Aug 29 2008

The Perils of Spending Money

Category: GenericJoe Robot @ 11:30

I’ve always been a firm believer that when you’re buying something that you intend to use a lot and/or keep for a significant period of time, buy the best that you can afford, rather than taking the cheap option. I think that ultimately, you get more out of the item itself, and you also can often save on replacements/repairs since cheap options don’t have such a good lifespan.

To put this in context … in the past 12 months I’ve bought a new bike (Kona Dew Deluxe) and a new camera (Nikon D80). In both cases there were cheaper options available, even staying in the same broad requirements (a cheaper hybrid bike, or a cheaper DSLR), but I decided to pay for the best gear I could afford.

One of the problems with this attitude though, is that with some purchases it’s not the initial hardware that hurts. It’s the “Razor and Blades” scenario, but this time it’s a much larger scale.

Take, for example, the camera. When we got it, we paid a reasonable $1300 for the D80 with a 18-135mm lens included in a kit. But having a “real” camera, and starting to get more interested in photography, I’m now shopping around for accessories. First thing I hunted for was a 50mm f/1.8 lens. This was supplied by my partner as a birthday present, but the price tag was around $200 … a significant percentage of the initial purchase price of the camera. If I’d been after the higher-spec f/1.4 version of the lens, that would’ve been closer to $500!

A short while back I started to look at tripods, remote shutter releases and a good quality bag to carry all this stuff in. While you can get tripods very, very cheap in various places, I’ve looked at some and there is no way I would trust 1.5kg+ of camera and lens on them … In fact, I have a crappy tripod that I got from Zazz for about $25, and it’s so poor that the head doesn’t even sit level. On a flat, level floor, you need to adjust the legs to different heights so that the head of the tripod and the camera are level. No thanks. So now I’ve just spent $470 for a remote control ($50), bag $(120), tripod and head ($300). If you’re interested in what gear I’m using, check out the Camera Gear page.

This is just the camera hardware! Then we go back to the computer, where after several weeks of research and agonising, I caved in and bought a 23 inch Apple Cinema Display. That one really hurt the bank balance, but once I dropped it on my desk and took out the crappy 19 inch Viewsonic monitor that it replaced, it felt like the right decision. But now I’m looking for software to take me out of iPhoto … And I haven’t even started on the bike gear!

So beware! Always buy the best you can afford, I stick to that. But make sure you know what buying the best entails, now and in the future!

Tags: , , ,


Aug 15 2008

iTunes + movies + Australian broadband = fail

Category: Apple, TechJoe Robot @ 00:37

Today Apple announced the availability of movies, for purchase and rental, on the iTunes store. As is to be expected, I have a few issues with this.

Like the TV shows, which were announced earlier this year, there’s a significant price disparity between the iTunes prices and dvd prices. Or rather, there isn’t. The purchase prices for movies on the iTunes store are $10 for “catalog”, $17.99 for “recent” and $24.99 for “new” releases. Obviously these are just guidlines, since Star Trek: Generations, which I would definitely consider “catalog” is $12.99. That’s better than all the other Star Trek movies though, which for some reason are “recent”, and thus $17.99. All of the Star Trek movies can be picked up for around $20 each in a shop, on a physical medium, in a plastic box, shipped from a warehouse. If you buy them all at once, they come down to $15 each. Yes, I’m aware that there are costs associated with digital distribution, not least of all the bandwidth required, but these movies should be significantly cheaper than their dvd counterparts. I suspect that a large portion of the blame for this lies with the big bad movie studios, who can’t seem to see beyond their short-sighted quarterly earnings reports, but I wouldn’t put it past Apple to put all the blame on the studios while not being overly aggressive in driving those prices down.

But that’s just the start of the financial pain train …

Take my aforementioned example of Star Trek: Generations. That comes in at 1h 57min 54sec (thanks iTunes). This translates to 1.39GB. That’s really not that bad, given how cheap storage is and such. But comparing that to the download limits on some typical broadband plans in Australia and it doesn’t look so good.

Say you buy or rent one movie per week. I presume that’s not an unreasonable target … You’re looking at close to 6GB per month, just on your iTunes movie habit, let alone the music purchases you’re supposed to be making, or any other internet usage. So let’s check what we have to spend with the ISPs to get that.

First up -this is going to seem comical, but please, bear with me - let’s have a look at Telstra.
$40/month will get you ADSL, hobbled to 1500kbps download speed, and a massive 400MB (not a typo) of downloads per month. Wow.
$70/month will get you the same blistering speed, but a 12GB limit, so we could rent and download two movies per week. Slow down!
Of course you could get that 12GB limit for $10/month less … if you slowed down further to 256kbps download. On the plus side, at that speed, you wouldn’t be able to download more than two movies per week anyway, so your limit would be pretty safe.

So we’ll move to the other “big” player, Optus. Not that great either, with $50/month getting you 2GB or $70/month getting you 15GB. But with Optus you’re on full ADSL2+ speeds (or as close as the disclaimer will allow).

Since doing this for even just the major Australian ISPs will get boring fast, I’m going to skip to the ISP widely regarded as the best in $/GB terms - TPG. Ignoring off-peak limits (since I think the majority of people included in this example won’t, or at least shouldn’t have to, rent a movie at 3am) we need to spend $50/month to cover our target, and we actually get 18GB of peak downloads, which means a ridiculous three movies per week, plus a bonus movie per week in off-peak time if we’re so inclined.

Seriously - is this really how we are Building Australia’s Prosperity with our National Broadband Network? Okay, it’s not likely to happen via iTunes any time soon, but is 3 movie rentals per week really that odd? There’s a big problem with the iTunes store selling and renting movies, but this one isn’t Apple.

Tags: , , , , ,


Aug 08 2008

iPhone 3G … or MMS - not for you!

Category: Apple, TechJoe Robot @ 11:01

Okay, this one’s a little long, so perhaps grab yourself a drink and some popcorn before settling in. And as forewarned, there’s a bit of background to this story …

I’m (currently) an unapologetic Apple fanboi. This has escalated to the point where I am now actually working (IT Support) in an environment that is very heavily mac biased. I do all my home, travel and work computing on Apple hardware, even if I do occasionally boot it up into Windows to do specific tasks. This hasn’t always been the case - I started my computing life on an 8086, progressed through 286 and 386, then used several flavours of Apple / Macintosh during primary school (Where on the Apple ][e is Carmen Sandiego?) and then around the System 7 vs Windows 95 days I shifted, fairly solidly to the Windows camp. I became one of those horrible Windows people, and ranted against macs for a good few years. At about OS X 10.2 I started looking at the mac again, now older, somewhat wiser and much more appreciative of things like UNIX (okay, BSD) core underpinnings and so on. And I was starting to see the flaws in the Windows world. Over the last few years, as XP has continued to be what it was 6 years ago, and Vista has not proved to be the magic pill someone, somewhere was probably hoping it would be, I’ve become a fairly solid believer in the OS X camp.

Still, I try not to be a zealot about it to other people, and I recognise the flaws in OS X and the positives in Win XP (and even Vista). But there’s no doubt about my favoured choice, and there’s little doubt that I’m willing to cut Apple a fair bit of leeway with products and try them out even if they might not be quite what the Reality Distortion Field might suggest.

With that in mind, I was front of the queue at my local Optus store for the iPhone 3G when it was released here in Australia. I knew what I was getting myself into. I was sacrificing tactile feedback, I was getting a fairly ordinary camera, and I was losing MMS. I have an iPod Touch, so I understood about the keyboard, and I knew that wasn’t an issue. Assessing my usage of the camera and MMS on my Nokia E65, I was certain I could do without those 5-6 messages per year, especially since I could freely email things to people who were usually close enough to email access anyway.

Having now had the iPhone for a few weeks, I can safely say that although my typing has been far from perfect, the keyboard is a non-issue. It has reduced my walking emails and messages, which is not really the end of the world, but if I can spare my eyes, there’s no problem with the typing. There is occasionally a bit of lag on the keyboard, and it’s annoying, but it’s not much different to my Blackberry, where I could sometimes type out a full message only to have the BB not recognise any of the (physical) keystrokes anyway.

The shitty camera quality does and doesn’t annoy me. Photo-wise, don’t care. I mean, it would be nice if I could get slightly better photos of my friends doing stupid things indoors to make contact photos, but it’s hardly a big issue. I have a real camera for taking real photos. But on the flip side, who includes a 2MP camera these days? Other phones in this price bracket are pushing 5MP cameras with “brand name” lenses. Okay, sure, they have a sensor the size of a pinhead, but compared to the iPhone camera, they’re pretty impressive. Apple has always cultivated a reputation as pushing technology and taking things that have typically been done badly and drastically improving functionality and marketability. So including a sub-par camera on their “Jesus phone” really seems out of place. Not including the (software) ability to record video seems odd as well, although battery life / processor power arguments can at least balance upright precariously, if not actually stand up to much scrutiny. The fact that jailbroken iPhones can do (crap quality) video without pain begs an answer to why it was left out.

So anyway … shopping around for something to protect my precious shiny from scratches, and I find a silicon case that doesn’t look too horrid. Normally I’m very much a fan of either “invisible” protectors, or a sleeve of some sort that protects in-pocket, but keeps the look of the device clean. But this case didn’t look too bad, and looked very easy to slip on/off as vanity dictated. I like to have my impulses at least told to someone else before I act on them, and it would’ve been so great to shoot off an MMS to my other half, who was not in a position to check her email or wander down to the Apple Store. Fitting, that my first iPhone MMS frustration was in an Apple Store, shopping for my iPhone.

When you read the spec sheet, really, who cares about MMS? It’s not that great, it’s typically overpriced on the networks, and the email argument does actually hold a lot of water, at least in my situation. But then there are those few times when MMS is exactly what you want, and you start to think “Hang on, what reasoning is there for NOT including a standard mobile phone feature?”

Think of the programming involved … there’s already the functionality for SMS, and the functionality for email. MMS would seem to be a no-brainer. Okay, we’ve struck out programming. How about appeasing the mobile networks, something Apple would’ve had to do in some instances, since a mobile phone without network support isn’t that useful. But networks, in a pure price-per-byte argument, are charging far, far more for an MMS message, since they are often capped at 100kb or thereabouts. So network-appeasement seems rather unlikely too.

It’s incredibly implausible that this was an “accidental” omission, since I don’t believe that any company developing a mobile could get to version 2.0 of their mobile OS and not have come across the feature. Which means it was deliberate. Which is frustrating. I am still an Apple fanboi, but this is totally an example of the decisions that they make that seem to serve no basis in consumer reality, but also, and this is the worst bit, don’t seem to even have any “pushing the industry” reasoning driving it.

Tags: , , ,