Year: 2007

10 Reasons For Simultaneous Movie Releases

Post ImageIn my humble opinion, the way movies are released today sucks. First they hit the theatres, then DVDs, then video-on-demand services, and finally television. The movie studios really like these different release windows for some reason. Why not release movies to all of these distribution channels at once? It makes a lot of sense to me. The hottest item during the Xmas shopping season in 2006 was probably HDTVs, and I suspect it will remain a big seller this year and next. Watching new releases like Spider-Man 3 in the comfort of my own home sounds very appealing.

The idea is finally being explored:

Comcast is trying to make the “simultaneous release” dream happen, but with prices being proposed in the $30-50 range per screening, the dream looks more like a Hollywood acid trip.

Yeah, that price simply isn’t going to fly. The article includes a bunch of really great analysis, so check it out.

Here are ten reasons why I think the “simultaneous release” dream needs to happen (in no particular order):

  1. Drinks and snacks at the theatre are horribly overpriced – talk about price gouging. Not to mention the cost of gas to get from your house to the theatre! I’d rather eat the food I already have in the house, thanks.
  2. There aren’t any crying kids, cell phones, or other distractions in my house. Oh and my floors aren’t sticky either.
  3. I don’t like being forced to sit through fifteen minutes of commercials before the movie previews start. It makes seeing a 90 minute movie a two hour experience (and that’s assuming you don’t line up to get good seats).
  4. Many people have invested thousands of dollars into a comfortable home theatre system – simultaneous releases let them make the most of it.
  5. Hollywood would make more money. Increased sales and reduced marketing expenses.
  6. Pause! You should control the viewing experience, not the theatre. Want to pause for a few minutes? Go for it.
  7. We’ll get better quality movies. Instead of making only movies that are likely to do well at the box office, Hollywood would be free to make all kinds of movies with each one being widely accessible.
  8. Theatre owners would be forced to revisit their business. Why do we go to the theatre? I think “to see a movie” is a secondary reason. The primary reason is to socialize. Perhaps theatres will come up with a better overall experience when their backs are against the wall.
  9. Independent and other small movie studios would play on the same field as the big boys. Remember all the trouble Mel Gibson had to go through to get The Passion of the Christ released in theatres? It wouldn’t have been such an issue in a world with simultaneous releases.
  10. Control over the volume. Control over the temperature. No parking necessary. You can lay down if you want. Etc.

Anything else? I think it’s only a matter of time until the simultaneous release becomes the norm.

Notes for 5/13/2007

Wow, another long time in between posts, this is not like me! I had a good reason though – Traz. Here are my weekly notes:

  • Traz is my Mom and Dad’s new puppy. He came all the way from New Brunswick and stayed with me Friday before heading to his new home in Yellowknife on Saturday. He’s totally cute. Here are some photos I took, and here are some from my Dad. Puppies are a lot of work! Good luck Dad.
  • Kim looked after Traz on Friday night for a few hours so I could go with Megan and Aimee to see Brand New at the Edmonton Events Centre (formerly known as Reds). It was a good show. They played a long instrumental piece at the end which Aimee liked, but I wasn’t so keen on.
  • The final episode of Smallville’s sixth season airs Thursday. It had better be good. I wasn’t that impressed with this week’s ep.
  • Microsoft showed off a public beta of Halo 3 on Friday – gamers gave it mixed reviews but there’s lots of time to go before it is launched. On the topic of games, check out the official Simpsons-themed Xbox 360.
  • Back in December the city of São Paulo banned outdoor advertisements. Here are some photos of the city from this month and last. I think the law should be reviewed. The city looks barren and ghostly now.
  • What a cool idea: a vending machine that allows “watching ads” as a form of payment for drinks.
  • News of the Windows Live Folders beta broke yesterday…is a “Windows Live Drive” on the way? I hope so. Some competition for Amazon S3 would be good.
  • As those of you on Facebook are probably aware, I’ve got a giant card for Mr. Rice who is retiring as principal of McNally after decades? on the job. Let me know if you want to sign it and we’ll work out a time. If you’re not in Edmonton anymore, email me.

Happy Mother’s Day!

The Gatekeepers of Privacy

Post ImageAs you know, I don’t worry that much about online privacy. In fact, I think it’s a huge waste of time to be overly concerned about privacy on the web. I always keep two things in mind:

  1. There is no such thing as private information.
  2. If someone looks at information online and draws a negative impression about me, I have larger problems than privacy to worry about.

So far my strategy has been working fairly well. To my knowledge I haven’t missed out on any opportunities because of information about me found on the web – quite the opposite in fact.

For some reason though, I am fascinated by the worries and concerns of others when it comes to information privacy. And believe, me there are a lot of worriers out there. So many, it seems, that Global TV‘s troubleshooter looked at the security of Facebook and other popular websites last night (unfortunately they haven’t full embraced the new web, and the video is not available on their site).

They contacted a local “hacking” firm, and asked them to review Facebook, Gmail, and other popular sites. The gentleman they spoke to couldn’t have been more cliché – long hair, super geeky, could be mistaken for a girl, you know the type. Anyway, they apparently spent over 30 hours trying to “hack” into Facebook and couldn’t get in. I just shook my head through all of this. They deemed Facebook “very secure”. Well, problem solved I guess, haha!

Then they spoke to a professor from the UofA (if I remember correctly) who said that living under the assumption that your information is safe is a dangerous thing to do. Finally someone smart! The segment then ended with the anchors asking each other if they were on Facebook (they aren’t, unfortunately). Oh and the suggestion that you should read the privacy policy of every site you visit (yeah, cuz that’s going to happen).

It doesn’t matter how secure Facebook is. Privacy is not about technology. If someone wants to find out something about you, they will. Social engineering, dumpster diving, and many other techniques are far more effective than trying to hack into a site like Facebook. More importantly, there’s no need to – just create your own Facebook account! Chances are, the person you’re interested in hasn’t adjusted their privacy settings anyway.

For its part, Facebook follows two core principles:

  1. You should have control over your personal information.
  2. You should have access to the information others want to share.

A respectable policy, no doubt. Here’s the problem though. Let’s say I give access to certain information only to my brother. No one else (in theory) can see it, right? Wrong. I can give my brother access to the information, but I can’t restrict him from doing something with it.

Technology is just a tool. People are the gatekeepers of privacy.

Odeo bought by SonicMountain

Post ImageBack in February I posted about Evan Williams and Obvious Corp. trying to sell Odeo. I hadn’t heard anything since then, so I kind of figured they were unable to find a buyer. Turns out they did though. From TechCrunch:

Details are just coming out, but New York based SonicMountain, a new startup, has acquired Evan Williams’ Odeo. The announcement will come sometime tomorrow. The price is not being disclosed but is in excess of $1 million, and the deal was all cash.

Mike Arrington isn’t joking when he calls SonicMountain a new startup – their website is plain and empty. The only thing of interest is the news release:

SonicMountain intends to incorporate exciting enhancements to the Odeo community within the next few months. Improvements in content organization, search, crawl, plus podcast hosting of both audio and video are only a sampling of upcoming upgrades planned for the site.

Evan Williams will work with SonicMountain as an advisor for the next six months or so.

I’m interested to see what SonicMountain actually does with the site. Intentions are one thing, actions are quite another.

Read: TechCrunch

Movie Piracy? Blame Canada!

Post ImageLooks like the “our business model sucks so let’s insult our customers” mantra has made it to the desks of Warner Bros. executives. If you’ve never been to an advance movie screening, too bad, because they are now banned for Warner Bros. movies in Canada:

Frustrated with unauthorized camcording of its new releases in Canadian cinemas, the studio said it will immediately halt all “promotional and word-of-mouth screenings” of upcoming releases.

“We regret having to cancel our screenings in Canada, but our studio must take steps to protect not only our branded assets but our commitment to our filmmakers and to our distributors,” Warner Bros. president of domestic distribution Dan Fellman said.

I can honestly say that were I to download a movie that was recorded using a camcorder in a theatre, I would immediately delete it. Not because I am sleeping with movie studio executives, but because a movie recorded using a camcorder just can’t look very good. Any serious pirate will have the time and bandwidth to go for quality!

When will these idiots learn? Camcorders in Canada are not the source of piracy. I doubt the practice has any measurable effect on the movie industry at all. Mathew Ingram points out a number of flaws with the argument being made, and Engadget gets a dig in too, noting the ban affects upcoming movies like…

…the upcoming Ocean’s Thirteen and Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, which’ll surely not be pirated now.

Surely not indeed! Come back next week to read about Warner Bros. suing toddlers and their grandparents!

Read: Reuters

Windows Live Hotmail with Outlook

Post ImageYesterday Microsoft launched the new version of Hotmail, called Windows Live Hotmail. I rarely use Hotmail anymore, but I signed up for the Windows Live beta quite a while ago to check it out. I will say it’s better than what they had, but it’s still not for me. I really wasn’t that excited about it at all, until I came across something interesting. From the press release:

Windows Live Hotmail will deliver a safer, more powerful and productive e-mail experience than previous versions with flexible access via the Web, on a mobile phone or with an e-mail client.

Say what!? An email client? That’s something I’d be interested in.

Available later this month in 11 languages worldwide, the new Microsoft Office Outlook Connector beta will enable people to view and manage their Windows Live Hotmail account from Outlook for free, with full contact, e-mail and e-mail folder synchronization.

I have Outlook open almost 24/7 as you know, so I’ll definitely be checking out the awkwardly named Connector. If they throw in the @live.com address too, I’ll be just peachy!

For more info, check out LiveSide.

Read: Microsoft

Facebook Music Coming Soon

Post ImageI would say that Facebook is well on its way to becoming the definition of social networking. There are only a few more features it needs (like an API that can edit data), and of course there are a lot of features that would be nice to have. One such feature that I place in the latter category is music, and it’s coming soon:

It is being rumored that Facebook will be announcing an online music service on May 21st.

Facebook is supposedly lining up several partners from the music industry for their music service, which is sure to be a hit amongst Facebook users, and a rival to MySpace Music and Bebo Bands.

Sounds cool, so long as Facebook doesn’t screw it up. I hope the dev team is repeating this to themselves over and over:

NEVER AUTOPLAY MUSIC ON PAGE LOAD! AUTOPLAY IS EVIL! SITE-WIDE MUTE IS IDEAL!

Yes the capitals are required. If they allow music to be played on the site without my explicit permission, I’m going to blow a gasket.

Read: Mashable!

Should GM really produce the Chevy Volt?

Post ImageBack in November I saw the documentary Who killed the electric car? and I remember being less than impressed, as my comments at the time confirm:

The movie could have been better. It felt like an extended commercial, and the people involved seemed like fanatical environmentalists. Oh, and when they realized they couldn’t answer the question properly, they just blamed everyone.

Essentially the filmmakers didn’t present a very strong case for why, exactly, electric cars should rule the roads. They seemed ticked at GM more than anything. According to a post over at Engadget today, GM is dabbling in electric cars once again, this time with the Chevy Volt:

Those of you as taken with GM’s Chevy Volt concept vehicle as we are may want to take a minute to reconsider any impending car purchases, as the car is now officially headed into production — in two different versions no less. According to Autoblog, that could put the car on track for a roll out in 2010, although GM isn’t quite ready to get that specific.

Apparently there will be a plug-in gasoline model, and a fuel cell model (though the latter will be too expensive for mass production). The plug-in model should deliver a gasoline savings of 500 gallons per year on average.

Do we really want plug-in automobiles though? Sure they result in some gasoline (and emissions) savings from the cars themselves, but what about on balance? Over 70% of the electricity generated in the United States comes from fossil fuels. With that in mind, plugging a car in is a lot like filling it with gas. The environment doesn’t really benefit. It might have more of an impact in Canada, where just 28% of our electricity comes from fossil fuels, but most of the Volts will be sold in the US.

Another thing to consider is the return on investment. GM claims they are willing to lose money on the Volt initially, but I’ll believe it when I see it. Besides, losing money on something doesn’t mean it’s cheap – just look at the PlayStation 3. Consumers will ask this question: will the price premium of the Volt be recouped in gasoline savings before the car is discarded? In most cases, I bet the answer will be no.

The last thing I’ll mention here is technology. New car technologies will not rule the industry for decades like the combustion engine has. What happens if someone perfects the fuel cell a few years after the Volt is produced? So long Chevy Volt, that’s what. This is another big reason that cars like the Volt need to be inexpensive. Otherwise, justifying their purchase is difficult at best.

I’m not sure plug-in cars like the Chevy Volt are a good thing at all. In the best case scenario, consumers love them, GM sells a lot of them, they last for more than ten years, and they really do have a positive impact on the environment. I think that’s really unlikely though. The more probable scenario is that only GM wins by charging a premium for the Volt. Consumers pay more to get a car with a short lifespan, and little to no positive effect on the environment.

Read: Engadget

Notes for 5/6/2007

Here are my weekly notes:

Get ready for Spider-Man 4, 5, and 6

Post ImageI went to see Spider-Man 3 last night, and I enjoyed it. I think the critics were unnecessarily harsh (though not harsh enough to make it rotten). It’s like they all met in the back room and decided to call the movie “a disappointment.” With a few minor exceptions, I thought Spider-Man 3 was even better than the second movie.

There is a particular villain who really should have its own movie, so I wouldn’t be sad to see them make another installment in the Spider-Man series. If you believe the chief executive of Sony Pictures though, they’ll be making more than just another one:

Sony Pictures chief executive Michael Lynton told the BBC: “Everybody has every intention of making a fourth, a fifth and a sixth and on and on.”

There would be “as many as we can make good stories for”, he pledged.

That is kind of exciting to hear, but you have wonder if fans will get tired of Spider-Man movies at some point. Or more importantly, if the actors will get tired of the movies!

He probably said that because Spider-Man 3 has broken both the opening day and opening weekend North American box office records, bringing in $148 million (do they not count Sunday as part of the opening weekend, or what?). It’ll be interesting to see if it can hang on to that record with Shrek 3 and Pirates 3 coming out later this month.

Don’t listen to the critics, Spider-Man 3 is definitely worth going to see.

Read: BBC