Hasta La Gadget!

So, here’s the situation. The current fleet of netbooks would be rendered next to useless with Vista loaded on, but having Windows XP on there forces manufacturers to regurgitate specification lists. Rather than using the introduction of Windows 7 to fully pursue a world where netbooks can actually run around freely with 2GB (or even 3GB!) of RAM and chipsets powerful enough to open seven Excel sheets simultaneously, Intel is today sparking up its Atom Processor Developer Program. The reason? To “spur a new wave of applications for… netbooks, with support for handhelds and smartphones available in the future.” Call us calloused, but that sounds a lot like a company pushing for “lite” software that functions on sluggish hardware.

Granted, we know that’s not exactly the case here — after all, even we wouldn’t argue that some applications could benefit from being re-written to operate on a 10.1-inch display — but it still feels like Intel’s pushing software programmers to cater to underwhelming hardware rather than innovating its chips to work faster and more efficiently. There’s no doubt that this feeling is compounded by just how long we’ve been waiting for a new wave of Atom CPUs, but at long last, we digress. The program actually has quite a few positive merits, such as striving to “reduce overhead and streamline the creation of new applications” for smaller devices — something that would benefit every user regardless of processor. So far, both Acer and Dell have voiced their support for the program, giving us at least a modicum of reassurance that the Aspire One and Mini lines aren’t vanishing anytime soon. Hit the read link for the glorified details, if you’re into that type of thing.

[Via jkkmobile]

Filed under: Software

Intel Atom dev program launched, seeks to inspire netbook-centric applications originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:48:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Didn’t Microsoft’s Xbox 360 Elite just drop to $299, like, three weeks ago? Yes, yes it did. Evidently that cut just wasn’t deep enough for Microsoft (or else it had a change of heart following the release of Sony’s $299 PS3 Slim), as the Redmond mega-corp has today lit up a new mail-in rebate program to bring the cost down to $249. Consoles purchased between today (sorry, Monday shoppers!) and October 5th are eligible, and it’s anyone’s guess as to what’ll happen to the 360 lineup come October 6th. So, is Santa coming early for anyone this year, or what?

[Via Major Nelson, thanks Logan]

Read – Rebate page
Read – Microsoft release

Filed under: Gaming, Home Entertainment

Microsoft kicks out $50 rebate for $299 Xbox 360 Elite originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:19:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

We assure ourselves that words will never hurt us, but they can cost a lot of time and money when it comes to trademark battles. Take the story of Daniel Kokin, who is continuing to fight Apple over a three-letter word: Pod.

Not iPod, mind you — just “Pod.” For nine years, Kokin has been developing a video projector, whose body design he feels is best described as a pod. His “Video Pod” projector would display video from a DVD player and other multimedia equipment, but not an iPod.

In 2007, Apple filed an opposition blocking Kokin’s registration of the Video Pod trademark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and Kokin (pictured right) decided not to back down. Thus far his efforts are paying off: USPTO recently denied Apple’s motion for summary judgment, meaning the two parties must finish this battle in court in front of a judge.

“After a careful review of all of the evidence, on the record presented, we find that there are genuine issues of material fact remaining for trial,” USPTO said in a statement (.pdf). “Accordingly, the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment on opposer’s likelihood of confusion claim are hereby denied.”

Winning the rights for the Video Pod mark is far away and uncertain, but for Kokin, just getting to this step was a victory.

“It’s an amazing feeling, it really is,” Kokin said in a phone interview. “I’m a little guy, and for Apple to be kind of shut down at this stage, I feel vindicated. You start to question your own sanity after a while. Am I doing something wrong? Or am I at a disadvantage because I have no money and therefore I’m supposed to be wrong?”

Apple for years has aggressively pursued other tech companies using the word “Pod” in their products or company names. One example involved a San Francisco startup called PodShow, a social networking website for video podcasters. Apple in June 2008 filed an opposition to the company’s usage of PodShow. Seven months later, Apple withdrew that opposition (.pdf). (PodShow later renamed itself to Mevio to coincide with a site redesign.)

Of course, not all entrepreneurs muster up for the challenge. Apple took the same action against TightPod, an independent, one-woman business that sold protective covers for notebooks. The proprietor, Terry Wilson, later renamed her business TightJacket.

The allegations are almost always the same: Apple claims a company’s usage of “Pod” will cause confusion among consumers who have come to associate the word with the famous iPod. Apple also claims consumers will believe a product with the word “Pod” in its name is made by Apple, thus causing confusion. Apple has made the same allegations to block Kokin’s registration of the Video Pod mark.

“Like Apple’s iPod registrations and applications, the Video Pod application covers a device that is or will be used to transmit video for entertainment and other purposes,” Apple wrote in its statement of opposition (.pdf). “As a result the similarity between Apple’s marks and Applicant’s Video Pod mark and the highly related nature of the parties’ goods and services, Applicant’s Video Pod mark is likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception in the trade and among purchasers.”

A legal scuffle over a three-letter word may sound trivial to the average consumer. But Kokin’s lawyer David Herzog of Pinnacle Law Group told Wired.com it was necessary for Apple to take these actions in order to protect its trademark. He explained that Apple is concerned with Kokin’s usage of the word Pod to describe an electronic device. If Apple doesn’t challenge Kokin, then future companies will not hesitate to use the word “Pod” in their names to sell electronics similar to Apple’s. It’s a matter of insulating trademark protection by setting a precedent, he explained.

But the same goes for Kokin: If he wins, it could pave a road for entrepreneurs to more easily use “Pod” in their product or company names. That doesn’t mean Apple won’t file opposition against their trademark registrations, too. It just means if they decide to stand up against Apple, there’s a higher chance they’ll win.

Apple declined to comment on this story.

“I think Daniel’s got an excellent chance,” Herzog said. “It’s a great win because so often the appeals board grants the summary judgment. There’s no question that this is a good ruling and is certainly making Apple nervous for sure.”

For Kokin, the Video Pod has been the subject of a long, tumultuous chapter in his life. He began developing the gadget in 2000, but the entire project was delayed indefinitely because of shady investors with ulterior motives, he said. Then, when he was getting the Video Pod project moving again, Kokin received a cease-and-desist letter from Apple in March 2007, a moment he said marked a turning point in his career.

“It changed my life at that point,” Kokin said. “You have to decide a), I’m not worthy of this challenge, or b), I’m about to let this consume a tremendous amount of my time.” Clearly, he went with b.

“While we’ve won this battle, it looks like this is just the beginning of a long, protracted legal battle — a battle I’m not finished fighting,” Kokin added.

Trial dates have not yet been set.

See Also:

• Apple Aggressively Pursues ‘Pod’ Trademarks
• Apple Bullies iPhone Accessory Maker Over the Word ‘Pod’

Photo: Fr3d.org/Flickr

Step aside, Bilbo Baggins and Frodo: Here at Gadget Lab we don’t care that today’s your birthday. We’re more psyched about the 20th anniversary of the Macintosh Portable, the first portable Macintosh.

That’s right: The ancestor of those slick MacBooks we see today was a bulky, clamshell device sporting a 10-inch monochrome screen. Apple released the Macintosh Portable on Sept. 20, 1989, and it wasn’t a hot seller: It cost $6,500 at the time ($11,313 in today’s dollars), and it weighed 16 pounds. Apple, and the entire tech industry, sure has come a long way.

The tech community this week has been celebrating this important gadget’s anniversary. Technologizer has posted a teardown looking at the insides of the Macintosh Portable, and both Ars Technica and Macworld reminisce on the most significant Mac laptops in history.

So, Mac users: What’s your favorite Mac laptop? The 12-inch PowerBook G4 perhaps? The current unibody MacBook Pro? My favorite was the 12-inch iBook G3 (500MHz): As a student at the time, this machine was the perfect size and weight for me to tote around everywhere. I was quite fond of this notebook before the logicboard crapped out completely.

Photo: Vokabre/Flickr

Engineers are developing contact lenses with an imprinted electronic circuit and lights.

(Credit: University of Washington)

Contact lenses have traditionally been engineered to help the visually impaired see the world around them more clearly–to attain perfect, or close to perfect, vision.

But why not super vision? Why not a lens that could superimpose holographic driving control panels over a pilot’s otherwise normal view? Enable Web surfing on the go? Provide a virtual world for gamers that covers their entire field of vision instead of just a plasma screen?

Engineers at the University of Washington have been asking just that as they manufacture first-gen versions of the bionic eye in the form of contact lenses with an imprinted electronic circuit and lights.

“Conventional contact lenses are polymers formed in specific shapes to correct faulty vision,” writes Babak A. Parviz, an associate professor at UW who heads a multi-disciplinary group on electronics in contact lenses, in the September 2009 issue of IEEE’s Spectrum. “To turn such a lens into a functional system, we integrate control circuits, communication circuits, and miniature antennas into the lens using custom-built optoelectronic components. Those components will eventually include hundreds of LEDs, which will form images in front of the eye, such as words, charts, and photographs.”

…

Originally posted at News – Health Tech