All Blogs Feeds

Windows Mobile holds back iPhone contenders

Dan Grabham — 1210260012

Looking at HTC’s Touch Diamond handset, you’d think it was cutting edge. Touch FLO 3D interface? Check. 7.2Mbps HSDPA? Check. But as we said in our hands on piece – there’s one problem, and it’s nothing to do with HTC itself. Nope, it’s that pesky Windows OS it runs on.

Microsoft knows that Windows Mobile is not up to scratch. It made that clear during its consumer pitching at February’s Mobile World Congress in Barcelona. We expect Windows Mobile 7 and 8 to seriously challenge Apple and Nokia on interface usability.

After all, Windows Mobile still makes a mobile work like a PC. And that, as we’ve seen with the iPhone, is not the way a mobile should work.

Things will change. The fact SonyEricsson has also jumped onto the Windows Mobile bandwagon with its forthcoming Experia X1 suggests that big things are ahead for the platform, even if looking up an email is currently still equivalent to wading in treacle.

However, it must be slightly annoying for HTC that it continues to have to develop atop Windows Mobile to make its handsets anywhere near usable and, in the case of the Diamond, at all appealing to consumers. And that despite the Touch Diamond deploying the latest 6.1 version of the OS.

It must also be slightly depressing for Microsoft’s Mobile bods who constantly see their OS tinkered with in an effort to make it more usable. But not as half as annoying as Windows Mobile is to use…

GTA IV: Xbox vs PlayStation

James Rivington — 1210170212

There's been a lot of focus in the last week on Grand Theft Auto IV and which platform it best runs on.

The majority of people who've played both versions are saying that it runs marginally better on the PS3, but the findings are inconclusive at best: both are equally good in our eyes.

What's interesting to me at the moment is how Microsoft is attempting to use GTA as a PR exercise to boast about the Xbox 360 console and its success.

We received an unbelievable and outrageous press release today from Microsoft UK saying:

"Gamers have voted with their wallets, and the results are in. The Xbox 360 version of 'Grand Theft Auto IV' has sold more than 100,000 copies, or 20 per cent more than the PlayStation 3 version in the UK since the game's release last Tuesday 29 April."

Exaggeration and hyperbole

The release then sees Microsoft rambling on and on, mostly just patting itself on the back about selling more copies and going on about how the Xbox 360 is the premium platform for enjoying GTA. Blah, blah, blah.

Please excuse me briefly while I pause to be sick.

Here's the point: there are more Xbox 360 consoles out there (it launched over a year earlier) so straight numbers are a terrible way of looking at the market. The Xbox 360 version of GTA IV sold 20 per cent more copies than the PS3 version. And that's despite the fact that there are almost twice as many Xbox 360 consoles in the wild in the UK, compared to PS3s.

Crunch the numbers

So, relatively speaking, for Microsoft to brag about doing better than Sony, it would need to sell almost twice as many copies of the game, too. But it didn't. And as such, the numbers say that per-console, the PS3 version has actually done a bit better.

"Data released by ELSPA/Chart-Track shows Xbox 360 Week One sales at 514,000 copies sold in the UK. PlayStation 3 version of the game sold only 413,000 copies, clearly demonstrating that gamers prefer the Xbox 360 version," says the Microsoft ~~press release~~ progaganda exercise.

What a load of complete rubbish, Microsoft!

Let's do the maths. 413,000 PS3 copies of GTA IV divided by the 1.2m PS3 consoles sold in the UK, equates to about 0.3 copies sold per console. So basically one in three UK PS3 owners have bought GTA IV in the last seven days.

Compare that to the 514,000 Xbox 360 copies sold in the UK, divided by the 2.2m consoles in circulation. It amounts to 0.23 copies per console. So about one in four Xbox 360 owners bought the game. Comparatively LESS than the PS3 version.

It's all a load of smoke and mirrors nonsense. Everyone is up to it - it's not just Microsoft.

This is an absolutely textbook example of a big company spouting a load of dingo's kidneys in order to promote itself.

The Phenom X3 factor

James Morris — 1209553820

AMD’s triple-core Phenom X3 is finally here. It may have sounded like an April Fool, but AMD has finally delivered on its announcement back in September 2007. Will the new holy trinity provide the renewed fortunes AMD needs to combat Intel?

The triple-core advantage

Although AMD’s Phenom X4 can’t quite compete with Intel’s Core 2 Quad even at the same clock speed, its real issue is the low frequencies currently available. The fastest Phenom X4 runs at 2.5GHz, whereas Intel’s Core 2 Extreme QX9770 is now on 3.2GHz. A clock speed issue is essentially a yield issue – AMD hasn’t perfected its Phenom production process sufficiently to produce enough high-clock CPUs just yet.

Although AMD would like to spin things another way, touting the benefits of three cores, the arrival of the Phenom X3 can only be an answer to this yield problem. AMD doesn’t have a special production line producing triple-core CPUs. They are all quad-core parts with one core disabled. The only reason AMD would want to do that is if one core isn’t performing up to the standard of the other three.

With its current designs, Intel can’t easily produce triple-core processors. Its quad-core parts are essentially two dual-core CPUs packaged together and joined at the FSB. So a triple-core design would mean two cores on one half, and one on the other – technically feasible, but hardly elegant.

So from AMD’s point of view, the Phenom X3 makes good sense. The Phenom X4 is hardly expensive – even the flagship 9850 Black Edition is only £150. But the entry-level Phenom X3 8450 is already below £100, putting it in the same league as AMD’s quickest dual-core Athlon 64 X2s.

Only a handful of Intel dual-core processors are cheaper – the Allendale 65nm ones with 2MB of L2 cache and 800MHz FSB rather than the usual 4MB and 1,066MHz of Conroe, plus the 45nm Core 2 Duo E7200, which has 3MB of L2 and a 1,066MHz FSB, rather than the usual 6MB and 1,333MHz respectively.

That’s likely to be an easy retail sell, now that true megahertz have been hidden behind mysterious model numbers in the processor market. For many punters, three cores for the same or less money than two sounds like a winner.

Intel strikes back

Intel’s response has been to slash its quad-core prices. And herein lies the rub for AMD. The 65nm Core 2 Q6600 can now be snapped up for a modest £134. The Q6600 has been a proven favourite amongst overclockers for nine months already.

So now the choice is dual-core, AMD triple-core for the same money… or add £40 and go quad-core. Intel’s other quad-cores are considerably more expensive, particularly the 45nm variety. The Q6600 is Intel’s single-handed spoiler.

If the Q6600 was available for £100, that would have been game, set and match to Intel. The current price leaves a little doubt, and a decision for potential buyers to make between price and an extra core.

So AMD should sell a few X3s. But only to those who don’t realise that an extra core is going to be of benefit primarily for tasks like professional 3D rendering. For most everyday software – and virtually all games – a higher-clocked dual-core processor will almost certainly be quicker.

Lenovo's MacBook Air parody

Dan Grabham — 1209549914

Great piece over at Fake Steve Jobs about this fantastic parody of the Apple MacBook Air ad. It's actually an ad for Lenovo, but is well worth your while watching. I could say more, but that would rather spoil it.

Fake Steve isn't keen though: "No idea where it came from but it looks like a case of Lenovo trying to coast on our momentum and pretend they're as cool as we are when it comes to design. Whatevs. MacBook Air is still the kewlest lapotop on the market."

Nvidia running scared of processing powerhouses?

Dan Grabham — 1209471137

You know, the story I wrote about Nvidia last week has got me thinking. The company’s latest marketing campaign centres on the fact that you don’t need to buy an expensive quad-core CPU.

Instead, it advises you to get hold of a reasonable dual-core processor and team it with a well-specced graphics card which will give you more bang for your buck. That’s a reasonable argument. But it rather hides something more; is it that Nvidia is actually running scared? It’s certainly the latest salvo in an ongoing tête-à-tête between Intel and Nvidia over the last few weeks.

Despite Nvidia’s strength in the graphics market, it doesn’t have something that its competitors do – a plan for when PC processing and graphics become as indelibly entwined as sea and sand (unless, of course, it really is buying VIA). On the other hand, Intel has its forthcoming Larrabee discrete chip. AMD has the GPU-CPU Fusion processor tech in the pipeline. Intel also plans to put graphics processing directly onto the die of the next-generation Nehalem architecture.

Long-term game

And while we won’t see the fruits of these labours until the end of 2009 at the earliest, the situation is an awkward one for Nvidia. Its only real competitor, ATI, has been snapped up, and although the short-term has been difficult for the new AMD, longer-term things could be a whole lot rosier.

While Nvidia has respect for Intel as a microprocessor manufacturer that works alongside its products, its representatives clearly have little time for the company’s graphical capabilities, especially in terms of the integrated market, which is where Nvidia really wants to make up ground.

Earlier this month Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang said Intel’s integrated graphics were "a joke", before saying that even if they were 10 times as powerful, they would only just match Nvidia’s offerings. He aided his illustration by telling analysts that Nvdia would be opening "a can of whoop ass" on Intel.

Very bullish indeed. Intel was quick to respond with comment about Nvidia’s Vista driver tardiness. But while Intel can probably afford to annoy Nvidia, can the same be said the other way around – especially with Larrabee on the horizon.

Intel goes it alone

Intel clearly has its sights set on a future without Nvidia. At the Intel Developer Forum at the beginning of the month, Intel senior vice president Pat Gelsinger spelled out the death of PC graphics as we know it. "First, graphics that we have all come to know and love today, I have news for you. It's coming to an end.

"Our multi-decade old 3D graphics rendering architecture that's based on a rasterisation approach is no longer scalable and suitable for the demands of the future," said Gelsinger.

That much is clear. But both Intel and Nvidia have carried on bickering. Both have released counter-claims regarding the abilities of Intel’s integrated offerings, and Nvidia’s latest ‘forget quad-core’ campaign seems in direct response to IDF claims that buying more powerful GPUs at the cost of CPU grunt doesn’t make sense.

The real winner out of all this could, intriguingly, be AMD. Although it has fallen behind in recent times, the company is currently the only organisation with comprehensive CPU and GPU know-how. And that could be invaluable in the ever more integrated, system-on-a-chip world of the future.

Canon's HF10: The best camcorder you can buy?

James Morris — 1209384022

Canon has gone to great lengths to give its HF10 camcorder the most auspicious launch it could muster. The company flew 80 European journalists to Morocco, loaned them a camcorder each - plus accessories - and presented them with two days’ worth of luscious scenery and events to try out its idea of ‘freecording’.

But in the cold light of day (or the chilly English springtime), is the HF10 really worth this level of hype? Or is Canon merely hoping to spin things in its favour with a plush press trip and indoctrination via lengthy hands-on experience?

Canon’s HF10 vs the competition

For a start, the HF10 doesn’t introduce any specific new technologies. Canon is rather late to the Flash memory party, and it has some powerful competitors.

Panasonic’s HDC-SD9, for example, offers the same Full HD, progressive shooting at a 17Mbits/s AVCHD data recording rate. It’s smaller, lighter, and cheaper too.

But the Panasonic camcorder is behind the HF10 on image quality and enthusiast features. So whilst it offers great HD video quality in an eminently pocket-friendly package, the HDC-SD9 won’t woo budding movie makers.

Sony has a couple of potential alternatives, too. The HDR-CX6EK is remarkably similar in looks to the HF10. But it shoots AVCHD at 1,440 x 1,080 with a maximum 15Mbits/s data rate. It also doesn’t offer the same level of features as the HF10, with no headphone or microphone minijacks and fewer manual controls.

So although the HDR-CX6EK has great image quality, it’s more for the point-and-shoot user – and it’s not as small as Panasonic’s HDC-SD9, either.

The smallest HD camcorder in the world

But Sony has another trick up its sleeve – the HDR-TG3. This is being touted as the smallest Full HD camcorder in the world. It weighs just 240g without battery, 35g less than the Panasonic HDC-SD9.

Most impressive is the fact that it’s half the width of the HDC-SD9. However, the HDR-TG3’s top AVCHD data rate is 16Mbits/s – 1Mbit/s less than the HF10 or Panasonic’s HDC-SD9. And whilst it records Full HD at 1,920 x 1,080, the HDR-TG3 has no progressive option.

Its biggest stumbling block is its 1/5inch CMOS, which is much smaller than the HF10’s so doesn’t offer its low-light prowess. It has no accessory shoe, microphone connection or headphone jack, either.

Nevertheless, the HDR-TG3 is an amazing feat of micro-engineering, and sure to excite those who just want an HD camera you can stick in a pocket. But it’s nowhere near as flexible as the HF10.

Then there are the Sanyo Xactis, which are great value. The Sanyo Xacti VPC-HD1000 shoots 1,920 x 1,080 Full HD, but only interlaced and only at 30 frames/sec, not the 25 frames/sec we use in Europe. This could cause compatibility problems with European audiovisual kit. Image quality also isn’t up to the HF10’s standard.

So… does the Canon HF10 really cut it?

The Canon HF10 certainly has the best image quality and the best features in its class. You would need to step up to a professional three-chip model to shoot better-looking video, and only larger HDV or hard disk-based models offer more features for serious video makers.

However, despite its compactness, the HF10 is still too large – and expensive – to be the kind of camcorder you might want to chuck around during extreme sports.

It’s small enough to carry with you in a bag, but not a pocket. The only fully fledged camcorder we’ve come across which is truly pocket sized is Panasonic’s standard definition-shooting SDR-S7, and that’s reassuringly cheap at around £200.

As ever, it comes down to what you plan to do with video. If you just want something to keep in a pocket and whip out for shooting the odd moment – like a compact digital camera – then the HF10 isn’t quite the best option. There are alternatives which compromise on quality to achieve even more impressive miniaturisation.

But if you want the best HD image quality and a heap of shooting features in a readily portable package, the Canon HF10 really is the best AVCHD model yet. We expect it to sell like hot cakes.

Do you agree with James? What do you think is the best camcorder currently available? Will you upgrade to HD? Leave us a comment below.

This is why I don't like the Nintendo Wii

Rungsberry — 1209119366

As Douglas Adams once said, the human race is not itself yet an endangered species, but that’s certainly not for lack of trying. We don't half do some odd things sometimes. For instance: in the last two years, nearly 25 million of us have gone out and spent £180 (or the equivalent) on a Nintendo Wii.

And by Nintendo Wii, I mean that small, ugly, cheap-looking white plastic box that lets you to play a small collection of mostly-bad games but in a very innovative and novel manor.

Ugly Wii

I find it absolutely perplexing that the Wii has been sold to so many people. I’ve seen better looking gangrenous wounds than the Wii. I’ve played board games with better graphics. And I’ve seen cows that handle better than most Wii games. So why is the console so popular?

I think it’s because Nintendo sells its Wii consoles based more on a cool idea than anything else. The Wii is truly revolutionary in the way it approaches games in a totally new way. The handheld remote controller is a neat idea, and it attracts people of all ages. It’s new and exciting. In theory, the Wii is the greatest games console of the 21st Century.

PS3 vs Xbox vs Wii

But that doesn’t change the fact that in practise, the Wii has a lot less technology packed inside it than both the Xbox 360 and the PS3.

Add to that the fact that the Wii is now more expensive than the cheapest Xbox and only £100 cheaper than the PS3 (as opposed to £245 cheaper like when the PS3 launched), and it's reasonable to assume that the Wii might be in for a tougher time in the next two years.

It’s no real surprise to me that the majority of Wii owners who I know, very rarely touch it anymore. Many are now wishing they bought a PS3 or an Xbox – I suspect that many more think the same, but would never admit it.

The odd good game

Of course, every now and then, a game comes along which people get excited about. And the Wii is dusted off and brought back from the dead. Mario Kart and Wii Fit being the two recent examples. But as soon as the novelty value wears off, people seem to lose interest.

It doesn’t help at all, that there is still a distinct lack of quality games available for the Wii. And a pioneering games console with no decent games is about as useful as a snooze button on a smoke alarm.

This is the most frustrating part from my point of view… Essentially the Wii is aimed at people just like me. I don’t have the appetite for playing games for long periods of time. I get bored very quickly. So a quick bash at Wii Tennis is exactly the kind of thing that appeals to me.

But in reality, the Wii bores me more than anything. We’ve got all three consoles in our house, and the Wii is by-far the least-played.

My conclusion is that the Wii is, yes, a really cool, innovative product. But it has also majorly over-performed thus far. And so Nintendo is going to have to come up with something new for the next console if it wants to enjoy the same level of success.

In the meantime, if you’re thinking of buying a new console, at least consider all your options before buying a Wii.

And finally... clearly I don't think the Nintendo Wii is up to much. But of course, 25 million sales (and counting) say I'm wrong. If you think I’m wrong, let me know in the comments below.

Panasonic and Pioneer: a match made in HD heaven

James Rivington — 1209045476

This morning’s news that Panasonic and Pioneer plan to share PDP technologies, was good news for everyone. Good for Panny, good for Pioneer, good for me, and good for you.

There’s not a tech-savvy person in the world who wouldn’t love to own a 65-inch Pioneer Kuro plasma television (and a living room big enough to house one, of course). However, the number of people who’re happy to blow nearly £4000 on a TV is very low indeed. And there sits the age-old problem for Pioneer.

As a consequence of this paralyzing catch-22 situation, the second-best plasma range – Panasonic’s Viera TVs - have been flourishing, offering a happy balance between quality and price.

This, though, now looks like it’s going to change. Pioneer can no longer afford to make its own Plasma panels. And so it’s sharing its secrets with Panasonic so that Panny can go forth and make super panels for both companies.

New TVs arrive next year

So what we’re going to get is improved Panasonic Viera TVs. But also improved Pioneer Kuro TVs… at cheaper prices.

It’ll be interesting to see how different the Viera and Kuro TVs are, once the next generation rolls off the factory conveyor belt in 16 months’ time.

Will Kuro still cost a lot more than the Viera? Will Kuro still be better than Viera? Will Kuro be worth the extra cost? Or will the two TVs be similarly priced?

It’s hard to see Pioneer making up an enormous amount of ground in terms of sales, and it certainly seems like Panasonic is the main winner in this deal. But it will sure-as-hell be interesting to hear more about this partnership once all the details are finalised in May.

Pioneer’s amazing zero-luminance extreme-black concept panel meets Panasonic’s mighty manufacturing muscles. The prospect should have Sony, Sharp, LG, Samsung et al, shaking in their proverbial substandard gumboots.

Facebook Chat: Another monumental waste of time

Dan Grabham — 1208967520

There hasn’t been such potential for time-wasting since Facebook itself hit the general consciousness. For IT admins and overly strict bosses across the land, Facebook Chat is the stuff of nightmares.

You know, most of the time I work in an office. Yeah, so I spend part of the time out of the office, seeing various companies and whatnot. But the rest of the time I’m sat at my desk, talking to people on the phone or, more pertinently, via IM like the rest of the office-bound populace.

I’ve always used MSN (Windows Live) chat. Recently, I’ve decided to use Chat within Gmail a bit more, as there are some different people on there, notably a friend who has carelessly moved abroad. And, occasionally on my second PC, I use Skype to message some other people, although I don’t keep an eye on it too much. Now Facebook has got in on the act.

Okay, so Facebook Chat may be fairly unobtrusive as one of my colleagues pointed out, but it’s also yet another way for people to contact the hell out of me. I didn’t sign up to Facebook to enable people to chitter chatter their way into my life and I certainly don’t need another method for people to talk to me.

There’s only one thing to say. Facebook Chat is a very bad idea.

Trouble for addicts

Actually, it’s a very bad idea only because it’s fantastically well executed – the kind of app Ajax was born for. Trouble is, it’ll lead to even more Facebook addiction.

For IT admins, blocking MSN or Skype is relatively easy. But blocking Chat on GMail or Facebook is impossible – unless you restrict net access itself. And for most of us these days, that’s impractical.

That main problem for all of us chat addicts is that you need to have Facebook open in order to use Facebook Chat - unlike the app-based Windows Live Messenger or Skype. Yep, so Chat in Gmail works like that, too, but many people who use GMail are well used to having it permanently open anyway. But having Facebook open all the time? That’s like, going to end in zero work!

I guess anything that encourages more communication should itself be encouraged, but when one of my friends wrote me a message in three parts on three different systems this morning (albeit "There’s just…too many…ways to communicate!") I knew it was time to take action.

So, if you’re reading this wondering why you can’t get hold of me, now you know why.

SSDs not yet a serious alternative to the hard drive

Dan Grabham — 1208948640

Interesting comments today from Toshiba’s Shozo Saito, who says that 25 per cent of notebooks will come with SSD storage in three years' time.

I’ve never really been a believer in solid state – and this kinda confirms that. If it was seriously going to have a big impact on the market, it would surely already be making serious in-roads in terms of market share.

Twenty-five per cent of all laptops might sound like a lot, but what about the other 75 per cent? Toshiba is talking about scaling up SSDs to 512MB and, of course, in three years’ time this will be even larger.

But the fact is, SSDs still cost many times the price of a hard disk which can store more. The cost will obviously drop, but will it keep pace with hard drives?

SSDs do have some other inherent advantages of course, particularly in terms of access speed and robustness, but it’s difficult to see how the hard drive will lose its market position until SSD can match it on capacity – and for a good price.