The Surface 2 is one of the precious few exceptions of a Windows tablet with 4G. Problem is, it runs Windows RT not the full version of Windows 8.Microsoft
Apple started making cellular-capable tablets in April 2010, but four years later most Windows-Intel tablets are still Wi-Fi only. One would charitably call that being late to the tablet party.
The tablet isn't a novel device anymore. You might even call it a mature market. IDC said Thursday that worldwide tablet shipments (including 2-in-1 hybrid devices) showed only 3.9 percent growth over the same period a year ago.
And 2014 will be a "challenging year ahead for the category" with the "the rise of large-screen phones," IDC added.
So, what's the state of the Windows 8.1 tablet in 2014 ? While there are some decent new designs from the likes of Dell ($249 Venue Pro 8) and Lenovo ($399 ThinkPad 8), there are precious few with 4G/LTE.
The Samsung Galaxy S5 is selling like warmed baked goods The Samsung Galaxy S5 is flying off the shelves, selling twice as many as the Galaxy S4 on launch day in the UK, with more than 9 out of 10 phones sold signed up to 4G contracts.
UK mobile phone retailers Phones 4U and Carphone Warehouse have
revealed that sales of the S5 were more than double that of the S4 on
its first day alone. The two big street staples say that pre-orders for
the new phone were "significantly" higher than its predecessor, with
Carphone Warehouse claiming sales 150 per cent of the S5 on day one.
And a whopping 95 percent of S5 contract sales at Carphone
Warehouse and 99 percent at Phones 4U saw phone fans signing up to 4G
contracts. 4G is still at a relatively early stage in Britain, but
it seems the S5 has arrived at the point when it's reached wide enough
coverage and hit price levels phone fans are willing to embrace. Both retail chains are partnered with Samsung to run dedicated Samsung Experience shops across Britain and Europe, the first of which opened just in time for the S5 launch. Samsung will be pleased: although the S4 undeniably did boffo business -- more than ten million shipped in its first month -- sales were a little slower than expected and didn't see the explosive growth of previous models. Speaking to Reuters, Yoon Han-kil, senior vice president of Samsung's product strategy team, said the S5 is "selling faster than the S4 so far."
The strategy with the S5 is not to fill it with gimmicks and bloatware.
"With the S4, we thought smartphones shouldn't just focus on hardware.
They also had to come with a lot of software and services, and that line
of thinking did lead us to cram many services into the device," Yoon
continues. By contrast, with the S5, "We decided not to put in so many
things and only include what the user really needs, so I cut out a lot
of services and software."
Apple and Samsung have sued each other for infringement.
CNET
SAN
JOSE, Calif. -- Google engineers have never copied Apple's iPhone
features for use in Android, an executive from the software giant said
Friday during testimony in the Apple v. Samsung patent-infringement
trial.
Hiroshi Lockheimer, Google vice president of Android,
walked the jury through early development of Android and said engineers
actually tried to make software that was very different from Apple's iOS
mobile operating system.
"We liked to have our own identity; we
liked to have our own ideas," Lockheimer said. "We were very passionate
about what we were doing, and it was important that we have our own
ideas."
Lockheimer was the first witness Samsung called in its
defense against Apple. Apple has accused Samsung of copying its iPhones
and iPads, but Samsung has argued that Google designed many of the
features for Android first.
Earlier Friday, Apple rested its case against Samsung after an expert detailed the $2.191 billion in damages the company says it's due from Samsung.
Samsung's
attorneys said the company may call as many as 17 witnesses by the end
of the day Monday, though many would be via deposition. Nevertheless,
Judge Lucy Koh said the company had to narrow its list.
Many of
the other witnesses on tap for Samsung are Google executives. Dianne
Hackborn and Cary Clark are slated to testify about the design,
development, and operation of Android, as well as possible alterations
made to the operating system. They should specifically talk about
features for quick links, or automatically detecting data in messages,
that Apple has accused of infringing its patent No. '647.
Almost two years after Apple and Samsung faced off in a messy patent dispute, the smartphone and tablet
rivals have returned to the same courtroom here to argue once again
over patents before federal Judge Koh. Apple is arguing that Samsung
infringed on five of its patents for the iPhone, its biggest moneymaker,
and that Apple is due $2 billion for that infringement. Samsung wants
about $7 million from Apple for infringing two of its software patents.
While
the companies are asking for damages, the case is about more than
money. What's really at stake is the market for mobile devices. Apple
now gets two-thirds of its sales from the iPhone and iPad; South
Korea-based Samsung is the world's largest maker of smartphones; and
both want to keep dominating the market. So far, Apple is ahead when it
comes to litigation in the US. Samsung has been ordered to pay the
company about $930 million in damages.
Most Samsung features that
Apple says infringe are items that are a part of Android, Google's
mobile operating system that powers Samsung's devices. All patents
except one, called "slide to unlock," are built into Android. Apple has
argued the patent-infringement trial has nothing to do with Android. However, Samsung argues that Apple's suit is an "attack on Android" and that Google had invented certain features before Apple patented them.
Suing Google
wouldn't get Apple anywhere since Google doesn't make its own phones or
tablets. Instead, Apple has sued companies that sell physical devices
using Android, a rival to Apple's iOS mobile operating system. In
particular, Apple believes Samsung has followed a strategy to copy its
products and then undercut Apple's pricing. While Apple isn't suing
Google, it expects that Google will make changes to its software if
Samsung is found to infringe on patents through Samsung's Android
devices.
Lockheimer on Friday said he joined Google in April 2006
to work on the Android team. At that time, there were only about 20 to
30 people on the team, and it operated like a startup. Currently, about
600 to 700 people working on Android report to Lockheimer, he said.
"People
tend to think of Google as a big company, but we were a small team,"
Lockheimer said. "We were autonomous, and the company let us do our own
thing." Apple has accused Samsung's Galaxy S3 of infringing three of its patents.
CNET
He
noted that there are "thousands" of features in Android, and all aim
for ease of use. He also testified as to the timeframe that Google
engineers developed features like quick links and background syncing for
Android. Many of the features were created in 2005 or 2006 ahead of the
first Android phone launch from HTC in October 2008, Lockheimer said.
The timing will be key to Samsung's argument that Google created Apple's
patented features first.
Lockheimer also testified about what
Android features handset vendors can tweak. For instance, phone makers
don't have to use the Google keyboard, but if they include it, they
can't change it.
Christopher Vellturo, an economist and
principal at consultancy Quantitative Economic Solutions, earlier Friday
wrapped up his testimony from earlier in the week, saying Apple should
receive about $2.191 billion in damages from Samsung for patent
infringement. He noted the figure includes damages -- such as lost
profits -- of $1.067 billion and reasonable royalties of $1.124 billion.
Vellturo on Tuesday had testified he determined the amount by
evaluating the scale of the infringement, the time span, the
head-to-head rivalry between Apple and Samsung, and the belief that the
patents were key for making Samsung devices easier to use and more
attractive to buyers. Samsung sold more than 37 million infringing
devices, Vellturo said. The total amount of sales in dollars was kept
confidential.
Earlier this week, another expert hired by Apple, MIT marketing professor John Hauser, argued that the company's patented features made Samsung's devices more appealing and that fewer people would have purchased the gadgets if the features were missing.
Hauser
and Vellturo are key to Apple's argument that it deserves about $2
billion in damages for Samsung's alleged infringement. The company
argues that Samsung copied Apple's iPhone as it tried to figure out how
to react and compete with the device. It realized it "simply did not
have a product that could compete successfully against the iPhone,"
Apple attorneys said during opening arguments earlier this month. Samsung, however, argues that many of the patented items are features Google had earlier created for Android.
The
head of Google Payments, Ariel Bardin, addresses attendees at the
Electronic Transaction Association's 2014 tradeshow in Las Vegas.LAS VEGAS -- It's been a bumpy ride for Google Wallet since
its launch nearly three years ago, but in spite of the obstacles the
company has faced, Google head of payments Ariel Bardin says the company
isn't giving up on Wallet or the mobile payments market.
"We have
been doing this for a while," he said during a presentation Wednesday
at the Electronic Transactions Association's Transact 2014 tradeshow
here. "And we'll continue to keep doing this for a long while."
He
acknowledged the slow consumer adoption of Google Wallet, but
highlighted the company's nearly 15-month-long evolution of the product,
which now has expanded beyond Google Wallet's initial reach. And the
key to Google Wallet's transformation has been the cloud.
"We
started out with Google Wallet, which equaled NFC [near field
communications]," Bardin said. "We still do that, but now we offer many
different types of payments and services." How has Google Wallet changed?
Google Wallet got its start anchored in a hardware-based short range wireless technology known as NFC. Using this technology, consumers could load credit card information into an Android
app that stored the information in a secure element that was part of
the NFC chip, and then using the short range wireless technology, it
transmitted the payment information from the phone to the sales terminal
with a simple tap.
The goal was that people could get rid of all
their credit cards, loyalty cards, and coupons that filled their wallets
and instead store all of it and access it from their mobile phones.
While the idea itself sounded nifty enough, a year after launch Google
Wallet still only worked with one credit card and bank combination. And
it only worked on one wireless network: Sprint.
Because the NFC
solution required that both mobile devices and point of sale processing
terminals include hardware, Google struggled to get a foothold in the
market. Wireless operators, who were developing their own competing
mobile payment solution, shut Google out of their networks and devices.
And merchants were reluctant to spend money to upgrade their sales
terminals. Google Wallet appeared doomed. Google Wallet in action.Then Google shifted gears and revamped Google Wallet.
It still uses NFC for the tap and pay functionality, but it now uses a
cloud-based technology called HCE, or host card emulation, to store
credit card credentials.
"The technology we initially used relied
on hardware," Bardin explained. "And there were a bunch of hurdles to
get it out the door using that approach. So we asked ourselves if we
could emulate the secure element in software, and make it a core service
in Android."
That is exactly what the company has done. HCE is
now included in Android 4.4, Google's latest version of Android
software. With this new approach, Google has opened up NFC to any
developer. Because the technology is built directly into the operating
system software it not only works with Google Wallet, but it can also be
used by other app developers that are building applications for
Android.
"Now anyone in the audience could build an app that leverages the tap-and-pay functionality," Bardin said. The 'cloud' is the answer.
While
tap-and-pay had been the only thing that Google Wallet offered when it
first launched, now it's just one component of the service. With payment
credentials stored in the cloud, Google can integrate payments into its
other products like Gmail. It also makes the service more flexible for
consumers and merchants, which can access the wallet from anywhere. This
allows for merchants to embed easy payment buttons into their mobile
Web sites that can link directly to payment credentials stored in the
cloud.
Bardin said that the beauty of this solution is that it
eliminates the need for customers to fill in their credit card
information when they want to buy things online using their mobile
devices. Because Android users are always "signed-in" on the Google
platform, they can leverage their payment credentials from Google Wallet
or even their Google Play account to buy things.
The cloud-based
nature of the service also makes it easy for consumers to add new
credit cards to their Google Wallets. They can also join and add loyalty
cards to their Google Wallets. And they can do all of this without ever
necessarily entering the app on their devices.
Again because
Google Wallet now lives in the cloud, it makes it easier for Google to
tie its other services to the wallet. For example, a year ago it added
the ability to send and receive payments via Gmail. Google
also offers Gmail users the ability to track all their online
purchases. The way it works is that users who opt in can allow Google to
scan Gmail receipts and then through partnerships with companies like
FedEx, Google gets the most up to date information on a package's
status. The competition is stiff.
It's
easy to see why Google wants in on the mobile payments market. According
to Gartner, the global market for mobile payments is forecast to be
about $720 billion worth of transactions by 2017. This is up from about
$235 billion last year.
But earning cash from these transactions
isn't the only reason that Google sees opportunity in this business.
Mobile payments is also simply another vehicle to drive users to other
Google services, such as search and advertising.
"We are in the
payment business to create a great user experience," Bardin said.
"That's a little different from others in this industry. Making money
will come later."
Google isn't the only Internet company that sees
potential in this market. Apple has also hinted it wants a piece of the
action. The introduction of the Touch ID fingerprint sensor on its iPhone 5S last year could pave the way for secure payment transactions. In January, Apple CEO Tim Cook said his company is "intrigued" with mobile payments. He added that such uses were one of the driving factors behind the introduction of Touch ID. There
are also several other potential competitors, such as PayPal and
Amazon. The big phone companies, AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile have a
joint venture called Isis that is also going after this market. And then
there are the many startups wanting in on the mobile payments craze,
such as Square, which allows anyone with an iPhone, iPad
or Android device to take credit card payments. (The latest rumor is
that Google and Apple have each talked to Square about possible
acquisitions, according to the news site Re/Code. Bardin did not address the rumors today. And neither Google nor Apple are commenting on the speculation.) In
spite of its struggles to make Google Wallet a success, many in the
payments industry believe that Google is still a major contender in the
market. And he said that Google and Apple will ultimately be the
companies to beat in the mobile payments market. "Google has the
money to make a bad mistake and still recover from it," Kenneth Douglas,
vice president of business partnership development for a Swedish mobile
payment called Seqr, said Tuesday during a panel at the Transact 2014
show. "Google and Apple own the most valuable real estate in mobile
payments."
Expect a redesigned 12-inch MacBook, an iPad Air 2, and a 5.5-inch phablet, according to an oft-cited purveyor of Apple rumors.
Among
the reams of data from KGI Securities analyst Ming Chi-Kuo released
Wednesday, are more detailed predictions of upcoming devices.
Here's an overview of the stack of predictions Kuo cited in his report, according to MacRumors. iPad Air 2: The
second-gen iPad Air will pack an Apple A8 processor and Touch ID (aka,
fingerprint recognition). Kuo believes the Air 2 will launch earlier
this year than last year's launch of the first-gen Air, premiered in
November.
Little is known about the A8 processor, but it would
be logical to expect that Apple will take its "desktop-class" 64-bit
computing strategy to the next level with the A8. A report this week
from JP Morgan said the A8 processor may surpass Intel's power-efficient Core i5 processors in performance. iPad Mini Retina: The
iPad Mini Retina will be slimmed down a bit, to the same size and
weight as the original iPad Mini. The Mini Retina has seen slow sales,
which Kuo attributes to the fact that it is slightly larger and heavier
than the first-gen Mini because of the Retina display. (Note that price
likely has something to do with slow sales too, as the entry Retina
model was priced at $399 versus the first-gen Mini's $329.) 12.9-inch iPad: A
large iPad will be targeted at entertainment and productivity (aka,
professionals). Kuo repeated an earlier assertion that the product
likely won't make it to the market until next year.
Separately,
Asia-based reports and analysts have speculated that the so-called "iPad
Pro" could be a hybrid of sorts that includes an Apple-designed
keyboard. 12-inch MacBook: This is the long-awaited Retina version of the MacBook Air,
according to Kuo. "We expect the unprecedented 12 [inch] model will
boast both the portability of the 11 [inch] model, and productivity of
the 13 [inch] model. The high resolution display will also offer the
outstanding visual experience of the Retina MacBook Pro. The offering
will likely be lighter and slimmer than the existing MacBook Air to
further highlight ease of portability in the cloud computing era," Kuo
writes. This isn't expected until late 2014. iPhone 6/phablet: There
certainly has not been a dearth of iPhone 6 rumors, so this part of the
Kuo's report was probably the least revelatory. He essentially
repeated rumors of 4.7-inch and 5.5-inch iPhones while offering a few
additional details.
The 5.5-inch model may be positioned as a
phablet, according to the analyst. It will come out "later in the
holiday quarter" and may eat into sales of the iPad Mini. The 5.5-inch
model will pack a big battery with "50% to 70% more watt-hours" than the
5S.
The 4.7-inch model will be the most popular, Kuo claims, with full-year shipments hitting about 60 million units.
Expected
screen resolutions for the two devices: Kuo expects the 4.7-inch model
to come with a 1,334x750 resolution Retina display (326 pixels per
inch), while the 5.5-inch model will boast 1,920x1,080 resolution (401
pixels per inch). So, both phones will have the same aspect ratio as the
iPhone 5/5S, meaning apps will not need to be redesigned.
Microsoft
Microsoft's
newly crowned head of Xbox, Phil Spencer, doesn't believe the software
company will sell off its gaming division, he said in a recent
interview.Speaking to Edge Magazine in an interview excerpt published on Tuesday, Spencer said not only that the Xbox division will remain a part of Microsoft, but that it will be an important component in the tech giant's future strategy.
"Xbox
is maybe the most relevant brand that Microsoft has with consumers
today," Spencer told Edge Magazine, adding that the Xbox division is "an
asset that's extremely valuable, and since our future ambition is to
grow our consumer relevance, Xbox has to be at the center of that."
Spencer's
comments might quell some rumors suggesting the Xbox division could
eventually find its way to the Microsoft chopping block. After Microsoft
CEO Satya Nadella took on his new role earlier this year, he said that
his company must focus on mobile and the cloud, conspicuously leaving
Xbox out of that discussion. More recently, Nadella has acknowledged the
importance of the Xbox division, saying that its software experience
might be a suitable fit for other services Microsoft is working on.
Spencer, however, is the first to directly respond to the questions
surrounding a possible Xbox sale.
Spencer wasn't the only one to
chime in on Xbox's future in the Edge interview. Former Microsoft
employee and game developer Peter Molyneux took issue with Microsoft's
Kinect, saying that "it feels like an unnecessary add-on." He went so
far as to call Kinect a "joke."
When Microsoft unveiled and
launched the Xbox One last year, the Kinect stood at the center of the
company's sales pitch, saying that the sensor, which allows for
everything from controller-free gaming to voice commands to control
on-screen applications, would play a crucial role in the Xbox One
experience. So far, however, it has been panned by many gamers who are
displeased with the general lack of games that fully support the Kinect.
Molyneux went even further, saying that it does a poor job of
responding to voice commands.
Although he didn't respond to
Molyneux, Spencer promised more games for Kinect this year. He also said
that the Xbox One will be getting more titles available exclusively on
the hardware, rather than the PlayStation 4.
CNET
has contacted Microsoft for comment on Spencer and Molyneux's
statements. We will update this story when we have more information.
Windows XP, your time has come.
CNET
Microsoft
has been urging Windows XP users to migrate to a more modern OS as
support ends today. But even with the latest patches, XP had worn out
its welcome in a world of more advanced cyberthreats.As
Microsoft first announced almost seven years ago, XP loses support
today. That doesn't mean XP computers around the world suddenly stop
working. But it does mean that they're at higher risk since Microsoft
will no longer support them.
Specifically, XP users
will no longer receive bug fixes, security patches, or other updates
designed to protect the core OS. Today's Patch Tuesday marks the last
round of updates for XP. Yet even with patches a plenty, the OS at its
core has been living on borrowed time the past few years.
"Windows
XP was launched in 2001, which meant the design and engineering of it
took place in the late 90s into 2000, which was a very different world
when we think about the profiles of the malware and the profiles of the
hackers and bad people attacking PCs on the Internet," Tom Murphy,
director of communications for Windows at Microsoft, told CNET. "It was a
much simpler time."
Dinged by security problems in the past,
Microsoft has also made security a higher priority in the years since
XP. That focus helped it shore up Windows 7 and Windows 8 as more secure operating systems. In particular, Microsoft's Trustworthy Computing initiative was the push needed to make sure all of the company's products are built with security in mind.
"So if you look at Windows 7 and Windows 8.1
over XP, there's a fundamentally different security model that makes
them more secure than an XP machine," Murphy said. "And there are ways
to reduce the risk [to XP] such as antivirus. But it's very important
that consumers understand that even with an antivirus software solution,
your XP machine is at risk because there's a chance there may be a
vulnerability in the actual operating system itself, and your antivirus
software will not stop that."
The
USB Type-C connector, which governs ports and cables, will be smaller
than typical USB ports on PCs but bigger than those on mobile phones.
USB Implementers Forum
So now we know what the next-gen USB cable will look like.
The new design, called USB Type-C,
is designed to replace today's multitude of cables and fix a number of
their shortcomings. Type-C USB jacks will be small enough for mobile
phones, the cable will be reversible end-to-end so it doesn't matter
which end you attach to your computer and which to your digital camera,
and as with Apple's Lightning connector there will be no upside-down
when it's time to actually plug the cable in.
The USB Implementers Forum,
which oversees the Universal Serial Bus specification, announced its
plans for a new USB cable and port in December but hadn't settled on the
exact physical design of the connector. Now it's done, and the new
cables could arrive in months, the USB IF said Wednesday at the Intel
Developer Forum conference in Shenzhen, China.
"The
specification is anticipated to be completed in July 2014. We could see
products with the new cable by end of year," the USB IF told CNET. Expect new USB Type-C ports to live side by side with old-style ports for awhile.
USB Implementers Forum
Type-C cures all these ills, the USB IF argues
But along with the difficulties of dragging the entire PC, phone, tablet,
and gadget ecosystem into the future, USB Type-C faces another
challenge from the USB IF itself: a new attempt to encourage wireless
USB data transfer after last decade's effort flopped. Cables still have
advantages, though, including the ability to charge and power devices
and fast data-transfer speeds. Although the new wireless USB in
principle can reach into the gigabit-per-second range with 60GHz
802.11ad wireless networking, Type-C cables will support USB 3.1's
10Gbps rates.The USB prong itself measures 8.3x2.5mm, smaller than the
plugs that fit into a PC's USB ports today but larger than the
6.85x1.8mm of the Micro-USB B-type those widely used in mobile phones.
Cable supported cable lengths won't change.
Other attributes of the Type-C design, according to the USB-IF:
It'll make an audible click when plugged in correctly.
It's designed to accommodate future USB incarnations with higher data-transfer speeds.
It'll support USB's growing role in carrying power to operate and charge devices through the USB Power Delivery technology.
It's designed to be plugged and unplugged 10,000 times.
With so many USB devices in the market today, don't expect an
immediate transition to the new cable. It's likely PCs will include new
and old port styles side by side, and that people will have use for
cables and adapters that bridge the old and new styles.
Protesters demonstrate outside the San Francisco home of tech figure Kevin Rose.
Counterforce
The
anti-tech industry sentiment appears to be taking a more personal
turn, targeting the home of prominent tech figure Kevin Rose.
The Digg founder and Google Ventures partner reported on Instagram
on Sunday that protesters demonstrated outside his San Francisco home
earlier in the day, carrying a large banner and distributing fliers
that referred to Rose as a "parasite." Leaflets distributed at Kevin Rose's house on Sunday.
Kevin Rose
"As
a partner venture capitalist at Google Ventures, Kevin directs the flow
of capital into the tech startup bubble that is destroying San
Francisco," according to the flier, a photo of which Rose posted to
Instagram. "The start-ups that he funds bring the swarm of young
entrepreneurs that have ravaged the landscapes of San Francisco and
Oakland."
Emblazoned with a '70s-era happy face, the flier goes
on to say that "techies...on average earn four times more than the
normal service worker" and closes with a bit of profane language.
As
part of the protest, a group calling itself the Counterforce demanded
that Google pay $3 billion to an anarchistic group for the creation of
"autonomous, anti-capitalist, and anti-racist communities throughout the
Bay Area and Northern California."
"With this three billion from
Google, we will solve the housing crisis in the Bay Area and prove to
the world that an anarchist world is not only possible but in fact
irrepressible," the group wrote in a blog post.
The
tech industry has become a flashpoint for wealth disparity and
gentrification in the San Francisco Bay Area. Protesters, who have
targeted the commuter buses for many Silicon Valley tech giants, blame
high-paid tech employees moving from Silicon Valley to San Francisco and
Oakland with driving up rents and home prices in the area.
Rose said in a tweet that he agreed that cultural and economic changes needed to be addressed.
"We
need to solve rising rents, keep the SF culture, and crack down on
landlords booting folks out," Rose wrote. "SF is such a great place,
definitely need to figure out a way to keep the diversity," he wrote in
another tweet.
San Francisco's Board of Supervisors met last week to discuss a pilot program that would let tech buses pay the city $1 to stop
at several bus stops designated for public transportation. After a
nearly seven-hour public hearing, the board voted 8-2 to let the program
go ahead as planned and start in July.
Yahoo
is ramping up its online video efforts with plans to acquire high-end
original programming usually found on cable TV, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The
Internet company plans to order four different Web series that would
appear on the Web as half-hour comedies, sources tell the newspaper. The
new comedies, which are expected to have per-episode budgets of up to a
few million dollars, are expected to be unveiled for advertisers on
April 28 during Yahoo's "NewFront" event.
CNET has contacted Yahoo for comment and will update this report when we learn more.
Amazon will be joining in an increasing crowded field of
Web sites jockeying for TV advertising dollars. In addition to
traditional TV stations, Yahoo will also be competing against the likes
of Amazon and Hulu, as well Netflix, which has already scored a hit with
its original full-length series "House of Cards."
In the past six
months, Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer has made a series a moves aimed at
increasing the company's focus on video. After Mayer said last November
that Yahoo's aim was about "entertaining," the company landed ABC News personality Katie Couric.
In late March, Yahoo was reportedly in talks to acquire video syndication service News Distribution Network for $300 million, another move aimed at better economic terms, such as improved ad revenue or guaranteed ad rates.
Apple iTV mock-upWill Apple go with OLED for a future TV set? Who knows, but Apple is testing panels, according to a South Korea-based report.
An
"unnamed" South Korean display manufacture is making organic light
emitting diode (OLED) panel samples for Apple's "iTV," which is
"expected be mass-produced next year," according to the Korea Herald, which cited Lee Seung-woo, an analyst at Seoul-based IBK Securities.
The
analyst offers a quick qualifier, however, saying it's "not certain
whether Apple will use it for the mass production of its long-rumored
iTV as it is still running tests."
Though the Herald story does not specify a manufacturer, BrightWire is reporting that it is LG Display.
Probably
the most surprising aspect of the news, if accurate, is the choice of
an OLED panel. Historically, Apple has shown a preference for LCDs.
And OLED panels are hard to make at sizes used for TVs, which which makes them very expensive.
And this has led to delays. "The delay is reportedly due to Apple's attempt to shift LCD panels to OLED," the report said.
"Though
the yield rate of OLED panels is still not high for mass production,
they are considered to be the best panels for TVs because of its high
definition and the potential of curvedness," the report said, citing
John Seo, an analyst at Shinhan Investment.
Intel's Doug Fisher explains the 64-bit kernel on 32-bit Android.
Intel said this week that it's going 64-bit on 32-bit Android. Confused? Intel offered some clarification at its China developer conference this week.
Here's the initial statement Intel released this week:
"Intel...released Android KitKat 4.4 with a 64-bit kernel optimized for [Intel Architecture]. With this release, the company ported, validated, and tested the Android Open Source code on IA, taking on the work that developers typically would need to do on their own. This release will provide the...64-bit kernel support for development of next-generation devices."
Intel's Doug Fisher, general manager, Software and Services Group, expounded on this during his presentation.
He began by saying that Intel is moving everything to 64-bit now. That means it's moving all of its mobile silicon. More-traditional hardware like servers, desktops, and laptops have been 64-bit for years (servers since 2001, desktops since 2004).
But that's just half the battle, because the software needs to be 64-bit too.
So, he went on to explain and demonstrate how a kernel -- a core piece of the operating system -- that's 64-bit can begin to provide some of the benefits of a full 64-bit OS
"So all of these devices that have 64-bit capability [in hardware] will now have a 64-bit kernel running on that. So, when you run Android, which is a 32-bit environment on top of that 64-bit kernel, you're getting the advantages, even in a 32-bit environment, of the 64-bit kernel," he said.
Fisher proceeded to demonstrate a 32-bit Android application -- a ray tracer. One part of the screen ran Android on a 32-bit kernel, the other on a 64-bit kernel.
Needless to say, the application taking advantage of a 64-bit kernel and its libraries offered better performance.
"You can see the performance difference already," he said.
Why all the fuss about 64-bit? Well, when Apple did its big 64-bit reveal at the last Worldwide Developers Conference, it shocked everyone, including heavyweights like Qualcomm. And, yes, Intel too.
Qualcomm, in short order, started making 64-bit chip announcements. It galvanized Intel too. The company finally moved the Windows 8.1 tablets to 64-bit this year and is now trying to set the pace for Android.
Google's original "Google TV," which was criticized for its complexity.
Google is getting set to unveil another TV effort -- "Android TV" -- and apparently it'll look a lot like Apple TV, Roku, Amazon's just-released Fire TV, and other set-top boxes.
That's according to a report in blog The Verge, which says it got its hands on internal Google documents that describe the product (but apparently don't give specifics on a release schedule -- the report says only that it's "about to launch").
"Android TV is an entertainment interface, not a computing platform," the Google documents reportedly say. "It's all about finding and enjoying content with the least amount of friction."
This time around Google is reportedly looking to make things -- to quote the internal docs -- "cinematic, fun, fluid, and fast," and to keep things simple.Google released its Google TV software in 2010, but the platform was handicapped by complexity, slow response times, and difficult operation. There have been various reports since then that the company has been planning a new product, and reports about an "Android TV" rebranding surfaced last October.
"The company is calling for developers to build extremely simple TV apps for an extremely simple set-top-box interface," reads the Verge report. "While Android still lives under the hood, the interface will consist of a set of scrolling 'cards' that represent movies, shows, apps, and games sitting on a shelf. You use a remote control with a four-way directional pad to scroll left and right through different suggestions, or up and down through different categories of content, each with their own shelves. Much like on other set-top boxes, each item will be like a miniature movie poster or book cover, and you'll pick the one you want. The controller will also have Enter, Home, and Back buttons to help get around, and there will be 'optional' game controllers."
Screenshots included in the Verge report display shortcuts to Google apps such as YouTube, Hangouts, and the Google Play store, as well as third-party apps such as Netflix, Hulu, and Pandora. There's also a games section. The Verge says the product won't supplant Google's successful Chromecast Internet-to-TV dongle, so user-interface designers might have to accommodate two separate products.
Sarah Tew When Amazon unveiled its Fire TV streaming-media box Wednesday, it saved the best for last.
After a roll call of the same video-streaming features that Apple TV,
Roku, and Chromecast all deliver in varying measures -- and the
unveiling of a few unique features like voice search and instantaneous
play -- Amazon presented what really sets Fire TV apart from the rest of
its class: gaming.
Far from being a peripheral bonus
feature, Amazon's game initiative is trying to deliver low-cost casual
titles to the people who can't or won't shell out $500 for a console,
but crave a bigger gaming experience than their smartphones and tablets
provide. The uncertainties, however, are how many of those people
actually exist, and whether Amazon's platform will be good enough to
make that sell.
With a
dedicated $40 game controller and thousands of titles -- some of which
are being developed by the company's new in-house studio -- on their
way, the online retailer was clear that the one thing it thinks it can
deliver that Apple or Roku or Chromecast can't -- yet -- is an Android-centric gaming experience that will grow over time, not stagnate, with some careful nurturing.
"When they got into the gaming stuff, that's really when they
started talking about the Fire TV as a differentiator," NPD analyst Ben
Arnold told CNET, calling the dedicated controller the clearest evidence
of the push. "For me, that says that they are serious about the device
being used for gaming and that it's central to its use."
However, Amazon is venturing into territory where others have failed.
One-time Kickstarter darling Ouya promised to revolutionize gaming until
a lackluster library and poor unit sales pushed it out of the hardware market entirely,
effectively killing the dream of a low-cost console-killer. In
addition, Amazon is attempting to attract non-gamers to streaming
features that are available not only on lower-cost devices like
Chromecast, but also higher-end game consoles that may already have a
space under the living-room TV.
To that end, Amazon will
rely on its aggressive marketing -- a tried-and-true approach from the
Kindle unit that takes advantage of the site's home page -- to convince
people to buy into its vision of a streaming device that delivers more
than you're used to, even if we aren't quite sure where to draw the line
between needed and unnecessary.
Fire TV is already leading
Amazon's electronics best-seller list, right behind Google's Chromecast.
How long it stays will have a lot to do with how Amazon expands the
streaming market with games, and just how good those games can possibly
get.
Why Fire TV needed to pack a punch
Amazon wants to signal that Fire TV is not just for existing Kindle
evangelists or Amazon Instant Video junkies, but is a box meant to
compete on all fronts. Playing catchup against Roku and Apple TV is a
daunting task, and Amazon needs all the firepower it can muster.
That's precisely why Fire TV is not only priced competitively
at $99, but comes with 2GB of memory, 8GB of storage, and a Qualcomm
Snapdragon quad-core processor.
Why pack so powerful
a punch for something you hope most consumers will kick back and stream
Netflix from? It beats the already far-along competition -- meaning it
looks good in comparison charts -- but more importantly it can power a
far wider variety of games.
The Roku 3, the next-most-powerful streaming box, has only a
dual-core processor with less than 100 games and its only real visible
port being Angry Birds. Chromecast and Apple TV hardware can't handle
standalone gaming at all, relying on mirroring from tablets and
smartphones instead.
In other words, Amazon gets a
two-fold benefit from packing powerful innards into Fire TV. On one
hand, it makes a strong argument for choosing Amazon's box over others.
It hopes you'll be far less likely to buy a streaming device -- if you
don't already own one -- with limited to zero gaming functionality and
potential than one with all the same bells and whistles, but more power
under the hood.
The second benefit is less superficial. Amazon
knows full well that people don't want to play games like Solitaire or
worn-out classics with a graphical ceiling dating back to the Super
Nintendo. With that kind of processing power and memory, Amazon can
cover the whole spectrum of mobile gaming -- from indie gems and updated
ports that have become the hallmarks of mobile to the games it develops
itself. The hardware places some wiggle room at the high end, too.
Plus, it knows we'll be using big screens and maybe its controller,
which rolls up alternatives like Nvidia's Shield handheld and AirPlay
into one expansive, native experience that can actually meet the needs
of a mobile-console hybrid.
That all looks great on paper. But
Amazon needs games, good ones and fast. Without a strong library, not
only will it not sell its pricey controller, but it will be taking the
efforts of an increasingly large mound of resources and putting it
before a tiny audience that will get bored fast and move back to their
touch screens.
Hardcore games first, with free-to-play to follow
Minecraft Pocket Edition on Amazon's Fire TV.
Sarah Tew/CNET
Lapsed gamers was the term Mike Farzzini, Amazon's VP of games, used
when explaining in an interview with CNET who exactly Amazon thinks
it's targeting with Fire TV games.
It's a reference to
people that used to love games or still do, but don't have the time,
money, or commitment necessary to warrant the purchase of an Xbox One
and Titanfall. Those gamers, Farzzini said, now look to free-to-play
games and casual experiences for their fix, like what one gets with
mobile hits Candy Crush and Clash of Clans alongside the occasional
splurge on a graphically-intensive game like Infinity Blade III or
XCOM: Enemy Unknown for iOS.
In this case, Amazon is
offering, at launch, games like ports of mobile favorites Minecraft
Pocket Edition and Asphault 8, while a version of Sev Zero -- a Kindle shooter-tower defense game
-- built from the ground up for Fire TV will come free with a
controller purchase. Otherwise, it'll be $6.99. It also has the first
season of Telltale Games' successful episodic title, The Waking Dead,
which the developer only started working on for Fire TV in January.
If
first-party exclusives are lacking or are slow-to-market, gamers and
third-party developers may stay away, much as they have with Nintendo's
disappointing Wii U."
Michael Pachter, Wedbush Securities analyst
While the average price of a paid game for the platform will
be $1.89, Amazon will be offering more than a thousand free-to-play
titles down the line, where it hopes to create lucrative titles with
more extended lifespans. The company's acquisition strategy is following
that blend to a tee.
In February, Amazon purchased
Double Helix, maker of free-to-play Xbox One title Killer Instinct.
Alongside the Fire TV announcement yesterday, Amazon revealed that it
hired Portal designer Kim Swift and FarCry 2 designer Clint Hocking.
Those additions will be pushing that mix of development strategy under
the same roof.
Sev Zero, the popular Kindle shooter, is one of the first higher-end Kindle ports coming to Fire TV.
Amazon
Despite that substantial commitment, there's still no way of knowing
if there is enough overlap between streaming device owners and "lapsed
gamers" to make this a viable strategy.
Amazon is going to
have a hard time convincing traditional gamers and developers that Fire
TV -- which it avoids calling a game console -- will be worth shifting
money and time away from the gold mine that is mobile. Part of the
appeal of mobile, after all, is that you can access it anywhere.
Amazon Game Studios can't do all the work itself in making that argument.
"If first-party exclusives are lacking or are slow-to-market, gamers
and third-party developers may stay away, much as they have with
Nintendo's disappointing Wii U," wrote Michael Pachter, a Wedbush
Securities analyst, after the announcements.
The controller,
at $40, will be another hurdle that could stunt the popularity of the
platform, a Catch 22 of sorts that will keep people from purchasing it
if there aren't good games, which would stunt development of games
because no one is there to play them.
"It is unclear how much
demand there will be for a $40 controller for relatively casual games,"
Macquarie Capital analyst Ben Schachter said in a note describing Fire
TV as underwhelming. He also expects Apple TV -- also priced at $99 --
to include gaming in its next iteration, a product that could leapfrog
Fire TV relatively soon in other respects too.
But it would be a
mistake to completely write off Amazon's gaming ambitions. This is a
company, after all, that's not afraid to make big bets to get into
entirely new businesses. And if it sells more Amazon content along the
way, it has no reason to slow down until it gets gaming right. Joan Solsman contributed to this report.
Microsoft
In the one week that Microsoft's Office for iPad has been on the loose, more than 12 million people have downloaded the productivity suite, the company says.
Microsoft announced the numbers via a tweet
that said, "More than 12 million downloads of Word, Excel, PPT &
OneNote for #iPad from the @AppStore <3 12="" 2014="" 3="" amp="" april="" downloads="" excel="" ffice="" fficeforipad.="" fficeforipad="" for="" from="" ipad="" it2egnpdkj="" million="" of="" office="" onenote="" ore="" p="" pic.twitter.com="" ppstore="" ppt="" than="" the="" word=""> The tech giant unveiled its Office apps for Apple's iPad tablet
last week. The apps are a set of tools for managing and creating
documents. In unveiling Office for iPad, Microsoft has taken a
calculated risk with hopes that iPad users will forgo free alternatives such as Google Docs and Apple's iWorks software.
Under Microsoft's "freemium" approach,
the applications are free to download, so a user can view a document or
presentation without needing a paid subscription. However, Microsoft
does require a $10 monthly subscription to Office 365 before users can
edit or create a document. The iPad apps -- Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and
OneNote -- are available for download from the App Store for no charge.
Though 12 million downloads is certainly a lot, Microsoft didn't
divulge how many new subscribers it's gotten for Office 365.
At its Build 2014 conference, Microsoft has revealed that a future update
to Windows 8.1 will resurrect the Start menu. No, really, stop looking
at your calendar — it isn’t April 1 any more. This is isn’t just some
half-assed Start menu, either — it’s a rather snazzy combo of the
Windows 7 Start menu, plus some Metro-style live tiles. The same Windows
8.1 update will also allow you to run Metro apps in a window on the
Desktop. Yes, it took Microsoft more than three years to backtrack on
Windows 8′s nightmarish interface and usability changes, but it seems
the company is finally coming around to the fact that it shouldn’t
ignore the needs of hundreds of millions of PC users.
Take a long, hard look at the screenshot above. (There’s a slightly larger version too,
if you want to admire the new Start menu in all its glory.) As you can
see, the left side of the Start menu remains virtually unchanged from
Windows 7, and the Shut Down button is right where it ought to be,
instead of hidden behind a few awkward gestures and clicks. On the right
side appears to be a bunch of Metro-style live tiles. Presumably you
can configure these, just like the Start screen. “My Computer” appears
to be missing, but you should be able to add “This PC” (the Metro live
tile that gives you access to the System applet).
In Windows 8.1 Update 1, you can pin Metro apps to the taskbar — but you can’t run them in a window yet
In
the current version of Windows 8.1 Update 1 you can pin Metro apps to
the taskbar — but as you can see in the screenshot, in a future update,
you’ll also be able to run Metro apps in a window. This one change will
finally mean that using Metro apps on a desktop PC with a mouse and
keyboard won’t be the abominable experience that it is now.
You
may have noticed that we keep mentioning that these changes are coming
in a future update — that’s because, unfortunately, that’s all the data
Microsoft has given us. The Start menu is not being resurrected for Windows 8.1 Update 1 (due on April 8)
— rather, there will be another update at some nebulous point in the
future that will bring it back, along with windowed Metro feature, and
presumably some other changes as well. We had originally heard that the Start menu wouldn’t be coming back until Windows 9,
but perhaps its priority has been bumped up a bit — or, more likely,
the exact product name/number is in flux. Given Windows 8′s poor
adoption and tarnished reputation, I wouldn’t be surprised if Microsoft
rushes to release Windows 9 — but who knows, maybe it will stick to its
guns and push out Windows 8.1 Update 2 later this year.
The original Windows 8 Metro interface screenshot that started this whole debacle, way back in June 2011Earlier, as I told the other writers here in the ExtremeTech bunker about these changes, they all said exactly the same thing: It’s about damn time.
Nearly everyone at ExtremeTech is a fan of Windows on the desktop, and
thus the last three years have been painful to say the least. Right from
the start, when Microsoft first unveiled the Metro-style Start screen in June 2011,
I voiced my concerns about its poor suitability for mouse-and-keyboard
use. For the first couple of years, Microsoft argued that it had done plenty of testing that proved people liked the Windows 8 interface, and that we’d eventually grow to like Metro.
Now, almost three years on from its initial public preview, Microsoft
is finally backing down on its touchscreen dream and trying to regain
the love and trust of billions of desktop Windows PC users.
If you don’t want to wait for the nebulously scheduled future update that will bring the Start menu back, check out our list of third-party Start menu replacements — they’re all pretty good. Likewise, if you don’t want to wait to run Metro apps in a Desktop window, ModernMix has got you covered.
The dream of taking any mobile device to any wireless carrier may soon become a reality.The
wireless market is going through a massive technological shift right
now, one that will eventually make it possible to take your smartphone
from one network and use it another. The switch to 4G LTE technology and
the use of more spectrum bands to deploy this service will help make
devices interoperable in a way they never could be using older 2G and 3G
technologies.
Although change is coming, network operators
haven't fully made this transition. As a result, handset manufacturers
still make multiple versions of the same device supporting different
radio technologies. Thanks to advances in chip technology that pack more
radios into each device, some smartphones still manage to cross big
technological divides. But figuring out which version of which device is
compatible with which network can be very tricky.
In this edition of Ask Maggie, I help a couple of readers navigate this confusing maze of technical specifications. Can I use my unlocked Moto X on any wireless carrier? Dear Maggie, Since
cell phone plans and prices are complicated, as you've mentioned in a
previous article, and tend to change so often, I'm drawn to the appeal
of off-contract cell phone plans. I'm also a fan of the Moto X,
something else you've mentioned in at least one previous article. I'm
still a bit fuzzy on the details of unlocked phones and CDMA vs. GSM
technology, but I am wondering if there is any way to buy a Moto X that
is capable of being used on both GSM (AT&T and T-Mobile service) and
CDMA (Verizon, US Cellular, and Sprint) networks. My
goal is to be able to switch among various carriers' off-contract plans
as their pricing and features change. While I realize they may not
change very often, I hope to be able to use a new phone, such as the
Moto X for a while and I hate the idea of having to buy a new phone if I
switch carriers. I've skimmed through various discussion
boards on the Internet that say the Moto X comes with both CDMA and GSM
radios, and that Verizon 4G LTE phones are "world phones" that are GSM
capable, but the verdict on the phone's interoperability still eludes
me. Would you be able to shed some light on whether there is any hope
for me? Thanks Cell Carrier Commitment Issues
Dear Cell Carrier Commitment Issues,
This
is a great question. With phones like the Moto X available for prices
as low as $350 and $400 without a contract, it really makes buying your
own device and foregoing a contract worthwhile. But figuring out which
phones work on which networks is tricky. Motorola's flagship Moto X stays current with Android 4.4.2 updates.The official advice on this from Motorola is that you should buy the phone that is designed for a specific carrier's network.
"While
devices may have common technologies and spectrum bands, each device is
optimized for the specific carrier configuration so even when unlocked,
certain network features may not be available," a spokeswoman told me
via email.
The Motorola spokeswoman has a point, but the truth is
that it is getting easier to take your smartphone to another carrier.
That said, in order to get the most flexibility out of a single device,
you have to be careful about which version you buy. For example, an
"unlocked" phone, which generally operates solely on a GSM network, is
usually bought at full price from the device manufacturer.
Any
other phone sold through a particular wireless operator or activated
through a carrier when you purchase it is usually locked to that
specific carrier. This simply means it has a software lock on it that very often can be removed
by calling the operator to get the unlock code. You may have to fulfill
certain requirements from the carrier in order to get this unlock code.
Keep in mind that carrier locks can still be on phones that are bought
full price through a carrier. In other words, just because you paid full
retail for the phone and are not on a contract that doesn't mean your
phone is automatically unlocked. For instance, all the phones sold
through T-Mobile are locked to T-Mobile. If you want to use it on
AT&T, you'll have to get it unlocked.
Verizon Wireless is the
only major wireless carrier today that does not put a software lock on
any of its 4G LTE smartphones. This means that whether you are on a
contract or you paid full price for your Verizon 4G LTE handset, it is
automatically unlocked. (Note: This is only for 4G LTE phones, and it is
not the case for 3G devices on Verizon.)
Aside from having a
locked or unlocked phone, the other thing you need to keep in mind if
you plan to take your smartphone from one carrier to another is that
there are often multiple versions of the same phone sold by different
carriers. And some of these will work fine on certain carriers and
others won't.
Figuring out which hardware works on which network
is tricky, even for experts such as myself and CNET Reviews Senior
Editor Brian Bennett. In order to help answer your question, we spent a
good portion of an afternoon researching and testing smartphones and SIM
cards from different carriers to see what type of service we'd actually
be able to get on different versions of the Moto X.
What we
discovered is that a Moto X designed for Verizon will work with either
an AT&T or T-Mobile service. But you will be limited in terms of the
service that you can access. As you are aware, Verizon is a CDMA
operator, which generally means that the radios in its devices are not
compatible with the technology used by AT&T or T-Mobile. But because
the Moto X is a so-called "world phone," which means it can be used
overseas, it also supports GSM and UMTS technology, which are the
network technologies used throughout most of the world and by AT&T
and T-Mobile here in the US.
Verizon and Sprint sell so-called
"world phones" so that their customers can roam when they're traveling
internationally. A by product of this functionality is the fact that it
also makes their devices technically compatible with AT&T and
T-Mobile GSM networks here in the States.
Because the Verizon
Moto X supports GSM as well as CDMA, you can get basic voice, text
messaging, and 3G data service when you put an AT&T or T-Mobile SIM
card in it. But unfortunately, you will not be able to get access to
either AT&T's or T-Mobile's 4G LTE service.
Why not? Even
though AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon are all using the same 4G
LTE network technology for their next-generation wireless service, they
are not using the same radio frequency to deploy the service. And if
the device you are using doesn't support the network technology
operating on the same frequencies as another carrier, then it won't
work.
This has made device interoperability tricky for handset
makers and consumers. For example, Verizon, which was the first major
carrier to deploy LTE in the US, initially built its network using a
sliver of 700MHz wireless spectrum that only it owned. As a result, its
early LTE devices only supported LTE service for what is known as Band
13. Because no one else has deployed LTE in this sliver of spectrum, no
other carriers support Band 13 in their devices.
Carrier
Current 4G LTE Band classes
Future 4G LTE Band classes
AT&T
B17 = 700MHz b; B4 = AWS 1700MHz-2100MHz
B12 = 700MHz a&b
Sprint
B26 = 800MHz; B25 = 1900MHz; B41 = 2500MHz
B12 = 700MHz a&b
T-Mobile
B4 = AWS 1700MHz-2100MHz
B12 = 700MHz a&b
Verizon
B13 = 700MHz c; B4 = AWS 1700MHz-2100MHz
But
because demand for wireless data is increasing, wireless operators are
starting to deploy LTE using other slivers of spectrum. In Verizon's
case, it is now deploying spectrum in what's known as the AWS band
(1700MHz -2100MHz). This means that Verizon devices that now support 4G
LTE must also include a new radio frequency band, which is called Band
4.
The good thing about AWS spectrum, which uses the Band 4 device
specifications, is that several other carriers are also using this
sliver of spectrum for their 4G LTE networks. AT&T and T-Mobile also
use AWS spectrum for LTE and therefore their devices support Band 4 LTE
radios.
What this means for consumers is that devices that
support Band 4 radios for LTE will, in theory, be able to operate on any
network that is deploying the AWS spectrum. Unfortunately, in your
case, the Verizon version of the Moto X does not support Band 4. It only
supports Band 13 for 4G LTE, making it only able to access LTE services
on Verizon's network.
But there are plenty of other Verizon 4G LTE smartphones that do support Band 4. For example, the iPhone 5S,
the new HTC One, and even the Motorola Droid X Maxx all support Band 4
along with the traditional Band 13 for LTE. When Brian and I tested
these devices to see if they'd get 4G LTE access on AT&T and
T-Mobile in New York City, we found that they did. What does this mean for consumers buying smartphones off contract? If
you'd like the flexibility to switch wireless carriers without getting a
new phone, it means that you need to educate yourself on the different
technologies and frequency bands supported on the various carriers. And
second it means, you need to carefully check the spec sheet of the
device you plan to buy. Then you can match the technologies and
frequencies supported on the device with the appropriate service.
In
general, phones designed for GSM networks interoperate easily with each
other. And if a CDMA device also has GSM support, it also tends to work
well on a GSM network.
But unlocked GSM devices or smartphones
made for AT&T and T-Mobile will not get basic voice or texting
service on any CDMA network, such as Verizon or Sprint. The reason is
that these phones do not support CDMA technology. So at this point, it's
not useful to try to take a GSM phone to either of these carriers or
any other operators using CDMA for voice and 3G data service.
Things
get trickier when you're buying a phone designed for the CDMA carriers,
such as Verizon and Sprint. Even though Verizon and Sprint use the same
basic CDMA voice and 3G technology on similar spectrum frequencies,,
devices are not interoperable. CDMA devices do not use SIM cards, which
means service must be provisioned by the carrier. And Verizon and Sprint
do not allow each other's devices to be used on their networks. I'm
sure there are ways to hack devices to this, but it's not an easy
process. For the most part, if you switch from Verizon to Sprint or vice
versa, it requires that you buy a new handset.
That said, because
most if not all new Verizon and Sprint smartphones are "world phones,"
they also include GSM functionality. This means they have a SIM card. So
if you can get the device unlocked or if in the case of Verizon it
comes to you unlocked, you should be able to put a SIM card in it from
any GSM carrier and it will offer basic voice, texting and 3G data.
Whether it will also support LTE depends on what LTE frequency bands are
supported in the phone.
Unfortunately for Sprint customers, the
carrier is using spectrum for its LTE network that no one else is
currently using. This includes 800MHz, 1900MHz, and 2500MHz spectrum.
Since it doesn't use any AWS spectrum for 4G LTE, its devices don't need
Band 4 radios, which is currently the only unifying LTE band in the US
used by AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon.
Now, there's a chance
that Band 4 may be included in certain phones sold on Sprint's network.
That's likely because the manufacturer has made a single "CDMA" version
of the device, which it sells to Verizon and Sprint. But just because it
might support that technology, it doesn't mean that the function is
turned on in the phone. So there's a chance that the device may support
the appropriate technology, but because it was a device made for Sprint
it doesn't actually use the functionality.
Sprint recently
announced that starting next year it will begin including Band 12 in
some of its devices. This is a band class used for lower 700MHz
spectrum. Sprint doesn't own licenses in this band nor does it plan to
deploy its own network in this spectrum. But the company has launched two partnership programs
to work with smaller rural operators, which own this 700MHz spectrum
and plan to build out their 4G LTE networks using it. Most rural
operators as well as T-Mobile through a recent transaction with Verizon
own this lower 700MHz spectrum. LTE networks haven't yet been built
using this spectrum, but that should be happening in the next year.
What
this means is that Band 12 could also become another 4G LTE
interoperability band, especially after AT&T begins including it in
its LTE devices. Last year under pressure from the Federal
Communications Commission, AT&T agreed to use Band 12 instead of its
current Band 17 for lower 700MHz spectrum. Once it starts rolling out
devices with Band 12, smartphones from AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile
will all be compatible for 4GLTE service. The Bottom Line: Unfortunately,
there aren't any devices today that work perfectly on every carrier.
But a basic rule of thumb is that unlocked GSM phones, such as the
Google Nexus devices, and phones designed for AT&T and T-Mobile will
work reasonably well on most GSM networks. In the US, that means
they'll work pretty well on AT&T and T-Mobile. But you should
probably still check the device spec sheets just to make sure.
And
remember that these GSM-based smartphones won't work at all on a CDMA
carrier's network. Also, if you buy the phone through AT&T or
T-Mobile or comes with AT&T or T-Mobile service, it is likely
locked, even if you paid full retail price for it. You can get it
unlocked, but you'll have to request an unlock code and meet the
requirements of your carrier.
If you want a bit more flexibility,
you could buy a 4G LTE smartphone from Verizon. You can buy the device
at full price without a contract, and if it's a 4G LTE smartphone (not a
3G device) it will come without a software out-of-the box. If you go
this route, you should still check the specifications of the device
carefully to ensure that the Verizon smartphone you're purchasing
supports Band 4 for LTE. This will indicate that it is compatible with
AT&T and T-Mobile LTE networks.
I hope this answer was helpful. And good luck. Why can't my 4G LTE smartphone work on any LTE network? Dear Maggie, If
all the major wireless carriers are using LTE for their next generation
networks, then why aren't all the devices interoperable? I know that
there is a big difference between CDMA and GSM. I understand that my
AT&T phone won't work on Verizon. But I thought that LTE was
supposed to end this. I'm just frustrated that I can't buy one LTE phone and have it work on any operator I want. Will I ever be able to do this? Thanks, Confused about LTE
Dear Confused about LTE,
I
understand your frustration. As you noted in your question CDMA and GSM
technologies are incompatible network technologies. As a result,
devices built for one of these technologies can't work on a network
supporting the other. Some device makers have added additional support
in phones, so that CDMA "world phones" from carriers like Verizon and
Sprint can operate on GSM networks.
iphonespies.com
But
you are correct that for the most part this divide between CDMA and GSM
has split the US cellular market into two when it comes to device
compatibility. AT&T and T-Mobile are on one side with GSM devices
and Verizon and Sprint are on the other with CDMA.
You are also
correct that all the major US operators in the US and around the world
have finally settled on a common network technology called LTE to build
their next generation of network. This is terrific news for consumers,
because eventually it should lead to more device interoperability and
hopefully true global network roaming.
But before you get too
excited, we aren't quite there yet. There are still two main obstacles
standing in the way of full device interoperability. The first is the
fact that wireless operators have deployed their 4G LTE networks in
different spectrum bands. As I explained to the previous reader, when
Verizon first deployed its LTE network it used a sliver of spectrum that
only it owns. So there was no need for it or any other carrier to
include the Verizon radio band for LTE in their devices.
The
second obstacle to device interoperability is that wireless operators
haven't yet started putting voice traffic on their LTE networks. Instead
they still use their older 2G and 3G networks which are either GSM or
CDMA based for voice and text messaging traffic. This means that even if
the LTE spectrum bands were fully compatible subscribers would still be
limited by the old CDMA/GSM restrictions.
The good news is that
things are starting to change on each of these fronts. In terms of
spectrum bands, wireless operators are beginning to use more slivers of
spectrum to add capacity to their wireless networks. For instance, as I
explained above, Verizon has added AWS spectrum to its LTE network,
which means it has to support another band of radio frequency in its
devices.
This AWS band of spectrum Verizon is using is also
supported by T-Mobile and AT&T, which means their devices also use
the AWS spectrum for LTE service. And this means the devices for all
three carriers are compatible when it comes to LTE.
Something else
that should help "harmonize" the spectrum bands used for LTE service
among carriers are two wireless spectrum auctions that the FCC has in
the works. The first is an auction to sell another sliver of AWS
spectrum. That is scheduled for September. The good news so far when it
comes to this auction is that the FCC rules, which were announced just
this week, require that devices using this spectrum be interoperable.
The
next big auction on the FCC's docket is the so-called incentive TV
broadcast auction, which will auction off excess TV spectrum in the
600MHz frequency band. It's scheduled for the middle of next year. And
again every major wireless operator as well as many small rural and
regional operators are expected to participate in this auction. Rules
for the auction haven't been finalized, but there is a good chance the
FCC will also require devices used with this spectrum to be
interoperable.
If all four major US operators are able to acquire
spectrum in these two upcoming auctions, it could mean one or two more
spectrum bands that will be commonly used for 4G LTE service by the
major carriers. And that will result in more devices supporting the same
network technology at the same spectrum frequencies, thus leading to
more interoperability among devices.
Another important development
on the device interoperability front is that Sprint said last week that
it plans to include a band in some of its future 4G LTE devices in a
frequency it doesn't even currently use for 4G LTE. Why? The carrier is
hoping to partner with smaller operators that do use this frequency band
in effort to virtually expand its network footprint. It also happens
to be a spectrum band that T-Mobile will soon support, and that AT&T
is also slated to support in the next couple of years.
Again,
what this means for consumers who want to take their device to other
networks is that once major operators are using common spectrum bands
for LTE there are no major technical barriers that prevent devices from
working on different networks.
The final piece to the
interoperability puzzle will be the emergence of Voice over LTE
technology, which will replace the older CDMA and GSM-based voice
networks that wireless operators currently operate today. Once this
happens, there will no longer be any technical reason why an AT&T or
T-Mobile smartphone won't work on either Verizon's or Sprint's LTE
networks. Voice over LTE deployment should begin sometime this year. Of
course, it will take a long time before the older voice networks are
phased out. But once VoLTE is widely deployed it will level the playing
field in terms of interoperability among all US carriers.
Of
course, wireless operators may try to thwart device portability. Even
though the technology hurdles might be eliminated, the operators could
still cripple phones with software locks that restrict their use on
competing networks. Still, I am optimistic that the unlocked device
market will continue to grow, especially if carriers such as AT&T
and T-Mobile continue to sell services that offer customers monthly
service price cuts if they use phones they've already paid for. And
once the technical barriers are no longer an issue, I think more device
makers will address this market. Hopefully, we will soon see smartphones
hitting the US market priced below the $200 and $300 mark. The bottom line: Even
though device portability is a little easier today than it was in the
past, it's still not where it should be or where it needs to be in order
to allow consumers to buy any device they want and put it on any US
carrier network. But the good news is that the technology is changing
the old rules. And that is ultimately a good thing for consumers.
The original Windows 8 Metro interface screenshot that started this whole debacle, way back in June 2011Earlier, as I told the other writers here in the ExtremeTech bunker about these changes, they all said exactly the same thing: It’s about damn time.
Nearly everyone at ExtremeTech is a fan of Windows on the desktop, and
thus the last three years have been painful to say the least. Right from
the start, when Microsoft first unveiled the Metro-style Start screen in June 2011,
I voiced my concerns about its poor suitability for mouse-and-keyboard
use. For the first couple of years, Microsoft argued that it had done plenty of testing that proved people liked the Windows 8 interface, and that we’d eventually grow to like Metro.
Now, almost three years on from its initial public preview, Microsoft
is finally backing down on its touchscreen dream and trying to regain
the love and trust of billions of desktop Windows PC users.
