Samsung Galaxy Gear

I’m sold. One picture did it. The one above by Josh Miller at CNET. I want the Samsung Galaxy Gear smartwatch. It doesn’t matter if the UI is sluggish. I don’t care if it requires charging once a day. I don’t even care if Samsung overloaded it with applications, which seems to be the case. I’m not going to buy it. But my inner nerd really wants it. The Galaxy Gear watch is hot, even if it has a critical flaw.

Samsung just beat Apple to the punch by a large margin. But that should be expected.

Samsung is a different company than Apple. Samsung iterates where Apple innovates. Samsung releases a first generation product that’s far from perfect. The first Galaxy Note was large enough to kill a man and was too slow for general use. The original Galaxy S was one of the worst Android options when it was released. Remember the Samsung Galaxy Tab? Yeah, twice as thick as the Nook Color and seemingly half as fast.
But this works for Samsung.

Apple on the other hand waits until they can release a product that’s nearly perfect. The original iPad was in development since at least 2002, eight years before the original hit the market in 2010. And even since then the product has simply seen updates. The first big overhaul is rumored to hit just this year.
And this works for Apple.

Yet, the consumer electronic scene is a different world than it was when Apple and Samsung first became the two superpowers. Samsung has a massive following now. Samsung has sold tens of millions of Galaxy S III and IV smartphones. It’s the leader in Android and general tech enthusiasts look to Samsung for innovation the same way they used to look to Apple.

Apple will likely follow its tradition of waiting until its smartwatch is ready. And now they have a good look at their main competition’s high and low points.

The Galaxy Gear watch seems to hit most checkboxes. The watch’s design is fashion-forward without being completely nerdy. It’s available in a wide range of colors. And it packs a good amount of tech including a camera into a modest-sized frame. The screen is attractive. It’s open to applications and there’s even a camera in the wrist band, because why not. And you can actually take calls on the thing by holding it up to your ear.

Engadget reports from some hands-on time with it that the UI is a bit sluggish and occasionally unresponsive. The S-Voice is not entirely hands free and the battery will only last a day. But this is Samsung. Those items will get better in the second generation.

By far the biggest drawback is the Galaxy Gear, at least at launch, is only compatible with the Note 3 and the new Note 10.1. It will likely work with the GS4 somewhere down the line, but it will require an update. Samsung has yet to say if it will work with any ol’ Android device. It’s very unlikely that it will ever work an iPhone in the same way Apple’s smartwatch will likely not work with an Android device.

As clever as the Galaxy Gear might be, there is still a lot of room in the market for other players. Pebble, for instance, already has a large following and will likely be viewed in the marketplace as a lower cost alternative to the Galaxy Gear. The Galaxy Gear is $299. The Pebble is $150.

There are also several smartwatch upstarts attending Disrupt next week and will be exhibiting in Hardware Alley. Samsung’s entrance into smartwatches will help move the market from niche to mainstream. As long as hardware startups can differentiate themselves from Samsung and eventually Apple, there is still plenty of money to be made in this growing market.

Should you buy the Galaxy Gear? Nah, wait for the next one. Or Apple’s smartwatch. That’s what I’m going to do. A Pebble is good enough for me until then. But I still want this one. Well done, Samsung.

We would love to hear your feedback !

Samsung beats apple by Samsung galaxy gear

 

Wolverine The Great

Director James Mangold brings a furrowed-brow solemnity to the comic-book world of Marvel’s blade-fisted antihero, The Wolverine. One that scratches and claws against the law of diminishing returns always destined to beset the splintering X-Men franchise.

Inspired by the 1982 Chris Claremont & Frank Miller Wolverine miniseries, “The Wolverine” takes enough liberties to better adapt it to the Marvel X-Universe that Fox has been building towards.

Haunted by the death of Jean Grey, former X-Man Logan (Hugh Jackman) is now a loner, foraging in the woods. But he’s tracked down and brought to Japan by a billionaire who’s keen to repay a life debt by stripping the Wolverine of his immortality.

Yukio (Rila Fukushima), a katana-wielding assassin with an intriguing back-story of her own, accompanies Logan to Tokyo, where he meets his would-be benefactor, Lord Yashida (Hal Yamanouchi), now an elderly mega-rich industrialist who wishes to repay his debt to Wolverine. Not willing to embrace death, he offers Logan a chance to relieve him of his eternal suffering in an exchange for his healing abilities. Logan refuses to do so – believing it to be a curse rather than a gift – only to be drawn into a web of intriguing mystery that needs unraveling.



Mark Bomback and Scott Frank’s screenplay follows Chris Claremont and Frank Miller’s popular Japan-set comic-book arc from 1982, but Mangold of “3:10 to Yuma” fame seeks to distance his film from those pulpy beginnings by embedding his protagonist in a conventional, near bromidic drama of familial squabbling, corruption and corporate greed.

Until a third act that collapses in a harebrained heap, the director largely succeeds in keeping the more fatuous aspects at bay, roughing up the surface with organically staged fight scenes and, raising the stakes by stripping his hitherto indestructible hero of his self-healing and regeneration powers.



Figuratively declawed, the Wolverine stumbles and bleeds, that intricately sculpted body which is hurting in tune with his inner torment.

That said,  ’The Wolverine’ is that rare superhero film that is mindful of the cannon but works excellently as a rousing standalone action picture with a lot of heart and soul to it. Hugh Jackman like many before him – such as Robert Downey Jr. (Iron Man), Christian Bale (Batman) and Sean Connery (James Bond) – has made Wolverine his own. With the right mix of vulnerability, steel and extremely buffed body, he creates an emotionally wounded superhero we can look up to and identify with.



The action set pieces from the dropping of the atomic bomb in the beginning, to the fight on the bullet train and the slightly silly climax are suitably gob-smacking. Unlike its predecessor the action in this movie is nicely balanced with the quieter moments and meditations of mortality.

Despite being an improvement on the last outing for Jackman’s not-so-merry mutant the movie leaves you with a sense of unfulfilled desire.

Regardless, the X-Men film series that started promisingly and then spun into a dive and was successfully rebooted thanks to the prequel “X-Men: First Class” is now at a point where the franchise has been snicked into strands so twisted from each other that its getting tough to trace the genealogy. Inconsistency is inevitable in a world that’s constantly being dug up with new characters and done over, leaving us no time to fall in love with anything being flung at us.

Heroes wander in, heroes wander out. Wolverine – the indestructible centerpiece of the buffet’s spread – isn’t waning, but Box Office results show otherwise. Here a superhero strives to be ordinary. As Marvel continues to claw the character’s mystique away, he’s starting to get his wish.

Wolverine the Indestructable Masterpiece

Google Glass Price Will Be $299, Claims Researcher

Google Glass is definitely one of the most anticipated gadgets of the year, with reports claiming that the wearable computer will become available for purchase by the end of the year. You probably are aware that the Google Glass has a price of $1,500 now, but how expensive will it be after it enters mass production? A Taiwanese researcher claims to have the answer to the question.

According to Jason Tsai from Topology Research Institute in Taiwan, the Google Glass will be priced $299 on launch. How did Jason Tsai estimated the Google Glass Price? Well, he tried to find out what it will be the costs of producing the device, then added a bit more to the final sum to make it a profitable device. For example, the little thingy in front of your eye, which is basically the display of the Google Glass has a price of around $30 to $35. The Google Glass display is supplied by Himax Display, Inc. and the Mountain View-based giant has recently purchase a 6.3% share in the company.

A Google Glass priced $299 is the wet dream of any geek or enthusiast, given that the developers who got into the Explorer program had to pay $1,500 for the wearable device. If Tsai got his estimations right and the Google Glass will indeed be priced only $299, then the device has the likes to become one of the most popular products on the market.

The Google Glass units that were sold through the Explorer program comes with adjustable nosepads and a durable frame that fits any face, which accommodates the HD display that is the equivalent of a 25 inch screen from eight feet away.

The audio is handled by a Bone Conduction Transducer, while the camera mounted on the Google Glass frame has a 5 megapixel sensor capable of recording 720p videos. You will be able to connect the Google Glass to your Android-powered smartphone using the Wifi – 802.11b/g or Bluetooth modules, while its battery is capable of getting it through a whole day of typical usage, then recharge it using a microUSB cable and charger.

Even though Google Glass comes with a total of 16 GB of flash storage you will only  have access to 12 GB, but, fortunately, you will be able to access your files and media stored in your Google Drive.

Will you purchase the Google Glass if Tsai’s estimations are accurate and it will have a price tag of $299?

Google Glass expected price

Authorizing new PC with iTunes

Authorizing new PC with iTunes

Learn how to authorize or deauthorize your computer with your Apple ID.

Authorizing and deauthorizing a computer allows you to manage which computers can sync or use apps, audiobooks, books, music, movies, or other content you've purchased from the iTunes Store.

You can use or sync your purchases from the iTunes Store on up to five different computers (these can be any mix of Macintosh or Windows-compatible computers). When you sync or play an item you've purchased, your computer is "authorized" for purchase using your Apple ID.

Notes:

• In order to enable Home Sharing, Automatic Downloads, or downloading of past purchases, your computer must be authorized for use with your Apple ID.
• Songs you encode in AAC format from a source other than the iTunes Store, such as your own audio CDs, and iTunes Plus content (music and music videos) do not need to be authorized.

Additional Information

• iTunes DRM-protected music includes audio with a bit rate of 128 kbps and allows users to transfer songs and videos to up to five computers, burn seven copies of the same playlist to CD, and sync to an unlimited number of iPods.
• iTunes Plus music refers to songs and music videos available in 256 kbps AAC encoding (twice the current bit rate of 128 kbps), and without digital rights management (DRM). There are no burn limits and iTunes Plus music will play on all iPods, Mac or Windows computers, Apple TVs, and many other digital music players.
• You may need to enter your Apple ID information again after initializing or formatting your hard disk. Initializing or formatting the hard disk does not remove the computer from the list of authorized computers. If you plan to initialize or format your hard disk prior to selling or donating your computer, deauthorize the computer first, then initialize or format the hard disk.
• Under some circumstances you may be required to enter your Apple ID information again, but this should not use up multiple authorizations. If you think that you may have used up multiple authorizations on just one computer, see One computer using multiple iTunes Store authorizations.
• The iTunes Store is governed by its Terms of Service, which permits Apple to change the authorization policy.
• An Apple ID based on an expired MobileMe account can still be used to purchase items and to authorize or deauthorize computers to play purchased music.

How to authorize new PC with iTunes