Apple’s Black Friday sale includes $101 off the new 13-inch MacBooks and discounts on iPods, but those looking to walk away with a cheap iPhone might have to wait.

Apple announced Tuesday that it would offer a “special one-day Apple shopping event” the day after Thanksgiving, but provided few other details.

The company unveiled its sale Web site Friday morning, and the most notable discount is $101 off the new 13-inch MacBook. The 2GHz MacBook usually runs $1,299 but is now available for $1,198. Prices on the 2.4GHz MacBook dropped from $1,599 to $1,498.

Apple also dropped $51 from the price of the white 13-inch MacBook, from $999 to $948, and the iMac 20-inch, with prices now ranging from $1,148 to $2,098.

On the Nano front, Apple is offering an $11 discount on the new, colorful 8GB and 16GB iPod Nanos, and $21 off the silver and black 120GB iPod Classics. The iPod Touch also gets a $21 discount on the 8GB, 16GB, and 32GB versions.

Looking to try out Apple TV? The device is also $21 off – with the 40GB version priced at $208 and the 16GB available for $308.

Cheap iPhone prices were nowhere to be found, though a few iPhone accessories are up for grabs. Save $5 on an iPhone 3G dock, $11 on an iPhone Bluetooth headset, $24 on iPhone cases, and $12 on docks and chargers.

Apple also has deals on games, speakers, carrying cases for Macs, iPod Touch and Nano cases, headphones, chargers, and software.

The discounts are available on the Apple Web site and in Apple retail stores until midnight on Friday.

It seems that mobile phone manufacturers are busy designing and preparing “iPhone killers”, mobile phones that use a touchscreen instead of a keyboard. Until now Apple’s iPhone has proven to be a real success and it proudly stands above all smart phones.

Research In Motion’s BlackBerry Storm has just been released and people are very excited to try it out and are actually thinking that the new BlackBerry might pose a real threat to the iPhone. On the other hand, The BlackBerry Storm is not an attempt to create a true iPhone killer, but to give BlackBerry users and fans the possibility to enjoy the newest technologies that are available at the moment.

Critics who have tested out the Storm have generally given good reviews, mentioning the phone’s smart SurePress system, that was designed to give the user the feeling that he’s actually using a keyboard and not a touch sensitive screen. SurePress allows the user to actually press the screen down in order to give certain commands.

The only problem with this is that SurePress has a weird learning curve that might not appeal to some. After a while, controlling the phone becomes natural and pretty intuitive, but a small amount of time is, indeed, needed in order to get familiar with the controls.

A thing that received many good grades was the phone’s Internet browser, which works very well and its cursor hovers above the user’s finger an not underneath it, like it is the case with other similar phones. This is a good thing because one knows exactly what he’s pressing, the view not being obstructed by the user’s finger. BlackBerry Storm also has its downsides and, maybe, the most noticeable is the lack of Wi-Fi.

Source: eFluxMedia

Scientists have created the first ‘humanoid’ robot that can mimic the facial expressions and lip movements of a human being.

‘Jules’ - a disembodied androgynous robotic head - is controlled only by his own software and automatically copies the movement and expressions of a human face.

Human face movements are picked up by a video camera and mapped onto the tiny electronic motors in Jules’ skin.

It can grin and grimace, furrow its brow, and ’speak’ as the software translates real expressions observed through video camera ‘eyes’.

Scientists have created the first ‘humanoid’ robot that can mimic the facial expressions and lip movements of a human being.

‘Jules’ - a disembodied androgynous robotic head - is controlled only by his own software and automatically copies the movement and expressions of a human face.

Human face movements are picked up by a video camera and mapped onto the tiny electronic motors in Jules’ skin.

It can grin and grimace, furrow its brow, and ’speak’ as the software translates real expressions observed through video camera ‘eyes’.

‘Jules’ the first humanoid robot who can realistically mimic a real person’s expressions merely by watching their face

‘Jules’ then mimics the facial expressions of the human by converting the video image into digital commands that make the robot’s servos and motors produce mirrored movements.

And it all happens in real time as Jules can interpret the commands at 25 frames per second.

The project, called ‘Human-Robot Interaction’, was devised at the Bristol Robotics Laboratory (BRL), run by the University of the West of England and the University of Bristol.

A team of robotics engineers - Chris Melhuish, Neill Campbell and Peter Jaeckel - spent three-and-a-half years developing the breakthrough software to create interaction between humans and artificial intelligence.

The robot is seen making a convincing attempt at being human automatically, controlled only by computer software

Robotics engineers say Jules’s expressions have to look natural in the same way as humans

It was originally programmed to act out a series of movements - as can be seen in the video - where ‘Jules’ talks about ‘destroying Wales’.

But cutting edge software now enables Jules to translate what it ’sees’ through video ‘eyes’ into equivalent movements on its face.

The technology works using ten stock human emotions - such as happiness, sadness, concern etc - that the team ‘taught’ Jules via programming.

The software then maps what it sees to Jules’ face to combine expressions instantly to mimic those being shown by a human subject.

Peter Jaeckel, working on ‘Jules’ at his lab in Filton, Bristol

‘We have a repertoire of behaviours that somehow is dynamic’, Chris Melhuish said.

‘If you want people to be able to interact with machines, then you’ve got to be able to do it naturally. When it moves it has to look natural.

‘When it moves it has to look natural in the same way that human expressions are, to make interaction useful.’

Peter Jaeckel, who works in artificial emotion, artificial empathy and humanoids at the BRL, said: ‘Realistic, life-like robot appearance is crucial for sophisticated face-to-face robot - human interaction.

Enlarge  

Human face movements are picked up by a video camera and mapped onto the tiny electronic motors in Jules’ skin.  ‘Researchers predict that one day robotic companions will work, or assist humans in space, care and education.  ‘Robot appearance and behaviour need to be well matched to meet expectations formed by our social experience.

‘Violation of these expectations due to subtle imperfections or imbalance between appearance and behaviour results in discomfort in humans that perceive or observe the robot. ‘If people were put off it would counter-act all efforts to achieve trustworthiness, reliability and emotional intelligence. ‘All these are requirements for robotic companions, assisting astronauts in space or care robots employed as social companions for the elderly.  ‘Unlike most research projects the focus lies on dynamic, subtle, facial expressions, rather than static exaggerated facial displays.

‘Copycat robot heads have been created before, but never with realistic human-looking faces.’ But not everyone is impressed by Jules’s mastery of mimicry. Kerstin Dautenhahn, a robotics researcher at the University of Herefordshire, believes that people may be disconcerted by humanoid automatons that simply look ‘too human’.

‘Research has shown that if you have a robot that has many human-like features, then people might actually react negatively towards it’, she said.  ‘If you expose vulnerable people, like children or elderly people, to something that they might mistake for human, then you would automatically encourage a social relationship.  ‘They might easily be fooled to think that this robot not only looks like a human and behaves like a human, but that it can also feel like a human. And that’s not true.’  It is hoped that the technology developed in Jules will help create robots for use in space, to accompany astronauts on solo missions, and in healthcare settings and nursing homes.

Source: Mail Online

CNN reporter Jessica Yellin has probably heard a lot of compliments during her career, which has included stints at ABC and MSNBC. But I’m guessing anchor Wolf Blitzer’s closing comment to her following her live report from Chicago early Tuesday evening was a new one for her.

CNN’s holograms, of course, have everything to do with the country’s most important exercise in democracy, helped illustrate the palpable excitement in America as it elected its first black president, and brought the cable network that helped launch a new chapter in television journalism that much closer to its audience

Uh-huh.

Let’s stretch the “Star Wars” metaphor to the snapping point, shall we? All I could think of when I saw the gratuitous techno-porn on display on CNN and most of the other networks Tuesday night was the fish-like Admiral Ackbar from “Return of the Jedi” bellowing, “It’s a trap!” CNN wanted the media world to hum loudly with its PR stunt, and nearly everyone bit, including Jay Leno and your humble Jedi wanna-be columnist.

Which doesn’t mean that I’m not sensing a disturbance in the farce that cable news has become in 2008.

Voting for Technology Over Substance

CNN’s ratings were through the Time Warner Center roof Tuesday, the best in the network’s 28-year history, so it’s not likely that any criticism over the hologram stunt is sticking with those in its corner offices. I’m also sure the rank-and-file employees are in “lighten up” mode due to the ratings throughout Campaign ‘08; historic candidates and times have resulted in sky-high audience interest in politics, and the cable news channels have benefited the most. So why not spend some of that extra ad revenue on gimmicks like the holograms, or CNN chief national correspondent John King’s “magic wall,” or the virtual reality studios on Fox and NBC?

Here’s why: Most of the gimmicks only serve to highlight the aforementioned addiction to buzz, ratings and the desperate need to separate from the competition. King’s touchscreen wall, and his mastery of it, is a notable exception; it helped highlight the only demographic that counted Tuesday night — not the 25-54 advertiser-coveted audience segment, but those old enough to vote and how they actually voted in which parts of the country.

It’s not just George Lucas movies that form the pop culture antecedents for what you saw on Tuesday night. NBC’s Ann Curry stalked the computer-generated halls of what could have been Alexander the Great’s famed lost library, just like Michael Douglas did during a key scene from the 1994 film version of Michael Crichton’s novel, “Disclosure.” (Rest in peace, Mr. Crichton; you proved one last time you were one of our best fortune tellers.)

And while there’s nothing necessarily technologically groundbreaking about having anchors walk in front of green walls, with backgrounds digitally generated behind them, you couldn’t tell that to Fox News Channel’s Brit Hume. The retiring dean of FNC anchors spent the early part of his successful career in print before switching to television via ABC News and then Fox. He’s never worked local TV and pitched to a weatherman gesticulating wildly in front of a lime-green backdrop, so the sense of wonder he exhibited when a Fox reporter demonstrated a digitally-created “board” was, for me, refreshingly old-school. “You call that thing a board?” Hume asked. “There’s no wood in it, right?”

The Silicon-Powered Campaign and User-Generated Voter

The fascination with technology by TV news on election night, and during the campaign, does serve one important purpose: It mirrors the pioneering use of the Internet, social networks and text messaging by candidates, particularly the Obama camp. It also shows the promise of a politically engaged voter armed with user-generated videos, blogs and Twitter .

It’s the kind of technology that I had hoped the networks would focus on more Tuesday night, instead of Hollywood-style special effects. I realize that all networks have Web sites now, and their primary focus remains TV, but this Web 2.0 thing is the future, you know, and I still think TV news is having trouble getting its arms around it. To me, these are the tools that could help television bring new substance and a different style to political coverage.

I was part of an effort Tuesday night to do just that. I was one of three hosts for coverage on KING5.com, the Web site for the NBC affiliate in Seattle. Let me be clear: I’ve covered a lot of elections in 28 years as a journalist, from local races to gubernatorial contests to presidential campaigns. I covered the Clinton-Gore campaigns in Texas for the ABC affiliate in Dallas in 1992 and 1996 and was in Little Rock for both election nights, with a quick stop at the ‘96 Democratic National Convention in Chicago. I co-anchored CNN Radio’s coverage of the 2004 presidential election. And Tuesday night was the most fun I’ve had covering an election — ever.

It was loose and fast-paced, casual and informative (if I may say so). We provided those watching on the Internet the latest returns on the presidential and Washington state races, complete with victory speeches and concessions, but it was also a window into the newsgathering process on an extraordinary night. We showed everything, warts and all; open discussions on why the Associated Press had called the Washington governor’s race for Christine Gregoire when the secretary of state’s office had not, on-the-fly interviews with party operatives and former governors wandering the newsroom, reading online comments and questions from some of the Web surfers who were watching. Once Obama was declared the winner, we started pulling up blog photos and YouTube videos of street celebrations in Seattle and Washington D.C.

We didn’t have holograms, but we did have our computers (including my trusty Powerbook) and a flat-panel TV with graphics — along with your basic whiteboard and a child’s wooden map of the U.S. that was marked up with blue and red felt-tip pens as states went to Obama or McCain.

It wasn’t slick and polished, but it also didn’t descend into chaos. It was like having a political conversation — free of arm-waving hysterics, talking points and overt bias — in front of the Internet.

Light sabers not required.

Source: Technology News World

Change is not just a political hot topic these days. According to a Gartner analyst, four emerging software solutions are reshaping software as we know it and will likely cause major disruptions to vendors and how the software industry delivers its products and services.

“Four overarching trends are reshaping how IT is used in the workplace. Each of these megatrends or disrupters must be evaluated to determine if it will have an effect on the business,” said Yvonne Genovese, vice president and distinguished analyst at Gartner, at the Gartner Symposium/ITxpo in Orlando, Fla.

These software solutions are “changing to be user-centric, Web-centric, service-oriented and utilized through new delivery models, such as cloud and software as a service,” noted Genovese, in a press release from the event.

Here are the four major disruptions to the software industry that Genovese has identified:

Disrupter No. 1: Rise in New Technologies and Convergence of Existing Technologies. “The IT market has reached a period of accelerated change and innovation in how IT is applied and delivered to businesses and consumers,” states the release. “Technology changes that have been centered on SOA migration have now been augmented to include business process management, device portability and mashup-capable content.”

By 2010, for example, Genovese predicts that Web mashups will be the “dominant model” for the creation of composite enterprise applications. (To read about Oracle’s efforts on its next-gen applications, see “Oracle Fusion Applications: Is 2010 Delivery Too Little, Too Late, or Smart Strategy?”)
“Mashup popularity stems from the ease with which mashups can be created. Because mashup applications can be created on the fly, they open up possibilities for a new class of more short-term or disposable applications that could never meet the criteria for corporate investment,” says Genovese. “Another benefit is that users can easily personalize mashup content displays. Mashups can resolve issues such as content aggregation and the needs of business users to have the personal flexibility to do different things by combining data from within and outside the enterprise.”

Disrupter No. 2: Change in Software User and Support Demographics. Changes in how, where and when everyone works, as well as innovative methods in how companies obtain their software using the Internet, are fundamentally altering the structure of business. By 2015, Genovese says, no company will be able to build or sustain a competitive advantage unless “it capitalizes on the combined power of individualized behaviors, social dynamics and collaboration.”

“Most current software is focused on general enterprise needs rather than user-specific needs,” Genovese says. “The opportunity for business and IT leaders is to understand how the individualization of work will affect businesses, critical processes, innovation and inter-enterprise collaboration. End-user preferences will decide as much as half of all software, hardware and service acquisitions made by IT.” (See “P&G Flirts with Google Apps and Scares the Bejesus Out of Microsoft” for an inside account of why P&G users wanted to use Google Apps.)

Disrupter No. 3: Revolutionary Changes in Software and How it is Consumed. Genovese predicts that by 2010, SOA will be used, at least in part, in more than 80 percent of new, mission-critical applications and business processes. “The resulting future application environment will be more granular, inclusive and fluid to enable rapid composition, integration, orchestration and reuse,” according to Gartner.

During 2008 and 2009, Genovese states that businesses must “radically re-engineer their processes, governance and disciplines to initiate and manage this transition” as well as evaluate and manage external and off-premises delivery of applications.

“Market excitement over Web platforms, SaaS and other IT utility services will only intensify, and this will increase business buyers’ appetites for these new options and services,” says Genovese. “This period will see huge changes in all facets of the IT market including clients, providers, investors, business and IT professionals and consumers.”

Disrupter No. 4: Software Market Moves to Megavendors Supporting Large Ecosystems. Software megavendors (SAP and Oracle, for example) have proven their impact and influence over customer spending across a range of markets, Genovese notes. “Megavendors seek to dominate enterprise architecture and the terms of integration in multivendor portfolios,” she adds. However, focused vendors (a.k.a., best of breed) must coexist with other applications and with enterprise architecture.

“As the transformation to SOA for packaged applications and the exposing and manipulation of process metadata become minimum requirements for the next generation, it is megavendors that will have the resources, and focused vendors that will have the incentive,” Genovese added. Unfortunately, she stated that focused, best-of-breed vendors face a long time before a next generation of open, composite applications drives the market and opens it to a wider range of vendors.

“We see rapidly changing technology in an industry that seems to be maturing. Vendors are focusing more on the ‘business of software’ rather than solely on product competition,” Genovese says. “Users faced with increased vendor power and lower price flexibility are looking for alternatives, containment strategies and ways to lower vendor switch costs. How the vendors react to these changes and pressures will be the basis for changes in their competition over the next five years.”

The spread of malicious software that can harm computers and open gateways for hackers and identity thieves is on the rise according to Microsoft.

The amount of so-called malware and other unwanted software found on computers rose 43% in the first half of the year, the company said Monday. More than 90% of the vulnerabilities affected applications, while only about 10% impacted operating systems, according to Microsoft, which released the data in its Security Intelligence Report.

The report “gives us a chance to share our extensive analysis of the threat landscape and related guidance with our customers, partners, and the broader industry,” said Vinny Gulloto, general manager for Microsoft’s Malware Protection Center, in a statement. “We are also committed to applying the data and intelligence from the report to our research and response efforts to provide customers with increased protection and services,” said Gulloto.

The report also showed that trojan downloaders and “high-severity vulnerabilities” are on the rise as well. Most hackers are motivated by financial gain, Microsoft said.

Microsoft systems are targeted by hackers more frequently than other systems, mostly because the company’s Windows technology resides on about 90% of all computers.

Microsoft said that there are a number of steps that computer users can take to help protect their systems from external threats. They should frequently check for, and apply, security updates—including updates from third-party application providers. They should make sure that their firewall is enabled and install up-to-date antivirus and anti-spyware programs.

And, said Microsoft, PC users should use caution when opening links and attachments embedded in e-mails, even if the e-mail is from a trusted source. Hackers often use links to direct users to phony Web sites in a technique called phishing.

A copy of Microsoft’s latest Security Intelligence Report is available for download.

Source: Information Week