Experience shows that the first wave of Internet-enabled change was tainted by irrational exuberance. A sober analysis of today's trends reveals that this new participation is both a blessing and a curse. Mass collaboration can empower a growing cohort of connected individuals and organizations to create extraordinary wealth and reach unprecedented heights in learning and scientific discovery... (but) the new participation will also cause great upheaval, dislocation, and danger for societies, corporations, and individuals that fail to keep up with the relentless change.
- Don Tapscott & Anthony Williams, Wikinomics, page 15.
Derek Pokora, Prov. RGD, is digital media manager at New Paradigm. His responsibilities include the organization and maintenance of web sites, managing the visual integrity of documents and presentation materials, audio/video editing, and graphic design. Prior to joining New Paradigm, Derek worked as a freelance graphic designer and has four years of experience in the market research industry. He has also authored a children's book, which he hopes to one day have published. Derek has an educational background from both the Business Management program at Ryerson University, and holds a diploma in Graphic Design from George Brown College.
Throughout the years, video game console companies, most notably Nintendo, have come up with some pretty crazy ideas for controllers and control surfaces. Throughout the evolution of video games, we’ve had a couple of standard controllers. The good old days involved many many hours in an arcade smashing the buttons and jerking the joystick playing Street Fighter Alpha. At home, you’d sit down in front of the TV and play with your gamepad.
Nintendo has been a company to push the boundaries with game interactivity. Not all of their controllers have been incredibly successful (Power Glove what?), but you have to give them credit for their ingenuity. The wiimote has been incredibly successful, and the recent addition to inserting it into a wheel for the new Super Mario Kart game is exciting. Games like Guitar Hero and Rockband have captured a large portion of the gaming market in a short period of time and who doesn’t still love playing Dance Dance Revolution every once in a while? And I’ll certainly never forget the feeling the first time I received the rumble of my haptic Playstation 2 gamepad.
But kids, it’s now time to put all of those devices away. Introducing, the ZCam. Read More »
I must give credit to Thusenth for this post, as he was the person who originally told me about SeeqPod.
SeeqPod is a fantastic music flash-based site that works as a search engine. Users can search to find mp3 files that are hosted on other people’s sites. It links to content as Google would, although it does allow users to play the content from their site, but ultimately they never host any of the content. Although I’m not always the biggest proponent of Flash due to its proprietary nature, it is instances such as this that demonstrate the situational applicability of the software. But I digress.
The nature of this site, however, hasn’t stopped Warner Music from suing the “playable search” company. You can view a PDF of Warner’s complaint against SeeqPod here. SeeqPod claims its music search technology is legal because it doesn’t actually host any files. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act has a provision that protects search engines from charges of infringement when they return potentially infringing results. Read More »
I recently had the pleasure of stumbling across this movie on the internet. A little behind the ball on this one, Good Copy Bad Copy is a documentary originally created for the Danish National Broadcasting Television network that was eventually released for free on the internet in 2007. It first appeared on The Pirate Bay and then was officially released under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial license.
GCBC is a insightful documentary about copyright and culture in the context of Internet, and is directed by independent Danish directors Andreas Johnsen, Ralf Christensen, and Henrik Moltke. The film goes around the world, showing the changing attitudes toward art and culture in Nigeria, Sweden, Brazil, the UK, and in the US. It features interviews with many people with various perspectives on copyright, including copyright lawyers such as Lawrence Lessig from Creative Commons, Tiamo and Anakata from The Pirate Bay, music producers, and controversial music artists such as Girl Talk and Danger Mouse who, as we all know, created the Grey Album by mixing The Beatles’ White Album with Jay-Z’s Black Album.
Even MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) CEO Dan Glickman makes an appearance. He briefly comments on the MPAA’s involvement with the raid on The Pirate Bay. Glickman states that although he knows piracy will never be stopped, they will try to make it as difficult and tedious as possible.
Amongst the most interesting segments include a trip to Russia to look at the rampant bootlegging that occurs there, the perspectives of the Nigerian film industry and the Techno Brega musical movement in Brazil, which has been using a business model for years that was originally considered to be pioneered by The Pixies, Metallica, and Phish back in 2004.
What becomes obvious progressively throughout the film is the death of the current business models used by the record industry and the lack of control which is becoming more prevalent in the current consumerist climate. The old vanguards are fighting to retain their revenue while people are endlessly re-using and recycling copyrighted material in order to create new art-forms.
I would highly recommend this light-hearted and neutral account of the current state of copyright to anyone. The link to download GCBC can be found here. Feel free to donate something to the makers of the documentary if you enjoy watching it.
As reported yesterday, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development and IBM (the leading earner of US patents for the past fifteen years) are partnering with Nokia, Pitney Bowes and Sony to release a portfolio of dozens of innovative and environmentally responsible patents to the public domain. This portfolio of IP is entitled the “Eco-Patent Commons” and is available on a website hosted by the WBCSD.
According to the WBCSD, the patents are searchable by anyone through a search engine on their website and global participation from businesses in diverse industry sectors are welcome. It will be fed with initial and subsequent patent pledges by companies that become members of the Commons. Through the Commons, the patents will be made available for free use by all, subject to defensive termination.
The objectives of the Eco-Patent Commons:
To provide an avenue by which innovations and solutions may be easily shared to accelerate and facilitate implementations to protect the environment and perhaps lead to further innovation.
To promote and encourage cooperation and collaboration between businesses that pledge patents and potential users to foster further joint innovations and the advancement and development of solutions that benefit the environment.
Examples of environmental benefits patented inventions may provide:
Use of environmentally preferable materials or substances
Materials reduction
Increased recycling ability
It is fantastic to see big business making such great strides to help the environment. Not only will these patents help the public domain to share economical and environmentally sustainable practices directly, but the concepts and specific information in these patents could inspire others for formulate new ideas and methodologies for other products and services.
It appears that there have been further developments in the realm of decentralizing social networks since my last post on the topic in August of last year. It was announced this morning that representatives from Google (Brad Fitzpatrick), Plaxo (Joseph Smarr) and Facebook (Benjamin Ling) have joined the DataPortability Workgroup.
Plaxo, Google and Facebook currently represent the key players in the competing approaches to Social Networking Platforms and Data Portability. Users could potentially take their data from the websites they use to reuse elsewhere and vendors could potentially leverage safe cross-site data exchange for a whole new level of innovation.
Among other things, the DataPortability Workgroup is actively working to create the ‘DataPortability Reference Design’ to document the best practices for integrating existing open standards and protocols for maximum interoperability.
Data privacy, however, is another issue. It is exciting though to see where this is going.
As originally cited in the WSJ, it appears as though Intel has abandoned the One Laptop Per Child program, citing a “philosophical impasse,” according to Intel spokesman Chuck Mulloy. This is putting it mildly. According to Gizmodo, not only did Mr. Negroponte persist that Intel stop selling the Classmate, but that they should also halt working with any company that makes inexpensive notebooks such as Asus. This couldn’t come at a worse time, as the CTO of the OLPC just resigned in order to start a for-profit company to commercialize technology she invented with OLPC. This is all pretty fresh news and the OLPC has not made comment yet, so there could be more than what is currently at the fore.
While on facebook today (not that I’m ever on Facebook while working), I came across a post from a friend about something called Hatebook… an anti-social utility that disconnects you from the things YOU HATE.
Care to vent about that ex who’s now dating your nemesis or are you just a misanthrope who can’t stop complaining? This parody on Facebook appears to look and function much like Facebook, except with an evil twist for everything. Profiles even include an almost Nietzschean section entitled “Why I’m Better Than You!”
However, don’t play around with Hatebook too much if you are concerned about privacy. All messages are viewable by all other users, and there are no privacy controls. This is a good thing, in my opinion, as a social networking site focusing on hatred could attract the ‘wrong type’ of individuals. As such, transparency can help protect everyone involved.
There is one problem though. Instead of an entire networking platform based on griping, you can simply install Enemybook on Facebook and save yourself the time of setting up another account. Who me? Complain? Never.
Machinima, a portmanteau of machine cinema, is filmmaking within a real-time, three-dimensional virtual environment which often uses 3D video game technologies. The first machinima film, entitled, Diary of a Camper, was originally created in 1996 by the Rangers (United Ranger Films) using Quake and was inspired by 1993’s Doom, which allowed players the ability to record gameplay. However, the term machinima was not coined until 1998 in response to an increasing use of other game engines to create movies.
It is now 2007. Less than ten years later, machinima is reaching new heights. As posted by Xeni on Boing Boing today, HBO has decided to purchase the rights to a Second Life machinima series entitled, My Second Life: The Video Diaries of Molotov Alva. Originally appearing on YouTube on March 2nd of this year, the Second Life avatar of Douglas Gayeton has created quite the media buzz with over 450,000 hits since then. The ‘documentary’ features a mysterious resident who leaves his real life behind to search for existential answers in the virtual world of Second Life.
HBO will soon be screening the film in a Los Angeles theater in order to meet the requirements for nomination of an Oscar in the Animated Short Subject category. So far, this deal is the highest profile example of an SL-to-RL rights deal to date. This also leverages Linden Lab’s policy in which residents may retain the underlying intellectual property rights for content that they create in the virtual world.
John Edwards uses Twitter. Obama’s the most widely viewed candidate on YouTube. Both the Yearly KOS, and the CNN/You Tube debates have happened, and now MySpace and MTV have announced a series of one-on-one candidate forums. The internet, and especially Web 2.0, has given candidates an extremely cost-effective way to reach millions of potential voters.
In an article by Josh Catone, he questions whether predicting the next US election based on Internet popularity might be a big mistake. Refer to the chart below.
According the data compiled here, it appears that the battle is between Barack Obama and Ron Paul for the Presidency. However, according to practically every poll conducted this past month, Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani have commanding leads. Catone’s reasoning for the disconnect? Age (younger people are more active online, but participate less in active voting), the ‘coolness’ factor (people socially connecting to politicians online but failing to follow through), and the possibility of errors in polling.
However, these descrepancies do not mean that the active engagement in politics online is without repercussion. In fact, inexpensive marketing as a result of the second wave of the web can actually aid a politician in fundraising, as well as building awareness. On the other hand, fundraising may not be as large of an issue as it has been in the past, given that the playing field is levelling out. How much did it cost Barack Obama to communicate to eleven million viewers? Nothing.
I think that Catone brings up some valuable insights. If age is a factor, then I would like to take this opportunity to encourage the youth of America to vote. If you claim to support someone online, then vote for them! The time invested to write a few messages on a candidates profile would be far better spent by going down to a booth and actually voting for the candidate you claim to support. Be consistent. If you are going to harness the democratic power of Web 2.0, then apply that belief to your own political system. It was implemented there first, was it not?
Brad Fitzpatrick, creator of LiveJournal and OpenID, has written a blog posting on his thoughts on the social graph and how it should be decentralized. According to Fitzgerald, we should be making the social graph a community asset, ensuring to utilize the data from different sites, but without depending on any individual company or organization as a centralized owner. Open source software could collect, merge, and redistribute the graphs from all other social network sites into one global aggregated graph.
Fitzpatrick believes that a user should be able to log into a social application and be presented with the option of prompting you to become friends with others, based on a previously declared relationship elsewhere. Fitzpatrick’s goal is to build the guts that can allow a thousand new social applications to bloom.
Sounds pretty good doesn’t it? Users wouldn’t have to re-enter their personal profile information each time they signed into a new social application, nor would they have to re-add all of their friends, thus avoiding the ‘social network fatigue problem.’
However, it is recognized that users don’t always wish to ‘auto-sync’ their social networks. People use different social networking sites in different ways. For example, a friend on Facebook may very well not be the same type of friend that one would have on LinkedIn. Do you really want everyone to know what you’re up to at all times?
Announced on its blog, Google News will be taking it’s News 2.0 to an even higher level by trying out a new feature on their website that allows individuals involved in news stories to post their view points next to the published news item. However, in order to send comments to Google, those parties involved will have to email Google with a link to the story that they are commenting on, as well as a way for Google to authenticate their identity. All appropriate information must be included in the email, and no attachments are allowed. For more information, click for help here.
This new feature raises some important points:
Unique comments made could result in the exclusivity of information for Google. Viewers would have to go specifically to Google News, as opposed to the original news source from which the feed was aggregated from in order to obtain additional insight from involved parties. This would attract a huge amount of attention to Google, which would probably fuel the fire that already exists between Google and disgruntled news sources.
This new feature has potentially severe ramifications for journalists. With the uprise in blogging, journalists have come under fire. Now that all of these comments will be posted in one place next to a story published by a journalist, their credibility will once again be scruitinized.
Although I think it’s a great idea, how exactly, beyond taking someone’s email at face value, is Google going to verify the validity of their involvement in the news story? Google, being rather adept with algorithmic-driven solutions, is not exactly experienced with human interaction. It will be interesting to see how Google will deal with an influx of new data of a different kind.
Google is currently only testing its comment feature in the United States, but may release this feature beyond these borders if interest peaks.
And knowing how popular Google is, this is very likely. Watch out newspapers. They way we read the news could change dramatically… and quickly.
Upon viewing Henry Rollins’ unabashed rant posted by Anthony, I couldn’t help but think of the future of the internet when faced with Google’s recent statement that it will bid at least $4.6 billion in the auction to obtain the 700 MHz Band spectrum. This spectrum, which runs from 698-806 MHz, is currently occupied by television broadcasters and will be reallocated for other wireless services due to television broadcasters vacating the bandwidth to move to digital television. This leaves, quite possibly, the most valuable available slice of radio-frequency spectrum up for grabs in America.
Google’s prospective bid on the spectrum, however, is contingent on open access requirements. Google said it would participate in the auction only if the FCC adopted conditions ensuring that consumers could use any applications or devices and that third-party providers could freely buy spectrum and interconnect with the network at any technically feasible point.
The question is why would Google impose such a stipulation when it could simply implement these restrictions once it won the auction?
Google wanted the FCC to impose these requirements so that, regardless of who wins in the auction, Google will get what it wants. Open access. This would allow new market entrants to compete against incumbent cell phone carriers like AT&T and Verizon Wireless. To go out on a limb, let’s say that maybe Google would want to get in on the wireless game. But that doesn’t sound like Google at all, does it? Whatever Google’s exact motives are, head of special initiatives at Google, Chris Sacca states,
“We’re putting consumers’ interests first and putting our money where our principles are — to the tune of $4.6 billion.”
AT&T isn’t so hot on the idea, as executive VP of external and legislative affairs, Jim Cicconi has stated,
“We would repeat that Google should put up or shut up — they can bid and enter the wireless market with any business model they prefer, then let consumers decide which model they like best.”
Verizon, on the other hand, grudgingly shifted its position in a defensive reaction once it recognized a consensus was emerging at the FCC in the direction of open access, stating that if the FCC persisted in imposing such rules, it should preserve customers’ ability to choose to have the same kind of relationship with a carrier that the customer enjoys today.
Regardless of the their stances on the issue, Verizon and AT&T will have to rethink their plans, as democratic members of the FCC have shown support for the open access initiative. FCC Chair Kevin Martin compromised by proposing approximately one-third of the airwaves sold would require buyers to offer open network access.
In a Press Statement released by the FCC on July 21, 2007 here, the FCC ruled:
“The licensees of the Upper 700 MHz Band C Block of spectrum will be required to provide a platform that is more open to devices and applications. This would allow consumers to use the handset of their choice and download and use the applications of their choice in this spectrum block, subject to certain reasonable network management conditions that allow the licensee to protect the network from harm.”
Although Google did not receive the exact ruling it was looking for, it is still interested in bidding. It won’t be too long before we will find out who comes out on top, as the FCC is required to commence the auction by January 28, 2008. Despite Google receiving the majority of media coverage on this issue in the United States due to its bold move, the same issue is currently being debated here in Canada as well with the oligopoly between Rogers, Bell, and Telus.
According to MIT research fellow David E. Stone in a fantastic article posted in Wired Magazine today, the motion sensitive controller is “one of the most significant technology breakthroughs in the history of computer science.”
The Wiimote, the controller that comes with Nintendo’s Wii system, is being looked at as the key to building realistic training simulators within the virtual world of Second Life. Using this product, individuals can have the potential to learn how to perform surgery, inspect buildings, or even learn how to drive using Google Maps and Google Earth. A more intuitive and tactile human-centric controller allows one to move their avatar and manipulate their environment in a more realistic manner.
Released under GNU General Public License (GPL) (open source) the Wii4SL Sourceforge Project is enabling people to do as such. The Wii4SL extends the open source version of the LindenLab SecondLife viewer with support for the Nintendo Wii Controller. You can now navigate your avatar through virtual space with the ease of the Wii Controller.
An example of this is the video below from YouTube. Instead of sitting at the computer and having your avatar walk around on Second Life, why not do the actual walking yourself?
Or even better yet, why not just go for an actual run in real life? It’s far less expensive than having all of the equipment necessary, and I’m sure the view would be far nicer. Besides, hopping up and down on a treadmill places just as much stress on your joints and doesn’t provide you with as good of a cardiovascular workout as a run would.
Simply because something can be virtually replicated, that doesn’t mean that it necessarily should be.
However, it’s definitely a step in the right direction.
Open source management and services firm OpenLogic has launched a new free download, Discovery, that will enable users to create and maintain an inventory of the open source software used on their systems.
Part of the initial success of open source in the data center - driven by Linux and Apache - came from its deployment by IT administrators without the knowledge of the CIO or IT director, but while that approach may have reduced purchasing and maintenance costs it leads to an administrative headache.
The new OpenLogic Discovery product is designed to identify 5,000 versions of the 900 or so open source software applications used by enterprises today. It is available for Windows, Linux, and Sun Solaris systems. The company is also offering JumpStart Inventory, a service that involves scanning and analysis by OpenLogic. The analysis identifies not just what open source software is installed but also how many installations, and identifies which of the open source packages found have passed OpenLogic’s 42-point certification process as well as which open source licenses are used.
JumpStart inventory is free for up to 500 machines, and with pricing for the service then starting at $5,000.
In an attempt to recreate the Great Library of Alexandria, Aaron Swartz, co-author of the RSS 1.0 specification, writer, and web developer, announced on Monday the launch of the Open Library Project, quite possibly his most ambitious project to date.
The goal of this project is to produce the world’s largest and greatest library on the Internet. It is intended to be fully open and a product of the people: allowing them to create and curate its catalog, contribute to its content, participate in its governance, and have full, free access to its data. The demo, source code, and mailing lists were all opened up in hopes of drawing interest from the public at large.
Utilizing their own database design, ThingDB (tdb), as well as the team’s independently created wiki software, Infogami, the Open Library project team hopes to expand its framework in order to build exciting site-specific features on top of it. It has already been connected to the Internet Archive’s book scanning project, so that one can read the full text of all the out-of-copyright books they’ve made available. They also hope to add a print-on-demand feature in order to print copies of the scanned books, as well as a scan-on-demand feature, so one could fund the scanning of that out-of-copyright book they’ve always wanted.
For more information on the project, or for a demo, click here.
In a ruling issued last month but disclosed yesterday by file-sharing attorney Ray Beckerman, The RIAA’s ex parte motion to compel the University of New Mexico to disclose the identities of its students has been denied, in the District Court of New Mexico, by Magistrate Judge Lorenzo F. Garcia, in Capitol v. Does 1-16.
At the same time, a University of Boston student is challenging the RIAA’s system of filing John Doe lawsuits in order to discover the names connected to IP addresses uncovered by the music industry’s investigators. This methodology is one that the RIAA is quite familiar with: file John Doe lawsuits, file ex parte applications for discovery, serve the resulting subpoenas on the alleged file-sharer’s ISP to discover the identity of the person to whom the IP address was assigned, and then offer the person identified by the ISP a chance to settle the copyright infringement claims without a lawsuit. In other words, the RIAA attempts to circumvent the judicial process while blackmailing individual parties in order to make their point. The would-be defendant never has the opportunity to answer during a John Doe lawsuit and rebutt the subpeona issued to them.
The RIAA has argued that it would suffer irreparable harm unless immediate discovery was allowed. Despite the fact that harm is caused due to copyright infringement, the harm related to disclosure of confidential information in a student or faculty member’s Internet files can be equally harmful.
“While the Court does not dispute that infringement of a copyright results in harm, it requires a Coleridgian ’suspension of disbelief’ to accept that the harm is irreparable, especially when monetary damages can cure any alleged violation.”
The remainder of the ruling can be downloaded here.
With precedent now set, the RIAA may now have a more difficult time with this type of case. The litigation process could be much more expensive and time-consuming. Those suspected of file-sharing may now be better informed from the beginning of the legal process instead of simply being notified with a settlement letter.
If the RIAA really wants to make an example out of someone, why don’t they just go after Jenna and Barbara Bush?
According to an article in the most recent edition of Nature, a close-up view of the human genome has revealed that its innermost workings are far more complex than originally believed. Focusing on only one percent of the human genome sequence, the ENCyclopedia Of DNA Elements (ENCODE) performed roughly eighty different varieties of experiments which yielded some 600 million data points.
The major result of the initial HGP provided us with the sequence of DNA, but did not provide a great deal of understanding as to what each sequence does. It was previously believed that about 97 percent of our DNA was ‘junk’, with no evident biological function. However, this has changed, as ENCODE has noticed that the majority of the remaining genome is ‘active to some extent’.
They found that ‘junk DNA’ was being transcribed into Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) – in other words, it was being copied in order to relay information, or instructions, from DNA to other parts of the cell. (Now I’m really glad I caught that episode of 100 Greatest Discoveries with Bill Nye on TVO last Sunday).
Considered to be the next step from the Human Genome Project, the ENCODE study was the collaborative effort of eighty organizations from across the globe who communicated via the International HapMap Project.
After a year in progress, the logo for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic games was unveiled by Committee Chair Lord Sebastian Coe and his ambassadors at the Roundhouse in Camden, North London this past Monday.
Designed by Wolff Ollins, who also designed the logo for the 2004 Athens games, this is the first time that the same brand will be used for both games. With an apparent price tag of £400,000, I can only surmise that the branding was so exorbitantly expensive that the organizers could only afford to create one brand for both games. In their defense, I can understand how the integration of both games does help the intention of the branding. I can also see how the branding itself contributed to costs having increased by 40 percent in the 18 months since the bid was won.
Based on the number 2012, the emblem comes in a series of pink, blue, green, and orange, and was designed with the intentions of inspiring everyone, while reaching out and engaging young people around the world. According to abdicating Prime Minister, Tony Blair, “When people see the new brand, we want them to be inspired to make a positive change in their life.” The message to be conveyed – London 2012 will be “Everyone’s Games.”
In this same spirit, you too can make an artistic contribution to the games. Download the design templates, do something creative with them and upload the results to the online gallery.
But is it really everyone’s games? With such a strong push from those who rightly should be advocating the success of the brand’s launch, there has been an exorbitant barrage of negative opinion from the general public. An online petition to change the logo has already garnered roughly 50,000 signatures.
Last night I found myself watching an interview of Al Gore plugging his new book “The Assault on Reason” on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. The two joked about the blurring of entertainment and news, and Gore stated that the Internet was a beacon of hope for democracy due to low entry barriers and active contributive efforts. Ironically enough, this statement was made on television, a medium that involves passive learning. This made me wonder about the future of the Internet television. With technological advancements growing at an exponential rate and the active participation of prosumers, will television be anything like it is now in a matter of a few years? Will traditional television as we know it even exist?
The CRTC has recently modified its advertising limits to conventional networks. By 2009, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission said there will be no restrictions on advertising for over-the-air TV broadcasters, who have complained loudly about a shrinking advertising base as viewers migrate to cable, satellite and the Internet. What will this mean for the networks? As programming is sent out for free over the airways, advertising is their means of revenue. If networks cram their programming full of advertisements to increase revenue, viewers will simply jump ship to alternative media sources, most notably the Internet. It just doesn’t seem logical to me. I mean, unless you really love watching commercials.
So let’s take a look at the alternative: programming via the Internet. With products such as Apple TV and the recent buzz about Joost, it looks as though we can abandon our TV cable accounts and use that money to increase the bandwidth of our Internet accounts. We can sit back, relax, and watch a wide range of programs with the potential of less advertising for one flat rate.
Or not.
There are issues that need to be addressed. Just ask the British. With a cap on Internet usage allowance, any Briton with an Internet connection can typically only view roughly three hours of programming on Joost before using up their monthly usage allowance. After that, top-up charges apply. Both in Canada, and in Britain, bandwidth restrictions, placing caps on data transfers, throttling during peak times and ‘traffic or packet shaping’ from high-speed ISPs result in much slower internet connection speeds (than what you are actually paying for) and limited usage. With Apple TV you can’t even directly connect to the Internet to view programming. The footage must be downloaded to one’s computer first before transferring it to your television via the stripped down MacMini. Besides, any computer with a TV Card has the same capability of viewing downloaded footage on your television set. With AppleTV, it is also necessary that the user have a High Definition Television. However, most of the footage available for download on the Internet is not HD compliant. Despite the fact that Joost is compatible with Apple TV, and the viewing quality is quite good with Joost, what is the point of
del.icio.us
Digg it
Furl
reddit
