Reader Comments

This sounds more promising. The problems I have had so far with their media efforts is that they have been too PC focussed. At the moment to get this experience we basically have to have a Media Centre PC sitting in our loungeroom as both the client and server. I don't want that, and can't afford it anyway. Basically I just want MS to make the media server elements standard across all versions of Windows, and then for them to license the Media Centre client look and feel to any manufacturer that wants to implement in on their device. This could be a PVR, XBox 2, PocketPC, SmartPhone, smart remote control etc etc My other issues have been with Windows Media Player 10, which have been a joke on portable devices like Pocket PCs. I love WMP10 on my PC, but MS refuses to allow it to be downloaded to my PPC as a RAM install. Instead I have to wait for HP to provide me with a ROM upgrade which is never going to happen, or buy one of their crummy new units which may/may not have WMP10 on it... Lame MS... Lame HP So in summary, I would say that MS have had typically good intentions, but sloppy execution so far. Let's hope they can do better before someone comes and copies their strategy and claims all the innovation for having got it right.

I notice you didn't mention the fact that the software crapped out on them a number of times during the demo. Digital home my ass.

Good intentions including turning your watch, tv, fridge and flashlight into a computer so it can run a version of Windows.. essentially? Yeah.. that's progress.. no conflict of interests here..

"MS have had typically good intentions, but sloppy execution..." You've just described their business model.

"I notice you didn't mention the fact that the software crapped out on them a number of times during the demo." It happens. I've seen Macs bomb during software demos as well (an Adobe presentation to be exact).

Paul also didn't mention that HP is coming out with a Linux-based media center. Also, what do you want to bet that Paul doesn't report on all the new car stereo options for the iPod from Clarion, Pioneer and others.

This is a windows news site. Linux and iPod accessories don't fit into this site. I don't agree with a lot of his views or whatnot but you need to know where to be critical and when to know that something doesn't fit into the site. If HP were dropping MCE for Linux he'd report it I'm sure but in addition to MCE big deal it doesn't fit in with the site.

Yes but it's so much more satisfying when it happens to Bill. At least when the Adobe app crashed, the entire OS didn't come down ala BSOD ala Windows ala piece of crap.

Well the iPod does run on the Windows platform, so I would say that it is valid material for a Windows "news" site. I use the term "news" very loosely when referring to this site, since it tends more towards fanboy cheering that objective reporting and analysis. Case in point...notice how none of the many keynote glitches (one with a Media Center PC, one with an XBox, one with a Tablet PC) weren't mentioned in this article. And this is with supposely mature products. Maybe this is why "the software giant hasn't yet received the credit it deserves."

I got a Media Center PC in November, and it hasn't crashed yet. Those of you who are ALWAYS detracting need to update your systems. Windows XP, while not crash-proof, is VERY, VERY stable. Let's move on...

"I got a Media Center PC in November, and it hasn't crashed yet. Those of you who are ALWAYS detracting need to update your systems. Windows XP, while not crash-proof, is VERY, VERY stable. Let's move on... " Amen. I use XP daily, 8-12 hours a day on weekdays, and I haven't seen the OS crash in about a year. And even then, it was the stupid ATI video driver update I installed. Thank goodness for system restore.

And this is site is a Windows information site so I expect material is aimed at Windows users / lovers and so it is appropriate that it should be biased towards Windows, Microsoft and its other products.

Why don't the people who hate Microsoft just go and buy an Apple and stop complaining. Personally, I love my Media Center PC, my Tablet PC and my other laptop and none of them crash. I agree with one of the other posters that the people who complain need to upgrade their systems. I bet half of them are using Windows '98 - please..... As an additional point, I find it so annoying that people constantly criticise Microsoft for wanting to make money, but ignore the fact that Apple computers are grossly overpriced and come with average specifications.

Nice report Paul, looking forward to those Tablet Power Toys.

Perfect presentation, the true reflection of the state of m$ software. Like the attitude also - grim smiles all the way. Especially the King-Kong size watches.

"Good intentions including turning your watch, tv, fridge and flashlight into a computer so it can run a version of Windows.. essentially? Yeah.. that's progress.. no conflict of interests here.." No what I meant was that they have good intentions in that they have an idea for something new, but their execution (from my experience) in implementing it has typically been sloppy the first few goes where it should be right from go. Anyway, you seem to have gone off on a rather bizarre little tangent that I find rather curious. You do not seem to like the idea of these devices being made more intelligent by the addition of more computing functionality- I assume that is what you mean by your apparent grudge in having these devices being made "into a computer"? Perhaps you could go back to using a sun dial instead of a more modern digital watch, use a mechanical projector for watching movies, a store room under your home for keeping things cool, or use two sticks of wood rubbed together instead of a flashlight. That really sounds like progress to me- Good one. It would seem to resolve your "conflict of interest" though, given you seem to hate the idea of smart devices for no particular reason other than to bag MS. Steve

"Perhaps you could go back to using a sun dial instead of a more modern digital watch, use a mechanical projector for watching movies, a store room under your home for keeping things cool, or use two sticks of wood rubbed together instead of a flashlight." [Checks wrist...] Hmmm, no sundial, but no digital watch either. Actually, other than when engaged in athletics or other activities requiring specialized, non-generic timekeeping, *WHO THE $#@!* would wear a digital watch? They're the height of tackiness and geekhood. [Checks local movie theather listings...] Nope, no one seems to have digital projectors. Film and reels, all the way... [Checks basement...] Yes, the wine cellar is performing perfectly, keeping my extensive collection of vino at a near-perfect temperature and humidity, without costing me a dime (thus helping me to purchase the aforementioned collection) and without requiring any maintenance, intervention, or risking any failure. [Checks candles on table set for romantic dinner with wife...] OK, lit with a match rather than two sticks, but definitely not anything requiring electricity for either the ignition or the resultant illumination. What's my point? Simply that not everything needs or is well-suited to the introduction of certain levels of "progress". Yes, I'm typing this on a computer that has abilities not dreamed of 20 years ago, and for that I am very appreciative -- but it's a very poor argument to assume that all aspects of life want or need to be "made more intelligent by the addition of more computing functionality".

“but it's a very poor argument to assume that all aspects of life want or need to be ‘made more intelligent by the addition of more computing functionality’.” That’s a straw man, since I never made that argument and entirely disingenuous on your part to try put words into my mouth. Given you can’t seem to remember (I assume you are quite old and recollection is not your best asset) you listed specific examples of where integrated computing technology does not improve the device. I argued otherwise for these. Now given you seem to be arguing an argument I never actually made, I will try reiterate *my* point. All of the devices you listed have been improved by incorporating computing technology. Digital Watches do improve time keeping. No argument. Your assertions that they are limited to “geekhood” and unfashionable is just a silly red herring which isn’t even accurate. You need to just check out Diesel’s range of watches to realise that retro digital is very in. People pay hundreds of dollars for them. Digital TV’s have allowed for higher definition Video and Sound. Digital Projection systems will improve picture and sound quality in the theatre once they are introduced. Mechanical projectors will go the way of the audio tape. Now Great, you have a wine cellar. I'm glad you were able to get rid of your fridge because of that. No? Still have that annoying habit of having to eat food that hasn't rotted? Perhaps you go out and club something every time your lovely wife wants something to eat. Speaking of romantic dinners… No point made since your initial use was specified as a "Flash Light". Unlike yourself, I don't confuse the need to brightly illuminate something with the need to get romantic with mood lighting. Technology has become omnipresent in our society, and it's going to evaporate anytime soon no matter how much an old timer like yourself squawks and whines away about how great the good old days were when your car didn't have a higher IQ than yourself. Steve

“Well the iPod does run on the Windows platform, so I would say that it is valid material for a Windows "news" site. “ No you are confused. Apple’s iTunes software runs on *some* Windows OS’s, but not all. It doesn’t run particularly well from my experience either. Now the iPod is a piece of hardware. It doesn’t run on anything other than a battery.. :cP Personally I’m not particularly interested in hearing whether a piece of Apple hardware interfaces with a piece of Clarion hardware etc. It seems obvious to me that such a hardware interface has absolutely nothing to do with Windows. “I use the term ‘news’ very loosely when referring to this site, since it tends more towards fanboy cheering that objective reporting and analysis. “ Because if we go to any Apple or Linux enthusiast site like ThinkSecret or /. we would find the “objective reporting and analysis” you seem to so desperately desire? Right... Steve

jesus christ you people...

nice try.. but no dice.. Windows doesn't think your watch needs a computer in it either.. but they'll do it because that means they can put WINDOWS ON IT. You can't install Windows on a TV.. you have to turn your TV into a PC first.. then you can put WIndows on it. DUH! CONFLICT OF INTERESTS. No one actually thinks this stuff is useful or innovative.. Billy Boy is just taking the most important element to MS's profit and saying.. oh okay.. running out of ppl to sell this to.. Why do you think Windows in on Cell Phones and PDA's? Does it make it better.. mmm .. not really..

2005: The Year of Convergence

Convergence. The presentation showed the ultimate convergence - first the slide-show failed, than tablet pc, than xbox. All perfectly converging ;)

"MS have had typically good intentions, but sloppy execution..." You've just described their business model. ----- Except for the good intentions part. You guys gotta get off convergence.. a cell phone that digitally adopts PDA functions is like convergence.. but barely.. Can you guys give some examples of this amazing convergence? How about the retarded bluetooth devices hooked up to portable music players.. hows that for redundant techn--i mean convergence?

Just for the record, the slide show failed because the stage lights overpowered the infra red remote control. The tablet PC didn't fail, there was a momentary lapse of internet connectivity that resumed the moment the presenter started talking about something else. As for the x-box, that was a pre-release version of software which is bound to have bugs in it. The people who hate Microsoft love to twist things...

"nice try.. but no dice.. Windows doesn't think your watch needs a computer in it either.." Nice try? If I were you I'd try learn to construct coherent sentences and start making sense before dismissing my opinion. Windows doesn’t “think” anything, it’s just a computing platform! MS is trying to implement parts of that platform on a variety of devices to better enable the overall experience of using these devices via convergence and networking. Now you have failed to present a coherent and logical argument as to why this is a bad thing. Statements like “No one actually thinks this stuff is useful or innovative“ without presenting any evidence to back up this view does not a successful argument make. For the record, Windows on handhelds has been demonstrably a good thing. If they hadn’t moved into and innovated this space, we would all still be playing around with dinky little mono-Palms. MS and the Windows platform brought things like multitasking, colour, multimedia, expansion, and wireless to handhelds. Dismissing any of these is just demonstrating your own cluelessness rather succinctly. Steve

“’MS have had typically good intentions, but sloppy execution...’ You've just described their business model. ----- Except for the good intentions part. You guys gotta get off convergence.. a cell phone that digitally adopts PDA functions is like convergence.. but barely.. Can you guys give some examples of this amazing convergence? How about the retarded bluetooth devices hooked up to portable music players.. hows that for redundant techn--i mean convergence? ” Why would they not have good intentions? Again you detractors rabidly attack like a pack of mad dogs, but you never present any evidence to justify your silly claims. I said they had good intentions because they are obviously trying to provide functionality that they think consumers will want. That seems like good intentions to me? Your statements on convergence are confusing, but that’s ok I think the whole thing is fairly nebulous at the moment and still a work in progress. I like to think more of it as making devices smarter. Eg: Your cell phone is still a cell phone, but it also happens to be able to synch with your desktop Outlook to tell you of your upcoming meetings, play some tunes, and play some games etc etc. That is something I definitely want. Personally, I still believe in specialised devices like the iPod. I mean look at the flop the iPod photo has been. Sometimes I wonder if consumers can actually handle more than one function from a device- your average consumer being just that daft. I think their will always be consumers that just want a plain basic device that only does its’ primary function. They just can’t handle anything more. I’m not sure why you don’t like Bluetooth devices? You never specified coherently which ones you are talking about? BT is just a personal networking technology. I don’t think it has anything to do with convergence. Steve

Windows.. as in the MS Windows Team that builds all this stuff! Yikes.. Furthermore.. The thing with convergence..as you'll see with the PSP.. is that it spells COMPROMISE. The iPod Photo is hardly a huge compromise, and should do fine.. obviously the price point is too high.. HP wouldn't be rolling them out if they weren't selling.. But really, convergence may work in some scenarios.. but in all likelihood, it'll be just like the TV/VCR combo.. great idea.. impossible to repair/annoying to use.. hard to sell.. overpriced.. compromised functionality..

"But really, convergence may work in some scenarios.. but in all likelihood, it'll be just like the TV/VCR combo.. great idea.. impossible to repair/annoying to use.. hard to sell.. overpriced.. compromised functionality.. " Describing convergence as a compromise is an ill informed way of putting it. Convergence shouldn't be about trying to make a device do everything, or compromise. It still leaves room for devices with specialised functionality. It's more about providing overlapping functionality when it makes sense. The ultimate example is the camera phone. We all know they take sucky pictures yet the market for these devices exploded to unbelievable proportions. Clearly something is being offered by the converged device that makes it attactive to consumers, but it won't eliminate the digital camera market any time soon. There is room in the market for both devices, and consumers are still ultimately happier because one of the devices in question offers more than its' base functionality. P.S. The iPod photo is a poor multimedia device. Save for hard drive, handhelds do multimedia exceedingly better at a more affordable price. It's not suprise at all to me why they arn't selling as well as your standard vanilla iPod. I'd wait for Apple to get their act together to provide a real multimedia unit that takes advantage of all the space and power and justifies the exporbitant cost. Steve

Steve you just proved my point.. If the Camera technology is beareable/good on cell phones.. which you insist it is.. then just imagine how much cheaper Digital Cameras themselves are. Of course! That's the whole point! Convergence means you have one form factor and you're trying to fit two DIFFERENT products into it.. ie. The PS2 is NOT convergence because it has a DVD player and a Game system.. these are two similar devices. You calling me ill-informed is just quaint, since you backpedalled the whole way through your response. ... The iPod photo will do better at a more affordable price, regardless of the handheld nature.. what a waste of time writing that sentence. The point is.. Convergence has always been idealistic and will always be idealistic.. The ONLY reason it's accidentally being mentioned, regarding successful products (You'll see I'm right in a years time when the PSP is mainstream in the US, and no one uses it for a music player because it's about three times the size of an iPod.. wait..) is because corners can be cut DIGITALLY, so to speak. Since the internals are NOT compromised by physical machinery, we can talk about the flexibility of software.. but still the physical limitations are the problem. Form Factor. Camera prices are coming down so phone companies include a jaggy camera on a $150 phone, plus a 3 year contract.. as things get better, the price comes down and the quality goes up. Such is technology. But REAL digicams experience even more value increase over that same span of time so the compromise is ever-present. Until the compromise goes away, convergence will always be a joke.

XP MCE 2005 utterly rules! Especially on my 32" flat panel ;-) Apple are going to feel the pain pretty soon for there naivety and complacency.

Yep I agree. Apple too often rely on their machines or devices having a certain 'cool' factor which disguises the fact that they are generally technically inferior to competing devices and are normally much MUCH more expensive than everything else. I just hope your average joe schmo will start to realise they should buy something for how good it is rather than whether the cool kids own one.

I'm not a big fan of any of the major players to be honest but I do like most new technologies coming out today. I think people should stop complaining and just enjoy the ride. At the end of the day all the big players are just companies trying to make money so its irrelevant which one wins because they are all ultimately out for the same reasons. Its irritating when people compain at Microsoft becuause Apple would LOVE to be in their positions. And don't get me started on Linux. Just because it is 'free' it doesn't mean that TCO is by any means free especially to corporate buyers. Ultimately the companies are ALL the same and we should treat them all as the same.

Yep I agree. Apple too often rely on their machines or devices having a certain 'cool' factor which disguises the fact that they are generally technically inferior -- You realize that the iPod's priced is propped up by demand, right? Besides the iPod, you have to give an example.. If you know of the MHz Myth, we can skip over that. I assume you do. Over and over, when talking about comparable systems, the Mac is more affordable. The very young line of Xserves is an amazing value. This is a totally different Apple than the one that priced the orginal Mac at a ludicrous $3000.

"If the Camera technology is beareable/good on cell phones.. which you insist it is.. then just imagine how much cheaper Digital Cameras themselves are. Of course! That's the whole point! Convergence means you have one form factor and you're trying to fit two DIFFERENT products into it.. ie. The PS2 is NOT convergence because it has a DVD player and a Game system.. these are two similar devices. You calling me ill-informed is just quaint, since you backpedalled the whole way through your response." Well no. For starters I wasn't calling you ill informed personally, I was saying your view that convergence being all about compromise is ill informed… in my opinion. Don’t take it personally. Now, I am finding what you say very confusing. Like your first statement on “beareable” sic camera technology on cell phones. I am NOT insisting the technology is adequate, consumers are hence why they have bought them to the point where Nokia now sells more digital cameras than Sony does. Why I should then go on to imagine “How much cheaper Digital Cameras themselves are” is anyone’s idea. I have no idea what you are trying to say. The rest of your post I also find confusing. Like your statement “Convergence means you have one form factor and you're trying to fit two DIFFERENT products into it..”. Again, this couldn’t be further from what I am saying, so I am not sure why I am “backpeddling”. Especially since I stated a couple of posts back that I do not believe converged devices are going to eliminate specialised devices anyway. Again, because you aren’t actually reading my posts. I have said I like to think of convergence as making devices smarter with overlapping functions. In my argument, the PS2 including DVD playback IS convergence because it is overlapping two FUNCTIONS in one device- you seem to have this obsession in it being HARDWARE only. Ironically, you insist that the PSP’s music function IS convergence while DVD playback IS NOT even though both devices are just playing a digital file off a drive. Go figure. Can you see why I find you confusing now? You don’t seem to have a clear and coherent view on convergence. Get one and we’ll continue the discussion. P.S. Your statements on the PSP being a flop convergence device. Come back to me when your statements have proved to be true, otherwise I got it first time you said it. No need to keep repeating yourself. It doesn’t make what you are saying any more truthful. Steve

The iPod really isn't very good at all. People just like them because its the cool gadget to get at the moment. People who follow the in-crowd make me sick. The iRiver is a much better device.

That's not convergence. That's software. *shakes head So if Apple comes out with this Pages app that combines Word and Excel.. you'd say that's convergence!? Oh jeez.. PSP IS CONVERGENCE BECAUSE THE FORM FACTOR REQUIRES COMPROMISE OF COURSE!! It combines very different things, while the PS2 only combines two very very similar things.. an optical drive that plays.. DVD discs.. That's not convergence!

“ That's not convergence. That's software. *shakes head So if Apple comes out with this Pages app that combines Word and Excel.. you'd say that's convergence!? Oh jeez.. PSP IS CONVERGENCE BECAUSE THE FORM FACTOR REQUIRES COMPROMISE OF COURSE!! It combines very different things, while the PS2 only combines two very very similar things.. an optical drive that plays.. DVD discs.. That's not convergence! “ Providing two or more different FUNCTIONS in ONE DEVICE where those FUNCTIONS typically used to require TWO SPECIALISED DEVICES is convergence. Games Machine + Movie/Music Player = Convergence. Portable Games Machine + Movie/Music Player = Convergence. Simple really I don’t see why you are struggling with it. It has absolutely nothing to do with constricted form factors, or compromises. That is not the intention of the engineers when they are designing the product. Your definition is truly absurd- I am stunned. Again, because you are struggling to understand what I am saying, I never mentioned SOFTWARE, I am talking FUNCTIONS. Your rather lame Apple, Word, Excel straw man is a convergence of APPLICATIONS, but given we are talking about DEVICE FUNCTIONS here it is irrelevant. Stop squawking about hardware. Consumers don’t give a rat about hardware when purchasing a device, they are just interested in what FUNCTIONS it performs. The hardware/software present is just an enabler for those FUNCTIONS. Either get your act together and get on the same page and stop projecting what you want me to say rather than what I am saying, or go argue with yourself in the mirror. Frankly I think you will probably have more luck with the latter. Steve

BUY A MAC!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"BUY A MAC!!!!!!!!!!!!!" Yeah, so then the single Mac user out there won't be so lonley.... :c)

DONT BUY A MAC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ( they suck )