Category: Internet
Opera Unite – eliminating the need for web servers
Norwegian web expert Opera has today announced the release of its Opera Unite service that promises to shake up the old “client-server computing model of the web”.
Opera Unite works by turning a computer into both a client and a server – effectively removing the need for a third party server to host data.
What this means for the average web user is that serving and accessing data should become much easier. A user simply selects folders on their PC that they wish to share. These folders will then accessible via web browsers at a designated web address. Opera have stated that the service should work with any modern web browser.
Apart from standard file sharing, Opera Unite also allows the creation of photo galleries complete with thumbnails and also allows users to play any mp3 stored in a shared folder within its built in media player. More savvy users can also host entire websites on their PCs should they wish to. There’s also a social networking aspect to the service.
If you’re still not getting the gist of it, here’s a little scenario to illustrate its potential:
Johnny goes on holiday to Alaska – he wants to see the grizzly bears. He takes his netbook with him, which only has an 8GB SSD. Johnny has planned ahead though and has set up his desktop back home to share his mp3s. He can now access all of these via his netbook from anywhere with a web connection. He can also save the photos of his trip on his netbook on a daily basis and share them with his friends and family back home without needed to upload to a hosting site like flickr.
Opera Unite is available with special versions of Opera 10, which itself is a pretty good web browser.
If you still don’t quite get it, maybe this video will help. (Warning: video contains dramatic American voice over and mood-setting music).
Koogle – the search engine with a difference
Koogle, the kosher web search engine for the ultra-orthodox Jew, has been launched.
The search engine only works six days a week (no surfing on the Sabbath) and omits material that may be deemed unsuitable for the religion. Shopping results will exclude links to butchers who stock non-kosher foods, as well as blocking retailers who sell products such as televisions – banned in the households of orthodox Jews.
The word Koogle is an amalgamation of the Hebrew word kugel, a traditional Jewish baked dish, and Google, the world’s most popular search engine.
I just had a look at Koogle, and I’ve got to say it’s not for me. I don’t speak Hebrew for a start. And I’m not Jewish. But if you are an orthodox Jew then give it a whirl. Mind you, if you were an orthodox Jew then you probably shouldn’t be reading Tech Digest. Koogle bans us after all.
(via BCS)
Blinkbox offers blockbuster movie streaming
Blinkbox has launched the UK’s first paid-for streaming movie site and signed a bumper deal with Warner Bros to boot.
The deal gives Blinkbox the rights to stream over 1,100 full-length feature movies and TV programmes. Big name launch titles include The Dark Knight and Body of Lies as well as TV shows like Friends.
Blinkbox also has deals with E1 Entertainment, Cinetic Rights Management, Revolver Entertainment, Eagle Vision, Black Diamond, Raindance and X-Treme Video. In total they now have over 1,400 titles – comprising more than 1,500 hours.
Of course, there are plenty on non-paid-for streaming movie sites, although the legality of these is questionable and the quality of their streams is usually pretty shoddy.
There are, also, services available such as those by Apple and LoveFilm that allow you to download films at a cost, although the service for Blinkbox will allow instant streaming, so no waiting around for your chosen film to finish downloading.
Rental prices are pretty much on par with services like LoveFilm – £2.49 for oldies and £3.49 for new releases. You can also buy titles for £7.99 – £11.99 – although why anyone would buy a digital version of a movie when they could buy a hard copy (and create their own digital version if they wish to) for about the same price, baffles me.
Three streaming options are offered – high at 1088kbps, medium at 544kpbs and low at 272kbps. If you’re not sure what sort of speeds your internet connection can handle run a speed test to find out.
The movie deals add to what was already a pretty cool service from Blinkbox. We first told you about them back in February last year. As well as paid-for content, users also have access to free TV shows, such as Peep Show, without even having to sign up.
Users can also create ‘blinks’ from a library of clips that numbers more than 20,000. These clips can be further edited by the users and messages can also be attached. These blinks can then be emailed to friends or embedded into blogs or other web pages.
Twitter generates $3million revenue for Dell
Back in March, this very blog suggested five ways in which Twitter might be able to make money.
Suggestion one was entitled “Companies must pay!” and highlighted how businesses were benefiting from free advertising via the microblogging site.
Today, it has emerged that computer giant Dell has made $3m from advertising its products via Twitter, with a third of this coming in the last six months – the period in which Twitter’s popularity has exploded.
This may seem small peanuts compared to the $12.3 billion of revenue Dell earned during the first quarter of this year, but $3million is still a whole lot of moolah. And it doesn’t really seem fair that Twitter won’t see a single penny of this.
The good news for Twitter is that Dell, who had previously dismissed the idea of ever paying Twitter for its service, may be coming round to the idea that there’s no such thing as a free lunch. They’ve admitted that Twitter offers a unique service that is incredibly useful in terms of marketing.
The web is full of affiliate links whereby commission is paid to sites linking to products – it’s what makes the free-content based system viable. It seems a bit silly that one of the web’s most popular systems isn’t involved in this system.
(via PC Pro)
No bundled Internet Explorer with Euro Windows 7
Microsoft has confirmed that the European release of their much anticipated OS, Windows 7, will be shipped without their Internet Explorer web browser.
The reason for this, somewhat strange, exclusion is the ongoing legal wrangle between Microsoft and the European Commission. The basic argument from the EC is that, by including IE bundled with Windows, Microsoft is creating unfair competition in the market.
So, Microsoft has pulled a major strop and have announced that Windows 7 E versions (the E stands for European, see what they did there?) will be devoid of any trace of IE. Although, of course, customers will still be able to install IE if they want to – Bill and the gang aren’t that magnanimous.
The EC is being equally as callow in the argument, however. They’ve reacted to the news by complaining that “rather than more choice, Microsoft seems to have chosen to provide less”.
Come on guys, kiss and make up, life’s too short.
I actually think the news is a good thing – there are plenty of good browsers out there, many of which are far superior to IE. This statement is backed up by the fact that IE’s market share is tumbling, whilst alternatives such as Firefox are gaining ground rapidly. Check out this brilliant Wiki which shows how, in the last five years or so, IE’s market share has fallen by over 25%, whereas Firefox’s has risen by nearly 20%.
I’m a real advocate for Firefox, as you may have noticed, but don’t dismiss Google’s Chrome, Apple’s Safari or, err…Norway’s Opera. Or take our unique test to see what browser you are.
Anti-virus giants fined over charging customers
It seems that the two biggest anti-virus companies Symantec and McAfee have been naughty boys. They’ve been hit with fines for £230k for automatically charging customers to renew their subscriptions. Oh dear. Customers complained because they hadn’t been given fair warning that this would happen.
This couldn’t have come at a worse time for the Californian based companies – Microsoft are currently prepping a beta release of their free anti-virus software, Morro.
Consumers should also be aware that there are plenty of other free options available to them for their computer security. AVG and Avast are big names in terms of free anti-virus protection and there are plenty of others out there. Spend a little while researching – you’re sure to find a perfect option to suit your own circumstances.
Also, before you splash out for a commercial option check with your bank to see if you can get free protection through them. Many online banking sites will provide their customers with a link to get free protection with a service that they’d usually have to pay for. For example, Barclays has a deal with Kaspersky and HSBC offers McAfee for free.
It pays to be safe but why pay for something when you don’t have to?
BT hits back in iPlayer throttling row
You may remember last week, we published a post regarding BT’s apparent throttling of its users broadband connections. Well, the telecom giant has hit back, going public with its condemnation of online video services like the BBC’s iPlayer and YouTube.
Basically this is how the row has unfolded: The BBC releases a story accusing BT of slowing down broadband connections at peak time – to less than 1Mbps between 5pm and midnight – when users should be getting up to 8Mbps. BT responds by sending an email to BBC Radio 4 programme You and Yours stating that content providers “can’t expect to continue to get a free ride”. They also go public with this stance.
The Beeb have responded today, via their blog, saying that BT’s move was a “forthright call for cash” and that the row could end with net neutrality becoming obsolete.
What this means is that ISPs, who currently make no differentiation between types of internet traffic, could begin to charge content providers for their output, particularly bandwidth hoggers like the iPlayer.
The row illustrates how much the net has evolved over the last few years. With the mass introduction of high-bandwidth streaming service like the iPlayer, Spotify, YouTube and the like, the pressure on ISPs to provide a fast and consistent service to their users has increased dramatically.
Lord Carter’s Digital Britain review is due next week and should call for broadband at high speeds and low prices. It might just be that content providers are going to have to come to a compromise with the ISPs to make that happen.
Whatever the outcome, the end users should not be the ones who are penalised. If an ISP advertises up to 8Mbps broadband with unlimited data allowance then that is exactly what they should provide. They shouldn’t promote a service if they are going to struggle to provide it.
(via The FT)
UPDATE: Last.fm founders quit
Martin Stiksel, Felix Miller and Richard Jones, the three men who founded last.fm in East London in 2003, have today left the company.
Last.fm has been owned by American media conglomerate CBS since May 2007 after they bought it for £140million, netting the trio around £19million each at the time.
Rumours are bound to circulate that their departure has got something to do with the US blog TechCrunch’s recent posts, claiming that CBS had possibly handed over last.fm customer data to the RIAA without the site’s agreement.
It might also be worth noting that it is almost exactly two years since the trio agreed the deal with CBS. It might therefore be possible that there was a two year handover period in place. Details of the departure should be coming clearer in the coming days.
What is clear is that Stiksel, Miller and Jones’ idea has played a major role in the dramatically altered landscape of music distribution. With streaming music become more poplar and more commercially viable with services like Spotify, it is fair to conclude that these three developers will be remembered as pioneers of digital music.
Plus, they’ve all got millions of quid in the bank, so it’s not all doom and gloom.
(via Music Ally)
Facebook usernames, what will you christen yourself?
On Saturday morning at 5.01am UK time, Facebook usernames goes live. Users will have the chance to register a username which will develop a unique URL for their profile. Currently the URL is populated by random characters and the move will make it “easier for people to find and connect with you” according to Facebook.
As with any change that involves the social networking giant, the announcement has created a big debate online. Some users have been requesting the service for a while now, whereas some users are stringently against it.
Here’s a quick overview of some of the positive and negative impacts the move may cause:
Positive – The creation of usernames should improve shareability, which has got to be a good thing in terms of a social media. Instead of having to search for an individual’s actual name via Google or Facebook directly, users can now search by username – which has proved popular on other platforms like Twitter and MySpace.
It will also be much easier to give your Facebook details to new people you meet. You could even have it printed on a business card if you are really cool/sad.
It will also make it easier to link all of your social networking tools together – providing you use the same username for every platform you are registered with.
Negative – As with any change to Facebook, concerns are going to be raised about privacy and security. Protest groups have, not surprisingly, already been set up.
There are also major worries that people won’t be able to get their desired user names. Facebook has over 200million members, remember. That’s a lot of people competing to get usernames. There’s bound to be issues with username squatting as well, as there are with domain names currently.
The move also leads to comparisons with MySpace – a service that many people stopped using as the popularity of Facebook began to take hold. It could be argued that usernames are a bit of a backward step.
Either way, expect Facebook to freeze up at 5.01am on Saturday as the race begins. I’ll be awarding a gold star to anyone who manages to register ‘markzuckerberg’ as their username.
Read the full FAQs here.
Chinese surfers to experience even more censorship
From 1st July all computers sold in China must be pre-loaded with software that prevents access to certain websites, according to a report by The Wall Street Journal.
For a country that is already ranked as the most stringent of online censors according to Herdict.com the move indicates further control for the Chinese government and less freedom for its public.
The software’s main developer claims that its Green Dam-Youth Escort programme would protect young internet users from “harmful” material such as pornography. However, China has been guilty in the past of restricting access to much less harmful sites. Only last week sites including Twitter, Hotmail, Live, Flickr and YouTube were reportedly off-limits.
Charles Mok, chairman of the Hong Kong division of Internet Society also expressed concerns that the software may be used “to collect personal data or filter other web sites”.
The Chinese government state that the programme is aimed at “constructing a green, healthy, and harmonious Internet environment, and preventing harmful information on the Internet from influencing and poisoning young people.”
Critics, such as myself, argue however that the programme is aimed at further controlling young minds, preventing them from finding out about some of the many atrocities their government are responsible for.
Why else would they ban access to Amnesty International?
