Sam's World Of No

Obviously, the makers of BBC iPlayer were initially distraught when I suggested, a couple of months ago, that their terrible product was re-defining the low bar when it came to beta software. The availability of programs was poor, the website was strange and required a seemingly-endless stream of passwords and identity checks, and the iPlayer software (read: DRM-enforcement SS Unit) was 6.64 megabytes of pure fail.

Clearly, the gauntlet was thrown down. I can visualise the events now as I had been there. And as if they had actually happened. First, the iPlayer team was excited about the blog post. Finally, they thought, the internet is taking notice of our betamax*-level technology. Then they read the post, remaking at the quick wit and the ever-thoughtful user comments, and were beside themselves. For nights, they lay sleepless. After a few days, they picked themselves out of their pit of despair and came up with a stunning idea, a spark of originality which would change the internet.

Hold on, cos this is complicated: They realised that what they should do, rather than making people download software that looks like it came from Astalavista and didn’t work, is stream the content straight from the website. That’s right. I couldn’t believe it either. As Steve would say, this is man-on-the-moon level invention. I can’t believe nobody ever thought of this before.

In all seriousness, the product that iPlayer has become is better and is actually worthy of being released to the real world. And of course it’s right that they released something early and waited for feedback, rather than keeping the product in development for years without working out what people want. And yes, they have responded quickly to the fact that they had produced a pup.

But you just think that they should have guessed that streaming online was the only way forward from the outset. It’s not like the path hadn’t been paved already. But, dear iPlayer engineer, here’s what you’ve been waiting for. “Well done”. Now get back to work - start by taking those stupid red boxes off the BBC News Homepage.

* And yes: I know that in some ways, Betamax was superior technology. But it still got sent to Failsville, which is where it sat, waiting to be joined by the initial iPlayer platform.

Bookmark:

The launch of the MacBook Air this week re-opened a can of worms for me; should my new laptop be a Mac, and now that Air is here, should I choose it over the MacBook Pro which I have previously considered my best choice?

The Mac vs Windows issue is still not solved for me. Ever since my G3, which was found in the lobby of our building with “free to a good owner” taped to it, I have been very impressed with the OSX interface. It is easy to use, and it is progressive. And it does what it does so much better than Windows. The appeal for me was clear.

Of course, Apple’s attack is part cool, part beauty and part ease of use - the latter is what mainly attracts me; but people tend to think of you as gullible if you even suggest that coolness and beauty are something to be attracted to. Yet the fact is that people like me spend a lot of time at computers, and having them be a nice play to be is no bad thing; in fact it’s a great thing. And the fact that they’re ideally suited to web development just adds to the allure.

So what to get? Well, the “same [old] lovable MacBook” isn’t going to cut it, so I’m stuck between Air and Pro. A friend told me I should “go pro, fo’ sho’” (he like me, is so totally ghetto it’s unbelievable), but it’s not that simple. Here’s the comparison in brief:

MacBook Air

• Light and small.
• Base processor is a 1.6 Core 2 Duo.
• 2 gig mem
• 80 gig hard drive
• 5 hours batt
• No SuperDrive
• 13 inch screen
• £1,199

Macbook Pro

• Still pretty light and pretty small.
• Base processor is a meaty 2.2 Core 2 Duo
• Extensible 2 gig mem
• 120 gig hard drive
• 6 hours bat
• 15 inch screen
• SuperDrive
• £1,299

Until I realised today that the prices were so similar, I was sold on Air. It’s a good deal compared to the pretty (but not as usable) Vaio TX, but it’s clear from the £100 difference that you’re paying for the portability both in terms of cost and in terms of technical specifications. And let’s not forget, when talking of tech specs, that the equivalent Dell laptops are fat, expensive beasts. The bigger Vaio models are nice, but not as nice as Mac. Then again, they are quite a bit cheaper. But they’ll have Vista on them - and the advances that Vista represents over XP are few, especially after you’ve had to turn off all the fancy graphics affects because they overload your system.

So anybody considering buying an Air has to ask themselves “really, how important is the ultra-portability to me”. I think for most people used to lugging around a Windows laptop, the answer will be “not very”, especially considering the improvement in portability that a Pro represents over these clunky machines. If the Air was £800, I would consider it. As it is, it’s MacBook Pro all the way.

Of course, I’ll change my mind again tomorrow. Fo’ sho’. Ho’.

Bookmark:

It seems like almost every week there’s a story on the BBC news site about social networking being used by identity thieves to glean personal details.

Perhaps “every week” is a bit of an exaggeration (those are the only links I could find in one Google search. On its first page), but it really does feel like the media are all too delighted to jump on these tales of impending doom, hand-delivered to them by whichever security/censorship firm has issued a press-release.

This is not news; it’s pummelling the same story at people over and over again. I thought we moved away from Victorian schooling models and rote learning. Enough already.

Bookmark: