Picking up spyware or a virus/worm/trojan used to require some conscious action on the part of the user:  opening an email attachment, installing supposedly ‘necessary’ system software (video codecs were a common ploy), or downloading media and/or applications of questionable origin.

These days, Bad Things can occur much more transparently: the most rapidly growing method of spreading malware today is via compromised websites – so now, rather than having to (one way or another) make the explicit decision to ‘invite the bytes’ onto your machine, merely visiting a malicious (or unknowingly compromised) site can launch an exploit.  And since this new type of ‘drive-by’ attack is often implemented through 3rd-party browser plug-ins (such as Flash and Acrobat Reader) or via good old fashioned Javascript, it’s not just a Windows or Internet Explorer issue anymore (for the first time, Apple recently issued a KnowledgeBase article advising users to start installing antivirus protection (although after the resulting flurry of unwanted publicity, the warning was removed from the Apple site 24 hours later).

Although the increase in web malware activity is dramatic, it’s been going on for some time now: a recent study found that during 2007 alone, the number of such attacks increased more than 500 percent.  And while this is bad enough news for the home user, it’s even more troublesome for the enterprise, as HTTP (port 80) is the often the only traffic left largely unrestricted on corporate firewalls.

One simple precaution?  Update, update, update.  To address Javascript engine vulnerabilities, update your browser religiously, regardless of which particular browser or operating system you’re using.   As for Acrobat Reader, resist the temptation to ignore those frequent messages about available updates: you might wonder just how much better a PDF can possibly be displayed, but these days, chances are good that the update has something to do with security – and the same goes for Flash.

You can check for any available updates for Acrobat Reader from the Help menu of the application itself, and to check your version of Flash, go here - the Adobe site will inspect your installation and let you know.

I’ve long been of the opinion that longer-form (professionally produced) internet video will happen on a truly widespread scale only when the problem of getting that content over to the television is solved – and that current discussion of internet video (and how to how to best monetize it) is often based on two false premises:

1. The personal computer will continue to be the primary internet video delivery device.
2. Internet video is about short- and mid-form content.

Such discussions often completely fail to adequately recognize how profoundly game-changing direct access to the internet from the next generation of TVs and set-top boxes will be.  In other words, while short form internet video (user-generated or otherwise) will always be a workplace diversion, the main event has not happened yet - we’re still in merely a transitional, evolutionary phase of the process - a process which will end at the couch, not the desk.

Where are we now?   Several major CE manufacturers are currently offering their first generation of standalone internet-enabled devices (each partnered with one or more internet video services):

Hardware:                                Service:

• Sony Bravia, PS3               Sony Playstation Network, Amazon on Demand
• Roku                                   Netflix, more to come…
• LG                                      Netflix, more to come…
• AppleTV                             iTunes
• TiVo                                   Amazon, Netflix
• HP MediaSmart                  CinemaNow, including others
• Microsoft xBox360            xBox Live Marketplace, Netflix

The problem with the above scenario is that no computer means no web browser, which means no Flash – so each OEM wishing to offer multiple services directly via their network interface-enabled hardware (TV, DVD, PCR or set-top box) has had to implement the interface to each service partner individually – a tremendously inefficient reinventing of the wheel.

Therefore, I’ve long felt that what’s needed is a standardized technical protocol for CE hardware to interface with these multiple video services.  Last week, Reed Hastings of Neflix expressed a similar view, noting that in the absence of standardization, “Everyone’s going to have to do customer interfaces for each device”, and further, that it’s “slowing down the market tremendously.”

While the web standards we now take for granted were developed in the shelter of academic and government agency environments, there’s a huge amount of money (and an equal amount of competing agendas) at stake in the internet video space – so the development of a new standard from the ground up at this point seems highly unlikely.  Instead, an embedded web browser running Flash (and/or Microsoft’s Silverlight) sounds like the better idea (Sony has already moved in this direction, embedding the highly-regarded Opera browser into its Bravia line of network-enabled TVs).

Admittedly, though, web on the TV leaves a bad taste in the mouth – previous attempts suffered from three major issues:

• Bandwidth
• Screen resolution
• User interface

Of these three, two are already solved: most broadband connections are now capable of streaming at least SD video, and increased resolution of HD TV makes web text quite readable. The third issue alone remains: the user interface.  Recognizing this, Hastings predicts a new generation of Nintendo Wii-like pointer/motion remotes to replace the primitive up/down/left/right arrows (and four dozen other never-used buttons) on today’s remotes (interestingly, Apple has recently filed for a patent on some technology for just such a device).

Look for this to be the big story at the CES show this January…

I’ve been thinking lately about how business issues (the shifting landscape of allegiances between companies) affects what (and when) technologies become available.

Not for nuthin’ (as they say here in New York) - here are a few thoughts…

no Flash on iPhone’s Safari browser
I think Adobe would be more than happy to write an iPhone Safari Flash player, but Apple is probably hoping the growing number of iPhone users will drive wider adoption of their Quicktime platform for streaming.  More on that here.

no Hulu-iPhone app
OK, so no Flash - but at least we get a bundled YouTube iPhone App that streams via QuickTime - because despite YouTube’s parent Google being behind the competing android smartphone platform, the two companies get along quite well, thank you (witness the iPhone’s rock solid gmail support).   Why not, then, a similar Flash-workaround Hulu iPhone App?  I imagine Hulu would love to see the swelling ranks of iPhone owners use their service (batteries permitting),  but don’t hold your breath: AT&T would have a major problem with that, because of the additonal bandwidth required (the average Hulu program is a lot longer than the average YouTube snippet).  This, by the way, is also the reason you won’t see an approved iPhone App any time soon allowing you to use the camera to shoot rudimentary video - as cool as that would be, AT&T doesn’t want us emailing anything that big around…  (although ‘jailbroken’ apps are out there if you’re brave and/or foolhardy enough to go off the Apple reservation and unlock the thing).

no Disney/Pixar content on Amazon’s ‘Video on Demand’ service
As a result of selling Pixar to Disney in 2004, Steve Jobs became Disney’s largest individual stockholder, and was given a seat on the Disney board.  iTunes video (via Apple TV) happens to compete directly with Amazon Video on Demand (via TiVo and the Sony Bravia).  Although Jobs has described Apple TV as nothing more than a ‘hobby’, could Apple have influenced Disney/Pixar not to play ball with such a direct internet video competitor?

no NBC/Universal content on Sony’s ‘Video Store’ service
NBC/Universal is the only major studio absent from the recently launched Sony Video Store service - since NBC is partnered with Microsoft on MSNBC, could NBC be a little reluctant to sign a deal with Microsoft’s game console arch rival Sony?

I’m just sayin’….

Does the world need another blog post on the iPhone?  I’m gonna go with ‘probably not’ – but as in most big cities where a car culture doesn’t hold sway, we’re all about our mobile devices here in New York – it’s something to do on the trains we ride and the streets we walk, so maybe our smartphones matter a little more to us here.  With that in mind, here’s the first of a few posts on some thoughts I’ve had about my “leetle friend”…

1. no adobe flash
And don’t expect it anytime soon.  While I’m sure Adobe would be happy to whip up an iPhone/Safari-optimized Flash Player, it think Apple would rather sit back and see if the iPhone can’t instead help drive more adoption of their QuickTime platform for video streaming .  Although Adobe’s Flash is the ubiquitous video streaming browser plug-in, Apple’s Quicktime does a perfectly credible job of streaming video content in the open MPEG-4 format (witness the Quicktime-based youtube iPhone App).
If that’s Apple’s strategy, it appears to be working - content providers are coming around: hit the NBC.com site from your iPhone, navigate to a show, and you now can stream episodes in MPEG-4/Quicktime - despite NBC (along with Fox/Paramount) happening to also be behind the well-received (and Flash-based) Hulu initiative (on a wifi network, the experience is pretty impressive).

But speaking of streaming…

2. no streaming (or over-the-air 3G sync) of audio podcasts
While there are a few nice iPhone IP radio apps out there (Pandora and Flycast come to mind), what about podcasts?  With this shiny new 3G network we’re paying for, it’s a little disappointing to have to wait until getting back to the mothership (i.e. a computer runnning iTunes) to sync up and get the newest ones.

Streaming and/or syncing podcasts via 3G would be a Cool Thing (I’m never satisfied).

However, as is often the case when a seemingly obvious (and perfectly technically possible) idea remains unimplemented, dig a little deeper and you’ll find a business-side issue:  in this case, it involves AT&T - my guess is we’re just all on the internet with our 3G iPhones a lot more than they had planned on, so they’ve been caught a bit unawares… (take one exceptionally well-designed mobile device, put it on one speedy all-you-can-eat data plan, add water, and stand back…)

But there is at least one alternative:  Podspew, a website that AT&T and Apple can’t be too happy about.  While it won’t sync podcasts onto the iPhone itself, what it wilI do is convert a good selection of popular podcasts to simple MPEG-4 web links that the iPhone can then stream via Safari and Quicktime (totally subverting Apple’s podcast model, come to think of it).  It works well and is worth checking out (until they get that cease-and-desist letter, that is…)

At any rate, it’s probably obvious by now I’m on the internet a lot with my iPod , walking around and taking the subways here in New York City.   Which brings me to the next issue of battery life, but that has to do with chemistry and electrical engineering rather than with 0’s and 1’s (remember Dell’s pickup truck-destroying laptop? - that was at least as much about pushing the physical battery design envelope as it was about any manufacturing defects – but that’s another story).

Did I mention I love my iPhone?

The New York Times website (which already does just everything pretty well) has recently starting publishing lovely 360-degree panorama images of select occasions, such the recent opening Olympics ceremony in Beijing or John McCain’s nomination at the Republican Convention.

A quick look at the HTML source code confirms it’s all done in Adobe Flash, the same platform Google uses for their new Street View panoramas. While the ability to drag around in Flash (or Apple’s Quicktime) is nothing new, Google Street View and the Times panoramas are impressive for other reasons: in Google’s case it’s the sheer ambition and scope of the project, and in the case of the NY Times panoramas it’s the quality of the photography and of the real-time processing of the individual composite 2-D images to create such an impressive faux 3D whole: it’s particularly striking to pan down from the main spectacle to the more mundane shoes, cables, and strewn paper cups of the adjacent photographers (you can also pan straight up if you’d like, and the Flash object is smart enough to prevent you from coming back down full-circle along the other side, upside down).

The Times also adds audio from the event, which is also nice, and leads me to imagine how incredible it would be someday if one could interactively pan around inside a streaming video rather than a static image (I know, I’m never satisfied ). Of course, while that would amount to a true remote virtual presence, the bit stream required to pull that off would be far beyond what’s currently feasible given the CPU cycles available on the average home computer, let alone the typical user’s internet downstream bandwidth (currently barely good enough for non-panoramic video).

But kudos to the Times and Google for leveraging the Flash panorama functionality so impressively, even if the technology’s been around for a while. Maybe the takeaway here is that the technological tools alone aren’t enough to make a media experience truly compelling – maybe making really effective media still also involves good old-fashioned human elbow grease at some point (i.e. Google’s spectacular ambition or the Times’ high production values).

I’d like to think so.