Hello and welcome to the Betavine Mobile Web blog!
We’re Kevin Smith, Christian Breitschwerdt, and Dan Appelquist from Vodafone's R&D team, and we’ll be keeping you informed of upcoming standards which aim to facilitate and grow Mobile Web access and usage, and also highlighting interesting industry news and trends.
The rise of the Mobile Internet, connected applications and the fall of the walled gardens is disrupting the current ecosystem of mobile content and application distribution. All the rules are changing and the power is shifting. It's shifting away from the established players and towards the innovators. It's shifting away from slow-moving marketing departments and towards fast-moving development teams. Mobile industry stalwarts are scrambling to find their role as this industry sea-change occurs around them.
Developers need to figure out the best way to work with operators and operators need to engage with developers in a positive way that builds the ecosystem. Operators arguably can play an important role, especially with the rise of third party APIs into the network delivered as Web Services. Who are the players in this new ecosystem and how can they effectively work together to make the Mobile Internet more than the sum of its parts?
We welcome your thoughts and responses in the comments section of any of these posts, and look forward to receiving your suggestions.
HI Nick :) I agree - the thing which used to scare my son as a three year old was a CBBC program where a face would magically appear on the side of a house! And it's almost impossible to guess exactly what will scare them, as you say. But my point regards how a parent can be helped to make a judgement in advance. For DVDs, I usually glance at IMDB, if it's something questionable for an 8-year/6-year old then I watch it first, and if I think it will disturb them then it stays on the shelf for a year or so (e.g. Spider-man, 12). Easy, job done, However for movies, then I don't have the time/cash to go and see it first myself. Looking at the 12A for Dark Knight, and the BBFC analysis ('supergero violence'), I may have been tempted to take my son along. However if they had explicitly tagged: torture, scary clown, knife attack, immediate violent threat to child (Two-face with a gun at Gordon's son's head) then I would be able to make a better informed decision. So my argument is that more granular metadata can *help* parents make that cinema going decision with more information up front. Fully agree that nothing can replace the parent's knowledge of the child, it's just the parent's knowledge of the film that can improve. PS I always thought the scariest part of Forbidden Planet was the fact that Leslie Nielsen was the captain!
This all sounds very wonderful! However, the 'horror' is usually within the context of the film it's self. For example, by shooting a scene from a low angle, low contrast colour and low light levels yo can make something that may seen OK becomes terrible to a child. My favourite discussion point in this is from my own two children. They love watching 'predator' movies, and find no difficulty in associating a fictional character in this type of film, and conversely a non fictional character in what they would most probably class as a 'boring' film. If I ask them the most frighting movie they have ever been allowed to watch (this is where I got totally wrong what I thought was good and bad for two people within my care) I get the answer "Forbidden Planet". A very old sci-fi movie about an alien machine that can make your thoughts real. The part of the movie which terrified both my children and caused them to asked me to turn off (and left me flabbergasted! ) the move was where an invisible 'being' creeps into the heroes ship and breaks a piece of the equipment. No blood, no violence, no harm! Just two children who invented in their own heads the most terrifying beast that only they could see. So you see, the whole debate around censorship is flawed in my opinion. It's very much down to the individual and the parent/guardian as to what is bad/good. I'm not to sure how web standards could help here!!!! :-)
"Meanwhile, a UK civil (not criminal court) has awarded punitive damages to a games manufacturer who paid to see who was sharing their new game online" This is slightly misleading - there was no award of punitive damages in this case. Rather, there was an interim damages award of £750; this is more than the price of the game itself, to reflect that the users were, as far as I am aware, uploading the game as well as downloading it. It's worth noting also that default judgement was granted, as none of the respondents turned up in court - the judge had little option but to find in favour of the claimants.
"as far as I know you cannot patent software in the EU" This is not wholly true - s1(2)(c) Patents Act 1977 states that "a program for a computer" is not an invention, "to the extent that a patent or application for a patent relates to that thing as such". Whilst software, then, cannot be patented "as such", where software forms part of a wider invention, or, the software is merely the embodiment of the invention, it can be protected via a patent.
Ups, somehow strange to comment while not being able to view the post!
My question would then be: how expensive are NFC readers? Is it feasible to expect an estardarization of these tools, and hence a low price to acquire them? And also: how many terminals support this technology? Is it widespread?
Good thing about the web (and mobile web) is that it is independent of the terminal itself, while depending upon the answer to the above questions on NFC, there may be a hardware dependency.
2009
(11 posts)
September
(3 posts)
July
(1 post)
April
(1 post)
March
(4 posts)
February
(2 posts)
2008
(12 posts)
August
(3 posts)
July
(3 posts)
May
(1 post)
April
(2 posts)
January
(3 posts)
2007
(47 posts)
November
(3 posts)
October
(6 posts)
September
(20 posts)
August
(1 post)
July
(3 posts)
June
(3 posts)
May
(6 posts)
This is not wholly true - s1(2)(c) Patents Act 1977 states that "a program for a computer" is not an invention, "to the extent that a patent or application for a patent relates to that thing as such". Whilst software, then, cannot be patented "as such", where software forms part of a wider invention, or, the software is merely the embodiment of the invention, it can be protected via a patent.