Engadget posted a compelling editorial by Brad Hill this week regarding the cord-cutting trend. Hill is VP for audience development at AOL and former director and GM of Weblogs, Inc.
Some 2.65 million cable subscribers decided to get rid of their service between 2008 and 2011, reports Hill. Since 1.5 million of those decisions were made in 2011 alone, it seems that the cord-cutting trend is accelerating.
There are a few “emergent consumer requirements” according to Hill. One is the ability to watch TV off the traditional scheduling grid. This of course means having recording capabilities. The second is a demand for à la carte programming purchases, or not having favorite cable channel shows lumped into a large package with other unwanted channels.
But cutting the cord isn’t without its problems. “This realm is infested with provider irregularities,” notes the post. “For example, Hulu is available on Roku, but not on Boxee. YouTube is widely distributed to media streaming boxes, but not to Roku. Multiple intermediaries create uneven match-ups between those four programmers and the main box builders (Roku, Boxee, Apple TV, Google TV).”
Hill compares this to what the music industry went through during the MP3 revolution, perhaps predicting the future of cable.
“The music industry’s lack of resilience during the MP3 revolution illustrated stress fracture points,” explains the post. “Record labels tried to enforce the single-path model — CD purchases, in that case. That wasn’t à la carte enough for the playlist generation, so albums were, to an extent, exploded by single track sales. Then music ownership was redefined by subscription plans (a little bit) and social music platforms (a lot).”
Hill suggests that inflated cable bills, resistance to tiered pricing and content bundling, and “coercive herding of users into one content delivery path, reinforced by the rumored cable authentication model” could push toward disruptive alternatives.
“The cable cord-cutting movement is not yet a rampage, but it is a trend, and it is growing,” he concludes.
The stop-motion technique has traditionally created an array of production challenges for Hollywood animators, something that may dramatically change thanks to a new technology.
The notoriously slow process is experiencing an update with the advent of 3D printing, which is helping animators shift from mechanical to computer-based animation. Engadget recently visited LAIKA’s facility in Oregon (formerly Vinton Studios) to learn how the new technique was successfully used to produce “ParaNorman.”
In mechanical animation, animators adjust gears and paddles beneath the skin of the models to create different expressions. But in 3D printing animation, the animators can print interchangeable faces for the models.
The animators for “ParaNorman” used 3D printing to create 1.5 million different expressions for their protagonist. They originally used the technology in the film “Coraline” in which the protagonist could display 200,000 expressions.
The animators in “Coraline” had to hand paint each of the printed expressions. But new technology allowed “ParaNorman” animators to use Photoshop to display color models of the expressions.
The studio believes it has only scratched the surface of what could come from 3D printing in stop-motion animation.
“I think it’s a huge quantum leap on multiple levels between ‘Coraline’ and ‘ParaNorman,'” says Brian McLean, director of rapid prototyping. “At the time, ‘Coraline’ was the pinnacle of stop-motion animated films and I think that ‘ParaNorman’ has just risen the bar that much further.”
South Korean researchers have developed a new method to view 3D movies without glasses. The research was recently published in The Optical Society’s Optics Express.
In traditional 3D theatrical displays, we know that projectors shoot two images onto the same screen at the same time. 3D glasses help separate the images, only allowing one image in the left eye, and the other image in the right eye.
There are some glasses-free 3D displays on the market, such as those used for Nintendo’s 3DS handheld game system and the HTC Evo 3D smartphone. But using a similar technique theatrically would require rear projection — an obstacle for most theaters.
The South Korean research team’s system uses a “special array” to polarize the light as it leaves the projector. The method also uses a filter to partition the screen into different sections.
“The trick then is to have the light visible to your left eye contain the left-eye pixels and vice-versa for the right eye,” explains Wired.
But the blocking of light in different parts of the screen causes low screen resolution. Despite this problem, physicist John Koshel still believes many theaters will eventually adopt the technology since it is less expensive than using multiple projectors, and people will enjoy not having to wear glasses.
“This technology is still in its infancy, but it’s a new step that was hidden for a long time,” explains Koshel.
“High frame rate (HFR) cinema isn’t here yet, but it’s one of the most talked-about topics in the media and entertainment space,” notes Debra Kaufman for Creative COW. “But how many frames per second is ideal? How does HFR cinema change the workflow and the bottom line?”
A group of experts met for a panel during the recent SIGGRAPH conference in Los Angeles to discuss “why we should be excited by the opportunities of HFR cinema and what we can expect in day-to-day production and post workflows.”
“The higher the frame rate, the more realistic the image, and even more so with 3D,” said pioneer Douglas Trumbull. “My interest is in hyper-cinema. By combining 3D with extremely high frame rate on an extremely large screen at extreme brightness, the result is more like live performance. This offers a new interesting unanticipated opportunity to make movies that are like live events. The viewer is in the movie, on the adventure.”
HFR advocate James Cameron screened test footage of identical content comparing 24 fps, 48 fps and 60 fps versions. His producing partner Jon Landau explained that HFR technology can raise the impact of both 2D and 3D experiences.
“We want to find technologies that disappear and transport the audience more into the narrative story,” said Landau. “We thought 3D was one step in that direction. We have a responsibility as filmmakers to continue to push technology to tell stories in better ways, to tell stories that couldn’t be told before and to drive people out of their homes into theaters.”
ILM visual effects supervisor Dennis Muren experimented at home by playing Ray Harryhausen’s stop-motion animated film “The 7th Voyage of Sinbad” at higher rates and noted how motion looked more natural and characters looked less artificial. He also experimented with TV commercials at 120 fps.
“I think HFR is a great tool,” Muren said. “It’s closer to reality. You can always filter the camera or cut it back, all the things that cameramen have done to take the curse off video. But the audiences can connect more. Add 3D on top of that and you’re there. I’m a big proponent of it.”
The panel discussed the history of frame rate experimentation and the cost and production considerations that led to 24 fps as a standard for film. The group also addressed current experimentation and how dramatically new the possibilities are in a digital process. Additionally, obstacles were addressed, specifically the potential massive amount of data involved with HFR production.
“The enthusiasm over the possibilities of HFR cinema was tempered by some of the impact on VFX and post production toolsets and workflows,” reports Kaufman. “But if the past — including the recent past with the adoption of 3D — is any indication, this won’t hold anything back.”
Reaction to the upcoming 48 fps screenings of Peter Jackson’s “The Hobbit” will be influential, suggests Kaufman: “If audiences are enthusiastic, everything will fall into place: studios will greenlight HFR projects, some directors will enthusiastically embrace it, hardware and software vendors will come out with the technology to handle it, and the VFX and post houses will deal with the consequences, as they always have.”
We should expect a decline in network television coverage of this year’s national political conventions, but a dramatic “gavel-to-gavel” increase in Web streaming.
Online video will move to the forefront as the top four broadcast networks compete with new rival start-ups such as Politico and The Huffington Post to cover speeches and events live via the Web.
The Internet will take center stage when Republicans convene in Tampa, Florida next week and Democrats the week after in Charlotte, North Carolina.
“NBC, in fact, is likely to forgo prime-time TV coverage entirely of the Democratic convention the night of Wednesday, September 5, when it is contractually bound to air the kickoff game of the NFL season between the New York Giants and the Dallas Cowboys,” reports the Wall Street Journal.
“This year, more than any other cycle, we are going to reach millions more viewers in ways other than just television,” said Marc Burstein, senior executive producer for special events at ABC News.
There will also be some interesting social tie-ins as more audiences are expected to access coverage via smartphones and tablets than TVs.
“Time magazine, for example, has formed a partnership with Foursquare, a location-based mobile check-in service, for the conventions, in which Time has provided content that users can unlock when they get to certain locations in Tampa and Charlotte,” notes the article.
“CNN has joined with Facebook Inc. to gather political sentiment from its users. Bloomberg has teamed up with Event Farm on apps to simplify ticketing to events at the conventions. Other organizations, including National Journal, have launched their own apps to help visitors navigate the conventions.”
VentureBeat recently took the new Cadillac XTS sedan for a test drive and reports on the company’s CUE (Cadillac User Experience) digital system.
CUE has an in-dash display with 8-inch capacitive LCD touchscreen and a heads-up display on the lower part of the windshield.
“It’s kind of a space-age experience, dubbed ‘car infotainment,’ that gives us a glimpse of the future of cars and technology,” notes VentureBeat.
CUE lets you call up your favorite radio stations and phone numbers. Up to 60 favorites can be reached with one or two finger gestures.
“Points of interest can include any locations, like your home and work addresses, the best gas station, the nearest grocery store, and other places that you go to often,” notes the post. “If Starbucks is your favorite coffee place, you can tap on the Starbucks favorite button and it will call up the nearest places.”
The system includes a 1.8-liter storage space under the dash with USB for charging your iPhone or calling up your music collection on the dashboard screen. You can easily access apps on the screen (Android phones can also connect via Bluetooth).
“Navigation works particularly well with CUE. If you have a map showing you turn-by-turn navigation, the lower part of the menu will fade out and disappear if your finger isn’t near it,” explains the review. “This gives you a bigger map screen to view, helping you navigate better by minimizing distractions. You can pinch and zoom on the 3D map to focus on a particular spot on the map. Points of interest, weather, and your Onstar safety system are also easily accessible.”
Those who want to avoid the touchscreen while driving can opt for voice commands via Nuance speech recognition technology.
CUE, powered by a three-core ARM11-based processor, comes standard in the new Cadillac ($44,075-$61,805).
When hackers attacked Wired senior editor Mat Honan’s data, they targeted iCloud, Google and Amazon. But while these cloud-based services served as the gateway into his technological life, Honan believes that the cloud also became his digital “salvation.”
Honan argues that although he has been a happy Apple customer for 20 years, the lack of cloud security disgusts him. Apple IDs are too easy to reset, he argues.
After days of struggling to recover Twitter, Gmail, and various other tech accounts, Honan finally stopped the remote wipe of his MacBook data with the help of Apple support.
Honan suggests local backup for data, writing that when “you control your data locally, and have it stored redundantly, no one can take it from you. Not permanently, at least.”
He also champions the cloud. “Because I use Rdio, not iTunes, I had all my music right away. Because I use Evernote to take reporting notes, everything that I was currently working on still existed. Dropbox and 1Password re-opened every door for me in a way that would have been impossible if I were just storing passwords locally via my browser,” he explains.
But Honan cautions that even when consumers take steps to protect themselves, they are still vulnerable if companies do not increase security. He writes that Amazon, Google and Apple are not alone in their lack of security.
“We don’t own our account security,” he concludes. ” And as more information about us lives online in ever more locations, we have to make sure that those we entrust it with have taken the necessary steps to keep us safe. That’s not happening now. And until it does, what happened to me could happen to you.”
The three companies responsible for the virtual production tools used in “Avatar” — James Cameron’s Lightstorm Entertainment, Peter Jackson’s Weta Digital and vfx software maker Autodesk — are working together on sequels to the Oscar-winning film, pushing those effects to the next level with new developments.
“In looking toward the next ‘Avatar’ films, we wanted to be able to work with higher efficiency, see changes on the fly and have a lot less downtime,” says producer Jon Landau.
“It quickly became obvious that filmmakers wanted tools for a virtual camera, a new way to efficiently capture large files in real-time and a tool that allows a director to load virtual sets, explore those sets and then makes changes or adjustments on the fly,” notes Variety.
“They’re now all present in Autodesk’s MotionBuilder 2013 package, after Autodesk set up a system with Lightstorm and Weta that allowed them to experiment and update the software by incorporating quick feedback from the set and the computer screen, says Bruno Sargeant, senior product manager for virtual production at Autodesk.”
“As a result, filmmakers using the system can immediately view playback of actors within their digital environments and see everything exactly as it will appear on the screen,” explains the article.
Pre- and post-production needs continue to blur together as technology advances. It’s increasingly important for companies likes these three to work together and for different departments to work on a given film at the same time, making on-the-spot changes.
“The goal is to make production in virtual space even more filmmaker-centric, according to Landau. In other words, to allow easier interaction between director and thesps, enabling the helmer to quickly make decisions about what is and what is not working in the film’s virtual environment,” according to Variety.
Three months ago, Forbes contributing writer Eric Jackson wrote an article projecting that Facebook and Google would not exist in their same mighty, dominant capacities in about 5-8 years time, because of the rapid rise of mobile commerce and activity.
At the time, he didn’t write much about Amazon, a company also vulnerable to the desktop-to-mobile shift. A powerhouse of online shopping, how will Amazon fare within the new landscape where people access shopping sites through mobile devices rather than desktops?
While Amazon and other giant companies are banking on the fact that people will access their sites on mobile devices in the same way they would on computers, evidence shows that’s not always the case.
“The reality is that we shop differently with our mobile devices compared to how we shop from our home office PC. The commerce companies who succeed will be the ones who understand the important differences and cater successfully to either the PC buyers or the mobile buyers (or both),” writes Jackson.
Jackson says it’s not about deals, but about immediacy and accessibility. There need to be opportunities for a shopper to take a photograph of a wanted dress and immediately identify the designer and where to purchase it online. It’s also about location and discovering deals close by.
Jackson notes that Pinterest and Etsy have promising mobile commerce models. He also extends congratulations to eBay for its quality iPad app and mobile commerce plan thus far.
Even so, Jackson predicts that it’s a yet un-invented mobile commerce app that will truly revolutionize the market. “My guess though… is that whoever is the leading mobile commerce app on smart phones and tablets for the next 15 years will get a pretty big valuation,” writes Jackson.
In mobile, it’s Apple. In social media, it’s Facebook. But in the world of search, Google’s biggest rival is Amazon and the online retailer poses a big threat to Google’s main business, reports the San Francisco Chronicle.
“Google is a search company, but the searches that it actually makes money from are the searches people do before they are about to buy something online,” the post explains. “These commercial searches make up about 20 percent of total Google searches. Those searches are where the ads are.”
Compared to searching products on Google, which requires weeding out links and inputting credit card info on various e-commerce sites, Amazon offers a more seamless approach with an easy cart and checkout process — with credit card information saved.
On mobile devices, Amazon’s app could prove even more dangerous for Google’s smaller-screen search.
“If you have a Kindle phone, which comes with free movies and books because you have an Amazon Prime account, which also gives you free shipping, why in the WORLD would you ever search to buy something through anything but Amazon? You wouldn’t,” the article surmises.
“That’s why Amazon is practically giving its hardware away. It’s also why Amazon scares Google more than anything Facebook or Apple are up to.”
“Outline transition plan for new CEO. Discuss potential candidates and process,” states a confidential internal memo dated in July, and obtained by Variety. The three-page document reportedly details how two of Hulu’s parent companies, News Corp. and Disney, plan to transform the streaming service.
“Whether that plan will be carried out with or without CEO Jason Kilar, whose future at the joint venture has been the subject of speculation for nearly two years, is the question,” reports Variety. “But sources caution that no search committee has been hired nor have other candidates been approached for his job. There have been preliminary talks between Kilar and Hulu board members about his future, but without resolution.”
The article notes this is an example of the “central tension gripping media conglomerates today as they juggle the often conflicting interests of growing the brands of tomorrow while still protecting existing revenue streams.”
A management buyout of Providence Equity Partners, another Hulu owner, is expected to close in September. The buyout will allow Hulu execs with vested shares, including Kilar, to cash out. The change in ownership structure could also lead to significant changes in content licensing agreements.
“As tremendous a payday as the one likely coming to him next month, he’s likely to be richly rewarded for sticking it out and growing the company to the point that could yield greater upside down the line,” the article points out regarding Kilar. “That said, his owners remain concerned he has enough money coming to launch a new vision elsewhere.”
According to Variety, the memo also outlines potential amendments to programming:
1) “No more exclusivity for current-season content once restricted to Hulu and the networks’ respective websites. Now Disney and News Corp. can turn around and license programming to another third-party, i.e. YouTube, which could dilute Hulu’s competitive advantage in the marketplace.”
2) “No more content parity. ABC.com and Fox.com will be able to hold back certain content to differentiate their own sites from Hulu, which was once entitled to everything on the networks’ sites.”
3) “Exclusive ‘super-distribution’ rights Hulu once retained to syndicate content to third-party sites like Yahoo and AOL would revert back to Disney and News Corp.”
In the wake of a federal ruling that online video viewing is protected by U.S. privacy law, Hulu could face millions of dollars in damages for transmitting consumer information to third parties.
The suit alleges that the video-streaming service forwarded viewing information of its users to Scorecard Research, Facebook, DoubleClick, Google Analytics and QuantCast.
“In a proposed class-action against Hulu, U.S. Magistrate Laurel Beeler ruled the Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988 applies to Hulu,” reports Wired. “The popular video-streaming service… argued that the 1988 act, passed to protect video store rental records, did not apply to streaming services.”
“The question is whether the mechanism of delivery here — streaming versus bricks-and-mortar delivery — ends this case at the pleading stage,” wrote Beeler. “Hulu’s remaining argument is only that it is not a ‘video tape service provider’ because the VPPA does not expressly cover digital distribution (a term that did not exist when Congress enacted the statute). Given Congress’ concern with protecting consumers’ privacy in an evolving technological world, the court rejects the argument.”
Congress adopted the VPPA in 1988 after Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork’s video rentals were published in a newspaper. The act requires consumer consent for disclosure of such information, something that may not suit today’s digital approach to media.
“Netflix is lobbying Congress to alter the law, seeking to allow its customers to automatically share their viewing history on Facebook or other social-networking sites,” explains Wired. “Music streaming services allow this feature, but the Video Privacy Protection Act forbids it for video.”
“The Hulu privacy case is now one step closer to trial, and the question of who can share your video playlist is about to break wide open,” suggests ReadWriteWeb in a related post. “The VPPA, the argument goes, puts video streaming businesses at a serious disadvantage on the social Web, especially when you compare them to, say, audio streamers like Pandora and Spotify.”
“After fighting the patent battle of the decade in court with Oracle, Googlers are getting publicly fed up with software patents as a whole,” reports VentureBeat. “Conceptually, they just don’t jive with innovation, two prominent Googlers have said recently.”
Google’s public policy director Pablo Chavez says patent wars are “not helpful to consumers. They’re not helpful to the marketplace. They’re not helpful to innovation.” And Google isn’t just sitting back and complaining about the problem; they’re taking action.
By filing amicus briefs, pushing for reforms, and working with other anti-patent tech companies, Google hopes to reinvent the patent system to better suit innovation.
“For example, currently patents have a 20-year shelf life; Google thinks this could and should be shortened. The company also advocates for strong financial penalties for lawsuit-losing patent trolls and against the patenting of abstract concepts that are only patented in the first place because they’re executed online,” the article explains.
Internet pioneer Vint Cerf (who invented the TCP/IP protocol and is currently VP and chief Internet evangelist at Google) jokingly suggested at a cloud conference that shooting the patent lawyers would be a logical step in creating the next big tech to replace the Internet. When the laughter subsided, he explained: “Bob [Kahn] and I knew we could not succeed if we tried to protect the Internet’s design. As it turns out that worked out really well, and I think that’s still pretty good advice.”
“The open ability to develop new applications and try them out has been vital to the Internet’s growth and to the space in which we currently operate,” added Cerf. “It has interesting ways of enhancing both sides of the equation.”
Google won its case against Oracle, but Android patent suits are still prevalent. “Ironically, just last Friday, Motorola Mobility and Google filed their own patent suit against Apple, asking for an import ban on all Apple devices,” notes the post.
Closing arguments are likely to be held this week in a potentially groundbreaking lawsuit that could impact how tablets and smartphones look and work.
As previously reported on ETCentric, Apple is seeking $2.5 billion in damages from Samsung for alleged patent infringement, while Samsung has countersued for $422 million.
“After nearly a month of testimony in the legal dogfight between Apple and Samsung over patents, the two parties are expected to make their closing arguments on Tuesday,” reports The New York Times. “It will then be up to jurors to hash out which Apple patents, if any, Samsung stepped on when it created devices that compete with the iPhone and iPad.”
Should Apple win, Samsung and others will likely start designing smartphones and tablets that look very different from Apple’s products.
However, a win for Samsung could have the opposite effect. “Expect to see an awful lot of Apple knockoffs without fear of retribution,” says Michael Gartenberg, an analyst at tech research firm Gartner.
“Although Apple sued Samsung, the outcome of the case has broader implications for other companies that create devices based on Google’s Android operating system, along with Google itself,” notes the article.
“Apple wants an order permanently barring Samsung, the largest maker of Android smartphones, from selling products in the United States that violate its patents. A legal victory against Samsung could give Apple extra ammunition in lawsuits it has filed against other Android makers,” explains NYT.
While some reports suggest Samsung has been on the defensive much of the trial, analysts have suggested the outcome may not swing fully in one direction or the other.
Jorge Contreras, associate professor of law at American University, predicts a “mixed result” — with Apple winning a few of its claims and losing others. Contreras suggests Apple has better footing with its claim of infringement on design patents for the iPhone and iPad, but has a challenge in proving claims regarding “utility patents” that address various software functions.
Irish start-up CloudVertical has been analyzing how customers use Amazon Web services, VMWare and Heroku and concludes that most companies do not come close to fully leveraging the resources they pay for.
CloudVertical CEO Ed Byrne explains that the problem does not affect one demographic, but rather “from companies spending less than $50,000 a year to those spending millions, people are only using about 30 percent of the resources they pay for.”
“This is really remarkable considering that for the past decade, the sales pitch for virtualization has been ‘physical servers only get about 30 percent usage,’” he notes.
Byrne recommends that CFOs analyze “capacity, usage, and cost” to effectively determine if they are making the most of their cloud storage options. “The cloud is not pay-as-you-go but pay-as-you-provision. People still fire up lots of servers and leave them there,” he says.
According to Google, most CFOs think they are effectively using the cloud, as 58 percent of surveyed CFOs said cloud computing reduced IT costs and 96 percent reported quantifiable benefits from cloud computing (VentureBeat cautions that the second number may be skewed by the fact that Google included Gmail under its definition of “cloud services”).
Byrne hopes CloudVertical can help solve the “lack of transparency and accountability” present in the cloud computing marketplace. “Most often compared to Cloudability, Byrne insists that CloudVertical’s real competitors are enterprise tools like IBM’s Tivoli or HP OpenView,” reports VentureBeat.
