Skyfall and the future of James Bond

It's already being hailed as one of the best James Bond films and, having already broken a few box office records, is certainly a commercial success but can it really live up to the hype, and just what does the future have in store for the worlds favourite agent?

In his previous outings as James Bond, Daniel Craig was criticised as a poor choice. Some of that criticism was based more on the fact that the new Bond movies were a departure from the traditional Bond format, something which disappointed many fans, but many saw Craig as a poor choice for the role and were far from shy in telling the world just how poor a choice he was.

His next outing saw a little more acceptance as the new Bond slowly began to evolve into a grittier but still not "traditional" 007 and left fans divided as to whether the franchise could continue to be as popular as it had been in its heyday. Craig, it seemed, was Bond marmite, you either loved him or hated him.

Skyfall has, surprisingly, split opinion still further with many lauding it as a welcome return to form while others have decried it as mindless slow paced drivel punctuated by a few loud set piece action sequences but can it really be that bad....or good?

Director Sam Mendes gives us a refreshing take on the story which works well, though which initially seems at odds with the idea of a suave secret agent in his prime. Here Bond is more mature, having been shot and officially dead for some time he is a little out of shape and finding it hard to be the strong care free hero that Bond has been for the better part of fifty years.

Mendes sets 007 against a villain (Silva, played well by Javier Bardem) that, for once, manages to be highly intelligent without revealing his plans (as previous Bond villains were prone to do). He has some very effective over the top moments (including using a train as a makeshift bullet, and a slightly cheesey yet fun entrance using a helicopter gunship) but ultimately toward the end drifts into being a somewhat less intelligent and more blunt opponent.

Does Craig ooze charisma and charm, does he finally make the character his own?

Well yes, and no.

Craig doesn't ooze charisma, or charm, but then he isn't meant to. This Bond is out of shape and more a blunt knife than the delicate blade of a surgeon we're used to. He isn't graceful or dropping funny one liners every few minutes (though there are of course one liners scattered throughout the film) but this works well, Bond has evolved into something similar yet also different to what you might expect.

Craig had, before the success of Skyfall, wanted to step down and let someone else take over as James Bond however having been convinced to sign up for two more outings as the super secret agent, and with the movie having already taken in much more than its $200 million budget, the future is looking good for the franchise.

Skyfall breaks a few Bond "rules", not least of which is that it doesn't end with Bond foiling a psychotic villains plan at the last minute and getting the girl, it also has a surprise toward the end that will have some fans doing a double take to see if what they think happened in the church really did and sets up a couple of characters which long time fans of the films should appreciate.

So we've got a film that sets up some key 'new' characters, delves a little into their histories and that of Bond himself and sees 007 evolve into something a little different. What next?

Well, contrary to popular reports there are not plans for a two part Bond outing with one plot spread over two movies, this rumour came about because screen writer John Logan is to write the next two Bond films and once pitched a two part Bond story however star Daniel Craig has denied that this will be the case.

However there will be at least two more James Bond movies both written by Skyfall co-writer John Logan and starring Daniel Craig, possibly with the same villain appearing in both ( it would not be a two parter but could, as has happened with past films, feature a recurring character) and undoubtedly (thanks to the success of Skyfall) with an even bigger budget.

Love him or loathe him, Bond is most definitely back.

Note: if you have an ios or Android powered phone or tablet and prefer reading offline check out the google currents magazine version of the blog here.

Ten things you never knew were patented

The wheel, the bible and human dna...,all things that are patented, believe it or not.

The face of the man in the moon, yes the illusion of seeing a face in the moon, is patented as is the act of swinging on a swing and, just as surprisingly the steering wheel is also patented.

Pressing the page up or page down keys to scroll up or down a page has been patented, courtesy of Microsoft, and yes even one of the oldest inventions known to man, the wheel, has itself been patented (back in 2001) and while most of these patents are American the UK manages to hold a little known yet surprising patent of its own that, unlike most patents, will never end.

The bible.

Yes, THE bible.

The bible, specifically the 1611 King James Version, is copyright and patented by the UK crown (the royal family) and as such never runs out. The patent is only applicable in countries ruled by the crown but still, it is an unexpected thing to be patented.

If you use apps on your phone while making a phone call, or you use a keyboard on your phone or tablet that can display either letters and numbers or symbols then you are unwittingly breaking two of Apples patents and if you use a laser pointer to exercise your pet, well, you guessed it - using a handheld laser device to get a pets attention is also patented.

And last but by no means least your dna is also patented, or at least 20% is. The American patent office have over the years granted over fourty thousand patents on different sections of the human genome which covers 20% of all dna found inside each and every human being.

iPad Mini - worth the hype?

It's official, after months of speculation Apple have officially unveiled the iPad mini, but will the specs have buyers keen to part with their cash or will it leave them asking the question "why"?

Intended to compete with the likes of Googles Nexus 7 (£189 for 16 gigabyte model) and Amazons Kindle Fire HD (£169 for 16 gigabyte model) the new iPad Mini starts at £269 (for the lowest ,16 gigabyte, model) but unfortunately for Apple it's unlikely that tablet buyers keen on reading ebooks or watching high definition video will be tempted should they look in detail at just what they get for the extra money.

The main reason is the Mini's resolution which is not, as might have been expected, a retina display but is instead 1024 x 768 with a pixel density of 163 ppi.

Compared to the 1280 x 800 of the Nexus 7 and the Kindle Fire HD (both of which also have a pixel density of 216 ppi) the iPad Mini loses out to its two main rivals in what is a key area for consumers, with both key challengers having screens that display more detail and at a higher resolution.

As expected there is no NFC but this isn't going to be an issue as although Googles Nexus 7 does have it most similar size tablets to Apples 7.9 inch entry model don't and the majority of potential customers are unlikely to be deterred by the lack of it.

The iPad mini has one key advantage over most rivals, a five mega pixel rear facing camera in addition to the front facing camera it and all its competitors also have, something that may attract those that fancy being able to snap some pics with their tablet but what about the meat of the iPad Mini, the key elements that can make or break a sale?

While it loses out on screen resolution and density it does have a decent cpu and gpu, the dual core A5 processor found in the iPhone 4S which is no slouch and compares well to the Tegra 3 processor used in the  Nexus 7 and the Omap 4460 used in the Kindle Fire HD (the larger 8.9 inch version of the Kindle uses an Omap 4470).

By not having to drive a retina display Apples A5 processor easily competes when it comes to games and processor intensive applications.

Apples trade off here is that to give the processor that edge in performance, and improve battery life (the Mini's battery life, between charges, is ten hours) they use a lower resolution screen so that where the processor usually has to power a high resolution retina screen here it can conserve that energy albeit by losing out to the competition in terms of screen quality, or more specifically the amount of detail it can display in comparison to competing tablets of a similar size.

It is important to note here that dearer models of the Mini will be available that have more storage and also 3G and 4G connectivity but for purposes of comparison we're just looking at the starter level wifi only iPad mini and the two main competitors that have the same storage and similar size.

Apples iPad mini has a slightly larger display size, physically, despite its lower resolution and that means that when it comes to on screen graphics it offers less detail but does so on a bigger screen which makes that lower resolution more noticeable.

For this reason extended viewing of documents (such as e-books or pdf files) is going to be easier on the eyes and more enjoyable on a Nexus 7 or Kindle Fire HD than it is on an iPad Mini and with Apple apparently aiming at these devices it seems something of an oversight not to compete on resolution (all the tablets mentioned, including the Mini use an IPS display).

The truth is that some people will buy the iPad mini simply because they want an Apple product, regardless of the specs, and it does have advantages (for example iOS devices often get games and other applications before their competitors do) but that lower quality screen is what will likely be the deciding factor for many potential buyers.

Lacking the high clarity screen typically associated with Apple products this could be the Achilles heel of the new  model, overall the product is a decent offering but with a significantly higher starting price than the competition  for what is, ignoring the screen, a similar specced device (as regards actual performance) to them customers might well wonder just why the iPad Mini deserves their cash.

The iPad mini can be pre ordered from November the second.

Apples new patent puts old foes back in the firing line

Apples newest slide to unlock patent not only sets the scene for yet more lawsuits against Android rivals but puts old ones, who implemented alternative slide to unlock methods in order to avoid legal action, back in the Cupertino giants firing line.

Apples new unlock patent gives them exclusive ownership of using a slide motion in any way to unlock a device, Android device maker had previously been able to work around the patents and avoid legal conflict but with the new patent this will be much harder for them to do.

Patent 8286103B2 is a clever, if sneaky, move by Apple. Android device makers changed their unlock methods to use different motions such as up and down or circular, Apple cottoned on to this and now have a patent that means these workaround methods still violate at least one Apple patent and, as a result, any mobile device manufacturer using slide to unlock methods of any type can now, in theory, be successfully sued by the company.

It may have surprised many that Apple were awarded its original slide to unlock patents when they were clearly invalidated by examples of prior art such as the NeoNode n1m (announced two years before the iPhones release, and eleven months before Apples original patent filing) but what may be even more surprising is that the company have managed to patent their rivals already existing workaround methods so as to invalidate them.

[Review] CoPilot Live Premium for Android

Googles satellite navigation app for Android is pretty good. The price can't be beaten (it's free), the directions are spoken well in advance of when you need to take them and it does a good job at getting you from A to B, so can an app that you have to pay for, such as CoPilot, really compete?

The first note worthy difference between Googles offering and CoPilot is that CoPilot can navigate without needing a data connection, for many users this won't be an issue but for those with no mobile data connection or for those who travel in areas where a network signal is sometimes unavailable this will undoubtedly be a big tick in its favour.

The second note worthy difference is that CoPilot has a wide variety of very good voices to choose from so that you aren't stuck with just the voice, or voices, that you already have installed on your Android. It also has another very big advantage over its free Google rival, customisation.

You can customise the speeds for any type of road, set it to avoid specific types of road (such as motorways, dual carriage ways, toll roads, etcetera) and do so for specific vehicle types. So if you want to avoid motorways when riding a motorcycle but not when driving a car, you can.

Further customisation options include the ability to show specific points of interest, the ability to edit your route to either add or remove specific locations, being able to have the application automatically switch from showing a list of directions to showing a layout of the road ahead and highlight the exact turn you need to take (complete with a visual depiction of what lane you should be in), the ability to choose from a variety of different map styles as well as being able to change the units of measurement used (metric or imperial).

You can also tell the app how far in advance of turns you wish to be notified, enable or disable its ClearView feature which, if enabled, will show you the lane you need to be in before a turn or customise the view of the maps so that they adapt to the time of day, making them easier to navigate with whether it is day or night.

The amount of time it takes the app to lock on to the gps satellites will vary depending on the device you're using it on, but on an LG P920 it acquires a signal as quickly as Googles free application does, the first time the devices gps is switched on it will naturally take longer but even then it finds a signal within thirty seconds (on the P920) which is surprisingly quick.

Setting a destination is easy, however you have to enter a town or city name, then it will offer a list of streets and then a list of addresses so it is a little regimented although you can also navigate to any point of interest CoPilot finds or to coordinates that are found encoded in a photograph.

If you visit the Play store to buy the app you'll see a couple of comments referring to it being a drain on the battery. These comments were for an older version than the newest version being reviewed here and so I can't confirm or deny whether they are accurate or not, my own use has found that the battery does drain noticeably quicker than when using Googles navigation app and I would recommend that if you plan on using it for more than say two hours it would be a wise precaution to have a way of charging your Android.

However an hour long trip uses up approximately twelve percent of the battery, that's with the screen on all the time, you can set the application to not show the directions all the time or even just speak them to you which would significantly reduce battery drain however in reality if you are making a long journey and using the app to navigate it is likely you will also have a charging cable available for your device and so possible battery drain may not be a concern for you.

Accuracy is an important feature of any navigation app and having been updated with newer navteq maps CoPilot should guide you to your destination with a minimum of fuss and seems to know the right routes although it is always possible that some new local features such as a new bypass etcetera may not be included in maps for the area in which you wish to travel but in testing this has been fine.

The combination of customisation, offline navigation and useful features such as ClearView all add up to make the app an attractive proposition.

For those who do have a mobile data connection you can use CoPilots active traffic feature to reroute you should any traffic jams arise on your planned routes, it's a subscription service but free for twelve months although users have reported that it isn't always very reliable and in reviewing this app I haven't used it, preferring instead to test the features that are included in the price (yes you get twelve months free but after that it costs money and so for this review only features that do not incur any additional charge have been tested).

There are of course other offline features you can use for free including being warned when approaching speed traps (which works well although will also warn there is a speed trap in locations where speed traps are not always present, ie places with speed camera signs but no actual speed cameras).

There is also the option to navigate to gps coordinates that have been encoded into a photograph, something which may be useful if you see a photograph you like and want to get to where the picture was taken.

Rerouting is instant, another advantage of using an offline app that doesn't need to communicate with a server to check how to get you back on track.

Directions wise it gives them clearly and well in advance, annoyingly it doesn't tell you to turn left or right as expected but says keep left or keep right which could be confusing if you were meant to keep to one side of a road ready to take a turn later and mistakenly take a turn early.

Back to the maps and they are definitely more up to date than those of similar apps, easily identifying and routing through a local bypass which other navigation apps had problems recognising although the POI's (points of interest) are sometimes out of date, for example a local garage is shown which hasn't been open for a few years so while the maps themselves are fine the POI's are a little less up to date and so may not be as useful.

But back to that question of whether CoPilot can really compete with Googles app, and the answer is that yes it can, and does. At twenty pounds it may seem a little steep but is still cheaper than rivals such as Navigon which are less intuitive to use and is as good as (and of course cheaper than) a standalone sat nav system.

If you're looking for a good offline satellite navigation app with plenty of useful features and up to date maps CoPilot is certainly the best available although it does have its quirks such as the whole keep right instead of turn right thing.

That said however, and having tried most of the alternative apps, CoPilot has definitely become my sat nav of choice and is well worth a look. You can't get a free trial but there is a free CoPilot app on the Play store that gives an idea of what to expect from the premium version.

Red Dwarf returns, but is it worth a look?

Red Dwarf returned to UK tv screens this week for its first new series in thirteen years (unless you include the three part "Back to Earth" story from 2009), but with the original cast now noticeably older could they rekindle the magic that made the show so popular back in the late eighties and early nineties?

While some critics have written off the new series as okay but not great the majority of them have hailed the new series as a welcome return to form, as have the majority of fans.

Episode one of the new series, titled "Trojan", sees Lister Kryten Rimmer and Cat come to the aid of Rimmers brother, Howard, with the help of an advanced spaceship they discover (The "Trojan" of the title).

While the episode felt like it was trying to be more of a standard sitcom than before, perhaps trying to hard to appeal to markets other than the UK, it did feel more like an early series of Red Dwarf with the majority of gags working well, some laugh out loud funny scenes, good chemistry between the cast members and it had that old magic back that fans were hoping for from its heyday.

The crew look surprisingly good for their ages, Rimmer (Chris Barrie) and Cat (Danny John Jules) are both 52, Craig Charles is 48 and Robert Llewellyn is 56 yet the fact they were obviously older didn't have the negative effect some had expected.

The first episode centred around Rimmer, a nod to previous series where some of the best episodes were those centred around one of the key characters (quite often Rimmer), and saw him finally best one of his bullying brothers in that weasel like yet strangely endearing way that only he could.

Along the way there were of course some well set up comedy moments, most notably the exam question concerning a Swede, Arnolds attempt at being captain like on the radio (only to be thwarted by a chair) and of course his final words to Howard.

The show was very much a return to form, not perfect but close enough that it bodes well for the rest of the series being enjoyable and having watched it twice myself I can confirm that as with the earlier series it holds up well to repeat viewings.

If you're a fan then chances are you'll enjoy it, if you're not well then maybe you won't but with just shy of one and a half million viewers tuning in to watch the return of Red Dwarf, giving Dave its second highest audience figure since the 2009 Red Dwarf mini series "Back to Earth", it's clear that a lot of fans were keen to give the show another chance.

It will be interesting to see how many return for the second episode, which will give an idea of whether the show can be a commercial success, but if early impressions and comments are anything to go by it looks like Red Dwarf has a good chance of repeating its earlier successes.

Did you really buy that app? XDA member exposes Play store vulnerability

Over at XDA forums a vulnerability in Googles Play store application has been exposed by user Zanderman112 that means anyone could use your phone or tablet to purchase applications, even if you have the app set to use pin protection to prevent unauthorised purchases.

The Play store app allows you to set a pin code for security so that, when someone goes to purchase an app, they have to know the code you chose in order to complete the transaction.

If you have purchased apps before then this is of course a very useful feature to have as it means that no one but you can run up a bill by purchasing apps.

Except that, it turns out, they can.

As Zanderman112 points out "All someone has to do to be able to make purchases on a supposed secure play store is go to Settings>Applications>All>Google Play Store and click clear data. No more pin".

And surprisingly it really is that simple, try it yourself and see. What will happen after clearing the data is that you will get the notice about Play Store and the first time screen asking you to click the button to accept the terms and conditions.

When you do that the Play store app will automatically recognise the account your device is logged into and all your apps will show up in the Play store with no purchase restrictions, meaning anyone with access to your phone or tablet can easily purchase applications as if they are you.

Zanderman112 provides an easy solution to the problem for Google, if they choose to implement it "The fix to this would obviously be that google have the pin be connected to your google account, instead of stored locally on the device". The question is will they?

In the mean time a temporary but effective solution is to lock your Android device with a pin code. For some that may get a bit tedious having to type in a code but unlike the Play store app code the system lock code is not so easy to bypass and will provide a much more effective form of security against the purchase of apps by others than relying on Play stores pin.

Dredd 3D hit or miss?

Ok I'll admit it, I was a big fan of the Comic books and not so keen on the Stallone version of Judge Dredd so the recently released Dredd 3D was something I really wanted to be good, but would it be?

In Dredd 3D America is a waste land ravaged by radiation, in the middle of this waste land sits Mega City One which, as the name suggests, is a very big (mega) city.

Suffering from high crime rates the only form of justice are the judges, armour clad police who are quite literally judge jury and executioner. Justice is instant, there are no courts and no legal trickery to get the guilty free, the judges decide your fate when they catch you and it's as simple as that.

The most feared of these judges is Judge Dredd, he sees the law as black and white. To him there is only guilty or not guilty and even the best excuse in the world won't change his mind if he finds someone guilty.

Tasked with taking a trainee judge out to test if she is ready for active duty Dredd and the rookie, a mutant named Anderson, respond to a grizzly multiple homicide in one of the cities huge towers where thousands of people live and work.

Unfortunately for the judges this particular two hundred storey tower is home to some very nasty characters headed by the drug queen Ma Ma who has her own reasons for wanting the two judges dead.

And so, as a result, the building is locked down and no one can go in or out until her order to kill them is carried out.

Cue two hours of non stop action, plenty of impressive 3D sequences and of course the well known Dredd 'catch phrase'  "I AM the law".

Fans will be happy to know that this is not in any way like the light hearted Stallone version, there are a few stern faced one liners of course but nothing to make you laugh out loud or worse still to make you groan.

No, this is definitely Judge Dredd for grown ups.

There is a lot of blood, lots of gory killing of the guilty, a serviceable plot, some enjoyable 3D set pieces and of course plenty of action.

Yes you read that right, the story is serviceable, not great but not rubbish either. It is clearly there to set up lots of action and it does so very well, it doesn't introduce noticeable plot holes, it tells us what we need to know and who the bad guys are and it doesn't bore the viewer.

Basically it does what any good action film ought to do, set up a hero and a villain and then set them against each other.

Karl Urban is exactly as you'd expect Dredd to be, he looks the part and he gets straight into dispensing justice in the way only Dredd can. Lena Headey is far from her normal self in the movie. Gone, well obscured, are her good looks but as usual she still plays the role of a strong independent woman very well and does a good job as the films big bad guy Ma Ma, well the films big bad girl.

It's surprisingly hard to fault the film, the action is constant, the actors all do a good job, the special effects are very well done and despite not having a plot that will win any Oscars it certainly doesn't bore and it won't have you looking at your watch and wondering how much longer it's on for.

The 3D is great in some key scenes (most notably the scenes involving the use of the slow mo drug), but there are some scenes that don't look really amazing in it but then that is probably the only negative thing to say about the film from the point of view of a fan of the action genre.

Dredd is a film for those who like lots of action, or who grew up reading the comic books. It is a fun no holds barred action movie that will easily keep you entertained right up to the end titles and for those who are fans of the character already this is a film that delivers the Judge Dredd we know and love.

The not so amazing iPhone 5? - details and reactions

As expected Apple unveiled the new iPhone 5 today and while it's quite different to the 4S that it replaces the new model has already convinced even some die hard Apple fans that, with the passing of Steve Jobs, the company really did lose their source of inspiration.

With a four inch display the iPhone  5 has a better chance of competing with its Android rivals, there is still no NFC which could put some people off and it does essentially look like someone simply stretched an iPhone 4S rather than looking like the polished design icon fans have come to know and love, something that has already caused some of those fans to criticise it even before it has gone on sale, but surely there is plenty about the phone to get excited by?

If you're an Android user of phones such as Samsungs S3 then the answer to that is no, but for 4S users there are some big changes.

The phone is taller with a larger screen, it has a higher resolution which while not HD is pretty close at 1136 pixels by 640 which allows for an extra row of icons (yes that really is a selling point apparently) and although it still isn't quite a 16:9 format screen, and it isn't high definition, it is a significant step up for current iPhone users.

Data wise it will support pretty much any standard used by carriers around the world including LTE (and yes that does mean the UK version of 4G will work just fine) so in theory if you can get one unlocked you could potentially use it anywhere.

Apple claim the iPhone is the worlds thinnest smartphone at just 7.6 millimetres thick, and while fans of the company will undoubtedly spout this claim verbatim the thinnest smartphone is actually the Oppo Finder at just 6.65 millimetres thick, but it is slightly thinner than its main rival the Galaxy S3.

The camera is the same eight megapixel one as that of the 4S but with a few tweaks such as a new low light mode, sapphire crystal lens cover, faster photo capture, ability to recognise ten faces at once, better stabilisation and panorama software, there is a new much smaller dock connector which will render all previous iPhone accessories unusable with the iPhone 5 unless you use Apples adaptor which will set you back £18 ($30) and it has a new A6 processor which is claimed to be twice as quick as that used in the 4S.

No details on how many cores the A6 chip uses are available but based on battery life of ten hours video playback it is most likely to be a dual core Arm A15 design similar to Samsungs Exynos 5 which runs at up to 1.7 gigahertz although Apple would likely lower it to around 1.2 gigahertz.which would still make it much quicker than that of the previous iPhone, the 4S.

Software wise the phone runs iOS 6 which has turn by turn satellite navigation to help keep up with Android which has already had this feature for some time, Siri can now start apps and the iPhone has three microphones tucked away inside to help it better understand your voice and help with noise cancellation.

The new iPhone goes on sale September 21 st but already, just hours after its debut, even some of Apples staunchest supporters are voicing disappointment and noting that it doesn't compete well in some areas with other high end phones and that the design lacks Apples usual sense of style.

When endgadget got their hands on the new model the reader feedback was split with comments from Apple users ranging from:

"That is seriously the ugliest design "upgrade" apple has done. WTF were they thinking. Two-tone of non-contrasting colors looks HORRIBLE. looks like something is wrong with the back. I saw the leaks and refused to believe apple would come out with such an ugly design. Top that off with is narrow and long look, they've turned something beautiful in the 4s into something just UGLY. No upgrade for me."


"i have a 4s, its this phone minus a row of icons....not worth upgrading", "I have an iphone 4s....i think the old design looks nicer, the new cable will require all new (costly) accessories, and from all i can see the new phone is adding LTE and another row of icons"




"They're just playing catch-up, and Apple can't pretend like it has resisted changing the iPhone's design all those years because it was unquestionably the best and the others were erring in their quest for bigger screens and faster connection speeds.

The iPhone 5 is the final nail in the coffin of those who defended the designs of the iPhone 4 and 4S versus the crop of high-end Android phones. It's an admission by Apple that they were wrong to stick to the smaller 3.5-inch screen and to mock those who went with bigger screens, that it was wrong to ignore LTE connectivity. It's an admission that, in some important ways, the iPhone 4 and 4S were inferior to the competition."

to the more die hard comments which focussed more on having a dig at Android than defending the new iPhone, such as

"For the s3 people, how to you like the need of a backpack to carry a phone around? Are they subsidized by Samsung? I think the iPhone 5 is good looking phone, nothing surprisingly new, but it is quite nice".

Apples stock rose after the product launch, as expected, but the lack of anything special in the iPhone 5, and the fact that Apple have ignored Steve Jobs views to make a larger iPhone, has left some asking if Apple can continue to compete as strongly as it always has when it isn't offering anything that challenges the competition and is instead beginning to be seen as trying to play catchup with Android phones.

There is no doubt that it will sell, and sell well, but already doubts are being aired about Apples continued success in the smartphone market just hours after what could have been a ground breaking product launch but instead became more of a "meh" than a "wow".

Sales figures will tell the story better than forum comments, reports in the media or the guessings of industry analysts but one thing is clear, not everyone is happy with the change in direction of the iPhone 5. Apple will lose some customers, how many remains to be seen although it is doubtful that it will be many, but if Apple are unable to do more than play catch up to the competition then at some point more and more customers will inevitably notice and consider buying an alternative product that has more or better features.

This can be seen already with some apple fans expressing their disappointment before the product has gone on sale, and the recent spate of lawsuits against companies such as Samsung and HTC now more than ever look like an attempt to keep iPhone market share by limiting the choice of alternatives available to consumers.

Apple claim grocery store is trying to copy them

Fresh from their billion dollar win over Samsung for their copying of such patented apple innovations as rounded corners, a flat black border on phones and tablets and rounded icons Apple are at it again.

Having already launched fresh lawsuits against other Android manufacturers, and having renewed their efforts to get a number of Samsungs phones (including the Galaxy S3) banned in America and Europe as stores worldwide prepare to sell the new iPhone, Apple have another target in their sight who, they claim, are blatantly copying their logo and site design in an effort to confuse Apple customers.

The company in question is Polish food retailer a.pl whose sister site fresh24.pl uses an apple as part of its logo. Yes you read correctly, Apple are suing a food retailer for using an apple that in no way resembles Apples iconic logo, and using the website address a.pl.

As you can see from the logo shown here the website are simply using an apple, it is not the same look colour or design as the famous Apple logo nor does it have a bite out of it.

Not surprisingly, the Polish website doesn't sell electrical products and so cannot really mislead Apple customers into buying products under false pretences....because they simply don't sell anything similar, so there is zero chance of an Apple customer mistaking an actual apple (fruit) for an iPhone or iPad and mistakenly buying one only to get it home and find that the dock connector doesn't fit.

Last year Apple ordered a German cafe called Apfelkind (AppleChild) to stop using an apple in their logo as it could cause confusion and was in violation of their trademark. Before that they sued a Canadian school for using an apple as part of its logo because, apparently, no one can now use an apple as part of any logo nor the word apple or something similar such as apl for fear it will confuse Apple customers.

Apple, it seems, genuinely believe that their customers are moronic or illiterate enough (or both) to not only mistakenly buy other companies products but also mistake food stores and schools for Apple stores and that they therefore need to be protected from themselves.

What is almost as surprising as Apple suing grocers, schools and cafes is that most Apple customers don't understand that Apples victories are based on their arguing that they (the customers) are stupid.

Apple successfully argued recently that people were mistakenly buying Samsung products because they confused the two brands, something that you just can't do in a real world environment because aside from the obvious branding on Samsung devices Apple products are always displayed in their own section away from those of their competitors.

But to try arguing that their customers can be confused by a food store might be a harder sell for Apple, although if Apple are correct about some of their customers you may soon see queues of upset people in Apple stores holding kumquats and cucumbers, wanting to know why they won't power up.

Red Dwarf back for new series

Almost twenty five years after it first aired a new series of cult sci fi series Red Dwarf hits UK tv channel Dave in just under a month.

After a mixed reception to the crews most recent outing in the three part special "back to earth" it became clear that fans still loved the show but weren't overly keen on the convoluted and at times unfunny story.

Dave decided to listen to the fans and give the Red Dwarf crew a full series now set back aboard the ship fans have come to know and love rather than on earth. The crew are understandably older, it has been quarter of a century after all, but sneak peeks and trailers show their funny bones are clearly still very much intact.

Craig Charles, who plays everyones favourite slob Dave Lister, sums up the new series in an interview with Bleeding Cool:

"We’ve stopped being an action adventure series and gone back to being more of a sitcom. Back To Earth looked fantastic and was very clever but it wasn’t as funny as it could have been, choosing to be more of an emotional journey. We’re now back to being four clowns in a room, each trying to be funnier than the next man. We’re still 3 million years into deep space, looking for a way home and really hot curry. But now it’s a bit more like Grumpy Old Men".

Red Dwarf X airs on Dave at 9 pm on the fourth of October.

"Android inspired" iPhone to debut next week

Apple have now officially confirmed they will premiere a new product next week, and the invites have a big number five as the shadow underneath that products launch date which means, yes you guessed it....the new iPhone is about to go public.

What you may not know is that the new iPhone is designed to challenge the likes of Samsungs Galaxy S3 and other high profile Android smartphones and as such will be sporting a new look for what will in effect be "iPhone - the next generation".

What do we know, and of course what can we safely guess at about the new iPhone?

Well unsurprisingly it is (unofficially of course) inspired by Android. No that doesn't mean that Apple suddenly like Android but it does mean that they have looked at the popularity of the best selling Android phones and designed the new iPhone to include some of their rivals most popular features.

Reliable news sources such as Reuters have confirmed that the iPhone will sport a larger four inch screen and the resolution of this screen is likely to be 640 x 1146 and sport a new row of apps if the developer version of iOS 6 is anything to go by.

When set to this resolution, to match the expected screen size of the new iPhone, iOS 6 automatically adds a new row of applications on screen and adapts to fit the increased display size whereas previous versions of the operating system simply space the apps out more.

This is the first sign that Apple have taken note of their rivals success, Steve Jobs always refused to make a larger size iPhone, he simply hated the idea of a larger screen size and while he was alive Apple were not allowed to change it.

And yet after his death sources inside Apple began saying he actually worked on the new iPhone and that he supported the idea of larger screen sizes. The skeptically minded among us may think that this is simply Apple using Jobs popularity to boost sales by saying "Steve Jobs helped design this", and that this will be said about other upcoming Apple products, but whether this is true or not the new iPhone will sport a larger screen. And it will be a widescreen (16:9 aspect ratio) one.

It will also sport a different dock connector. The traditional thirty pin connector has been dropped in favour of a smaller connector. And yes this will render it unusable with current iPhone accessories but no doubt Apple will already have an adapter cable available, for a price, that will help connect the different interfaces.

We don't know the cpu type but a new Apple battery has leaked, it is just ten milli amp hours higher rated than that of the iPhone 4S and is claimed to be the new iPhone 5 battery. It could of course be destined for the current 4S but if it really is (as claimed) that of the new iPhone then it suggests the phones cpu will be a dual core model and not the quad core monster that many people are expecting.

This would explain the small increase in battery life, the battery for the iPhone 4S had the same amount of increase over the iPhone 4, and would mean Apple have chosen to play it safe with a dual core processor rather than risk utilising a quad core which would traditionally necessitate a more powerful battery.

The cpu will clock in at between 1.2 and 1.5 gigahertz, probably dual core rather than quad core, and while some may argue this is not enough to compete with the higher end Android phones it's important to realise that a number of high end models still use dual core processors and that iOS is already optimised to work with a dual core processor, so in practice a dual core processor would actually make sense.

Despite recent claims to the contrary it is very likely the new iPhone will indeed feature Near Field Communication. Apple have moved the new iPhones camera and it would make sense to do so if they were planning to put an nfc chip there as the rumoured stronger metal back would prevent an nfc chip from transmitting signals properly whereas placing the chip where the camera previously went would be a better location.

So, will it or won't it have near field communication? With experts divided on the subject the likelihood, if only from a common sense point of view, is likely to be yes.

NFC is emerging rapidly as a popular technology, here in the UK and a growing number of other countries it is used for quick cashless payments in a number of shops enabling you to just swipe your phone over a reader in order to pay a bill. It is also increasingly being used in areas such as home automation (switching on appliances when you enter or exit your home for example) and in initiating file transfers between compatible devices.

As more and more Android phones take advantage of this it makes sense for Apple, who will be competing with them, to do the same otherwise they risk falling behind and that's something Apple won't want to do.

It makes commercial sense for Apple to include nfc in the new iPhone, that doesn't mean they will but if they decide not to it will put them at a disadvantage against rival phones such as the S3.

Feature wise iOS 6 on the new iPhone finally adds some things Android users have had for a while (and no I'm not referring to the notification centre iOS now has, something that Apple "borrowed" from Google).

With the new iPhone you can dismiss a phone call with a message or set a smart reminder, UK users can now finally use Siri to get UK based information, there is better facebook integration, turn by turn satellite navigation comes in and users of the new iPhone will now be able to download applications in the background and no longer need to type in their password when they want to download free applications.

With a larger screen size, nfc, a smaller dock connector and features such as the recent notification centre and upcoming iOS features such as dismissing calls with messages, better facebook integration and turn by turn satellite navigation the new iPhone will be more in line with its Android rivals but unless it has a few new tricks up its sleeve Apples latest offering may not have what it takes to threaten Androids increasing dominance in the smartphone arena.

Regardless of its features you can be sure the newest iPhone will sell very well as always helped along by the fact that the late Steve Jobs was "involved" in its design (something which no doubt will also be claimed for the iPad Mini should it see the light of day in October).

New Android version doesn't call home

Want all the fun of Android but without the bits that send your data back to Google? Well a new version of Google, made by and for Russians, does just that. Yes you heard correctly, Googles servers will no longer penetrate your shields (and yes, that was a nod to star trek).

At it's unveiling at the IFA in Berlin to Russian deputy prime minister Dmitry Rogozin the projects manager, Dimitry Mikhailov, claimed the new version of Android is un hackable and has all the features of Android as we know it but that it won't send any data to Google.

Although only available for the Russian top brass right now a tablet running a slimmed down version will go on sale to the public later this year for $460. Perhaps by then some enterprising developer will figure out how to put this on to some of the popular smart phones, while this will of course appeal to the foil hat brigade the Russians own reasons for making this, that they are concerned their data may be leaked from Googles servers and therefore compromise their privacy, is a valid one.

It may seem overly paranoid, and perhaps it is, but then as the old saying goes "it's not paranoia if their really after you". So, for those who prefer it the Google free Android experience is on its way.

And for those curious about the Android logo used for this article, it's a rather neat twist from Richard Racz on the traditional Google version.

iHard - Bruce Willis set to take on Apple over iTunes

You've heard of Apple and Samsung battling each other in court but the fruity giant from Cupertino may soon star in a legal face off with Hollywood star Bruce Willis who is considering suing over ownership of his iTunes collection.

As you may or may not know you don't actually own the music or videos you purchase from Apple using iTunes, you pay for a license to use them, so should you wish to give your collection away, or leave it to a loved one, you can't.

Bruce, unhappy that he can't leave his collection to his daughters, is said to be willing to face Apple in court in order to get the right to transfer ownership, a right many iTunes users may not even be aware they don't have.

Apple have the power to freeze the use of any iTunes account if they  believe that account is being shared illegally, something that would render the stars collection unusable.

The chances are that Apple will come to an agreement to avoid such a high profile celebrity court case where they could be seen as being in the wrong but, if they don't then Willis's next starring role could just be in court.

The latest in Apple versus Samsung patent trial, is the tide turning for Samsung?

The patent trial between Apple and Samsung resumed earlier today, and while testimony hasn't yet finished for the day, already we're seeing signs of what's to come.

Yesterday Apple secured a significant step toward victory when Judge Koh barred the designer of Samsungs F700 phone, which predates the iphone yet is similar in style, from testifying.

Why is this good for Apple?

Apple had originally included the F700 in its list of Samsung devices that infringed on Apples patents but, on realising that it was designed prior to the iphones release and therefore could not have been a copy, they dropped the phone from the court case.

This makes sense as it would have helped Samsung show that it had an iphone like design prior to Apples and that the features Apple claim are infringed, such as the rounded corners for example, were selected as part of the natural evolution of a products design rather than by slavishly copying the competition as Apple claim is the case for the remaining Samsung products.

By barring Samsungs designer discussing the F700 and its design process Judge Koh has prevented them from introducing a key piece of evidence that would show, with little room for doubt, that Samsung really did have similar products to the iphone before Apple released any details of it, swinging the case a little more in favour of an Apple win.

Judge Koh ruled that, because it was no longer accused of infringing Apples patents the F700 was irrelevant to the current case and therefore discussing its design is also irrelevant. This seems to ignore the fact that such evidence would help the jury more easily reach a conclusion were they to be aware that such a design predated Apples but unfortunately the Judges decision is final.

Apples damages expert, Terry Musika, testified that despite his estimation that damages should be set at $2.5 billion he personally believes $2.7 billion is what they should really be as he took the jury through the way he had calculated the damages amount and explains that Apple paid him and his team $1.75 million dollars to help them come up with computer models and calculations, saying that it was not an easy thing to do despite just fifteen minutes earlier saying it was a fairly straightforward process of "sliding" money from a sale that would normally go to apple over to samsung if it wasn't an apple sale.

Samsung are, as the days legal action draws nearer its end, asking the Judge to end the case today based on their argument that Apple have not convincingly proven their case. Koh gave Samsung just five minutes to explain their arguments merit. Samsung argued that this was not long enough to respond to claims worth $2.5 billion in damages but tried their best to do so.

Judge Koh has, at the time of writing, just dismissed the case against three of the accused Samsung products because they were not sold in the United States. However she does allow these same products to be used against one of Samsungs subsidiaries and so in practice they are still part of the case but in respect to subsidiary companies rather than Samsung itself.

In fifteen minutes Samsung will call their first witness who will testify on examples of prior art. If Samsung have done their homework well his testimony could be a turning point in the case which has, in general, shifted more in favour of apple.

Gloves come off in Samsung vs Apple

People who want to buy an ipad or iphone are mistakenly ordering Samsung products instead, or at least this seems to be the crux of Apples legal argument.

Forgetting the fruity logo emblazoned on Apple products, the Samsung name right on the front of Samsungs or the fact that unless you blindly walk into a shop and just pick something up (in which case, shame on you) you will have an idea of what you want and purchase accordingly, Apple believe you will confuse their products with Samsung despite their admission early in the trial that Apple products are always on a seperate display to non Apple products (which makes it much harder to confuse them with those from other companies).

Of course Apple could be seen as arguing, unintentionally, that the kind of person who buys an Apple product does so based solely on its looks and not on its features, price, etcetera, which would mean that Apple considers it's customers are somewhat stupid and need protecting from themselves by removing any other product that has any similarities.

A large part of Apples attack on Samsung relates to the fact that Apple products are often rectangular in shape, have rounded corners, a centred screen and a speaker grill.

This was highlighted yesterday when Samsung cross examined Apples expert witness on design yesterday. Displaying four different cases of prior art Samsung asked the witness, Peter Bressler, whether these designs that came out before the iphone had a flat screen, a speaker, grille on the front, rounded corners and so on.

Bressler had to admit they were but then argued that it was unfair to only consider the front or back of a device without looking at every side and accused Samsung of being misleading.

Of course the argument that Apple make is that customers see a device from Samsung and think it is really an Apple product, that they then purchase it and this loses Apple money as a result.

In such a situation the front would likely be all the customer really looked at or could see on display in a store but were all possible viewpoints of a product considered Apple would no doubt be in a slightly stickier situation as the Apple logo would pretty quickly give away that, wait a minute, this is an Apple product.

Unfortunately Apples defence team are doing their best to avoid the fact that the design of certain things tend to evolve so that they have a lot of similarities, for example your car probably has four circular wheels, a steering wheel with a horn in the centre, exterior mirrors, airbags at the front and so on just as your television is probably rectangular, flat, thin, dark black or grey with two speakers hidden at the side or bottom of it.

With phones for example it feels nicer using something with rounded corners rather than sharper square edges, you need a speaker at the front to hear who you are talking to, buttons at the side for volume control, a head phone socket at the top etcetera.

These are common sense directions that smartphone designs were already moving in before the iphone was released. Indeed in the picture below you can see a 2006 Samsung design that predates the iphone (meaning it did not copy it because no one had seen the iphone at that time because the iphone was unveiled in 2007).

The gloves were off this week with Samsung highlighting just how much money each Apple expert was being paid to say that Samsungs products were copying those of the fruity giant (for those who are curious Peter Bressler, mentioned earlier, received $75,000) and by spending much of their time grilling Apples experts on the finer points of the design, pointing out a number of significant differences.

Samsung went into often minute detail about the Samsung devices accused of being copies, going so far as to point out that the Infuse 4G for example does not have a bezel but a case and that, were the casing to be considered a bezel it would still not be a copy of the iphones which not only has a distinct bezel but is also much slimmer than the casing / bezel from Samsung.

An interesting point the jury in the trial won't get to know is that Apple also accused Samsungs F700 of copying their look but quickly dropped it from the case when they realised it was in development before the iphone.

Why is that interesting? Because by that action Apple have clearly shown that the F700 looks like an iphone, so much so they wanted to prosecute, but that was in fact designed independently and without copying the iphone. Because of this they can't sue over that particular model, but unfortunately for Samsung they are niot allowed to use this evidence in court against Apple.

After all it would damage Apples claims of Samsung copying them if they had to admit they knew of a Samsung phone with many of its patented design features that predated their own. They couldn't then expect a jury to believe Samsung copied Apples.

But once you see some of the design "features" Apple have patented you begin to see that most modern smartphones can be seen as violating them. Here are some of the more unbelievable design elements at dispute in the current trial:

• rectangular hand held mobile device with rounded edges
• the colour black being used for the front of a device
• use of the colours black, blue, brown, brown-grey, grey-green, green, orange, red, silver, tan, white and yellow as part of the products design (used in display elements such as icons)

Apple also claim, despite not having patented the following, that they are original to Apple and Samsung are copying them by using the following non patented features:

• a rectangular box for packaging
• minimal lettering
• front view of the product displayed on top of packaging box
• a two piece box where the top nestles over the bottom
• a tray within the box that cradles the product
• being able to see the product immediately upon opening the box

Apple hit back with a Samsung document from 2007 that praised the iphones in several areas and stated that Samsung needed to compete with the iphone, and that the iphone was now the phone all others were being compared to.

Unfortunately it didn't say Samsung should copy any of the design in any way but that they should build a better product to compete. And that is exactly what the tech industry does, a good product comes out and then others improve upon it. This is the very reason why cars look like cars (with the accelerator, gear stick etc in the same place within the vehicle, having a steering wheel and so on), why laptops look like each other,  etcetera.

It remains to be seen who will win the trial but with each side having a set number of hours allotted to them, and with Samsung using a lot of theirs in just cross examining Apple witnesses, they may have to start cutting back on lengthy cross examinations that elicit a few small victories in favour of their own presentation of witnesses which, hopefully, will yield them more significant victories.

(Boxing gloves image used courtesy of Generationbass)

Perfectly clear hits Android [REVIEW]

Athentechs ios app "perfectly clear" hit android this week, with some users seeing it more as a hit to their wallet thanks to the use of in app purchases but we'll get to that later.

Perfectly Clear is a clever photo enhancement application that uses some clever code to analyse your photo's and automatically adjust them so that they look better, a kind of automated photoshop.

It does a fairly good job of automatically adjusting images (as can be seen in the picture below which is the automated version of the picture, not a manually tweaked version, and which shows the difference even totally automatic adjustment can make) but perhaps its greatest feature is that you can manually adjust settings to tweak a picture until it's just right for you and then share it in various ways or simply save it.

Pictures can be saved at the original size or at various alternate resolutions, this caused problems in testing as with an average of a hundred megabytes of ram free it could only save large pictures (such as a fourteen megapixel image) at 2048 by 1536 resolution, telling me that it required fifty two megabytes of ram which it could not allocate.

On devices with more free memory this won't be an issue of course and even at 2048 by 1536 pixels images are detailed enough for everyday use, with a little more ram you can save at higher resolutions which makes the app equally useful for those with high resolution images.

For an in app purchase of  under a pound you can unlock additional features which include teeth whitening, face smoothing, skin tone correction and making eyes more noticeable.

This has annoyed some users who feel cheated at the use of in app purchases and claim it makes the application unusable, but in this case their annoyance is misplaced.

All the automatic correction and a number of manually adjustable settings work with no additional payment needed. The only features you pay extra for are those specifically targeted at improving pictures of faces, something you may find useful for enhancing a facebook profile picture for example but even without the in app purchase the software still performs well on a variety of different pictures (including faces of course).

Indeed the ios version has this same use of in app purchases, and charges a small one time fee for certain features that are more specialised.

In app purchases can be annoying when they make an app almost unusable without spending out more money however this is one case where everything works without these purchases and unless you're planning on editing pictures of faces where you want to to whiten teeth or make eyes look sexier than you aren't going to need those features in the first place.

But should you want them, are they worth the extra money?

Surprisingly yes. The eyes can be made clearer larger and more defined (in what some would call a cute way, almost like becoming a human version of an anime character) and the teeth can indeed be whitened should you really have a need to do so.

Clearly there is some clever calculation going on to target specific areas of faces within pictures, and clearly if it is something only certain users will find useful an argument could be made that it makes sense to sell the app for less and simply charge extra for those who need those more specialised features.

At its introductory price of just over sixty pence (sixty three at the time of writing) it makes sense for budding photographers, or even those with a habit of taking not so good pictures, to get Perfectly Clear while it's on offer.

The use of in app purchases is of course always going to remain a sore point for some users, and rightly so, but at least in this instance it doesn't interfere with the intended use of the application and isn't going to stop your photo's looking better if you don't want to pay more for those more specialised extras.

If you want to know more, or to buy the app yourself, head on to the Play store and, as is recommended with any app purchase, check the user comments there before making your decision.

Budget gaming handheld promises old school thrills

Tablets can be great but when you fancy a gaming session it's nice to have a proper controller, like those we get with our favourite games consoles. Now you can have both thanks to a new handheld (or should that be tablet?) called the Wikipad that debuted at CES earlier this year and which is set for release soon.

The finalised specifications for the new tablet / handheld were revealed yesterday and while not entirely groundbreaking they promise a decent experience.....

A 1.4 gigahertz quad core Tegra 3 processor partnered with one gigabyte of ram, Android version 4.1 (JellyBean), two cameras (eight megapixel rear and 2 megapixel front facing), a 10.1 inch IPS screen (with a 1280x800 resolution) and a minimum of at least sixteen gigabytes of internal storage space certainly makes this an attractive tablet in its own right but unlike most tablets the Wikipad has a special treat in store for those who love their games.

What treat?

The tablet becomes a self contained handheld gaming system thanks to a clever controller bundled with it that makes the tablet screen function as a large handheld display while allowing game and menu control with a joypad type interface that include two sets of triggers and bumpers, two analog sticks, four buttons as well as a start button and a select button and of course a d-pad.

As you can see from the pictures it transforms the already decent tablet into a proper Tegra 3 powered portable gaming system that will run all your favourite high end Android games, let you use a proper joypad to control them as you'd expect from a handheld gaming console, and yet can revert back to your everyday tablet should your inner adult feel the need to come out for a while and get some work done.

Aside from the obvious possibilities this offers there is also the less obvious one of being able to play all those old school favourites from your Playstation or arcade gaming days thanks to the use of emulators. Now you can play them as you remember, with proper controls, uninterrupted by the outside world or of course just use the controller to blast away at zombies.

But the fun doesn't stop there for hardcore gamers. Want to play your favourite PS3 or XBox 360 titles on your new Wikipad? Well thanks to their partnership with Gaikai (a games streaming service that rivals OnLive) you can do just that.

That's right, without ever needing to buy another console title you can still play the top games on them using the Wikipad.

Okay, okay, so it sounds great but what's it going to cost?

Originally the price was set to be $250 but at the time it had a glasses free 3D display and eight gigabytes of internal storage. The change in specifications means it should still hit that target price and retail at $250 (£160).

At that price it promises to steal away potential buyers of tablets such as the Nexus 7 and even Asus Transformer series, offering a fun gaming experience combined with the everyday benefits of a decent tablet.

PS43E490 - Brand name 3D TV a budget price?

Samsung have made a concerted effort to get people watching tv in the third dimension with this budget priced 3D tv that sells for £400, but does it do the job?

The 43 inch Plasma screen produces deep rich colours with excellent black levels and a good sharp picture. On a 1080p high definition source, such as a BluRay or the BBC HD channels, the picture quality is impressive and looks better than rival LCD televisions.

The tv is NOT (as some claim) full HD, it is in fact a 720p HD set.

This is quite common for large screen Plasma sets (particularly 3D models) because at a typical viewing distance the difference between 720p and 1080p is difficult for most people to notice, and because the majority of broadcast material is actually in 720p as are most high definition console games (XBox 360 games, for example, are upscaled to display at 1080p resolution but are in reality rendered in 720p resolution).

But, getting back to the tv and on a 1080 source it performs its magic to reduce the resolution to 720 very well, to the extent that you'd be hard pressed to find a noticeable difference in quality between this and a 1080p model, good news for those after a big screen on a small budget.

If you just want a decent high definition tv without 3D you might want to stop reading now because you can get a similar sized tv without 3D for less, the key reason to buy this set or something similar is the addition of 3D, which we'll discuss in a moment.

The only real drawback to this television is the sound. It can be loud when needed, that's a good thing, but it never quite sounds perfect. It lacks something, it can be heard and it's not annoying but the sound quality is sub par when compared to the picture and although it's fine for everyday use, and easy enough to get used to, you may find yourself wanting to plug in a surround sound system when watching your favourite movies.
That said however this tv really comes into its own when it enters the third dimension.

This tv uses Active Shutter glasses, some people love these types of glasses and some don't. Yes that's right there are two types of 3D in the tv world (but don't worry, your 3D games and videos will work with whichever you prefer).

There are passive glasses which halve the resolution of your 3D tv when in 3D mode and then there are active shutter glasses, the method the Samsung uses and which retain the full resolution which produces a clearer more defined and better quality image.

They take what you see on screen and feed the left eye view to your left eye and the right eye view to your right one. They send these views to each eye so fast that you can't tell they are sent seperately and your eyes merge them together so they are a true 3D image.
Some people find this to be a problem, some glasses are said to flicker or cause nausea. The truth is that the glasses with this set are very good and even though I am sensitive to flickering (some flourescent lights and strobing for example) I have not found any flickering evident with the tv in 3D mode.

If you stare really hard at a paused image with lots of bright white in it then flick your view from one side of the screen to another you can make yourself have a sort of flicker effect momentarily as your eyes refocus but you have to go out of your way to do so.
The only flicker issues I have found actually come from buying additional glasses that were rechargeable, for some reason the rechargeable set had a tiny flicker noticeable when looking quickly from one part of the screen to another which while only noticed in such a situation was notable enough that the rechargeables are relegated to be a backup should the batteries in the glasses shipped with the television run out.

So flickering, what's it like? The fact is the 3D flicker just is not noticeable except on the rechargeable glasses and if you stare at a particular image with bright elements and shift views very quickly. Watching 3D content you really don't notice anything but is the 3D itself any good?

The answer is yes. Avatar, for example, really shines in 3D. Not a fan of the two dimensional version I have to say that watching it as it was filmed, in the third dimension, is like watching a completely different movie and serves as an excellent demonstration of the sets 3D prowess.

If you're a fan of the Olympics then you'll want to check out the BBC's 3D coverage of the Judo, volleyball and gymnastics which add a definite sense of depth, and in some cases a feeling of almost being there, to the events shown in their nightly 3D highlights broadcast but remember that when it comes to films some 3D titles are better than others.

For example the latest Transformers is somewhat underwhelming in 3D because as with a number of big budget films it plays it safe and doesn't really utilise the full power of 3D in case it causes some of its viewers to feel nauseous which is a shame, but of course not the fault of the tv you watch it on.

Most of the big Hollywood releases try and go more for a feeling of depth in 3D but don't be too concerned as there are still plenty of well made 3D films out there including the love them or hate them final destination movies (it's quite hard not to wince when you see a sailing mast thrust out of the screen toward you as it impales a helpless victim dropped on it from a bridge that's breaking apart).

The television can view side by side (sbs), above and below and of course BluRay 3D content but it also has a clever party trick that increases the amount of 3D you can find to watch by converting two dimensional video into that of the third.

Using it's closely guarded technology, widely acknowledged as superior to that of other manufacturers, it guesses at what should be nearer the viewer, and what should be further away, by deconstructing every frame of video and then analysing every pixel that makes it in such a way that it can guess quite well where to place things on screen relative to the viewer.

I still have no idea quite how they do it but it is different to how other tv sets convert 2D content and does produce more effective results. Of course it can never beat content filmed in 3D, and some things don't convert very well, but in general it does do a good job of converting and it adds another string to the sets 3D bow.

One type of conversion it excelled at was the first test I threw at it, Top Gears Stig driving a supercar round their track, surprisingly effective so whatever Samsung are doing they certainly seem to be doing it well.

Other than 3D video what else does this set offer?

It lets you play a wide variety of different video formats from either a usb stick or a networked dlna device including those in avi, mp4 and mkv containers whether they use the Xvid, DivX, H264, X264 or WMV video codecs which a lot of tv sets have trouble playing.

It also plays music files and allows you to view pictures of course and if you happen to use an Android phone or tablet you can download a free app from the Play store that lets you use your touch screen android device to control the tv (if the tv is connected to the same wifi network as your android at the time).

It only has two hdmi inputs, which might put potential buyers off, but if you're in the market for a good all round high definition tv that can play films off a usb stick, or dlna device, but can also play 3D content as it was meant to be seen then this is definitely one set to consider and certainly the best 3D set at this price range.

BBC 3D Olympics begin tonight

If you have a 3D tv you might want to tune in to BBC HD tonight where you'll be treated to over three hours of the opening ceremony of the Olympics in side by side 3D starting at ten to nine this evening (27th July).

Every night at eleven, through out the Olympics, there will also be a recorded 3D highlights show for one hour every day with the mens 100 metres final at half past eight (through to ten pm) on August fifth, and the closing ceremony (nine pm to twelve thirty am) on August twelfth being broadcast live.

At the start of each evenings coverage you might be interested to see the sixty second films of atheletes in action, filmed with a phantom camera, which Kim Shillinglaw (head of 3D at the BBC) promises to be breath taking.

For those who don't have a 3D tv but are thinking of getting one, the 3D broadcasts are unecrypted and completely free so you might want to record them and play them back at a later date. There are a variety of 3D televisions out there but for the highest definition you will need the type that use active shutter glasses as the other type, commonly known as passive 3D, halves the resolution.

I won't wade in to the "active 3D versus passive 3D" debate here, each have their merits, my own 3D set uses active shutter glasses and is definitely a good option but it's really down to personal choice.

MK802 - Android on a TV stick

The MK802 isn't, as it's name may imply, part of a Milton Keynes postcode but is in fact a full blown android computer packed into a case the size of a usb stick that turns any HDMI equipped television into a smart one that runs the popular Ice Cream Sandwich version of the Android operating system.


It features a one gigahertz single core processor, one gigabyte of ddr3 ram (there are 512 megabyte versions available but this article concerns the higher ram one gigabyte model), a Mali 400 gpu (despite some sellers listing it as an AMD gpu it is actually the better quality Mali that is actually used), 802.11 b g and n wifi, micro sd card slot (supporting up to thirty two gigabytes of additional storage space) and two USB ports (one standard and one smaller usb port for USB On The Go devices).

Using the stick is easy enough, attach the hdmi cable between the stick and your tv, then plug a controller into the usb port (ideally a wireless keyboard and mouse, although you can buy some remote controls that will also work). After this you simply plug in the power lead and about a minute later the mk is up and running and ready for use.

You will no doubt have heard that this is a perfect way to make a "dumb" tv into a "smart" one but just what does that mean in practice?

Well it means that your tv can now, thanks to the stick, do all the things that a high priced internet enabled smart tv can do and surprisingly, despite the fact that you can buy one of these for less than fifty pounds, it does so quite well. It's not without its problems however, and there are drawbacks. The biggest of which is the lack of a power button. Yes, that does mean you can only turn it on or off by connecting or disconnecting the power lead.

However while disconnecting the power suddenly can, in theory, damage the device (because it doesn't give time to close down the operating system first) you can in, reality, get round this by using a free app such as "real reboot" which will tell the device to reboot.

Using this, when the screen goes off and is about to restart (some tv's will also say "no signal") you pull the power and it has the same effect as performing a proper shutdown, meaning there is then no chance of it causing problems.

Another drawback is the small size of the unit. Because it generates heat this can build up and after three or four hours watching movies this could be a worry for some, although in practice it shouldn't be much of a problem unless you plan on say a twelve hour movie marathon or gaming session. Certainly after a good four hours of solid use it does get very warm but never to a point that it causes any problems and it's the price you pay for having a lot of power in this form factor.

But don't assume this Android stick is bad, there is a lot to like about the MK802. It runs all the expected apps that a decent smart tv would run (NetFlix, Ebay, Amazon for example) but also a lot more that they couldn't, which makes it a handy thing to have around.

Email, web browsing, streaming media from YouTube Netflix or Hulu, this will do all of these with ease but it will also play pretty much any file format you can think of thanks to the use of android apps such as VLC or the built in media player which easily copes with a wide range of tasks such as playing full hd 3D video for example.

It comes with Angry Birds Space installed, should you fancy playing a game or two, and will handle similar casual games (such as TileStorm HD) but the single core cpu is not going to be enough for serious gaming fans, so don't buy this expecting to play DeadSpace or Nova 3 any time soon although some people are running Dead Trigger quite well on it so some higher end games clearly are more ok with it than others.

Speaking of games, it runs the MAME emulator app (available free from the Play store) very well. You can use a wireless mouse or keyboard to control MAME, or use a usb joypad plugged into a usb hub, and I have to admit that playing your favourite arcade games on a big screen is definitely one of the perks of owning the MK802.

Of course another perk is that, being portable, you can take this with you. An Android computer that fits in your pocket isn't something you expect to find, at least not for a low price, but thanks to advances in technology (and mass production) it's here to stay.

Should you mess anything up on the 802 (which you won't unless, like me, you decide to poke around with system files) it's a breeze to put right. In less than five minutes you can re install the whole operating system using a Windows computer connected via usb, you can also simply install updates over the top of the existing operating system when they are released in the same way so that you keep everything intact (your apps and settings, for example) but still get the benefit of updated features from new firmware updates.

And that is one more good thing about the MK802 over similar devices, it is supported with updates whereas many android pc sticks are simply sold and then abandoned with no updates. Only this week an update added features such as a 3D video player and full 1080p output while fixing a few software bugs along the way.

The MK802 runs apps well, including some emulators, and plays a wide variety of decent Android games. It comes pre installed with the official Android app store as well as a very good media player that supports a surprisingly large number of video and audio formats and of course the aforementioned 3D video player. 

If you fancy getting your hands on one you can do so here or if you want to know more, or get help with the MK802, you can always check the forum at the Rikomagic website.

Apples new UI patent may not be Android killer after all

This week saw Apple being awarded a potentially killer patent that could be the ultimate weapon in their war on  Android.

Patent number 8,223,134 essentially covers the user interface of a smartphone, particularly displaying electronic lists and documents on a portable multi touch device that features a processor and memory. What you may not realise, unless you read quite a lot of the patent, is that it also covers the use of widgets on a portable device, which may be something that Apple try to use against Android at a later date. But for this article we're looking specifically at the content of the abstract which specifically applies to displaying lists and electronic documents on a multi function touch screen device that features a processor and memory and that runs its own software.

If you have read some of this patent already you may have noticed it prominently mentions the use of a scroll bar, and you may be thinking that because it specifies using a scroll bar then you can avoid court action over this patent by simply eliminating the scroll bar altogether.

But you'd be wrong, as Apple specifies within its patent that the scroll bar can even be totally transparent (ie not even visible), yes that means even if you eliminate the scroll bar you may still be found liable in court.

So how is this a killer patent? Because the iphone did it first and now every other smartphone does the same, Apple invented the idea of a multi touch portable device with its own user interface so why shouldn't they use it, even if it is to stifle competition, right?

Well, unfortunately for Apple, no they didn't invent the idea and unsurprisingly there is prior art to this that shows as much, including a multi touch mobile phone that pre dates the newly approved Apple patent application by a year.

The Onyx multi touch phone from 2006

And if prior art exists before Apples 2007 patent application then it should invalidate that patent, although if you follow the "patent wars" you'll be all too aware that despite numerous cases where prior art has been found judges typically continue to allow Apple to assert the same patents in court and use them to cause their competitors problems such as the recent Nexus ban in the United States.

Still, it doesn't hurt to know there is prior art and so I've been doing some digging around to try and address this specific patent issue that could be used against Android, the fact that it uses scrolling electronic lists and does so on a multi touch device that incorporates at least one processor and that runs software.

Before the iPhone existed, or was patented, computers had used what is called a graphical user interface (GUI). Now we call them simply a user interface (UI).

These computers and their interfaces, as any pre 2007 computer user will be aware, used scrolling lists as part of their daily operation albeit scrolled through with a mouse or keyboard. In fact the use of scroll bars and displaying electronic documents stretches as far back as at least 1973 with the Xerox Alto computer.

Of course these can't be used against the Apple patent simply because they were not accessed using a multi touch touchscreen device. Apple invented the portable multitouch touch screen device.

Or did they?

In 2006 Synaptics Onyx mobile phone, an actual real and usable device (albeit a concept one), was able to differentiate two simultaneous touches (multi touch) and was a small mobile phone able to do things mentioned in Apples later patent such as scrolling through a list on screen using a finger (it could also do drag and drop actions).

You can see pictures of the phone here or a video of it in action, being demonstrated using a computer (because it was a bigger display and therefore more appropriate for demonstration purposes, however as the video explains all the actions performed are done with fingers on the Onyx) here or in the video below from SlashGear.

So already we have an example of a portable multi touch devices performing the ui interactions described in Apples patent, but one that was a physical reality and in use before the relevant patent submission in 2007.

I'm not sure even the most ardent Apple supporter could honestly disagree that the Onyx concept phone meets the requirements of a portable multi touch device, nor that it demonstrates at least some of the user interactions described in Apples later patent application such as scrolling through a list.

But there are other examples that may be acceptable as evidence of prior art such as the 2006 Plastic Logic e-ink multi touch display which comprised of a flexible display mounted over a multi point touchpad which made the portable tablet sized display able not only to interact with user elements such as scrolling through pages (lists) but also allowed the user multi touch control. This was the basis of their later ebook reader the QUE proReader.

Hopefully by now you are starting to see that Apples patent application does indeed stem from actual devices that predate it. Of course Apples patent covers in particular the use of a portable multi touch device with a processor and ram and running at least one program. There are not lots of examples of this before the iphone but the Onyx is indeed one and one is all it takes to serve as an example of prior art.

Apples patent is very vague in certain areas, and so it remains to be seen whether it will indeed be viable as a weapon against any portable device that has a user interface, certainly it is unlikely to succeed in European countries which tend to frown upon software related patents particularly where the concept or implementation was in use or detailed by others in advance of the patent application but in America, Apples home, it is likely to be used more than once in court battles against manufacturers of Android devices such as Samsung Motorola and HTC.

Because the patent mentions the use of widgets it is possible that this could indeed be used against Android even if only in that regard, which would be a shame but given some of the decisions made in Apples favour in American courts, despite some courts in other countries such as Holland and the UK finding against them using the same patents, it is certainly a possibility.

The patent wars rage on, and yes Apple have a new weapon in the form of this ui patent but not quite the doomsday one they hope for.