my sample size is 1. But, this is a great example of the sorts of things our governments (local and national) COULD be doing across their whole services portfolio to engage with its citizens. I'm sure it's not a huge system, but what I particularly liked was the way it kept you informed throughout the process, and closed it all off at the end.

Three cheers to the CTC, and one and a half cheers to the people in government somewhere who have at least allowed this to work!

UPDATE (9th March): The one thing missing from the system was the ability for the original reporter to re-open the case if the fix had not been made or not made satisfactorily. Within a day of me suggesting this feature, the CTC had added a button to do exactly this. So, that means four cheers for the CTC!

Tags: UK, Fillthathole, CTC, Cycling, Road, Pothole

UK Government Science Investment

I was disappointed to read about the UK Government taking money from the science and medical research budgets to "soften the blow" of Rover's collapse.

That Rover was a dead duck was known for many, many years (decades even), and while I have sympathy with the workers there, I don't think they deserved anything different than any other worker laid off from a failed company.

But looking at it another way, the stupidity and short-sightedness of the government's moves seems clear: Does anyone for one minute think that Rover's demise came about by investing too MUCH in science and engineering research?

Once again, we have taken from the future to pay for past mistakes. Particularly nasty is the fact that medical research is reduced when clearly this has nothing to do with engineering.

As an aside, the article implies that the government has put a significant extra investment into research so it is merely taking back a little of that largesse. But I know that much of the money (like for the NHS) has gone on administration. For instance whereas a grant of £170k a few years ago would have been spent on the research, the grant is now topped up with "overhead" of, say £130k to pay for admin at the university. No more science is done than at the £170k level, but the cost is now £300k!

Tags: UK, Science, Medical, Research, Budget, Rover

In praise of cycling MP's

I knew the moment I saw the headlines about politicians' expense claims that I was going to get exasperated.

"From £16,000 on taxis to £230 on a bike: politicans' travel expenses revealed" was the headline in the right-on Guardian. Perhaps I am just a little bit touchy, but that certainly seemed to be a dig at cycling MP's (and by extension, all cyclists). How else to interpret highlighting one of the smallest claims in an article generally criticising excess amongst our elected officials? Other newspapers also devoted column inches to the cycling claims of Jeremy Corbyn MP. Yet, it represents just 5 one thousandths of one percent of the total claimed by all MP's (0.0051%).

And, this weekend, Jasper Gerard, writing in the Observer under the headline "For our tireless MPs, no expenses are spared" sent me suitably over the edge with:

"But my favourite claim is Jeremy Corbyn's, who pocketed £230 - for cycling. Perhaps puncture repair kits are pricey."

Ha, bloody, ha!

Let's get this straight. The only logical and rational comment on Jeremy Corbyn's claims are to point out how much better the public purse would have been if other MP's made use of such transport. Diane Abbott's £2,235 in taxis is a start. And, boy, does she need the exercise. How about Mr Khabra's £3,007 (Ealing) and Mr Khan's £2,153 (Tooting) car expenses. And, perhaps Ms Janet Anderson and Mr Laurence Robertson (£16,612, and £12,015 mileage respectively), could at least get their fat arses out of their leather seats for SOME of their travel?

And, let's just look at Jasper's comment in more detail. The cost of cycling is actually the cost of a puncture repair kit is it? Just like the cost of driving is the cost of his in-car air freshener? Jeremy Corbyn cycled 1,100 miles in a year (on parliamentary business). I suspect his bike would need a good service after that amount of mileage with some new tyres, brake pads etc. That's probably about £100 or so a year based on my experience. Then there's the cost of the bike. And, lets not forget the cost of a decent lock, luggage carriers, waterproofs etc.

Cycling is considerably less costly than most other methods of transport, but it is NOT free. It's considerably beneficial for other road users who don't have their roads clogged up even more (please, this is not China - most cyclists cycle out of choice not economics). It's beneficial to our economy by not clogging up those roads. It's considerably more beneficial to the environment, and it's also beneficial to our health system (and the "health systems" of those cyclists too).

So, to Jeremy Corbyn, and those other cycling MP's: I praise you for your efforts and fortitude. Your £230 is the best value of the £4.5m spent last year.

And, to our unelected journalists who wouldn't know a crank from a cog: STFU!

Tags: UK, MP, Expenses, Jermey Corbyn

Even newer Getamac ads for UK (Humour)

I came across this video of comedians Lee and Herring back on the stage together. You'll have to skip to about the 1 minute 35 before it gets past the compere, but the sketch is hilarious, though not without some pretty strong language. If you know the two of them, read no further. For a bit of background read on...

I've posted here about Richard Herring before. Together with Stewart Lee (also infamous for his Jerry Springer - The Opera), they were a good comedy double act of the 90's with TV shows like "Richard, not Judy". Richard has posted a daily blog since well before blogs were fashionable, and shows up on the comedy circuit and on radio quite often. There is a bit of a long running joke of their careers nosediving a bit after their show was (unfairly perhaps) cancelled. Mitchell and Webb as featured in the new UK Apple ads are perhaps this decades closest duo to Lee and Herring, so there is a huge amount of irony in this sketch.

As an aside, its another example of how Apple is becoming so mainstream and talked about these days.

Thanks also to NotBBC for the link/video.

Tags: Apple, GetaMac, Stewart Lee, Richard Herring, Mitchell and Webb

Microsoft UK rip-off

“The UK’s future competitiveness depends on IT,” said Gordon Frazer, Microsoft’s UK managing director at last week's launch of Vista claiming that Vista and Office 2007 would have a real impact (though I find this hard to see unless other countries don't upgrade as fast - assuming indeed that upgrading DOES help productivity).

The UK has been a huge market for Microsoft, and we have a particularly soft public sector that accepts anything Microsoft throws at it for extortionate amounts of money.

So how come if the UK is so important to Microsoft, and that the company is so concerned with our productivity does it ensure that its software should cost twice what it does in the States?

I was wondering what it would cost for instance to put XP Pro or Vista on a Mac using Parallels. So I checked out Amazon:

Amazon.co.uk - Windows XP Pro SP2 Cost £232.99 (reduced from £289.99)
Amazon.com - Windows XP Pro SP2 Cost $239.99 (reduced from $299.99)

Even allowing for VAT on the UK version that is an exchange rate of £1=$1.21 at a time when the dollar is almost at the 1:2 ratio. Microsoft already makes gross margins of over 85% on Windows. It means in the UK, it makes double the profit.

This is not an isolated case. For Microsoft Office 2003 Professional, the price is £399 UK vs $414 US. It is possible to get both applications cheaper in the US (for instance NewEgg has Office 2003 at $359). Many US stores are also carrying Vista upgrade offers (though I've read some horror stories there too).

To me this is outrageous and unjustified, yet I see no fuss about it. Where is our good media when they're needed? This is a scandal that our competition and consumer bodies should be looking at now!

Tags: Microsoft, Vista, Office, UK, Price

Imaginative Terrorism

While terrorism is not of course to be laughed at, I had to confess to a snicker or two as I read this story at the BBC today.

The defendant also plotted to blow up three limousines "packed" with gas cylinders and explosives in underground car parks in the UK, the court heard.

The story goes on to say how the plot was known as "the Gas Limos Project". Thus distinguishing it from the parallel "dirty bomb project". I haven't been to terrorism school myself, but I might take a guess that one of the first lessons learned should be about how to conceal your activities, and that perhaps a little more invention is required for naming projects than this?