Hulu Got Offered For Sale - Not Google. So Who?!

Hulu got an offer for sales.  According to Business insider, tweets from CNBC and WSJ (they're very close to each other) indicated that Google is not the company that made the solicitation.  

So, if not Google, then who?  I know people want to think that it's Apple or Microsoft.  I doubt it.  Between the two, I'd said it's more likely Apple but even that's not likely.

I think Facebook makes more sense.  It has shown interests in video streaming with its own endeavors but I think they've largely been major fails.  

Also, in contention could be cable companies.  They're stuck in the Dark Ages of cable video and getting Hulu could also be a route for the company to avoid becoming dumb pipes for broadband.

Whoever it is, it figures going after Hulu is cheaper than buying Netflix and is a faster route to the living room to challenge Netflix.  

It'll be interesting once this deal is closed.  Can't wait.

Note:  As a mobile fan, I would love to see Apple or Google make the move.  That would be fantastic.

Source: Business Insider.

Israel Asks Apple To Remove App That Might Foster Violence And Hate

There is an app that the Israeli government is requesting that Apple pull from the store that they said is potentially fostering violence against Israel.  The app name is called ThirdIntifada.

According to the Yahoo News post, it is an Arabic term for varying degrees of uprisings against Israel.  I only said varying because, while I know a lot of it is violent, I don't know if all of it is.  Semantics aside, I do believe in the freedom of speech and religion to a point.  

Doing a quick check on iTunes, the app has received three stars with no reviews to read from.  Plus, just about everything is in Arabic, including screen shots so I have no idea what it's saying.  

The request to remove the app came from Israel's information minister to Steve Jobs.  

I am bringing this up because from Yahoo's post, I am not able to corroborate the claims.  I guess I have grown not to take anything we read at face value.  Could be the Yahoo post is as it says or that the AP writer is too lazy to doing any fact checking before posting this.  We've been examples of such in the past.

But if true, I sincerely hope Apple examines this issue carefully.  I think lots of governments and Apple competitors are watching to see just how plays out.

Source: Yahoo News.

150M iCloud Users? Basis For Apple's Social Network

RBC surveyed 1500 iPhone users and found that Apple may have 150 million iCloud users total, if you count in the number of iPod touch and iPad users.  Is that a lot?

According to figures provided by 9to5Mac, that's about 75% of Google's 200 million Gmail users and half of Twitter users.  It's no wonder Twitter is feeling pretty good about being integrated into iOS.  Still, all of these numbers pale in comparison to Facebook's 700 million users.

On top of that, iTunes Match could add $1.5 billion to the music studios and Apple's bottom-line.

That and in of itself is a pretty huge number.  Should apple want to leverage this along with its other social initiatives, iCloud could be the basis of a social network to challenge Facebook and Google.  Should this be the case, Apple can fold the fledging Ping into it and provide a better integration with FaceTime and iMessage.  And let's no forget Apple's photo streaming features.  

All of this can be done will protecting user privacy.

Source:  9to5Mac.

Versus: A New Series To Look At Present And Future of The Major Mobile Platforms And their Viablity

I'll be sharing with you my thoughts in the various mobile platforms
regardless of their sizes today and how they can survive through
tomorrow and even thrive.

I started thinking about this last night while listening to various
podcasts during my run yesterday. I think it's critical that we
examine where things are without getting too caught up in the various
fanboyism and take a good look at how things can turn out.

The iPhone 4 death grip was an issue but to this day, I cannot say for
sure if it was such a big deal. While Apple probably got a B- for how
it handled it, things could have turned out even worse for Cupertino.

Today, everyone is piling into RIM and its aging OS that runs on the
Blackberry. As far as I'm concerned, the Blackberry OS reminds me of
Mac OS 8 and 9 which was a patchwork that Apple desperately tried to
push out to compete with the better and faster Windows 95, 98, and
XP. Still, Apple prevailed and I like to see what are the chances
that RIM can rise like a Phoenix and remain a relevant mobile company
tomorrow.

Also, Android with its never-seen-before growth has come to dominate
the mobile market. However, it's no secret that it is plagued by
malware as well as fragmentation.

And today, an analyst even believe that the release of iPhone 5 that
is like to be on multiple carriers including Verizon and Sprint could
not only further stem Android's share of thr market but begin to erode
its dominace in the US.

It'll be a fun look at the future. Maybe there will br a dark horse in
this fast evolving mobile war that comes out of nowhere and blindsided
even Steve Jobs.

WiFi Based Charging

This is something I can get behind.  uBeam - A wirelessbase charging system better than anything on the market with a farther range.  On one side, you plug into the wall socket an ultrasonic transducer and on the iPad, iPhone, or another device, an adapter. The transducer sends off an inaudible sound to the adapter which then converts the sound back into energy to charge your mobile devices.

How will this sound affect the human body?  I don't know if it will at all.  Even dogs will not be able to hear this.  And I've got a few more questions about it. Like how efficient is this system and how much it'll cost.

In the TUAW post where I found information, it mentioned that someone like Starbucks can install this and virtually free up the wall sockets.  

Source:  TUAW.

Next Gen Mobile Chips: Quad-Core Or Supercharged GPU? What's Best For Battery Life

The next step in mobile chips is naturally going to be more sophisticated and faster than the current chips that power the top line mobile devices.  Tegra 2 from Nvidia is making waves with Android smartphones and tablets while Apple's A5 chip powers its iPad and, probably, the next generation iPhone.  Both of these chips are dual-core running at 1Ghz.  Also powering these chips are powerful graphics units.  And while it took years for desktop CPU to go from single core to dual core and an even longer period of time for laptops, mobile device chips are made the move faster and there is already talk about quad-core chips.

So, I wonder what is better for overall mobile performance.  And how does that balance with the battery life?

At this point, I think the current chips are good enough for our mobile needs.  And in fact, the previous gen chips, like the single-core Qualcomm Snapdragons running at 1Ghz as well as the A4 chips powering the iPhone 4, are doing quite a good job.  Their performance supports one hundred percent of mobile needs.  And as far as handling top of the line iPhone and Android games, these chips has yet to show their age.  

For competitive reasons, the various mobile device makers has no choice but to continue to push the mobile tech envelope  At the same time, I think the older chips will continue to find a market in the low-end smartphone and prepaid markets.  

And since more operations are being off-loaded to the GPU for greater coding efficiency, I wonder if there is a need to hurry the jump from dual-core to quad-core.  Don't get me wrong.  I'm all for faster and better smartphones and tablets.  At the same time, I like to see that balanced against even better battery life.

The 10-hours we're getting from Xoom and the iPad are pretty good but I would like to safely get 12 hours out of them for the next gen upgrades.  And on the smartphone side, is there really such a thing as moderate use that many review sites like to say in their battery tests?  I think as society goes more mobile, today's heavy use may well be tomorrow's light use.  

Take the Atrix which is used to power an Android-netbook setup.  Also consider the ASUS Transformer  Both of these devices can lay claim to better battery lives only with the hope of the added battery in their respective keyboard accessories  That doesn't work for me.  

Apple allows mirroring through its Airplay implementation to a HDTV or monitor.  With a BT keyboard, we can be looking at a whole new setup for our future computing needs.  If the iPhone or iPad that is simultaneously used as a mirroring device and for wireless input, that has got to sap the battery life.  

It would be great to see the next generation mobile devices used in this capacity without much of a penalty to the battery life.  And used as a standalone device, go from today's 10-hours to 12-15 hours.  

So, it'll be interesting to see if these companies will try to increase the mobile processing power with higher core counts and/or GPU but hold the line for battery life at the current level or go with a smaller increase in processing power while pushing the envelope on the battery life.

RIM Buyout Scenario and Questions

RIM is now cheaper to buy than Yahoo.  Even with a twenty percent premium, RIM can be had for $18 billion – plenty of companies are capable of buy them out with just even the cash reserves on hand.  

Microsoft quickly comes to mind.  Intel.  Cisco.  Google.  Oh, and then there's the unlikely candid that is Apple. 

Three questions need to be asked about a RIM buyout scenario:

1. Who's more likely to pull the trigger?  
2. How would it change the landscape?
3. And is Apple really not as likely to be a RIM suitor?

I think we'll know in the next few months just how likely RIM is going to survive and in what form.