It’s an old rumour, but a persistent one – are Apple ever going to get around to releasing the mythical iWatch?
There have been many reports in the past about Apple’s rumoured foray into wearable computing, but it looks like this may be the first one to bear fruit: according to inside sources, Apple currently has a 100-strong team working on the device, and it’s fast approaching prototype stage. (This is backed up by the Kickstarter Pebble Smartwatch concept: according to the developers, creating the software for the Android version of the Pebble was a ground-up endeavour, but an iOS version of the device was easy, due to Bluetooth software hooks that were already present - suggesting Apple already had plans in this direction.) But while anticipation is running extremely high, people don’t seem to be sure about what the iWatch actually does. What we do know is that it will be capable of connecting via Bluetooth to other Apple devices such as the iPhone and iPad, enabling users to perform simple tasks without having to take out their phone or tablet. Simple tasks include such day-to-day interaction as checking texts, posting to Twitter and even controlling music playback on your phone or tablet, making the iWatch essentially a remote control. But the technology is capable of many more exciting things.
The iWatch could, for example, be used as a fitness augmentation. While worn, the watch could perform tasks such as monitoring heart-rate, tracking their running routes and acting as a pedometer, enabling easier and more intuitive workouts. Even more beneficially, the iWatch might have possible health applications, monitoring the status of the wearer in order to notify them when anything untoward changes in their body. Built-in navigation and radio access would make the iWatch the perfect companion for the frequent traveller. Best of all, the Bluetooth link-up to your iPhone would keep the iWatch sleek and svelte, because all of those added extra features that bulk up a Smartphone (such as Wi-Fi connectivity, GPS and cellular capacity) are already included in the iPhone itself – the iWatch would just be piggybacking off them. This would, essentially, turn your phone into a pocket server, opening the doorway for many other exciting emergent technologies in the future.
While we’ll have to wait and see to get a handle on exactly what the iWatch is capable of, only one thing is certain at this juncture – the iWatch is definitely coming. Insider leaks have been thick and fast, but external factors such as Apple hiring an OLED expert away from LG strongly suggest that Apple have a keen interest, if nothing else, in flexible glass displays, such as the one shown off by Samsung at this year’s CES. Flexible glass would be the perfect material to make a Smartwatch from. And the success of the Pebble can’t have gone unnoticed, either – with 85,000 pre-orders and a price-tag between $115 and $125, this indie, crowd-sourced project is currently putting Apple to shame (while handily raising the profile of the Smartwatch at the same time). It’s a brand new marketplace for Apple to make it big, and we have no doubts that they’re going to seize the opportunity with their characteristic showmanship and enthusiasm!
View/Leave Comments
We’re personally very excited by the OUYA console. Not only is it a superb-looking piece of hardware, echoing the very best designs of Apple with its sleek and sinuous profile, it’s incredibly cheap, with pre-orders for the console and a single controller a mere $99 (or around £65). But the goal behind the console is even more exciting – the notion of bringing Android gaming to the mass-market, by hooking the OUYA console up to your home television and playing touchscreen games with pinpoint accuracy via a controller, is an idea that may seem simple in theory… but stands to gain the company an incredible amount of money, and a place in the console hierarchy normally reserved for giants like Microsoft and Sony. After all, with the potentialities of Smartphone gaming increasing apace - courtesy of superb games like Shadowgun and Dead Trigger, which can realistically compete on equal footing with high-quality console shooters – it would provide an incredible boon to the Android ecosystem to have a foothold in the homes of users, as well as their pockets!
The ecosystem that OUYA intends to launch is one that’s much more open than the one presently offered by the console market: while Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo all have their pre-eminent developers, OUYA is confidently opening itself up not only to third-party developers of all stripes, but also hackers and jail-breakers, who can mod and alter both the hardware and software of OUYA to tailor the user experience. It’s much the same idea as that behind the Android OS itself – keeping the experience as open-source and fluid as possible, permitting customization for the hard-core fringe while retaining ease of usability for the more casual user. And, of course, it doesn’t hurt OUYA’s cause that the console is going to be cheaper than even Nintendo’s Wii, the benchmark for the lower-end of console gaming! All in all, we really can’t see how OUYA can go wrong – with all the ingredients for success in place, and a heady pool of cash to draw from; we confidently expect them to be a household name by this time next year. We’ve took the liberty of placing links to their commercial site below – remember, pre-orders for the device are already open, with shipping expected for April of 2013!
For the uninitiated, Windows RT is a stripped-down version of Windows 8 designed to run on devices using ARM-based processors, such as tablets. The OS is sold only to developers, for the express purpose of preloading onto their devices; it is not intended as a standalone product for consumers. So why have Samsung opted to follow Microsoft’s lead, and release a new tablet to coincide with the release of Windows 8, when they’ve traditionally been associated with Android? Surely it would make more sense for the South Korean chaebol to utilize Google’s upcoming Android 4.1, Jelly Bean – or even wait for their much-anticipated Chrome OS, which is ultimately expected to homogenize the Google user experience and act as a bridge between laptops, tablets and Smartphones.
There are a number of explanations. The most obvious is the notion that Samsung have already established themselves as a force to be reckoned with in the Android market: they’re exceeded only by Apple as the premier provider of Smartphones (at least in terms of profits). It would make sense to try and diversify their market with a tablet utilizing a new OS, rather than stick to the same, tired iterations of Android. More ominously, this could signal a sea-shift in Samsung’s attitudes towards Google. Many have hypothesized that Samsung are attempting to distance themselves from Google, recently - though Google make a show of support for all adopters of their Android OS, Samsung has recently made the decision to utilize the Tizen operating system on their lower-spec Smartphones, despite the surfeit of older versions of Android (such as Froyo and Gingerbread) that are perfectly suited for this task. Samsung clearly want a little more autonomy in terms of software; or perhaps they’re just uncomfortable with putting all of their eggs in Google’s basket.
Whatever the case may be – whether diversifying their market share, or radically shifting dimensions into a new one entirely – Samsung’s tablet is slated for release in October, which will coincide with the release of both Windows 8 and Microsoft’s Surface tablet. They’ll have a lot of work ahead of them; with both a new OS to tinker with, and a hardy market opponent in the form of the Surface, diversifying into the Windows tablet market will be an uphill struggle. But assuming they can overshadow their Microsoft competition, Samsung stand to gain substantial profits from this move!
The original Firefox was a revelation on release: the first internet browser to truly offer an alternative to the then-ubiquitous Internet Explorer, it attained success through a combination of superior features and a conspicuous lack of any serious competition. Mozilla managed to build up some serious goodwill amongst its users (courtesy of its non-profit, open-source nature and extensive add-ons) and briefly emerged as the premier internet browser of the time, before Google released Chrome and usurped their crown. Now Mozilla is planning on penetrating the Smartphone market too; but this time, it seems, the positions are reversed. Now it’s Google that has the early lead with the Android OS, and Mozilla that is planning on stealing first place. But it’s not that simple, because a very different situation has arisen in the Smartphone market.
Mozilla is no longer competing with Microsoft, a company well-noted (and well-criticized) for a decade-long decline in both hardware and software manufacturing; Mozilla are not up against an antiquated foe in a strictly two-horse race. The Smartphone market is dominated by Android on one side and the iOS on the other. The battle lines have already been drawn: Apple have approximately 30% of the Smartphone market, while Google dominate over 50%. Apple have established a closed-circuit system, manufacturing both hardware and software in-house for a cohesive user experience - while Google are lauded for their open-source approach, freely distributing the Android OS to developers to create a broad spectrum of devices. The two major players have been going from strength to strength, gradually inching out competitors such as RIM and Symbian, while effortlessly steam-rolling emergent operating systems such as Tizen… so what can Firefox bring to the market?
Mozilla claim that they’re aiming for the lower end of the Smartphone market, but the large number of older Android operating systems like Gingerbread and Honeycomb – coupled with simpler operating systems like Windows Phone and Bada – means that there’s no real gap in the market. The higher end is dominated by the more powerful iterations of Android and, of course, Apple’s iOS. As if Mozilla’s position were not tenuous enough, they’re currently being paid $300 million a year by Google, to ensure that Google remains the default search engine option in the Firefox browser. So how will the information supergiant react when Mozilla attempts to muscle in on their Smartphone market with a new OS? It could cause serious financial issues for Mozilla if Google decide the upstarts are more trouble than they’re worth, and simply opt to not renew their agreement in 2013.
We have to wonder if Mozilla have a trump card up their sleeve (or simply think they do), because this endeavour seems to have the odds stacked against it. Even if they were to succeed in harvesting a piece of the pie of the low-end Smartphone market, it wouldn’t be an especially notable victory; profit margins in the shallow end of the pool tend to be unspectacular, compared to the kind of annual profits seen by the likes of Apple. And even if Mozilla succeeds in offering a superior experience to its competitors, will anyone notice or care to adopt a new OS in a market where most customers have already developed entrenched brand loyalty? In the opinion of Mobile Madhouse, Mozilla should have struck to the arena of browsers, where it’s guaranteed a profit instead of just a pipe dream!
Unlike Apple’s Worldwide Developers Conference, which is more about spectacle, showmanship, and the unveiling of new products, Google’s I/O (which stands for both input/output and “Innovation in the Open”, the I/O motto) is focused more on the technical side of things: it is designed primarily to appeal to developers. It features in-depth sessions and seminars, with the central aim of expanding Google’s internet and mobile phone market applications. Past I/O events have run the whole gamut of themes: from OpenSocial and the App Engine in 2008 to an onus on Google TV in 2010, Google have a habit of fixing their sights on a target and doggedly pursuing it, using the I/O as a platform to define their intent. But Google has two products that are always just in the background, defining and propping up Google themselves: their mobile phone OS, Android, and their proprietary Chrome OS, an operating system designed to run on only specific hardware from Google and its manufacturing partners (such as Asus). Given the way things have been going this year, we can make some educated guesses as to which way the wind is blowing!
First up is the Google Nexus 7 tablet. This is a definite showpiece: after an internal training document leaked online recently, revealing the design and specifications of the device, Google will really have to pull out the stops to ramp up some excitement for this long-anticipated tablet. Dubbed the Nexus 7 because of its 7” screen, this smaller tablet offering is designed to compete directly against Amazon’s Kindle in the budget tablet market, eschewing the more expensive tablet marketplace (currently dominated by Google’s chief competitor, Apple, and their ubiquitous iPad).
Secondly, the new version of the Android OS, dubbed Android 4.1, or “Jelly Bean”, if we’re following Google’s alphabetical/sweets naming scheme. Judging by the fact it’s Android 4.1 instead of Android 5.0, Jelly Bean will be an incremental update over the current Ice Cream Sandwich OS, providing a more polished experience and greater utility, but no real overhaul. Common consensus is that alterations will include Chrome becoming the default browser, a refurbished GUI, and the debut of Google’s long-rumoured voice interface program, currently codenamed ‘Majel’ after the wife of Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry. Such a program could provide the edge that Google needs against Apple’s much-touted Siri system.
Finally, we can probably expect to see some expansion in Google’s Cloud-based storage systems. Out of all the “big three” developers (Google, Microsoft and Apple), Google are the company to embrace the potentialities of Cloud-based storage and computing the most fervently. It wouldn’t surprise us if an expansion to their Cloud storage services was imminent – though this news would be of little importance to the casual user, as the ability to rent out virtual servers to provide extra power for applications is something only the hardcore user (or developer) would be interested in pursuing. But for budding online businesses, such an expansion could be a real boon – and it would make sense to compete with Elastic Compute Cloud, Amazon’s Cloud storage service, since Google are already going for Amazon’s tablet jugular with the Nexus 7.
But this is all speculation for now – we’ll have to wait until tomorrow for any real details. And just like a child at Christmas, we can’t wait to see what Google pull out of their sleeve!
For example, the company was busy developing three separate designs for the Galaxy S3 at any one point, to throw sleuths off the trail. That doesn’t mean there were two dummy designs and a real one, with only the real one facing upgrades – all three designs faced the same periodic updates, ensuring that even the engineers working on them couldn’t differentiate the truth from the lies! These prototypes were locked in secure cases even when carried to an adjacent developer’s room, guaranteeing that passers-by couldn’t get a glimpse of the device. And such transportation was a necessity, because reproducing images of the S3 prototypes were strictly forbidden. Engineers couldn’t snap a photograph or even take a sketch of the components, and were instead forced to describe the nuances of the design out loud when requesting items from Samsung’s procurement department, to avoid even the grainiest photograph or the roughest sketch from leaking into the public domain.
And of course, that’s not mentioning the usual security measures established in a situation like this – a team of elite engineers and developers who are the only ones permitted to view the device; a separate working area from the rest of the development staff; sophisticated security technology like retinal scanners, fingerprint identifiers, etc to avoid drop-ins… as staff have acknowledged, the security measures were often incredibly tedious, and were described by one engineer as “tiring and frustrating”. They were forced to lie to even close family members in order to ensure that no “loose lips sink ships” scenarios came to the fore. One engineer denied his involvement with the Galaxy S3 to his precocious young son, who had (correctly) guessed that his prior work on the Galaxy S and S2 would lead to a similar position on the S3’s design committee. Others had to repudiate allegations from curious wives and parents, bound to a non-disclosure agreement that was valid until the 3rd of May (the eve of Samsung’s gala event in London, at which the S3 was introduced to the public).
Ultimately, all of their preparation paid off: despite a few grainy photographs managing to leak online, the disparity between the three “prototypes” reduced their veracity, and nobody managed to view the complete design prior to its grand unveiling. The engineers deserve a lot of credit for their efforts; not only on the development of the device, but the incredible lengths they went to in order to keep it under wraps. The lack of publicity meant that the introduction of the S3 was that much more special – and could certainly account for a portion of their record-breaking 9 million pre-orders!
The Tipo’s appeal is simple: it possesses two SIM cards, and has a dedicated hardware key allowing you to switch between them at will (in addition to software settings which permit you to automatically switch between SIM cards during conditions which you can pre-set, such as time of day). It bolsters its usefulness by being a fairly good low-end Smartphone, to boot, with a 3.2 Megapixel camera, just under 3GB of storage (expandable via SD card) and connectivity features such as 3G, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, as well as the prerequisite scratch resistant glass. Essentially, it’s intended to bridge the gap between a cheaper feature phone and the low end of the Smartphone market, and act as a jumping-off point for new consumers. Unusually for such a device, though, it’s running the most recent version of Android (the Ice Cream Sandwich OS) despite having only a single-core processor with a mere 800MHz – the Sony Xperia Play pulls down 1GHz and is still apparently unable to handle ICS. Running the latest version of Android should certainly sweeten the deal for the casual user, on what could otherwise appear to be a fairly lacklustre and gimmicky device.
But accusations of gimmickry aside, Sony are still learning a trick that many of their competitors have yet to master – diversification. In much the same way that the Xperia Acro S and the Xperia Go were intended to appeal to mobile phone user’s on-the-go, the Tipo Dual is intended to appeal to casual users and individuals who’d like to utilize two mobile phone networks simultaneously. Sony’s recent devices may lack the power of HTC’s One range, but they’re succeeding with their goal of appealing to very different types of users, and by doing so they're broadening their market reach accordingly. And, if rumours of the upcoming 1000.jpg "Samsung Galaxy S3 Black S-Line")
1000.jpg "Samsung Galaxy S3 Pink Flip")
In terms of aesthetics, you’re not going to see much difference from its progenitor, the Curve 9300 (also known as the BlackBerry Curve 3G): it has the same small casing (60mm across, 109 tall, and just under 100g in weight), the same modest screen size, and the same QWERTY keyboard, eschewing touchscreen interaction in favour of ease of use. There are some subtle differences, though. The headphone jack is now located at the top of the device, instead of the side, making it easier to listen to music on-the-go; and the formerly flattened keyboard is raised up slightly, to enable both easier typing and swifter complex key movements (such as copying and pasting, or undoing). Really, though, that goes without saying – sans touchscreen, the Curve 9320 needed to makes its input as intuitive and painless as possible.
Despite its compact size, the battery size is 1450 mAh, permitting an impressive 432 hours of stand-by, which is approximately 5 hours of talk-time, and over a day of music playback potential. But, of course, there are some trade-offs for the casual user: the much smaller screen size (comparative to the larger Smartphones) means a pixel density of only 164 ppi, at around a 320 x 240 resolution. Additionally, you can expect to run out of space much faster, with only 512 MB of storage – on other mobiles, the SD card slot is an optional extra, but on the Curve 9320 it’s a practical necessity, if you’re seeking any kind of information storage whatsoever.
With that said, you can’t reasonably expect a feature phone to have anything like the range of options offered by a Smartphone. If you preorder the Curve 9320, you’ll be shelling out less than £200 for a device that still possesses Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and its own radio. Other phones may be stronger, faster, and even better looking – but, to a man, they’re all a lot more expensive. For a stripped-down experience that’ll take you right back to the mobile market of old, it’s hard to see how a casual consumer could go wrong with the BlackBerry Curve 9320.
