jump to navigation

Adobe Abandons Mobile Flash Video (Over Steve Jobs’ Dead Body) 2011/11/10

Posted by nydawg in Archives, Digital Preservation, Information Technology (IT), Intellectual Property, Media.
Tags: , , , , , , ,
add a comment

Wired Magazine ran an interesting news story that many have been expecting!  “On Wednesday morning, Adobe delivered the eulogy for its multi-media Flash platform for mobile, stating the company would no longer invest resources in porting its once-indispensable cross-browser technology to smartphones and tablets.  It’s a startling admission of failure from a company that vehemently defended Flash and its mobile strategy in the face of Apple’s refusal to allow it on the iPhone and iPad. Adobe even took on Steve Jobs in a war of words over Flash’s viability as a mobile platform, all in the public domain.  But the writing was on the wall for Flash years ago, and Adobe knew it. With no Flash announcements to be heard at its Adobe Max conference earlier this year and with the company slowly beefing up its toolkit of Flash alternatives, Wednesday’s move is in step with Adobe’s broader strategy of migrating its loyal Flash developer base to a new era, one where mobile platforms reign supreme.”

It’s interesting to watch how these advancements will change our archiving strategies as older formats are retired and/or unsupported.  Everyone knows that the H.264 codec is more energy-efficient, but is the quality also better, and is it worth those license fees?!  So  just for fun, you might want to check out Steve Jobs’ “Thoughts on Flash” from April 2010:   “I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven – they say we want to protect our App Store – but in reality it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.”


Does the Kindle Fire Threaten iPad Tablet Market? 2011/09/28

Posted by nydawg in Information Technology (IT), Intellectual Property, Media.
Tags: , , , , , ,
add a comment

For nearly a year, people have been hoping for some type of competition to Apple’s iPad.  Well, this news release may be the next in a series of possibilities, but since it comes from Amazon, it may hold some promise.  Personally, I don’t think it really is an iPad killer, but  I think time will tell if there really is a “market” for tablet computers.  In the meantime, though, this new technology will provide another example of a cloud computer which forces consumers (or end users) to rely on locked-in cloud storage to access their information. Though I don’t totally buy into the hype that Kindle Fire will compare favorably with the iPad, some (like Ars Technica) do. . . .

“Amazon’s Kindle Fire is likely to be the first successful tablet not sold by Apple, and there are several good reasons for it: the low price of $199, the convenient, portable size of 7 inches, and a rich catalog of books, movies and music offered through Amazon’s Web-based services. But Amazon’s smartest move was to avoid the fatal temptation of creating an iPad clone. ”

If you check out the comments section, you’ll see that a better comparison may be between the Kindle Fire and the Barnes and Noble Color Nook. . . . .  Ultimately, I think that one of the biggest differences is (obviously) size!  Though my interactions with iPads have been limited to a handful, I think the 10″ screen is better suited to reading full-page essays and articles and etc.  On my own eReader/Tablet (by Entourage), I find it annoying to read small print and try to zoom in and then move forward and etc.  But that’s what you get with a 7″ screen (or two).  Alas, I don’t think the Kindle Fire is a dead on arrival, because unlike the iPad, it may allow end users to access Flash videos and retrieve content from the Amazon Cloud. . .   On the other hand, though, the price is cheap ($200), and a Kindle eReader now sells for only $79! So in the long-tun, as an appliance to access content stored on the Cloud, this may work out well for Amazon, as long as they don’t lose too much money on each loss-leader sold, and can make it back on licensing fees.

And one last consideration is the E Ink technology (“As its engineers explain it, “electronic ink is a straightforward fusion of chemistry, physics and electronics to create this new material.” “) which was so good for battery-life.  With this new color tablet option, it will be interesting to see how long batteries last– especially when playing Flash videos.  Oh, and one other thing, like the iPad, the Fire does NOT have a USB port either!  Meanwhile, somewhere in Redmond, WA, Bill Gates weeps!

From Scroll to Screen and Back: Vendor Lock-In and eBooks 2011/09/04

Posted by nydawg in Best Practices, Digital Archives, Digital Humanities, Digital Preservation, Information Literacy, Information Technology (IT).
Tags: , , , , , , ,
add a comment

I saw an interesting article in the NYTimes titled “From Scroll to Screen” which looks at the transition in print media over the last two thousand years.  While the author is specifically looking at the transition from books to eBooks, he declares, “The last time a change of this magnitude occurred was circa 1450, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type. But if you go back further there’s a more helpful precedent for what’s going on. Starting in the first century A.D., Western readers discarded the scroll in favor of the codex — the bound book as we know it today.”

Like many archivists and librarians, I am also highly interested in how this transition will work in the future.  Last year I read William Powers‘ excellent Hamlet’s Blackberry which led me to new ways of thinking about media and different formats used to carry data and information between different stakeholders across time and space. . . .

So this article in the NYTimes by book critic Lev Grossman caught my interest when discussing how one format replaces the previous:  “In the classical world, the scroll was the book format of choice and the state of the art in information technology. Essentially it was a long, rolled-up piece of paper or parchment. To read a scroll you gradually unrolled it, exposing a bit of the text at a time; when you were done you had to roll it back up the right way, not unlike that other obsolete medium, the VHS tape.”

He goes on to explain how those scrolls were items of prestige, probably because of the “scarcity” of scroll-creators.  “Scrolls were the prestige format, used for important works only: sacred texts, legal documents, history, literature. To compile a shopping list or do their algebra, citizens of the ancient world wrote on wax-covered wooden tablets using the pointy end of a stick called a stylus. Tablets were for disposable text — the stylus also had a flat end, which you used to squash and scrape the wax flat when you were done. At some point someone had the very clever idea of stringing a few tablets together in a bundle. Eventually the bundled tablets were replaced with leaves of parchment and thus, probably, was born the codex. But nobody realized what a good idea it was until a very interesting group of people with some very radical ideas adopted it for their own purposes. Nowadays those people are known as Christians, and they used the codex as a way of distributing the Bible.”

And anyone who has ever tried to compare two or more passages in a book  on an ereader, you may be interested to read: “The codex also came with a fringe benefit: It created a very different reading experience. With a codex, for the first time, you could jump to any point in a text instantly, nonlinearly.”   This doesn’t quite work as easily in the tablet or eReader age, but stay tuned, as I imagine at some point they will improve on the technology.   “If the fable of the scroll and codex has a moral, this is it. We usually associate digital technology with nonlinearity, the forking paths that Web surfers beat through the Internet’s underbrush as they click from link to link. But e-books and nonlinearity don’t turn out to be very compatible.

So as we move from the tried and trusted durable medium of the codex and hard-cover book (even if printed on cheap paper) to the electronic tablet (early versions, soon-to-be-obsolete operating systems, playing outdated versions), our content management expertise and digital asset curator skills should become more valuable as new technologies eveolve and media formats become obsolete and disposable and our culture is at-risk.

But our hands are tied.   Even to address the pressing concerns of eBooks and eReaders and tablets, archivists are left out in the cold.  We dare not say anything about the vendor lock-in regarding Kindle’s proprietary formats, because they are Amazon’s Intellectual Property.  We cannot say anything about vendor lock-out in regards to Apple’s iPad tablet not playing (hot) Flash videos (see Steve Jobs “Thoughts on Flash”), and causing problems when accessing Fedora through its Flash application.  We cannot even mention the fact that iPads do not have any support for portable SD card and USB 2.0 external drives.  In other words, if you want to get information on (or off) your iPad, you probably have to email or upload it. . .  😦

So what can we do?  Or, more clearly, what should a digital archivist know to catalog and describe when working with born-digital materials?!  Well, of course there’s so much (not everything entirely relevant though!), but at the very least, better format (not just medium, but format, and maybe codec) descriptions can create better strategies leading to better plans, processes and best practices.  And keep your damn books!

I’ll admit that I finally broke down and bought an eReader.  Since I was going to be travelling to Chicago for the SAA, there were many articles I wanted to read and think about in advance, so for the last few months I was searching for the right one.  Of course, I was quite wary of Kindles because of the proprietary format and wasn’t sure how well it would read PDFS (or if it could), but friends suggested the Digital Reader or Sony eReader, and at least one friend suggested checking out the Nook from Barnes and Noble.

I wasn’t really sure what I wanted, and I ddn’t really care that much.  Basically, anything that would let me read PDFs, most of which I would download from the internet or specifically, the Society of American Archivists‘ (SAA), American Archivist journal.  Of course, I also found some excellent reads on Project Gutenberg and Internet Archive (where, btw, they’re preserving physical books!).  I’m really interested in the e-ink technology, so that was one factor, and the other factor was that I didn’t want to pay more than $130.  (Another factor, on which I thought I would have to compromise was that I wanted an eReader with two screens that would open like a book.)

Well, as you might expect, my research was not leading me to any answers, and I had almost decided to just go with one or the other (whichever was cheapest), and know it would be a temporary solution, until I can afford to buy a nice tablet computer . . . . .But then one day, I got an email offer from Woot for a one-day only clearance sale of all 2-screen dualbook (eReader & Tablet) from Entourage Pocket Edge!!  So I picked that up and I love it. . .. (Yes, there’s problems, but for reading pdfs and drawing on a journal or annotating pdfs and surfing the web on the tablet side, and etc. )   Maybe I’ll write more on it later, but for now, I hope you’ll just give a long thought about what we’ll lose if we give up functional non-linearity in our published works! (and I don’t mean Digital Humanities people with their datamining techniques..)

Apple iTunes & Amazon Own 80% of Paid Digital-Download Market 2010/12/22

Posted by nydawg in Archives, Copyright, Digital Archives, Intellectual Property.
Tags: , , , ,
add a comment

It's Hip 2B Square

“After several years of explosive growth, sales of individual song downloads have slowed. With just over 1 billion tracks sold so far this year, the industry wide tally is up 0.3% from the same point in 2009, according to trade magazine Billboard.

But digital album sales continue to grow robustly, even as CD sales plummet. Sales of the discs have declined 20% this year, while digital album downloads have grown 13%, to over 75 million. (Vinyl record sales are growing at a similar rate, but with just 2.4 million sold this year, the format remains marginal from a commercial perspective.)

Ars Technica: “Amazon was so good at pushing its “Daily Deal” promotions (deeply discounted albums of hot bands) that Apple apparently felt threatened by it—an anonymous music industry exec said earlier this year that Apple was stepping up pressure on artists to
avoid Amazon’s music promotions, lest they lose their valuable marketing support from iTunes.”

Of course people using Amazon Kindles are already well-aware of vendor lock-in through encryption, so this will probably become an issue for Amazon & Apple users in the near-term through the long-term.  (crickets . . . crickets   .    .     .   still waiting)