Archive for the ‘Computing’ Category

Weekly News Roundup (15 May 2011)

Sunday, May 15th, 2011

I’ve had a busy week. Early on, I finished writing the review for PowerDVD 11. You’ll have to read the review to find out whether the new version of PowerDVD is worth it or not, but I really like the Android/iOS remote app, which basically turns your touch device into a touchpad for your computer. And being able to stream content from my phone to my PC through my home Wi-Fi is a lot easier than connecting via USB or Bluetooth. Pity the streaming doesn’t go the other way, from the PC to the smart device, but I’m sure Cyberlink will be sued into oblivion by the entertainment industry if they ever tried something as innovative and useful as this.

Not only that, I managed to get the April 2011 NPD US video game analysis up yesterday. That’s right, the feature is back, big time. Well, not big time, since I suspect it will go missing again next month as Sony tries to hide the PS3 sales figures. It’s actually quite funny, because if you read the April 18th edition of the WNR, I made a joke about the possible reason why Sony did not want to release PS3 sales figures for March, where it goes “This can only mean one thing, and that is that PS3 sales for March was negative – more people returned PS3s in March than people who actually purchased one #NotIntendedToBeAFactualStatement“. Not only did I write that *during* the PSN intrusion, which nobody, not even Sony, were aware of at that time, what I wrote is actually coming true, with lots of stories of people returning their PS3s. I had nothing to do with the hack, I swear! I barely even know how to use Internet banking!

And so before the FBI breaks down my door, here’s this week’s WNR, which doesn’t feature as many news stories, because there probably hasn’t been any really interesting news stories (and considering the fact that I’m not the only one writing the news these days, I’m much more certain this is the case, as opposed to everybody suddenly getting a case of the lazies).

CopyrightSo staring with copyright news, and while there are only three real news stories covered this week, the second one is a real doozy. What exactly is a doozy? I have no idea. But the second story is a real one.

LimeWire Logo

LimeWire settles again, this time with rights holders, for $105m. It's a much better result for LimeWire than the billions and trillions the RIAA had wanted

The first story is LimeWire’s settlement of one of their remaining lawsuits, or is this the last one, I don’t know, there are so many! LimeWire has settled with copyright holders, after settling with publishers back in March (for an undisclosed amount). Copyright holders hold the copyright on the song, while publishers hold the copyright on a recording of the song. Of course, with the way the studio system works, the same label is sometimes both the copyright holder and the publisher, so basically even with two possibly nine figure settlements, the actual artists that created the songs will probably get nothing, or if they do get something. You know, this is where I think copyright laws have gone completely out of control. If you ask an average Joe on the street,  “Hey Joe, who do you think copyright laws are really meant to help?”, that person will probably say “My name is not Joe”. And then he or she will say that copyright laws, with the way they’re being used, are obvious created to help rights holders make money, and prevent nasty pirates from sharing their works without permission. But you know what Joe, you’re absolutely wrong.

The aim of copyright has always been to promote freedom of expression, the spread of culture and to promote creativity. It is not solely, as the RIAA stated when commenting on the LimeWire settlement, to help “rewards creators”, and even if that were the case, the creators are not the RIAA or the four major labels it represents. Copyright is very much a balancing game. If you don’t have copyright protection, then original works will be disseminated in a much freer fashion, and so ticks the first two of the three criteria I mentioned above. But the problem is that, and I hate to agree with the RIAA here, if the original creators are not properly rewarded for their efforts monetarily, then there is less incentive to create, especially in today’s money obsessed society. I mean, yes, some artists do art not for money, and you might even say that these are the real artists. But even real artists need to eat. And as a society, we value art and creativity, and so it’s only natural that there is a financial aspect to it.

But if you take copyright the way it is currently being used, or rather, abused by the rights holders, then you have things like DRM, DMCA take-downs, mass lawsuits, and all with the aim to lock in the profits, and not usually on behalf of the artists themselves either. It’s not a very expensive process to publish your own Blu-ray movie, due to licensing, the need to purchase DRM keys, and so how does this foster creativity for the public good. And with the major studios and labels controlling the scene, unless you’re a major artists that can negotiate your own terms, others have to put up with giving the studios and labels a large chunk of the money earned on their works, and so the current system doesn’t really “reward creators” either. Fortunately, the Internet and computing technology in general has helped to level the playing field a little bit, allowing consumers to do more with their purchased content, allowing independent artists and publishers to distribute their work without having to rely on the majors’ connections. And it’s true, piracy do hurt the independents as well, but with piracy, comes publicity, and if your work is good, really good, than you can make fans of pirates, and fans will provide financial reward, either through live performances, or a iTunes purchase to show their support for the artists (even if they’re already downloaded his or her songs). If anything, piracy means creative works are being judged on their merits more than ever now, and only the really good works will benefit financially. And isn’t that a good thing, to promote good work over bad? And it’s almost these points, the level of playing field, the greater access to the market by independents, and having to actually produce good work, that is most worrying the entertainment industry, not the money *directly* lost through piracy. They don’t want to lose their monopoly, so that artists can distribute and promote their own songs without the need for the labels and studios, and end up keeping all of their money (which is why the RIAA ordered Homeland Security to close down blogs that artists were using to leak songs and promote their music). They’re afraid that one day, artists will wake up and realise that “We have the Internet now. We don’t need you any more”, and so they’re trying protect their position by law, using copyright and piracy as an excuse. What the major studios and label want is against the public interest, against what copyright stands for, and they are the real abusers of copyright laws.

US Department of Justice

If PROTECT IP is passed, the DoJ can use tax payer money to help movie studios and music labels sue websites

And they want to abuse it more, and create more laws that makes it easier to abuse copyright, which brings us to our second story. The PROTECT IP act, currently being considered in the US congress, will tip the copyright scale even more in favour of the multi-billion dollar corporations that are calling themselves “creators” these days. The details are scary, to say the least. If the bill is passed, it will authorize even more domain seizures by Homeland Security and ICE. The Department of Justice will now be authorized, to use tax payer funds, to file civil lawsuits on behalf of rights holders, to save the billion dollar corporations even more money, time, and effort, and even if the domain name or website is not hosted in the US, the Attorney General can step in and force US based search engines to remove results for the website (“site:thepiratebay.org” -> no results found), ISPs to stop providing access to the website and even financial companies to stop providing services to those websites, all on the say so of the rights holders. If the recent domain name seizures as part of Operation In Our Sites are anything to judge by, the “defendants” will have almost no way to defend themselves until their businesses have been ruined, and even after that, it will be extremely difficult. In other words, a judge is now required to make a judgement on a one sided story, presented by the full might of the US government and billion dollar corporations, and represented on the other side by nobody, and this is what due process has become. So if the RIAA spots another website that is threatening its control over artists, all they have to do is to make a phone call to the politicians that are already in their pockets via lobbying money to get exert pressure on the DoJ and the AG to act, and then that website will exist no more. That’s what due process will become, if PROTECT IP is passed (and given the lobbying cash being thrown around to both sides of politics, as expected, there’s already a lot of support for the bill).

And sometimes they don’t even have to make that phone call, because PROTECT IP will grant corporations governmental powers (hey, if they’re already people, or so the US Supreme Court says, and people run the government, why not let corporations have the powers of government as well?). Corporations can force financial service providers to cut services for websites they don’t like, much like how the government “convinced” the likes of Amazon, PayPal and Mastercard to cut service to Wikileaks. They don’t yet have the powers to force search engines to remove search results or the force ISPs to cut service to websites they don’t like, but give it time.

So if you don’t like the way PROTECT IP overreaches, now is the time to contact your congressman and senator. It probably won’t do much good, because most of them can’t understand the technical ramifications of what they’re voting for, or what they’ve already been paid to vote for, but it’s your only weapon against this monstrosity of a bill, and it is still supposedly the best weapon in a supposedly democratic society.

Google Music

Google Music will anger music labels because it helps consumers too much

Another great weapon is innovation. The Internet is so innovative and allows so much innovation, the TPTB are incredibly afraid of it. And Google now follows Amazon’s lead and taking music to the cloud, much to the chagrin of the music industry. I dislike the way Google is trying to take on everything and everybody, often forgetting their core responsibilities, but putting my opinions aside, innovation is always welcomed. The service is currently in beta, and only open via invitation in the US, but like Amazon’s service, you get GBs of space online to store all your music, and the music will then be accessible everywhere there is an Internet connection, and also on Android devices of course. The music industry don’t like it because it means they can’t make people re-buy the same music half a dozen times, one for each device, so they’ve used the excuse that the service will be used to host pirated songs by individuals. So? If people have already stolen your songs, then how they play those songs should be the least of your concern, I would think. On the other hand, if the music industry had embraced the Internet instead of being afraid of it, they could have launched their own similar service, charged people for it, and kept a lid on copyright issues through policing. And make a bundle out of it as well. At least the movie industry are looking at UltraViolet, which would do something similar with movies, but even better because you don’t even have to download anything if you don’t want to (stream it right after you buy it), which is kind of a necessity with GB sized movies really. But the RIAA will sue Amazon and Google, and probably Apple too, and anyone daring to give consumers more freedom as to what they can do with the purchased content.

Not much happening in HD news, and I’m already over my word count with only three stories covered, so I’ll skip this section for the week.

Gaming

But there’s still gaming, and of course, there’s still the PSN thing. The story out now is that the PSN is slowly coming back online, and so we’ll start to find out just what kind of compensation Sony will be providing for the more than three weeks of downtime.

It will most likely be a free PSN game or two (and I really hope they don’t make it so people have to input their credit card numbers to get the free games, because that would be kind of perverse), free identity theft protection for a year (it’s never a good thing when a company has to do something like this), and a free trial of PlayStation Plus. Sony, during the week, sent letters to game publishers which provided a bit more information on how the hack went down, including the interesting fact that they company didn’t even know they were being hacked until the servers went down from too much hacking (or data transfer, probably), and that hackers managed to hide their tracks by deleting logs, which probably didn’t have real time log monitoring and offsite log retention, which could have allowed Sony to detect the problem earlier, and to have clues as to what the hackers had done.

Of course, for some, nothing can make up for the lost in trust, from comments right here on Digital Digest, to comments I’ve read in other public and private forums, this latest incident appears to be the straw that breaks the camel’s back (except it’s more like a bale of straw, given the magnitude of this f***-up). The same comments have people saying they’re trading in their PS3s for Xbox’s, and there are news reports floating around with retailers also reporting the same thing, but you know, for every person that does the trade in, there are probably tens and hundreds that are not keeping their PS3, but every little bit hurts Sony, especially since they’re locked in a bitter battle with the Xbox 360 for global dominance, even if they’ve appeared to already have lost the battle in the US (the PS3 is now comfortably third in total sales in the US).

If Sony wants to get back into the game, if you excuse pun, then they have to admit that it isn’t just this single incident that has made people reconsider Sony, as a brand. It’s the DRM rookit, the alienation of the hacking community that was once your greatest supporter, thanks to OtherOS. If is the same community that you should have embraced instead of sued, after they discovered your flawed security system, to help you make your system more secure, and perhaps bring OtherOS back as a open source project that will require no financial commitment from Sony (if that was what they were really worried about). And it’s also the arrogance, in their advertising campaigns and slogans. “It only does everything?” Yeah, it did do everything, except a lot of the things you wanted it to do, and it was just unfortunate that it did a lot of things for hackers too. The whole Sony Knows Best attitude has to go, they have to become a much humbler company that truly puts customers first. To go back to the Sony that fought bitterly for our rights in the Universal vs Betamax case, the same Sony that revolutionized portable music via the Walkman, the same company that ended the Nintendo/Sega hegemony with the PlayStation. Do all of that, and they can stop becoming one of the most hated companies in the world. If you make Microsoft look like the good guys, and if you lose to a console that used to have a 1-in-3 fault record, then you’re doing something really really wrong.

Speaking of the devil, the Xbox 360 may be getting a dashboard update next week, which only seems to add PayPal support. But with Netflix Kinect support, Hulu Plus (with Kinect), and Avatar Kinect all coming recently, perhaps the good old “Spring Update” isn’t as an important occasion as it used to be. Either that, or Microsoft are too busy reinforcing their online security to bother with adding more features. I suspect many web companies that hold a lot of credit card info have done the same in the last few weeks, and so I guess that’s the silver lining out of the PSN fiasco (the silver lining is for other companies though, not for Sony).

Alright, already too much ranting this week. Got to save up something for next week, so until then, have a good one!

Weekly News Roundup (27 March 2011)

Sunday, March 27th, 2011

Another week, another WNR. A pretty quiet week I think, one where I wasn’t paying much attention anyway, so it was good that it was a pretty quiet week and I didn’t miss any big stories because I was too busy wasting time. Anyway …

Copyright… let’s start with copyright news. One news that did escape my attention from last week was the White House’s attempt to make unauthorized video streaming a felony. Actually, I did see the news, and dismissed it as typical posturing. And it was just a white paper anyway, and you can buy tons of white paper at Staples for less than the price of a sandwich.

TorrentFreak

TorrentFreak is under fire of music industry expert Moses Avalon, who says the website could be shut down under new US laws

That is until this week, when I stumbled upon an online spat between music industry expert Moses Avalon and BitTorrent/anti-piracy news website, TorrentFreak. You’ll have to read my news article, as well as Avalon’s blog and TorrentFreak’s response, to get the full picture, but to sum up, Avalon surmised, from the White House white paper, that pretty soon, P2P usage would be made a felony as well. From what I’ve read, and to be honest, I only skimmed as I usually do when I come across an opinion I don’t agree with, it seems Avalon is saying that P2P, the technology itself, would be illegal if the White House’s IP Czar had her way. I believe the only connection between the white paper, and P2P use in general, is that because P2P has an upload component, it *could* make BitTorrent transfers somewhat akin to streaming. However, and I think it’s fairly clear, that there is a huge difference between illegal use of a technology, and making that technology illegal. I don’t for one second think that technology like BitTorrent will be made illegal, because it would also make perfectly legal services, like Skype, Spotify, or even applications used by the US military today, illegal. BitTorrent is perfectly legal, under any law. What some people use it for though …

And as for why Avalon thinks TorrentFreak should be put on the banned website list, I have no idea. TF is a news and information website, much like what Digital Digest is pretending to be, and sure, it has a bias, but I think one would be hard pressed to find one website (especially a niche one) that doesn’t have a bit of a bias, including Avalon’s own website. Avalon refers to “P2P lifestyle”, for which he thinks TF promotes, and that this is the area in which the new proposed laws could see TF get banned, as TF “encourages” unsuspecting youth to lead a life of crime by downloading the latest Bieber hit. “P2P lifestyle” reminds me of the term “gangsta lifestyle”. There seems to be a lot of music these days that might be what one might believe to be promoting the “gangsta lifestyle”, something Avalon should surely know about working around the music industry (Nate Dogg R.I.P – Regulate In Peace!). Is Avalon saying that the government should ban music that could be seen as corrupting today’s youth (and yesterday’s youth too, considering gangsta rap’s long history)? If song lyrics which call for the assassination of police officers or the physical assault or even murder of other people are not illegal, then I’m pretty sure TF should be safe.

Pile of money

The first of many instalments that LimeWire has to pay to record labels, if they had their way in terms of damages payable

LimeWire’s troubles in the courts continues, as the music labels suing the defunct music file sharing network wants a potential $75 trillion dollars in damages, more money than the global music industry has ever made since recorded history began, and greater than the entire world’s combined GDP for a year. The judge presiding over the case has called it “absurd”, although to be fair to the record companies, they didn’t really ask for $75 trillion. It was just that the calculations they used to determine the billions in damages that do actually want is so flawed that, multiplying the amount they want per download, rather than per unique work, it does work out to be in the trillions, or at least several hundred billion. This again brings up the question of just how much money the industry is actually losing to piracy. I will cover this in more detail in a news article next week (I’m like that squirrel in that well known fable – I’m saving stuff for the “news winter”,  by saving some real news for next week when there might not be any real news), but it appears that since LimeWire’s shutdown, music piracy has decreased dramatically (and yes, I’m taking a huge personal risk by linking to notorious “P2P lifestyle” website, TorrentFreak – I’m calling my lawyer as I type), as expected. In fact, nearly half of Americans that pirated music have stopped doing so in the last quarter of 2010, largely thanks to the shut down of LimeWire (according to respected research group, NPD). So surely, this should lead to increased revenues, what with 12 million less music pirates in the US now? All we need now is the figure for increased revenue, divide that by the 12 million who stopped downloading, and then we can work out the real cost of piracy, per person. Of course, if revenue actually went down in the last quarter of 2010, then that could be a bit of a problem for the RIAA PR machine.

So if there was no significant revenue increase, or heaven forbid, that there was an actual decrease in revenue, then what does it mean? Another music industry and piracy expert, from the University of Queensland Australia, thinks that the solution to the piracy problem is for the music industry to compete with piracy. Reducing price and making content more available, and as easy to access as pirated downloads, say professor Stuart Cunningham, is the key. I’m not a university professor, as I barely have a bachelor’s degree, but I think this is what I’ve been saying for some time now and it’s good to hear someone who has read books and stuff to agree with me. To be honest, the piracy problem is so bad these days (I’m in total agreement with the entertainment industry on this point), that anything, *anything*, is worth a try. Even if it means having to let go of a century old business model. Cunningham also criticized the industry’s tendencies to over-exaggerate the financial toll of piracy (and this was before the “LimeWire $75 trillion” news story came out) – it’s good politics, but it doesn’t really solve any problems, and sometimes I think the industry doesn’t really want to solve the piracy problem, it only wants to be subsidized (via tax payer handouts and whatnot) for it. Or get some judge to give them $75 trillion.

In other unreported news (unreported on Digital Digest, that is), the Australian arm of the MPAA, the AFACT, is going all the way to the highest court in Australia (there I go, linking to TF again … I’ve just become a repeat offender!) to appeal two decisions so far that have seen it on the losing side of the legal battle with Australian ISP, iiNet, over the issue ISP issued infringement warnings.

Not much happening in the world of 3D, HD and Blu-ray. Is it me or is the 3D hype dying? The only news of note was one where Samsung I think producing an external 3D Blu-ray drive for the PC. Except that all Blu-ray drives are capable of playing 3D Blu-ray movies, and so really, the “3D Blu-ray” marketing here may be just in the software included, which is not even made by Samsung (it’s Cyberlink’s). The only hardware change I can figure may be the connection interface, maybe USB 3.0 instead of 2.0, but 2.0 should be more than enough for 3D Blu-ray’s requirement of 60 Mbps, considering 2.0 is rated for up to 480 Mbps (although real world performance is only a fraction of this, but 200 Mbps is still easily achievable). Any drive rated 2x or above for Blu-ray read speed should suffice for 3D Blu-ray. I guess the 3D hype isn’t dying yet when companies are still using it to promote products that aren’t really any different to its non 3D predecessor, at least in hardware.

Gaming

And finally, in gaming news, more PS3 jailbreak news this week as well known Android hacker Koushik Dutta turns down a Sony job offer to protest the company’s ill treatment of fellow hacker, George Hotz.

Sony’s R&D recruiter emailed Dutta with a Software Engineering job offer, but Dutta politely declined saying that he “could not in good conscience work at Sony”. It’s good to see someone with principles.

Dutta Sony job offer

Android hacker Koushik Dutta says no to Sony's job offer, to protest geohot's treatment

Sony, on the other hand, were busy trying to discredit geohot for taking a long planned vacation this week by accusing the hacker of trying to delay proceedings. Hotz is actually in South America, which sounds iffy, but he has clarified that the trip was long planned, and paid for using his own money, not that which has been donated to his fighting fund. He also assured Sony that he’s in contact with his lawyers.

One hack that may or may not make Sony mad is one demonstrated by Kinect hacker Shantanu Goel, when he demo’d running Kinect on the PS3, and using Microsoft’s controller-less motion gaming system to play Killzone 3. It’s all pre-alpha stuff, so things don’t work as well as expected, but it’s still interesting to see in action (YouTube video of the hack in action here). Why did I say it would make Sony mad? Well, what doesn’t, these days.

Best of all, the hack is open source, so anyone with Kinect and a PS3 can try it out for themselves.

Alright, that’s enough writing for this week. Have a good one!

Weekly News Roundup (13 March 2011)

Sunday, March 13th, 2011

Welcome to another edition of the WNR. For those that are new to this, this is where I usually write my introduction, or in the rare cases, I get to mention the one piece of work that I actually managed to do the whole week. This is one of those rare cases. The work in question is the monthly NPD US video game sales analysis for February 2011, which I posted yesterday. No big surprises, and the five week reporting period for this February made the figures look better than what it was a year ago, when it was only a four week reporting period, but once again, the Xbox 360 was the real winner with year-on-year growth even when you take into account the reporting differences. Kinect is a big part of why the Xbox 360 is doing well, but you do wonder how long people are willing to wait for some new games, because people I think are already bored with the launch titles.

Also, just a reminder that the draw for the Digital Digest Facebook/Twitter competition took place this week, and you can see if you’ve won here. I’ve tried contacting the winners via Facebook/Twitter, but not everyone has gotten back to me, so hopefully you’ll read this message and collect your $20 Amazon gift card.

Lots to go through, so let’s get started.

CopyrightIn copyright news, LimeWire is in the news again, this time for settling one of the two lawsuits it is facing. No details have emerged regarding the settlement agreement, other than both sides will pay for their own legal costs.

But the way music copyright works, LimeWire is still facing about a billion dollar worth of damages from the other lawsuit. With music copyright, copyright is split between copyright owners of the song in question, and the publisher, which owns particular recordings of songs. The settlement this week is with the publishers, but some of the very same companies as part of the settlement are still suing LimeWire as copyright owners. LimeWire is still fighting that other lawsuit though, and they’ve even gone as far as subpoenaing mega-corps such as Apple and Google to see how distribution deals are normally set up. And the conclusion they’ve drawn from the internal emails they’ve looked at is that piracy possibly even helps sales, and that the closure of LimeWire actually had a huge negative effect on legal music sales. And this will all have an effect on the possible amount of damages that LimeWire needs to pay.

Sony's Michael Lynton

Sony Pictures CEO Michael Lynton once said that he's the type of guy that "doesn't see anything good having come from the internet. Period."

Other than this piece of news, it was actually pretty quiet on the copyright front this week. Just before I started writing this edition of the WNR, I came across this editorial in The Observer, on the websites of the British newspaper. The premise of the article is very simple – that movie studios have only themselves to blame for not embracing the Internet, and allowing online piracy to fill the gap left between the traditional, outdated business model, and the consumer’s demand for something new. The entertainment industry spent the last decade basically trying to use the courts and lobby governments to intervene on their behalf, instead of actually working with the technology. And when they did work with technology, it was to invent DRM whose only function was to annoy legitimate consumers, and actually create a legitimate excuse, at least for some, to obtain content illegally. When people can obtain the same or higher quality content for free, and more easily than legal purchases, this creates the illusion that what they’re doing is perfectly justified, even when they know that it’s illegal. What the industry needs to do is to not give people any excuses, at least not good ones, to not buy legal content. And this starts with making content easier to access, to grant users access to more content, faster, and all at a price point that is reasonable. The Observer article hints at the fact that it may already be too late to act, that a whole generation has grown up disrespecting any type of legal purchase, making fun of those that do the right thing. However, I’m more optimistic, because the success of iTunes and Apps suggest that, people in this new under-25 generation do still spend money, even if their expectations are very much raised in terms of value and ease of use. It’s now up to the industry to rise up and meet those expectations, or the doomed scenario that The Observer article predicts, one where a perfect storm of “excessive budgets, dwindling finance and diminishing returns” will catch up to the industry.

iTunes

You still can't re-download your past purchases on iTunes, thanks to the music industry's imposed limitations

If you want an example of the industry not embracing the Internet, then Apple’s iTunes is a good example. While the music industry was pre-occupied on cramming as much DRM into music as possible, even putting root-kits on CDs, Apple was quietly building a new business model to suit the Internet age. Sure, Apple also did experiment with DRM, with no success as predicted, but they also made sure that even if you had to deal with Apple’s draconian DRM scheme, you would at least get something back, which would be cheaper music (cheaper than buying a whole album just for a song anyway), ease of use, and hardware devices that made it all work. And Apple, a computer company, now profits from a music, where the music industry could have perfectly easily retained this revenue for themselves, if they just had the foresight to embrace the Internet, instead of fearing it. And this week, another example of the industry’s fear was on show, as news broke of Apple trying to re-negotiate re-download rights for iTunes music with the major labels. That’s right, once you buy a song on iTunes, you cannot re-download the song without paying for it again. This is not Apple’s doing, this is a roadblock put up by the industry, who greedily wants to be paid on a per download basis, as opposed to a per purchase basis. While this is a simple inconvenience to iTunes users, it just goes to show the mentality of the industry who sees the Internet as the worst thing ever (as one Sony executive put it), trying to make it harder for Apple to sell music *legally*.

I can sort of see why the entertainment industry is reluctant to offer re-download rights, and to also put out reasonable prices. They way they see it, if someone is spending $50 on 30 music tracks at $1 each and one DVD movie at $20 every month, then by lowering the price of tracks to 10 cents, and movies to $5, then they will see their income drop from $50 to $8. But the way I see it, if you do truly build a great and easy to use system, people will still spend $50, they’ll just buy more things. In fact, I can see people even spending more than $50, if every buying decision becomes a non-decision and the perceived greater value in their purchases will probably mean more purchases over time. And there will also be more people paying for content than before, because nobody but the really hardcore downloaders will find it necessary to go through the trouble of pirating a 10 cent track. Then there’s the indirect result of “teaching” a generation about copyright, not by trying to punish those that don’t do the right thing, but by creating reasons for them to do the right thing.

High Definition

In HD and 3D news, nothing much again this week. The only thing remotely related to HD was the news that you will soon be able to rent movies on Facebook, using Facebook credits.

I guess after my rant above about the entertainment industry not embracing the Internet, this is one example of the opposite. I still don’t know if this will be a success, but at least they’re trying. The problem is that it costs 30 Facebook credits, or around $3, to rent a movie that you can only really watch online, via a Flash based movie player not too dissimilar to YouTube. That sounds a bit steep for $3 to me. And the same argument I made above rings true here as well, as instead of trying to sell/rent a few overpriced movies to a small minority of Facebook users, wouldn’t it be better to sell/rent a lot of reasonably priced movies to more Facebook users – the long tail approach, where the money is made on a huge number of small transactions, as opposed to a few large ones.

Gaming

And in gaming news, some better news for Sony this week as their European PS3 import ban has been lifted, and LG, which initiated the ban in court, might even be fined for perhaps taking things a bit too far.

It’s all just as I suspected, a petty patent dispute (one which, to be fair, was started by Sony), with no real consequences once both sides settle down and settle the matter, in or outside of court. But even Sony admit this one could have been costly, since supply was definitely starting to get constrained had the ban not been lifted in time.

And a new firmware is available for the PS3 as well, with 3.60 released this week to give PlayStation Plus subscribers access to 150MB of online storage to store their save games in the cloud. The firmware also addressed security issues, as I suspect every firmware release from this point will, and hackers have reported that it is somewhat effective, for now at least.

PS3 HDD Upgrade

Sony encourages people to upgrade their PS3's HDDs, but refuses to fix the firmware bug that renders some PS3s with upgraded HDDs useless

While the update is good for PlayStation Plus subscribers, it’s not so good for those that had their consoles bricked due to the botched 3.56 firmware. What happened was that 3.56’s security fix to fight hackers, fought against those that had legally upgraded their PS3’s HDDs (something Sony encourages people to do, even providing instructions in the manual on how to do it). The update rendered the system unusable, and even the later 3.56 Hotfix didn’t fix the problem, although it did allow those that still had the original unmodified HDD to get the system up and running again (and once that happened, users could then upgrade their HDD again without problems – in other words, users needed install the 3.56 Hotfix by using their original unmodified PS3 HDD, and then afterwards upgrade their HDD). Everybody thought that 3.60 would then fix this major bug, and allow borked systems to work again, but unfortunately, this was not the case. Apart from paying for an expensive repair by Sony tech support, there’s no other way to restore functionality, but some have had success begging Sony to fix their PS3s for free, if they were only out of the warranty period by a few months. I urge people to talk to their local consumer rights group, to inform themselves of their statutory warranty rights, and demand Sony repair their PS3s for free, for a problem that Sony and Sony alone were responsible for in the first place.

Microsoft, on the other hand, are basking in the rays of good news, with Kinect officially entering the Guinness Book of Records as the “fastest-selling consumer electronics device”, with 8 million units sold/shipped in the first 60 days according to Guinness’ own independent research. So far, 10 million units have been shipped to retailers as of the end of February, that’s almost one for every five Xbox 360’s. Still, as I mentioned earlier, Kinect will succeed or fail based on the software offerings, and so far, what’s on offer has been pretty average.

And so that’s another WNR done and dusted. Before I go, I would just like to say that my condolences goes out to the people of Japan. Google has set up a page with resources on the crisis in Japan, for those seeking information or ways to help.

Weekly News Roundup (27 February 2011)

Sunday, February 27th, 2011

The last week of the “high maintenance” month of February is upon us, and it’s a relatively quiet one in terms of news stories (quantity wise, anyway). I did finally write that US video game sales 2010 year-in-review blog that I promised over a month ago. And it was pretty short as promised as well, mainly thanks to NPD no longer releasing publicly all the figures needed to do a proper analysis. But really, the story of 2010 was the Xbox 360 revival (not that it was ever close to dying or anything), with the last of the three graphs I posted in the review blog being the most telling, showing the trend of the three major home-based consoles. Anyway, onto the news roundup.

CopyrightIn copyright news, let’s start with more bad news for isoHunt. Not only did they get sued again last week, now, even a potential ally in Google has come out blasting the BitTorrent search engine.

Now, on first glance, you might expect Google to back isoHunt, considering both are search engines. And since Google is fighting its own copyright battle against Viacom, surely this puts them on the same side as isoHunt. But that’s not really the case. Viacom’s strategy in their appeal of the YouTube verdict is to say that it’s no longer enough for websites to be DMCA compliant, that is to remove infringing content when requested. Instead, Viacom says that there is something called “red flag” infringement, which means that if it’s somewhat obvious that infringement is occurring, then Google/YouTube should take action even without any specific DMCA complaints. The problem for Google in regards to the isoHunt appeal is that the MPAA might just win the case against isoHunt on the basis of “red flag” infringement, and it would set a precedent that would disadvantage Google. So what’s Google’s legal strategy? It’s to paint isoHunt not as a search engine, but just a really really bad copyright infringer. It’s arguing that there’s no need for the MPAA to even use “red flag” infringement, because isoHunt is plainly guilty of actively and deliberately supporting piracy, something that Google/YouTube cannot be accused of. Yes, it really hurts isoHunt’s defence that they’re just a search engine, like Google, but this is Google in self-protection mode.

Red Flag

The so called "red flag" infringement ruling could spell an end to online innovation

Regardless, “red flag” infringement is actually quite a dangerous precedent to set, so I do support Google’s efforts in trying to fight against it, even if it means that isoHunt will be sacrificed as a result. The problem with “red flag” infringement is that it potentially could kill innovation on the Internet, because let’s admit it, a lot of even today’s most popular and mainstream web services had to tolerate or even support “red flag” infringement, to get their business up and running. Would YouTube exist today if people weren’t allowed to upload copyrighted content back when it first started out? Would Google, the search engine, have become the most popular search engine if it blocked all piracy related search results when it was first launched? Would any of the free file hosting websites even exist, allowing us to share large (legal) files that otherwise would be too big for email? “Red flag” infringement is basically the content owner’s way of stopping all innovation, even if there is a remote chance that infringement could occur at some unspecified time in the present or future, and that’s dangerous. And it also puts the onus on identifying infringing activity on the side of the website publishers, as opposed to the content owners, which doesn’t even make sense, since how would I know what content belonged to whom and whether it’s really authorized or not (case in point, Viacom’s own employees uploading copyrighted clips under fake accounts, to create fake hype and promote their shows)?

And so we move on to the next set of news, which is also about appeals. This time, it’s the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft’s (AFACT) appeal of a verdict from a year ago which found Internet Service Provider, iiNet, not guilty of authorizing copyright infringement committed by its subscribers, even though iiNet failed to act on infringement notices sent by the AFACT. The result of the appeal was announced this week, and it’s victory again for iiNet, even if it’s mostly symbolic at this point. While iiNet won the appeal, several decision has been overturned in favour of the AFACT, and it probably paves the way for AFACT stepping up its campaign to make ISPs the copyright police. iiNet’s victory apparently was more due to technical reasons, the precise design of the copyright infringement notices which the court found inadequate, and really, the decision probably gives the AFACT a very clear set of guidelines on just how to send infringement notices to ISPs. Basically, a symbolic victory for iiNet, but probably a more substantial win for the AFACT in the long run.

What frustrates me most about these types of trials, and about ISP warnings and/or three-strikes system, is that, in the end, it will be so so easy for users to bypass monitoring and escape being caught, or even cautioned. This is because anti-piracy monitoring today is basically just based on monitoring BitTorrent networks, which is only one way to obtain pirated content. Encryption, VPNs, or even just direct Internet downloads via digital lockers, can all escape the watching eyes of the piracy police, and so with millions of dollars being spent on lawsuits, and even more millions per year for monitoring and policing, the result will, as always, just push people towards using new piracy tools that will make online piracy harder and harder to track and stop. Remember in the good old days when websites simply hosted the pirated files, and how easy that was to stop compared to stopping torrents? Civil liberties are being sacrificed to give corporations a *false* sense of security, and that’s a really really bad reason to force us to give up our rights (is there even such a thing as a “good reason”?)

High Definition

Again, not much happening for HD/3D news, and I’m not even going to mention the stupid “Inception to be converted to 3D” news, because if there’s one thing worse than the 3D hype, then it’s “taking a 2D movie and converting it to fake 3D so we can squeeze more money out of the fans” phenomenon. Note to studios: not everything has to be in 3D!

XviD 1.3.0

XviD 1.3.0 has been released this week

While not exactly HD news, exactly, but a new version of Xvid has been released, version 1.3.0, and it’s the first new version in quite a while. MPEG-4 ASP based codecs may no longer be as sexy or “cool” as the MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 ones, but there’s still a place for the good old Xvid codec  for medium quality video files.

And the absence of real news means that I will have to plug my weekly US Blu-ray (and DVD) sales analysis feature, the latest analysis found here. It’s a place where Blu-ray fans can go to bask in the glory of “their” format’s sales successes, and where die hard HD DVD fans like myself can go and find any signs that show Blu-ray’s weakening stance, no matter how statistically insignificant (“OMG, Blu-ray sales fell 20% compared to last week – it’s doooomed!!”).

And as part of compiling the stats, I also regularly update a series of related graphs, that are never actually posted anywhere (other than on our on-and-off “Blu-ray: The State of Play” feature). So instead, I’ll post some of the graphs here right now, for your enjoyment.

Every week, there are stats to show how Blu-ray revenue as a percentage of combined disc (Blu-ray + DVD) revenue, and here’s the stats plotted that compare the most recent weeks (in red) to the same week a year ago (blue):

Blu-ray Sales Percentage: Currents vs a Year Ago (as of 2011-02-12)

Blu-ray Sales Percentage: Currents vs a Year Ago (as of 2011-02-12)

The graph below shows the same stat as above, except plotted in a linear time fashion, with a trend line showing Blu-ray’s growth.

Blu-ray Market Share Trend: As of 2011-02-12

Blu-ray Market Share Trend: As of 2011-02-12

And finally, this graph shows the Blu-ray growth rate (so if Blu-ray’s market share was 5% a year ago, and now it’s 10%, the the growth rate is 100%, or doubled), again with a trend line.

Blu-ray growth rate trend: As of 2011-02-12

Blu-ray growth rate trend: As of 2011-02-12

Gaming

And finally in gaming, which these days, should probably be renamed to the “PS3 Jailbreak” section instead. Last week ended with Sony banning a bunch of users from PSN for using hacked firmware, and now the hackers have fought back by hacking PSN to un-ban themselves, as well as make it possible to ban anyone they want.

Note to Sony: don’t try to out-hack hackers.

geohot's rap video

geohot's takes the battle with Sony to rap form

Then we had the news of Sony attempting to bring out a new PS3 SKU that would be hack proof (famous last words). geohot and others have already said that the only way for Sony to really combat the PS3 hack is to release a new hardware, and it seems Sony has taken their advice. At the same time, Sony is beefing up their own legal team as they seek to sue their way out of this mess (what could possibly go wrong?). Sony have also got the German police to raid the home of PS3 Linux hacker graf_chokolo, which will please the Linux/hacking community. You can read more on these stories here.

For those that think I’ve been too hard on Sony, perhaps you’re right. Personal history with the company aside, the main reason I and a lot of people detest Sony is solely based on their recent actions, best described in this Make article/rant. I started Digital Digest talking about how to play DVDs in Windows, back when commercial solutions were few and far in between, and with Pentium 4’s still an expensive early-adopter thing, you just needed to hack your way to  play DVDs on PCs smoothly, from tweaking drivers to using custom decoders and more. And from then on, it’s always been about using products and software beyond the purposes intended by manufacturers and publishers. Sony’s hatred towards anyone that wants to do things outside of Sony’s own limited imagination, and their arrogance of forcing people to use Sony products in Sony’s own prescribed manner (and it’s not just end users, it’s also developers too, having to adapt themselves to Sony’s way of doing things, as opposed to the other way around – a philosophy that Microsoft, for example, do not share, which is why the Xbox 360 is a much more developer friendly platform). And it’s also the arrogance in their response, which is almost always an overreaction (eg. CD root-kit fiasco), because it’s as if they believe that using, developing for or even selling a Sony product is a privilege, and so if you make Sony angry, expect retribution. Point out a flaw in their security design? Sony will get you. Make their products do more than advertised? Sony will get you. Sell products to help Sony users in a way Sony doesn’t like? Sony will double get you (as geohot wisely raps in his video, “I shed a tear everytime I think of Lik Sang”).

Speaking of Microsoft as a “good guy” when it comes to consumer right seems quite wrong to me, but compared to Sony, there are a lot of “good guys”. But Microsoft’s response to the Kinect hacks (not the first response, which was similar to Sony’s, but the subsequent responses by openly welcoming the hacks) is to be commended, and really, it’s the best business decision as well (Sony’s actions have often hurt themselves more than anyone else, to be fair). And now Microsoft is following up by releasing an official PC developer kit for Kinect, available for free to non commercial users and researchers. Of course, opening up the development of an console accessory is different to the reaction of seeing your product hacked into oblivion, but still, it’s hard to imagine Sony reacting to the hack in the same manner (as the Make article mentioned, the Aibo hacking incident kind of shows what a typical Sony response might have been).

Also, Kinect will work with Windows Phone sometime in the future (not this year though), which given the recent Nokia announcement regarding moving to the Windows Phone platform, can only be a good thing for Kinect. Still, Kinect needs some better, more varied games, because frankly, I’m a bit tired (in both sense of the word) from playing Kinect Sports soccer and winning 4-3 all the time (I’m not that good at goalkeeping, which for me, consists of flapping my arms wildly).

Alright, enough ranting for this week. Have a good one.

Weekly News Roundup (6 February 2011)

Sunday, February 6th, 2011

Welcome to a new month, the month with arguably the hardest to spell name (Febuary? Februarey?), and also the hardest to remember in terms of  number of days it has (hint, it’s not 30 or 31, and it’s not always the same every year either). February is what you would call “high maintenance”, if it were a person.

The promised Facebook/Twitter competition should be launched in the next day or two. There’s nothing you actually need to do, if you’re already liked our Facebook page and/or followed us on Twitter, you’ll automatically be entered into the draw to win some Amazon gift certificates (those that signed up before early will receive a better chance to win). Full details to be posted when I make it up. Before then, we have this week’s news to go through, so let’s get started.

CopyrightIn copyright news, the big headline of the week, at least according to the MPAA, was that almost a quarter of the world’s web traffic was piracy related.

To be honest, I had expected a lot more than that, considering that out of the big files you can download, Linux ISOs aside, I can’t really think of a lot of legal content that’s 8GB or 12GB in size, whereas many pirated games are. Without iTunes HD movie downloads, and Steam, the quoted 23.8% of global traffic being pirated related, could have been a lot higher. The study was commissioned by NBC Universal, but it was the MPAA that screamed the loudest at the findings. Except, as usual, they missed some really important points in the report. One interesting note was that the US actually had a lower piracy rate than the rest of the world, which is strange because most of the pirated  stuff comes from the US (movies, TV shows, games), and what with the poor economy and relatively cheap Internet, you just expected the US to be the lead in terms of piracy. Another interesting result was that only 2.9% of downloads on the BitTorrent networks that the study monitored were for music, with films and TV accounting for nearly half of the downloads (and 35.8% being pornography).

Envisional Piracy Study - Break down by content type

Music torrent downloads only count for a very small percentage of downloads, according to the Envisional report (graph credits: Envisional report)

The theory is that the US has greater access to legal content, and so there’s less reason for many to get content via illegal sources. This is definitely true with TV shows, since Hulu and the other streaming networks, which block access from outside the US, means that there’s almost no reason to download torrents of the latest episodes. The low number of music downloads could be because that torrents have never been the best way to download music, not when LimeWire was around anyway. But it could also be because music availability is greater in the US, and that music, unlike movies and especially TV shows, don’t suffer from the same sort of delay releases and release windows, that actively prevents people from purchasing in order to maximize profits for publishers from different channels. In this day and age, having to wait a whole week before you have access to the latest episode of say The Office or even months before you can buy Boardwalk Empire on DVD/Blu-ray, just doesn’t work. When your friends or co-workers are downloading/streaming illegally and then discussing the latest episodes, you almost have to download/stream it yourself. And porn? Well, nobody wants to have to pay for porn, or to have something less than innocent show up on their credit card statement, so that’s another reason why it’s so popular.

So the fact that “it’s free”, while I do agree has a lot to do with why pirated content is so attractive, but there are clearly other factors in play that should not be ignored, if one is really intent on reducing online piracy. Unfortunately, groups like the MPAA and RIAA’s goal is to eventually get legislation that guarantees their revenue stream, and online piracy just happens to be a convenient excuse at the moment. It’s an easy argument to convince ignorant politicians, unaware of just what the Internet is all about. With all the studies being done, none has even tried to find out the real financial cost of piracy, not the billions upon billions imagined by the MPAA/RIAA. Not in the US anyway. But a Japanese government backed think-tank has looked at the problem, and has found some interesting answers. In regards to Anime and online streaming and P2P downloads via the popular (in Japan) Winny software tool, the study found that these kinds of piracy not only did not hurt DVD sales, it actually helped. YouTube uploads of Anime episodes actually helped to generate more sales, while P2P downloads did not hurt sales at all, only rentals. The promotional effects of YouTube uploads, even of full episodes, has been known for a while now, and you’d be hard pressed to find one publisher that doesn’t utilize YouTube for promotional purposes. And as for P2P downloads, with DVDs so cheap and online piracy so easily accessible for so long, people who still buy DVDs will always buy DVDs (or Blu-rays), in my opinions, because if free and easy hasn’t convinced you do break the law, nothing will (and for people who like to collect things, like me, buying and downloading are two totally separate things).

Don't Make Me Steal

Reasonable demands, or blackmail?

And the findings of these reports don’t really contradict a study by Warner Bros. back in December, where the conclusion there seem to be that a lot of people downloading pirated TV shows and movies are downloading the foreign dubbed version, which would otherwise not be available via legal means. And that by not fulfilling the needs of the market, that legitimate consumers are being pushed into pursuing content via other means, including illegal means. Which brings us to this week’s most interesting copyright related news story – the Don’t Make Me Steal manifesto. What is it? Well, it’s basically a list of demands, that if met, the people who signed the manifesto would all promise not to download pirated movie of TV content. It sounds a bit like a threat, which is why it’s controversial (and I don’t think the “Don’t Make Me Steal” title is a good one, because in the end, nobody “makes” you steal, it’s still a choice, even if it is sometimes the most sensible one).  But these are not really unreasonable demands. They’re not demanding everything be free, and actually, a lot of demands match up perfectly to what the recent studies have concluded, that a lot of people are being under-served. Removing release windows, reasonable pricing (buying DVD/Blu-rays should not cost more than a movie ticket, and rentals should not cost more than a third of the same ticket), greater access to dubs and subtitles, no DRM, and a lot of others things I suspect that the movie/TV industry will eventually figure out on their own and implement. So if this manifesto can change the debate from one of “how should we punish those that pirate stuff” to “how do we encourage people not to pirating stuff”, then it has served its purpose. It shows there are plenty of things movie and TV studios can do to reduce piracy, and they should at least give these suggestions some serious thought before trying to shift the blame and responsibility to everyone else.

All of this comes as the number of individuals sued by mass piracy lawsuits reached 100,000 in the US alone. Both piracy and anti-piracy, in my opinion, has gotten out of control, and the only real solution is to examine the real causes behind piracy. Or it will end up becoming a futile fight, where the process becomes a daily grind of trying to put out millions of fires with no positive effect towards actually solving the problem, something that was addressed well by the TV show The Wire (in relation to the war on drugs, but the idea is the same). How many websites do you have to get Homeland Security to shut down before the war on piracy can be won? How many civil rights do we have to sacrifice in order for the entertainment industry to keep their dying business model? How many people must be sued for illegal downloads before people stop downloading? And how long would all of these actions take before the problem is solve. Years? Decades? Never?

And not wanting to enjoy schadenfreude, Intel’s problems with Sandy Bridge seems like karma biting back for putting in hardware DRM into the new chip, and then for not even admitting it was DRM, even though it clearly was. The actual problem appears not to be that serious, it’s a flaw on the motherboard chipset that Sandy Bridge CPUs rely on, and it has to do with the SATA2 controller part which will fail over time for a small percentage of chips. Disabling the rogue transistor, or simply use the provided SATA3 ports instead, would be a simple workaround, at least until Intel can provide details on how they plan to fix the problem. Still, had Intel spent more time testing Cougar Point, instead of getting all giddy at the prospect of adding hardware DRM, maybe they could have avoided the potential billion dollar problem.

High Definition

Onto HD/3D news, not a whole lot happening really in the world of Blu-ray or 3D. But for general HD, and I know I’m stretching a bit here, then the news that Microsoft plans to solve Google’s H.264 problem may be somewhat interesting.

Google Chrome

Google dropping HTML5 H.264 support for Chrome may be an attempt to hurt Apple

Google dropped support for H.264 as part of its HTML5 implementation, and this means that HTML5 videos that use H.264 would not actually work on Google’s Chrome browser, which is a shame. Google quotes wanting to support “open software” as the reason, despite the fact that they’re the biggest supporters of the closed Adobe Flash software, being the only browser to bundle Flash with the default download. But Microsoft has been actively trying to get people to use H.264 for HTML5, no doubt because they own lots of patents on the format, and so they’ve released a Chrome extension that brings back H.264 support, for those with Windows 7 anyway (which has H.264 decoding built natively into the OS). They did the same thing for Firefox a couple of months ago, so this move wasn’t unexpected. And Google can hardly complain, considering their stance towards Flash.

You may ask what is Google’s motive behind dropping H.264, if it wasn’t for the sake of “openness”? Some would say it’s because they want people to use their own WebM format, for which Google owns the patents on (but has decided, for now, not to charge royalty). Maybe. But Google’s real target, in my opinion, is Apple. Apple loves H.264, they also only support HTML5 (not Flash) on their iDevices, and being a fairly closed system in which Apple has control over everything, it’s unlikely WebM support will be implemented without Apple’s permission for these devices and Safari in general. So Google’s move alienates Apple, while their own Android platform still manages to support H.264, Flash and WebM, with hardware acceleration too even. To me, this is a calculated move against Apple, forcing Apple to either accept WebM and implement hardware support for it, or to live with an YouTube app that runs poorly on iDevices. And Google’s alliance with Flash, and Apple’s anti-Flash stance, just further confirms what I and many others think.

Of course, there’s no guarantee that WebM will be adopted, not even by YouTube. In fact, this move most likely benefits Adobe and Flash, since it then becomes the only way to tie everything together, and get everything working, especially since Adobe has already announced they will add WebM support to Flash. And H.264 will be here to stay, as long as Flash is here to stay, and as long as Blu-ray and iTunes still exists.

Gaming

Another week, and the cat and mouse game between Sony and PS3 hackers continue. Sony brought out the 3.56 firmware to counter the hacked 3.55 firmware, but the process of hacking 3.56 has already begun and it’s a matter of when, not if, it will get hacked (because once the master key and the method it can be obtained became public, it’s really game over for that security platform).

PS3 3.56 Error Message

The unfortunate message that PS3 owners with upgraded HDDs are experiencing

And as expected, Sony’s war against hackers has caused its first piece of collateral damage, with PS3 owners that have upgraded their hard-drives being the first set of victim. Sony active encourages people to upgrade the PS3’s hard-drive, and even provides instructions on how to do it online (and it doesn’t void warranty either). They did this to counter the over-priced Xbox 360 hard-drive add-ons. But people who installed 3.56 found that their upgraded HDDs would no longer work, with a “The data is corrupted” error, even after reformatting. Apparently, Sony re-released 3.56 just now and it might have fixed the problem, but you need the original HDD to first upgrade to the new 3.56 (Sony didn’t call it 3.57 because they didn’t want to admit to their mistake? It’s not the first time either …), and then upgrade your HDD. Those without the original HDD (which has to still retains the original formatting) are still stuck with a bricked console, unfortunately. 3.57 will hopefully be here next week, but who knows.

So once again the advice is don’t upgrade your PS3’s firmware until at least a week after release. Yes, it’s a week that you may not be able to play online (or even certain games offline, which prevents play without an active PSN connection, which of course requires the latest firmware). I think if Sony is intent on releasing firmware updates so frequently, the least they should offer is a window in which both old and new firmware versions can be used, although I suppose there are huge technical issues related to supporting two firmware versions at the same time on PSN.

So that’s it for another week. Hope you’ve enjoyed this issue of the WNR. Have a good one and see you at the same time next week.