Apple's iPod antitrust class action suit: All you need to know (FAQ)
Apple is headed back to a courtroom, and this time, it's not about patents.The Cupertino, Calif., electronics giant will defend itself against charges of inflating iPod prices starting Tuesday in a class action, antitrust lawsuit. Specifically, the plaintiffs in the decade-old suit allege that Apple made software updates that prevented iPod music players from playing songs that weren't purchased from the company's iTunes store. By banning music from competing digital audio vendors, such as RealNetworks, Apple hurt the market for other music players and caused iPod prices to be higher than they should have been, the plaintiffs claim. Apple counters that it closed off iTunes and iPods to digital files from competitors to make sure the items available for download remained secure and of high quality. It says software updates improved its products, were good for consumers and had no impact on iPod prices.The two sides will duke it out in an Oakland, Calif., courtroom for the next couple of weeks. Witnesses include some of Apple's top executives, with former CEO Steve Jobs likely to be the star (via deposition, not a Ouija board).iPod sales today are nowhere near the level of the iPhone, which accounts for more than half of Apple's revenue. But there was a time that the music player was vital to Apple's future. Introduced in October 2001, the iPod helped fuel Apple's comeback and establish its reputation as a consumer electronics innovator. But the popular player has lost some of its appeal now that users can access music on their smartphones. iPod shipments have fallen since reaching a peak of 54.83 million units in fiscal 2008. The iPod, though, remains in Apple's lineup as a low-priced, simpler device for games, media and music. (The iPod Nano is priced starting at $149, while the iPod Touch starts at $199.) And though unit sales have declined in recent years as customers have opted for iPhones, iPods continue to bring in billions of dollars in revenue. For the fiscal 2014 year, ended in September, Apple sold 14.4 million iPods and generated $2.3 billion in revenue. Both figures are close to half the level of fiscal 2013. By comparison, the iPhone -- Apple's top revenue generator -- brought in $102 billion in sales in 2014 on about 169 million units.Here's information on what the antitrust trial is all about:What are the trial's logistics?The jury trial kicks off December 2 and lasts for nine days. It's being held in Oakland, Calif., and presided over by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers.See alsoApple fights RealNetworks' 'hacker tactics'Apple's Jobs calls for DRM-free musicDRM-free iTunes Store to haunt Apple?Jobs ordered to testify in FairPlay antitrust caseWho are the plaintiffs?The case involves two plaintiffs, Melanie (Tucker) Wilson and Marianna Rosen. Both are consumers who purchased audio downloads and iPods directly from Apple. They argue they paid more for iPods than they would have paid if Apple hadn't violated antitrust regulations. In a 2010 filing, the plaintiffs said they "suffered injury" to their property "in the form of overcharges." A third plaintiff, Somtai Troy Charoensak, dropped out of the case.While two plaintiffs are directly involved in the case, the suit was filed on behalf of about 8 million consumers and hundreds of retailers, including Walmart, Best Buy and the now defunct Circuit City. None of the retailers have filed suits of their own.When did the litigation start, and what was the initial complaint?The plaintiffs first filed suit January 3, 2005. Initially, it started off as a case that accused Apple of illegally tying the iPod to iTunes so they only worked with each other, and not with competing music players or music stores. A court deemed that legal, however, so the plaintiffs shifted their focus to Apple security updates that barred competing music stores from syncing with iTunes.What's the trial about now?The plaintiffs now argue that Apple "has used its dominant market position in the markets for audio downloads and portable digital media players to stifle competition and strengthen its monopoly in these markets," as they said in their amended complaint from 2010. Apple "engaged in systematic conduct to shut out rivals' competing audio downloads and portable digital media players by cutting off their access to the marketplace," they said.The plaintiffs argue that Apple instituted "unneeded technological restrictions" and security updates in a couple versions of iTunes -- 7.0 and 7.4 -- that blocked competing music stores from making their audio files compatible with iTunes. All songs sold by iTunes in the early days included a proprietary version of digital rights management (DRM) software called FairPlay. FairPlay prevented iPods from playing audio downloads purchased from iTunes competitors. It also barred consumers from playing music they bought through iTunes on audio players besides iPods.Steve Jobs, Apple's co-founder and former CEO who died in 2011, will appear on stand through a taped deposition.Stephen Shankland/CNETWhen rivals such as RealNetworks would tweak their music files to make them work with iTunes (technology that RealNetworks called Harmony), Apple would issue another update to iTunes to ban the competing music. The plaintiffs allege in their complaint that those updates were unnecessary and were specifically made to "suppress new products that threatened [Apple's] monopolies in the relevant product markets.""Apple's use of software updates, intended to shut out competitors, constitutes a violation of United States and California antitrust law," the plaintiffs said. "None of the anticompetitive conduct described in this complaint had a legitimate business justification." They argue that Apple could have licensed FairPlay to other music vendors and media player makers, but it decided not to do so.The case isn't about iTunes pricing, though. The plaintiffs say because music from other stores wouldn't work with iTunes and iPods, customers were forced to buy more music directly from iTunes. When it came time for consumers to buy new music players, they had to buy iPods because of all the iTunes music they owned. Because demand was higher for iPods, the prices increased, causing consumers to overpay for Apple's music players, they say."Apple used its dominant position obtained as a result of FairPlay to obtain monopoly power in the relevant product markets and to make substantial profits in the sale of iPods," the complaint said.What is Apple arguing?Apple, for its part, says the updates to iTunes were necessary to secure the music store and make sure all audio downloads were safe. If it couldn't protect the content being offered, media companies would have pulled the files, Apple has said.The company also will argue it has added many new features to iTunes and iPods over the years that have made them attractive to consumers, including the ability to purchase and play videos, better battery life and bigger screens. It will say that its software updates made iTunes and its devices better and that they didn't boost iPod prices. And while the plaintiffs claim RealNetworks considered Harmony to be legal, Apple in 2004 accused RealNetworks of adopting "the tactics and ethics of a hacker." Apple had refused to provide licenses to companies seeking iPod compatibility, and RealNetworks did not seek permission before releasing the software. RealNetworks is not a party in the antitrust suit and no executives will appear as witnesses.How much money is at stake?The plaintiffs are asking for $350 million.What's all this about DRM?Today, music purchased from third-party vendors such as Amazon will work on Apple devices, but that wasn't always the case. When Apple first launched its popular music player, it used its own proprietary form of digital rights management, called FairPlay. Apple didn't license the technology to anyone, which meant only songs purchased from iTunes would work on iPods.Apple competitor RealNetworks in 2004 analyzed Apple's FairPlay to figure out how to make its music compatible with iTunes. In July of that year, the company released Harmony, technology that allowed music purchased in its store to play on iPods. RealNetworks, which sold audio downloads for as little as 49 cents per track during a short-time promotion, claimed it sold more than 3 million music files in the first three weeks of selling iPod-compatible music. That helped RealNetworks increase its market share to 20 percent from 10 percent while Apple's fell to 60 percent from 70 percent, according to the plaintiffs in the current antitrust suit.See alsoAttention, artists: Streaming music is the inescapable future. Embrace itDo we really need DRM?Apple says a silent goodbye to iPod classicFour days after RealNetworks released Harmony, Apple warned that it updated its iPod software from time to time and that it was "highly likely" that Harmony would stop working with current and future iPods. In October 2004, Apple released an update to iTunes that again made RealNetworks audio files incompatible with iPods.It continuously updated iTunes to not only add new features but make sure it prevented others from finding loopholes to offer music that worked on iPods. Analysts have said Apple benefited from the use of DRM, and Apple's DRM features caused investigations by various European countries and by the European Union as a whole.In February 2007, then-CEO Jobs posted an open letter on Apple's website, urging record companies to abandon DRM technologies. In the letter, Jobs said Apple was forced to create a DRM system to get the world's four largest record companies on board with the iTunes Store. But he said there were alternatives -- Apple and the rest of the online music distributors could continue down a DRM path; Apple could license the FairPlay technology to others; or record companies could be persuaded to license music without DRM technology. The company clearly favored the third option."Imagine a world where every online store sells DRM-free music encoded in open licensable formats," Jobs wrote at the time. "In such a world, any player can play music purchased from any store, and any store can sell music which is playable on all players. This is clearly the best alternative for consumers, and Apple would embrace it in a heartbeat."It took about two more years before Apple actually started offering DRM-free music. The company revealed during a Macworld keynote address in January 2009 that Apple had finally struck deals with all the major music labels, making songs sold via the iTunes Store free of DRM.Today, digital downloads remain the most popular way of paying for music, but streaming services are quickly closing in. In the US, streamed music accounted for 27 percent of music sales in the first half of the year, up from just 3 percent in 2007 and 15 percent in 2012, according to the Recording Industry Association of America. Streaming sales have nearly surpassed sales from physical music -- mostly CDs -- which stand at 28 percent. Digital downloads made up the biggest chunk at 41 percent of total revenue, but both downloads and physical sales are dwindling. Apple in August paid $3 billion for Beats to gain a foothold in streaming music.What iPods are included in the suit?The suit addresses iPods sold from September 12, 2006, to March 31, 2009. That includes the fifth and sixth generation of the iPod Classic; the iPod U2 Special Edition; the first, second, third and fourth generations of the iPod Nano; the first, second and third generation iPod Shuffles; and the first and second generations of the iPod Touch.Why are iTunes 7.0 and 7.4 so important to the case?The crux of the plaintiffs' case against Apple revolves around the iTunes software updates Apple released that prevent other music from working with its devices. The plaintiffs allege that iTunes 7.0 and 7.4 -- released in September 2006 and September 2007, respectively -- were not genuine product improvements but simply were made to bar other music vendors from Apple's products. Because Apple's system had not yet been hacked, there was no reason to update the security system, they say. Along with security features, though, Apple will argue that iTunes 7.0 and 7.4 were legitimate, needed updates that improved its products. Ten years of the iPod (photos)See full gallery1 - 4 / 15NextPrevWhen Apple released iTunes 7.0 in September 2006, it called the update "the most significant enhancement to the world's most popular music jukebox and online music and video store since it debuted in 2001." The biggest new feature was the inclusion of digital movie purchases available the same time as the DVD versions hit the market. At launch, iTunes included 75 films from Walt Disney Pictures, Pixar, Touchstone Pictures and Miramax Films such as "Toy Story" and "Shakespeare in Love.""Here we go again!" Job said in a press release at the time. "First music, then TV shows, and now movies."Other additions included an iTunes video playback window with on-screen controls; cover flow views of music, TV shows and movies; expanded parental controls; gapless playback, which eliminated pauses from one song to another; and an updated user interface. Apple also introduced popular video games for the fifth-generation iPods, including Tetris and Mahjong.Also included in the suit is iTunes 7.4, which was a more minor update that hit the market in September 2007. The software included the ability to make custom ringtones and use closed captioning while watching videos. At the time Apple introduced iTunes 7.4, it also unveiled the "iTunes WiFi Music Store" to let consumers browse, search, preview, purchase and download songs and albums over a Wi-Fi network directly onto their iPod Touch or iPhone.Who are the big witnesses?The trial roster features some of Apple's top executives, including marketing chief Phil Schiller and iTunes chief Eddy Cue. Both will talk about competition, iTunes and other topics.But the star witness likely will be former Apple CEO Jobs. Attorneys took his deposition on April 12, 2011, six months before he died. The court will see about 20 minutes of testimony related to iTunes competitors, Apple's treatment of RealNetworks and how the major record labels wanted interoperability. None of the testimony relates to iTunes 7.0 or 7.4 as neither was relevant to the case at the time.Other Apple executives being called to testify include Jeff Robbin, current vice president of iTunes. At the time of his deposition in 2010, Robbin served as vice president of iTunes and Apple TV. He will testify about iTunes competition, development of FairPlay, improvements and innovations related to iTunes and FairPlay, the response to programs that circumvented FairPlay and security risks, responses to RealNetworks' Harmony, and other related topics.Phil Schiller, Apple's head of marketing, will testify during the iPod antitrust trial.CNETAlso on the list is Augustin Farrugia, Apple senior director of Internet services security. At the time of his 2010 deposition, Farrugia served as senior director of DRM technologies, and he led the redesign of Apple's FairPlay architecture. He will testify about FairPlay design and implementation, FairPlay redesign efforts from 2005 to 2007, anticipation of and response to hacks and vulnerabilities, and other related topics.Much of the testimony will come from expert witnesses. The plaintiffs plan to call David Martin, a computer software expert with a PhD in computer science. Martin taught for several years after receiving his PhD in 1999 but hasn't worked at a school since 2007. He has testified for 13 trials since 2000 and has served as a consultant in 17 other instances, according to his resume filed with the court. He will testify that iTunes 7.0 and 7.4 were not legitimate, needed updates, and that the updates to iTunes caused iPods syncing with RealNetworks' music to become unusable.Other experts being called by the plaintiffs include Roger G. Noll, a professor emeritus of economics at Stanford University, and Jeffrey Wooldridge, a professor of economics at Michigan State University. Noll will support the plaintiffs' case for liability and damages, while Wooldridge will serve as a rebuttal witness.Apple's experts include Robert Topel and Kevin Murphy, economist at the University of Chicago, and John P.J. Kelly, CEO of consultancy Kelly Technology Group. Topel will testify about the antitrust factors and the amount of damages (if any) that are due, as well as give rebuttal testimony to Noll's statements.Murphy will discuss competition and factors in the market and provide a rebuttal to Noll, and Kelly will talk about improvements made to FairPlay and iTunes and why they were needed, among other topics.Other potential witnesses include the plaintiffs and other Apple executives.What does this mean for consumers?Not too much. DRM and iPods are largely issues of the past. But if you're one of the people who bought an iPod during the covered time frame, you could get some money if the plaintiffs are successful.What does this mean for Apple?Not too much. The company has already removed DRM from music in the iTunes store, and music downloads from other vendors work on Apple's devices. Even if Apple loses, $350 million is a tiny fraction of the company's annual revenue. In fiscal 2014, Apple generated $182.8 billion in sales, which is about $500 million a day -- or $20.9 million an hour.Tune back to CNET for coverage of the trial.
Networking talk- From cloud to iCloud and why you should care
Networking talk: From cloud to iCloud and why you should care
Currently, a user first downloads songs, videos, podcasts, or photos onto a computer, then syncs it with other mobile devices. This is a little inconvenient but at least you just need to download the content once. The iCloud service, on the other hand, according to Steve, automatically "pushes" the content to all your iCloud-connected devices using the Internet. This means the total amount of data that needs to be downloaded would be the original amount multiplied by the number of devices you have. Now multiply this similar activity by millions of users, and we face a huge bandwidth problem and put a lot of stress on an already overstressed data infrastructure. All that just so you can save a few minutes by not plugging your mobile devices into the computer.Many Internet providers now put a cap on the amount of data you can download per month. Comcast, for example, allows only 250GB, which is actually not much in my personal experience (though I am not a typical example as I have to test storage devices, which involves moving lots of data around). Nonetheless, having multiple iCloud-compatible devices would help you use up the data allowance faster.The second side effect is the loss of control. As iCloud is integrated into apps and devices, that might mean users will not have control over it, and may even not be able to opt out. If you store your purchased digital content in Apple's iCloud storage space, that could mean the company has control over what you can view. It's unclear if you can even upload your own content, ripped music from your CDs or music purchased from other services for example, and store it in Apple's iCloud. Judging from the way iTunes syncs contents with devices, it's a safe guess that the iCloud service will offer users much less control over it than other existing cloud services.On top of this, there's also a security risk factor that's present in all cloud services. After all, it's just another online data service that keeps the private information of millions of people.Obviously, we'll have to wait to see how iCloud is implemented. However, judging from what Jobs said and what he didn't, the iCloud service does seem to have cloudy parts. For those hard-core fans of Apple and the iCloud who are superexcited, sorry if I have just rained on your parade. But face it: if you like the cloud so much, you should be ready to get wet once in a while.
Currently, a user first downloads songs, videos, podcasts, or photos onto a computer, then syncs it with other mobile devices. This is a little inconvenient but at least you just need to download the content once. The iCloud service, on the other hand, according to Steve, automatically "pushes" the content to all your iCloud-connected devices using the Internet. This means the total amount of data that needs to be downloaded would be the original amount multiplied by the number of devices you have. Now multiply this similar activity by millions of users, and we face a huge bandwidth problem and put a lot of stress on an already overstressed data infrastructure. All that just so you can save a few minutes by not plugging your mobile devices into the computer.Many Internet providers now put a cap on the amount of data you can download per month. Comcast, for example, allows only 250GB, which is actually not much in my personal experience (though I am not a typical example as I have to test storage devices, which involves moving lots of data around). Nonetheless, having multiple iCloud-compatible devices would help you use up the data allowance faster.The second side effect is the loss of control. As iCloud is integrated into apps and devices, that might mean users will not have control over it, and may even not be able to opt out. If you store your purchased digital content in Apple's iCloud storage space, that could mean the company has control over what you can view. It's unclear if you can even upload your own content, ripped music from your CDs or music purchased from other services for example, and store it in Apple's iCloud. Judging from the way iTunes syncs contents with devices, it's a safe guess that the iCloud service will offer users much less control over it than other existing cloud services.On top of this, there's also a security risk factor that's present in all cloud services. After all, it's just another online data service that keeps the private information of millions of people.Obviously, we'll have to wait to see how iCloud is implemented. However, judging from what Jobs said and what he didn't, the iCloud service does seem to have cloudy parts. For those hard-core fans of Apple and the iCloud who are superexcited, sorry if I have just rained on your parade. But face it: if you like the cloud so much, you should be ready to get wet once in a while.
Bidding on alleged iPhone 6 prototype tops $90,000 on eBay
Bidding on alleged iPhone 6 prototype tops $90,000 on eBay
Like millions of other people, Alex Kantor, a technology fan who works with a mobile company, decided he would upgrade to a new iPhone 6. Unlike millions of other people, Kantor has a very unusual story to go along with his new smartphone. He says he ordered his upgrade through Verizon. When it arrived, it appeared to be a phone running in developer mode. He believed he had a prototype in his hands, so he decided to test other consumers' interest by placing it on eBay. Bidding is currently at $90,300 (about £56,402, AU$103,411) with 177 bids placed."I determined that this iPhone was a version not meant for the consumer market after seeing the software version on it. I am an avid tech lover and I knew what this software was right away. It is actually called SwitchBoard and is only for internal Apple testing," Kantor tells CNET. "Also, there is no FCC markings on the rear of the device or model number. Also, there is a red charging port which is known on prototypes." The auction description notes that iOS 8 has not been placed on the device. It comes with the box, charger, headphones and paperwork. "This device is being sold as is. I cannot guarantee that it will make calls or that the camera will work," reads the description. Kantor later added that he plugged the device into iTunes and that iTunes recognized it as an iPhone.Related storiesApple iPhone 6 teardown: Design changes make device easier to repairiPhone 6 and 6 Plus drop and drown test results are iniPhone 6 reservations in China reportedly hit 4 millionKantor says the phone was sent to him directly by Verizon and he believes it was simply the "luck of the draw" that he received the version he did. It's a bit like unwrapping the golden ticket from a Willy Wonka chocolate bar.There are still plenty of questions swirling around this device. Is it truly a prototype? If it came from Verizon, how did it get into the regular shipping mix? Will Apple try to get the phone back? Are all those astonishingly high bids actually real? Kantor certainly hopes they are. "I am so surprised by how high the auction has gone. Yesterday morning I was about to end the auction at $3,500 just to get out quickly. I am very happy that I decided not to end it," he says.If the phone is what Kantor says he believes it to be, then this wouldn't be the first time an early version of an Apple device has escaped into the public's grasp. Apple asked for the return of a 3G MacBook prototype sold through Craigslist back in 2011. Tech site Gizmodo ended up returning an iPhone 4G that came into its possession in 2010. There have also been a couple of cases of iPhone prototypes getting left behind in bars.Kantor's eBay account currently has one positive feedback for a purchase he made within the last six months, though the account was started in early 2013. He has no eBay sales feedback. CNET has not had the opportunity to examine the phone and can't make a determination as to whether it's a real prototype. We have reached out to Apple and Verizon for comment.This will be an interesting story to watch as the auction still has three days left to go. In the meantime, Kantor ordered himself a replacement iPhone 6, saying, "Hope the other one comes back the same." Update, 12:07 p.m. PT: To add more information on previous eBay activity and a note about reaching out to Apple and Verizon.The back of the phone and the red lightning port.Alex Kantor
Like millions of other people, Alex Kantor, a technology fan who works with a mobile company, decided he would upgrade to a new iPhone 6. Unlike millions of other people, Kantor has a very unusual story to go along with his new smartphone. He says he ordered his upgrade through Verizon. When it arrived, it appeared to be a phone running in developer mode. He believed he had a prototype in his hands, so he decided to test other consumers' interest by placing it on eBay. Bidding is currently at $90,300 (about £56,402, AU$103,411) with 177 bids placed."I determined that this iPhone was a version not meant for the consumer market after seeing the software version on it. I am an avid tech lover and I knew what this software was right away. It is actually called SwitchBoard and is only for internal Apple testing," Kantor tells CNET. "Also, there is no FCC markings on the rear of the device or model number. Also, there is a red charging port which is known on prototypes." The auction description notes that iOS 8 has not been placed on the device. It comes with the box, charger, headphones and paperwork. "This device is being sold as is. I cannot guarantee that it will make calls or that the camera will work," reads the description. Kantor later added that he plugged the device into iTunes and that iTunes recognized it as an iPhone.Related storiesApple iPhone 6 teardown: Design changes make device easier to repairiPhone 6 and 6 Plus drop and drown test results are iniPhone 6 reservations in China reportedly hit 4 millionKantor says the phone was sent to him directly by Verizon and he believes it was simply the "luck of the draw" that he received the version he did. It's a bit like unwrapping the golden ticket from a Willy Wonka chocolate bar.There are still plenty of questions swirling around this device. Is it truly a prototype? If it came from Verizon, how did it get into the regular shipping mix? Will Apple try to get the phone back? Are all those astonishingly high bids actually real? Kantor certainly hopes they are. "I am so surprised by how high the auction has gone. Yesterday morning I was about to end the auction at $3,500 just to get out quickly. I am very happy that I decided not to end it," he says.If the phone is what Kantor says he believes it to be, then this wouldn't be the first time an early version of an Apple device has escaped into the public's grasp. Apple asked for the return of a 3G MacBook prototype sold through Craigslist back in 2011. Tech site Gizmodo ended up returning an iPhone 4G that came into its possession in 2010. There have also been a couple of cases of iPhone prototypes getting left behind in bars.Kantor's eBay account currently has one positive feedback for a purchase he made within the last six months, though the account was started in early 2013. He has no eBay sales feedback. CNET has not had the opportunity to examine the phone and can't make a determination as to whether it's a real prototype. We have reached out to Apple and Verizon for comment.This will be an interesting story to watch as the auction still has three days left to go. In the meantime, Kantor ordered himself a replacement iPhone 6, saying, "Hope the other one comes back the same." Update, 12:07 p.m. PT: To add more information on previous eBay activity and a note about reaching out to Apple and Verizon.The back of the phone and the red lightning port.Alex Kantor
The 404 370- Where we're still up at Alison o'clock
The 404 370: Where we're still up at Alison o'clock
Every show with Alison Rosen is knee-slappingly hilarious, but today's is so crazy that Alison has to wear The 404 army helmet to protect herself...from Wilson. Alison is on today's show to pimp out her brand new daily Web show, The Daily Alison. The show features Alison just being her own funny self, but she also brings on big name guests for quick 10 minute interviews, folks like Will Forte, Doug Benson, and Mr. Rosen himself. Like our own Sweet Lou and Baby Bakalar, Alison's humor is derivative and influenced heavily by her father, which all leads to a conversation about the horrifyingly embarrassing things our parents did when we were younger. We also discover that Alison hasn't yet been swept off her feet by that perfect gentleman, so we swear a solemn oath to be the Goose to her Maverick and find her a nice waiter at TGI Fridays to feed her coconut chicken shrimp skewers and Volcano shots.The first half of the show, though, is mostly Wilson complaining about the new "Transformers 2" movie. I'll let you all know right now that he doesn't spoil anything about the movie, other than the fact that Shia Lebeauf turns out to be a ghost at the end. In reality, though, Wilson tells us there are two characters named "Skids" and "Mudflaps" that make Jar Jar Binks look like Martin Luther King. The back story is that those two robots picked up the English language by watching American television, but did they really have to have gold teeth!? I think that was the part that set Wilson over the edge. I haven't heard the guy rant in awhile, but this one is definitely worth checking out.This won't be the last time you see Alison Rosen on our show. She'll be back, but in the meantime you can catch her every day on The Daily Alison, the Alison Rosen blog, and, of course, Twitter. See you next time!EPISODE 370Download today's podcast Subscribe in iTunes audio | Suscribe to iTunes (video) |Subscribe in RSS Audio |Subscribe in RSS Video This content is rated TV-MA, and is for viewers 18 years or older. Are you of age?YesNoSorry, you are not old enough to view this content.PlayFollow us on Twitter!The 404Jeff BakalarJustin YuWilson TangAdd us on Facebook!The 404 Fan PageThe 404 GroupJustin YuJeff BakalarWilson Tang
Every show with Alison Rosen is knee-slappingly hilarious, but today's is so crazy that Alison has to wear The 404 army helmet to protect herself...from Wilson. Alison is on today's show to pimp out her brand new daily Web show, The Daily Alison. The show features Alison just being her own funny self, but she also brings on big name guests for quick 10 minute interviews, folks like Will Forte, Doug Benson, and Mr. Rosen himself. Like our own Sweet Lou and Baby Bakalar, Alison's humor is derivative and influenced heavily by her father, which all leads to a conversation about the horrifyingly embarrassing things our parents did when we were younger. We also discover that Alison hasn't yet been swept off her feet by that perfect gentleman, so we swear a solemn oath to be the Goose to her Maverick and find her a nice waiter at TGI Fridays to feed her coconut chicken shrimp skewers and Volcano shots.The first half of the show, though, is mostly Wilson complaining about the new "Transformers 2" movie. I'll let you all know right now that he doesn't spoil anything about the movie, other than the fact that Shia Lebeauf turns out to be a ghost at the end. In reality, though, Wilson tells us there are two characters named "Skids" and "Mudflaps" that make Jar Jar Binks look like Martin Luther King. The back story is that those two robots picked up the English language by watching American television, but did they really have to have gold teeth!? I think that was the part that set Wilson over the edge. I haven't heard the guy rant in awhile, but this one is definitely worth checking out.This won't be the last time you see Alison Rosen on our show. She'll be back, but in the meantime you can catch her every day on The Daily Alison, the Alison Rosen blog, and, of course, Twitter. See you next time!EPISODE 370Download today's podcast Subscribe in iTunes audio | Suscribe to iTunes (video) |Subscribe in RSS Audio |Subscribe in RSS Video This content is rated TV-MA, and is for viewers 18 years or older. Are you of age?YesNoSorry, you are not old enough to view this content.PlayFollow us on Twitter!The 404Jeff BakalarJustin YuWilson TangAdd us on Facebook!The 404 Fan PageThe 404 GroupJustin YuJeff BakalarWilson Tang
Make easy time-lapse movies with your iPhone
Make easy time-lapse movies with your iPhone
Time-lapse movies can be a complicated affair, and quite often involve either a lot of special equipment, and/or post-processing skills. For just a buck though, you can use the recently released Timelapser app (link opens in iTunes) to turn your iPhone into a tool that can do this time-bending filming technique using nothing more than the onboard camera. Timelapser's interface tells you how long your movie will be, and how many shots it's taken.CNETDepending on what model of phone you have you can use the app to take a picture anywhere from every three seconds to once per half hour. All the while it grabs each frame and stitches it into a movie that's saved on the phone, and that can also be e-mailed to friends. Of course if you really want to cook with gas, you'll need an iPhone 3GS, which lets you speed up how fast the phone can take shots. Alas, with my lowly 3G I was limited to taking a shot every six seconds. Owners of the original iPhone have to step it down to eight seconds. The app has a wealth of settings that let you pick things like how large the video's resolution is, how many frames per second it should be, and how long you want the delay to be before it starts shooting. This can be useful if you're propping up your phone somewhere and need time to set up your scene. Users can also use the app just to take a series of photos one after another which get saved in your phone's camera roll. As I noted when I checked out the IP Camera app, which can turn your iPhone into a networked security camera, the very best way to use this app is with one of Apple's fancy docks. You can also just prop it up with whatever you may have laying about the house, but with the dock you get the benefit of being able to keep it plugged in. This is incredibly important if you plan on shooting something over a couple of hours. You may also want to turn your phone sideways so that your videos get shot in a typical widescreen style.Here's the test video I did. My settings were 360 × 480 pixels, taking a shot every six seconds, which came to a grand total of 788 individual photos (thankfully none of which were saved to my film roll). The whole thing took about 10 seconds to process and save to my photo library when the app was done:
Time-lapse movies can be a complicated affair, and quite often involve either a lot of special equipment, and/or post-processing skills. For just a buck though, you can use the recently released Timelapser app (link opens in iTunes) to turn your iPhone into a tool that can do this time-bending filming technique using nothing more than the onboard camera. Timelapser's interface tells you how long your movie will be, and how many shots it's taken.CNETDepending on what model of phone you have you can use the app to take a picture anywhere from every three seconds to once per half hour. All the while it grabs each frame and stitches it into a movie that's saved on the phone, and that can also be e-mailed to friends. Of course if you really want to cook with gas, you'll need an iPhone 3GS, which lets you speed up how fast the phone can take shots. Alas, with my lowly 3G I was limited to taking a shot every six seconds. Owners of the original iPhone have to step it down to eight seconds. The app has a wealth of settings that let you pick things like how large the video's resolution is, how many frames per second it should be, and how long you want the delay to be before it starts shooting. This can be useful if you're propping up your phone somewhere and need time to set up your scene. Users can also use the app just to take a series of photos one after another which get saved in your phone's camera roll. As I noted when I checked out the IP Camera app, which can turn your iPhone into a networked security camera, the very best way to use this app is with one of Apple's fancy docks. You can also just prop it up with whatever you may have laying about the house, but with the dock you get the benefit of being able to keep it plugged in. This is incredibly important if you plan on shooting something over a couple of hours. You may also want to turn your phone sideways so that your videos get shot in a typical widescreen style.Here's the test video I did. My settings were 360 × 480 pixels, taking a shot every six seconds, which came to a grand total of 788 individual photos (thankfully none of which were saved to my film roll). The whole thing took about 10 seconds to process and save to my photo library when the app was done:
Comcast iPad app launches for DVR control
Comcast iPad app launches for DVR control
Comcast has launched its Xfinity TV iPad and iPhone app in Apple's app store.The application, which is available for free, allows Comcast customers to browse or search for TV listings from Apple's tablet or smartphone. Once the user finds what they want to watch, they can tap on the show in the app and immediately change the channel of their DVR to that station. If a show isn't on yet, they can also program their DVRs to record the episode or series.Next month, Comcast plans to make television shows and movies viewable from its application. The app will boast shows and films from "the top premium networks," Comcast said. Over time, the company will add "thousands of additional entertainment choices."Comcast also plans to double down on its mobile application development going forward. The company revealed today that the Xfinity launch is "the first in a series of scheduled app releases" for iOS-based devices. In addition, it plans to make "several" Android apps available this year, as well as programs for the BlackBerry and other mobile devices.Comcast isn't alone in its desire to expand its offering through the iPad.Earlier this year, Time Warner Cable unveiled an iPad app prototype that shows current programming and full TV listings. The cable provider indicated at the time that its goal is to give users the ability to watch shows when away from home on their iPad, and once they get home, resume watching the show on their television.
Comcast has launched its Xfinity TV iPad and iPhone app in Apple's app store.The application, which is available for free, allows Comcast customers to browse or search for TV listings from Apple's tablet or smartphone. Once the user finds what they want to watch, they can tap on the show in the app and immediately change the channel of their DVR to that station. If a show isn't on yet, they can also program their DVRs to record the episode or series.Next month, Comcast plans to make television shows and movies viewable from its application. The app will boast shows and films from "the top premium networks," Comcast said. Over time, the company will add "thousands of additional entertainment choices."Comcast also plans to double down on its mobile application development going forward. The company revealed today that the Xfinity launch is "the first in a series of scheduled app releases" for iOS-based devices. In addition, it plans to make "several" Android apps available this year, as well as programs for the BlackBerry and other mobile devices.Comcast isn't alone in its desire to expand its offering through the iPad.Earlier this year, Time Warner Cable unveiled an iPad app prototype that shows current programming and full TV listings. The cable provider indicated at the time that its goal is to give users the ability to watch shows when away from home on their iPad, and once they get home, resume watching the show on their television.
Coders choosing Mac OS over Linux environment
Coders choosing Mac OS over Linux environment
Apple's Mac operating system has surpassed Linux in popularity as a development environment in North America, according to an Evans Data survey.Windows remains at the top of the development environment heap, used by 80 percent of the survey's more than 400 professional software developer respondents in June; Mac OS was used by 7.9 percent of those surveyed, displacing Linux, used by 5.6 percent. A few other tidbits from the survey:Developers believe that mobile and cloud development will increase the most in importance over the next three years44 percent of respondents are actively engaged in multithreaded program development49 percent indicated their intention to support smartphone platforms42 percent intend to support tablet applicationsDespite displacing Linux as a development environment, Mac OS has not displaced Linux as a development target.More than twice as many developers still primarily target Linux as target the Mac. But the Mac environment offers developers some niceties that seem obvious but are perhaps less understood. I spoke with Jeremy Whitlock, core platform architect at Nodeable (disclosure: I am CEO of Nodeable), about why he chooses to develop on the Mac. Whitlock told me that the answer primarily comes down to convenience. The Mac OS has the Unix toolchain that he prefers, it runs all of the open-source software that he needs for development, and it also provides the only legal way to develop for all platforms legally from one set of hardware--which is really about the fact that you can't legally do iOS/Mac application development without a Mac. You can't virtualize OS X on non-Mac hardware, and you can't run OS X on non-Mac hardware, at least not legally. Additionally, ever since Intel processors came into the mix, developers are more comfortable with the performance of Apple hardware.
Apple's Mac operating system has surpassed Linux in popularity as a development environment in North America, according to an Evans Data survey.Windows remains at the top of the development environment heap, used by 80 percent of the survey's more than 400 professional software developer respondents in June; Mac OS was used by 7.9 percent of those surveyed, displacing Linux, used by 5.6 percent. A few other tidbits from the survey:Developers believe that mobile and cloud development will increase the most in importance over the next three years44 percent of respondents are actively engaged in multithreaded program development49 percent indicated their intention to support smartphone platforms42 percent intend to support tablet applicationsDespite displacing Linux as a development environment, Mac OS has not displaced Linux as a development target.More than twice as many developers still primarily target Linux as target the Mac. But the Mac environment offers developers some niceties that seem obvious but are perhaps less understood. I spoke with Jeremy Whitlock, core platform architect at Nodeable (disclosure: I am CEO of Nodeable), about why he chooses to develop on the Mac. Whitlock told me that the answer primarily comes down to convenience. The Mac OS has the Unix toolchain that he prefers, it runs all of the open-source software that he needs for development, and it also provides the only legal way to develop for all platforms legally from one set of hardware--which is really about the fact that you can't legally do iOS/Mac application development without a Mac. You can't virtualize OS X on non-Mac hardware, and you can't run OS X on non-Mac hardware, at least not legally. Additionally, ever since Intel processors came into the mix, developers are more comfortable with the performance of Apple hardware.
CNET Labs investigates iPad heat complaints
CNET Labs investigates iPad heat complaints
Updated at 8:05 p.m. PDT: The first round of CNET Labs iPad heat testing is complete. Results are available in this blog by Senior Editor Eric Franklin. Though further tests will be conducted, the initial results find the new iPad to be only slightly warmer than the iPad 2, and in no way a danger to users.Our CNET Labs team is currently investigating claims that the third-generation Apple iPad may overheat under normal operating conditions, such as video playback or gameplay.Anecdotal reports have pointed out that the new iPad can get a little toasty. A statement from Apple asserts that the new iPad operates "well within our thermal specifications."Personally, I've noticed that the new iPad runs slightly warmer than the iPad 2, especially when the screen is turned up to full brightness and you're playing one of the more intense 3D games (such as Infinity Blade). Having experienced far more extreme temperatures from the bottom of my laptop during HD video playback (something the iPad seems to handle quite well), I wasn't concerned about the iPad's warmth. I also found that the iPad cooled quickly when set aside. Apple forum postings (here and here) and a report seem to point to heat as an issue for certain users. In 2010, CNET reported on a similar complaint with the original iPad. Because of the new iPad's beefed-up processor, the increased energy demands of the improved screen, and larger battery, these same issues may be amplified. As with previous iPads, there's no internal fan to aid with cooling; instead, the aluminum casing is designed to dissipate heat.For more information on the probable causes of the new iPad's temperature, read Brooke Crothers' analysis on CNET's Nanotech blog
Updated at 8:05 p.m. PDT: The first round of CNET Labs iPad heat testing is complete. Results are available in this blog by Senior Editor Eric Franklin. Though further tests will be conducted, the initial results find the new iPad to be only slightly warmer than the iPad 2, and in no way a danger to users.Our CNET Labs team is currently investigating claims that the third-generation Apple iPad may overheat under normal operating conditions, such as video playback or gameplay.Anecdotal reports have pointed out that the new iPad can get a little toasty. A statement from Apple asserts that the new iPad operates "well within our thermal specifications."Personally, I've noticed that the new iPad runs slightly warmer than the iPad 2, especially when the screen is turned up to full brightness and you're playing one of the more intense 3D games (such as Infinity Blade). Having experienced far more extreme temperatures from the bottom of my laptop during HD video playback (something the iPad seems to handle quite well), I wasn't concerned about the iPad's warmth. I also found that the iPad cooled quickly when set aside. Apple forum postings (here and here) and a report seem to point to heat as an issue for certain users. In 2010, CNET reported on a similar complaint with the original iPad. Because of the new iPad's beefed-up processor, the increased energy demands of the improved screen, and larger battery, these same issues may be amplified. As with previous iPads, there's no internal fan to aid with cooling; instead, the aluminum casing is designed to dissipate heat.For more information on the probable causes of the new iPad's temperature, read Brooke Crothers' analysis on CNET's Nanotech blog
Citi paints not-so-pretty picture for Apple's iPad, future market
Citi paints not-so-pretty picture for Apple's iPad, future market
Citi Research has released a report that doesn't bode well for the iPad if its conclusions prove to be accurate. In data-dense presentation titled, "Mobility Hardware and Components, Marketing Presentation, March 2014" released Wednesday, a team of analysts reiterated a familiar Citi theme, saying the era of "device exhaustion" has arrived, adding in the same set of bullet points that "we are NOT positive on Apple" (emphasis Citi's).Though this wouldn't be the first time Citi has been sour on Apple, Citi's forecast for the tablet market makes Apple the most vulnerable due to its leadership status. Citi sees tablet year-to-year growth in the 20 percent -- or slightly above -- range this year, then dipping below 20 percent by the first quarter of 2015. That compares to the heady 140 percent-plus growth seen in early 2013.While market-growth deceleration happens with any device eventually, Citi sees the tablet cycle running its growth course sooner than had been previously expected.The Citi report reflects a January IDC report on tablets that said "markets such as the US are reaching high levels of consumer saturation." Overall, Citi's device exhaustion theme doesn't only apply to tablets. "Device Exhaustion is driving shorter product life cycles. Developed markets are approaching smartphone saturation. Average Selling Prices (ASPs) are poised to fall. Innovation in smartphones is becoming elusive. Margins in the supply chain are at risk," Citi said in a summary. And what's the next big thing?"So look for unique focus areas of investing such as Internet of Things (IoT)," the report said.
Citi Research has released a report that doesn't bode well for the iPad if its conclusions prove to be accurate. In data-dense presentation titled, "Mobility Hardware and Components, Marketing Presentation, March 2014" released Wednesday, a team of analysts reiterated a familiar Citi theme, saying the era of "device exhaustion" has arrived, adding in the same set of bullet points that "we are NOT positive on Apple" (emphasis Citi's).Though this wouldn't be the first time Citi has been sour on Apple, Citi's forecast for the tablet market makes Apple the most vulnerable due to its leadership status. Citi sees tablet year-to-year growth in the 20 percent -- or slightly above -- range this year, then dipping below 20 percent by the first quarter of 2015. That compares to the heady 140 percent-plus growth seen in early 2013.While market-growth deceleration happens with any device eventually, Citi sees the tablet cycle running its growth course sooner than had been previously expected.The Citi report reflects a January IDC report on tablets that said "markets such as the US are reaching high levels of consumer saturation." Overall, Citi's device exhaustion theme doesn't only apply to tablets. "Device Exhaustion is driving shorter product life cycles. Developed markets are approaching smartphone saturation. Average Selling Prices (ASPs) are poised to fall. Innovation in smartphones is becoming elusive. Margins in the supply chain are at risk," Citi said in a summary. And what's the next big thing?"So look for unique focus areas of investing such as Internet of Things (IoT)," the report said.
Chrome Cr-48, black MacBook- Separated at birth-
Chrome Cr-48, black MacBook: Separated at birth?
The all-black Cr-48 that Google is shipping to the first members of its Chrome OS notebook pilot project looked awfully familiar to us when it showed up at our office.Software aside, after putting it side by side with a black MacBook that Apple shipped in 2007 we had in house, it dawned on us why: the two are practically twins. Not identical, but at least fraternal. The overall look is shockingly similar to Apple's now-extinct machine: from the color to the chiclet keyboard to the hinge, size, trackpad, even to the indentation in the place where you lift the lid. Well, see for yourself. We took some photos of the two machines next to each other for you to peruse. Google's Cr-48 and a MacBook side by side...See full gallery1 - 4 / 4NextPrevNow, if you go deeper than a first glance and break out a ruler, you'll see that there are some differences between the two externally. While the hinges look practically the same size, they aren't: 6.5 inches on the MacBook to 6 inches on the Cr-48. And the screen sizes vary slightly: The Chromebook's measures 4.5 inches by 7.5 inches, and the MacBook's 5.25 inches by 8.5 inches. The trackpads, however, are equal in size--though not in function: in 2007, Apple had not yet introduced its clickable touchpad-as-button, which the Chrome notebook utilizes.Of course there are some pretty big functional differences too: Google has nixed the disk drive, Ethernet port, and all but one USB port, but does include an SD card slot. The 3-year old Mac notebook also has those pesky caps lock and function keys that Google has eliminated.But what's inside these two machines is obviously where the key difference lays: Apple has the fully-featured Mac OS X desktop operating system powering its notebook, while Google's test hardware is wrapped around its brand new Web browser-based operating system, Chrome OS.
The all-black Cr-48 that Google is shipping to the first members of its Chrome OS notebook pilot project looked awfully familiar to us when it showed up at our office.Software aside, after putting it side by side with a black MacBook that Apple shipped in 2007 we had in house, it dawned on us why: the two are practically twins. Not identical, but at least fraternal. The overall look is shockingly similar to Apple's now-extinct machine: from the color to the chiclet keyboard to the hinge, size, trackpad, even to the indentation in the place where you lift the lid. Well, see for yourself. We took some photos of the two machines next to each other for you to peruse. Google's Cr-48 and a MacBook side by side...See full gallery1 - 4 / 4NextPrevNow, if you go deeper than a first glance and break out a ruler, you'll see that there are some differences between the two externally. While the hinges look practically the same size, they aren't: 6.5 inches on the MacBook to 6 inches on the Cr-48. And the screen sizes vary slightly: The Chromebook's measures 4.5 inches by 7.5 inches, and the MacBook's 5.25 inches by 8.5 inches. The trackpads, however, are equal in size--though not in function: in 2007, Apple had not yet introduced its clickable touchpad-as-button, which the Chrome notebook utilizes.Of course there are some pretty big functional differences too: Google has nixed the disk drive, Ethernet port, and all but one USB port, but does include an SD card slot. The 3-year old Mac notebook also has those pesky caps lock and function keys that Google has eliminated.But what's inside these two machines is obviously where the key difference lays: Apple has the fully-featured Mac OS X desktop operating system powering its notebook, while Google's test hardware is wrapped around its brand new Web browser-based operating system, Chrome OS.
Box Office Report: 'Thor' Prevails at Box Office, but Are Some Disappointed
Here areyour three-day box office returns (new releases bolded): 1. Thor: The Dark World - $86.1 million 2. Jackass Presents Bad Grandpa - $11.3 million 3. Free Birds - $11.18 million 4. Last Vegas - $11.10 million 5. Ender;s Game - $10.2 million 6. Gravity - $8.4 million 7. 12 Years a Slave - $6.6 million 8. Captain Phillips - $5.8 million 9. About Time - $5.1 million 10. Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2 - $2.8 million The Big Stories Anyone writing that Thor was a disappointment at the box office this weekend is crazy. Honestly, the only people who should be disappointed with the numbers that Thor Deux put up are those who estimated it was headed for mid-90s territory. Anyone who actually saw the film has every right to be disappointed. Even angry and should demand their portion of its $86 million back. It may not be as bad as your Fantastic Fours and Ghost Riders, but it is down there in the company of the bottom third of Marvel film product. That being the optimum word, of course: product. Cause that’s what we got. A ride on the post-Avengers train to bridge in the next wave and Marvel is laughing all the way to the bank. Thor: The Not-So-Dark Truth The grosses of the first Thor film, with little more than the knowledge of his appearance in an Incredible Hulk TV film and the Adventures in Babysitting mythos for most people, should have been expected to not line up with Marvel’s more popular superheroes. Sure that was more visual acuity than Iron Man had over the years, but that also had the newfound appeal of Robert Downey Jr. for audiences while Chris Hemsworth’s big role was as a red herring in A Perfect Getaway and a supporting role in a shelf-sitting Joss Whedon coscripted horror film. It still opened the summer of 2011 with $65.7 million and went on to gross $181 million. (That was a bit more than what Captain America would cook up a couple months later.) Thor has a better advantage now. Not one, but two big-screen appearances under the hammer. How does his first direct sequel compare to others in the comic film world? The Dark Knight (+224.9%), Blade II (+90.5%), X2: X-Men United (+57.0%), Hellboy II: The Golden Army (+49.0%), Thor: The Dark World (+31.0%), Iron Man 2 (+29.9%), Batman Returns (+12.8%), Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (+3.5%) Ghost Rider, The Punisher and Kick-Ass all took drops with their sequels. Then again, people barely knew their sequels were even coming out. Spider-Man 2 did not open as big as its predecessor but that was more Sony’s error in going for the July 4 holiday rather than being the summer kickoff of 2004. It opened to $26 million less and still came within $34 million of the original’s final gross. Thor and the Lame Elves are going to eclipse the $181 million from the first go-round. (X-Men Origins: Wolverine is the only film to open with $80+ million and not hit $200.) It is the 11th Marvel feature to start with over $80 million. The others all bare the mark of Spider-Man, Iron Man, X-Men or The Avengers. That’s not bad. Add in another $240 million overseas, the sequel will easily eclipse the $449 million worldwide gross of the original. As for the whole Avengers bump Thor was supposed to get, a 24.8% increase compared to Iron Man 3’s 35.9% is not too shabby either. We’ll see just how much love there really is for Captain America when The Winter Soldier opens off-peak in April, brought to you by the directors of You, Me and Dupree. An Ender by Any Other Name Ender’s Game took a steep decline this week. As expected, Thor cut deep into its numbers dropping it 62% and back to fifth place while adult comedies and kids fare held a bit better and should continue to do so next week as nothing opens wide except The Best Man Holiday. Ender’s total now stands at just under $44 million and is going to struggle to hit $70. Bad Grandpa had no problem making that tally and has held so well it even has a shot at reaching $100 millionas does Sony’s Captain Phillips. Last Vegas and Free Birds will likely hit that combined, holding well enough to knock Ender back. Meanwhile, 12 Years a Slave continues to increase its screen count and slowly draw in a bigger audience. Its tally stands at over $17 million. Support Your Overseas Rom-Com Finally, Universal doesn’t seem to know how to sell people on a time-traveling romance. Even when it costars The Time Traveler’s Wife herself, Rachel McAdams. Domhnall Gleason may not slide off the tongue but letting Richard Curtis’ About Time limp its way from a 175-theater limited release to a 1,200-theater semilimited release is not helping to get word of mouth out there yet. Love Actually started on just 576 screens back in 2003 and grossed $6.8 million. On nearly 1,200 screens the following week it grabbed almost $8.7 million with its large cast. It played pretty consistently on less than 1,750 screens its first month before grabbing its final $16 of its $59 million. Unless About Time is discovered soon, $16 million may be what it is looking at total. Erik Childress can be seen each Thursday morning on WCIU-TV;s First Business breaking down the box office on the Movies & Money segment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)