Logitech Launches the Revue – The First GoogleTV Device

Today, Logitech launched the Revue which is their set-top box powered by GoogleTV.  This is the first of many future devices that will use GoogleTV and will initially be sold for $299.99.  I have not had any hands-on experience with the unit yet, but wanted to provide some introductory perspectives.

The first thing that caught my eye about the unit was the controller.  The original insider reports suggested that the included remote would be the Logitech Mini Controller, but Logitech chose to package a full-size keyboard instead.  The keyboard offers extensive functionality, but appears to be bulky and it looks like it would be awkward to use in practice.  The Mini Controller is available, but requires an additional $129.99 which seems extraordinarily expensive.

Continue reading Logitech Launches the Revue – The First GoogleTV Device

Set-top boxes: is simple better?

I blogged a few weeks ago about my positive experience with my new Roku, and it appears that the battle of dedicated Internet connected set-top boxes is starting again.  (Note that gaming consoles such as the XBox360 or PS3 could also be considered competition in this space.)  Specifically, Apple has announced its newly updated AppleTV, D-Link will soon be launching their Boxee device and Logitech will be releasing the Revue based on GoogleTV.  All of these boxes are designed to dominate your living room by providing access to rich Internet content.  However, the strategies used by these vendors vary.  The Revue and Boxee bring a full Internet experience while the Roku and AppleTV focus on a streamlined approach.

The living room has always been a consumer electronics battleground.  An early company targeting the space was WebTV who sold a set-top box that accessed the Internet and provided a web browsing on the TV.  WebTV’s devices were relatively complex and included a dial-up modem (limited broadband back then), a traditional remote control and a wireless keyboard.  The company was not successful and was purchased by Microsoft for very little.  I believe that the device was overly complex for the living room and did not provide a quality Internet experience.  Ironically, Logitech and D-Link appear to be following a similar path. Continue reading Set-top boxes: is simple better?

Roku: So simple and yet so useful

I am a techie and love buying new gadgets.  However, every once in a while, a device comes out that makes you think, “how could something so simple be so useful,” and this describes Roku perfectly.  It is a single purpose device designed to stream audio and video from the web.  There are no fancy LED displays or LCD remotes or flashing lights; it is a small black box that just sits there and does its job consistently and effectively.

Background

My interest in the Roku stemmed from a desire to watch movies on TV.  My cable company, Comast, offers video-on-demand, but I had been frustrated with the lack of choice and particularly in the area of children’s content.  At the same time, I had also recently become entranced with Pandora.  It is an amazing service that does a great job streaming a customized mix of music over the Internet.  The combination of these two requirements originally drove my search for an appropriate device.

My first thought was to put a computer in the entertainment center which could meet both of the above requirements and more, but the thought of having to boot something and then manage a keyboard, mouse and potentially a complex remote control was too much.  Another option I considered was a videogame system.  Most of today’s consoles serve as portals to the Internet and can stream audio and video, but the problem was cost and functionality.  These systems can be expensive and bring a whole range of videogame features which I would love , but currently have no time for.  It rapidly became clear that I needed a dedicated device, and I wanted something that would pass the wife test meaning that it was unobtrusive and easy to use. Continue reading Roku: So simple and yet so useful

Chevy Volt – A status symbol or a rip off?

This week, Chevrolet announced that their new electric car, the Volt, will initially be sold for $41,000.  The car represents a different direction for GM and incorporates a brand new electric powertrain.  This is the car that has been highlighted as the future of GM and in some cases even positioned as the savior.  However, judging by the initial pricing, I wonder whether GM will miss the mark and the US tax payers will be left holding the bag.

Background

The Volt is different from today’s hybrid electric vehicles like Toyota’s Prius, Honda’s Insight or Ford’s Fusion.  These cars use a drivetrain that relieas on batteries and a traditional combustion engine.  At low speeds, they run on batteries and the combustion engine kicks in at higher speeds or when the battery gets low.  In contrast, the Volt is fully electric and relies exclusively on batteries and electric motors for propulsion.  The batteries offer a limited range of about 60 miles and need be charged nightly.  The car also incorporates a traditional combustion engine which is used to charge the battery and will never drive the wheels directly.  The new design raises significant questions about car performance when the battery is depleted and battery life.  Since this is brand new technology for GM and they are the first car manufacturer shipping in volume, the answers to these questions are not clear.  As with all new technology, there is a substantial risk in purchasing V1.0 of anything and the Volt is clearly meets this criteria.

The current situation

Chevy will begin shipping these cars late this year, but the price is not competitive.  $41,000 is a substantial premium to the competition which better the Volt in all categories except mileage.  The following table illustrates some alternative car options and their prices. Continue reading Chevy Volt – A status symbol or a rip off?

Amazon cuts Kindle price – 3 reasons why it does not matter

Amazon recently reduced the price of the its Kindle eBook reader to $189 from $259.  This is a substantial discount, but does it matter?  Personally, I am not convinced about the benefits of the Kindle or equivalent eBook readers.  Here is why:

DRM

I am frustrated with the strict Digital Rights Management (DRM) inherent in the Kindle and other similar platforms.  I believe that protecting intellectual property is critical, but today’s DRM solutions are very limiting and are designed around the needs of the publisher not the consumer.  The problem is that there is no universally adopted DRM standard.  The Kindle’s DRM is different from Barnes and Nobles’ Nook which is different from Apple’s iBookstore.  The result is a confusing range of formats and options with limited or no interoperability.  Books purchased from Amazon will not run natively on Barnes and Nobles’ Nook or Apple’s iPad.  Amazon has tried to address this by making Kindle applications available for a number of platforms, but it still can be a challenge if you prefer an alternative platform.  As we all know, technology changes rapidly and as eReaders proliferate, there is no guarantee that your Amazon (or Barnes and Noble or iBookstore) content will work on future platforms.  This is very different from the traditional book model where you get perpetual license to a physical book and are guaranteed access to the content. Continue reading Amazon cuts Kindle price – 3 reasons why it does not matter