There are a lot of great things about living in Europe.  Staying up until 3:30 AM on a Monday morning to watch the Super Bowl is not one of them, but as a NY Giants fan for life (evidently a hereditary condition) and considering the great game these two teams played four years ago the last time they met in the Super Bowl, I  had no choice.  No choice, I tell you!

So I stayed up way past my bedtime Sunday night.   Although the game was broadcast on German television, I opted instead for NBCsports.com and the first ever streaming of a Super Bowl for the US commentary.

I chose the US website for the play-by-play coverage in English – but as it turned out, there were other advantages to watching the game online too…

Unlike what’s called football in the rest of the world, to watch an American football game is to watch a heavily mediated experience – alternating bursts of action and strategy make it perfectly suited for multiple camera angles, continuous sportscaster commentary, quick-cut editing, and slow motion replays.  I know it’s a violent game (as is ‘rest-of-the-world’ football, when you consider the near total lack of player protection) – but I maintain that if they invented a sport from scratch for the medium of television, it would end up looking a lot like American football (witness this catch from the game).

It’s quite a feat, making a live event look and feel as neatly packaged and slickly produced as a movie – and they’ve gotten really good at it (and we’ve gotten really used to it).   That’s why watching the game online turned out to be so unexpectedly compelling:

As you can see from the screenshot above, viewers could choose between the main traditional TV feed (i.e. with a director switching between cameras) and any of the static source cameras.   Wanna stay on the camera suspended by cables above the field and watch the growing sense of urgency in Tom Brady’s face as he huddles with his offense  between plays from just a few meters above his head?  No problem!  But not only does this offer the opportunity to see things you’ve never seen before on a televised football game – you also have the option to slow down the frenetic cutting between cameras you didn’t realize you had become so used to.

And that’s how I ended up watching a lot of the game, staying on one camera for minutes at a time.  It’s a little  ironic that one new technology allowed me the choice to ‘turn off’ (or at least slow down) another technology, but without the relentless quick camera cuts, I was suddenly able to experience the game suddenly as a more live, real-time event (in fact, except for all the commercial breaks, it was almost like watching ein Fußball-Spiel here in Berlin).

Was it perfect?  No – as you can see, video resolution wasn’t exactly up to ’30 Rock on Hulu’ standards.  That was to be expected, given the scaling issues involved with the live streaming of was expected to be (and indeed did become) the most-watched US television broadcast in history (with the amount of traffic hitting those servers, I was happy with not a single rebuffering dropout).   Also, every time I switched to a new camera, it took 3-4 seconds for the stream to refresh – but still, all in all, it was pretty impressive.  Kudos to NBC for the vision (and courage) to do it, kudos to Microsoft’s Silverlight 4 video streaming platform, and kudos to whatever content delivery system they used.

That it streamed as well as it did, and that it offered a new viewing experience via allowing the user to switch between cameras?  A win for video streaming (oh yeah, and for the Giants!)

The New York Times has just published a piece on a technology we’ve written about a few times before (here, here, and here).  They’re covering research into its possible uses in the data center, whereas we came across it in a consumer electronics context:

Problem: Stakeholders in the preservation of the broadcast/cable television paradigm (networks, cable companies) are much less inclined to deliver content via the internet to your television than they are to your computer’s web browser.  That’s a shame, because your computer is essentially a single user, lean-forward device – not great for television.  In fact, that’s what makes it nonthreatening enough to be accommodated.  It’s a business-driven issue rather than a technological one, and it’s what has crippled Apple TV, Google TV, Boxee, and any number of other set-top box contenders to date.  It could be a while before a stable and sustainable internet television business model gets hammered out.   In the meantime, how to get that web content over to the television where it belongs, without running an HDMI cable under  the carpet?

Solution:  Use an  Ultra Wide Band wireless solution, of course!  Getting an uncompressed audio and video stream over to the television would require a lot more bandwidth than what even the most up-to-date flavor of  802.11 wireless technology can handle, but luckily, ‘short fat pipe’  UWB technology capable of moving a very large amount of data a very short distance does exist, and in fact it’s been around for a few years now.  It was surprisingly difficult to find, but over a year ago we found a simple and inexpensive  WiMedia-based solution that we’ve happily been using ever since: it consists of only a small (dongle-sized) USB2 transmitter at the computer and another small dongle-sized HDMI receiver at the television.  Install the driver on your computer, put that website or iTunes video into full screen mode, and you’re good to go (until you have to get up off the couch to pause the video – but hey).

The product (bought for under 100 USD) has ended up being a highly effective workaround for the ‘browser-only’ internet television problem described above.   Funnily, though, it’s remained something of a well-kept secret in the consumer electronics space – and since I imagine our particular use case will disappear once true internet television does indeed arrive (whenever that is), this recent New York Time piece on whether the same ‘short fat pipe’ technology has an unexpected future moving large amounts of zeros and ones between servers in the data center caught our eye.

Back where I come from, they like to say that “soccer is the sport of the future, and it always will be”.

You could say the same about internet television.  OK, sure – even as I type this, millions of video streams are being watched by millions of solitary computer users at this very moment – but while some folks (including us) have spent the last few years promising that internet television is right around the corner, the consumer electronics landscape has become littered with failed attempts to deliver the lean-back/multi-viewer/couch-centric user experience we know and love (and how we do love it – in 2010, Americans spent 2.7 hours per day in front of their televisions).

It’s going to happen, though.  Simply put, the benefits to the user (time shifting, long tail content, à la carte pricing) and the benefits to the advertiser (targeted advertising – need I say more?) are just too compelling for it not to.

So here we find ourselves on the eve of CES: time, once again, to predict the advent of internet television.  Let’s see: there’s Google, back with new and with improved Google TV – as well as a roster of hardware partners that now includes the world’s top two TV makers Samsung and LG (they join founding Google TV partner Sony).  And then there’s Apple – we’ve been speculating about this forever, but recent rumors about an impending Apple TV this year have achieved critical mass, based on word from both Apple suppliers and from the at-large tech media .

Make no mistake: internet television is, to use a technical term, The Big Enchilada.  Precisely because the stakes are so high, though, the incumbents (internet service providers, cable companies, cable networks) have been struggling to stay out in front of the  impending disruption (and avoid having what happened to the music industry happen to them).   Up until now, the best way to do that has been to deny these internet television services access to the same top-tier content they’re happy to be making available via your computer’s web browser (more on one viewer’s workaround: here and here).

The next step in the evolution of internet television is not going to have to do with processor speed or Siri voice-based remote controls – rather, it’s going to involve that vital third part of the internet TV equation: content.

The real thing to watch for in the Google TV announcements coming out of  Las Vegas this week will be what content agreements are in place.

It was Google’s inability to ink such agreements (and some less than well-received hardware) that made 2011 a disappointing year for Google TV.  Google CEO Eric Schmidt has high hopes for 2012, though: he was recently quoted predicting that “by the summer of 2012, the majority of the televisions you see in stores will have Google TV embedded.“  That’s a pretty bold statement.  After the disappointing 2011 Google TV has had, it’s hard to imagine Schmidt going out on a limb like that without having some new top-tier content agreements up his sleeve.  And as for Apple?  Building an internet television has been their obvious next move for at least the past few years.  Why is it only now that it (finally) appears imminent?

The answer to both questions could be that that new business models for internet television content licensing and distribution have recently been ironed out – and we’ll be hearing about them later this week.  

I picked up a few new books from the MIT Press bookstore and will be sharing my thoughts and impressions of them as I finish them.

First in the queue this weekend was The Smart Swarm: How Understanding Flocks, Schools, and Colonies Can Make Us Better at Communicating, Decision Making, and Getting Things Done.

Thanks to the subtitle, you’ve got a good grasp of the book’s premise. The author, Peter Miller, is senior editor of National Geographic, and wrote the book very much like a solid long read from the publication. The only thing missing was the vivid photography.

Overall, I enjoyed this book and how Peter weaved together various research findings from the study of ants, bees, starlings, and fish. As I read the book, it triggered insights into the Tea Party/Occupy Wall Street movements, while also making me realize what’s been driving behaviors I’ve seen come from people using online and mobile technologies. Anyone wanting to improve what they’re doing to mobilize people will benefit from these insights, too.

Here is a collection of notes I took while reading this 269-page book:

Read the rest of this entry »

I’ll admit it: I’ve never uploaded a video to YouTube, I’ve never subscribed to a YouTube Channel, I’ve never (ok hardly ever) used it to discover video (vimeo is more to my taste for long-tail/user-generated online video).  In short, I was never a big YouTube user  (it turns out YouTube is a big Brian Ales user, but that’s another story).

Then a few days ago, I received an email from Google regarding my seldom-used YouTube account:  I had until December 20th to log on and upgrade to the new YouTube, or my account would be deleted.

Deleted?  That’s one aggressive upgrade policy.  But when das Google sends you an email with a link to click on, you click on it, right?

Read the rest of this entry »

I have a few  friends who’ve had ID chips implanted in their expensive purebred pets over the years.  I’d always thought of it as a vaguely creepy, almost comically yuppie thing to do – until we found ourselves having to do just that in order to legally bring our cat (of somewhat more humble animal shelter rescue origins) with us when we moved here to Berlin.

Since the chip in question is only about the size of a grain of rice and is completely undetectable lying somewhere under the loose skin behind his neck, I had completely forgotten about it.

Until I noticed the uniforms worn by the wait staff at a trendy Berlin café I was at the other day, that is…

QR code  Originally developed on Japanese automobile assembly lines to keep track of individual parts, QR code represents the state of the art in bar code technology, and is capable of storing textual information much more densely than the old-school vertical bar codes found on your groceries.  With the advent of high-quality smartphone cameras and QR code-scanning mobile apps, the square pixelated images have started showing up in print ads, billboards, catalogs, and signs everywhere, as consumer-facing businesses have co-opted the technology for marketing purposes.

Technical takeaway?  QR code makes the transfer of a small but meaningful amount of data from a physical object to a machine over the air possible.

User experience takeaway? Your cellphone is learning to read.

All well and good – but seeing these codes plastered across uniforms worn by humans rather than on inanimate physical objects – well, it reminded me a little bit of that chip inside our cat.

After thinking it over a bit, though, I think it’s just an example of technology as fashion statement – like simulated “shark fin” car antennas, merely an affectation more about conveying a certain level of affluence and technological hipness than anything having to do with actual functionality.

That would make the whole thing a bit silly, wouldn’t it?  Still, less silly than the alternative: imagine patrons actually trying to use these codes, frantically pointing their smartphone cameras at the backs of waiters and waitresses as they quickly pass by, hard at work in a busy café – all in an effort to get the menu or website URL onto their mobile devices.

That, to me, would be not only silly, but a little sad, too – and might just be what too much technology would look a little something like.

On German exposure to credit crises of all flavors: North American and European  Michael Lewis is the author of several non-fiction bestsellers chronicling the current plight of the US and global financial markets.  Last month he wrote a thought-provoking piece in Vanity Fair that not only covers not Germany’s central role in the US (sub-prime mortgage-driven) and European (sub-prime EU partner-driven) debt crises, but also speculates on some cultural issues that may have might have contributed to the extent of the country’s involvement.  As a US expat living in Germany, I felt that while a few of his points in that regard were a bit of a stretch, he gets a lot right.  Agree or disagree, an interesting and well-written piece.

If you read one article on Steve Jobs’ legacy…  read David Carr’s piece in the New York Times.  Enough said.

A picture’s worth a thousand words… especially when it’s a gigapixel picture.  No reading required to get the point here on what the combination of hi-resolution photography and social media (or even worse, facial recognition technology) could mean to privacy.  Not just ‘online’ privacy, but physical privacy – in public. 

Just click here (it takes a bit for the image to load), and zoom into the crowd.  Keep zooming – until the little blue icons (and the implications of this technology on personal privacy) become clearly visible.

Writing from New York  a few hours before Irene is set to hit town, this seems genuinely the first broadband-generation social media-heavy hurricane coverage to strike our Northeastern states.

The New York City Mayor wrote me an email, and my Brooklyn neighborhood association sent one, too. So did my beach house community. Even my insurance company seems to worry about me these days.

What strikes me most amidst this blast of e-messages is how different public service announcement now disseminate and how they seem to have changed an entire city’s public perception about what constitutes appropriate disaster recommendations.

Read the rest of this entry »

Ready, set, go!   Today, June 20, Keith Olbermann starts his new old show on Current TV.

Now on Al Gore’s user-gen channel, the former host of Countdown on MSNBC will henceforth reach 60 million US homes (plus 10 million in the UK and Italy).  That’s not chump change, but it’s still a not-so-shy 35 million less than his previous target primetime audience.

Still, if all goes well, Current’s young(er)-and-social audience will dig Keith enough for maximum ratings – plus help with viral promotion of the program across the online social sphere – which in turn would, yep, help boost viewership.

Current also hopes Olbermann’s name will help with new subscriber acquisition.  Using its new anchor as it’s #1 spokesman, Current is now asking anyone inside Cablevision’s Long Island TV market to campaign for Current TV carriage.

But Olbermann’s arrival at Current TV marks more than just a new show.  Both Countdown and Olberman’s new role as Chief News Officer role further moves the channel away from its original user-generated video roots, towards a (hopefully) capable alternative to existing cable news.

Not sure whether this means a definite end for Current’s initial viewer-submitted short-form video format?  With Olbermann’s arrival, there seems plenty room for an entirely new TV news format.  Let’s see what the new Olbermann / Current TV duo can conjure up.

Meanwhile, off we go with pre-launch coverage about Olbermann the *feuding co-worker* , the *larger-then-life egomaniac*, or Olbermann the *millionaire media mogul*.

Be it as it may, Countdown on Current promises to be every bit as informative and controversial as Olbermann’s previous gig.

PS: If you happen to be a Cablevision customer not wanting to miss out on Current’s Countdown, here’s how to reach out to be heard.

The Problem: Video content owners are comfortable making their programming available over the internet only if the delivery device is a computer hitting a website (i.e. hulu.com or the thedailyshow.com).  More compelling platforms such as tablets (and, um, televisions) are denied access to this premium content – precisely because they are more compelling platforms  (and would be too disruptive to incumbent business models).  For example, note hulu’s cat-and-mouse maneuvering to fend off access by boxee television software for almost two years now – or Viacom’s threats to sue various cable providers over their new internet-based on-demand mobile device apps.

The Solution (for now, at least): If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.  Until internet television really ‘happens’, the best solution (for me and many others) is to get video and audio from the computer over to the television, so I can appear to the internet to be someone sitting in front of their computer – when in fact I’m a guy sitting on his couch in front of his television.  This way, I have access to all that web-only content (take that, hulu!).

It does involve solving the technical problem of getting audio and video (in at least 720p resolution) over to the television, though.  That’s a lot of data to move, and an HDMI cable running across the floor is not an option – what’s required instead is a  ‘short fat pipe’ capable of moving a lot of data over a short distance wirelessly.  I’ve written about the various options available (and what I’ve been using for the past few months) here.

Is my solution a bit clunky?  Sure – I have to go to the computer, enter full-screen mode, and then control the video transport from there.  But the fact remains that until the business-side issues preventing true internet television get resolved, the web will continue to offer a richer video selection than dedicated systems such as Apple TV or Google TV – and for all its lack of elegance, my low-cost solution makes that problem just go away.

In fact, it has been working so well for me, I wonder if there’s a business opportunity being missed…

Read the rest of this entry »