Hasta La Gadget!

Have you heard? Bluetooth 3.0 sounds like a fantasy spec: Wi-Fi speeds, faster response time and more efficient power usage. Here’s a quick primer on Bluetooth and why Bluetooth 3.0 is going to rock face.

Why Is Bluetooth Blue?
Let’s start at the beginning: As you probably already know, Bluetooth is a wireless protocol maintained by the Bluetooth Special Interest Group. What you might not know is that it’s actually named after a 10th century Danish king, King Harald Blatand (Bluetooth) who brought together parts of Scandanavia. This is what Bluetooth was designed to do, except it’s bringing together devices—rather than Viking hordes—with a universal wireless standard. The symbol for Bluetooth, even, comes from the runes for Harald Bluetooth’s initials, H & B.

Basic Details
Bluetooth is a short-range wireless setup design for personal area networks that rides on the 2.4 to 2.485GHz bands. The core of the radio tech is that it uses a frequency-hopping spread spectrum signal that bounces between 79 different frequencies, which makes it less prone to interference from other 2.4GHz devices in the area—you know, like everything nowadays. It’s designed to be low power, but the standard has three different classes of strength, using more power to go farther. Most mobile stuff is Class 2, using about 2.5mW power for a range of 33 feet, but Class 1 will stretch out over 100 feet meters using 100mW.

Profiles, or Where It Gets Confusing
The Bluetooth spec is a series of profiles, which you can think of like capabilities. Devices have to have compatible profiles in order to make certain magic happen. For instance, the Advanced Audio Distribution (A2DP) profile describes how to stream stereo audio, like to headphones from an MP3 player. No A2DP, no stereo. There’s a ton of them, from FTP (file transfer profile) to headset profile, which defines how a Bluetooth headset should talk to a gadget. You’ve also got core protocols, like object exchange (OBEX), which is what you lets swap files between Bluetooth devices, famously crippled by Verizon on some phones.

Bluetooth Spec Versions
• Bluetooth 1.0, in a word, sucked. The puny 1Mbps connection was split between data and voice, so you really only got about 700Kbps transfer rates (if you were lucky) and you could only tether to one device at a time.

• 1.1 fixed some of 1.0 and 1.0B’s suckiness

• 1.2 is where it started getting actually better, bringing in Adaptive Frequency Hopping to make it more resistant to interference from the constant 2.4GHz maelstrom, and Enhanced Voice Processing, so it doesn’t sound like you’re talking through a cat blender. Backward-compatible with 1.1. The original RAZR had Bluetooth 1.2.

• Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR, hello speed, goodbye power. Ratified in 2004, data transfer rates were boosted to 2.1Mbps with Enhanced Data Rate, and power consumption was cut in half. It’s the Bluetooth standard that made good headsets possible. Technically, EDR is optional, but what’s the point without it? The iPhone is an example of 2.0 + EDR, as is the HTC Touch Pro and T-Mobile’s Android G1.

• Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR added further enhancements to the Bluetooth 2 spec—better, faster pairing, with fewer steps and lower power slurpage still, depending on what you’re doing. It also adds support for Near Field Communications (NFC), for completely automagical pairing.

Bluetooth 3.0 + HS and Bluetooth Low Energy
Oh hey, you made it. The Bluetooth Core Specification 3.0 High Speed was formally adopted a week ago.

The big deal is that has crazy fast data speeds of up to 24Mbps (fast for Bluetooth, that is), thanks to the fact it piggybacks on good old 802.11 Wi-Fi radio. The standard Bluetooth radio is used for the boring, low intensity part, like profiles and whatnot, but the data shakedown happens over 802.11 when you’re doing things like wirelessly syncing music libraries, downloading photos to a printer or sending video files, so you’re only using lots of juice when you need to. Unicast Connectionless Data is a feature that’ll make devices more responsive (less lag, yo) and Enhanced Power Control will use power more smart and efficiently (so, using less of it, though transferring heavy files like whole music libraries is gonna suck on the power teet hard, obviously). No device has it now, but we should be seeing it live in the next 9 to 12 months, which isn’t a bad turnaround, considering it took 4 years for the first Bluetooth 1.0 devices to show up.

At about the same time, Bluetooth SIG revealed Bluetooth low energy technology that will let devices sip power so slowly they can last more than a year on a single battery. It’s slow like Bluetooth 1.0 and isn’t voice capable, but will be super useful in monitors and sensors and those kinds of gadgets, letting them connect to bigger computers and whatnot.

So that, in a nutshell, is the wacky world of Bluetooth. See, it doesn’t have to be just used by douchey business guys.

Still something you still wanna know? Send any questions about why the sky is blue, evil clown dentists or how Coke rots your teeth to tips@gizmodo.com, with “Giz Explains” in the subject line.

When I hooked Digeo’s Moxi HD DVR up, I told my wife it’s like TiVo, and she said, “Then why don’t we just use TiVo?” After several weeks testing it, I have no good answer.

If you’ve never heard of Moxi or Digeo, you are forgiven. Although the company has been making set-top boxes for almost a decade in one form or another, this is the first time Digeo is selling a Moxi box to consumers directly. There are rollouts of similar-looking Moxi cable boxes in smaller markets across the US—the chance is slim that you have one, but if you do, you’re damn lucky, because they are a hell of a lot nicer than any of the crap Motorola or Scientific Atlanta DVRs that cable companies usually foist on their highest-paying customers.

But the question here is unfortunately not, “Is Moxi better than a cable box?” even though the answer to that question is, “You know it.” The question is, why should I buy one of these instead of a TiVo? And the answer is, at the moment, you probably shouldn’t.

Price Breakdown
When the news came out, some people bitched about the price, but the truth is, Moxi HD does sit somewhere between the two comparable CableCard-compatible high-def TiVo models. It’s got a 500GB hard drive, bigger than the 160GB on the $300 baseline TiVo and smaller than the 1TB found in the $600 TiVo HD XL. Once you factor in service, it’s pretty much exactly on par:

• Moxi HD is $800 up front, or four $200 payments, or 20 monthly payments of $40.
• TiVo HD is $300 plus $300 for three years of service up front (more if you pay a la carte)
• TiVo HD XL costs $600 plus the same service pricing, so if you pay for three years of service up front, it costs $100 more than Moxi

In the rear, they are very much the same. Both Moxi and TiVo deliver HD video over HDMI, take a CableCard tuner from any cable company, and can have expanded storage by way of a drive attached to the eSATA port. The difference lies in the interface, and in the internet-based services that each box offers at the moment, always subject to change.

Note: I realize that I have left out CableCard-compatible Windows Media Center PCs. As a fan of the Media Center platform, I didn’t do this by accident. It’s just that we have yet to see a cool-running quiet set-top PC marketed widely to average users for a reasonable price that can compete with TiVo or Moxi. When that product comes along, you better believe it will be in the running.

Interface
The company that builds the Moxi has been talking about their interface since the beginning of time, and even brags about an Emmy it won for it. I can see why. It’s a fun interface, a refreshing change from candy-colored ca-plop ca-plop ca-plop TiVo menu that you might well be sick of by now.

The interface operates a bit like Sony’s Xross Media Bar PlayStation interface, with icons running along a horizontal bar. Whenever you pause on an icon, Recorded TV, for example, you instantly see a vertically aligned list of choices, in this case, all the programs you’ve recorded, grouped by show and listed in alphabetical order. Point to a particular show grouping, and suddenly each episode appears to your right, and you can move over to them and select the one you want. In most cases, it’s a fluid experience.

My beef on the interface is that there are things you must learn that aren’t readily obvious, and are not helped by the design of the remote. The Zoom button turns out to be the most important button on the whole thing, but you wouldn’t know it from being so tiny. Zoom brings you in and out of the overlaid Moxi interface, unlike the centrally positioned Moxi button, which does, well, something.

Button confusion is combined with redundant motions or inconsistent behaviors. For instance, sometimes the back button will get you out of things, but sometimes it will not, and you are required to hit OK. You can move forward (right) or back (left) along the main icon menu, but if you pause, you can no longer move right, because that takes you into a new menu, so you have to left-arrow your way out if you want to keep looking at the icons. Hitting OK when you land on an icon is a no-no as well, since that takes you to secondary options: The thing to do when you get to the icon you want is to freeze. Usually. If you’re confused by all this, welcome to my first week with Moxi.

You can get over a lot of the confusion by learning the behavior, but I don’t remember ever having to learn TiVo behavior, or even having to look at the TiVo remote, which I have to do a lot with Moxi. My final frustration with the interface is one that may be remedied soon. There isn’t great customization. I don’t know how to sort recorded shows by date, and there are too many icons in the main menu for things I couldn’t give a fig about, and there’s no way, at the moment, to hide them.

Note: I shot that one-handed while a cat was pounding into my arm, begging for lunch, so pardon the helter-skelter framing.

Services
The big deal with set-top boxes these days—not just cable boxes but Blu-ray players too—is connected services. Everybody wants Netflix, Amazon On Demand, Rhapsody, Hulu, YouTube, your mom’s private video stream (just making sure you’re paying attention). Officially, Moxi only has Rhapsody and Flickr at the moment, but unofficially, by way of a special Windows background-server app, it has all of the above and more.

PlayOn (normally $40 but Moxi gives you a “free” product key when you buy one) lives on your Windows PC, using it to access Netflix and Amazon as well as Hulu, CBS, YouTube, ESPN and CNN, to grab video from the services and pop it up on the Moxi screen. Now, as you might imagine, some of it looks like ass, and because of the double bottleneck—internet-to-PC then PC-to-Moxi—quality suffers and there are lots of hiccups. But in theory, with the ideal all-ethernet setup, you can immediately make your Moxi do more than a TiVo can now.

PlayOn The Moxi also yanks vids and stuff from your PC or other servers on your network. Like anything else, though, there’s limited file compatibility, and I’m not a fan of the interface. I could get it to see H.264 video on a network drive, but it couldn’t play them. And although the manual says you can stream H.264 video from a computer that can decode them first, I couldn’t find any of the media files I had on the PlayOn test PC for some reason, probably because it didn’t have Windows Media Connect or other server software running. (Side Note: Don’t be like me—don’t rip your DVDs in H.264.)

I think even if the PlayOn service worked half as well as it had inside my head, I’d be happy, but the Moxi service in general still felt buggy, like it was still in beta, even though I am assured that it is not. In addition to the expected occasional trouble with CableCard (some as a result of my moving houses), I have experienced more mysterious problems. Even now, the system occasionally restarts spontaneously, and I can’t go two days without noticing chunks of time missing from my favorite shows, like they’d been hand recorded by Richard Nixon.

Other connected perks do work nicely. Like TiVo, you can program it over the web, and that worked instantly, so much so that it was my preferred way to add shows, because I could just type in their names, and pick recording preferences afterward. I will give a special shoutout to the Ticker, which, once you figure it out, lets you browse news reports and other text feeds while watching shows. It’s great, but I’m still not comfortable turning it on and off. (Apparently, more practice is needed.)

So I end as I began, with a strong interest in Moxi and the need for new TiVo competitors, but with the gnawing feeling that however much Moxi can advance, TiVo has a head start it will be able to exploit for years to come. I love that there are more entrants to this field—Moxi’s “enemy” as it were is not TiVo but the total crap cableco DVRs that both are striving to replace. That said, though, you can only have one, and I think I’m going back to TiVo, old-school menus, silly sound effects and all. [Product Page]

In Summary

Interface look is refreshing change from TiVo, with lots to do while watching TV PIP

PlayOn capability technically means it has the most web video options available; Ticker great for news, sports and weather

Price up front is daunting, even though it’s on par with TiVo pricing when you factor in service

PlayOn server software not the easiest to work with, only runs on Windows, and internet connection can be very sluggy.

Remote button layout is confusing; important buttons are not clearly identified

There’s nothing majorly wrong with Apple’s MobileMe service. All of its subsidiary pieces and parts—the email, the syncable calendar and contacts, the photo gallery, the online storage—do fine. So why doesn’t it make sense?

Apple has every right to be proud of the fact that it got its act together, and everything that was all herky jerky back in July 2008, when the $99-per-year MobileMe launched, is now working as billed. The push email shows up immediately, if you use your me.com account. Ditto for the push contacts and the push calendar, though you can’t use web cals like Google’s or Yahoo’s if you want to be super synced. The gallery works great; as a dad I upload tons of pictures and videos to the MobileMe gallery right from iPhoto, but with iPhoto ’09, I can upload them to my free accounts at Facebook and Flickr too. There’s even iDisk, a smoothly integrated 20GB cloud storage service, which now has a public drop box for file sharing, just like YouSendIt. And if you have a time capsule NAS/wireless access point, you can remotely access your disk using mobile me, as well as use back to my mac remote desktop control. (The service tracks the dynamic IPs of all your machines, so each machine can always keep track of the others.)

Maybe you’re catching on to the real problem here. It’s not just that you “free” junkies who read Gizmodo wouldn’t be caught dead paying $100 for anything but a 50″ flat-panel TV. It’s that the service itself is made up of many pieces you already have. This presents a complicated economic argument: If you already have an online photo gallery and a free or company-given email account that you like and use, why would you pay to have those things twice, just to get contact syncing for your phone and a decent online storage system. Wouldn’t you go find a less elegant online storage system for a lot less money, and content yourself with syncing your phone to your computer’s address book every couple of days?

I said that the service worked as billed, and it does. My favorite component is the contact syncing, because anytime I add anything on my phone or my computer, the two are instantly in sync. But I’d achieve the same result, with less magic, if I remembered to sync my iPhone every so often.

I did have one problem with contact syncing, but I bring it up mainly to tell how easy it was to fix: I had imported a bunch of contacts from email accounts online, and some contacts got corrupted along the way. I had 18 contacts, out of 250 or so, that wouldn’t sync from Mac to iPhone or MobileMe web portal. The fix was easy: Go in and change something about the entry, like adding the person’s company name or a fax line, even their kid’s name. As soon as you tweak the entry, boom, it gets uploaded.

Most other exchanges in MobileMe have been without incident, even exporting my Google Cals in a big bunch, then manually importing them into iCal from time to time. But the very fact that I use MobileMe for some services and free web apps for others, and the fact that I am in many cases the one making sure everything talks to everything else, underscores the point I’m making, that MobileMe is a confederacy of programs that have nothing to do with each other.

In the end, even after it’s working well, it’s difficult to recommend for two reasons: The money, which I’ve sufficiently covered above—a hefty sum when contrasted to free web-based simulacra—and the compatibility, not with your device “ecosystem” but with everybody else. Who uses iCal or Me.com mail? Google wins those battles for sure. Even though I swear by MobileMe Gallery, most people I know prefer Flickr, or just Facebook.

There’s a solution. Apple could offer some things for free, and some things cheap. Just bought iLife ’09 or a new Mac? Guess what, you get to upload your photos to a MobileMe Gallery. Buying an iPhone? Syncing your contacts and calendar is a $2/month add-on. I think iDisk could easily be a success at $25/year, all by itself, as long capacity goes up each year automatically based on capability. It’s not like these component parts have anything to do with one another anyway.

My mother-in-law recently switched to a Mac after eons on a PC. I looked over her shoulder as she was placing the order, and when we came to the part where she could get MobileMe at the low introductory price of $70, she asked me if she should. I thought for a second, and realized the answer was no. I may keep her grandkid’s pics on MobileMe Gallery, but she’s perfectly happy with Picasa, and there’s a beta version of that for the Mac out now. For free. [MobileMe]

It’s not the first. It’s not the fastest. It’s not the lightest, the strongest, the cheapest, or even the best looking electric motorcycle out there. It is, however, one of the very few you can order today and, when it ships next month, ride it (legally) on the highways and byways of all 50 states. Europe, too. Among that very limited group the Zero S electric supermoto (or electrimoto as we’ve taken to calling it) is certainly a standout, completely custom-built around battery and motor, and we were lucky enough to take it for a spin on a hazy, dingy, frequently traffic’d New York City side street — just the sort of conditions a two-wheeled urban warrior/commuter relishes. Read on for our full impressions and a video that will take you along for the ride.

Continue reading Engadget shreds on the Zero S all-electric motorcycle (with video!)

Filed under: Transportation

Engadget shreds on the Zero S all-electric motorcycle (with video!) originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:08:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Do you ever stop to realize that another human being carefully conceived and designed every object you will touch today? It’s a pretty amazing thought, and after Objectified, you’ll be thinking it more often.

And that’s exactly the point. Like Helvetica, director Gary Hustwit‘s previous documentary triumph about the most prevalent typeface on earth, Objectified sings the praises of those very people who, while not necessarily under-appreciated, definitely operate in the background—they design your stuff. It’s a secret little world, and through Objectified, we get to live in it.

Take this lamp I bought at a flea market last weekend. I Googled the only thing on the bottom that would identify it (“WINDSOR L-10”) and got zero relevant results. It’s old, pre-internet for sure, so I wasn’t surprised. But who designed it? It’s so tiny and Wall-e like (essentially a hybrid of Wall-e himself and the task lamp Pixar uses in their logo)—I want to know more! Someone designed this, and I love imagining the moment of its conception.

My lamp only cost $15, so odds are it wasn’t designed by any of the überheavyweights featured in Objectified: There’s Apple’s Jonathan Ive, Smart Design (of Flip Video fame) founders Davin Stowell and Dan Formosa, the legendary Dieter Rams of Braun, the folks at IDEO (who designed the first laptop, among many other things), Naoto Fukusawa (father of the Infobar), Chris Bangle, the infamous (and former) chief designer of BMW, and many others. It’s a star-studded group. Also featured prominently is Rob Walker, who writes my favorite New York Times column “Consumed” in the magazine every Sunday—he is a joy in every scene he is in, including where he dreams of an ad campaign encouraging people to got out and use and be satisfied with the stuff they already own.

But what’s great (and where Helvetica also ruled) is that Hustwit is a master interviewer. He gets his subjects to speak about what can be a jargon and marketing-voodoo laden industry with total clarity and comfort that folks that didn’t go to design school can comprehend freely. Ive, holding up the single aluminum block from which a unibody MacBook is hewn while trying to control his massive biceps, speaks about how designers are ultimately obsessive, borderline neurotic people. He can’t look at an object anywhere without seeing the multiple layers of intent involved-who designed it, who it’s designed for, what it does well. To Ive, it’s an illness.

To others, it’s desire. Marc Newson, who designs everything but is famous especially for aviation-related like the EADS spaceplane, puts it this way: “I want to have things that don’t exist yet,” which I think we can all relate to here.

One place where Objectified gets somewhat tripped up is in its hesitance to boldly define the inherent conflict of the designer, especially now: good design should last and improve with time, which is often directly opposed to the interests of a commercial designer’s clients who want people to keep buying things. This theme does come up in the film, but where Helvetica had the postmodernism vs. modernism conflict-in-a-bubble at its heart, which served as the perfect organizational structure to not only be entertaining, but to also school everyone in design theory, Objectified lacks a similar conflict by which everything can be defined.

I was disappointed to not see more of the good design vs. capitalism conflict mainly because it’s going to be the most important concept in gadget design over the next few decades—not only for the environmental concerns, but because software is more than ever the representation of a gadget’s heart and soul. This is not a new concept: when fondling the Grid Compass (the world’s first laptop computer he helped design), Bill Moggridge of IDEO says it only took a few seconds for the user experience to be completely about the software interface on its 320×200 screen, with the hardware dropping away almost completely. And he designed it! As an interesting contrast, Naoto Fukasawa explains that in Japan, interactions with a tangible object are much more important, culturally, to the Japanese. Which makes sense when you see the horrid software being run by such a beautiful phone as the Infobar.

This concept also fits snugly in with a designer’s environmental concerns—since software doesn’t fill up a landfill, having hardware that can be re-upped to latest and greatest status over the web makes the earth happy too.

This choice to not hang the whole film on this idea was of course a conscious one, and it probably ensured a broader, more appealing film in the end. I just missed the elegance of everything fitting together into nice ideological halves in Helvetica.

But when judged alone, Objectified gets the job done beautifully and does for industrial designers what Helvetica did for graphic designers: lets us step into their frame of reference and greater appreciate, or at the very least notice, their omnipresent work.

Trailer:

More info: objectifiedfilm.com