Tag Archives: IDC

Treason has many forms

This is the setting we have seen plenty of time and in all forms of situation. I scarcely wanted to believe what I saw, but the BBC might misrepresent things at times, but they never lie and as we see ‘Xbox caps cloud gaming at 15 hours a month for Game Pass subscribers’ is what I call pure treason. There is no question of funds, or limits and of settings as I personally see it and I am happy that I rejected the Xbox over 5 years ago. So as we see “Xbox is introducing strict monthly time limits for Game Pass subscribers who stream games online through its cloud gaming service.

The changes, which come into effect in November, will see a subscriber to the £16.99 Ultimate monthly plan able to stream games for up to 15 hours a month – before having to purchase additional cloud play time. Xbox said the limits were due to the rising cost of cloud gaming, and they would allow the firm to “continue to invest” in the service’s “reliability and performance”.” For reference I almost played 20-25 hours on my PS5 this Friday and Saturday. As such this limit would have been met within the first weekend of the month. So as we see “Asha Sharma, Xbox’s chief executive, told the BBC in an exclusive recent interview that the company and the industry as a whole needed to “start to innovate on affordability and efficiency,” amid a “crisis” in computing prices.” I think that this is not the whole story. Gamers are draining their AI token space setting and that needed to be culled (AI token space is perhaps not the best definition, but it is what I am working with) So what was once good is now no more. And for Xbox users (my personal view) is that this is a good reason to switch to another platform. We saw this setting in part when in 2012-2017 there was a trade agreement (I forgot the name and I can not find the article I wrote, I wrote over 4000 of them). But there was a setting where that agreement was setting in motion to take out 2nd hand games. In the last minute Sony gave a presentation where one Sony executive handed over the disc to another executive, all whilst Don Mattrick cut his fingers first in this. It was the end of him and Xbox. Now whilst we see that Sony is ending discs, Microsoft is setting in motion a transfer and trades from disc to digital. It is the beginning of the end, because when net neutrality ends, gaming is over, or you must be willing to pay for the plus hundred of hours a month and that will get expensive really fast. The stage I am unaware of is what will Nintendo do. We see the ‘Code in box” mentions, but that is not a guarantee that physical gaming is at an end.

There is no soft message from either Sony or Microsoft that is ever to be believed (like “We’ll sort something out” or “We will stand by you” that time is over and whilst there are options in a few ways there is no telling what 2027/2028 brings. And what is the betrayal of gamers (in my humble opinion?) It is the sentence that is embedded in the article “Both cloud gaming and AI use data centres to process information.” And as I see it, the noise around this (given below) is part of this.

And I have a problem with this. Microsoft insulated themselves by getting the IDC to ‘proclaim’ “By 2028, IDC predicts 1.3 billion Al agents will be embedded in enterprise workflows. The challenge is no longer adoption.” I personally think it should be in the meat section right next to the boloney. What data was used to give this prediction? Scare tactics to get into the AI agents or go under section? At present there are massive issues with the quality of technical support, customer care and a few other settings. As such there is no way that 1.3 billion AI agents will be used, unless you consider the AI agents cybercrimes set, is that an optional premise? There are massive issues all over the field, but as such Gamers can be cut from any agreement, because it is just not business. I haven’t figured out what disclose systems have to do with that, but usually limiting gamers is never good for the gamer. I am drawing in part a blank, but I have learned over the last few decades that it tends to be corporate greed, not corporate ability that limits a gamer. As such I would have to give my vote (for now) to Nintendo. But perhaps Sony wisens up in 2027, because that is where the hard numbers will take them. Microsoft is a lot cause, no doubt about it, but Sony could reset their systems. And yes, the PS6 is likely going to be more expensive. Fine. I have had my PS5 for years now and it has served my immensely. I would have that my optional PS4 will do the same. I still have my PS4 too. Some older games are still good and playable there. Not everything needs to port over (nice if it does, but reality tends to be different) and that is fine. Perhaps Bethesda will port more games and they might ask for a fee, I have no issues with that. I bought with great joy the remastered Oblivion and I never regretted that. Like some movies, you can upscale hardware, or you can get the 4K version. And so far that act has been amazing. As such I recon that players like Guerrilla Games might kick of the expanded Horizon 3 for the PS6 with Horizon 1 and 2 added and gamers will pay good money for that. It could become their most successful game ever. And lets not forget, that franchise game started on PS4 and it never, not once disappointed. There are more games and I reckon that Microsoft has its own champions there too. So at what point was it a good idea to stop disc-less  settings? If there is real truth in this agentic agents the need for Physical discs is clear, as such something does not add up. Perhaps I am not seeing it, but as I saw the treacherous sentence embedded in the BBC article, I got to think the worst of Microsoft (yes, it is possible for them to do worse) as such I reacted to that setting of gaming under a taximeter. And they know that, the average gamer spends 40+ hours a week gaming and that has been clear going pack to the original Xbox, so why the taximeter now?

And if this is the future of gaming, the disc-less setting starts making sense in a greedy corporate way, if it is storage for the PS6 games, there are other solutions (like two discs, one for installation) and gaming on the second disc. This has been done before but as I see it, the net neutrality is about to hand us gamers a bitter defeat and the rural gamers will be hit twice over. We need to do something and I am puzzled as to what could be done. 

So back to the BBC article. We are also given “Jez Corden of Windows Central told the BBC the announcement showed that “absolutely nothing is safe from the AI-driven component crisis,” but he added it also highlighted “where Microsoft’s priorities are”.” And that is fine, but it also implies that Microsoft is deserting their gamers all for fake AI, because that is the silliest part, all AI is fake and when you consider the works of Alan Turing you will get that this world is not ready for anything real. The computers lack several components and when they have these components it is only for billionaires. Im not a billionaire and I reckon you aren’t either. There is more but that is well over a decade in the future, but these things are done now, as such we see people chasing phantoms in a system that doesn’t allow ghosts. What a funny situation.

So what kind of treason is self-delusion? Because that is also treason and people can say that it is all open me, that I am committing treason against myself. But consider what has happened and what is happening at present. I believe that I am right, even though I have a few banks on Microsoft, but I dumped that system years ago, so I do not care, but gamers have embraced the Xbox and gamers I care about. They can change system, but not everyone has that kind of cash, because the days of the $299 Atari 2600 are over. Today you need serious cash to embrace gaming and that is where the truncation starts. The lack of options. I gave an option to Saudi Arabia and I hope they embrace this setting, because they could gain billions of gamers and there is still the steam-deck, I never had one, because Sony made me happy, but there is a new wave forming. I merely hope it is a Japanese setting and not an American setting, because they are going from bad to worse. And there is still the Nintendo. 

All choices and we must make up our minds. I merely hope that Sony comes to their senses (or better inform us) before December 2027. Have a great day and if needed find a console that doesn’t need a taximeter to play games. I just had an idea, what if SEGA relaunches his Dreamcast? They had plenty of really good games. Its just an idea.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, IT, Media, Science

Challenging fruit

There is an old saying: ‘An Apple a day, keeps the doctor away‘, which could be regarded as correct, or at least as something that is not wrong. These are essentially two statements that depending on your way of life is either more or less correct. Yet, in technology it is a lot less correct, mainly because our health does not have a chance to survive if it comes with the daily cost of $679 a day.

You see, the fruity side of mobile phones is not really an issue when we look at the IOS side of things (aka: the iPhone world), it is quite another when we look at the Android side of things. Even though this was last Wednesday’s news. There have been a few things that required digging and it has been a little bit of a chase. The article was not the first one I saw as I was watching the Google event at 04:00 (as stated in a previous blog). The article ‘Pixel is a direct challenge to Apple – and a referendum on Google‘ (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/05/google-pixel-phone-market-apple-iphone), was on my mind, but so were a few other items.

The article raises a few issues, some of them are not entirely agreeable from my point of view, so let’s deal with them.

Some do get monthly security updates, but others get Android version updates sometimes years after Google releases new versions, creating so-called fragmentation that makes it harder to develop apps and services” is the first quote I have an issue with. For this I need to step back to one of my earlier smartphones. The Motorola Razr-V. Now, when I bought it I though it was an amazing phone. I still have it, it still works and it is in a drawer somewhere. When I bought it 4 years ago 1GB was ‘da bomb’. I had 4GB storage, so I was happy as can be. I had one update, which was from Ice Cream Sandwich (4.0) to Jelly Bean (4.1) at some point and still, all was fine, just a little nagging need for RAM. What happened was what always happens, we need more storage and we need more RAM. Yet it was not the only thing that was an issue. You see, this model would not support Kit Kat (4.4) and now we had ourselves a horse race because we saw more and more news regarding security flaws and the essential need to have android as updated as possible. Now we get to the issue with the quote: “sometimes years after Google releases new versions“, which is not that correct. You see, the makers of phones did not consider upgrades to the OS, for the mere reason that they prefer to sell a new phone instead of upgrading your old phone, when the phone is deep within warranty it is one thing, however after that passes, the seller tends to not care and getting the new system vetted and fitted requires resources and a serious amount of them. So Motorola came with a notice that it would not be possible to update this model beyond KitKat. Now, because it was a cheap deal and I had actually not considered that updating the Android OS would be a biggie, I ignored it, and it was just one of those few lessons you tend to learn the hard way the first time around. You see, I am an Android user for a reason. As Apple advocated a device that can do a million things, and it can call people, the Android was the opposite. It was a phone that could do a lot of additional things. With Android the phone remained the centre, not the apps (as I personally saw it). The issue is more than semantics, I felt it was a state of mind, which is why I prefer Android (whilst not hating the iPhone).

Now with my feelings regarding safety and security, I believe that it is very important never to be more than 2 versions old, so as I am on Lollipop, it is essential for me to get a new phone capable of Nougat. Those on Marshmallow should decide for themselves if they want to wait another version before getting a new phone. In light that the average functional phone is over $600, that rule becomes a lot more important, also knowing that you are buying something that will need essential replacement after 2 years makes it even more important to find the right device and especially at the right price. This is why I have been hammering on systems with 64GB storage and at least 2GB RAM (3GB preferred). The fact that the makers are withholding these devices, whilst they are available, angers me. This is because the Telecom companies love a consumer forced to upgrade on an annual basis. What they fail to realise that our budgets are not as wide as their need for coke and hookers (if we believe the NY marketing needs, so the entire greed philosophy falls away. So when I go to the shops now, I expect a Nougat device, or a Marshmallow version at high discount. When a shop offers a Sony with a 2 year old operating system at $900 (Lollipop, aka Android v5), they have obviously lost their minds! Now this is the part that matters in the case of Sony. They call it ‘The pioneering 4K smartphone‘, as well as ‘Sony’s next-generation camera technologies in collaboration with Sony’s Alpha engineers‘ and then they promote it, whilst not updating the phone with an operating system that is less than a year old? And only this month, will they come with a previous version of Android (Marshmallow, aka Android v6). Now, this falls in line with the quote from the Guardian, the issue I have is that if they had their ducks in a row, the phone would have been in the shops with Marshmallow (v6), with the option to update to Nougat (v7).

It is my suspicion that the service oriented devices have not caught onto the need to have a more generic framework oriented approach. I touched on it in my article ‘Chicks for free‘ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2015/03/31/chicks-for-free/), where I touches on SaaS in March 2015, as well as the advantage Huawei gave to its customers by being competitive in price and hardware. They had cornered a nice chunk of market in just one year. Parts of all this were also discussed in January 2015 (https://lawlordtobe.com/2015/01/15/exploiting-mobile-users/). So the issue has been around long enough for the market to adjust, they just decided not to do that. So for Google to come with the Google Pixel (XL) makes perfect sense. Although, from my point of view, $1400 for a device that might initially not last beyond 2 years is still a hard pill to swallow. Apart from the retired groups who are out of cash and comprehension of the technology, we are now facing a growing group of people where the risk of malware exposure goes up tenfold. So the precedence to slam the mobile market is very appealing.

I do not believe that Google is the bad guy here, I believe that our comprehension of accepted support is changing. Let’s take the new Pixel. For one, the marketing was perfectly done and so far from cheap Telco page to Forbes, they are all wildly enthusiastic. A fair point of view, especially as I (from my needy point of view) found just one flaw. Now, there is a side that is not yet known, however, if Google delivers on the statement ‘Two years of OS upgrade from launch‘ as stated, meaning that your Google Pixel will support the installation of Android v9 (whatever that candy name will be, I vote for ‘Liquorice’), then the Pixel will be a steal at twice the price. Meaning that your $1400 should last you 3-4 years, twice the current expected lifespan, easily making it the only choice as an Android phone.

I have an even bigger issue with the quote “Francisco Jeronimo, market research firm IDC’s research director for European mobile devices, says: “Many people care about updates. They recognise that getting the latest update is about getting something better, unless they’ve got an old phone. But it’s about how easy it is to do. Going online and finding an update is something most will not do. If you present it as a notification, as Apple does, then most will jump on board.”“, in this I state that it is my personal believe that Francisco Jeronimo didn’t give the right ambiance to this spin. I have presented evidence that this issue has been known and was visible for the better part of 3 years. Old phone or not, the issue has been limitation of hardware and now that the players realise that the gig is up, they are likely to go into some form of blame mode, whilst their own approach should have changed years ago. The fact that brands like Oppo and Sony are selling what they call state of the art today with a 2 year old OS is just as big a joke, especially if it doesn’t come with the clear notice that an upgrade is available. If I need to give it a name, I would call it the annual update Telco requirement is pushing back and most people are willing to switch providers on a moment’s notice if needed. So Google went Fruity, looked at Apple (it has its own model of OS) and from that point of view, the power of a dedicated mobile became apparent. So now we see that for a mere $150 extra, we get a phone that is not 32GB, but 128GB. So only the dedicated silly would not get that, mainly because logic suggests that Android v8 and Android v9 will all be larger than the previous versions, as could logically be deduced. So not getting storage constraints over the next 3 years makes perfect sense, even if you have a minimal amount of apps. In this case it is not the 10 apps I have now, it is the notion that over the next 3 years I might get another 10-20 apps, as well as a few thousand pictures and knowing that storage will not be an issue, that peace of mind is very important, the moment you get hit by the limitation, it will make sense.

So as Google is challenging that fruity named competitor Apple, it needs to adjust its own model a little bit too. You see, there is a reason why corporate clients still rely on Blackberry. It is the one market Apple has not been able to penetrate, once Android does that, if will be able to shift its interests to another field of data gathering (I mean client instigated data gathering) and data encryption interactions, fields that Apple was not able to surpass Blackberry in, Google has a fair chance at changing that field, with Google now entering layer 1, they have a complete layer coverage allowing to take on the industrial strength enterprise security that Blackberry is famous for, which would give Android the push into the areas where critical security issues are the number one need.

The reality is that this would take at least one additional android upgrade before they enter that field, which have giving Apple the time, but not the engineering skills or the architecture to compete with Blackberry on that level. With this I imply that Apple by keeping to its consumer market views, it ignored a corporate side, or so has create the potential to rule the market, whether it will depends on what they do next, but they have been off to a great start.

The final quote is one that the article has dealt with already “Jeronimo says: “With the Nexus, Google attempted to bring the best device running the latest version of Android, but couldn’t give priority to one of the tier two manufacturers that were interested in making it when you have companies like Samsung and Huawei leading the market. It meant Google struggled to differentiate with its own device when its partners were already making very good devices that were good value.”“, it still requires a little extra and the element that is kept silent is the one I dealt with in ‘The smokescreen of a Smartphone War‘ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2016/09/30/the-smokescreen-of-a-smartphone-war/), you see, making a version and then making it not an option in Australia reeks. It reeks of Telco managed collaboration, the article stipulates why I feel that way. Now that Google blows storage apart with 128GB for $150 should show those two brands and a few others too, the stupidity of their actions. Huawei had an advantage by offering the 64GB, now that is a no no, it seems that Google can make a massive change, what was once a 0.2% market has the potential to become a 10% market in the next 12 months, which would be a growth that is unheard of. A market Huawei decided not to engage and now Google has voiced it will offer options that I would have considered overkill and not essential. Google seems realise that it does not matter whether the person prefers 64GB or 128GB, by offering them 128GB at a 64GB price is a winner in everyone’s books and it shows the consumer that 32GB might be good for nana and grandpa, the rest should just go big at the additional requested fraction more. In that regard the entire model race with two price additions, one for size of screen and one for size of storage is in my view brilliant (I will give credit that Apple had this approach already).

Which leaves us with the last speculation, no matter how we see 2016, with the changes of 2017 we see that Google is entering a new innovative phase of connectivity. Android devices like Google Home, might seem like a party trick, but the reality of Android devices and the option to connect them is more than a fab, the world presentation blew me away and where it matters, your Pixel could become the hub in all this, music on that little boom box, whilst streaming the pics to your TV. For the mere giggles in me, the device (an entertainment unit), which Microsoft promised the Xbox One to be and not delivered. Google now presents and delivers an actual entertainment system whilst not promising it. It is just too funny for words.

So whatever path you take, whether IOS or Android, just make sure it delivers long term what you need, if you do that, you will remain happy with whatever choice you make and that is what truly matters in my humble opinion.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media