The most distinguishable feature of Apple's iPhone X was not the one they had hoped. Rather than the "all screen" design, which is definitely a wishful thinking marketing campaign, the most noticeable feature is the notch at the top of the screen. This design element makes the screen look bizarre and makes the OS strange to use. It is also the phone's most hated feature.
Whether you are a user or a developer, no one seems to like the notch. The idea is fairly obvious: use as much of the body of the device as possible, while still maintaining the front-facing camera, speaker and Face ID sensor. The problem, of course, is that it makes the phone work in a way that no one would expect. If a wireless network's name is longer than a few characters, the name no longer displays normally, but instead scrolls constantly. The behavior of apps is also wildly changed, with all apps having to be rebuilt to support the unnecessary design idea.
Of course, Apple didn't create the notch; that distinction goes to the Essential phone, though they took it in a different direction. The notch there was as small as possible, only surrounding the camera.
Somehow, however, this idea that consumers seem to hate is catching on with other hardware vendors. At Mobile World Congress, a number of phones were spotted looking similar, if not identical, to the iPhone X, notch and all. Of course some small companies were going to make knock-offs, but it was the big companies that were surprising. For example, the announcement of the Asus Zenfone 5 showed that Android users and developers were about the face the same annoyance that Apple owners and devs have. In addition, Huawei and LG also have devices sporting the notch.
As this manufactured "trend" increases, there are some important things to know for owners. The most important is that apps are not going to work on these phones. It is a guarantee that information will be lost or, in some cases, the apps will simply fail. The likelihood is that the big Android developers, like Microsoft and Facebook, will deal with these issues quickly (they were some of the first to support the iPhone notch), but most developers will never try. That's because there are already too many different types of phone hardware to support that creating a whole new UI concept to support some smaller phones is not in their budget.
Apple has the ability to force developers to follow certain hardware-specific rules, but Google does not have that same power, because they do not control the ecosystem. It is one of the long-running issues for Android: version inconsistencies, hardware diversity and API variations. These things are also what make Android so powerful in the market, but Google has gotten itself into the same situation that Microsoft has been in for decades, but this time Apple has affected them in a negative way. The notch could certainly cause issues across the Android landscape.
Often times, when a company files suit over copyright claims, the end result is predictable. For example, when Disney sued Redbox for reselling the digital distribution codes that are bundled with DVDs, most of the industry saw what was going to happen: Redbox was going to stop selling the codes. Obviously, the codes come as a package deal with the DVDs, so it should be a slam dunk, right?
Wrong. Federal Judge Dean Pregerson decided to throw a surprising wrench into the works during an initial hearing where Disney was looking to stop Redbox's practice during the trial. The judge used a mostly unknown and almost never used aspect of copyright law, which states that enforcement can be prevented if the copyright is being misused. In this case, the judge believes that tying the ownership of the digital distribution to the ownership of the physical discs was a misuse of copyright law.
Obviously Disney intends to appeal this ruling, for a number of reasons. If this ruling were to be allowed to stand, it would have sweeping implications across a number of industries. Let's start with the most obvious: Hollywood. If the ownership rules were to allow the discs and digital to be split, the immediate response would be for the bundles to stop. The only reason you get the digital version for free is because it is a single owner.
Possibly more importantly, there are a tremendous number of products that bundle software that is not allowed to be split. For example, you buy a digital camera, it might come with a free copy of Adobe Photoshop Elements. We all know that you cannot resell that copy of Photoshop, but with this ruling, that may no longer be the case. That free videogame that came with your videocard? Same thing might apply there.
With a change in copyright enforcement, stemming entirely from this case, might come a change in how we purchase products. DVDs may no longer come with digital download codes. Videogames may no longer come with DLC download codes. Videocards may no longer come with a free videogame. Commercial network hardware may not come with the management software. This could be a game changer that none of us expected to see.
There's no question that the technology topic of this year has been cryptocurrency and blockchain. For the tech enthusiasts in the industry, the idea of decentralizing the data and processing is very appealing. Moving the transaction processing away from "traditional banks" is a draw for the market, but it is also turning out to be a problem.
One of the things that the banks have going for them is compounded knowledge, something that only comes with time and experience. Most of the banks have been around a long time and learned the hard lessons about how banking works years or decades ago. In the crypto world, the currency exchanges, which often act in the absence of a bank, are trying to forge their own paths. Being as they are all running in the technology startup environment, they eschew the existing wisdom and look for new ways to do things. While that has helped in a lot of industries, it seems to cause a lot of trouble in this one.
For example, we have seen several very large heists, such as NiceHash, Coincheck and, of course, Mt. Gox. Sometimes these issues are unavoidable, but sometimes the lack of experience in the industry is the problem.
An example of that comes to us care of Zaif, an exchange run by Tech Bureau Corp. out of Japan. For almost 20 minutes, all requested transactions had zero charge. Now, that is not to say that there were no transaction fees; the entire transaction was zero charge. A few users discovered how it worked and "purchased" about $20 trillion worth of Bitcoin. Yes, that is trillion with a T.
The company waited 4 days after the incident before announcing the issue. They attribute the issue to a glitch, but revealed no information about the glitch itself. They did promise that they would work to prevent future issues. Obviously, the transactions were invalidated and no one received or lost anything during this period. The only exception is Zaif, which lost a lot of trust, both from the crypto community and from the Japanese government. The Financial Services Agency is currently investigating what happened and whether or not the organization is secure enough to operate.
As we have mentioned in the past, it is important to remember when getting into cryptocurrency, there is always going to be the loom of technological collapse, so keep that in mind.
The last 2 years have been good for augmented reality and mixed reality content. From holographic medical tools to the infamous Pokémon GO, there are many ways to interact with augmented reality content. With Microsoft, Apple and Google all having AR development kits, making the process of adding information to the real world far easier than just 2 years ago, more of this type of content is expected to come to market.
Some of the biggest supporters have been major franchises looking to enter the AR gaming field. While Pokémon GO is the obvious market leader, Harry Potter has an entry into AR gaming in the works, as well. Both of these high profile games are developed by the same development house: Niantic. This week, a new franchise wants to compete for your AR attention, with a new developer involved.
Sony Pictures Entertainment Consumer Products is looking to bring a Ghostbusters AR game to mobile, titled Ghostbusters World. In the trailer, available after the break, you can see that the game will stay true to the themes of the films and TV shows, with ghost hunting, and even the familiar trap imagery.
What do we know? There will be a myriad of ghosts available, and the game will include battles with said ghosts and the ability to capture them, presumably using the trap imagery we see in the trailer. We also know that the game is planned for release in 2018 for both iOS and Android. Unfortunately, that's about all we know. How will battles work? What new ghosts will be available? What does the game's UI look like? All of these are questions we will have to wait until later in the year to find out the answer to.
With the all-female reboot of the franchise and the heavy reliance on the costumes in the past season of Stranger Things, it is no surprise Ghostbusters is getting the AR treatment. Are you looking forward to the game? Let us know in the comments.
Check out the teaser trailer for Ghostbusters World after the break.
Over the past few months, a lot of discussion has surrounded the future of cellular technology, the 5th generation, or 5G networks. Intel was showing off the possibilities at CES 2018, with their entire booth being powered by a localized 5G network. At the Winter Olympic Games, Samsung used the opportunity to show off the possibilities with localized 5G setup around the venues and the Olympic Village. While it's clear that the technology is ready for small-form setups, a lot of question has surrounded whether or anyone is ready for a large deployment test.
It would appear that AT&T, one of the largest mobile providers in the US, is ready to see what happens when an entire city is lit up with the LTE replacement. While the 5G roadmap has been in place since 2016, almost exactly 2 years later the company has announced the first of their 12 test cities, and one of them might surprise you. In addition to Dallas, Texas (9th largest city) and Atlanta, Georgia (38th largest city, major travel hub), they will also being testing in Waco, Texas (197th largest city). Obviously, one of these things is not like the others, with Waco being a bit of a surprise test site.
It does make sense to want to test the technology in a smaller location and not just a larger city, for a variety of reasons. While stress tests on the towers is an important aspect of the process, it is also important to see whether or not idle time causes any issues. If the network is understressed, it could potentially cause its own issues. In addition, a smaller city, like Waco, could allow them to run larger device tests without as much disruption to the existing network.
Just because AT&T wants to begin the rollout of 5G in a big way, that doesn't mean that you will have any access to it for a while. Even if you are in a launch city, and the technology becomes publicly available, you will still need a few things. Most importantly, you will need a 5G-capable device. If you are an Apple customer, it will likely take several generations before they adopt the technology, based on their speed to adopt 3G and 4G radios. The best bet for getting a 5G compatible device will be a Samsung, as Samsung is involved with developing the standard, and has been demoing the technology at the Olympics.
5G networks are designed for more than just phones, though. With lower power consumption and much higher bandwidth capabilities, 5G could mean that your next-generation smarthome and other IoT devices could have radios built-in, meaning that Wi-Fi setup could be a thing of the past. It would seem that something as simple as bandwidth upgrades could be this impactful, but 5G could change the way computing is done.
It seems like no major brand is having quite the level of public outcry that YouTube has faced in the past few months. Whether it be inappropriate content in YouTube Kids, or ads with drive-by crypto miners, or their ongoing battle with Amazon, or of course the years-old demonetization scandal, YouTube seems to be unable to just catch a break. Recently, however, the company has come under fire for its uneven response to controversial content on the site.
For example, almost exactly a year ago, then-popular YouTuber PewDiePie paid a group of people to hold a racist sign in a video. YouTube and Disney's reactions were swift and harsh, with Disney dropping him entirely and YouTube terminated his Preferred status and canceled his YouTube Red series within hours of the video's release. More recently, another popular YouTuber and Preferred partner, Logan Paul, uploaded a video in which he openly mocked Japanese people in their home country. He then uploaded a video from a forest in the country known for suicides, where he encountered a body.
The response from the public was equally swift, but the response from YouTube was not. In fact, it took some time before the company removed Paul's Preferred status, which it did a few days after the video was published, despite the content of the video being far more inflammatory than PewDiePie's content had been. After an apologetic video shortly after the idiotic incidents, Paul took a break from YouTube, but temptation is a harsh mistress, and he returned this week with his trademark nonsense. In fact, he returned with a video in which he used a Taser on a rat and pulled a live fish from the water, suffocating it.
Clearly he hasn't learned anything from his experiences. This time, however, YouTube's response was quick, terminating all of Paul's advertising on his channel, which accounts for roughly $1 million per month for the 22-year-old. But PewDiePie and Logan Paul are not the only idiots on YouTube producing this kind of content, so what is YouTube's plan? Apparently trying to solidify their policies in writing - sort of.
When one creator does something particularly blatant-like conducts a heinous prank where people are traumatized, promotes violence or hate toward a group, demonstrates cruelty, or sensationalizes the pain of others in an attempt to gain views or subscribers-it can cause lasting damage to the community, including viewers, creators and the outside world. That damage can have real-world consequences not only to users, but also to other creators, leading to missed creative opportunities, lost revenue and serious harm to your livelihoods. That's why it's critical to ensure that the actions of a few don't impact the 99.9 percent of you who use your channels to connect with your fans or build thriving businesses.
So, the company recognizes the problem, but does not quite offer a solid solution. As is normal for Google-owned properties, the policies are open to interpretation at a level that is difficult to work with. For example, what is a "heinous prank" or what constitutes "cruelty" and to whom? It's fine that YouTube believes they want to censor content, it is their site after all, but with such vague descriptions, it will be hard to know where the moving line will be at any moment. But this is the problem you always encounter when you begin to censor content.