Apple iPad Mini due in October: report

Apple will debut its 7.85-inch iPad Mini at an event in October, new reports say.

The iPad Mini is real, and it’s coming soon — but don’t expect it to debut along side the new iPhone. According to John Paczkowski at AllThingsD, Apple plans to launch it smaller tablet at an even in October. The report is based on information from anonymous sources (of course), but currently stands as the most reliable bit of information we have about Apple’s plans for a smaller iPad.

Prior to Paczkowski’s report, Daring Fireball’s John Gruber, long considered an expert on all things Apple, speculated that Apple would not debut the iPad Mini along side the new iPhone, as previous reports stated it would.

“I don’t think Apple would want reviews of both a new iPhone and new-size iPad appearing at the same time. Why share the spotlight? Why have another Apple product battling with the iPhone for the top spots in news coverage?” writes Gruber. Instead, he says, “it makes more sense for Apple to hold two events.”

The new iPhone is expected to debut at an event on September 12 — few doubt this will happen. The sixth-generation iPhone will reportedly then be released to consumers on Sept. 21. Once all the reviews of the new iPhone are out, says Gruber, Apple will hold its traditional music-focused event in October, and that is where the iPad Mini will make its big reveal.

Paczkowski’s report essentially “confirms” Gruber’s informed speculation.

The iPad Mini (or whatever it will be called) is expected to sport a 7.85-inch touchscreen and look similar to the full-size, 9.7-inch iPad, but with thinner side bezels, like that found on the iPhone 4/4S. We don’t know much about its internal hardware at this point, but few believe it will be as powerful as the current iPad. This is mostly due to price factors: Many believe (or hope, as the case may be) that the iPad Mini will clock in at around $200 to $250 — the same price as the excellent Google Nexus 7 tablet, and the Amazon Kindle Fire. We’ll see. Fortunately, it looks like we’ll only have to wait until October to find out.


Source : digitaltrends[dot]com

Samsung’s value drops by $12 billion after court loss to Apple

samsung-vs-apple

Samsung loses 7.5 percent of its value in the first day of trading after Apple's court victory. It looks like the real cost of that losing verdict for Samsung could be high.

In the aftermath of the Apple vs. Samsung verdict, everyone is trying to work out what it really means. Is Google’s Android platform really at risk now? Will Apple continue to sue everyone? How will Apple’s victory over Samsung affect you?

The $1.049 billion that Samsung has to pay to Apple is less than one percent of its revenue in 2011, but focusing on the award is to ignore the real cost of this loss for the South Korean company.

Samsung Electronics shares slumped 7.5 percent after the Apple victory. According to The Guardian that’s $12 billion in market value and it is Samsung’s biggest daily drop in nearly four years. A staggering 1.27m Samsung shares changed hands on Monday, although the share price recovered slightly before the Seoul market closed.

Early indications are that Samsung’s rivals, LG and Nokia, will benefit with share prices rising for both companies. However, other Android manufacturers like HTC and ZTE saw share prices drop as well. That could signal a loss of confidence in the platform. That could also be good news for Microsoft with a Windows Phone 8 launch on the horizon and Nokia as a partner.

While Samsung has fingers in a lot of pies in the consumer electronics industry, it is sales of mobile devices which have driven recent profits. A number of Samsung devices will probably now be banned after the Californian jury found the company had infringed six Apple patents. The hearing to decide on that is scheduled for next month. Samsung’s flagship Galaxy S3 was not included in the case, but there are obviously fears that Apple will now go after it and other devices in Samsung’s line-up.

Ultimately this loss may cost Samsung a lot more than the $1 billion that the jury awarded.


Source : digitaltrends[dot]com

Seven profitable opportunities for sensors that could reshape our world

alderaban nao robot sensors

Sensors can make your house more efficient, cars safer, ads smarters, and they’ll make the next generation of entrepreneurs a tidy profit in the process.

Soon, there will be more sensors in the world than all the phones and computers combined. But there’s a problem: Many of the people who know sensors aren’t entrepreneurial (they’re engineers), and most of the people who are entrepreneurial haven’t yet realized the huge extent to which sensors will change the world.

Translation: This may be your big opportunity.

To illustrate what sensors can do, Michael Hinshaw and I included this intentionally very long paragraph in our recent book:

Today, digital sensors can:

  • monitor your tire pressure and avoid dangerous blowouts;
  • analyze the gait of elderly citizens and warn of falls before they occur;
  • follow the gaze of shoppers and identify which products they examine – but don’t buy – in a store;
  • monitor which pages readers of a magazine read or skip;
  • float in the air over a factory and independently monitor the plant’s emissions;
  • detect impacts in the helmet of an athlete and make it impossible for them to hide potential serious blows to their brains;
  • reveal when a dishwasher, refrigerator, computer, bridge, or dam is about to fail;
  • trigger a different promotion as a new customer walks by a message board;
  • analyze the duration and quality of your sleep;
  • warn drivers that they are about to fall asleep;
  • prevent intoxicated drivers from operating a motor vehicle;
  • warn a person before he or she has a heart attack;
  • detect wasted energy in both homes and commercial buildings;
  • warn a parent or boss when anger is creeping into their voice, to help prevent them from saying or doing things they will later regret;
  • tell waiting customers how far away the pizza delivery guy is from their house;
  • analyze the movements of employees through a factory to detect wasted time and efforts;
  • trigger product demonstrations or interactive manuals when a customer picks up or examines a product;
  • congratulate an athlete when she swings a tennis racquet properly or achieves an efficient stride while running. 

 The big question is: What will you do with them tomorrow? Here are seven ways you can personally profit from sensors:

1.) Add sensors to any dumb object, and give it the ability to act intelligently. Without a sensor, when the water filter in your refrigerator gets too old, you keep using it anyway. Add a sensor, and your refrigerator tells you to stop using it. Find something that bugs people with its stupidity, and make it smart.

2.) Learn to program a robot. Robots are moving collections of sensors, and some of the wisest folks among us are learning how to program the software that controls robots. This video from Aldebaran highlights the talents of an incredibly versatile robot with facial- and speech-recognition capabilities.

electricfoxy move wearable sensor clothing3.) Help people improve their athletic performance with sensors. The Move project at ElectricFoxy is studying ways to do this, and over at Sense of the Future we have identified over 200 health and fitness apps that use sensors.

4.) Make computers – and everything else – simpler to use. One way might be by incorporating gestural interfaces, like what Prime Sense is developing. We are getting very close to the day when our technology becomes so advanced that it disappears. Personally, I can’t wait to throw away all our remote controls.

5.) Build a new business around sensors. My friend likes to windsurf, so he uses a sensor on the buoy outside his favorite harbor to show him when the winds top 20 mph. He does this via a service called iWindsurf, which is basically a collection of sensors placed along the coastline. Where could you place sensors to deliver a valuable new service to a group of people with a strong interest? For example, I’d pay $5 to get a video of my son scoring a soccer goal, so someone might want to mount sensors and a camera in the crossbar of soccer goals and sell the videos to parents.

6.) Increase safety with sensors. Without a sensor, your car will run over the tricycle your son left behind your real wheel. With a sensor, your car will warn you not to back up. How can you use sensors to make the world safer, or at least your corner of it?

emotiv neuroheadset brain control sensors7.) Use your brain (better). Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) are sensors for your brain. Right now they are mainly used in research labs, but a few companies like Emotiv have headsets you can buy today, and more are on the way. There are lots of overblown claims what these devices can do — most still require dorky, greasy caps — but anything that helps train your brain is a good thing.

I’ve just scratched the surface. For the next few days, imagine that everywhere you go everything has a sensor inside it. What would you want it to tell you, and when? Even better, what entrepreneurial opportunity can you create? There are millions of possibilities.

Bruce Kasanoff is a speaker, author and innovation strategist who tracks sensor-driven innovation at Sense of the Future. Kasanoff and co-author Michael Hinshaw teamed up to explore more of the opportunities unearthed by sensors in Smart Customers, Stupid Companies.


Source : digitaltrends[dot]com

Opinion: The subscription MMO is dead - long live free to play?

The era of the subscription-based online game has well and truly ended in 2012. It had a good run, really. Fifteen years is quite a long time for anything to stay static in the land of gaming.

Ultima Online introduced the idea back in 1997, when those of us who had internet access were mostly still on dial-up and got booted off of AOL whenever anyone called the house. In 1999, EverQuest came along, drawing in fans and addicts and making the idea popular. It would take another five years before World of Warcraft, launched in 2004, would take the MMORPG mainstream. When Mr. T is hawking your online game in TV commercials that even your grandparents think are kind of funny, you've hit the jackpot of cultural relevance.

World of Warcraft remains the undisputed king of the "traditional" monthly subscription MMOG, yet even its dominance is waning. Blizzard's most recently quarterly numbers put the subscriber base around the nine million mark, a significant decline from the plateau of 10-12 million they held steady at for several years.

Other games in the Western, big-budget MMO space have long since gone free-to-play. All of Sony Online Entertainment's titles, including EverQuest and its successor, EverQuest II, are now without a subscription fee. City of Heroes and Lord of the Rings Online haven't required a monthly charge in several years. DC Universe Online saw a 700% jump in revenue when it became free. And years before the others converted to free games, Guild Wars had already formed a devoted fan base without ever requiring a monthly fee.

Then of course there are the browser-based games: while generally still less well-regarded among American audiences, they boast participant figures that even World of Warcraft in its heyday could barely dream of. RuneScape, in its decade online, has gone well past the 200 million player mark.

So why, then, does the specter of a decade long gone still hover over otherwise-good games and prevent them from being successful?

Star Wars: The Old Republic, launched by BioWare at the end of last year, and The Secret World, brought online by Funcom this summer, both looked to be promising games. The former uses the setting from Knights of the Old Republic, which to this day is still lauded by its many fans. BioWare's story-driven, dialogue-driven style of play, as made popular in KOTOR as well as in the Dragon Age and Mass Effect series, was an immediate draw, and SW:TOR sold well over a million copies right out of the gate.

Unfortunately, the subscribers didn't stay. By the beginning of this summer, there were fewer than a million remaining, and BioWare Austin had been hit hard by waves of layoffs. In July, EA gave the impression of caving in, and announced that the game would go free to play this November.

The Secret World, meanwhile, hoped to be an entirely different sort of game. It dispensed entirely with common tropes like leveling or set classes, and instead hoped for a more free-form experience set in a modern-day Earth. Despite provocative storytelling and regular content updates, though, Funcom has not been able to attract the required subscribers to their venture. This week, they laid off half their staff.

Every positive post or tweet about either of those games has generally been met with a wall of, "It looks interesting, but I'll wait until it's free to play."

Players, and potential players, aren't stupid. As every previous big-budget MMORPG, with the exception of World of Warcraft, has inevitably gone to a free-to-play model, they will wait on the sidelines until their new game of choice follows suit. The audience has become a self-fulfilling prophecy: unwilling to pick up a game until it has gone free-to-play, a game must then go free-to-play to gain those players. MMORPGs are also now faced with the simple fact that competition has driven down prices. As players can dabble in so many without paying a flat fee, there are other places to go.

There will not be another license to print money like World of Warcraft was. The audience is done paying up-front for the box and continuing to pay a third as much again each month thereafter for continued access. Persistent multiplayer environments are not the novelty they once were, and the subscription model now feels like the antiquated relic of a time gone by. The Secret World is certain eventually to follow in the footsteps of SW:TOR and nearly every other MMORPG before it, and go free-to-play if it wishes its audience to grow.

The games themselves are getting better, and more varied, than ever. They aren't all traditional fantasy RPGs anymore; some are shootersrs, and others are exploring all kinds of environments and play. But the one thing that almost all the new online games have in common is that they will not require a monthly fee.

The subscription model is dead. Star Wars: The Old Republic and The Secret World

* Except for that hat. And that horse. And that house...

Republished with permission. Kate Cox is a contributing editor at Kotaku.


Source : techspot[dot]com

Rumor: Will Samsung unveil Android-based Galaxy S camera alongside Galaxy Note 2?

Photoshop rendering of rumored Samsung Galaxy S camera

Rumor has it Samsung is planning to introduce a Galaxy S camera running Android 4.0 at IFA 2012.

When a major tech event is approaching, the rumor mill tends to go wild with alleged photo leaks and anonymous sources teasing all sorts of unconfirmed devices. The upcoming IFA 2012 is no exception either and the latest tip given to GSM Arena has Samsung launching a new, Android-based camera.

The new device will allegedly be called the Samsung Galaxy S camera and feature a familiar 4.8″ SuperAMOLED screen. It won’t be running some stunted version of Android either, the tipster said it would come preloaded with Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich. The device is described as a “Galaxy S III glued to the back of a point-and-shoot camera”, so bye-bye physical buttons. The camera itself has a 16-megapixel sensor, pop-out Xenon flash, 10x zoom, and a curved right side for easy handling. Reportedly, Samsung will fit all that into a package 1.5 to 2 times thicker than a Galaxy S III. GSM Arena created a realistic-looking photoshop render based on the rumors, which we’ve included above.

In terms of connectivity, the Galaxy S camera will potentially come in two versions: one equipped with Wi-Fi only and one sporting both 3G and Wi-Fi. Don’t expect to replace your smartphone, however, as the device is said to only support mobile data, meaning voice calls and text messaging will be absent. We can’t imagine many people would want to carry around a point-and-shoot as their main device, but it would be nice for photo-enthusiasts to have the option.

The Galaxy S may not be the first Android-powerd camera to reach the market, but it could be the first to get it right. After all, a connected camera would be very popular in today’s sharing-obsessed culture. Just keep in mind this is all speculation until the truth is revealed at IFA in less than a week. It is worth noting, however, that Samsung is known to introduce experimental products at IFA like last year’s Galaxy Note phablet.

For interest’s sake, let’s say the rumor is true. Would you buy an Android-based camera? And would you ever consider using it as your main device if it did support voice and text?


Source : digitaltrends[dot]com

It's free
index