My views on the EyeTV device in another post here converged with this post from Charles Arthur's blog about a serious problem he encountered with his Sky+ box.
My dabblings with the EyeTV device were also only brought about by the complete failure of my Pace Twin Micro PVR to do a reliable job after applying every software update I could.
In just one area (PVR's) these stories paint a very poor picture indeed of what we as consumers have become accustomed to, and actually accept (or do we?). Charles and I are relatively geeky people. What happens to the mass of people who are not? VCR's just worked. And when they didn't it was likely to be human error - something we can accept.
I think this picture is replicated in so many areas of technology today and is getting worse. HDTV's promise will be a massive disappointment to many people when it first comes out, mark my words. The result will be considerably slower takeup. I already refrain from recommending what should be great stuff to (non-geeky) friends because I know it doesn't just work like it should. Charles has had some serious frustrations with Digital Terrestrial TV. I bought a DAB radio for my car 4 years ago that was completely useless. What about the endless efforts by consumers to protect their computer equipment from virii, spyware etc. At the minimum wage, I suspect the collective cost of time consumed is greater than the GDP of a mid-sized nation!
On the other hand, it shows that we should indeed celebrate when things do work as we hoped and expected. If anyone doubts that the success of the iPod is primarily about the fact that it JUST WORKS (iPod + iTunes + iTMS) for (just about) everyone should check out some of the other products in geekdom occasionally.
However, even in iPodland, there are efforts afoot to mess this up. While this is a well-covered topic from last week, this article is a good analysis of how big companies (still) just don't get it. Such efforts will be counter-productive to all concerned (content providers, intermediaries and of course law-abiding consumers).
These collective failings are serious indeed, and perhaps we geeks have to do something about it by not accepting faulty products because we can either live with the deficiencies or work around them? We certainly can't rely on consumer reviews to do anything about them because they're either just not up to the job (eg Which magazine), or not sufficiently independent of the vendor themselves.
Thoughts please?
update: read this on Hollywood and Vista and weep
30 August 2005
Pocket EyeTV for DTT - an apology
First things first, an apology is in order. My brief (first impressions) review of the Pocket EyeTV device turns out to be next-to-useless. Perhaps I should refrain from a first impressions review in the future? (My Nokia 6680 review on the other hand is still pretty fair).
I have now got 3 different problems with the EyeTV device in my configuration. And, while I was initially happy with the responsiveness of the support people, that seems to have dried up when you send a second email in on the incident which demonstrates you've already done the obvious things.
Problem 1 was observed when watching sports. Cricket and football seemed strange. I couldn't quite put my finger on it. But then I stored a few frames using the screenshot feature built into Mac OS X. I noticed that there were often 2 images of player and/or ball in the same frame. Despite trying different eyetv preferences and different screen settings and frequencies, I could not eliminate these problems. It might be solely due to the use of an external plasma display via DVI or VGA but it is extremely annoying, and despite sharpness/colour advantages makes watching such events a problem.
Problem 2 comes usually after a few days of typical use (which for me involve leaving the computer on sleep much of the time). After a while, the live TV window no longer picks up a signal. It sometimes gets hung only on the higher number channels or even specific signals, but then degenerates into a complete inability to receive any channel. Rebooting the computer does NOT fix this. Only unplugging/replugging the device in the USB port fixes it. That indicates a firmware problem with the device - only in this situation is firmware reloaded, as during restart power is still provided by USB. I have seen this exact problem reported elsewhere. This means the device cannot be relied upon to record shows unattended (a prime reason for having this device). I don't know the exact circumstances as to why it goes into this mode - I suspect its something to do with sleep and/or restarting the application rather than leaving it permanently on.
Problem 3 also happens intermittently. When watching a recording, I note a lot of stuttering frames or brief (up to 1/2 sec) pauses. These pauses happen in the same places indicating the problem took place on the recording, rather than during playback. I have been keen to keep other applications off when running the EyeTV software. So, it should easily be able to keep up. Yet, even after a system restart, memory use seems much higher than on my powerbook (both 512MB RAM). Whether this is the EyeTV app or something else I don't know. My suspicion is however that the stuttering recordings are created when the machine decides to do a lot of memory swapping. Some recordings don't exhibit this. My suspicion is that these are recordings made soon after a restart, and that over time, the machine becomes increasingly incapable of making a smooth recording.
All of these problems mean that the device is not achieving what I had hoped for - a replacement of my Pace PVR. I will have to consider a return which will be a hugely disappointing blow in my quest to build a reasonable HT/media centre setup.
I have now got 3 different problems with the EyeTV device in my configuration. And, while I was initially happy with the responsiveness of the support people, that seems to have dried up when you send a second email in on the incident which demonstrates you've already done the obvious things.
Problem 1 was observed when watching sports. Cricket and football seemed strange. I couldn't quite put my finger on it. But then I stored a few frames using the screenshot feature built into Mac OS X. I noticed that there were often 2 images of player and/or ball in the same frame. Despite trying different eyetv preferences and different screen settings and frequencies, I could not eliminate these problems. It might be solely due to the use of an external plasma display via DVI or VGA but it is extremely annoying, and despite sharpness/colour advantages makes watching such events a problem.
Problem 2 comes usually after a few days of typical use (which for me involve leaving the computer on sleep much of the time). After a while, the live TV window no longer picks up a signal. It sometimes gets hung only on the higher number channels or even specific signals, but then degenerates into a complete inability to receive any channel. Rebooting the computer does NOT fix this. Only unplugging/replugging the device in the USB port fixes it. That indicates a firmware problem with the device - only in this situation is firmware reloaded, as during restart power is still provided by USB. I have seen this exact problem reported elsewhere. This means the device cannot be relied upon to record shows unattended (a prime reason for having this device). I don't know the exact circumstances as to why it goes into this mode - I suspect its something to do with sleep and/or restarting the application rather than leaving it permanently on.
Problem 3 also happens intermittently. When watching a recording, I note a lot of stuttering frames or brief (up to 1/2 sec) pauses. These pauses happen in the same places indicating the problem took place on the recording, rather than during playback. I have been keen to keep other applications off when running the EyeTV software. So, it should easily be able to keep up. Yet, even after a system restart, memory use seems much higher than on my powerbook (both 512MB RAM). Whether this is the EyeTV app or something else I don't know. My suspicion is however that the stuttering recordings are created when the machine decides to do a lot of memory swapping. Some recordings don't exhibit this. My suspicion is that these are recordings made soon after a restart, and that over time, the machine becomes increasingly incapable of making a smooth recording.
All of these problems mean that the device is not achieving what I had hoped for - a replacement of my Pace PVR. I will have to consider a return which will be a hugely disappointing blow in my quest to build a reasonable HT/media centre setup.
22 August 2005
BT - don't ya just luv 'em
I had thought BT was getting better at handling customers, but then 2 episodes have convinced me it's all on the surface, and underneath it's rotten.
Early this year, I cancelled one of my lines which wasn't getting used. I was promised that the number itself could be made to ring on my other line for £1/month. The person doing this was very professional, but wrong. I couldn't have this number, I had to have a randomly issued one. This was later communicated to me after the line had been cancelled. All apologetic, we resolved this with BT providing me with a "this number has changed" message for 3 months free. Not great, but it would do. I received a "final bill" for this line which, as settled by DD, was of course paid. Not a great experience, but I accepted the error that was made.
Then 3 months later, I receive a stream of invoices for the same line, but under a different account number. All invoices said "Final bill". 2 were for £30 (one was an amended one), and one was for £6 with some credits showing. I also received a suggestion to perhaps pay by direct debit (I thought I did!). I didn't do anything, but then I got a final reminder. So, I called BT....
20 minutes on hold - "we're very busy" then a disconnect.
18 minutes on hold - then India and a very bad line. No issue with the guy on the line who did have access to the information (but still required me to give him the number I'd already entered) - told me the £30 was for the message but didn't know why I'd received 3 bills or 4 different bills all saying "Final bill". Said he'd have to transfer me... another 10 minutes on hold, then Irene (UK) answers and asks for my phone number...and then... click... disconnect.
Well, I've got better things to do. So when BT comes looking for their £30, I'll refer them to here. By the time they do, I'll have forgotten this waste of an hour, but this way it's here for me to point them to when they eventually get round to calling me.
Footnote: This reminds me of a site I was considering setting up sometime back called something like www.crapservice.com (inspired by f*****company.com), which was to highlight really poor customer service. I decided not to do this because of the libel implications of people posting false claims. But really someone has to bring these companies to account for what they do, don't they?
Early this year, I cancelled one of my lines which wasn't getting used. I was promised that the number itself could be made to ring on my other line for £1/month. The person doing this was very professional, but wrong. I couldn't have this number, I had to have a randomly issued one. This was later communicated to me after the line had been cancelled. All apologetic, we resolved this with BT providing me with a "this number has changed" message for 3 months free. Not great, but it would do. I received a "final bill" for this line which, as settled by DD, was of course paid. Not a great experience, but I accepted the error that was made.
Then 3 months later, I receive a stream of invoices for the same line, but under a different account number. All invoices said "Final bill". 2 were for £30 (one was an amended one), and one was for £6 with some credits showing. I also received a suggestion to perhaps pay by direct debit (I thought I did!). I didn't do anything, but then I got a final reminder. So, I called BT....
20 minutes on hold - "we're very busy" then a disconnect.
18 minutes on hold - then India and a very bad line. No issue with the guy on the line who did have access to the information (but still required me to give him the number I'd already entered) - told me the £30 was for the message but didn't know why I'd received 3 bills or 4 different bills all saying "Final bill". Said he'd have to transfer me... another 10 minutes on hold, then Irene (UK) answers and asks for my phone number...and then... click... disconnect.
Well, I've got better things to do. So when BT comes looking for their £30, I'll refer them to here. By the time they do, I'll have forgotten this waste of an hour, but this way it's here for me to point them to when they eventually get round to calling me.
Footnote: This reminds me of a site I was considering setting up sometime back called something like www.crapservice.com (inspired by f*****company.com), which was to highlight really poor customer service. I decided not to do this because of the libel implications of people posting false claims. But really someone has to bring these companies to account for what they do, don't they?
HDTV and DRM
Excellent article over at Ars Technica covering HD, Windows Vista, DRM etc.
I had been wondering about this topic for some time, and this article confirms my fears. Basically for HDTV, we will get whatever DRM we are given. We will not be able to avoid it except in return for lower quality.
Will this slow down the adoption of HDTV and related technologies such as blu-ray? Will someone come up with something legal or illegal that breaks through this? Will the content creators have learned from iTunes that it is POSSIBLE to have DRM that is (generally) consumer-acceptable? I suspect no - they'll do whatever they've always done - limit stuff as much as they can to start with.
However, I'd be very careful about spending a bucketload on a high end tv (or computer monitor for that matter) until this whole area resolves itself. I've already learned through experience that "HDTV-ready" for instance is meaningless. If you buy a set today, buy it for what it does for you TODAY, and don't justify higher amounts by what it MIGHT do tomorrow (cause you'll just be disappointed!).
I had been wondering about this topic for some time, and this article confirms my fears. Basically for HDTV, we will get whatever DRM we are given. We will not be able to avoid it except in return for lower quality.
Will this slow down the adoption of HDTV and related technologies such as blu-ray? Will someone come up with something legal or illegal that breaks through this? Will the content creators have learned from iTunes that it is POSSIBLE to have DRM that is (generally) consumer-acceptable? I suspect no - they'll do whatever they've always done - limit stuff as much as they can to start with.
However, I'd be very careful about spending a bucketload on a high end tv (or computer monitor for that matter) until this whole area resolves itself. I've already learned through experience that "HDTV-ready" for instance is meaningless. If you buy a set today, buy it for what it does for you TODAY, and don't justify higher amounts by what it MIGHT do tomorrow (cause you'll just be disappointed!).
19 August 2005
My Salling Clicker Review on Powerpage
I've written a short (well short for me) review of Salling Clicker (Mobile phone as a remote control) over at Jason O'Grady's Powerpage
I'll give him the "exclusive" for the time being, but as there are no comments on his site (for this article) you can post comments here. I'll do an updated one here soon.
I'll give him the "exclusive" for the time being, but as there are no comments on his site (for this article) you can post comments here. I'll do an updated one here soon.
16 August 2005
iPod, Patents and the media
In a somewhat quiet week, this article seems to have been the catalyst for some much more headline-grabbing press. Basically the article seems to suggest that Apple has lost a patent application about some part of the iPod interface, and that the winner is... Microsoft! (note: you have to read other articles to find that the patent filer is a Microsoft employee)
From what I can gather, despite good and early rebuttals of the relevance of this from Andrew Orlowski at The Register, some people have just added 2+2 and come up with 42. The Independent (obviously missing Charles Arthur's insightfulness while he is away) came up with this ridiculous extrapolation based (apparently) on nothing more than the original Appleinsider story and a complete lack of knowledge of patent law.
I personally found this article to be the most clear cut in its analysis of both the situation AND the media's failings.
Now, I've also got a conspiracy theory to add in. Perhaps Apple wanted a story like this to do the rounds just to distract everyone from endless speculation and discussion about the next iteration of iPods and other goodies to be announced at Apple Expo in Paris in about a month's time? This seems a pretty innocuous way of getting the rumour sites to focus on something else!
But should this story turn out to have a grain of truth - if Microsoft really gets royalties for managing to patent an interface that was publicly available on a device from it's arch-rival, with its submission MORE THAN 5 months after this device was publicly released, then it might surely be the beginning of the end for current patent law as we know it? That's long overdue when it leads to such obvious stupidities as granting a patent for a stick and the many other grants for patenting the bleeding obvious since the era of business process patents.
From what I can gather, despite good and early rebuttals of the relevance of this from Andrew Orlowski at The Register, some people have just added 2+2 and come up with 42. The Independent (obviously missing Charles Arthur's insightfulness while he is away) came up with this ridiculous extrapolation based (apparently) on nothing more than the original Appleinsider story and a complete lack of knowledge of patent law.
I personally found this article to be the most clear cut in its analysis of both the situation AND the media's failings.
Now, I've also got a conspiracy theory to add in. Perhaps Apple wanted a story like this to do the rounds just to distract everyone from endless speculation and discussion about the next iteration of iPods and other goodies to be announced at Apple Expo in Paris in about a month's time? This seems a pretty innocuous way of getting the rumour sites to focus on something else!
But should this story turn out to have a grain of truth - if Microsoft really gets royalties for managing to patent an interface that was publicly available on a device from it's arch-rival, with its submission MORE THAN 5 months after this device was publicly released, then it might surely be the beginning of the end for current patent law as we know it? That's long overdue when it leads to such obvious stupidities as granting a patent for a stick and the many other grants for patenting the bleeding obvious since the era of business process patents.
10 August 2005
Nokia 6680 and Opera Mobile Browser
Just discovered the Opera browser for Nokia/Symbian Series 60 phones. (note this is the browser, not the Opera mini service which may also be interesting once released in the UK). Even better news is that it's apparently free for the Nokia 6680. In fact, I think it should be preloaded. So presumably another Orange "customisation" to take it off!
I had been a bit frustrated when trying the standard browser, though to be fair, I hadn't spent a lot of time on it.
But with this, it seems to do a good job of taking normal pages (eg bbc news, this blog) and displaying them in a way that is familiar and makes sense. Plus, I was able to figure out bookmarks, navigation, images etc much faster. Performance on a 3G network also seems good.
I had come to the (obviously premature) conclusion that browsing on the phone was a waste of time. But, this makes it MUCH, MUCH more usable.
It's also available for many other devices at just $19.95 I think for a limited time.
I had been a bit frustrated when trying the standard browser, though to be fair, I hadn't spent a lot of time on it.
But with this, it seems to do a good job of taking normal pages (eg bbc news, this blog) and displaying them in a way that is familiar and makes sense. Plus, I was able to figure out bookmarks, navigation, images etc much faster. Performance on a 3G network also seems good.
I had come to the (obviously premature) conclusion that browsing on the phone was a waste of time. But, this makes it MUCH, MUCH more usable.
It's also available for many other devices at just $19.95 I think for a limited time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
