The Digital Home

Even though the company promised it would be the cornerstone of its mobile plans going forward, Google's Android platform has fallen off the radar in the past few months. Some say it's because the company has had a series of issues with its SDK and companies are complaining about the difficulty of developing on the platform. All the while, we've been waiting for something from the Android camp to find out what's going on.

Chances are, Google is being tight-lipped about Android's progress for one of two reasons: it's having more trouble than it originally anticipated or it simply doesn't want us to know anything before it springs some major developments on us.

Regardless, I can't help but wonder if things have gone awry. After all, in an industry where the iPhone gets most of the attention, wouldn't Google want to do what it can to remind us all that it has something of its own up its sleeve?

I guess not.

Is it just me or is it time for people to relax?

A recent story from Mail Online details obesity experts' issues with Nintendo's latest blockbuster, Wii Fit. According to the story, a ten-year-old girl was playing the game and after telling it how old she was and what her height is, it measured her weight and told her that she's overweight.

In a fit of rage, obesity experts condemned the title claiming it could harm a child's self-image and called on Nintendo to include a warning in the game that said it's not suitable for children.

"She is solidly built but not fat," the girl's father told reporters. "She was devastated to be called fat and we had to work hard to convince her she isn't."

Now, I understand that a child's self-image is an extremely important issue in today's world and there are a number of cases where weight can have a lasting impact on the child's life. But let's also not forget that the instruction manual on Wii Fit does say that BMI calculations may not be accurate for individuals aged 2 to 20 and even those that are more muscular will probably not see the real measurement of how over- or under-weight they are.

But for the rest of us, I can't help but say that while the truth may be difficult, part of the value of Wii Fit rests in its attempt to be honest with the gamer and help that person achieve a more healthy lifestyle.

This morning, I read a fascinating blog post at the Lefsetz Letter that explored reasons why artists should start giving their free music to those people who attend their concerts.

"As it is, you're announcing your tour almost a year before it happens, getting all that revenue up front, before anybody else does," he writes to the artists. "If you give away the music with the ticket, the audience has a long time to become familiar with it! Hell, the dropping of the album and the on sale date happen simultaneously!"

Throughout the entire post, he outlines exactly why artists should offer free music -- maybe as little as four or five tracks -- and why he believes that it's not only good for all parties involved, but a worthwhile idea if they want to make it big in the business.

But all this talk about what artists should do to promote themselves has me thinking: what sort of alternatives are available to us right now that will let us get free music, while still helping the artists? Unfortunately, there are very few.

Each other.

Too simple? After seeing yesterday's NPD numbers and hearing about them from all the companies, each has their own spin on what went down last month. Nintendo (rightfully so) chose to gloat about how well the Wii is selling. According to NPD, the Wii outsold the 360, PS3, PS2, and PSP during April. Even better for the company, it held the number two spot in hardware sales with its DS platform.

On the other hand, Microsoft chose to discuss how well its platform has done so far and explained to me that its 10.1 million units sold mark is a major milestone for the company because the first console in each generation to hit 10 million units sold in the US has won the console war. When asked if it should be worried about Nintendo, Microsoft said it doesn't see Nintendo as a competitor. When asked if it should be worried about Sony, the representative said it's not worried at all and the company believes it's in the best possible position right now.

Finally, we move to Sony. The company was barely beaten in hardware sales by Microsoft -- a mere 900 unit margin separated the two companies -- and it did relatively well in software sales. That said, it only captured 35 percent of GTA IV sales, which the company attributes to a smaller installed base. Of course, a more logical notion suggests the robust online component included in the Xbox 360 version was the main reason. Regardless, it contends that it's coming on strong and can win the console war.

And as I examined what each company had to say about the numbers, it became quite obvious that not one understands the other.

Sega is in trouble. According to its latest filing in Japan, the company incurred a loss $501 million during its 2008 fiscal year and its video games division lost about $56.3 million. And as the company was quick to point out, something needs to be done on the video game front.

The Sega Dreamcast is not the right prototype.

(Credit: CNET.com)

"As rebuilding our consumer video game business is crucial, we now need to review our game title strategy more flexibly to adapt ourselves to changes in the trend of the market," said Koichiro Ueda, head of Sega's public relations department.

Of course, Sega did what it could to downplay the news of its impending failure on the video game front and said that it thinks it can turn things around, but I just don't see how that's possible with just games. Let's face it -- the company's once proud Sonic franchise is floundering and there's no indication that it's really that valuable on Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo platforms. Beyond that, the company has done poorly with other titles it has released and aside from a lingering desire for the return of the Shenmue series, few people even think about the developer any more.

With that in mind, Sega needs to change its strategy and turn things around. And the only way it can do that is to release its own video game console.

Every year is important for Microsoft, but the way things are shaping up, I think 2010 will be its most important yet. And although the company has yet to confirm any concrete details about where it's going in the near-term, it has been especially tight-lipped lately about the future of Windows and the Xbox 360. And if you ask me, those two products will be at the center of the company's issues in 2010.

Why 2010? The way I see it, this year is pretty much over for Microsoft. Sure, the company will finally stop the sale of XP (or so we think) and the Xbox 360 will see some minor improvements made to its software, but all in all, nothing too major will happen this year. And considering 2009 will be the year that Microsoft tries to solidify itself as the major player in the gaming and OS markets, it makes perfect sense to suggest that 2010 could be one of the most important years in the company's storied history.

But if it doesn't wake up and realize that it's in some serious trouble with Windows and the Xbox 360 could face problems if it continues to be compared to the Playstation 3, 2010 could also be one of the worst years in the company's history.

In the ongoing war between file sharing and opposing organizations, we're constantly reminded by just how ridiculous some of the battles really are. Case in point: the "three strikes and you're out" regulation that has been flying around lawmaking bodies in Europe and now, possibly Canada.

According to the experts, lawmakers are desperately trying to find ways to stop file sharing and with the help of organizations that can't stand the thought of songs or movies being downloaded "illegally", they're doing everything they can to go after the wrong people. Simply put, the "Three strikes and you're out" policy stipulates that if an Internet user is caught file sharing three times, ISPs will be forced to terminate that subscriber.

"The policy - occasionally referred to as "graduated response" - received support last fall from French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who pressured the private sector to negotiate an agreement to implement the three strikes system," Michael Geist wrote in an article describing the rule. "The policy soon attracted global attention as the United Kingdom, Japan, and Australia all announced that they were contemplating a similar approach."

As this policy spreads across the world, what can we expect from it? My guess: nothing.

Over the past few weeks, rumors have swirled about the possibility of Apple's iPhone being available on more cell phone carriers' services. Of course, this has already been announced overseas in a number of countries, including Italy, Australia and India, but so far, there has been no indication that it'll happen in the US. But if you look at the writing on the wall, it becomes abundantly clear that it will.

iPhone should be set free!

(Credit: Apple)

Although I believe it will happen this year, there's no doubt that there are a number of hurdles in Apple's path if it truly wants to open the iPhone up to different carriers. First off, the company will lose its revenue sharing deal with AT&T and ostensibly back out of a five-year exclusivity agreement with the carrier. And while these two issues are important to consider, I have no reason to believe Apple can't come out on top by backing out of both agreements.

When the deal was signed with AT&T, one important element that's missing now was true back then -- Apple was an unproven entrant into the cell phone market and the company was trying to establish a foothold. Because of that, it entered into an exclusive agreement with AT&T and used that deal to build up considerable demand. But now, the iPhone is a known quantity and Apple carries all the leverage. Beyond that, it's being faced with a major contender in Google Android-based phones that will be available on almost every carrier, and thus, must act before it's too late.

Suffice it to say that Apple will back out of this deal and make the iPhone available on all carriers. Here's why: