Boot up: Apple's Steve Jobs tribute, Google chief on Siri, and more

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
A woman uses her iPhone to do a Steve Jobs memorial. Photograph: Yuriko Nakao/Reuters

A quick burst of links for you to chew over, as picked by the Technology team

Android chief says your phone should not be your assistant >> AllThingsD
Rubin unleashed (on Siri): "I don't believe that your phone should be an assistant. Your phone is a tool for communicating. You shouldn't be communicating with the phone; you should be communicating with somebody on the other side of the phone."

Remembering Steve Jobs >> Apple
A live page of tributes to the Apple co-founder.

Groupon seeks offering near $12 billion valuation >> NYTimes.com

"Groupon, the daily deal site, is considering an offering valued at close to $12 billion as it prepares for an investor road show next week, according to two people with knowledge of the situation." But if enough people come in then you can get it cheaper?

MediaFuturist: The future of media: re-boot and enjoy.

"Soon, most of the world's Internet traffic will be generated by a huge variety of mobile devices instead of computers, and 'the other 3 billion' users aka consumers in the BRIC countries are coming online at a very fast pace. Remember: 10% more broadband and / or wireless equates to 1% growth in GDP - but also a 1000% percent increase in disruption:) "Give it another 3-5 years and it's very likely that almost 5 billion people will be connected with fast and very cheap (if not free) mobile devices - and they will not 'consume' media and so-called content in the same way that we did when renting a movie still meant getting a piece of plastic that embodied it, or becoming a faithful and constant visitor to the quite beautiful but nevertheless super-walled iTunes garden." People will want access rather than files, he argues.

Currys slashes PlayBook prices to £250 >> PC Pro

"Another tablet's price has been slashed, with Research in Motion's BlackBerry PlayBook now £150 cheaper at one major retailer. Currys and PC World have announced £150 off all models of the PlayBook, with the low end 16GB version dropping from £399.99 to £249.99. "'It looks like they need to get units moving, and it will be interesting to see if this is only PC World and Currys or comes from RIM,' said Geoff Blaber, director of devices and software platforms at analyst firm CSS insight." It comes from RIM. It also comes straight off RIM's bottom line. Its financials are going to be woeful next quarter. (Our local Currys had one on display. Then it didn't. And none replaced it.)

Where Did Cached Pages Go On Google?

"Since Google launched the new instant previews just about a month ago, the question we have seen come up from searchers time and time again is 'where did the cached page go?' "Yes, Google has moved the 'cached' and 'similar' links from near the display URL in the search results and to the instant preview section." Phew.

You can follow Guardian Technology's linkbucket on delicious

View the original article here

US investigates Google tax strategies

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
Google's headquarters in California. Photograph: David Paul Morris/Getty Images

US tax authorities are investigating the strategies used by Google to cut its tax bill by about $1bn (£635m) a year by funnelling profits from the US and Europe to subsidiaries with low tax rates.

The Internal Revenue Service has requested information from Google about its offshore deals following three acquisitions including its purchase of YouTube in 2006, according to Bloomberg.

Sources said it was "bringing more than typical scrutiny" to techniques known as the "Double Irish" and "Dutch Sandwich", which move revenues through units in Ireland, the Netherlands, and Bermuda.

The complex revenue shuffle is legal and is used by countless US multi-nationals. However, the tactic cost the US treasury an estimated $90bn in tax revenues in 2008, according to Kimberly Clausing, an economics professor at Reed College.

Over three years Google is estimated to have saved $3.1bn in tax revenues using a subsidiary located in Bermuda where the corporate tax rate is zero.

A Google spokesperson said there was nothing unusual about the audit. "We are considered a large case company, which means we are under a continuous audit by the IRS so of course they would be reviewing our treatment of all acquisitions."

In 2009, the most recent year for which records are available, the Bermuda subsidiary collected €4.34bn (£3.9bn) in royalties from a Google unit in the Netherlands, according to a Dutch corporate filing.

The search engine giant is using Ireland as a conduit for European revenues but in turn the Irish subsidiary is being charged royalties for its intellectual property – use of the brand and technology such as Google's algorithms.

The 2009 Google Ireland Ltd accounts show the company turned over €7.9bn in Europe for the year ending 2009 and a profit of just €45m after "administrative expenses" of €5.467bn were stripped out.

Administrative expenses largely refer to royalties (or a licence fee) Google pays its Bermuda HQ for the right to operate.

Notes to the accounts show "administrative expenses" rose significantly between 2008 and 2009 – by €794m – because of increases in headcount, sales and marketing and the "royalties paid as a result of increases in recorded turnover".

The IRS has already approved a major part of Google's strategy. In 2006, the agency signed off on a 2003 intracompany transaction that moved foreign rights to its search technology to an Irish subsidiary managed in Bermuda called Google Ireland Holdings.

That deal – known as a "buy in" in tax parlance – meant subsequent profit overseas based on those copyrights has been attributed to foreign subsidiaries rather than to Google in the US where the technology was developed.

A Google spokesperson told the Guardian: "We have an obligation to our shareholders to set up a tax-efficient structure, and our present structure is compliant with the tax rules in all the countries where we operate. We make a very substantial contribution to local and national taxation and provide employment for over a thousand people in the UK. We also generate significant revenues for other companies, and last year gave more than $6bn to our AdSense publisher partners, including newspapers and broadcasters across the world."

View the original article here

Google Motorola deal is a gamble

Google's purchase of Motorola will allow it to go head-to-head with Apple in the smartphone market photo: Brendan Mcdermid/Reuters

Google Apple and is involved in a replay of war Steve Jobs lost against Microsoft two decades ago. They compete to create the dominant operating system for the computers in the future — smartphonesour.

If you want to force his hand, Google has mobilised a legion of Motorola footsoldiers. Motorolans, comes as Google Chief Larry Page referred to them, in both human and patents form.

Androidsuccess has prompted its main rivals to start buying up patents in an attempt to kill from the operating system that is used in almost half of new smartphones. $ 12.5bn heel on Motorola can mainly justified by its significant intellectual property shield.

More interesting is the business-building reasons to trade. The biggest headache Androids horizon is not disputes, but fragmentation. Unlike Apple addicted to Google other companies such as Samsung, HTC and Motorola, of course, to make its handsets. It can not tightly control the user experience. For phones can function properly, their software has to be constantly updated, but in many Android phones this does not happen, and customers are starting to cotton.

Mini software downloads or "apps" that allows us to find a street map or Play angry birds game for smartphones which entries are for record players. There is little point in having one without the other.

Unfortunately, use no older phones always the available apps in the Android store. Before Apple and Google entered the market, there were dozens of operating systems and developers were not able to build and market the apps that was guaranteed to work. By Google system openness is to recreate the fragmentation, it was created to solve the very problem.

Motorola is a gamble. Google has a chance now to make phones as good as Apple 's, but if competing manufacturers feel pressure set aside, they might desert Android rows.

View the original article here

Google buys Motorola mobility for $ 12.5bn

Google is buying Motorola mobility – maker of Motorola Xoom tablet — for $ 12.5bn. Photo: Yoshikazu Tsuno/AFP/Getty Images

Google is acquiring Motorola mobility, the American mobile carrier smartphone business in a lot of $ 12.5bn (£ 7.6bn) cash.

Acquisition will enhance Google's growing dominance in the market for nascent smartphone and tablet computer. $ 40 A share deal – which is Google's largest acquisition to date – is a 63% premium on Motorola mobility closing price on the New York Stock Exchange on Friday.

Larry Page, Google chief executive, said: "Motorola mobility total commitment to Android has created a natural fit for our two companies. Together, we will be creating great user experiences that improve the efficiency of the entire Android ecosystem for the benefit of consumers, partners and developers. I look forward to welcoming Motorolans to our family of Googlers. "

Sanjay JHA, CEO of Motorola mobility, added: "this transaction offers significant value for Motorola mobility stockholders and provide compelling new opportunities for our employees, customers and partners around the world.

"We have shared a productive partnership with Google to move the Android platform, and now through this combination we will be able to do even more to innovate and deliver excellent mobility solutions across our mobile devices and home businesses."

The deal represents Google's biggest challenge yet to Apple, which has led the way in the smartphone and tablet markets with the iPhone and iPad.

Other manufacturers, including Samsung, HTC, will be free to release phones using Google's Android software. Google will run Motorola mobility as a separate undertaking.

The takeover also enables Google, which has traditionally avoided involvement in hardware, to manufacture giant Nokia. The move comes just six months after the Finnish phone maker signed a strategic agreement with Microsoft in an attempt to rebuild its ailing fortunes.

Motorola was the first mobile maker partner with Google and release phones based on its Android operating system.

Motorola spun off mobility as a separate company in January of this year. Manufacturing division produces smartphonesprimarily, such as the Motorola Droid and Defy but also makes the tablet computers, and digital set-top boxes.

Analysts have long predicted that half of the world's smartphones will use Android software before the end of 2012, as manufacturers have hastened to adopt Google's operating system instead of developing their own.

The deal is subject to U.S. regulatory approval, which could prove a bigger hurdle than usual, to Google's Android division is already being tested by antitrust investigators. The companies said they expect the takeover to be completed in late 2011 or early 2012.

Andy Rubin, senior vice president of mobile at Google, said: "we expect that this combination will allow us to break new ground for the Android ecosystem.

"However, our vision for Android is unchanged and Google is still determined to Android as an open platform and a vibrant open source community. We will continue to work with all our valued Android partners to develop and distribute innovative Android-powered devices. "

In a blog post announces the acquisition, page said the deal would allow "better protect" Google Android from "anticompetitive threats" over patents from Microsoft, Apple and other companies.

The highly competitive smartphone market has escalated to a bitterly fought the patents war between the major manufacturers and software giants. Microsoft and Apple Sue Motorola and Google over a string of alleged patent infringements on Android.

Monday's deal means that Google now owns Motorola mobility mass of patents – trøde to total around 17,000 – and strengthen its position in the market. However, these patents deter the ongoing trials from Microsoft and Apple.

Page said: "in 2008, Motorola bets big on Android as the only operating system across all its smartphone devices. It was a smart effort and we are thrilled with the success they have achieved so far. We believe that their mobile business is on an upward trajectory and ready for explosive growth. "

View the original article here

Boot up: Google buys Motorola – all the links you need, and more

Motorola has tried to build quality managemtn ever before in its production processes. Photo: Mark Lennihan/AP

A quick burst 7 links you to chew over, as picked by the technology team

"As opposed to being protected, as MMIS patents seems to be too weak, these other Android device makers will be second-class citizens. Google has set its priority. I said before: Don't overestimate the patent part of the deal. It's all about Google maximize its control over the Android reasons and with the effects I roughly described herein, and which I will comment on the closer will forward. "

"It is not to say it was not a bold, brash Move, or even say it was not the right Move for Google and Android as a platform. But it is all relative to position Google was in--and that position was a weak, and to pretend otherwise is to deny the obvious. And don't forget that it is leaving Google in a weak situation with the two leading Android handset makers, Samsung, HTC. I think Apple and Microsoft will probably feel pretty good, package solutions about have forced Google to spending $ 12.5 billion Motorola--a handset maker with rapidly declining sales, no recent profits and faulty management. "

"According to Infonetics, Motorola mobility was the leader in set-top box revenues last year, and also was tops in hybrid IP/QAM set-top boxes--, the boxes used by operators like Verizon that combine broadcast TELEVISION and over the top programs. By leveraging Motorola's position with the air carriers, Google can better to solidify its offer to extend the Google TV and Android in the living room. "

"Google Inc. agreed to pay Motorola mobility Holdings Inc. $ 2.5 billion, if it fails to close the purchase of mobile phone maker, said a person with knowledge of the situation, a fee of more than six times the typical amount."

"Our sources say that Motorola was in acquisition talks with several parties, including the Microsoft era. Microsoft was interested in acquiring Motorola's patent portfolio, which would have made it to the torpedo Android yet. The ability to deal brought Google to table debate results in blockbuster sale. "

Reading between the lines in Microsoft's edits: Linux is no longer a desktop threat; Apple and Google is "mostly" his main rivals; Mobile issues; Online battle now is inside the browser; and security is in, innovation is out. Worth reading in full.

Microsoft is finally ready to talk about Windows 8. Here is the new official blog.

You can follow the guardian technology's linkbucket on delicious

View the original article here

Google "improving privacy policy"

A Google Street View camera in London. Photography: Harold Cunningham/Getty Images

Google has "taken reasonable steps" to improve its privacy policy , given that its Street View mapping cars captured illegal data last year, Information Commissioner said Tuesday.

The internet giant promised to improve how it handles users ' data in November, after the information Commissioner's Office ruled it committed a "material breach" of the data protection act when its mapping cars toured UK cities.

United Kingdom's data protection watchdog said Google had improved its practices, but urged the company to make improvements in some key areas.

"I am satisfied that Google has made good progress in improving its procedures for the protection of personal data by the company they signed with me last year," said Christopher Graham, the information Commissioner. "All the obligations they gave us has been progressed, and the company has also accepted the results of our audit report, which we have asked them to go further.

"Ico Google review is not a rubber stamp for enterprise data protection policies. The company must ensure its work in this area continues to evolve with new products and technologies. Google will not be filed and forgotten by ICO. "

Google attracted criticism from authorities around the world after it admitted to gathering of so-called payload data from unsecured Wi-Fi networks through its Street View mapping cars.

The company said it has improved data protection training for all staff, including design engineers, and built in strict privacy controls for all new products.

But ICO urged Google to improve how it explains to users how their data will be managed within its range of products, including Gmail, search, and Street View.

Watchdog said Google must ensure all its products have a "privacy design document", not just its new services. ICO conducted audit in Google's London headquarters on 19 and 20 July, when the peer "evidence" and interviewed key personnel.

In a post on Google's European public policy blog Tuesday, Alma Whitten, the company's Director of privacy, said it had "significantly improved" core training of technicians in the past year.

Whitten added: "the report validates the improvements we've made our internal privacy structures, training programs and internal reviews and identifies some scope for continued work. We welcome your feedback on our progress and we look forward to working with them to ensure we continue to develop products that reflect strong privacy standards and practices.

"We have worked hard on these new privacy controls that are designed to improve our internal practice without getting in the way of the innovation that has driven Google since its inception. We know, there is no perfect solution, so we will continue to improve our existing processes and develop new so privacy awareness grows and evolves in parallel with Google. "

View the original article here

Boot up: hands on Google + games, Apple increases iPhone ' orders ' and more

A quick burst 6 links you to chew over, as picked by the technology team

"Google passes the test so far. It can essentially duplicate Facebook's platform for games and bring over a lot of games that already exist elsewhere. The next test is to see how many games it can get, and how performance works when the games scale to millions of players. Facebook may not be so concerned about Google for now, but it definitely has to watch his back because his platform is not so difficult to clone. "

"Apple has upward adjusted OrderTotal volume for iPhones, consisting of the iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4 CDMA and iPhone (5) for the second half of 2011 at 12-13%, from 50 million units originally estimated at the end of the second quarter of 2011 for more than 56 million units. iPhone 5 will account for 25.5-26 million units, according to the Taiwan-based supply chain decision-makers. "

So-called digilantes ditch their mission ... because tech was not good enough. I would bet there are got so much to do with balaclavas as tech.

"...These movies include titles like The Hills Have thighs and Bikini Jones and the Temple of Eros. "

Buddy Media, Facebook advertising affiliate, now worth about $ 500 m, according to its latest funding round.

"The idea came during a" what if "conversation with my wife Brigitte, while walking along University Avenue in Palo Alto. What makes Apple with its almost beyond comprehension $ 76B cash? COO of Gassée family is creative and practical, an abstract painter turned "timber variance"-she builds or rebuilds houses in Palo Alto. She is not enchanted by technology and is a utilitarian conception of computers, phones, navigation systems, tablets ... a position that provides a useful counterpoint to my sometimes overly enthusiastic embrace of something that computes. "

You can follow the guardian technology's linkbucket on delicious

View the original article here

Apple Help ' fake ' patents, says Google

Google iPhone-maker has accused Apple of using ' fake patents» to make Android phones more expensive. Photo: Kimberly White/Reuters/Corbis

Google has Applescript, accused Microsoft, , Oracle and "other businesses" to try to make Android smartphones more expensive for consumers by running a "hostile, organised campaign" against it by using "fake patents" acquired from bankrupt Canadian firm Nortel and their existing patent holdings.

Its chief legal officer David Drummond, argue that companies that effectively imposes a "tax" to push the price of Android devices. "Microsoft and Apple have always been in each other's throats, so that when they get in bed together you need to start asking what is going on," Drummond wrote in a blog post.

But Microsoft has hit back, with its General Counsel Brad Smith argues on Twitter to Microsoft invited Google to bid jointly for Nortel patents – and were beaten. Representatives from Apple and Oracle declined to comment on.

Drummond says that the rival companies are using an "anticompetitive strategy, [who] escalates also cost of patents is way beyond what they are actually worth" and use them to stifle innovation.

Drummond writes that "in this instance, we trøde, it was important to speak out and make it clear that we are determined to preserve the Android as a competitive choice for consumers, by stopping those who try to stifle it."

He has stated: "Microsoft and Apple's winning $ 4.5bn (£ 2.7bn) to Nortels patent portfolio was almost five times greater than the pre-auction estimate of $ 1 billion. Fortunately, the law frowns on accumulation of questionable patents for anti-competitive funds – which means these agreements will probably draw regulatory control, and this patent bubble will pop. "

A consortium, including Microsoft, Apple and RIM won the bid for Nortel patents, which covers a number of communications technologies, from a consortium of Google and Intel. Google had made a preliminary bid of $ 900 m before the auction, but was ultimately outbids despite large reserves of cash.

Drummond says: "a smartphone can cause as many as 250,000 (mostly doubtful) patent claims, and our competitors want to impose a charge for these questionable patents that make Android devices more expensive for consumers. They want to make it harder for manufacturers selling Android devices. Instead of competing by building new features or devices, struggling through litigation. "

Microsoft has sued Motorola and Barnes and Noble, argue that their use of Android infringes patents that it holds, while Apple has filed a number of similar suits abandoned patent claims against other companies.

HTC has admitted that it pays Microsoft for a set amount for each Android device it sells. The amount was not disclosed, but it is believed to be between $ 5 and $ 15.

Apple recently won a preliminary ruling in the United States that HTC is infringing patents covering the iPhone. And Oracle is currently suing Google in a multibillion-dollar lawsuit on that Android infringes copyright concerning its Java programming language, acquired through the purchase of Sun Microsystems.

Google launched its Android mobile operating system at the end of 2007, with the first phones appear about a year later. It makes it available for free handset makers, in contrast to companies like Microsoft, which charges about $ 15 per handset by using its Windows softwareyour phone.

Android phones have exploded in popularity, makes more than a third of all smartphones sold around the world. Platform has expelled the former leader Nokia, which abandons its Symbian operating system in favor of Windows phone. Apple and rim have their own mobile operating systems, as they are not licensed.

Google has been hampered by a lack of intellectual property in wireless telephony, which has subjected it to patent-infringement lawsuits from rivals such as Oracle.

Drummond says Google is seeking to strengthen its patent portfolio; It recently bought more than 1,000 patents from IBM. It is also in negotiations to buy the InterDigital, a key holder of the wireless patents valued at more than $ 3bn, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The most valuable patent it uses include its "PageRank" search algorithm that is used to organize its search results: it has an exclusive license to from Stanford University, where Sergey Brin and Larry Page developed the PageRank patent. Although is now available for licensing, has Google rights to decide who can license it.

Patent acquisitions is expected to accelerate, with IBM and Kodak is often referred to as shopping for intellectual property on the market.

View the original article here

How Google and Hotmail aims to stop hacking

Errore nella deserializzazione del corpo del messaggio di risposta per l'operazione 'Translate'. Quota per la lunghezza massima delle stringhe (8192) superata durante la lettura dei dati XML. Tale quota può essere incrementata modificando la proprietà MaxStringContentLength dell'oggetto XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas utilizzato durante la creazione del lettore XML. Riga 1, posizione 8817.
Errore nella deserializzazione del corpo del messaggio di risposta per l'operazione 'Translate'. Quota per la lunghezza massima delle stringhe (8192) superata durante la lettura dei dati XML. Tale quota può essere incrementata modificando la proprietà MaxStringContentLength dell'oggetto XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas utilizzato durante la creazione del lettore XML. Riga 1, posizione 9094.

"My Google email account was recently hacked into whilst I was on holiday in Slovakia. The hacker said that I had been robbed at gunpoint in Spain and robbed, then asked people to send money to a money transfer account in Spain," read the email that arrived this week. "This has happened to other people, I gather."

It certainly has: this is the peak season for people having their accounts hacked, principally because so many are travelling, and thus using either computers or networks that are shared and which they trust too much.

For that reason, Google, Hotmail and Facebook (though notably not Yahoo) have all implemented a system called "two-factor authentication" to protect your account. The basic idea is straightforward: as well as your username and password, when you use a new device to access their system, you also have to enter a one-time code which is sent to your mobile phone.

The idea is to protect against your user details being stolen over an insecure network or a computer that may be running malware that tries to capture precisely those details. And even if the malware captures the one-time code, once you've logged out the code becomes invalid. So if they try to log in with your stolen details, they'll be faced with a demand for a code – which will be sent to your phone.

Ideally, the would-be thief won't have your phone – though the possibility that they might is the reason why you should protect your SIM with a passcode, and set your phone to lock automatically.

The problem is that not everyone uses 2FA (as it's also known) – and it's quite hard to force them to. "With 750 million users, it's quite hard to get a security feature to work for everybody," says Joe Sullivan, Facebook's chief security officer, a former US federal prosecutor who previously worked at eBay for six years and joined the giant social network in 2008.

For many people working on their familiar computer, a username and password is sufficient security. But for others, 2FA is desirable, he says. "It's like how I have a key to lock my front door, but I also have an alarm that I can choose whether I set or not."

Google and Hotmail also allow you to set up two-factor authentication. Yahoo Mail does not – so avoid using it in situations where you don't trust everything about the network and computer you're using. (An internet cafe computer should not be trusted, on principle; nor open wireless networks in hotels, railway stations or elsewhere.)

One thing that using two-factor authentication with all these services is that, first, you need a mobile phone number; second, you need to set it up before you travel, or at least while you're at a trusted machine (which is none of the machines you'll encounter while travelling).

To activate two-factor authentication:

• In Google, it's found through the "settings" tab on the top right-hand side of the page. You have to set up 2FA on a trusted computer. (It's a good idea to have a printer to hand so that you can print out a list of backup codes it provides for access just in case your mobile phone is lost or stolen.) You'll have to provide a phone number to which the codes can be sent; obviously, a mobile is ideal.

Google has introduced two-step verification to protect accounts

• In Hotmail, you first need to add a mobile phone number in your Windows Live Account overview page. (Again, you'll need to do this on a trusted computer first.) Then whenever you go to Hotmail or other Windows Live services, you can choose to get a single-use code – a string of numbers that will be sent via text message to your phone – to use instead of your password. Make sure you do. Single-use codes expire after about 15 minutes; make sure too that you log out of the account before leaving the machine.

• In Facebook, go to Account (top right-hand corner) and Account Settings. From there choose Security and Login pprovals: this offers a tickbox for "Require me to enter a security code sent to my phone". Again, you need to have your number entered.

Yahoo doesn't offer 2FA, which is a problem, because it puts your login details at risk. There isn't any option to introduce it either; the Guardian has established that a service called YToken which has a web page claiming to offer it in fact doesn't, because there wasn't enough demand, according to its owner.

If you need to access Yahoo emails while you're away, it's safest either to do it via a smartphone (with a Pin and phone lock) or set up a Hotmail or Gmail account which periodically logs in to the Yahoo account and shows you the email from it, and use more secure authentication with them.

Twitter doesn't yet have two-factor authentication enabled. "It is great and something to aspire towards," says Del Harvey, Twitter's head of Trust and Safety. "But the fact that it has taken Google this long, with the resources that it has, tells you that it's not simple."

Furthermore, lots of people use Twitter from their mobile phone – its 140-character updates mean that it's ideal for both smartphones and the simplest phones which only send texts. (In a number of countries, Twitter has an SMS number to which you can send updates.)

"We get a lot of people who contact us to tell us they've lost their phone, and need us to turn off their SMS updates," says Harvey. Implementing two-factor authentication for people who lose their phone "would mean we lock them out of their [Twitter] account on the web and also make it incredibly difficult for them to get started up again".

Although she uses Gmail, and two-factor authentication, Harvey knows that if you get a sufficiently large number of users you'll eventually get an unmanageable number who have managed not to follow the instructions. "They've lost their phone, or they didn't write down the backup codes, or – this happens – they did take down the backup codes but stored them on the phone. And now they've lost the phone..."

Harvey's faith in human fallibility is touching, but well-founded. "Users aren't likely to use things that make it harder to use their account," she says. Instead, Twitter has focused on adding straightforward security that prevents your details being "sniffed" over networks: all connections to Twitter now happen over secure SSL links (the https: prefix in a browser toolbar: if you find yourself on what looks like a Twitter site but it doesn't have that prefix, end the session).

A Twitter spokesperson said: "Users can turn on https. It's not currently on by default. We're working on that though."

That of course won't stop people guessing your password if it is weak — a word in a dictionary or a simple combination of letters and numbers. (Yes, lots of people use "abc123" as their password. That's not a strong password.)

You can check your password's strength at howsecureismypassword.net, which will tell you how long it would take the average desktop PC to crack your password. It doesn't store passwords, and doesn't ask for a username, so you can trust it.

For "abc123" the answer is "this is one of the 500 most common passwords – you should probably change it". (For my personal Twitter account, the answer was "24,000 years".)

Facebook and Twitter search out weak passwords: if you try to create an account with a weak password, or one that has been shown to be widely used (as happens when hackers breach systems and post huge lists of usernames and passwords), then they will block it.

"When we see those massive stores of emails and passwords, we make sure to get to see the emails and passwords," says Facebook's Sullivan. "If we find that someone has the same email/password setup on Facebook, we change it and force them to change it when they login."

Facebook's advantage is that it can also force people to prove their identity by showing them pictures of friends – something that the real person will generally be good at doing, and anyone else won't.

Sullivan says that anywhere between 1% and 10% of passwords are the same between sites – pointing to another problem: people using the same password between sites. It is the single biggest source of vulnerabilities, besides weak passwords.

The ideal is that you use a different password at every site – which can be done, if you use some imagination. It's also good to include numbers and punctuation marks – those add to the complexity, and hence the difficulty of breaking them.

Most of all, if you use a different password at every site, then if by some misfortune your username (often an email) is stolen along with your password at one (flawed) site, then the automated tools that hackers use on other sites (including Facebook, Gmail, Hotmail, Twitter and Yahoo) will fail to get them in. That's success – at least inasmuch as it prevents you having a worse day than having your account hacked.

View the original article here

Google +: Tweet smell of success | Dan Gillmor

A Twitter user. Google + enjoy opening its platform to third-party developers that Twitter has. Photo: Jonathan Hordle/Rex features

It is a month ago Google launched its non-Facebook and non-Twitter social network. Despite some signs of a slowdown in growth – and some difficult issues around ease of use and terms of Service-there seems little doubt that Google has created something that could stand the test of time.

More than 20 million people have signed up with G + (my shorthand to Google +) already. There is a small fraction of the bases are using Facebook and Twitter, but for a month in existence, it is a notable figure (although one news report suggests that people use it less, on a per capita basis, than when they first joined).

I use it more. Although this service is still in "beta" status, the Google account, it's already compelling – like Facebook and Twitter have been compelling places to visit for college students (and many others) in recent years. Why? Former Chairman of MySpace (remember MySpace?) wrote in this week, "G + is about people and the community. It is a celebration of our existence … "

I would not go so far, but I would say that there is much to be desired about the service. As I noted in a post a day after G + launched, the term Google team a number of things that have been waiting competition – the need for more robust control and privacy for users who have been waiting for Facebook people, and a more user-friendly way to post short thoughts and have conversations around those who have been waiting for Twitter.

Some observers believe Twitter is more at risk than Facebook, and there can be true. I certainly spending less time with Twitter, but I would dream of quitting completely. Service 140-characters are still leagues better for hearing and sorting through "breaking news", which I placed in quotation marks, because so much of what is new on Twitter is unverified. In addition, third-party tools makes Twitter very useful for, among many other things, keep track of certain people links to what they consider important.

But Twitter has to acknowledge its weakness, and not only because G + is more flexible in the way it can be used. It took less than four weeks to have more followers on G + than I've accumulated on Twitter for more than four years. This is now not entirely shocking: Twitter started from a user base of zero, while Google + started from a base of hundreds of millions of Google search users. But the number of followers is just a number. What is most remarkable is the level of engagement I experience with the people who read what I write. It is not uncommon to see dozens of comments on short postings I publish on G +, one greater than answer generated on Twitter, where the conversation is much more difficult to follow in any case, the order of magnitude.

Google + need to copy the Twitter in a decisive manner: by opening its own data and conversations to third-party developers, because Web browsers is still not robust enough for the kind of thing many of us want to do with the service. For example it is easy enough to put a few people in circles – G + method for the creation of groups to which you want to follow – but organize them when you have more than a few are very clumsy with the current system.

Google + leaders also are struggling with problems of identity – not yours, but the identities of the users. In the first instance permitted Google people to sign up with pseudonyms and create accounts for organizations. This violated the terms of Service, but in several weeks, Google did not respond, and when it did, it turned to unilaterally from certain accounts. The company must allow both pseudonymous and organization accounts, but only the latter seems to be on the road, according to public opinions.

I am also disappointed by what I've learned about the service's security. Although communications are encrypted, was Google's answers to my questions about the Government spying on users are not encouraging. The company does not dispute that: one) it can record users ' text and video conversations, even when they are, in theory, shared by only two people; and (b)), it would give government agencies the ability to tap these conversations. Google has to abide by the law, and it has a track record of fire resisting exaggerated the Government's efforts to spy on us citizens.

The company may have created an architecture that is designed to ensure real security, but chose otherwise. Given its increasing problems with the Government, this is not much of a surprise, I suppose. I had hoped, however, Google + can be an excellent tool for dissidents in dictatorships, and it is a pity that it chose otherwise.

And as noted several weeks ago, I am not entirely sanguine, at least to put more of my communications to the Web sites I do not control. Google + has become an almost essential part of my day. I get great value out of it, but I would be careful not to let it be a dependency.

View the original article here

The beginning of the end of Google

We have grown tired of lazy Conference speech technique of laying out some radical, provocative vision with opinions on the end of this era, or beginning of a new revolution in something else. We feel over-informed, perhaps, about the tech universe mode.

But occasionally, the best of these tech prophets can express a trend with the developing countries a more imaginative perspective than tech news treadmill, and it is a venture investor and musician Roger Carrick did pretty well back in may on us Narm Conference ... the non-enticingly named National Association of recording Merchandisers.

Although spoken was a while ago, has a video and Mcnamees own transcript causes stir this week. It is not a point of view, we are accustomed to hearing, but Carrick Apple explains why "is a far better monopoly to handle than Google" because it has been better to build a business model around digital content.

Google's consistency undermined marks

He is very hard on Google indicates era of searching is due to the increase in the specialized Search appsthrough Google "to get a taste of what the music industry has dealt with in a decade" as tech world changes around it He makes astute observation ... that it was the lack of differentiation, what seemed to be the equivalence of information online, which undermined the credibility markers.

Photo creativedc of on Flickr. Some rights reserved

"What we all missed at the time is that Google knows to treat all information the same, enforced a standard that allows no differentiation," he told the audience at Narm.

"Every word of every Google page is in the same typeface. No marker images displayed other than Google 's. This action essentially neutered production values of every high end content creator. The long tail took off and the music industry got his ass kicked. "

The main beneficiaries, he says, must be those that were done by Google era of the web, as commoditised all content by "removing differentiation".

Microsoftthe end of the/Google monopoly era

It is an excellent, exciting, well-informed and all too rare perspective on the role of technology in facilitating content creation and distribution.

He is evangelical about the iPad and iPhone as units because of their massive adoption rate, but goes on to say that HTML5 , is the largest creative and business opportunities for content creators since the Google and Microsoft began to monopolize and monetize content by others in the past twelve years.

Where Microsoft had even 96% control of internet connected devices, it is now only 50% because the growth in mobile replaces the PC era. Google, have meanwhile captured 80% Index Search business, which it has dominated the expanding web advertising market.

"Google's success filled finally on the Internet with crap, so consumers began to use other products to your search: Wikipedia for facts, Facebook for questions of taste, time or money, Twitter for news, Yelp for restaurants, Realtor.com for places to live, LinkedIn for jobs. In the past three years, these alternatives have gone from 10% of the search volume for around half, "said Carrick.

End of search

"As if all this competition was not bad enough for Google, then along came the Apple with the iPhone and App Store ... Apple has stamped, reliable apps for everything If they want news, use Apple customers apps from the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal. If they want to know which camera to buy, ask the friends on Facebook. If they want to go to dinner, use the Yelp app. these searches have economic value, and it is not going to Google, although Android.

"When Apple and app model win, Google's Search Business loses."

But if there is a triumphant results to Apple, Carrick activates it round again. HTML5 provides a better experience than an Apple app, but is cheaper and offers better value for users. His band Moonalice has been by using HTML5-based technology for livestream their shows for mobiles and iPads.

"Near term focus your platform strategy on Apple," he advises musicians. "The long term, focus on HTML5. The faster you commit to HTML5, the more likely you will produce something of economic value. Remember that HTML5 will produce companies as important as Amazon, iTunes and Netflix. It costs musicians practically nothing to create a good digital video and amazing audio, but they need distribution systems optimized to their content ".

There is an extract of Apple's dominance of Google below, and also the Full-length, segmented 57-minute presentation on Fora .TV. The transcript was posted by Carrick even on music analysis blog The Lefsetz Letter.

View the original article here

Google faces tax investigation of China

Chinese authorities have found three companies linked to Google Inc broke tax rules and examine possible evasion, a State-run newspaper said Thursday that increase the risk of recurrence of internet pressure on the search giant.

Google said two of the companies of the named its units and a third was a separate company, working closely with Google. But Google denied tax violations alleged in the Chinese-language economic daily.

"We believe we are and have always been in full compliance with Chinese tax legislation," said Google.

Although the report is unfounded or embellished, it could bring fresh headaches in China to Google, which has gone through difficult times since the beginning of last year when it clashed with the Government over internet censorship and hacking attacks.

China generates a small percentage of Google's revenue, but is the world's largest internet market with more than 450 million users. The country's Search market, dominated by homemade Baidu Inc, was worth 11bn Yuan (£ 1.05bn) in 2010 and will probably grow by about 50% every year for the next four years, according to iResearch.

The economic daily said the three companies were investigated and punished "Google enterprises in China".

"The tax authorities have already investigated and punished the three companies under the law," said the report on the front.

The companies were charged with submitting false and unreasonable demands for the total value of 40 m Yuan, the report said. It did not say when the alleged violations alleged to have happened.

"It is understood by this reporter that the tax authorities further examines Google enterprises in China on suspicion of tax evasion," said the short story, which also later was reported by China's official Xinhua news agency.

Google said two of the accused companies – Google information technology (China) Co Ltd and Google information technology (Shanghai) Co Ltd – was its sub-units.

It said the third company named, Google advertising (Shanghai) Co Ltd, was a separate undertaking that work "closely with Google as Google's only first-tier reseller in China" of advertising on the search engine's Web pages.

"Most foreign companies in China, particularly high-profile companies with a global reputation at stake, is very cautious in order to ensure they are in full compliance with the relevant tax laws," said Mark Natkin, Executive Director of the Marbridge consulting, a Beijing-based companythat advises investors on China's Internet and telecommunications sectors.

China's Foreign Ministry would not comment directly on the report. "In General, all companies operating abroad should obey the laws and regulations in the host country," said Ministry Spokeswoman Jiang Yu.

The report appeared after Google again clashed with the Chinese Government over internet censorship.

Earlier this month Google said difficulties that users in China may have faced open his e-mail service could be expected to be the result of the Government blocks.

China's ruling Communist Party has intensified censorship in recent months, fearing that calls for protests inspired by anti-authoritarian uprisings throughout the Middle East and North Africa could voyages.

Google's serious problems with the Chinese Government began in January 2010, when the company said it was no longer willing to censor search results in the country. Earlier, the accounts with a disclaimer on its China service that searches cannot be completed due to local laws.

View the original article here

Google + 1 to rival Facebooks like button

Google is today to introduce the most significant social feature to its search service, however, add a one click button to allow users to recommend sites and share these recommendations with their friends.

Photo of the . reid. on Flickr. Some rights reserved

Plus one will initially only be available for 2% of Google's English users in the United States, but it will be perceived as a rival to Facebook's increasingly ubiquitous ' Like ' tool, which appears on hundreds of thousands of third-party Web sites.

Appears as a small icon next to each search result and text ad logged in users can share their recommendations with contacts through their Gmail address book, Google Reader and Buzz contacts and finally Twitter contacts. Google will not comment on the Facebook contacts to finally be integrated.

Google characterizes Plus one as another feature similar to Facebook, says that the recommendations be shared only within the framework of relevant searches, rather than spamming all contacts. Social be understood in a broad sense as the next generation of Web-services, but Plus one also begin to affect the ranking of sites in Search results listings. Users will be able to choose to recommended Web sites must be more visible in search results.

Google also plans to expand service to news publishers so that they can integrate Plus one on history pages.

View the original article here

Tech weekly: Google reorganizes its index

Aleks Krotoski and Jemima Kiss joined Tom Watson MP, former Director of digital engagement Publications Office Cabinet to discuss the amount the Government pay for their Web solutions.

Charles Arthur asks Margaret Manning, CEO of digital consultancy assistance reading room, which is why her organization charged UK taxpayers almost £ 600 for a 32 x 32 pixel favicon under information Commissioner Office corporate throbber button in July 2010.

Tom explains challenges becomes a digital advocate in public office, ways of civil service may be authorised technological role, and the current minister for the Cabinet Office, Francis Maude, must play in the work climate digital procurement strategies. He proposes the same digital work could be done for half price, that some projects overcharged and unnecessary, and to try to tackle in government technology projects is like trying to catch water in your hands.

Also this week: Sue Black from University College London explains how Britain's important role in the computer science history has been secured thanks to a social media fundraising efforts for the purchase of Alan turingpapers from Bletchley Park.

Finally, the team on the future of web search, after several credible news aggregators was down ranked in search results after they fell foul to a tweak in the Google algorithm aims Weeding out sites, trash other people's content.

Don't forget to ...

• Comment below
• Mail on tech@guardian.co.ukus
• Receive our Twitter feed to program updates or follow our Twitter list
• Like our Facebook page
• See our images on Flickr/post your tech pics

View the original article here

Forget Google — it's Apple, which converts to the evil empire

Even when Apple , was mainly a computer manufacturer, people used to compare it to BMW. It was because it made animal, nicely designed products for a niche market composed of wealthy, design-conscious customers who also served as an enthusiastic – nay – fanatical evangelists to fire. It was seen as innovative and quirky but not part of the industry's mainstream, which was dominated by Microsoft and the companies that make PCs, ran Windows software. This view of Apple was summed up by Jack tramiel, head of the Commodore, when Steve Jobs showed him first Macintosh computer. "Nice, Steve," growled contentedly and Tramiel. "I guess you want to sell it in stores."

It was a long time ago. Now is the Apple with a market capitalisation of just over $ 331bn, the second most valuable company in the world – bigger than Microsoft ($ 220bn), Oracle ($ 167bn) or Google ($ 196bn). Quirky little computer company has grown to a giant. But not necessarily a huge-friendly variety, as the world's magazine publishers have recently discovered and as music and software industries have known for a long time. To Apple now controls the commanding heights online content business, and it seems to do the same mobile phone company. At the moment it looks as though no one has a good idea of how to stop it.

Each year, Fortune magazine sends queries to a sample of us CEOs asking for their opinions of their competitors. Results for the year 2011 has just been released and they show that the Apple is the "most admired" company in the United States. This is the sixth year in a row, it has held this title.

The reasons are obvious. Product page creates Apple beautifully designed, extremely functional and user friendly devices, joy customers and give fat profit margins; It has a culture which reliably delivers these products at specified dates; It is much more innovative than any of its competitors; and it has a unique mastery of both hardware and software.

On the strategic side, has the company displayed a deep understanding of technology and an astute assessment of potential devices and services that people will pay over the odds. Most CEOs would kill to run a business, each having a quarter of these competences. Apple seems to have all of them. Its current dominance is built upon three main ideas. First is that the design really means something. It is not something you can outsource to a design consultancy – which is what most businesses do – and design is as much about ease of use, as it is about aesthetics. The second insight was that of illegal music downloading maelstrom triggered by Napster could not item, and the first company to offer a simple way to legally buy music (and, later, other types of content) online would clean. And third — and most important – there was insight that mobile phones are really just handheld computers happen to make voice calls, and that it computing is the bit that really means something.

Most of the media comment about Apple attributes all these insights to its charismatic Steve Jobs, co-founder, with the explanatory statement, that Apple Renaissance began when he returned to the company in 1996.

It may well be, although it seems unlikely that such a comprehensive corporate recovery could be a single person, no matter how charismatic work. What is more plausible is that Apple's corporate culture trains on some of the characteristics of its CEO personality, much as Microsoft was once a corporate extension of Bill Gates, with all that implied in aggression and drive.

Regardless of the legend, is that Apple now has a dominant position in several Central enterprises (content distribution and mobile computing) and have a seriously disruptive consequences for the mobile phone industry. In particular, its iTunes Store it control over tollgate through which billions of paid for music tracks and albums, videos, and apps cascade down to millions of customers worldwide. It charges a Commission on anything that passes through this gate. And each Apple mobile device sold can only be activated by connecting to the entrance.

This will give Apple unprecedented power. Plenty of other organizations offering paid for downloads, but none have credit card information with so many internet users are accustomed to paying for things online. This was a reason why holders of printed periodicals began to slaves when iPad appeared. Here at last was a way to get people to pay for online content: just make it available on iTunes and let Apple collects money. It rankled sure that Apple took 30%, but – hey – at least it would bring an end to the parasitic free riding, which was endemic on the web. In the future, the web was dead: publishing of magazines as iPad apps was the future.

Then Apple changed abruptly with the rules of procedure, stipulates that any salesperson a digital subscription on a Web site publisher must also make the same subscription offer within app from Apple would take a cut of 30%. Publishers have been furious over this, but there is nothing they can do about it if they wish to do business on the iTunes store, you have to do it the Apple way.

This was just one example of the large unfriendly Giant flexing its muscles in itself, but it could be a harbinger of the future.

Umberto Eco once wrote a memorable essay claimed that the Apple Mac was a Catholic entity, while the IBM PC was a Protestant. His reasoning was, like the Roman Church, Apple offered a guaranteed route to salvation — Apple way – provided a fixed to it. PC users, had, on the other hand, to take personal responsibility for the work out of their own routes to heaven.

ECOS metaphor applies with a vengeance for the new generations of Apple iDevices, which is strictly controlled appliances. You think maybe you own your lovely, shiny new iPhone or iPad, but in reality, an invisible virtual string connects it back to Apple HQ on an infinite loop, Cupertino.

You can not install anything on it, which did not have the prior approval of Mr jobs and his subordinates. And if you are foolish enough to break the rules and examine your own path to salvation, so that you can find when you next attempt to synchronize with iTunes, as it has become an expensive paperweight, designed beautifully. If there is no power, so I do not know what is.

View the original article here

Google Nexus S ' Gingerbread ' Review

Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request

Let's get something out of the way first, and then we can get into the review proper. Ready?

Better than the iPhone 4. That's my review in a nutshell: the basic version of the Google Nexus S is better than the basic version of Apple's iPhone 4, assuming both are on a data contract - and that you have a Google account, which is pretty much essential to use an Android phone. That's based on nearly two months' use of the Nexus S, enough to have prodded around all its little foibles and either gotten used to them or remained frustrated by them, and comparing it for some time in parallel to an iPhone 4 (generously loaned by 3) and the rest of the time to an iPod Touch.

Unlock: keys to the kingdom
Home screen: make yourself at..
Battery life: it's got some
Buttons: a standard layout at last?
Web display: functionally better
Phone: it's meant to do this too
Press-and-hold: the key to the context
Notifications: another improvement on iOS
Keyboard: Houston, we have a prrebjsl
Autocorrect: this may be a failing
Market: or car boot sale?
Video: too
Multitasking: all together
Voice input: perhaps
NFC: nifty, if...
Overall: the verdict

That isn't to say that there aren't areas where the iPhone 4 is better than the Nexus S; there are. For instance, camera picture quality, keyboard autocorrection, keyboard, unified mailbox view, inbuilt ability to forward contacts via MMS, trustability of the app store, stability of apps.

But for me, using the Nexus S as a phone and a connectivity device with a Google account, the flexibility of the Android 2.3 "Gingerbread" operating system puts it ahead of the iPhone 4.2.1 in a number of areas: notably, the ability to pin phone numbers to screens, contextual settings, webpage display for reading, notification system, and - noticeably - battery life.

Let's begin then with the basics. The Google Nexus S is available via the Carphone Warehouse, and is Google's second venture into "own-branded" handsets (the first being the Google Nexus One about a year ago). It's actually made by Samsung. It has a slightly curved shape which fits well to the face. My biggest gripe there is that it is featureless - no physical buttons on the front face - that I found it difficult on pulling it from a pocket to know which way up I was holding it.

One feature of Android that I've always liked is its unlock system: rather than a PIN, it lets you swipe a pattern covering at least six points on a 3x3 grid to unlock it. (This is the system used within Google itself.) This seems to me the best match of easy to remember by the owner, yet hard to crack by others; and you can do it with one hand if you need to. A PIN system (like that offered by Apple, and Android as an alternative) is typically only four numbers, and harder to do one-handed because you have to lift your thumb from the screen.

You get five screens, each able to hold 16 (4x4) apps; the constant element in each is an icon menu which goes to the phone interface, the full apps folder, and the browser. By default the main home screen is empty - a perplexing choice, since you would at the very least want your contacts, email, text/MMS messaging and calendar apps there.

It's easy enough to add apps from the main folder, but forcing you to do it seems perverse. There's minimal, and then there's hands-off. This is the latter. Compare the iPhone, and Symbian, where the home screen comes pre-populated.

Worth mentioning this early. It's excellent - I could easily get two days from a full charge with constant 3G data access and Wi-Fi use. (Other people have reported different experiences, but this was Nokia-class, ie very good.) It's better than the iPhone 4, which starts looking peaky after a day of heavy use.

This being Google's design, the choice of button ordering on the bottom of the screen should be optimal, shouldn't it? (It's an OLED screen, and the buttons are virtual rather than physical.) The huge variation in Android phone button order has been rightly criticised, and Microsoft's decision to standardise it in Windows Phone 7 rightly praised. Here, it's Back / Contextual menu / Contextual search / Home. (On WP7 it's Back / Home / Search.) If Android phone manufacturers standardised around this layout, it would make it easier for Android users to switch phones without upsetting muscle memory. Then again, perhaps the manufacturers view that upset as a useful barrier.

The buttons did cause me problems sometimes. For example, in the official Twitter app, the "reply to this tweet" icon is on the bottom left of the screen - scant millimetres above the hard-coded back button, which takes you back to whatever you were just doing (which might or might not be reading Twitter). Many, many times I hit the "all back" rather than "reply" button - and remember that this was over the course of two months, so it wasn't a novice mistake. I simply could not adapt to it. My fingers never got smarter, and the screen certainly wasn't going to get larger.

The iPhone moved web display along dramatically through its use of the MobileSafari browser, which could give you an accurate rendition of a standard web page. Gingerbread goes one further, though: double-tap on a page and the text reflows so that you get the text, and any inset pictures (say that take half a column) are pushed aside. That makes it an excellent browser for reading the web; the typeface used is very legible.

The phone app is neat enough, breaking it down into a straight phone interface, call log (showing incoming, outgoing and missed, but not subdivided), contacts and favourites. It's good enough, but only as good as Windows Phone 7, which I didn't think was optimal.

The function is actually done better on the iPhone, which shows you "All" and "Missed" calls, and also has a tab to connect directly to voicemail. (With visual voicemail, it would be even better.) But of all the major platforms, Nokia actually does this best, with the Symbian interface showing you incoming, outgoing and missed calls. (Get it while you can - only 150m left.)

What's best is the ability to take a specific phone number and pin it directly to a home screen - so if you have a number (your home, office, spouse etc) that you want to be able to call with a single touch, you can pick it from a full contacts entry (eg if there are three or four numbers for your spouse, you can pick one). That's really excellent functionality which you can't get on Windows Phone 7 or the iPhone.

To add one of those numbers to a home screen - and indeed to do a lot of things on Android - the essential action is "press and hold" (also known as the "long press") - either on an element such as a phone number or contact or URL. This brings up a contextual menu which adds all sorts of functionality - share a URL on Twiter, say, email link, and so on. Press-and-hold the Home button and you get the list of the eight most recently used active applications, and you can then switch by touching any of them.

Context is all: press-and-hold on a contact on the Google Nexus S running Gingerbread shows a contextual menu

"Press and hold" ("long press") is such a useful functionality that when I was using the iPhone I found myself holding down icons and names uselessly and wondering briefly why nothing was happening. If Apple is smart it will find a way to add this function to future iOS releases.

Yet - and here's the surprise - Google has apparently ruled out press-and-hold from future OS releases (it isn't in Honeycomb, the tablet OS; that has a dedicated multitasking button), apparently because it thinks that the functionality isn't discoverable enough - as in, people don't realise it's there. If that's correct, it's a surprise: it's a simple way of adding lots more functionality to a button and screen.

Notifications in Gingerbread on the Google Nexus S: informative

Another thing that Gingerbread handles miles better than the iPhone: telling you when something has changed - email comes in, Twitter mentions, voicemail, whatever. The iPhone either throws up a dialogue that interrupts you (for example if a Wi-Fi network hoves into its view, or a calendar appointment comes due), or makes a noise.

You can pull down the 'Notifications' tab to find out what's been updated

On Gingerbread, by contrast, the top bar (where the phone and battery strength are always visible - are you listening, Windows Phone 7?) is also given over to "notifications" about Wi-Fi strength, phone diverts, Twitter mentions and messages, voicemails, downloads, installs and so on. You can then pull these down to examine them, and navigate straight to them from there, or clear them. You can also get a chime for texts.

Apparently Apple is overhauling notifications for an upcoming iOS release - not before time. Android runs over it on this one.

There's been a lot of excitement on some forums among users of earlier versions of Android about the "Gingerbread" keyboard (you can even download an independent developer's version for free from the Market).

iPhone 4 and Google Nexus S keyboards: identical sizes. So far so good...

Personally, after a long time of use and effort, I didn't like it. I found it difficult to be accurate over any length of time or at any meaningful speed. That's despite the fact that I used it every day for two months (a fact I keep emphasising because I know that otherwise people will say I haven't made the effort).

Beginning to type 'thid' on an iPhone and the Nexus S: the iPhone will autocorrect to 'this' when a space is hit; the Nexus might

And it's also despite the fact that the keyboard is exactly the same size as the iPhone keyboard, which I've also used regularly (on an iPod Touch). In theory there shouldn't be any difference in typing on them, should there? But there is.

I think the cause of the problem is down to Gingerbread's autocorrect. The Gingerbread system offers spelling corrections as you go along in a strip below the display area: what you've typed appears in white on the left, and the "best pick" word choice beside it in bold orange, and other choices appearing as you keep typing.

If you're mistyping and see the word you meant in that strip below, then you touch it and it's substituted. This does work. But often I found that because the strip in which the words appear is narrow, it's easy to hit a key instead, or something in the display area, either of which completely disrupts what you're doing and makes the problem worse.

An alternative correction system is to hit the space bar, which will again substitute the first pick; but the problem there is that the space bar is (again) scant millimetres from both the "context" and "search" buttons, so in mid-flow you can suddenly find yourself thrown off into picking a URL or a picture. That's confusing, but a natural consequence of the multiple functions being squeezed into a small space. I lost count of the number of times I swore at the keyboard as it put up that giant hurdle to productivity.

The autocorrecting algorithm isn't that good either. The reason why I can type better with the iPhone/iPod Touch keyboard is, i think, because it's better at working out what I'm (mis)typing.

Trying to type the same sentence on the iPhone 4 and the Nexus S (without looking at the screen in either case): the result isn't good for the Nexus.

Indeed, the keyboard interface remains the one - very significant - element that makes me wary of the Nexus S. The iPhone interface doesn't offer those additional contexts. Arguably, that's a defect in the iPhone, because you have to be more organised in how you collect data (say, if you want to tweet a URL or picture), but multitasking is available on either phone, so you can swap between apps, copy a URL and paste it in. I'd rather be able to type accurately.

At this point seasoned Android users will be saying "How stupid - you should just download a different keyboard from the Market!" (Swype was mentioned by some people, but it's not available on the Market, only from the site itself via beta.) Two thoughts on that: most people won't (just as - shock! - the vast majority of people won't root their phone) and second, this is meant to be Google's showcase phone and its showcase smartphone OS version. We're comparing defaults here. Swype may be very fine, but it's not installed. Yes, there are free keyboards on the Market which you can download and install. Pragmatically, though, defaults rule the world.

And: I did try Swiftkey. No difference, I'm afraid - the keyboard is the same size, which meant I kept making mistakes. My advice would be: try the keyboard carefully before buying.

Which takes us logically to the Market. Like the iPhone App Store, there's living proof of Sturgeon's Law there, but without the reassurance that Apple offers that Google is standing behind it. I did download a number of apps - including one which adds the (to me essential, yet omitted from Gingerbread) capability to forward contact details by text message. (With most of the world still on featurephones, this is still a common task, Google.) Plus an app for taking notes. Yup, note-taking should be in the next Android version, Google.

The improvement to the Market by putting it onto the web and letting apps download there is a big step forward, but all the app stores now face a crucial problem. Unlike the web, they don't have reputation and linking. There is no PageRank algorithm. The difference between the Market and the App Store feels to me like the difference between a bazaar (or perhaps a car boot sale) and a bank. You can get fantastic stuff in a car boot sale; you can also get royally ripped off. And banks can get broken into. But on balance, your money is safer in the bank. This seems like a crucial difference; until that gap is closed, there can't be a really successful paid-for ecosystem revolving around the Market.

Take one example: Cineworld, the national cinema chain. There's an iPhone app from within which you can book and buy a ticket anywhere in the country. On the Market, there are two unofficial apps which will show you what's playing where. No book, no buy. Arguably Cineworld is the one that's missing out here, given the popularity of Android phones in the UK. These things are chicken-and-egg, though; what does it take to get big organisations like that to think of writing Android apps?

Yet possibly Google actually likes it that way. After all, ad-funded apps give it more chances to sell ads; it gets nothing from developers' payments.

Everyone wants to know about video performance, as if we lived our lives watching video on our phones. It's good. YouTube plays well. I'm afraid I didn't try Farmville. So sue me.

The Nexus S handles this well (though apps seem to be suspended, rather than running concurrently). One annoyance is that various apps, including system apps, sometimes crash (or halt permanently). The phone itself did the same a couple of times, for no obvious reason, though never during a phone call.

This is reckoned (by Google) to be its triumph: you can use voice input for all sorts of things, such as writing texts or searching. It even has a dedicated button on the keyboard. Is it good? It's serviceable (and needs a good data connection - it's not done locally on the phone), but in lots of cases you don't want to be mumbling to your phone. Voice is potentially the biggest step forward in smartphone control; the iPhone and Windows Phone 7 both offer it to varying extents.

The Nexus S includes Near-Field Communications capability, which could be useful if we ever get mobile payments worked out properly in this country. (They're coming on Visa cards, but their advent to phones is slower.) Useful, at some point.

Pros: excellent functionality in operating system; press-and-hold ("long press") adds contextual elements; very good integration with Google services; future-proofed if NFC becomes effective.
Cons: keyboard can be extremely frustrating; Market still lacks apps from many big organisations; lack of markings on phone makes it hard to figure out which way you've got it up.

Basically, Gingerbread is arguably the best smartphone operating system you can get at the moment - if you can live with the keyboard. (If we had a more subtle star system, I'd give it 9/10.)

You can get it SIM-free at Amazon for £480. Or at Carphone Warehouse and other outlets.

You can also compare alternative deals via Top10.com - around £25 per month gets you 500MB and a free phone which looks like the best at the moment, but of course caveat emptor.

Further reading/reviews: Engadget; TechRadar (4/5); TechCrunch; Pocket Lint (9/10); CNet UK (9/10).

Have you tried it? Have you compared it? Let us know.

View the original article here

Google faces tackle claim

Google says fresh claims it has abused its market dominance, after a internet French search company accused the block development of competitors.

1plusV offers users thematic clustered Search Results but claims it has been forced to adopt Google technologies to access vital commercial advertising services. Versailles-based company is a competitor to Google's thematic — or "vertical" — search facilities. the European Commission initiated an investigation of market dominance by Google in november of last year after months of mounting complaints.

Accusations include claims that firms offering competitor services to Google has been ranked artificially low down popular searches. As well as 1plusV, companies have filed objections with the Commission includes Ciao. de, a German subsidiary of Microsoft, British price comparison site Foundem.co.uk and France Ejustice. fr.

Google has said it is cooperating with the Commission's investigation.

View the original article here

Google fight Spanish requirements to Remove ' libellous ' links

Google will challenge Spain's privacy regulator in court this week. Photo: Bloomberg/Getty Images

Google will this week challenge a Spanish demand will remove links to articles in newspapers, including El País and official journals, the items that have complained about violate their privacy.

Technology-giant has been ordered to remove nearly 100 online articles from its search listings by Spanish data protection authority, which Google warns would have a "deep," chilling effect on freedom of expression.

Google will challenge the orders in a Madrid Court on Wednesday, the result of which could constitute a precedent for controversial new for the release of internet in Spain.

Injunction against search engines is the only way to block access to sensitive materials published by these sites, the Spanish authorities argue that newspapers in the country legally can refuse to comply with more informal requests.

Google says, however, it works only as an intermediary, and therefore it cannot be held responsible for all content on the Internet.

Peter Barron, Google's Director of external relations for Europe, told the guardian: "we are disappointed by the Spanish privacy regulator acts. Spanish and European law rightly hold the Publisher of the material that is responsible for its content.

"Require intermediaries like search engines to censor material published by the other would have a profound, chilling effect on free expression without to protect people's personal information."

The event covers the five contested articles will reach Madrid magistrates ' court this week. Google will be ordered to remove articles from its search results, if its Court challenge has failed. However, the articles would still be available at newspaper sites should Google loses.

Requirements Follow a burgeoning public debate in Spain on the "right to be forgotten" – or to the right of people to delete their internet data "trails". Complaints from the public about their representation online has jumped 75% year after year, the country's privacy regulator said in June last year.

Padraig Reidy, news editor at index on censorship, said the ruling would have "massive ramifications" for freedom of expression. "What is worrying is the reason why they should go to Google, rather than the people who put up this content — some of which are legally bound.

"It intervenes in privacy law, and has massive ramifications on freedom of expression and how the Internet works. If Spain punish search engines for indexing content, how can there be freedom of speech? It looks like a level of people who don't know how the Internet works. "

Spain Agencia Española de Protección de Datos – national data protection agency – declined to comment.

• This article heading and the first subparagraph was amended on 17 January 2011 reflects the fact that complaints against Google is about invasion of privacy, rather than libel, as previously stated

View the original article here

Outbound Google boss Eric Schmidt sells shares

Eric Schmidt stepping as chief executive of Google but becomes Executive Chairman photograph: Graham Turner for guardian

Outbound Google boss Eric Schmidt said, he is preparing to sell shares in the search engine worth more than $ 326 m £ 200 m on the day after he raised from the top job.

The sale comes after the company announced that Google co-founder Larry Page would replace Schmidt as chief executive in April, take over the day-to-day running of the company. Schmidt becomes Executive Chairman. Share sale would be his first in more than three years.

Plan stock-trading, filed with the u.s. financial regulator the Securities and Exchange Commission, States that Schmidt plans to sell as much as 534,000 class a shares in the course of the year. Google's shares were worth $ 611.75 yesterday, making sales worth $ 326. 67 m to today's prices.

Sales represent only a fraction of Schmidt's Google fortune. His 10 years at the company has 55-year-old built a holding of 9.2 m Google shares worth $ 5.8bn.

The surprise announcement that Schmidt leaving chief executive job shocked Wall Street and Silicon Valley. He has worked closely with page and co-founder Sergey Brin for a decade to take the company public and build it into one of the most effective and successful companies in the world.

He intensified after tweeting that it no longer required "adult supervision". On a conference call with analysts Schmidt said: "I think Larry is ready. His ideas are very interesting and clever, and it is time for him to have shot at running this. "Last year Google was eclipsed by Facebook as the most visited site on the planet and Google have suffered setbacks in social media. Analysts believe the move may signal the company attempts to regain lead in innovation.

Colin Gillis, an analyst with BGC financial, wrote in a note to investors: "while Google has grown under Eric Schmidt's tenure as CEO, a case can also be made that it was not built any new material revenue streams, was intended for the construction of late mobile market has no effective social solutions, overbuilt its Headcount is placed and the Government regulators cross hairs."

View the original article here