Reader Al F.'s old Apogree speakers and Krell amplifiers.
I never had any doubt that readers of this blog have the coolest systems, but the magnitude of the flood of homemade speakers, desktop systems, headphones, and all sorts of groovy turntables totally knocked me out. There's some sweet gear here, so click to the slideshow and check out the systems. Thanks to all who sent JPEGs -- I heard from well over 100 readers, so I can't show everyone's gear.
Photosynth is now available for Windows Phone 8.
The app allows users to stitch together photos to create panorama images or even full 360-degree views. After shooting and stitching the images, users can publish their photos to the Photosynth site or Bing or can share it via Facebook and Twitter.
New features added for Windows Phone 8 include:
One of the biggest criticisms of Windows Phone (as well as BlackBerry and other smaller phone systems) is that there aren't as many apps available as there are for
Android and iOS. However, Microsoft has been steadily increasing the number of apps available for its newest smartphone operating system to catch up with its bigger rivals.
Earlier this week, Twitter updated its Windows Phone app to add a slew of discovery features that had been included in its iOS and Android apps for some time. And Spotify last month launched a new Windows Phone 8 app in beta.
Apple's iCloud status at 8:41 a.m. PT
Apple's iCloud had a major outage this morning, but things are slowly but surely returning to normal.
The outage was reported this morning on Apple's Status page, showing that 11 percent of users were affected. All of iCloud's services, including Mail support, Notes, and sign-in weren't working. Since then, the services have made a comeback and fewer users have been affected.
As of this writing, just Photo Stream, Documents in the Cloud, and Backup are not working. Apple says that it's affecting "less than 1 percent of users."
Apple's iCloud is no stranger to issues. In September, the service was hit by an outage that lasted a couple of days. Last week, the company's App Store,
iTunes, iCloud, and the MacBook App Store were inaccessible to many people through part of a day.
CNET has contacted Apple for comment on the latest outage. We will update this story when we have more information.
(Via 9to5Mac)
Unfortunately, AT&T's iPhone 5 is only LTE at AT&T.
BARCELONA, Spain--Here's the good news: the U.S. wireless industry is working to ensure that you'll eventually be able to take your LTE-enabled phone from one carrier to another and get the same experience.
The bad news: it likely won't happen for a few years.
That's according to T-Mobile Chief Technology Officer Neville Ray, who spoke to CNET in an interview at Mobile World Congress. Ray says the industry is keen on phones that can operate on different carriers, but that there remains a lot of complexities.
The advent of 4G LTE technology was supposed to unify the industry, joining together factions that spent years in their respective technology camps, or CDMA and GSM. That's been a big hurdle, particularly large countries such as the U.S. and China. In the U.S., for instance, phones can move between AT&T and T-Mobile USA, but will not work on Verizon Wireless or Sprint Nextel.
But alongside the rise of a common technology in LTE is a new problem: spectrum fragmentation. Because of the lack of consistent spectrum bands, each carrier has built their networks using incompatible spectrum frequencies. AT&T and Verizon actually run on the same frequency, 700 megahertz, but are in different parts of the band and can't work with each other. T-Mobile and Sprint Nextel are each using their own different bands.
The industry is already doing a lot of work to address the complications. Qualcomm told CNET that it will solve the 4G LTE roaming problem this year by introducing a chipset that can run on multiple frequencies. CNET broke the story that Verizon would have international roaming partners for its 4G LTE network by next year.
So while there's been progress on the chip side, there remains a problem with the radios and how many bands they can actually handle, Ray said. He added there were additional complications handling both low and high bands of frequency.
Another wrinkle: additional spectrum that will eventually be made available to the wireless industry that adds even more new frequencies. That comes on top of different bands of spectrum held by AT&T and Dish. So achieving interoperability is like hitting a moving target.
Verizon has said that while it may have some agreements in place next year, it will take some time for phones which are compatible with certain frequencies to hit the market.
There seems to be more of a push for the carriers to work with international carriers than their domestic competitors. The carriers, of course, have a vested interest in keeping the customer locked into its network, so the idea of interoperability may not be high on the list.
The legacy network incompatibility, meanwhile, means these devices couldn't work together either way if a 4G LTE connection wasn't available.
Ray, who also serves as chairman of 4G Americas trade group, said he is a big believer of consumer portability. Indeed, T-Mobile has pushed to get AT&T iPhones switched over to its carrier. But in many markets, those iPhones drop from a faste connection to a slower one because of spectrum incompatibility. Only in select markets does T-Mobile and AT&T have compatible bands for HSPA+, a fast network they both call 4G. But an
iPhone 5 on AT&T wouldn't get LTE with T-Mobile.
How quickly this gets addressed depends a lot on how rapidly the industry puts the new bands of spectrum to use. Ray said he believes this is an important issue.
"Ultimately, that problem has to be fixed," he said.
BARCELONA, Spain--Time for a new meaning to 'plug and play': the BeeWi Mobot is a power plug that not only controls the gadgets in your home, but also tells you what's going on while you're out, thanks to a SIM card and an iPhone app.
The Mobot is a prototype shown off by BeeWi at mobile phone show Mobile World Congress. Plug it into a power socket, then plug an electrical appliance or gadget into the Mobot, and it will control that gadget. What makes it more than just a regular timer plug is that all the Mobot plugs in the house can talk to each other, and to your phone. Originally, they used ZigBee, but the finished version is set to use Bluetooth instead.
The master Mobot has a SIM card in it, which then connects to the other SIM-less Mobots via Bluetooth or Wi-Fi. You can then turn each individual plug on and off from wherever you are with an iOS app. The app also lets you schedule your lamps, your washing machine or whatever is plugged in to turn on or off automatically at set times.
The Mobot can also let you know what's going on in the house. It has a motion detector and can text you when it detects someone moving around, whether it's warning you of an uninvited wrong'un or letting you know your kids are home safe. And you can set the plugs to turn on the lights or fire up your computer when you walk in the room.
The plugs also have a temperature sensor to warn of fire, and have a battery inside so even when the power goes out, the Mobot has enough juice to warn you that it's time to come home and rescue the contents of the freezer.
The BeeWi Mobot is planned to arrive in the second or third quarter of this year. At present, it's planned to cost a rather steep 149 Euros for the master Mobot and a further 59 Euros for each peripheral plug -- it's only when you consider this product is largely aimed at people with second homes that the price is put in perspective.
For more on the latest phones,
tablets and just about anything with a SIM card in it -- including a GPS walking cane and an
Android-powered coffee machine -- check out our news, previews and videos from Mobile World Congress.
Tesla's Model S
Elon Musk, speaking on Bloomberg TV, said "a lot" of people canceled orders for Tesla's Model S following a scathing New York Times review.
"It probably affected us to the tune of tens of millions, to the order of $100 million, so it's not trivial," Musk said. "I would say that refers more to the valuation of the company. It wasn't as though there were 1,000 cancellations just due to The New York Times article. There were probably a few hundred."However, Musk did note that Tesla sees more new reservations for the Model S each quarter, indicating demand has been growing for the vehicle.
The New York Times earlier this month published a review of the Tesla Model S that criticized the car's functionality. Among the many complaints was that the vehicle ran out of juice earlier than expected, stranding writing John Broder in the freezing East Coast weather. Before leaving on his trip, Broder said he charged the car until the display read "charge complete;" and then, working to conserve the battery while driving, he said he turned off the car's heat and drove on cruise control at 54 mph.
Tesla disputed Broder's account of the test drive and published logs that it said refuted the New York Times report. The publication and company have since kept up a nasty back and forth about the review, with each claiming the other is wrong.
"The thing I really thought was wrong is that we are looking at the data from the test drive and it does not correlate at all to the article that was written," Musk said on Bloomberg TV. "The result was that the car ran out of range. There was this sad shot of our car on a flatbed as though that was the only outcome possible for such a drive and that's just not true."
Here's the full video, via Bloomberg TV:
The HRT MicroStreamer
High Resolution Technologies makes some of the very best and most affordable digital-to-analog converters on the market. The company's newest model, the MicroStreamer, is a tiny thing, just 2.5 inches by 1.2 inches by 0.4 inch, and since it's USB-powered it doesn't have a power supply or require batteries. It works as an external sound card for computers, tablets, and some smartphones. It's also a high-quality headphone amplifier. It was designed in the U.S., and the little guy's circuitboard's components are mounted in Southern California. The aluminum case is made in China, and the metalwork finishing is done here.
The MicroStreamer has two 3.5mm output jacks, a fixed-level jack that connects your computer and home stereo, or powered loudspeakers; and a variable output headphone jack. The MicroStreamer's two outputs have separate signal paths, digital filters, and amplifier circuits, each one is optimized for its application. Setup is supereasy; just hook up the included USB cable between the MicroStreamer and USB port on the host computer or
tablet and select it as the default device. HRT also claims that the MicroStreamer can be used as a USB DAC with Samsung Galaxy S3 (and the upcoming S4) over its MHL connector (contact HRT about the details of that setup). LEDs display the sample rate (32k, 44.1k, 48k, 88.2k, and 96k) of the music being played. As firmware improvements become available, the MicroStreamer can be updated from your desktop.
The HRT MicroStreamer (left), AudioQuest DragonFly (right)
The MicroStreamer impressed from the get-go; the sound was highly detailed and pure. Compared with the $249 AudioQuest DragonFly USB DAC, the MicroStreamer is a tiny bit bigger. To test the headphone amps, I started with two very different headphones, a high-impedance (300 ohm) Sennheiser HD 580 and a low impedance (35 ohm) Hifiman HE-400; both are full-size headphones. I can't say there were huge sonic differences between the HRT and AudioQuest, even when I played 96-kHz/24-bit high-resolution files. The V-Moda M-100 really sounded great with the MicroStreamer. This headphone model's bass can sound muddy when I play it with my
iPod Classic, but the MicroStreamer firmed up the low end, the stereo soundstage was more spacious, and the treble was sweeter, too.
I also tried the MicroStreamer with Ultimate Ears UE 900 in-ear headphones while listening to Jakob Dylan's "Women and Country" album. This recording has a lot of bass, and the MicroStreamer outdid the DragonFly by better clarifying the lowest frequencies. Violinist Joshua Bell's beautifully recorded "Short Trip Home" CD was magnificent with the MicroStreamer and the UE 900. The amplifier was dead quiet and added no noise or hiss to the sound.
I also auditioned the MicroStreamer feeding an amplifier and my desktop speakers, the KEF LS50s. The sound was highly detailed and clean. It's amazing that such a tiny component like this can produce first-rate audiophile sound quality.
The MicroStreamer retails for $189.95; HRT also offers a less expensive USB DAC/headphone amp, the HeadStreamer, for $139.95.
Randi Zuckerberg knows a thing or two about complications caused by the Internet.
The sister of Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg has seen her fair share of controversial choices or awkward missteps become fodder for attacks from those who view her as the ultimate benefactor of nepotism.
After serving as Facebook's marketing director for six years, Zuckerberg struck out on her own with Zuckerberg Media, a media and production company that fashioned her an executive producer of the oft-panned Bravo reality television flop "Startups: Silicon Valley." She's also the lead singer for a cover band called Feedbomb, which is comprised of past and present Facebookers.
Come fall 2013, we'll all get to read more about her online and offline adventures, as the other Zuckerberg is turning her overexposed existence into a lifestyle book entitled "Dot Complicated" for HarperCollins. She's also penning a companion picture book for children that will also be released this fall.
CNET went to Zuckerberg to get the scoop on the pending publications, and we couldn't help but ask about how her brother feels about her putting their private lives on display. Our questions and her answers are included in their entirety below.
Q:What does the title, "Dot Complicated," mean to you and why do you feel it best describes your story?
Zuckerberg: Technology has changed virtually every part of our lives. We live in a world of such rapid innovation - as the tools change, so do the social norms and etiquette that go with them. While many things have gotten easier and more efficient, many aspects of our day-to-day lives and managing our personal relationships have become a lot more complicated. That's why I'm so excited to be writing Dot Complicated, because I am passionate about helping people untangle their modern, wired lives.
Personally, along with being part of the team that built Facebook from early on, I also grew up on social media. These tools have affected how I raise my son, how I balance my career, and how I interact with friends and family, to name a few. I've seen firsthand how this new digital era can be both wonderful, and utterly complicated, at the same time. I can only imagine how confusing things must feel for millions of people who use these tools, every single day, and don't live right in the heart of all the action. If I can use my own experiences, knowledge, and lessons learned to help other people navigate their modern, digital lives (while having some fun along the way,) I would consider the book a huge success.
Who do you see as the primary audience for the book and why do you feel the need to publish your story now?
Zuckerberg: There's a lot of great content out there about "technology" or about "lifestyle" -- but I saw a gap missing at the intersection of the two. How technology is changing the way we interact with the people around us, how it affects our love lives, our personal lives, our work lives. My hope is that the book will be interesting and useful to a broad audience, whether you are a lightweight consumer of these tools, a parent who wants to stay up-to-date with the latest trends "the kids are using," a student who wants a competitive advantage in the job market, or a business who wants to better understand the modern consumer's habits and social issues.
The reason for publishing the story now is that I just launched my newsletter, also named Dot Complicated a few weeks ago. The newsletter has already received such positive early traction and feedback, that I felt the timing was right to expand it into a book as well, especially since the book process requires a lengthier timeline. I plan to discuss many of the topics we cover in my Dot Complicated newsletter -- complexities of the modern, digital world we live in -- including issues around etiquette, privacy, social, identity, career, love, family, and more. I will also discuss where social media is heading and how it will continue to influence every facet of our modern world -- from our personal relationships and professional careers to the bigger picture of global initiatives and politics.
It's also a great time for me personally to be publishing this book, as I'm navigating how to balance my career and new motherhood and how to raise my son the right way in this digital age. I've engaged with a lot of people online who are grappling with similar challenges and questions and I feel strongly that right now is the time for that approachable voice of technology. I didn't want to limit the audience, which is why I'm working on both an adult nonfiction book, as well as a children's book, with HarperCollins. In this digital world we live in, it's important for children to be tech-savvy and to understand the benefits and risks of technology from early on. Which means speaking to them directly.
Is there anything that will surprise readers? Can you provide a few examples?
Zuckerberg: I think what has surprised me the most in my research and conversations, is that no matter where in the world you go, no matter if you're speaking to someone in Silicon Valley or Nebraska, Dubai or Delhi, we're all grappling with the same issues related to technology and our lives. I did a lot of public speaking last year, and no matter where I went, people always asked the same questions: how can I better understand what my children are doing online? How can I ask my significant other not to immediately reach for their
tablet in bed? How can I make sure I don't lose my job to someone who is younger and more tech-savvy? I plan to address many of these topics in the book -- some of the topics may surprise readers, or feel slightly uncomfortably familiar/intimate at first, but when you break past the news about the latest gadgets, devices, updates, and software, you realize that technology is nothing without the humans on the other side of it. These are issues that affect all of us in our own lives and need to be openly discussed as a society.
Can you share one of the funnier anecdotes you plan to include in the book?
Zuckerberg: There are too many to choose from. Because tech and pop culture are coming together more closely every day, I've had the opportunity to check things off my bucket list I never dreamed I'd be able to do, like walking the red carpet for The Golden Globes, getting a personal phone call from The White House, and hosting a live video chat with United Nations Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon and rock band Linkin Park ... together. I can't give away all my good stories just yet, but suffice it to say that I think readers will be thoroughly entertained, as well as educated.
The Bravo show "Startups: Silicon Valley" rubbed many people working in the technology industry the wrong way. Will you discuss the show, the cast, the ratings, and address the critics in the book?
Zuckerberg: Of course I'll talk about the show in the book. It will just be a small part of the book, as I have so much content to cover, and this was just one experience I am lucky to have been part of, but I've done a lot of reflecting over the past few months on what I think the future of media/television looks like in the digital age -- and I've purposefully remained quiet about everything, so I can write about it for the first time in the book. I hope that readers will be pleasantly surprised by and interested in the learnings I have to share, based on my recent experiences working with Bravo and other media partners.
Do you expect Dot Complicated to incite a strong negative reaction among Valley types?
Zuckerberg: You know, it seems that these days, everything that anyone does incites a strong negative reaction, doesn't it? It's so easy to hide behind our online handles and criticize others. I'm just focused on doing the best work I can, and through this project, helping people navigate their complicated, wired lives. Of course not everyone will agree with every single thing I have to say -- and I wouldn't want them to! Would you honestly want to read a book that didn't have anything provocative, controversial, or thought-provoking in it?
The tone of Dot Complicated will be friendly, informative, and a little bit sassy -- just like our newsletter. I'm thankful for all of the great feedback we've been receiving on the newsletter, which in turn is helping me shape the book so that it reaches readers at a raw, human, and relatable level.
Has your brother expressed any concern about a nonfiction book that relates stories from your personal life, stories that will surely include details about his own private life?
Zuckerberg: The book will draw from some of my own personal experiences, in order to tell a broader story about the complexities of our wired world. Some media outlets have called this book a "memoir," which makes me laugh, because that couldn't possibly be further from the truth of what this book is. Who writes a memoir at age 30?! My goal with this book is to spark dialogue and inspire people of all ages to embrace technology and the new sets of norms that come with sharing content online -- something my family has always been supportive of.
Nate Silver at work. (Credit: CBS News)
With great precision FiveThirtyEight's Nate Silver predicted which states President Obama would win in his second-term election. Now he is applying his statistical-analysis methods to predicting who will take home the Oscars on Sunday.
Silver has made Oscar predictions in the past, but with only 75 percent accuracy. By comparison, he picked all 50 state winners in the 2012 presidential election. Silver refined his Oscar prediction models this year by assigning weights to the glut of movie awards that precede the Oscars, similar to how he weighted the various polls in calculating his election predictions. Silver explained:
These patterns aren't random: instead, the main reason that some awards perform better is because some of them are voted on by people who will also vote for the Oscars. For instance, many members of the Screen Actors Guild will vote both for the SAG Awards and for the Oscars. In contrast to these "insider" awards are those like the Golden Globes, which are voted upon by "outsiders" like journalists or critics; these tend to be less reliable.
Silver is giving the best-picture edge to "Argo," best actor to Daniel Day-Lewis, and best supporting actress to Anne Hathaway by wide margins. His results are in line with what the movie critics have been predicting. The competitions for best actress, best director, and best supporting actor, however, will be closer races, according to his calculations. Those awards will be the true test of Silver's Oscar prediction prowess.
(Credit: Nate Silver/New York Times)
Microsoft's Surface Pro tablet.
Is Microsoft a cooler company than it was in the past? Some people certainly think so.
Among 853 people between the ages of 18 and 29 questioned in a Reuters/Ipsos poll, half believe the software giant is cooler than it was a year or two ago. Though 50 percent may not be a resounding endorsement, it topped the coolness factor for a couple of other tech players.
Twitter was deemed cooler than in the past by 47 percent of the young adults polled, while Facebook got the same response from just 42 percent.
Microsoft's score is a promising sign. The company is often seen as having lost its cool factor years ago, thwarted by more innovative competitors. Even chairman and co-founder Bill Gates said this week that he was not satisfied with the company's lack of innovation in certain areas.
But Reuters believes some of the new Microsoft products may be changing that perception.
In particular, the report pointed to Microsoft's savvy marketing push for its Surface
tablets as well as the
Xbox 360 and Kinect combo, which has proven popular among younger gamers.
So, which high-tech brand name was the coolest?
Google's
Android took top honors, considered cooler than it used to be by a full 70 percent of those 18 to 29. Apple followed, getting the nod from 60 percent of the young adults questioned.
Still, coolness doesn't necessarily mean higher sales.
The poll "definitely shows that Microsoft's efforts are paying off, but we'll have to see how cool translates into customers," Gartner analyst Michael Gartenberg told Reuters. "It's also hard to compare 'cool' factor as a quantitative measure against Apple, a company, and Android, a platform."
Conducted between February 5 and 19, the poll was designed to gauge the perception and use of different technology brands and received responses from 4,798 people in total.
Apple chairman Arthur Levinson.
Arthur Levinson, Apple's chairman of the board, still misses Steve Jobs.
"I'm still not to the point where I walk into that board room and don't miss Steve," Levinson told Fortune in an interview published today. He went on to say that being Apple chairman, a position he took in 2011 after Steve Jobs' death, still feels "weird."
Levinson is one of the more respected figures in the biotechnology industry. Until 2009, he was CEO of Genentech, a company that many believe, kicked off the entire biotechnology industry. He currently serves as chairman of that company, in addition to Apple.
As with other prominent Apple figures, Levinson was tight-lipped on the company's plans and shared little about its process, saying only that the board will see upcoming Apple products between 6 months and 18 months before their launch. In some cases, the board can chime in and suggest changes, though he acknowledged that it's not in place to "define product specs."
"And ultimately, the board is there to hire and fire the CEO," Levinson said.
For now, it appears his CEO, Tim Cook, won't be fired. He pointed to Apple's fourth-quarter performance, in which the company generated a $13.1 billion profit, as "phenomenal." He also told Fortune that while Apple's stock price is plummeting -- it's down 32 percent in the last six months -- he's confident in its ability to stay strong, saying that he won't worry about how many iPhones the company sold in any quarter.
Levinson's confidence in Apple comes as its co-founder Steve Wozniak sounded off on his views towards the iPhone maker. In an interview with Bloomberg published today, Wozniak said that Apple is in danger of losing its standing as the coolest company in the technology industry.
"We used to have these ads, 'I'm a
Mac and I'm a PC,' and the Mac was always the cool guy," Wozniak said. "And ouch, it's painful, because we kind of are losing that."
Apple was granted a patent for proximity detection.
The patents, approved by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, cover a wide range of technologies, as earlier reported by Patently Apple. The proximity sensor patent, first filed in 2005, covers technology related to detecting one or more touches and differentiating whether the touches are light or hard, among other capabilities.
Another patent relates to electronic media devices and future active packaging that allows power and data to be supplied to one or more electronic devices housed within the packaging. And Apple also was granted a patent for a mounted shock sensor that allows an Apple Store Genius or technician to figure out whether a damaged device was dropped. The other patents largely cover components and functions like automatic image cropping, reconstruction of lists in a document, and providing information to a caller based on a called mobile terminal's temporary directory number.In the world of mobile, patents have become a key focus area and battleground. Apple, Samsung, and others have sued each other repeatedly, accusing each other of ripping off designs and other elements. Apple won a big battle against Samsung in August, with a jury finding Samsung infringed on Apple patents and ordering it to pay Apple $1 billion. Among the victories in that case, the jury found Samsung infringed on design patents for some products, and it upheld certain Apple utility and design patents.
Apple continues to build its patent arsenal. Today's awards follow several dozen the company has won in the past several months.
At CES in January, Sony announced several LCD TVs with "Triluminos," a new backlighting method that they promise offered "rich, authentic color, and excellent red and green reproduction." Digging deeper, it turns out Triluminos includes an optical component produced by QD Vision, Inc. called "Color IQ" which uses quantum dots to help create light.
OK, so what are quantum dots?
Quantum dots are a "semiconductor nanocrystal technology." If you remember your high school (college?) physics, avail yourself of the Wiki page.
If you don't know your valence bands from your conduction bands, you can think of a quantum dot as this: tiny pieces of matter with unique properties, including the ability to emit light at very specific wavelengths. Sort of like microscopic pieces of glitter that glow green, red, or blue depending on their size.
Red, green, and blue spectra for red, green, and blue quantum dots.
Specific wavelengths of light are good. We need specific wavelengths of light, the more specific the better. All televisions create an image by combining the three additive primary colors: red, green, and blue (RGB). Sharp adds yellow, a secondary color, but this isn't in any content and is created by the TV. Mixing RGB in varying amounts gives us all the colors possible in our current TV system.
All LCDs create these colors with filters. Plasma displays create them with phosphors that glow in the required color (similar to the way CRT tube TVs worked). OLED, depending on the company, is one or the other. LG's method creates a "white" OLED then adds color filters. Samsung's method has specific red, green, and blue OLED sub-pixels.
So where do quantum dots come in? Sony has a method.
Sony's X900 and W900 lines
Three of Sony's 2013 TVs will use quantum dots in their backlighting, in the guise of QD Vision's Color IQ tech (the 65X900, 55X900, and 55W900). A traditional LED LCD uses blue LEDs, coated with a yellow phosphor, to create "white" light. While reasonably efficient compared to other technologies (i.e. CCFL LCDs and plasmas), this still creates a lot of "wasted" energy. Orange, for example, doesn't make it past the color filters on the front of the TV (instead, red and green are combined to create orange).
Triluminos uses blue LEDs, but instead of coating them with a yellow phosphor, the blue light from the LEDs passes through the Color IQ optical element containing red and green quantum dots. So the blue LEDs have two functions: create blue light, but also energize red- and green-emitting quantum dots so they in turn can create red and green light. About two-thirds of the light created by the blue LEDs is used to excite the QDs. Cool, right?
This diagram is a top-down view of one side of two edge-lit LCDs (the front is "up" in this case, the back is "down"). The upper image shows a traditional "white" LED (blue, with yellow phosphor). The lower image is the method used in Sony's Triluminos: a blue LED that passes through red and green quantum dots. This RGB light bounces off the light guide, and out through the liquid crystal and other layers just like a regular LCD TV.
If you're curious about how LCD backlighting works, check out Is LCD and LED LCD HDTV uniformity a problem? which has images and diagrams of how backlights work. Oh, and if the "Triluminos" name sounds familiar, Sony has used it before. This time, as shown, it's referring to an edge-lighting technology, not the RGB LED backlighting as in 2008.
Sony claims this allows for a wider color gamut compared to LCD TVs using "white" LEDs, as in more potential colors. Since all modern TVs are fully capable of reproducing every color in all current HDTV content, this is a bit of marketing hyperbole.
However, the benefits of this could go beyond cool, futuristic tech and WowNeeto-based marketing. When I've reviewed LED-lit projectors, I've found that the color possible from RGB LEDs looks more realistic than the same Rec. 709-calibrated colors created by color filters (DLP) or dichromatic mirrors (LCD/LCOS) as lit by UHP lamps. One TV engineer I asked about this phenomenon replied "LEDs are like painting with purer paint."
Our own David Katzmaier often remarks in his reviews on the bluish cast seen on some conventional LED-based TVs compared to, say, plasma sets. "It's usually most prevalent in dark areas, but I sometimes see a slight bluish 'coldness' in brighter material and skin tones too. In some cases I see it despite seemingly excellent color measurements from my instruments."
So it's possible that even with the same measured color points, quantum dot-enhanced displays could produce more realistic color. Will they? Will the color mixing required to create Rec. 709 from wildly oversaturated color points cause other issues? What effect will the color filters, which are still necessary on LCDs, have on this "purer" light? These are questions we can't answer until we see the X900 series, and any future TVs with quantum dots.
This whole column and not one "Quantum Leap" joke. Oh dammit.
Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) image of sparse QDs (white) on a semiconductor background (black). Individual QDs, as well as close-packed small groups can be resolved.
The current generation of quantum dot technology requires a primary light source like the blue LEDs in Sony's Triluminos. This won't always necessarily be the case. It will be possible to excite the quantum dots directly. This could be a full QD backlight, but it could be more. How about a direct-emissive display like OLED, but instead of Organic Light-Emitting Diodes, it's sub-pixels filled with red, green, or blue quantum dots. QD Vision calls this a "QLED," and it could have similar performance characteristics as OLED (like a truly infinite contrast ratio). Will it be easier to produce, offer better color, or have even lower power consumption? At this point, we have no idea. Given the production difficulties OLED has had, just the fact that there's something on the horizon that could offer potentially similar performance is exciting.
Bottom line
Got a question for Geoff? Send him an e-mail! If it's witty, amusing, and/or a good question, you may just see it in a post just like this one. No, he won't tell you which TV to buy. Yes, he'll probably truncate and/or clean up your e-mail. You can also send him a message on Twitter: @TechWriterGeoff.
Pioneer VP-1000 LaserDisc Player
Years ago, long before the dawn of the DVD or Blu-ray formats, consumer video was strictly all-analog, from the very first broadcasts right up to the introduction of the LaserDisc. The 12-inch, double-sided LaserDisc looked like a giant CD, but the video was analog encoded on two single-sided aluminum discs layered in plastic. The discs that debuted in 1978 had analog audio soundtracks, but later discs featured stereo digital sound. Millions of players were sold in the U.S., but LaserDisc was, even during the height of its popularity, a niche format that appealed mostly to videophiles. It had much greater success in Japan, and was used in 10 percent of all households. LaserDisc video quality was a big step up from VHS and Beta tapes.
Pioneer's LaserDisc players, starting with the VP-1000 in 1980, dominated the market, but in 1981 RCA started a minor format war with its analog CED video discs (an LP-like grooved video disc), but the inferior system faded quickly.
My friends with large LaserDisc collections were skeptical of DVD's quality, and were unhappy with the first DVDs' compression artifacts. The LaserDisc supporters gleefully pointed to poor DVD transfers, ridden with aliasing, blotching, and pixilation woes. LaserDiscs were 100 percent compression-free. There were significant DVD compatibility issues, some discs wouldn't play in some players. I spoke with Geoff Morrison about his take on the LaserDisc, and he said "There was a natural smoothness to the image, because it was analog, and over most televisions [of that era] there wasn't a radical change between a good LaserDisc and the first DVDs." Even the Criterion Collection, known for releasing exquisitely restored editions of classic films, didn't immediately abandon the Laserdisc format.
To be fair, it didn't take all that long for the DVD engineers to sort out the mastering problems, but in the early days it looked like we were going to have an analog vs. digital war on our hands. It didn't happen, but the LaserDisc true believers kept the faith long after DVD reigned supreme. Pioneer continued selling players well into the DVD age and ceased production in 2009.
Did you ever own or watch LaserDiscs? Share your memories in the Comments section.
The Outlaw Audio Model 975 (top) and Model 7125 (bottom)
There's no doubt that the best of today's receivers sound great and come jam-packed with a vast range of features. Even entry-level models paired with a decent 5.1 speaker/subwoofer system can do a fine job, but some buyers aim higher. They may have invested in a 65-inch or larger display, or maybe a video projector and a 120-inch screen. They crave a sound that matches the grandeur of the picture, and they can get that only with separate components like the Outlaw Audio Model 975 Surround Processor and Model 7125 Power Amp.
The Model 975 Surround Processor's feature set is fairly minimalist, which makes it a nice alternative to today's increasingly hard-to-use receivers. The Model 975 was designed to sound good, but if you need USB inputs, 4K upscaling, Audyssey Auto Calibration, Wi-Fi, Air Play, HD Radio, Internet radio, Ethernet, or Bluetooth, the Model 975 won't cut it. True, there are just four HDMI inputs and that might be a deal-breaker for some potential customers, but I love everything else about the surround processor, including its uncluttered front panel. It's a joy to use.
I listened to the 975 with Outlaw's Model 7125 amp, and if you look under the top cover you'll see why no receiver, including lots of $2,000 or $3,000 ones, can match the sound of a well designed dedicated amp. The receivers don't have enough space to house the massive power transformers, power supply capacitors, and heat sinks for the output transistors you see in power amps like the Model 7125.
I auditioned the Model 975/7125 combo with the Pioneer SP-PK52 speaker system, along with a Hsu Research VTF-1 Mk2 subwoofer. I started with a few multichannel DVD-Audio discs, and the sound was far and away the best I've heard in the CNET listening room. The first thing I noticed was the newfound clarity, so my already positive feelings about the Pioneer speakers shot up a few notches! They sounded bigger and more powerful than before, and the better multichannel recordings generated a remarkably seamless, room-filling soundstage. That is, the gap between the front and rear speakers disappeared; the entire room was energized with sound. I could play the system louder, without strain, than I could with the 90-watt-per-channel
Denon AVR-1912 receiver. The Model 7125 is rated at 125 watts per channel, but it sounded considerably more powerful than the wattage numbers would indicate. The 51-pound Model 7125 has power reserves that receivers like the 22.4 pound Denon can never hope to muster. For example, the Model 7125 can deliver 190 watts into all seven channels with 4-ohm-rated speakers! Denon's higher-end $1,200 AVR-3313Ci receiver can deliver 165 watts per channel into easier-to-drive 6 ohm speakers, but it weighs just 26.45 pounds. There's no way the Denon could deliver close to the same power.
Under the covers: the Outlaw Model 7125 (left) and Denon AVR-1912 (right)
If you have a receiver with 5.1 or 7.1 channel outputs on its rear panel, you may not have to buy Outlaw's Model 975 Surround Processor. You can run your receiver (bypassing its internal amps) with the 7125 and radically upgrade your sound. Outlaw also offers a range of more powerful amps, topping out with the 7x300 watt $3,499 Model 7900.
Comparing the Outlaw 975/7125 combo with a Denon AVR-1912 receiver I was surprised by the magnitude of the difference in sound quality. The Denon was fine, but the Outlaws were a lot more transparent, vivid, clear, and powerful.
Outlaw sells direct with a 30-day return policy. If you order the Model 975 ($575) and Model 7125 ($999) together, the discounted price is $1,398.
Do movies look weird on your new TV? Does everything have a hyper-real, ultra-smooth motion to it? Are you sure something is happening with the TV's image you don't like, but you can't figure out what?
Chances are, what you're seeing is called the "Soap Opera Effect," as descriptive a moniker as we get in tech, in that this feature makes everything on your TV look like a cheap soap opera.
Here's what it is, what it does, and how to turn it off.
The Soap Opera Effect, or SOE, is actually a feature of many modern televisions. It's called "motion smoothing," "motion interpolation," or "ME/MC" for motion estimation/motion compensation. Some people don't notice it, some don't mind it, and a few even like it. From e-mails and article comments I've read, it seems most people hate it.
This motion "whatever" was ostensibly developed to help decrease apparent motion blur on LCDs. All LCD TVs have difficulty with motion resolution. Which is to say, any object onscreen that's in motion will be less detailed (slightly blurry) compared with that same object when stationary. High-refresh-rate LCDs (120Hz and 240Hz) were developed to combat this problem. Check out "What is refresh rate" for a more in-depth description of this. The short version: in order for high-refresh-rate TVs to be most effective, they need new, real frames to insert in-between the original frames.
Thanks to speedy processors, TVs can "guess" what's happening between the frames captured by the camera originally. These new frames are a hybrid of the frame before and the frame after. By creating these frames, motion blur is reduced. With 30fps and 60fps content, this is great. Content like sports have better detail with motion, and there are minimal side effects (beyond errors/artifacts possible with cheaper/lesser motion interpolation processing).
Film
However, with 24fps content (namely Hollywood movies and most nonreality, prime-time TV shows like sitcoms and dramas), there's a problem. The cadence of film, and the associated blurring of the slower frame rate's image, is linked to the perception of fiction. Check out the scathing reviews of the high frame rate version of "The Hobbit" for proof of that. Even if this perception seems grandiose -- the look of 24fps is expected with movies and fiction TV shows. Even though the TV and movie industries have been moving away from shooting on actual film, the new digital cameras are set for 24fps because the audience for fictional programming expects that look.
SOE messes with this cadence. By creating new frames between the 24 original frames, it causes it to look like 30fps or 60fps content. In other words, it makes movies (24fps) look like soap operas (30/60fps). And thus, a name is born.
Toshiba ClearFrame logo
By any other name
Every TV company has a different name for their motion interpolation processing. A sort list: Sony MotionFlow, Samsung Auto Motion Plus, Sharp AquoMotion, Toshiba ClearFrame or ClearScan, Vizio Smooth Motion, and LG TruMotion. I sense a theme.
While reducing motion blur is the main reason this processing exists, the (possibly) beneficial side effect is reducing the 2:3 judder noticeable on fast pans in 24fps content. The process of converting 24fps content for 60fps televisions involves a 2:3 sequence. The first frame is shown twice, the second frame three times, the third twice, and so on. Check out "1080i and 1080p are the same resolution" for a more detailed description. Because this sequence is, well, weird, camera pans can look jerky or juddery. Motion interpolation smooths this out. This is one of the reasons why some people prefer the SOE.
Nearly all companies allow you to disable SOE, and most allow you to adjust its intensity. Some separate out the blur reduction from the judder reduction, though personally I've found SOE at any level to be distracting.
Plasma
Up until recently SOE has been an LCD-only "issue." In the effort to make plasmas more competitive in a retail store, motion smoothing circuitry has found its way into plasmas. Because plasma TVs don't suffer from the motion blur problems that LCDs have (or at least, not to the extent), motion smoothing is largely superfluous. For that matter, plasmas aren't increasing their refresh rates to insert new frames, so all that's really happening is the TV is creating new frames to insert in-between the film frames, just to make the motion smoother.
Panasonic, for example, calls its version of this Cinema Smoother. On its LCDs, you can find it under "Motion Picture Setting."
This is how Panasonic explains its Cinema Smooth processing. Other company's processing works the similar to this diagram. Note the ' and " signifying the blue-boxed frames are different (interpolated).
Bottom line
The best part about the Soap Opera Effect is if you don't like it, you can turn it off. A few minutes digging though your TV's picture settings, and you should be able to find it. Get to know where this setting is (it's probably on the remote, too). It's possible you'll want it on when you're watching sports, or other "video"-based content (30fps or 60fps). Then, for movies and fictional TV programming, you can turn it off. This will give you the best-of-both worlds approach with minimal motion blur with sports, and no SOE with movies.
With plasma TVs, though, there is little penalty to turning this "feature" off. So go ahead.
Got a question for Geoff? Send him an e-mail! If it's witty, amusing, and/or a good question, you may just see it in a post just like this one. No, he won't tell you which TV to buy. Yes, he'll probably truncate and/or clean up your e-mail. You can also send him a message on Twitter: @TechWriterGeoff.
A hefty chunk of taxpayer dollars spent by the government on mobile phone service for low-income Americans may have been wasted.
A federal program called Lifeline provides hefty discounts on mobile phone service to qualifying low-income households. The goal is to ensure that they can connect with families, employers, and emergency services.
How many of those households should actually have been receiving the discount?
Last year, the Federal Communications Commission started forcing mobile carriers to confirm the eligibility of their Lifelife subscribers. The agency figured that around 15 percent of users would be determined ineligible, but the tighter rules discovered a lot more than that.
A review of the program by the Wall Street Journal found that 41 percent of the 6 million people who benefited from Lifeline were unable to prove their eligibility or failed to answer requests for verification from their carrier.
In total, the government spend around $2.2 billion on Lifeline last year.
Mobile phone subscribers pay around $2.50 per household to fund Lifeline and other subsidized programs. That money is used to pay carriers $9.25 per customer each month to deliver free or cheap mobile service, according to the Journal. Funding for Lifeline has risen over the years as more carriers have jumped onto the bandwagon.
But holes in the program seemed to have led to its natural abuse.
Until recently, subscribers didn't have to offer any proof of their income level. They could continue with the program without having to periodically verify their eligibilty. And no checks were made to see how many people in a household were taking advantage of Lifeline.
The findings from the program appear to have taught the FCC a lesson.
As a result of the Lifeline Reform Order adopted on January 31, 2012, Lifeline subscribers must now show documentation about their income. Carriers have to recertify them every year. And subscribers must confirm that no one else in their household is using Lifeline.
Are the new rules making a difference? So far, yes.
The FCC's Lifeline Year-End Savings Report showed that more than $213 million was saved last year as a result of the reforms. And the agency is projecting even greater savings this year and next.
The Legend of Zelda: Hyrule Historia
It turns out that Hyrule isn't the only place Link can dominate.
The New York Times yesterday published its list of best-selling books for the week. Sitting atop the "Hardcover Advice & Misc." list is none other than "The Legend of Zelda: Hyrule Historia," the book published last month by Dark Horse Books and Nintendo.
The title, which is described as "containing an unparalleled collection of historical information" on the famed franchise, is authored by Akria Himekawa. Zelda creator Shigeru Miyamoto and the franchise's current steward, Eiji Aonuma, are also given author nods.
"The Legend of Zelda: Hyrule Historia" beat out a host of prominent titles in its first week on the list, including "Shred: The Revolutionary Diet," which came in second place. "Rebooting Work" hit the list for the first time and landed in third place.
"The Legend of Zelda: Hyrule Historia" is currently sold out at Amazon, but will be back in the store on February 15. The title is priced at $34.99, but customers can order it from Amazon for $19.24.
(Via Polygon)
The AktiMate Micro speakers in white
To be honest, I've never heard a Bluetooth speaker I liked, because better sound was available from wired speakers, like the AktiMate Micro model. They're sold in pairs for $499, so you get true stereo sound, a rarity even with higher-end Bluetooth and most other wireless alternatives like the $600 Bowers & Wilkins Zeppelin Air, $600 Bose SoundDock 10, or $399 Sonos Play:5. Those three are perfectly fine for what they are, but wired stereo speakers from Audioengine, Emotiva, and AktiMate sound better, much closer to what I hear from traditional hi-fi speakers. True, they're not as easy to move from room to room as those wireless models, so if mobility is a higher priority than sound, pick up a wireless speaker.
The AktiMate Micros have a proprietary 4-inch Kevlar woofer and a 1-inch soft-dome tweeter. The back panels have a slot port. The desktop-friendly design measures a tidy 5.7x7.87x9.45 inches, and they are available in high-gloss red, white, or black.
The left speaker houses an in-house-designed stereo 40-watt Class D amp that powers both speakers, a stereo analog 3.5mm input and a USB input, and on the front baffle, an input selector and rotary volume control. The built-in DAC tops out at 16-bit/48KHz audio, and it's not bad, but you can easily do better with an inexpensive external DAC, like my $99 Schiit Modi. Then again, the Micro's internal DAC is about average for a desktop speaker -- none of them are standouts -- but the Micro's DAC will certainly clobber the sound available from your computer's analog jacks.
The top of the left speaker also has a flip-open panel that reveals a 30-pin docking connector compatible with most older-generation iPhones and iPods, but not the latest Apple devices with the Lightning connector. The right speaker is passive and just has a pair of all-metal binding posts on the back panel.
I played my
iPod Classic, docked to the Micros, and was impressed by the speakers' clarity and resolution. Bass isn't as deep or full as from the Audioengine A5+ speakers, for comparison, but the Micros' low end is tauter and more precise. To maximize the speakers' bass output I put them near a wall, and that filled out the bottom a bit. The little guys play loud enough to fill a decent-size room.
I watched a few movies and was generally satisfied with the Micros' sound, but home theater bombast was in short supply. I don't see an easy way to add a subwoofer to the system, but the sound on straight dramas and comedies was very good. Dialogue was articulate and natural.
Comparing the Micros with my desktop reference Emotiva Airmotiv 4 speakers ($349/pair), the differences were readily apparent. The Airmotiv 4s make more bass, but the Micros were more dynamically alive. The Airmotiv 4s played louder and had superior treble extension, but the Micros were more open and had better soundstage depth. I like both speakers, but I'm sticking with my Emotivas.
I suppose it's still a fair assumption that more people listen to music than movies with headphones, but there has to be a growing audience listening to movies, TV shows, and YouTube videos via their headphones. Thanks to the booming popularity of tablets, might the ratio of movies-to-music listening time be moving away from music? Or not?
I watch a lot of movies at home with headphones on. They present a level of detail that you can get from speakers only when you play them really loud. With headphones, I don't have to crank the volume. They're also handy when other people in my apartment are sleeping.
If you watch movies or TV shows on an
iPad, headphones are the most likely way you'd listen. Some folks probably use a single Bluetooth speaker for movie sound with
tablets, but then again, if you have a decent home theater you're more likely to listen with speakers. Do you watch movies on your computer, and if you do, do you prefer headphones or speakers? Do your headphones sound better than your computer speakers? Of course, where you watch may skew the headphone vs. speaker preference one way or another.
Please share your movie vs. music listening over headphones experiences in the Comments section.
Copyright © News cachinnate. All rights reserved.
Design 
And Business Directories
