« October 2006 | Main | December 2006 »
Maybe Sony and Microsoft Could Start A Back-Incompatibility Support Group
Electronics | Nov 17, 06
It appears that both Sony and Microsoft have some issues making products that are compatible with other stuff made by Sony and Microsoft, respectively.
First, Sony has admitted that its PlayStation 3, just launched last weekend in Japan, cannot play some games available for the PS and PS2, while others play with various glitches and bugs (this on top of supply problems – see "But If We Made Too Many PlayStations, They Wouldn't Be As Cool"). Apparently they've got a Japanese web page up to tell buyers which of their legacy games are to be consigned to the dustbin of PlayStation history.
Meanwhile, Microsoft revealed that the Zune doesn't work with Vista. Not that Redmond needs to make the Zune a more attractive value proposition ("Just 'Cause We're Monopolists Doesn't Mean We're Not "Street"...", "The Zune: Microsoft's Little Brown Lump Of DRM-Enforcing Digital Joy"). But having two new marquee products behaving like oil and water can't help the roll-out of either.
Now let's cut these two firms some slack - and I'm all about giving a break to corporate citizens with a history of hiding rootkits on CDs (Sony) or of running afoul of anti-trust laws (the other one). Sony says they'll try to put out fixes on some older games, though others will likely never work properly on the PS3. As for Gates & Co., Vista is still in beta and the company says they'll remedy the compatibility problem shortly.
As of this writing, consumers are reported to be lined up around the block to buy those PS3's that are made available. And Microsoft has the near-monopolist's edge in driving the Vista upgrade, Zune or, as may be the case for many users, no Zune.
To some extent, these kinds of issues are the price of innovation. The PS3, with its Cell processor and Blu-ray functionality, does represent genuine technological progress. Vista's millions of code lines constitute a programming effort of historical proportions (I'll leave the market to decide what the Zune represents). Asking for new tech to emerge without running into backward compatibility issues is not entirely realistic. So if you want to be in with the new, you probably will have to throw out some of the old. Or at least download a fair number of fixes.
Posted by jeffrey.trester at 12:35 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The Universal Zune Tax
Electronics | Nov 14, 06
Microsoft's agreement to pay Universal a fee for every Zune it sells basically means that, to the extent this cost is passed on to the consumer, Universal gets to make you pay just for owning a player, regardless of whether you actually listen to their music.
The reasoning here seems to be that Universal must be compensated by Zune owners for the music they will, on average, inevitably steal (this despite the DRM-friendly nature of the device – see "The Zune: Microsoft's Little Brown Lump Of DRM-Enforcing Digital Joy"). Don't particularly care for the artistry of 50 Cent or ABBA? Too bad – pay up. Needless to say, Universal's rivals are most interested in this deal, and are vowing to impose similar terms on Apple when it comes time for renegotiations on distribution via iPods
You can't blame them. Taken to its logical extreme, the labels wouldn't even have to sell any music to get paid, or even have anyone listening to their product. They get paid simply for existing, a privilege usually reserved for people with titles like "god-emperor". Not that the world isn't clamoring for their product; surely plunging CD sales are the result of music piracy and not general lack of interest in soulless psuedo-music utterly devoid of creativity.
However, there's a slight difference between squeezing Microsoft and Apple: Redmond doesn't have a near monopoly in this space, while Cupertino does (can the Apocalypse be far behind?). It's not at all clear that the Zune is an attractive enough player to make a dent in iPod hegemony. This leads to Zen-like koans like "If there is a tune and it's not available on iPods, does it really exist?" or "What is the sound of a music that's not playing on an iPod?"
When John D. Rockefeller consolidated Standard Oil's grip on the petroleum industry, he did so partly by gaining influence over railroads, allowing him preferential shipping rates and payments for competitor's shipments. Effectively, he raised the shipping rates for his rivals, aiding him in driving them into submission or out of business. To be sure, Rockefeller's power over distribution arose because he controlled an outsized portion of the distributed good, but control of the means of distribution itself proved at least partly decisive
There's no analogue to Standard Oil among the music companies. It's not clear any single content provider is significant enough to impact iPod sales by withholding its product, especially, given the massive market acceptance of those little white earbuds and the afore-mentioned tepid enthusiasm for major label music. Ganging up on Jobs might be more effective, but the DOJ tends to have issues with cartels, and there's often that pesky member that defects. So Apple might be in the position Standard enjoyed, not in terms of production itself but in having that crucial control of distribution.
The labels may hate digital music, but when it comes to the iPod, one wonders whether they can live without it. And as downloads grow, there's always the risk that artists will get serious about independent web distribution, cutting the record firms out completely (some popular indie acts have already done this successfully). Apple need not mind, as this product can still be distributed through iTunes – indeed, Cupertino might want to consider encouraging indies so as to reduce any leverage the majors have over it.
If that happens, there are some suits that can stop worrying about downloads and start contemplating downward mobility.
Posted by jeffrey.trester at 12:26 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Panasonic Rolls Out 65'' Of 1080p Plasma Holiday Joy
Electronics | Nov 9, 06
Until recently, buyers of really big flat screens often settled for 720p resolution in order to obtain plasma's truer blacks and freedom from LCD angle-dependent "fade". That began to change over the summer, when Panasonic introduced the Elite 50'' PRO-FHD1 (see "Panasonic Puts "p" In 1080p Plasma").
Now, that same firm has begun selling a 65'' model, the Panasonic TH-65PX600U. It's a 1080p set sporting a 5000:1 contrast ratio, three HDMI interfaces, built-in ATSC/QAM/NTSC tuners, a SD memory card slot, and PC input. Listing at $9,999.95, vendors on PriceSCAN.com are already offering in-stock units at double-digit percentage discounts.
And as for the Elite PRO-FHD1, which went for around ten grand only three months ago, it now may be had for less than six thousand dollars (see graph below). When it comes to plasmas, deflation seems to be alive and well.
Time Period: 8/14/2006 through 11/6/2006
Each tick mark represents one week
Red = High Price, Blue = Average Price, Green = Low Price
Posted by jeffrey.trester at 4:08 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
So Xbox Has A 1080p HD-DVD Player – Blu-ray's Still A Cooler Name (You Can Tell By The Dropped Vowel)
Video Games | Nov 8, 06
Microsoft just took a significant step toward eliminating the high-def competitive advantages of Sony's Blu-ray enabled game consoles. By introducing an HD-DVD player add-on for the Xbox 360, Gates & Co. not only answer the PS3's resolution challenge in 1080p clarity but also turn a massive installed base of game players into a potential market for Toshiba's HD-DVD standard. It's priced just shy of $200, so for Xbox 360 owners this is an inexpensive alternative to a stand-alone HD-DVD player.
This comes as both Sony and Nintendo may face supply issues with the PS3 and Wii (see "Does Nintendo Have A Wii Pre-Sale Supply Problem?" and "But If We Made Too Many PlayStations, They Wouldn't Be As Cool"). Thus, the release seems well timed to allow Redmond to (characteristically) capitalize on the execution difficulties of its rivals.
One caveat: Microsoft's new player does not feature an HDMI port, and it's not clear what the implications of this might be for playing DRM-protected disks. One wonders whether the temptation of a vast universe of HD-DVD players might prove irresistible to content providers, even if that new market does not accommodate their DRM dreams
Posted by jeffrey.trester at 7:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
