Sales/Support: 303.906.2222

M.KAP Hosting

News

AT&T: Net rules must allow ‘paid prioritization’

AT&T said Tuesday that any Net neutrality plan restricting its ability to engage in “paid prioritization” of network traffic would be harmful and contrary to the fundamental principles of the Internet.

Telecommunications providers need the ability to set different prices for different forms of Internet service, AT&T said, adding that it already has “hundreds” of customers who have paid extra for higher-priority services.
“Our view is that if the Federal Communications Commission is going to be making policy decisions on this front, it should base them on the facts, as opposed to dogma,” an AT&T representative told CNET on Tuesday. In a blog post, AT&T vice president Hank Hultquist argued that the Internet Engineering Task Force’s specifications specifically permit paid prioritization.
The flap over paid prioritization started a few weeks ago when Free Press, a pro-regulatory advocacy group, sent letters (No. 1 and No. 2) to the FCC dubbing the concept “discriminatory” and claiming it will “only benefit the few content giants that have deep enough pockets to pay for favorable treatment.”
In a telephone interview on Tuesday, Free Press research director Derek Turner said that allowing paid prioritization would undercut the entire concept of Net neutrality, which had its previous legal foundation swept away earlier this year when a federal appeals court shot down the FCC’s attempt to punish Comcast for temporarily throttling BitTorrent transfers.
Since that ruling, liberal interest groups have been lobbying FCC chairman Julius Genachowski for a new set of regulations, while a majority of members of the U.S. Congress has opposed the idea. Google and Verizon responded by announcing their own proposal, which includes a “presumption” that paid prioritization on wired networks is illegal.
“A ban on paid prioritization is the DNA of the open Internet,” Turner said. He called AT&T’s arguments a “straw man,” saying that: “What AT&T is describing is a practice that we have no problem with, which is that an end user can buy a T1 and set priority flags, and AT&T respects those priority flags.”
Prioritization ‘expected’
But the designers of the protocols that make up the modern Internet had something a bit more ambitious in mind. In the late 1990s, the Internet Engineering Task Force revised those standards to allow network operators to assign up to 64 different traffic “classes,” meaning priority levels.
Free Press “wants to force consumers to be charged higher rates to pay for the construction of more broadband infrastructure than would be needed if networks could be better managed,” says Berin Szoka, a senior fellow at the Progress and Freedom Foundation, which has been critical of new broadband regulations.
A July 1999 IETF specification (RFC 2638) discusses paid prioritization by saying: “It is expected that premium traffic would be allocated a small percentage of the total network capacity, but that it would be priced much higher.” Another specification (RFC 2475) published half a year earlier says that setting different priorities for packets will “accommodate heterogeneous application requirements and user expectations” and “permit differentiated pricing of Internet service.”
Today that concept of “differentiated services” is referred to as DiffServ. It’s part of quality-of-service technologies that companies like AT&T offer, usually to business customers, that rely on DiffServ packet headers to group different types of classes of service together. Real-time voice communication may be ranked the highest, followed by financial transactions, then e-mail, and finally bulk file-transfer protocols that aren’t as sensitive to brief slowdowns.
It’s true that DiffServ markings are typically used inside corporate networks to support applications like VoIP. But a video-conferencing site that has connectivity through AT&T could presumably use DiffServ to prioritize its packets over, say, online shopping and BitTorrent transfers–and keep that priority all the way to an AT&T home customer.
Which is precisely the argument that AT&T is making. In a strongly-worded letter (PDF) sent Monday to the FCC, AT&T says that the protocol specification “in no way limits the use of DiffServ to packets marked by ‘end users,’ as opposed to content providers or network operators.”
“The (FCC) should view with healthy skepticism the opinions it receives on technical Internet matters from an advocacy group with no demonstrable expertise or operational experience in those matters,” AT&T’s letter says. “Paid prioritization over Internet access is not, as Free Press maintains, some lurking future menace that would pervert the intent of the IETF. To the contrary, it was fully contemplated by the IETF.”
Free Press’ Turner disagrees. “DiffServ was not designed to be a tool to allow the network provider to drive application-level discrimination,” he says. He says that his organization will send a letter to the FCC by Wednesday explaining its position.
Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20015231-38.html?tag=mncol;posts#ixzz0yIYjmtBd

AT&T said Tuesday that any Net neutrality plan restricting its ability to engage in “paid prioritization” of network traffic would be harmful and contrary to the fundamental principles of the Internet.Telecommunications providers need the ability to set different prices for different forms of Internet service, AT&T said, adding that it already has “hundreds” of customers who have paid extra for higher-priority services.

“Our view is that if the Federal Communications Commission is going to be making policy decisions on this front, it should base them on the facts, as opposed to dogma,” an AT&T representative told CNET on Tuesday.

In a blog post, AT&T vice president Hank Hultquist argued that the Internet Engineering Task Force’s specifications specifically permit paid prioritization.The flap over paid prioritization started a few weeks ago when Free Press, a pro-regulatory advocacy group, sent letters (No. 1 and No. 2) to the FCC dubbing the concept “discriminatory” and claiming it will “only benefit the few content giants that have deep enough pockets to pay for favorable treatment.”

In a telephone interview on Tuesday, Free Press research director Derek Turner said that allowing paid prioritization would undercut the entire concept of Net neutrality, which had its previous legal foundation swept away earlier this year when a federal appeals court shot down the FCC’s attempt to punish Comcast for temporarily throttling BitTorrent transfers.

Since that ruling, liberal interest groups have been lobbying FCC chairman Julius Genachowski for a new set of regulations, while a majority of members of the U.S. Congress has opposed the idea.

Google and Verizon responded by announcing their own proposal, which includes a “presumption” that paid prioritization on wired networks is illegal.

“A ban on paid prioritization is the DNA of the open Internet,” Turner said. He called AT&T’s arguments a “straw man,” saying that: “What AT&T is describing is a practice that we have no problem with, which is that an end user can buy a T1 and set priority flags, and AT&T respects those priority flags.”Prioritization ‘expected’

But the designers of the protocols that make up the modern Internet had something a bit more ambitious in mind.In the late 1990s, the Internet Engineering Task Force revised those standards to allow network operators to assign up to 64 different traffic “classes,” meaning priority levels.

Free Press “wants to force consumers to be charged higher rates to pay for the construction of more broadband infrastructure than would be needed if networks could be better managed,” says Berin Szoka, a senior fellow at the Progress and Freedom Foundation, which has been critical of new broadband regulations.A July 1999 IETF specification (RFC 2638) discusses paid prioritization by saying: “It is expected that premium traffic would be allocated a small percentage of the total network capacity, but that it would be priced much higher.”

Another specification (RFC 2475) published half a year earlier says that setting different priorities for packets will “accommodate heterogeneous application requirements and user expectations” and “permit differentiated pricing of Internet service.”Today that concept of “differentiated services” is referred to as DiffServ. It’s part of quality-of-service technologies that companies like AT&T offer, usually to business customers, that rely on DiffServ packet headers to group different types of classes of service together.

Real-time voice communication may be ranked the highest, followed by financial transactions, then e-mail, and finally bulk file-transfer protocols that aren’t as sensitive to brief slowdowns.

It’s true that DiffServ markings are typically used inside corporate networks to support applications like VoIP. But a video-conferencing site that has connectivity through AT&T could presumably use DiffServ to prioritize its packets over, say, online shopping and BitTorrent transfers–and keep that priority all the way to an AT&T home customer.Which is precisely the argument that AT&T is making. In a strongly-worded letter (PDF) sent Monday to the FCC, AT&T says that the protocol specification “in no way limits the use of DiffServ to packets marked by ‘end users,’ as opposed to content providers or network operators.”

“The (FCC) should view with healthy skepticism the opinions it receives on technical Internet matters from an advocacy group with no demonstrable expertise or operational experience in those matters,” AT&T’s letter says. “Paid prioritization over Internet access is not, as Free Press maintains, some lurking future menace that would pervert the intent of the IETF.

To the contrary, it was fully contemplated by the IETF.”Free Press’ Turner disagrees. “DiffServ was not designed to be a tool to allow the network provider to drive application-level discrimination,” he says. He says that his organization will send a letter to the FCC by Wednesday explaining its position.


Frash, the iOS Flash workaround for iPhone and iPad

by Josh Lowensohn

Like many, I was excited at the prospect of Frash, a new third-party tool that cropped up this past weekend for jailbroken iPhones and iPads thatadds Adobe Flash compatibility to these devices.

The add-on, which was created by development firm Comex (makers ofjailbreaking tool JailbreakMe.com), is in its early alpha stages, so it’s unfair to compare it to say, something like Adobe’s first-party efforts withits beta on Google’s Android. But after using Frash for the past three days, I’m impressed.

Yes, it crashes a lot, and yes, it’s incapable of doing most videos, or any sort of Flash games, which are arguably the two main reasons to get Flash onto an iOS device. However, for something as simple as loading up a restaurant menu, or a Flash-only splash screen that clicks through to an HTML site, Frash has the makings of an invaluable tool.

But even with jailbreaking now legal in the U.S., is it worth the related risks such as:

• Voiding your warranty agreement with Apple
• Relying on a vulnerability that was patched by Apple on Wednesday
• Trusting software from an untested source?


Motorola and Verizon To Launch TV Tablet, Report Says

Ian Paul, PC World

Motorola and Verizon To Launch TV Tablet, Report SaysRumors of an Android-based tablet from Motorola and Verizon have surfaced claiming the 10-inch device may be on store shelves by the fall. Motorola’s tablet would be a direct competitor to Apple’s iPad. But unlike Apple’s tablet, you would be able to watch television on the Motorola device thanks to integration with Verizon’s FIOS digital TV service, according to the Financial Times.

The Times doesn’t provide any detailed specs for the tablet, but does say it would support Flash video–another feature the iPad lacks. The 10-inch device would also have a rear-facing camera for taking snapshots and a front-facing camera for video conferencing. You would also be able to turn the tablet into a Wi-Fi hotspot, according to the Times, suggesting the device would likely have 3G connectivity provided by Verizon.

Reports have been circulating for some time that both Verizon and Motorola are planning Android-based tablets. In May, Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam told The Wall Street Journal the carrier is collaborating with Google to produce an Android tablet that will compete directly with the iPad. McAdam did not say anything about a partnership with Motorola during the interview.

Later that month, Motorola co-CEO Sanjay Jha said during an investor conference that Motorola was working on “a companion 7- to 10-inch device…as an augmentation to your TV experience.” The Motorola exec also said to expect the new tablet “in a very short period of time.” Jha did not mention a partnership with Verizon.

An Android tablet from Motorola and Verizon could be an exciting prospect. Especially if the device is able to stream live television and access Flash-based video Websites such as Hulu and Amazon Video On Demand. If the rumored Motorola tablet is integrated with Verizon’s digital TV service, I also have to wonder whether it will also support Google TV–an Android-based platform Google hopes will finally merge the Web with your living room television.

The device may be just rumors at this point, but a Motorola-Verizon partnership would make a lot of sense. The two companies are both heavily invested in the Android platform, and have already worked closely on popular Android products such as the newly launched Droid X. So far, there’s no word on pricing or storage capabilities for the rumored tablet.

If Motorola’s tablet does make an appearance this fall it may not be the only Android-based iPad competitor out this year. Samsung has invited the media to a press event scheduled for next Wednesday where the company is expected to unveil the 7-inch Samsung Galaxy tablet.


Feds say mobile-phone jailbreaking is OK

Jailbreaking your iPhone or other mobile device will no longer violate federal copyright law, the U.S. Copyright Office ruled Monday.

The decision, part of a process that takes place every three years, said that bypassing a manufacturer’s protection mechanisms to allow “handsets to execute software applications” is permissible.

The Copyright Office also allowed bypassing the anticopying technology used in DVDs, but only for “documentary filmmaking,” noncommercial videos, and educational uses–a ruling that stopped short of allowing Americans to legally make a backup copy for their own use, in case the original DVD gets damaged. It also doesn’t apply to making backup copies of videogame discs or Blu-Ray discs.

Apple, the maker of the iPhone, had objected to the exemption for jailbreaking phones. A letter that the company sent to the Copyright Office argued that allowing jailbreaking would result “in copyright infringement, potential damage to the device and other potential harmful physical effects, adverse effects on the functioning of the device, and breach of contract.”

Apple’s support department already receives “literally millions of reported instances of problems flowing from jailbroken phones,” the company said, and legitimizing the practice of jailbreaking would result in more malware being delivered outside of the App Store, other security problems, and even physical damage to the iPhone.

Monday’s announcement certainly counts as a political victory for jailbreaking enthusiasts and critics of the anti-circumvention portions the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, but it may not have much of a practical effect.

Apple has never sued any of its customers on grounds that their jailbreaking violates the DMCA, even though a February 2009 estimate suggested that over 400,000 U.S. iPhone owners have done so. Nor has it filed any breach-of-contract lawsuits claiming that the software license agreement was violated.

Section 2(c) of the Apple iPhone Software License Agreement (PDF) bans any attempt to “modify” the iPhone software or to reverse-engineer it.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, the San Francisco-based civil liberties group, had requested that the Copyright Office expand the number of exceptions in the DMCA, which has been a focus of controversy among programmers, hackers, and security researchers for over a decade. The DMCA broadly restricts, but does not flatly ban, bypassing copy protection technology.

“The Copyright Office and Librarian of Congress have taken three important steps today to mitigate some of the harms caused by the DMCA,” Jennifer Granick, EFF’s civil-liberties director, said in a statement Monday. “We are thrilled to have helped free jailbreakers, unlockers, and vidders from this law’s overbroad reach.”


Velocity Cruz Android Tablet: 7-Inch Display, $300

By Charlie Sorrel

Until now, the iPad has faced almost no competition. Soon, though, the Android and WebOS tablets will start to ship in bulk, and things may change. Amongst the first will be Velocity Micro’s Cruz lineup, which brings a wide-screen (16:9) tablet running Google’s Android OS for just $300.

It’s not the first Android tablet (the underwhelming, underpowered Archos 7 holds that distinction) but the Cruz is the first you might seriously consider buying. It comes from Velocity Micro, a company that makes notebooks and desktops but is probably best known for its high-end gaming PCs.

The touchscreen Cruz is flanked by an e-reader and a “kid-friendly” (read: drop-resistant) model, which come in at $200 and $150 respectively.

The Cruz tablet looks a bit like a cut-down iPad. It has 802.11n Wi-Fi, 800 x 480 pixels on the little 7-inch screen, 4-GB storage (expandable via SD-card, with an 8-GB card in the box), an accelerometer, a seven-hour battery-life and (oh Lord, can it be true?) a USB port.

The Cruz is essentially a slab of screen, which is just what a tablet should be. As such, it will succeed or fail based on its software, which is Apple’s big advantage, and also on battery life. The seven-inch screen seems like a great idea — for some, the iPad is too big — but the 16:9 ratio is a little odd for a device that can be used in portrait orientation.

Velocity Micro confuses the customer with the other options. For $100 less ($200), you can opt for the 4:3 “e-reader” which is essentially the same tablet with less memory (none built-in, 2-GB card in the box), slower Wi-Fi (802.11g) and a 800 x 600 display (yes, more pixels, but not capacitive, demoed above).

The tablets all ship Sept. 1, just six weeks away. Once we get them in our hands, we’ll see how they measure up to the iPad.


Letter from Apple Regarding iPhone 4

From Apple.com:

Dear iPhone 4 Users,

The iPhone 4 has been the most successful product launch in Apple’s history. It has been judged by reviewers around the world to be the best smartphone ever, and users have told us that they love it. So we were surprised when we read reports of reception problems, and we immediately began investigating them. Here is what we have learned.

To start with, gripping almost any mobile phone in certain ways will reduce its reception by 1 or more bars. This is true of iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS, as well as many Droid, Nokia and RIM phones. But some users have reported that iPhone 4 can drop 4 or 5 bars when tightly held in a way which covers the black strip in the lower left corner of the metal band. This is a far bigger drop than normal, and as a result some have accused the iPhone 4 of having a faulty antenna design.

At the same time, we continue to read articles and receive hundreds of emails from users saying that iPhone 4 reception is better than the iPhone 3GS. They are delighted. This matches our own experience and testing. What can explain all of this?

We have discovered the cause of this dramatic drop in bars, and it is both simple and surprising.

Upon investigation, we were stunned to find that the formula we use to calculate how many bars of signal strength to display is totally wrong. Our formula, in many instances, mistakenly displays 2 more bars than it should for a given signal strength. For example, we sometimes display 4 bars when we should be displaying as few as 2 bars. Users observing a drop of several bars when they grip their iPhone in a certain way are most likely in an area with very weak signal strength, but they don’t know it because we are erroneously displaying 4 or 5 bars. Their big drop in bars is because their high bars were never real in the first place.

To fix this, we are adopting AT&T’s recently recommended formula for calculating how many bars to display for a given signal strength. The real signal strength remains the same, but the iPhone’s bars will report it far more accurately, providing users a much better indication of the reception they will get in a given area. We are also making bars 1, 2 and 3 a bit taller so they will be easier to see.

We will issue a free software update within a few weeks that incorporates the corrected formula. Since this mistake has been present since the original iPhone, this software update will also be available for the iPhone 3GS and iPhone 3G.

We have gone back to our labs and retested everything, and the results are the same— the iPhone 4’s wireless performance is the best we have ever shipped. For the vast majority of users who have not been troubled by this issue, this software update will only make your bars more accurate. For those who have had concerns, we apologize for any anxiety we may have caused.

As a reminder, if you are not fully satisfied, you can return your undamaged iPhone to any Apple Retail Store or the online Apple Store within 30 days of purchase for a full refund.

We hope you love the iPhone 4 as much as we do.

Thank you for your patience and support.

Apple


Windows 8 leaks show Microsoft’s eyes on Apple

Although still early in the process, newly leaked documents about Windows 8 offer some keen insight into where Microsoft wants to head with the next version of the operating system.

One thing that is made abundantly clear is that Microsoft has been paying attention to Apple. In the documents, which appear to come from an April meeting with computer makers, Microsoft discusses its Cupertino, Calif.-based rival and outlines plans to offer a Windows Store similar to the way Apple distributes software on its iPhone. The documents, which Microsoft has declined to comment on or authenticate, also talk about plans to give Windows a more iPad-like response time through new power management settings.

In particular, one slide titled “How Apple Does It: A Virtuous Cycle,” talks about the need for simplicity in design. “Apple brand is known for high quality, uncomplicated, ‘it just works,’” the slide says, adding that “This is something people will pay for!”

Other slides don’t directly reference Apple, but talk about the need for a number of features popularized by its products, including the App Store, as well as a more instant-on feel.

Although Windows has continued to dominate the PC market, still holding roughly 95 percent of global market share, it faces a significant threat from mobile operating systems looking to encroach on the low end of the computer market, including the iPad and Android-based devices.

Hewlett-Packard, which originally talked about plans for a Windows 7-based slate PC in January, now refuses to say whether it will build that product and has since announced plans to buy Palm in a deal expected to close shortly. Microsoft has been working on tablets for nearly a decade and, as early as 2005, outlined the hardware trends that would enable a device like the iPad. Thus far, however, only Apple has been able to create a hit with consumers.

Among the goals outlined for Windows 8 are some features that would appear to be aimed at making Windows more competitive in this market, including improved simplicity, better support of touch and gestures, as well as support for smaller-size screens.


iPhone 5: Leaked Promo Footage

An exclusive look at the upcoming, revolutionary iPhone 5, long before the product itself hits the market. You won’t believe your eyes.


Google kills background images on home page

by Tom Krazit

Google.comBackground images were the temporary default look for Google.com before being pulled earlier than expected.

(Credit: Screenshot by Tom Krazit/CNET)

Fourteen hours into a 24-hour experiment with background imagery, Google’s home page is once again stark white.

Design guru Marissa Mayer confirmed that Google was ending the experiment early due to what she called a “bug,” which erased a link underneath the search bar on google.com that explained why Google’s famously spartan home page had taken on a colorful look. Apparently many searchers on Google.com Thursday morning missed the company’s blog post Wednesday night, and were confused and annoyed at the change, turning “remove google background” into the seventh-most-popular search on Google Thursday.

Last week Google announced that it would begin providing its users with the option of setting their own background image behind the home page, but last night it forced an image to appear for all users signed into a Google account to highlight the feature. That didn’t sit well with many grown used to Google’s clean white design, especially when Google’s explanation of why it was forcing this look vanished from the home page.

It also gave fans of Microsoft’s Bing search engine a chance to crow, given that one of Bing’s most noticeable features is a striking background image behind Bing.com that contains links to searches about the image.


Microsoft’s Xbox motion control system is Kinect

An official product shot of Kinect, formally known as Project Natal, the new motion-control system from Microsoft. The company showed it off Sunday night in a special performance in Los Angeles.

LOS ANGELES–After more than a year of speculation, we finally know what Microsoft’s new motion-control system is called. For those that have referred to it for a year as Project Natal, meet Kinect for Xbox 360.

On Sunday night, at the University of Southern California’s Galen Center here, and during a special performance by Cirque du Soleil, Microsoft finally and formally pulled back the wraps on its much-anticipated system, now known as Kinect, but originally the work of the Israeli company 3DV.

After sitting through (actually standing, as the press was placed on the floor of the arena for a couple of hours with no seats) the performance, in which the Cirque’s performers acted out and demonstrated a number of ways that Kinect can be used, my first impression is that Microsoft has hit on something with some serious potential. But at least as demonstrated Sunday, that potential hasn’t been fully realized.

It was tempting to think that Microsoft was taking Kinect a little too seriously during the performance, given the scale and scope of the event (more on that in a bit), but it’s clear that the company has a system on its hands that it plans to incorporate widely across its video gaming and digital living room environments.

And while it’s too soon to tell exactly how Kinect will be used, and what software is being developed for it–Microsoft will say a lot more Monday morning at its formal E3 press conference–one thing became clear Sunday night: with Kinect, and a sports game, and an exercise game for it, Microsoft is, among other things, putting Nintendo and its Wii, its Balance Board, its Wii Fit and Wii Sports squarely in its sights.

Clever entrance
After waiting in line for more than an hour, the thousands of people on hand for the Sunday night event were ushered inside the Galen Center. While we didn’t know what was in store, we were first taken through mock living rooms, where “normal” American families greeted us. We didn’t get to sit down, however, but were clearly being led to see how Kinect, nee Project Natal, is an integral part of the living room experience.

Everyone was then given a white poncho, with large shoulder pads, and awhile into the Cirque’s performance, I looked around the arena and had a definite sense of being part of some sort of religious revival, what with thousands of people sitting and standing together, all wearing identical shimmering white ponchos. No individuality here.

When the performance finally began, a loud, all-encompassing voice boomed out of speakers and began spelling out homilies, among them that history was about to be rewritten and that for the first time, human beings would be in control and that the machines are going to have to adapt to us.

“After 5 million years of evolution,” the voice boomed, “might the next step be the absence of an object?”

High on the walls of the arena were large digital screens, and these became the place where we were able to really see what Kinect is all about.

Far up one wall, a “real” living room was placed, and there, a “family” of mom and dad, brother and sister took turns playing all kinds of games and other experiences for Kinect. While not naming any of these games, it was clear that Microsoft was previewing what it would be showing off tomorrow.

At one point, a giant, glowing Xbox symbol rose out of the stage where the Cirque du Soleil performers were doing their thing. And on top of this stood one of the kids, who raised his arms and began to show how Kinect would mirror his movements.

The kid yelled out, “What’s your name?” And the disembodied system responded, with letters jumbled on a screen and then placed in order, “Kinect.”

A few minutes later, we saw how by walking in front of a Kinect system, your body movement is matched by that of an avatar on the screen. Then we saw how you can wave your arms to flip the pages of a large “book, “which in this case was used to embed photos Kinect was taking of the family.

Game time
And now it was time to play some games.

Standing in front of the Kinect system, the young boy began miming out the movements for a river rafting game, and high on the walls, on digital representations of giant TVs, we saw his avatar riding a raft, dipping and weaving his way down a river of rapids.

Soon, the raft morphed into a platform of sorts riding on rails and here, we saw one of the directions Microsoft and its developer partners are clearly going with Kinect: to score points, the kid had to wave his arms around in order to get his avatar to do the same and accurately hit a series of targets coming at him on different parts of the screen. If a target was high and to his left, that’s where he had to put his arms. Low and right? He had to put his arms there. And so on. This looked pretty cool, and was definitely one of the things that showed the device’s potential. It made me feel a little bit like it was Disneyland’s Jungle Cruise on crack.

Next up was a driving game, and not surprisingly, controlling the vehicle by miming a steering wheel with your hands.

The game itself looked kind of cool, and at one point, as the car vaulted high into the air on the screen, it slowed down and took on freedom of movement in 360 degrees, and was able to totally change direction and aim at a different set of targets. And then it became a flying car, with wings, which was being controlled by both the “brother” and the “sister,” each standing on one of the “wings.”

And then it was time for a “Star Wars” scene, and the avatar belonging to “dad” suddenly had a light saber in his hands, and “dad” was able to control it with nothing but his hands. First he was fending off Stormtroopers, and then, of course, it was time to battle Darth Vader.

That was all well and good for the kids and for men, but what about women? Well, then it was time for a yoga scene, and sure enough, Microsoft showed how Kinect can be used for a stylish yoga regimen, with the user’s avatar almost exactly mirroring her body motions. How exactly that will work in consumer software is not entirely clear to me, but I’m sure we’ll see on Monday.

By now I was seeing some of the strategy, and understanding how Microsoft seemed to be showing glimpses of its versions of the games and hardware that helped Nintendo’s Wii become such a hit.

The yoga demonstration and the flying car, for example, seemed to be aimed at Nintendo’s Balance Board. And then we saw a big multi-sports competition game, in which the family faced off in sports like Hurdles (jumping), javelin (throwing), bowling, beach volleyball, soccer and the 100-meter sprint. This was Wii Sports writ for Kinect.

There was also a dancing game, in which the performers showed how it was necessary to mimic an on-screen avatar’s moves precisely in order to get points–turning most of what we’d seen so far on its head, of course, in that the humans were now following the avatar, rather than the reverse.

And then, it was over.

Obviously, Sunday night’s event wasn’t meant to unveil specifics about the kinds of games that will be available when Kinect ships, likely this fall. That will come Monday, with Microsoft’s press conference. Nor did Microsoft talk pricing Sunday night.

But what it did was issue a clear challenge, both to Nintendo and its hugely popular Wii system, and to Sony, which is also working on its own motion control system, known until now as Move. Sony will likely be showing a lot more about Move–including perhaps another brand name–with its own press conference on Tuesday. And Nintendo, too, will be showing off its goods on Tuesday. So one has to wonder how it and Sony will answer Microsoft’s challenge.

My takeaway from Sunday night, as I alluded to above, is that Microsoft definitely thinks it has a game-changer with Kinect. And I surely see the potential. I hope that it will be showing a lot more on Monday, because with what we saw Sunday night, I’m impressed, but not all that much so. It was the sign of a nice addition to the motion controller wars, but not yet anything that completely upends things. And mainly that’s because nothing Microsoft showed Sunday night was all that much of a surprise. We’ve known about Project Natal for more than a year. This all seemed like obvious directions.

That might change on Monday, but unless it does, I’d have to say that Microsoft is going to have to work very hard in the coming months to live up to how seriously it is taking itself with Kinect.


M.KAP Hosting provides both businesses and individuals with reliable, professional-class, network environments to host websites, email, business applications, and other rich media content, along with personal service and support that is second to none.