Geek Central

Thanks to relatively fast internet speeds and cheap hard drives, we’ve never had access to so much digital media. Many people’s music collections run to tens, if not hundreds of thousands of songs, and while most methods of downloading TV shows and movies are generally not exactly legal, you can bet that most technologically aware consumers have a healthy library of AVI and MPG files. However, while the various forms of digital media can all be viewed or played on a PC, few people choose to have a PC located in the living room. Microsoft’s persistent vision of the PC as the centre of your digital living room has generally failed to materialize. Although it’s now easier than ever to connect a flat-screen digital TV to a PC, few of us actually want an ugly, noisy and generally large box in our living rooms.

PCs were never intended as media delivery platforms, and although they now excel at that task, they are generally found in studies and bedrooms. Even if you do have a PC in your lounge, the chances are that it’s tucked away in a corner, probably connected to printers and other peripherals, and nowhere near your TV and surround-sound amp.

There’s also the issue that if you use your TV as your PC’s monitor, the display is going to suck for anything other than watching video, because a horizontal resolution of 720, or if you’re lucky 1080 lines, is frankly horrible for standard Windows operation. Laptops are perhaps more suited to connecting to your TV as they are by their very nature portable, and if you have a relatively new one, it is likely to have an HDMI output and maybe even a Blu-Ray drive. Still, it’s not the most elegant solution, so we’ll look at what options you have for streaming your media around your home.

Hot and Bothered

A couple of years ago, before Vista’s storm cloud darkened the horizon, there was a flurry of enthusiasm for the so-called Home Theatre PC. The idea was to take the PC out of its native environment, and stick it next to your TV, to serve up music, films and TV, and if you were really advanced, use it as a PVR, too. The problem is, no matter how much you spend on a small-form factor case, finished in aircraft-grade aluminium with blue LEDs and a VFD display, it’s still essentially a PC, with all the drawbacks that implies.

If you want to use it as a PVR, it needs to be left on 24 hours a day, which Windows was never designed to do. If you don’t, it can take an age to startup. On top of that is the noise that most PCs generate, which can ruin the ambience during quiet parts of your favorite film. In terms of PVR functionality too. The original version of Windows XP Media Center was also not without its problems, although the version within Vista is much improved. Still, do you really want to use Vista, unless you really have to? The solution then, is not to put your PC next to the TV, but rather get the media files from your PC onto your TV, stereo or laptop that’s situated in another room of the house. Although there have been devices round for a few years to do this, most of them have been pretty limited.

As the technology has matured, things have improved significantly, and there’s a wealth of media streamers and media extenders to choose from. Most will require some sort of network connection, but some make use of internal hard drives, or have USB ports so that you can plug in an external drive. We’ll look at two ways of streaming media, either to your TV or to another PC or laptop, and the software and hardware you’ll need to do the job.

Give us a Squeeze

When it comes to connecting your PC to your TV or stereo, there are some devices that just stream audio, while others can stream audio, video and pictures. Most of the best ones will be of a similar form factor to a hi-fi separate, or DVD player, so that they won’t look out of place in a hi-fi rack, or under your TV.

One of the first audio streaming devices was the Squeezebox, from Slim Devices (now part of Logitech), which used an Ethernet connection to stream audio to any hi-fi source. It had a basic remote and display, but just about did the job. Squeezeboxes now use 802.llg wireless, and can stream pretty much any music format from your PC, as well as connect to a number of internet radio stations.

Terratec has the Noxon which does a similar job, although it has to be said, it not only looks odd, the menu is pretty hard to use, which makes it a bit of a chore to use. The latest streamer from Slim Devices is the Squeezebox Duet, which consists of a base unit, and a handset, complete with color LCD display. The base unit is connected to your stereo or portable speakers, and the rechargeable handset is then used to control your music, in a very similar way to how you would control an iPod. The handset uses WiFi to control the server software, but it will also work with Direct Access Storage devices, such as MAS drives with media server support, so you don’t even need to leave your PC on to use it. You can even control older Squeezebox devices, if you purchase the handset on its own. At around $370 it’s not exactly cheap, but it does represent the ultimate boy’s toy when it comes to music control.

If you’re more of an Apple fan, then you can stream your iTunes music library using AirTunes and an Airport Express adaptor, which will work with any router, and not just Apple’s. The Airport Express adaptor plugs into a wall socket, and then into your speakers or stereo. The only issue with this is that you either need to set iTunes to just play a load of music, or you will need to control AirTunes from your PC, unless you have a set of speakers that enable direct control of your iTunes library. Still, if you have a laptop, it’s probably easier to use AirTunes than it is to connect your laptop to your hi-fi, but it’s still not an ideal solution.

Rather than just listen to our music collections though, most of us want to be able to watch downloaded video on our TVs. There are two main types of device that enable you to do this, pure streamers and units that contain an internal hard drive.

Perhaps one of the best known is the Apple TV. The Apple TV looks much like the Apple Mini, is devoid of buttons and comes with the same dinky remote that is supplied with the Apple MacBook.

The unit contains a hard drive (either 40 or 120GB), 802.1ln wireless and a variety of connection methods for attaching to your TV and stereo. The interface is pretty slick (it’s the same one used in Leopard for Front Row), and the latest update enables you to download video directly onto the internal hard drive, rather than the previous method where you had to download videos to your PC using iTunes, then sync with the Apple TV. Although MPEG4 video is supported, it is only in Quicktime or H.264 format, so you won’t be able to playback any DivX or XviD content. TV shows and films can now be both bought as well as rented, although it has to be said the selection is pretty limited.

Still, it’s one of the few legal ways to download and watch high-definition movies, which counts for something. Though it pains us to say it, being an Apple product, it does tend to just work. However, while it may appeal to less technical users, it has too many limitations to recommend to the more savvy PC user. Dual Band Equals Win

There are plenty of alternatives to choose from though, pick any major brand associated with networking, and the chances are that the company has a solution. We’ve tested a number of them over the last couple of years, and it has to be said that a lot of them have had some serious flaws, from a lack of HD outputs, to slow, or even no, wireless connections.

Usability is a key issue with media streamers and many of the devices produced by networking companies have tended to fall down on this front in the past. The main issue is usually the interface, it’s not uncommon for menus to have too many levels, so just choosing a song to play back involves several minutes of button-pushing on the remote. In addition, any device using an 802.11g wireless connection is going to suffer when it comes to video and you can forget about HD video entirely. Last year saw a raft of new media streamers released, and while most have moved to 802.lln, some are using 802.11n dual-band, which uses both 2.4 and 5GHz spectrum to provide the extra bandwidth needed for HD video. You will of course need a compatible router.

When choosing a media streamer, look for a good range of outputs, including HDMI, Component, S-Video, digital audio output via coaxial or optical ports, and analogue stereo RCA plugs. File format supports is one of the most important aspects, make sure the device you choose can play all the common file types, such as DivX, XviD, H.264 encoded video, MP3, AAC, WMV audio, JPEG, GIF and BMP image formats. Due to Apple’s proprietary DRM, you probably won’t be able to play any music in your music library that has been purchased from the iTunes Music Store, although some manufactures have claimed compatibility in the past.

While some media adaptors come with their own server software, others rely on Windows Media Center, or Windows Media Player 11. Some software is better than others, but the best will enable you to select a series of folders to share, and the server software will then monitor the folders for changes, so that even when you add new files, they are accessible on your media streamer. The problem is that as the software has to be installed on your PC, you need to leave it on if you want your media streamer to be able to connect to it. Some NAS devices come with a built-in media server and this can often be accessed by a media streamer, but you’ll need to check the specs to find out if this feature is supported. The advantage of this system is that you can simply copy all your media to the NAS, and you don’t have to keep your PC on 24 hours a day. Media Player 11 tends to work best when sharing between Vista machines, but can be used to share media with other PCs running Windows XP and some media streamers.

However, we’ve found it can be notoriously fickle, often refusing connections, and it doesn’t seem to update the library with any consistency when you add new files.

Systems that use Media Center tend to be much more reliable. Getting content from your PC to your TV requires a network connection, and few people are fortunate enough to have network points in every room of their house. It is, of course, possible to run network cable from room to room, but unless you’re redecorating and can bury it in the wall, or run the cable under the carpet, it’s not terribly practical or attractive. While wireless has been widely used in the home for quite a few years now, unless you are running an 802.11n system, you’ll find that streaming video is a distinctly unhappy affair, and streaming HD is virtually impossible. Even 802.11n can struggle with HD video, if your house has thick walls, or your router is a long way away from your media streamer.

The latest routers and some media streamers use 802.1ln dual-band, where the extra bandwidth is used in order to maintain a high data throughput. If you want to stream HD content, then you may want to look at these options. Some CD burning software, such as Roxio’s Creator Suite, and Nero Burning ROM also offer media sharing, but we’re not great fans of these suites, as they add a huge amount of bloat to your Windows install.

A Noise Annoys

If you can’t get a good wireless signal and Ethernet cable is impractical, then you could try powerline networking. There are a number of products available from the likes of Devolo and Netgear. These are basically plug adaptors, which you connect a network cable to and then plug into a three-pin mains socket. Plug another one into your router and you can use your house’s electrical cables as an extended network.

Results can be a bit mixed, depending on how old the wiring in your house is and how much ‘noise’ is on the wiring. Noise is high-frequency interference on your wiring, and is generally created by any device that contains a motor, such as a vacuum cleaner, hair dryer, washing machine or tumble dryer. If there’s a lot of noise on your powerline network, then speeds can drop, or you may lose the connection altogether, so it’s something you need to be aware of. Another issue is that there is no single standard for powerline networking, although most devices use either standards from either the HomePlug Powerline Alliance or Universal Powerline Association.

If you are using devices from more than one manufacture, make sure they both use the same standard. An alternative to a networked device, is one that contains a hard drive, and which can be loaded with content by connecting to your PC using a USB cable.

We’re great fans of the Tvix series of devices (www.tvixbox.co.za), because they often do a far better job than most of the standard media streamers, and have menus that are more intuitive and easier to use.

One of our favourites is the HDM-6500A. You will need to pop a SATA hard drive inside, but once you do you get HD output through HDMI or if you are lacking in a TV that has HDMI support you can use either the Component S-Video or composite that are provided. You can connect it to your PC using USB 2.0 and transfer files to the internal hard drive, plug a removable drive into one of the USB ports, or connect it to your network using an Ethernet cable.

The server software is basic to the extreme, as it’s basically just using Windows networking and Samba, but as an added bonus, you can upload files across the network to the unit, using FTP. Tvix is also one of the few companies that provides regular firmware updates, in order to add new features to its devices. Not only that, but the HD M-6500A has an expansion slot, into which you can plug an optional analogue or digital TV tuner card, and the unit has full PVR functionality; something that’s not offered by virtually any other media streamer. Even better than that though, the remote control has glow-in-the-dark buttons, so no matter how low you turn the lights down, you’ll always be able to find the right control.

The final choice is to not buy a media extender at all, because you probably have one in your living room already. Microsoft’s Xbox 360, Sony’s Playstation 3 and the Nintendo Wii, can all be used as media extenders to some degree or other. Although this functionality was built into both the Xbox and the Playstation, it’s not something that was originally intended for the Wii, yet using the console’s internet connection, it suddenly becomes possible. But no matter how good these consoles and streamers are, it’s actually your humble PC that makes it all possible.

With Internet Explorer 8 now available, can Microsoft hope to retain market dominance over fierce open source rivals such as Mozilla’s Firefox or the feature packed Opera web browser. Can history give us a clue to what the future of web browsers/browsing might hold? How did Netscape Navigator go from having a dominant 89.36% market share of all web browsers in 1996 and yet only 3.76% by mid 1999?

Let us take a journey that will begin long before even the intellectual conception of Internet Explorer, that will glance at its long defeated rivals, examine the current browsers available and will end with a prediction of what the future of browsing will offer us – and which browser(s) will still be around to offer it.

People often think that Internet Explorer has been the dominant web browser since the golden age of the internet began. Well for a very long time now it has indeed been the most popular browser and at times been almost totally unrivalled. This was mainly a result of it being packaged free with Microsoft Windows, in what some would later call a brutal monopolisation attempt by Microsoft. The last few years however have heralded the arrival of new, possibly superior browsers. Mozilla’s Firefox has been particularly successful at chipping away at Explorers market dominance. So where did it all begin, and why were Microsoft ever allowed to have a hundred percent market dominance?

Origins

The truth is they never did have total dominance, but at times they have come very close. Microsoft actually entered the Browser Battle quite late on. Infact a man named Neil Larson is credited to be one of the originators of internet browsers, when in 1977 he created a program – The TRS-80 – that allowed browsing between “sites” via hypertext jumps. This was a DOS program and the basis of much to come. Slowly other browsers powered by DOS and inspired by the TRS 80 were developed. Unfortunately they were often constricted by the limitations of the still fairly young internet itself.

In 1988, Peter Scott and Earle Fogel created a simple, fast browser called Hytelnet, which by 1990 offered users instant logon and access to the online catalogues of over five thousand libraries around the world – an exhilarating taste of what the internet, and web browsers, would soon be able to offer.

In 1989 the original World Wide Web was born. Using a NeXTcube computer, Tim Berners-Lee created a web browser that would change how people used the internet forever. He called his browser the WorldWideWeb(http://www., which is still likely to sound familiar to internet users today. It was a windowed browser capable of displaying simple style sheet, capable of editing sites and able to download and open any file type supported by the NeXTcube.

In 1993 the first popular graphical browser was released. Its name was Mosaic and it was created by Marc Andreessen and Eric Bina. Mosaic could be run on both Unix, and very importantly, on the highly popular Microsoft Windows operating system (incidentally it could also be used on Amiga and Apple computers). It was the first browser on Windows that could display graphics/pictures on a page where there was also textual content. It is often cited as being responsible for triggering the internet boom due to it making the internet bearable for the masses. (It should be noted that the web browser Cello was the first browser to be used on Windows – but it was non graphical and made very little impact compared to Mosaic).

The Browser Wars – Netscape Navigator versus Internet Explorer

Mosaic’s decline began almost as soon as Netscape Navigator was released (1994). Netscape Navigator was a browser created by Marc Andreessen, one of the men behind Mosaic and co-founder of Netscape Communications Corporation. Netscape was unrivalled in terms of features and usability at the time. For example, one major change from previous browsers was that it allowed surfers to see parts of a website before the whole site was downloaded. This meant that people did not have to wait for minutes simply to see if the site they were loading was the actual one the were after, whilst also allowing them to read information on the site as the rest of it downloaded. By 1996 Netscape had almost 90% market dominance, as shown below.

Market Share Comparisons of Netscape Navigator and Internet Explorer from 1996 to 1998

………………..Netscape…….IE
October 1998……….64%………32.2%
April 1998…………70%………22.7%
October 1997……….59.67%……15.13%
April 1997…………81.13%……12.13%
October 1996……….80.45%……12.18%
April 1996…………89.36%…….3.76%

In these two years Netscape clearly dominated the internet browser market, but a new browser named Internet Explorer was quickly gaining ground on it.

Microsoft released their own browser (ironically based on the earlier Mosaic browser which was created by one of the men now running Netscape), clearly worried about Netscape’s dominance. It was not so much the worry that it would have a 100% market share of internet browsers on their Windows operating system, but more the worry that browsers would soon be capable of running all types programs on them. That would mean foregoing the need for an actual operating system, or at the most only a very basic one would be needed. This in turn would mean Netscape would soon be able to dictate terms to Microsoft, and Microsoft were not going to let that happen easily. Thus in August 1995, Internet Explorer was released.

By 1999 Internet explorer had captured an 89.03% market share, whilst Netscape was down to 10.47%. How could Internet Explorer make this much ground in just two years? Well this was down to two things really. The first, and by far the most important was that Microsoft bundled Internet Explorer in with every new copy of Windows, and as Windows was used by about 90% of the computer using population it clearly gave them a huge advantage. Internet Explorer had one other ace it held over Netscape – it was much better. Netscape Navigator was stagnant and had been for some time. The only new features it ever seemed to introduce were often perceived by the public as beneficial for Netscape’s parent company rather than Netscape’s user base. (i.e., features that would help it monopolise the market). Explorer, on the other hand, was given much attention by Microsoft. Regular updates and excellent usability plus a hundred million dollar investment would prove too much for Netscape Explorer.

2000 – 2005

These years were fairly quiet in the Battle of the Browsers. It seemed as if Internet Explorer had won the war and that nobody could even hope to compete with it. In 2002/2003 it had attained about 95% of the market share – about the time of IE 5/6. With over 1000 people working on it and millions of dollars being poured in, few people had the resources to compete. Then again, who wanted to compete? It was clearly a volatile market, and besides that everybody was content with Internet Explorer. Or were they? Some people saw faults with IE – security issues, incompatibility issues or simply bad programming. Not only that, it was being shoved down peoples throats. There was almost no competition to keep it in line or to turn to as an alternative. Something had to change. The only people with the ability and the power to compete with Microsoft took matters into their own hands.

Netscape was now supported by AOL. A few years prior, just after they had lost the Browser Wars to Microsoft, they had released the coding for Netscape into the public domain. This meant anybody could develop their own browser using the Netscape skeleton. And people did. Epiphany, Galeon and Camino, amongst others, were born out of Netscape’s ashes. However the two most popular newcomers were called Mozilla and Firefox.

Mozilla was originally an open sourced project aimed to improve the Netscape browser. Eventually it was released as Netscape Navigator 7 and then 8. Later it was released as Mozilla 1.0.

Mozilla was almost an early version on another open source browser, Firefox. With it being an open source the public were able to contribute to it – adding in what features it needed, the programming it required and the support it deserved. The problems people saw in Internet Explorer were being fixed by members of the open sourced browser community via Firefox. For instance, the many security issues IE 6 had were almost entirely fixed in the very first release of Firefox. Microsoft had another fight on their hands.

2005 – Present

Firefox was the browser that grew and grew in these years. Every year capturing an even larger market share percentage than before. More user friendly than most of its rivals along with high security levels and arguably more intelligent programming helped its popularity. With such a large programming community behind it, updates have always been regular and add on programs/features are often released. It prides itself on being the peoples browser. It currently has a 28.38% market share.

Apple computers have had their own browser since the mid 1990’s – Safari – complete with its own problems, such as (until recently) the inability to run Java scripts. However most Apple users seemed happy with it and a version capable of running on Windows has been released. It has had no major competitor on Apple Macs, and as such has largely been out of the Browser Wars. It currently holds a 2.54% market share and is slowly increasing.

Internet Explorer’s market share has dropped from over 90% to around 75%, and is falling. It will be interesting to see what Microsoft will attempt to regain such a high market share.

Opera currently holds 1.07%.

Mozilla itself only has a 0.6% market share these days.

The Future of Web Browsing

Web browsers come and go. It is the nature of technology (if such a term can be used), to supplant inferior software in very short periods of time. It is almost impossible for a single company to stay ahead of the competition for long. Microsoft have the advantage of being able to release IE with any Windows using PC. That covers over 90% of the market. They also have the advantage of unprecedented resources. They can compete how they wish for as long as they wish. So there is no counting IE out of the future of web browsing.

Safari is in a similar position, being easily the most popular Mac web browser. Its long term survival is dependant upon Apple and the sale of their computers.

These are the only two browsers that are almost guaranteed another five years of life, at least. Firefox may seem like another candidate, but the public is fickle, and one bad release, or if it seriously lags behind the new Internet Explorer 8 for long, could easily see its popularity quickly descend into virtual oblivion.

However, it seems likely community driven browsers, such as Mozilla and Firefox, will be the only types of browser capable of competing with the wealthy internet arm of Microsoft in the near future.

As for web browsing itself, will it change any time soon? Well it already has for some online communities. For example, if you want to buy clothes you could try entering an online ‘world’ creating an online virtual You to go from ’shop to shop’ with, looking at products and trying/buying what you see. Some ‘worlds’ allow you to recreate yourself accurately including weight and height and then try on things apparel such as jeans to give you an idea of how you would look in that particular item.

Will ‘worlds’ like this destroy normal web browsers such as IE ? – It seems unlikely. Traditional web browsers provide such freedom and ease of access that it is hard to see any other alternative taking over. However they are part of the new, ‘thinking out of the box’ wave of alternatives that some people will find attractive, and really who knows what the future will bring.

I’m nearly ready to relaunch the new and improved drumthumper.net! Just need to take care of a few legal things and then all systems will be go. If you are looking for family pictures, shoot me an email, I’ll send you a link to the personal site.

Until next time;

Joe

From the usual suspects to those hidden gems you missed in the process. Simply put, we are going to take you on a stroll down FPS memory lane.

read more | digg story

Today, Microsoft is announcing its biggest layoff ever and Sun is quietly laying off the first of what may turn out to be an additional 6,000 employees. Red Hat? Total year-over-year up 17%. Novell? Its Linux sales in 2008 were up by 38%. Which companies do you think are doing better?

read more | digg story

The main website has been whittled down to a static page. I’ve got big things in store for 2009. I’m currently working on a personal site for pictures of my family, and will hopefully have it live by the first week of January at the very latest.

Stay tuned.

Joe

From Digg:
“Even though they are still too young to speak, babies at just five months old are able to distinguish the differences between the works of major classical composers, scientists reveal. Researchers found that babies responded differently to upbeat tunes, such as ‘Ode to Joy’ from Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, compared to a selection of gloomier tunes.”

Now, here’s my question: what happens when you play baby some Joe Satriani or Van Halen? Will the results be the same?

Will the kiddo be a better than average musician?

read more | digg story

This one is a bit more serious than the last space pic:

I’m writing this post just a day after I was forced to reinstall Windows and recover my data. I can’t tell you what a nightmare it would have been had I not backed up all my important stuff. Here are four important data back up strategies for Windows users, most of them being almost the same for Mac users except for the change in the software type.

This article is a great read for everyone. Eventually you’ll be in the same boat.

read more | digg story

A picture says a thousand words…

read more | digg story