You can’t keep a good open-source project down. A while back there was a project called Mono that was started to create an open-source version of the .NET platform. A few weeks back the development team was laid off, by the new Novell owner Attachmate, and they promptly created a new company, Xamarin. They plan to have commercial .Net bits and pieces for iOS and Android. They will also continue to work on the open source Silverlight project called Moonlight for mobile phones and Apple’s Mac Store.
This is what open-source projects are all about, providing alternatives to commercial projects that can often be so proprietary as to stifle development and capability. I have used a wide range of open-source applications and development libraries ranging from complex cryptography to simple string routines. The update cycles are faster, the functionality often superior and getting a response to a question is vastly superior to say getting one from Microsoft.
You are sitting at your computer in Australia, or pick your place, checking the prices on eBay or an online retailer. Checking the price of a HDMI cable you find that it is 10 times the price at your local store, even after shipping, and even if you have to pay import duties. You hit the purchase button and in some cases it arrives in a few days. Sounds like a fantasy? Think again, many online shoppers are finding that the items they are interested in are far cheaper online. I chose Australian as the example because it is one place where prices are rarely less than double when compared with the online alternatives.
Yes it is good old greed that keeps the Aussie prices at their at their dizzying heights and the local sellers cry foul while pocketing their high profit margins. When it gets to the digital world the situation is even worse. The Top 20 will cost you more than 70 percent over the same price at the Australian iTunes store versus the US one. Given that the A$ is higher than the US one at the moment this is digital highway robbery. Computer games have an even higher price difference and it can be worse for application software. Even after applying the local GST it is far cheaper from overseas stores.
Looking forward to cheaper PCs in the future, Intel says think again. As Intel starts to gain the upper hand, a.k.a. a monopoly we can expect the competitive pricing days to be over. Of course if we all don’t switch to their new chip technology that may put a crimp in their plans. Crowing over the recent increases in vendor sales Intel CFO boasted how they had “broken the pricing death spiral that has bedevilled the PC industry for most of its history.”
For those who have lived in countries that have monopolies, e.g. Thailand, we know how dangerous it can be for a single player to gain the upper hand in a technology. If Intel gets their way they will control the CPU marketplace, slow down the release of new chips and put up the prices. This is the way of a monopoly holder. The PC group last year made around 50 percent in profits which as the CEO pointed out not too many businesses get that kind of return except “selling drugs maybe." In a later statement Intel said that he was referring to legal pharmacology.
Industry News
China makes most things for most organizations all over the globe. Foxconn is one such factory and they recently had an explosion that killed three and wounded sixteen. Foxconn has been watched over the past few years and there have been accusations of worker abuse that has lead to protests, suicides and even poisonings. The cause was due to a “super-light dust explosion.” If true the ventilation systems were not up to scratch. The iPad2 is manufactured by Foxconn, at that factory, so I suspect availability may be an issue for a while.
Lockheed-Martin has purchased what is supposedly the first quantum computer from the Canadian company D-Wave. There are many who claim the D-Wave machine is not a true quantum computer. The real question is what does the thing do and how does it do it. It has 128 qubits of processing. Some say that processing above 8 qubits has never been demonstrated. If true this would represent a huge leap forward in computing. According to MIT associate professor of computer science and electrical engineering Scott Aaronson:
“In the new work, they apply an annealing operation to eight coupled qubits arranged in a 1D chain, then plot the probability of a particular basis state as a function of time, by running the experiment over and over and stopping it at various intermediate points. They then look at the dependence of the probability-versus-time curve on a third parameter, the temperature, and claim that they can explain the curve’s temperature dependence by a numerical simulation that assumes quantum mechanics, but not by one that assumes classical simulated annealing.” You decide
Most agree that the D-Wave approach does not represent true entanglement and that it will still only work on classical computing problems. This may be true but D-Wave claim their machine will still do it faster. The new partnership then may be more about a symbiosis where Lockheed-Martin gets access to new technologies and D-Wave gets complex problems to try.
Professor Ian Hargreaves' is working on a Digital Copyright Exchange that many claim will never happen. Intellectual Property is a complex subject that spans organizations, international treaties and local laws and regulations. These all loosely surround a number of different and often disparate technologies.
As a creator of something, assuming you didn’t just copy it from one else, the treaties are supposed to protect you. How this works varies on the countries involved and who you are. Apple and Microsoft for example in the US seem to be able to patent stuff that others have done before them, with impunity.
Everyone knows that the licensing for digital music needs some serious work. The current system requires two copyrights, one for the sound recording, which belongs to the labels one for the composition. The labels control how this is split and in many cases the artist and the manager do not know how this is calculated. To figure out how the publishing is handled you need a few doctorates. In many cases there are a dozen different deals going at any one time. Hargraves wants a new opt in program, if you don’t then you are not protected. I would have thought the system should be the other way round, you are protected unless you opt out. The new proposal removes your flexibility and your control.