Over on Techcrunch they have this Bram Cohen quote:

“Moving forward behind the scenes, we will continue to develop µTorrent and will be using the codebase in other applications, especially ones where a fast, lightweight implementation is more suitable, such as embedded systems on TVs, cell phones, and other non-PC platforms.”

 When are fast lightweight implementations like uTorrent not suitable?

Link to Techcrunch » Blog Archive » BitTorrent to Acquire µTorrent

Pretty amazing to see what one man can do with some ingenuity. 

Microsoft has released a new product into called Windows Live Writer.  It’s sole purpose it rich editing and composing of blog posts.  As this is my first use of it I can’t tell you how good it really is, but so far it seems completely excellent.

For example, right from the Writer you can insert pictures into the post:

Also of interest you can insert maps right into a blog post:

St. Louis is about 60 miles from me

(Yes, I know I haven’t posted in a long time…Sooooo busy)

Argh.  While syncing my music to my SMT5600 the phone crashes after just a few songs are transferred.  The phone will not respond to any button presses.  The only way to recover from this state of affairs is to remove the battery.

WMP10 just shows that whichever song it was copying when the phone crashed is xx% done without reporting any errors.

My search skills have failed me because I am unable to find anyone else suffering from the same issue!

Here’s Gizmodo’s story:

Rumors: Origami Just a Glorified Media Player with Nasty DRM?

Here’s a story they’ve never run:

Facts:  Ipod Video Just a Glorified Media Player with Nasty DRM, That Can’t Run the Thousands of Windows Software Applications.

Their never ending fascination with Apple becomes more and more tiring as the days go by.  I have a hard time seeing a future for Origami, but I’m sure willing to give it a shot…

I’m currently in the process of changing hosting providers. Hopefully this happens without any downtime. I’ll do a write-up of the process later.

In what is seen by many as an attempt to grab onto some of the success (money) of internet power houses like Google, the broadband industry has been floating ideas about charging such companies extra money since they couldn’t exist without the bandwidth provided to them by the broadband industry.

The problem is this: Would the internet be successful if the telephone and cable companies became the gatekeepers of what you could and could not see?

Additionally, we already pay for the bandwidth, and I can only assume that companies like Google already have massive bills to pay for the bandwidth to their server farms, so at first I couldn’t see how exactly one could justify such a move. After further reading I see that the industry’s idea is not to charge for the basic bandwidth that everyone gets today, but to charge extra for things like QoS guarantees. I see this as a potential slippery slope where in a few years time traditional internet access becomes sub-par because it is pushed aside by those who are paying extra for a high QoS…after all, if a packet attached to an account with guaranteed QoS comes along at the same time as your regular ole’ non-guaranteed packet, your packet is getting pushed aside. This has the potential to happen with more frequency as more and more people opt for the QoS-”enhanced” package on their broadband accounts. The broadband providers will of course have every reason to encourage more people to pay for QoS until we get to the point where everyone is paying extra. This coupled with the broadband providers desire to stifle all competition will lead to nirvana for them, and mediocrity for the rest of us.

PS: I’m already living in a state of broadband provider-induced mediocrity since I cannot get either DSL or cable HSI where I live. My only option is the $110/month I pay for an ISDN line plus the $35/month for an ISP…

I apologize for the headline.  I’m just excited.  Flexible display technology has the potential to push mobile tech usage far and wide.  Imagine being able to use the equivalant of a laptop without having to deal with the hassle of a laptop.

A couple of years ago I took my Compaq Presario 2700 laptop on a 2-week vacation to Italy so that I could use it for mapping and travel information via dial-up internet and so that I could use it’s hard drive to store all the digital photos I took while there.  There were a couple of problems with this.

First of all, that notebook is pushing 8 pounds, which is a lot of weight … especially while carrying all the other luggage through airports, bus stations, and train terminals.  Secondly, the size is just awkward.  It’s like carrying a Trapper Keeper with you everywhere, except it costs thousands of dollars and you’re afraid to sit it down.

Just imagine something along the lines of those foldable keyboards that allow you to pull a full-size display out of them, à la, the mobile computers in …

The NYT and the Consumerist don’t seem to get the idea behind micropayment spam-protection schemes. Or at least they gloss over the benefits that AOL and Yahoo are providing whilst attacking their admittedly shady method of profiteering on spam control.

Update:  Upon further reflection, I realized that my original comment didn’t reflect what I was trying to get out there.  AOL and Yahoo are only going part of the way in spam-prevention here.  The ideal system would involve the email recipient to set a price to send him/her an email.  You could also whitelist friends so they didnt have to pay a thing.  This system would drastically cut down on the spam, and would still allow people who didnt know you to email you for a minimal fee, say one penny.  (Or you could set it to a dollar and no one you didnt whitelist would ever email you.)  AOL and Yahoo’s systems are a step in the right direction, but don’t really address the problem.  Neither company will see widespread adoption of their system.