Galaxy S III Mini indicates Samsung’s hero strategy works

Now that the Samsung Galaxy S III Mini has been confirmed, the first question you should be asking yourself is this: if the original was too big, will this device be just right? It’s exactly that that Samsung wants you to be thinking – even though the components inside this “Mini” version of the device may be rather different from the original, it really depends on your perspective whether or not you’ll accept the Samsung “Hero” branding that’s taking place here. It worked with the simultaneous launch of the Galaxy S III on multiple carriers in the USA with the same model and name intact – will the “S III” magic continue forth with another nature-toting smartphone?

With the Samsung Galaxy S II, the company made a giant mistake sending out different devices to several different carriers with different names on each of them. Now Samsung retains the good points of having multiple different devices – they made the Galaxy Beam, after all – while they keep one great hero collection in-tact. With the Galaxy S III Mini, a built-in fanbase can be accessed.

Samsung has created a device in the Galaxy S III that works with a variety of 3rd party apps that support sharing. We’ve seen these apps appear on several devices since the Galaxy S III appeared – and in some cases, they existed on devices before the S III as well – but now that the one hero has them, the lesser devices will follow. Have a peek at this hands-on with the Galaxy S III’s sharing abilities and expect them to appear on the Galaxy S III Mini as well:

S-Beam

AllShare Play

Camera Sharing with Share Shot and Buddy Photo Share

Now if you’ve got the Galaxy Note II, the Galaxy Note 10.1, the Samsung Galaxy S III, and the Galaxy S III Mini, you’ll be able to share – almost without exception – back and forth between them with near-exclusive abilities. Sound like another company you know?

This is the way you go big in the smart device industry today – exclusion under the guise of value-added features. Let us know if you feel the same way, and be sure to stay tuned for the Galaxy S III Mini as it either follows the slipstream created by the Galaxy S III or it fades into obscurity.


Galaxy S III Mini indicates Samsung’s hero strategy works is written by Chris Burns & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


AT&T’s team up with IBM is exactly the jolt “the cloud” needs

If you’re hesitant to work with your data stored in this ephemeral location called “the cloud”, you’re not alone – but AT&T and IBM have announced a team-up today that’ll send a shock through the market that’ll have masses of users converting. When you’ve got a new technology – or any technology that people may be hesitant to use in general – your best bet in making people adopt it is to prove to them that it’s reliable at the same time as it is either fun or helpful to use. To do that you need brand power and better yet, cross-brand power like AT&T and IBM are demonstrating this week.

AT&T has announced that they’ll be pushing a global network that users will be able to utilize with cloud-stored data available from anywhere they may roam. IBM is part of this deal with the actual physical data-storage facilities – that data’s gotta be somewhere, after all. These two titans will split revenue from the deal, with Andy Geisse, head of AT&T’s unit for business clients noting simply that this collaboration will be “huge.”

If you’ve got AT&T, one trusted brand, and IBM, another trusted brand, joining in on one cross-branding project, their mutual trust for one another will blossom and grow in the public eye, providing a bit of synergy, as it were. AT&T is one of several of the largest mobile data providers in the United States, each of them competing now with not just a collection of the best of the best devices, but services that work for these devices unique to the carrier as well.

With IBM on AT&T’s side, the other carriers will be forced to move forward with their own “cloud” solution. It’s not going to be easy to match up against IBM, one of the world’s best-known brands both in and out of the data storage universe.

Are you convinced of the security provided by a crossover project like this? Will you use The Cloud now that a team-up of this caliber has been made available?


AT&T’s team up with IBM is exactly the jolt “the cloud” needs is written by Chris Burns & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


A Samsung Nexus 10 won’t solve Google’s tablet problem

Google, if the rumors are true, has turned to long-time Android supporter (and arguably the only OEM really making a success out of Android) Samsung for the next Nexus tablet, and unlike the budget Nexus 7 it’s a direct challenge to the iPad. Blasting past Apple’s “Retina” boasts with a 10.1-inch, 2,560 x 1,600 display, there’s no doubting that such a slate would be a joy to the eyes, but it’ll take more than ribald resolution to address Google’s lingering Android tablet problem, and no amount of fancy Samsung hardware can do that.

Android has never had a device problem. Some of the most innovative and boundary-pushing hardware we’ve seen of late is running Google’s OS: fast chips, impressive screens, superlative connectivity; capable cameras; a smorgasbord of options to suit your hand, and pocket, and wallet. That’s not to say there isn’t innovation going on elsewhere – Apple keeps churning out compelling devices, and I’ve had a soft-spot for a while for Nokia’s PureView tech – but suffice to say you could never accuse Android of lacking in pure gadget appeal.

The Nexus 7 was compelling, then, not because of its hardware, but because of the balance it represented between specs and price and capabilities. A sub-$200 tablet with a highly usable screen, sure it lacked some of the bells & whistles – like a rear camera – but ASUS and Google had good excuses for their absence, and the promise that when Jelly Bean gets replaced, Nexus 7 owners will be quickly treated to the next version.

At its launch, I speculated that Google’s goal with the Nexus 7 was to encourage consumers to begin paying for apps rather than relying on free, or ad-supported software. Google’s $25 of free Play store credit was contingent on registering a credit card or other payment option, for instance, and the Nexus 7 was delivered already linked to the buyer’s Play account. Android users have long been known as favoring free apps to a greater extent than iOS users, and Apple hasn’t stinted from rolling out those “average spend” stats whenever it can.

The Nexus 7 had another purpose: encouraging Android developers themselves to create more applications for the platform. Not just any apps, though: software for tablets.

“Giving out a free tablet and hoping apps follow isn’t a new strategy”

Giving out a free tablet device and hoping apps follow isn’t a new strategy; in fact, Google tried it itself at I/O in 2011, a year before. It was Samsung doing the honors with hardware too, funnily enough, in the shape of the original Galaxy Tab 10.1 (complete with a fetching limited edition Android-themed back panel). “Go, take our slender Honeycomb tablet” was Google’s message, “and reward us with applications so plentiful they knock the iPad into a cocked hat!”

Unfortunately, things didn’t quite go to plan. Honeycomb proved underwhelming, just like sales of the Android tablets running it, and then the Ice Cream Sandwich update was slow to appear, and finally – by the time Jelly Bean appeared on the horizon, looking smooth and compelling – Samsung decided it wasn’t going to bother updating the Galaxy Tab 10.1 any more anyway. All of those developers carefully prepared with hardware, only to discover that they couldn’t test their apps on the latest version of Android unless they installed it via unofficial routes.

The end result is, well, little change from the state of Android tablet app play 18-24 months ago. At a time when the App Store is flourishing with apps for the iPad, the Play market is still all too often smartphone-centric in its wares. It’s still hard to put together a convincing list of tablet apps that show off the best of Android hardware.

In the meantime, we’ve had no shortage of clever, unusual Android tablets to choose from. We’ve seen removable keyboards and digital pens; accessories and add-ons Apple has never bothered with. And, with third-party developers apparently so reluctant, manufacturers like Samsung and others have stepped up with apps to take advantage of those features themselves, and in the process increased the likelihood that the tablet will be delayed in getting the next version of Android fresh from the Google spout.

Any Samsung launched under the Nexus brand will have pure Android as Google intends it, but that also means none of Samsung’s own app handiwork to fill in the gaps. All buyers will have to play with is what’s in the Play store today, and the bulk of that is software intended for phones. The Nexus 7 could get away with it because, at a pinch, an embiggened Android smartphone app looked okay on its 7-inch screen. On a Retina-slaying Samsung super-slate, with 10.1-inches to play with, that’s simply not going to fly. Google needs to figure out how to wake more developers up to Android tablet apps, or the Samsung Nexus 10 is only going to emphasize how poorly prepared the platform is.


A Samsung Nexus 10 won’t solve Google’s tablet problem is written by Chris Davies & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


Nokia Lumia Windows Phone 8 hero branding key to success

With the exclusivity of the Nokia Lumia 920 on AT&T announced at the start of this Windows Phone 8 generation of phones, the future seemed to dim a little for the company’s chances at taking on the rest of the market in the USA. When the Nokia Lumia 810 was announced this week for T-Mobile, it instantly became apparent that Nokia wasn’t limiting its wares to one carrier – not at all. With rumors abound that Verizon will be in the mix soon as well, we’ve got a real collection of Nokia device out to take on the USA – will it be enough to keep users interested in the Windows Phone 8 universe?

It’s absolutely vital that Nokia push their graphic design prowess on this launch – they’ve got no lack of knowhow in this arena, and compared to even Apple, they’ve got top-class sharpness in the flat advertisement arena. But without a single message, Nokia will once again fail to capture the full attention of the public. Nokia has an opportunity to center themselves on one spot and let the Lumias sell like mad – “Nokia Lumia: Colorful, Powerful, Smart.”

With advertisements on every corner, repeat messages on major web hubs, television, and even in print publications, Nokia would be able to sustain the environment necessary to create faith in the consumer. Then Microsoft comes in. If Microsoft would provide coverage throughout its own advertisement spread, the Lumia universe could grow.

Each time you see a Windows 8 computer, you should see a Windows Phone 8 device – and not just any Windows Phone 8 device, a Nokia Lumia. Although to be fair, it will be difficult for many consumers to tell whether they’re seeing a Lumia or a Windows Phone 8X – we’ll see how that pans out over the next few months.


Nokia Lumia Windows Phone 8 hero branding key to success is written by Chris Burns & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


How Will Bill Gates Be Remembered?

Apple co-founder Steve Jobs was a special person. He was able to combine some of the finer elements of the industry into products that made users worldwide drool. And along the way, he established himself as one of the most important figures in the technology industry. To say his contributions to the industry were significant would perhaps be too simple a summation of such an important figure.

A year after his death, Jobs was celebrated by consumers worldwide, giving a clear indication that although his company is now under the leadership of someone else, he will never be forgotten.

But all of the remembrances and tributes make me wonder how other prominent technology giants will be remembered. More specifically, I’m wondering if Bill Gates, a technology icon in his own right, will be remembered in the same way as Steve Jobs.

At first glance, there should be no reason Gates doesn’t earn the same respect and idolatry of Jobs. After all, without Bill’s decisions, we might not have Windows, the PC market wouldn’t be as advanced as it is today, and it’s hard to say how the corporate world would be operating. It’s easy to say that someone else could have come up with everything Gates did, but they didn’t. And his position as a tech icon has been cemented because of that.
“Without Bill’s decisions … it’s hard to say how the corporate world would be operating.”
But Gates wasn’t always as beloved as Steve Jobs. For a long time, Gates was viewed unfavorably because he was the richest person in the world. And in the late 1990s when Microsoft was at the height of its power, Gates was viewed as the evil leader that dominated other companies.

Now, though, things have changed a bit. Microsoft is no longer the big, brooding company that it once was. And although it’s still generating billions of dollars in revenue each quarter, it’s largely an afterthought in an industry dominated by Apple and Google.

Moreover, Gates is no longer running Microsoft, and long ago left day-to-day operations at the company. Gates is now a full-time philanthropist. And his contributions to the world and the people who are in need of help is nothing but commendable.

Still, I can’t help but wonder how Gates will be remembered. On one hand, I think that he might finally get his due as a technology icon after his death when people take an honest look at his contributions and the economic activity they spurred.
“Gates was great and all… but he wasn’t Steve Jobs.”
At the same time, I can’t help but shake the feeling that Gates inspired enough distaste among critics over the years that even over time, he won’t be viewed on the same level as Steve Jobs. Gates was great and all, those critics might say, but he wasn’t Steve Jobs.

Of course, the debate over whether that’s true or not will last forever. And chances are, no one will be able to arrive at a consensus. But if we can agree on anything, it’s that Gates did contribute quite a bit to the industry. And if nothing else, he should be remembered for that a long ways from now when the old guard gives way to the new upstarts.


How Will Bill Gates Be Remembered? is written by Don Reisinger & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


The iPad mini will be free: here’s why

In a world where the cost of some technology is hotly debated and is completely dismissed for others, it only makes sense that Apple would release the iPad mini for free. I wrote a column back before the iPhone 4S was release called Why the iPhone 4S will be free – turned out it wasn’t the iPhone 4S that ended up being free, but the iPhone 3GS – and that was indeed the first time any iPhone was offered up for free in a sales structure that remains today (with the iPhone 4 in that position at the moment). Apple will bring this structure to the iPad universe too – but it wont wait for its oldest models to fall into the $0 position to make it happen.

With the iPad mini being created with parts that add up to a price that’s far less than the iPad, iPad 2, or iPad 3, Apple will have the ability to subsidize. Apple will not do this, however, as it does not follow the equation that’s been working for them for a handful of very, very good years for the company. Instead you’ll once again see an iPad that costs more to buy with a data connection than it does to purchase without.

In the future there will be an iPad that’s free – the iPad mini could be that tablet. Apple could find a way to securely offer wireless data to the device that only works with their digital services – iTunes, the App Store, and iTunes Match (with its yearly cost still in-tact, of course). If Apple is able to offer data for free in such a way, they’d have a device that’s leagues ahead of the competition.

The Google Nexus 7 is a fun tablet, so is the Amazon Kindle Fire HD, but they’d be crushed by an iPad mini if it were offered for even $50 above their base cost. Their sales won’t necessarily slack once the iPad mini is released – if it’s ever revealed, that is – but sales of an iPad mini with Apple’s ecosystem intact would draw in the masses – including the die-hard Apple fans that, for whatever reason – haven’t been able to pull the trigger with the larger iPad.

At $249 USD, a 7-inch Apple tablet with essentially any specifications (within reason) would sell millions of units in pre-orders alone. If Apple is able to work with carriers to offer the iPad mini on a 2-year data contract (as is standard with most smartphones and data-connected tablets today), Apple would break all iPad sales records, top to bottom. Free (even on a data contract that consumers would have to pay for month-by-month) would just be too good to pass up.

Would you agree to a free iPad mini if it were tied to a 2-year mobile data contract?

Be sure to check out the small iPad mini timeline below to get an OK idea of what the device may be bringing to the table and hit our Apple portal to keep up to date with all things iPad in the future!


The iPad mini will be free: here’s why is written by Chris Burns & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


Three iPad mistakes the iPad mini needs to fix

Though Apple hasn’t confirmed (nor denied) the existence of the iPad mini, the flurry of excitement surrounding the release of such a device quite recently makes this a perfect time to discuss what features a small iPad could fix. It’s not as if the iPad (the 3rd generation, that is) has a whole lot wrong with it at the moment – it’s far and away the best selling tablet-form device on the market, not to mention the best-selling iPad in the history of the iPad line. But what we’ve got here is the idea of the iPad made more accessible by the masses – the public that, believe it or not, can’t quite figure out why they’d pay $500 USD for a device that they might accidentally drop when they’re getting up from the couch.

Three elements are at stake here – three features could be modified to a degree that would make everyone on the edge of buying an iPad pick one up in miniature form – then there’s the school factor as well. What about cost? What about the ability to do work? Let’s see what we can fiddle with here with a smaller form factor.

1. Weight

With a smaller iPad comes a lighter iPad. Again, not that the iPad as it exists now is entirely too heavy, but a tablet that wont bust through the screen of my MacBook Pro when I drop it from a foot above it on accident, that’d be better. Of course there’s always the human factor in play – most devices would smash through a display if thrown hard enough.

But here’s the clincher: if the iPad mini is significantly lighter and the size of a standard book, not a textbook, then the device would blast through the e-reader ranks. At that point it doesn’t matter if any or all e-readers have next-generation technology, perfect e-ink displays and amazing readability, they’re just not an iPad. The brand power of the Apple universe remains.

2. Cost

No matter how you spin it, there’s a giant cross-section of people out there that either cannot afford an iPad or can’t justify spending the amount of cash an iPad costs on a device that they don’t necessarily need. Apple needs to attack this massive pile of people. With an iPad mini that cuts costs in a major way would open a door in the same way that the iPod touch does for those unwilling to go the extra mile to pick up an iPhone.

If Apple releases an iPad mini that costs $249.99, I will literally stay up until midnight whatever night they want me to stay up just so I can buy one. I wouldn’t even necessarily keep it – I’m perfectly happy with my iPad 3 – but I know quite a few people in my life that wouldn’t mind getting one as a gift, and at that price it’s just not something I’m going to say no to.

Of course a much lower cost also opens the door for schools to grab hold of the tablet universe. We’ve spoken about low-cost tablets several times before, Android spearheading that movement because it’s free to implement – but with Apple having an opportunity like this, it may be time to jump back into the education business.

3. Free Data

This is my wish, for the most part – and it’s not like it’s going to happen, but here’s the case: it’s already been done. Tablets already exist out there with “free” 3G internet connectivity, that connectivity subsidized by advertisements. Apple would never do that. What they would do – what they could do, someday, is limit the internet connectivity to the iTunes store and App Store exclusively. I’m not sure how that would work, but it has to – it will.

Have a peek at the timeline below to see additional iPad mini bits and pieces and see if you can put the puzzle together before the big event – if and when it happens!


Three iPad mistakes the iPad mini needs to fix is written by Chris Burns & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


Could Google+ Eat Evernote?

Information is pointless if you can’t find it when you need it. That’s the ethos that has driven search engines like Google just as it has “digital notebook” services like Evernote, and it’s also the reason why Google+ could eat Evernote’s lunch if it put its mind to it. With the news of Facebook’s one billion active users, questions as to how Google+ will compete with Zuckerberg’s empire have inevitably surfaced; of course, the best way to stay relevant is to offer something completely different altogether.

While both Facebook and Google+ are social networks, they take very different approaches. Facebook is about friendly sharing: inviting people into your digital life, and dipping into theirs. Google+, in contrast, sits at the hub of all of Google’s services, each of which is focused on a different type of data: email, documents, music and videos, photos, and more.

I’ve been an Evernote user for years now, and a Google+ user since the service opened its virtual doors in mid-2011. Like many, I’ve been relying on Evernote as a digital aide-memoir, a place to gather up thoughts, lists, books I might want to buy, music I might want to listen to. I’ve drafted articles and reviews in Evernote on my phone while sitting on buses and trains, then picked up where I left off in the desktop version. I’ve even relied on its clever OCR – which can pick out text in photos and make it searchable – to store business cards, snapping them with my phone’s camera for easier recollection than digging through a physical stack later.

“I just want to be able to find my data quickly”

It’s proved its worth both because it’s convenient and because I’m lazy: I don’t want to have to remember which device my information is stored on, I don’t want to have to remember to synchronize when I get back home, I just want to be able to find data quickly later. In recent weeks, though, I’ve found myself bypassing Evernote and using Google+ for many of those tasks instead.

For those who haven’t used it (or who have turned the feature off), the Google+ app for Android and iOS automatically uploads photos and video you capture with your phone and tablet to a private album. From there you can share it easily, either publicly or to specific circles you’ve set up; or, as I’ve been doing, you can keep it private but use it as a simple way to keep track of information.

In bookstores, I’ll snap a shot of the cover of a book that I might want to check online reviews of later, or I might grab a photo of a particular wine bottle, or a DVD, or an advert; anything I might think I’ll be interested in at some point in the future, but know will slip from my memory before I’m home again. I know Google+ will automatically upload it and it’ll be waiting for me, not only in the browser on my computer, but pushed into the Google+ album in the gallery on all my Android devices.

I could snap a photo with Evernote, but I’d feel obliged to tag it, or sort it into a notebook, and that’s more than I want to do when I’m out and about. Still, Evernote’s organizational systems are far more advanced than those of Google+, since it’s set up to handle sorting and recalling huge amounts of information.

That needn’t always be the case, however. Google has all of the constituent parts to make an impressive alternative to Evernote, building on different aspects of services already on offer. Text and handwriting recognition are already used by search, able to find results in PDFs and translate the scrawl of a finger on your smartphone display: they could just as easily pick out text in snapshots of book jackets and billboards. Evernote’s notebooks could find their equivalent in private Google+ circles: individual ways to gather together content that could – but not necessarily – be kept private rather than shared.

Where Google+ has the potential advantage over Evernote is how integrated it is into our daily lives and the services we rely on, not to mention the social aspect. My photos of business cards currently wait in an Evernote notebook for me to search and find them; Google, meanwhile, could pull out the text and automatically slot it into my Gmail contacts, then sync that with my phone. It could also fill in the gaps based on what it knows about the person: things that won’t fit on a 3.5 x 2 inch card, like a Google+ bio, or a list of sites that person contributes to and samples of the recent content they’ve produced.

Those books I’m curious about, or adverts I’ve spotted, could be recognized with the same technology that powers Google Goggles: then I can automatically see reviews, and the cheapest place to buy them. Maybe there’s a QR code on the advert, something I probably won’t scan at the time – it always seems to be the way that the billboards with QR codes I see are when I’m underground on the Tube, with no signal to look them up – but which Google+ can quietly look up for me itself, and use that information to flesh out what I see when I come back to review my gallery of gathered images. After all, it already knows that I must be interested in that topic, since I’ve been curious enough to take a photo of it.

“I needn’t solely rely on Google’s opinions, I can crowdsource”

Of course, Google+ is a social place, and so I needn’t solely rely on Google’s opinions before I make a decision: I can crowdsource it. I’m probably not the first person to ask, either, so if the ensuing discussion is done publicly, Google+ could easily bring together those multiple conversations so that everybody gets the benefit. Google knows masses about me and the sort of people whose opinions I particularly trust – it reads my email, after all, and it sees who I interact with most and what I click on regularly – so it could make sure the most useful tidbits simmer up to the top where I’ll see them first.

I, like a lot of people, am lazy with how I collect my data – heck, sometimes I just email myself something I need to remember, and hope it’ll be somewhere near the top of my inbox when I next open it up – but I expect great things in how I then consume it. Evernote is a brilliant digital alternative to the notebook, but my life has moved on from collating snippets of information through which I’ll browse later on.

If Facebook is about sharing the minutiae of our lives and hoping our friends comment on it, then Google+ has an opportunity to do something new, to bridge our interests and our expansive digital memories and help us process them in meaningful ways. Evernote may get caught in the crossfire, but I doubt I’m the only one who’ll follow the path to the service that helps me get most done with the least effort.


Could Google+ Eat Evernote? is written by Chris Davies & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


Can there ever be another Apple?

I often look at Apple and what it has been able to accomplish over the last decade with amazement. Who would have thought that a technology company – especially one that was extremely close to failure – could become the world’s most valuable firm? But Apple has. And with over $100 billion in cash on hand, the chances of it going back to the old days of failure and despair seem unlikely.

[Original image: Photon_de]

Still, Apple’s meteoric rise from obscurity to household name is by no means unique. Several companies over the years have been able to land themselves at the top of the corporate world with a proper combination of innovation and outstanding leadership.

Realizing that, I can’t help but wonder if there will ever be another Apple. I’m not saying that the next Apple will be another company that builds smartphones and tablets, but one that can see the future and deliver it now.

Of course, many Apple fans would say that there isn’t any room for another Apple. After all, the company has the innovative insight to deliver the latest and greatest products already. And with enough cash on hand to buy up, well, just about anybody, Apple can insulate itself from losing ground to another firm.

“Apple might be big and popular, but it’s not invincible”

But holding such beliefs on the ultimate power of corporations is a dangerous game. Major companies can be huge and powerful, but a few wrong moves, and they will fail.

Make no mistake – Apple might be big and popular, but it’s not invincible.

So, that’s precisely why I think there can be another Apple. In fact, I’m a firm believer that there eventually will be another Apple. The company will find a way to innovate beyond what others in the industry have. And with a loyal following, it might just be able to surpass what Apple has achieved so far.

That said, I have no clue what company will be able to be the next Apple. And as much as I’d like to see a startup climb its way to the top of the technology world, I’m starting to think more and more that the next Apple will be a company that has already solidified its position as a trustworthy vendor in the marketplace. The way the industry works at this point, there’s really no easy way to reach the top without an already trusted brand behind it.

Still, it’s possible. Apple might own the mobile space for the next several years, but what’s to say some other company might not do something similarly special in the living room? Or perhaps a firm will come along that transforms how we use computers. It’s easy to say that no more innovation is possible beyond what Apple can deliver, but such claims are nonsense. This is the technology industry. With the right mind and enough cash, anything is possible. And to not believe so is to not acknowledge how far we’ve come over the last few decades.

Apple is special. Apple is impressive. But it’s not the end. And we must all remember that.


Can there ever be another Apple? is written by Don Reisinger & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.


PlayStation Mobile shackles Sony to gaming past

In the announcement for the PlayStation Mobile store and environment released this week by Sony is a clause that’s rather tiny and is disguised as a perk: three devices allowed for each game. In the past, back before the smartphone, this sort of note would have been amazing – you mean I can play this game on my PlayStation at home as well as at my cousin Joe’s house? Amazing! Now here in the present, three devices is a limit that Sony shouldn’t be working with.

As the gaming universe very, very reluctantly starts making its way into the mobile environment, limits in play continue to appear here and there. A feature for the PlayStation Vita is cross-compatibility with some games between it and the PlayStation 3. Cross-compatibility for a game between smartphones and tablets should, by all means, be a given by now. With the PlayStation Mobile environment, you can play a game you purchase on three devices and that’s it – once you’ve played the game on your tablet and your smartphone, you get one more choice.

For a lot of people, this isn’t a problem. If you’ve got a smartphone and a tablet, you’re probably going to have those devices for some time to come. If you purchase a smartphone, you’re likely nailed in to a 2-year contract with your mobile carrier, and a tablet isn’t something you buy more than once a year – if that. What the PlayStation Mobile rule of 3 does not account for is the ever-growing multi-device-owning public.

I should not be counted as I’ve got more devices in and out of my hands than most people will ever touch as a product reviewer – but given the current release schedule for products at less than a year between one device and its upgraded version (see: HTC One X+), it’s not out of line to assume people are switching devices much more often than the 2-year lock implies. It must be then that Sony wants to work in the old world, one where the idea of piracy being so important that they limit the devices on which a game can be played for the legitimate multi-device-owning public.

And that’s your first-world problem opinion for the day. Do you own more than three devices that you’d like to play the same game on? Let us know!


PlayStation Mobile shackles Sony to gaming past is written by Chris Burns & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.