Hans Across The Interwebs

In a horrible case of world wide lack of good reporting, it’s being reported widely now that Nvidia is responsible for 29 percent of (logged) Vista Crashes - ATI only 9 percent and Microsoft 18 percent.

Of course this is bad, and it doesn’t help very much to say that Nvidia has about 33 percent marketshare, versus ATI’s 19. It’s still bad.

But everyone seems to be very easily glossing over the real crying shame in this story. No less than 18 percent of crashes are caused by software and drivers that Microsoft wrote themselves. It took them like 2,000 years to create this thing, and they still couldn’t make sure they cause fewer crashes than Intel and ATI combined? Microsoft, what’s up with that?

This story seems to be no more than Microsoft spin, trying to take some of the heat off for their horrible patch job.

Well, you can’t blame them. They’ve been getting a lot of bad press, so I guess they had to try something.

The 3G iphone is on the way and I want one. But please let all the cruel rumors stop until its here. I can’t concentrate like this.

Did it all start with Kevin Rose’s rumor that 3G iphones would not be far away and would feature a camera on the front for Video chat? His predictions have been hit or miss in the past. Still, sometimes ‘hit’. It could be true. We want it to be true.

In fact so much so, that suddenly all kinds of evidence has started to appear that a 3G iphone can’t be far off. Lo and Behold: iPhones are all but sold out in New York Apple stores, according to the Huffington Post.. A sure sign that Apple is getting ready to replace it with a newer version, right?

Well, maybe. But maybe not.

While thoughts of 3G second generation iPhones dance in consumer’s heads because limited product supply could be an indicator that new iPhone models are about to be released, the lack of product might also be a side effect of production or shipping delays.

Then there was the Wired story that Apple had already ordered 10 million 3G iphones.

Gartner analyst Ken Dulaney has joined in the rumor-mongering, saying that Apple has in fact already placed an order for 10 million of these second-generation iPhones. That’s in addition to the 10 million v.1 iPhones Apple has ordered, he says.

While Dulaney doesn’t give a specific timeframe for its release, he does claim Apple moved up its iPhone v.2 release mainly to help spur on iPhone uptake in places like Europe, where slow sales have been attributed to the phone’s distinct lack of 3-Gness.

Well that rumor is obviously false, since not even 10 million of the version 1 have been sold as of yet.

The argument about European users certainly does make sense. The original iPhone is available in most European countries - either legitimately or through clandestine means. But I’m certainly not replacing my 3G, 5 megapixel cameraphone WITH video chat until the iPhone can give me at least a comparable experience. Okay I’ll take 3 megapixels, but not a pixel less. And 3G is definitely a minimum requirement now, though I won’t be disappointed if it’s not exactly 250Mbps.

One thing is for sure, absolutely everyone is now convinced the iPhone is a viable platform. The introduction of the Software Development Kit (SDK) has silenced critics that the beautificious machine was too proprietary, and has instead made them download the SDK more than 100.000 times.

In fact, even Microsoft is now contemplating developing applications for the iPhone. Then again, when Microsoft comtemplates - they tend to take their time.

So it looks like the biggest product of 2007, is shaping up to also be the biggest product of 2008. Props to Apple for great product design and even greater marketing and PR.

I’m wondering though if a 3G iPhone will spur a replacement cycle - especially since at least in the US there’s 2 year contract attached to every iPhone. Or is the 3G iPhone most importantly an international play as predicted by Gartner?

I’ll tell you this. Apple better hurry it up, because I’m sure these rumors aren’t helping sales of poor old version 1. And: if a 3G, 32Gb, 3 megapixel iPhone came out - I’d own one the very same day. What about you? Would you buy one, or if you own one would you replace it?

Even though Silverlight was first announced ‘way last year‘, the debate about wether it’s going to be successful still goes on. Silly, because it will of course get totally huge.

For those not in the know, Microsoft Silverlight is, according to Microsoft

a cross-browser, cross-platform, and cross-device plug-in for delivering the next generation of .NET based media experiences and rich interactive applications for the Web.

Like Flash, only better more ambitious

Basically, it’s like Flash in the sense that it’s a plugin for your web browser that enables applications you couldn’t build using html, ajax and all that jazz. Only it can do much more. Flash’s beginnings after all are in creating graphical interaction on websites. Today’s Flash is a scaled up version of that. Silverlight’s beginnings are in full on .Net application development. And from what I understand, it hasn’t really been scaled down.

This became even more evident last month, when the Silverlight 2 beta was shown to the world. Most sceptics who pooh-poohed (sp?) the first version last year as an overblown web movie player, are not so sure any more.

To be sure, Flash has been around for a long time, and it will stay for a long time to come. There’s a place for easy and accessible development of cool and interactive graphical web environments. But there will also be a market for richer applications with more going on ‘at the back end’. Silverlight would be a more obvious choice for those kinds of development.

Microsoft is big and slow, but the introduction of Silverlight shows there are at least pockets of people who understand the power of the web and who are not held back for protection of Microsoft’s current business model. More importantly, they have the freedom to create new services and introduce them to the public. I’m assuming there’s more to come.

So the first reason Silverlight is going to get, like, totally Huge is: the OS is moving to the web and Flash doesn’t scale up enough for that. Silverlight does, because it’s what it was built for.

Some more reasons

Anyone who can develop in .Net can develop for Silverlight. Think of Adobe’s statement with Air: “If you can do web development in html, ajax, javascript - now you can do desktop development”. Well, here’s Microsoft: “if you can do client development in .NET, now you can do web development with Silverlight”.

Microsoft states about 2.5 Million .NET developers. You can assume they’re overstating it. It’s still a lot of developers that now are able to create apps for the web.

Installed base? Irrelevant

A little word about installed base. This discussion is not about installed user base. There is practically no barrier for a user to install Silverlight. It just took me all of 30 seconds to download and install it on my Mac. It may take a less experienced user a few minutes - but people install plug ins all the time. If the application is cool enough, they’ll install what makes it possible (as evidenced by my wife and my parents, who are completely tech fobic but still manage to surprise me every now and again - when they care enough to do so).

So now it’s just a matter of waiting for those cool apps. If you know any, let me know in the comments. If you think Silverlight sucks, also let me know in the comments.

The big buzz on the web for the past week has been Yahoo’s Digg Killer, aptly named Buzz. This news site – launched on february 25th - caught everyone unawares by suddenly launching droves and droves of traffic all over the web, impressing even the most unimpressable of bloggers, Techcrunch’s Mike Arrington: “it’s clear that a link from Yahoo.com blows away anything Digg or any other competitor can offer.”, said Arrington.

Salon.com and the Huffinton Post, to name a few, reported significant traffic increases in the many hundreds of thousands.

No Revolution here?

But Yahoo Buzz is no social news revolution, and it’s not bringing the Digg concept to the masses as some would have us believe.

Don’t think you’ll be posting your next blog post (probably something like “10 things to think about during a boring subway ride while picking your nose”) on Yahoo’s Buzz anytime soon: it is invite only. The stories therefore necessarily only come from bigger, more mainstream sites. And that leaves nothing but a watered down, castrated version of Digg, a digg.

That’s not to say this thing isn’t big, but Yahoo was always getting lots of traffic. Once they decided to point more links outward, any model they chose was going to creat massive amounts of traffic. As does Buzz.

Meanwhile, Microsoft still wants to buy Yahoo; Yahoo still doesn’t want to get bought but is in talks with Microsoft anyway; and Yahoo is trying to bring up its price by stating they will grow 73 percent in revenues in the next three years. They failed to indicate why they’d be able to do in the next three years what they were unable to do in the past three years. Maybe it’ll be through Yahoo Buzz.

I do know one thing: I just can’t wait for Buzz to get really big, so someone to think of a next generation app to replace it: The Buzz Killer! (ahem)

So what do you think about this Buzz thing?