TidBITS#829/15-May-06
=====================
Confused by the whole "net neutrality" debate? Geoff Duncan lays
it all out this week, after which Adam shares his experiences with
the Garmin StreetPilot 2720 GPS unit, which proved invaluable on
a recent vacation. Apple has continued its burst of updates the
releases of Security Update 2006-003, QuickTime 7.1, and Front Row
1.2.2, and updates to four iLife programs, but television fans may
be more excited about the availability of several new Fox TV shows
at the iTunes Music Store. We also note the release of NetNewsWire
2.1 and announce a DealBITS drawing for Open Door Networks'
DoorStop X Security Suite.
Topics:
MailBITS/15-May-06
DealBITS Drawing: DoorStop X Security Suite
The War Over Neutrality
Garmin StreetPilot 2720 Ups the Ante for Car Navigation
Hot Topics in TidBITS Talk/15-May-06
<http://www.tidbits.com/tb-issues/TidBITS-829.html>
<ftp://ftp.tidbits.com/issues/2006/TidBITS#829_15-May-06.etx>
Copyright 2006 TidBITS: Reuse governed by Creative Commons license
<http://www.tidbits.com/terms/> Contact: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------
This issue of TidBITS sponsored in part by:
* READERS LIKE YOU! Support TidBITS with a contribution today! <----- NEW!
<http://www.tidbits.com/about/support/contributors.html>
Special thanks this week to Dave Creek, Tom Verhoeff,
Carolyn Leigh, and Ron Perry for their generous support!
* Make friends and influence people by sponsoring TidBITS! <--------- NEW!
Put your company and products in front of tens of thousands of
savvy, committed Macintosh users who actually buy stuff.
For more information and rates, email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
* SMALL DOG ELECTRONICS: Selected Drives on Sale! <------------------ NEW!
LaCie 160 GB 7200 RPM FireWire P3 Porsche - $99
LaCie 250 GB 7200 RPM FireWire mini HD - $139
Visit: <http://www.smalldog.com/tb> -- 800-511-MACS
* FETCH SOFTWORKS: Fetch 5 is now available, with SFTP, Bonjour, <--- NEW!
StuffIt, Unicode, Dock progress, AppleScript, and a simplified
interface optimized for Mac OS X (including Tiger)!
Download your free trial version! <http://fetchsoftworks.com/>
* Web Crossing, Inc: Web Crossing offers integrated collaboration
tools with a broad spectrum of functionality, but did you know
adding discussions, blogs, podcasts, chat, polls, and calendars
is point-click easy? Try a demo! <http://www.webcrossing.com/>
* Circus Ponies NoteBook: Never lose anything again. NoteBook <------ NEW!
keeps your digital life organized. Take notes, clip content,
share information. Find anything instantly with automatic
index pages. Free 30-day demo! <http://www.circusponies.com/>
---------------------------------------------------------------
MailBITS/15-May-06
------------------
**Four iLife Apps Receive Updates** -- Apple released minor
updates to four of the iLife '06 applications today - iWeb,
iPhoto, iMovie HD, and iDVD - both via Software Update and
as stand-alone downloads. As usual, the updates all include
unspecified minor bug fixes and stability improvements. Beyond
that, iPhoto 6.0.3 (a 14.1 MB download) reportedly solves problems
with sharing iPhoto libraries (though we can't tell how, since
iPhoto 6.0.3 still creates thumbnails with read-only permissions
that prevent complete sharing of iPhoto libraries in the Shared
folder), as well as issues relating to photocasting of smart
albums and creating calendars and books. iMovie HD 6.0.2
(7.0 MB) resolves PAL audio problems and can now correctly
display iLife Sound Effects in its Media Browser. iDVD 6.0.2
(5.6 MB) "addresses issues with burning some 16:9 projects,"
according to Apple.
<http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/iphoto603.html>
<http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/imoviehd602.html>
<http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/idvd602.html>
Somewhat bigger news, and a much bigger download, is iWeb 1.1
(95.3 MB), which adds support for two heavily requested features:
comments (which can even include attachments up to 5 MB) and
search fields for blogs and podcasts that are published to .Mac.
It also contains "image management fixes to improve site load
performance." [JK]
<http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/iweb11.html>
**Security Update 2006-003 Released** -- Apple posted the latest
security update last week, which patches vulnerabilities in many
major Mac OS X components, such as Finder, Mail, Preview, Safari,
CoreGraphics, AppKit, Keychain, and Launch Services. Several fixes
prevent malformed image files from causing crashes or executing
code, while others focus on specific security holes. The update
is available via Software Update, or as separate downloads for
Mac OS X 10.4.6 Client (in a 12 MB PowerPC or 23.5 MB Intel
version) and Server (a 13.1 MB download); or Mac OS X 10.3.9
Client (a 28 MB download) and Server (a 41.6 MB update). [JLC]
<http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303737>
<http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/
securityupdate2006003macosx1046clientppc.html>
<http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/
securityupdate2006003macosx1046clientintel.html>
<http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/securityupdate20060031046server.html>
<http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/securityupdate20060031039client.html>
<http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/securityupdate20060031039server.html>
**QuickTime 7.1, Front Row 1.2.2 Released** -- Apple improved
two of its media-centric products last week. QuickTime 7.1,
a 49.1 MB download, delivers "numerous bug fixes," improves H.264
performance, and adds unspecified support for iLife '06. The media
playback application Front Row 1.2.2, a 4 MB download, adds song
shuffling in playlists, and fixes bugs related to preventing
Audible audiobooks from playing, DVD compatibility issues, and
more. Software Update has the updates as well, of course, and
beware - as always - that QuickTime 7.1 will overwrite QuickTime
Pro 6 licenses. [JLC]
<http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/quicktime71.html>
<http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/frontrow122.html>
**NetNewsWire 2.1 Released** -- The final version of RSS news
aggregator and reader NetNewsWire 2.1 shipped last week from
NewsGator, the company that acquired the product and hired
developer Brent Simmons last year (see "NewsGator Acquires
NetNewsWire"). NetNewsWire 2.1 dramatically improves
synchronization across multiple computers, enabling you to
maintain the same set of subscriptions and not view the same
news items you've already marked as read on one computer. It also
enables viewing news items and modifying subscriptions via the
NewsGator Web site, as well as a "sort by attention" option, which
pushes subscriptions to the top that the program believes you have
more interest in. Performance is also much faster in practically
every way.
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=08278>
<http://www.newsgator.com/NGOLProduct.aspx?ProdID=NetNewsWire>
NetNewsWire costs $30, which includes a one-year subscription
to NewsGator Online Premium. The program also synchronizes, with
less speed, efficiency, and cleverness, via .Mac or an FTP server,
so the NewsGator subscription isn't absolutely necessary for
synchronization benefits. The application requires Mac OS X 10.3.9
or later, and is a universal binary. NewsGator continues to
develop NetNewsWire Lite (still in beta), which is available
at no cost. It does not include a number of interface features,
but does handle synchronization. [GF]
<http://www.newsgator.com/NGOLProduct.aspx?ProdId=NetNewsWire&ProdView=lite>
**Fox TV Shows Hit iTunes** -- In the largest single network debut
to date, Apple has added another passel of television programming
to its iTunes Music Store, this time from Fox Entertainment.
The 16 new shows available via iTunes include current series 24,
Prison Break, and fX Network's The Shield; Whedon-verse favorites
Firefly and Buffy the Vampire Slayer; reality shows 30 Days
and Unan1mous, and shows from Fox's SPEED and FUEL TV outlets
including Pinks and the First Hand sports diary. As always,
episodes are available in an advertising-free format for $2
apiece and may be viewed on a computer or on a video-capable
iPod; some discounts are available for purchasing (or gifting)
entire seasons.
<http://www.newscorp.com/news/news_294.html >
<http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewCustomPage?
name=pageNetworkPage_FOX>
Fox's move to put television episodes on iTunes comes just a few
weeks after the network announced a revenue-sharing agreement with
its network affiliate stations. Although terms of the agreement
haven't been published, the Wall Street Journal reported it
enables Fox to make 60 percent of its prime time lineup available
via the Internet the morning after the shows air, with stations
receiving a 12.5 percent cut of the earnings after costs. [GD]
DealBITS Drawing: DoorStop X Security Suite
-------------------------------------------
by Adam C. Engst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Although the Mac world isn't nearly as scary as the Windows world
when it comes to malware and intrusions, it's still a good idea
for any Mac directly connected to the Internet to have a firewall
in place. But although Apple includes an open source firewall that
is capable of protecting you, it doesn't give you many options,
nor does it tell you what to make of the near-constant Internet
pokes and prods on your Mac that emanate from malicious people and
bots. To address these concerns, long-time Mac developer and ISP
Open Door Networks (who wrote the first firewall for the Mac many
years ago), have come up with the DoorStop X Security Suite.
It includes DoorStop X, which provides an easier interface,
more flexibility, and better logging than the built-in firewall.
Also included are the Who's There? Firewall Advisor, which helps
you make additional sense of the logged access attempts, and
the second edition of "Internet Security for Your Macintosh,"
a comprehensive ebook about security on the Macintosh. All three
products are integrated, so, for instance, you can use Who's
There? not just to understand a particular attack, but also
to pull up relevant sections from the book and to protect the
attacked service in the firewall.
<http://www.opendoor.com/doorstopsuite/>
In this week's DealBITS drawing, you can enter to win one of three
copies of the DoorStop X Security Suite, each worth $79. Entrants
who aren't among our lucky winners will receive a discount on the
DoorStop X Security Suite, so be sure to enter at the DealBITS
page linked below. All information gathered is covered by our
comprehensive privacy policy. Be careful with your spam filters,
since you must be able to receive email from my address to learn
if you've won. Remember too, that if someone you refer to this
drawing wins, you'll receive the same prize as a reward for
spreading the word.
<http://www.tidbits.com/dealbits/doorstop/>
<http://www.tidbits.com/about/privacy.html>
The War Over Neutrality
-----------------------
by Geoff Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In recent weeks a great deal of ink and pixels have been spent on
the topic network neutrality. As set out by pundits and some of
the mass media, a major battle is brewing between the big-money
telecommunications companies who build the networks which comprise
the Internet, and the big-money technology companies whose
businesses depend on the Internet. The telecoms want to be able
to charge Internet companies for preferred access to users on
their networks; conversely, major Internet firms - and many
consumer advocacy groups - argue such pay-for-good-access schemes
will create an Internet of haves and have-nots, stifle innovation,
and ensure only the highest paying online services are accessible.
In the United States, the issue has entered the political arena,
with some members of Congress proposing to legislate network
neutrality, and corporations and interest groups attempting
to swing public opinion (and politicians' votes) their way.
Propaganda sites for both sides have gone online.
<http://www.handsoff.org/>
<http://www.savetheinternet.com/>
So what's the brouhaha? Where did this debate come from?
**Defining Net Neutrality** -- It's odd to say, but as a practical
matter the Internet has never been neutral. Access methods and
capabilities have always impacted the Internet experience. Just
ask anyone downloading Apple's 100-plus megabyte system updates
via dialup: they'll tell you the Internet is biased _against_
them! Similarly, you may have a broadband connection, but maybe
your new favorite band's MP3 files are being served over an ISDN
line and still download at a snail's pace, or perhaps your cable
provider can't quite keep up with the streaming QuickTime movie.
Or maybe your ISP allows you to send mail only via their mail
servers, rather than through your employer's or one you run
yourself. And firewalls - which are everywhere these days -
are all about taking the "neutral" out of the Internet: they
deliberately screen and block different types of Internet traffic.
Corporations routinely block peer-to-peer file sharing and
services which are known security risks; schools enable access
only to approved "whitelisted" sites (or blacklist problematic
sites: Del Mar College in Texas recently blocked access to
MySpace). Some technologies "shape" Internet traffic by limiting
how much of available bandwidth can be used by certain users,
locations, or services, and, of course, some governments actively
block and censor the Internet. These are all current examples
of non-neutral behavior on the Internet today.
Further, Internet service has always been a pay-for-bandwidth
privilege. There's nothing neutral about it: no one has a right
to use the Internet for free. Although you might be able to skip
between Wi-Fi hotspots these days and get decent Internet service
without paying a dime, rest assured the folks running those
hotspots are paying for that bandwidth. Connecting to the Internet
costs money, whether it's via dial-up, cable modem, DSL, wireless,
satellite, or another access method. Generally, the more money
you're willing to pay, the more bandwidth you get. Today's
Internet giants spend mammoth amounts of money to ensure they
have bandwidth to meet their users' demands. You think Apple must
have big Internet pipes to serve out those massive system updates?
Think about Microsoft! Then think about the bandwidth that sites
like Amazon.com, Google, MySpace, and YouTube must require. They
aren't getting it for free, either.
Since in reality Internet access has never been "neutral," it's
tough to define "net neutrality." However, at a basic level, you
can think of it as representing the way the Internet operates in
the U.S. (and much of the world) today. Leaving aside variables of
access, policy, and bandwidth outlined above (and more besides),
being connected to any portion of the Internet generally enables
users to access darn near anything at best-effort rates. It
doesn't matter whether you connect to the biggest online sites
and services (like AOL, Yahoo, Google, MySpace, Amazon.com,
or iTunes) or the most obscure blog, photo page, or teenage poem
extolling Brad Pitt's abs. In the abstract, data from _all_ those
sites are treated equally and the Internet delivers information
as efficiently as it can given the circumstances, regardless of
who operates the physical networks the data may traverse. That's
the essence of net neutrality.
**Why Telecoms Are Worried** -- The telecommunications companies
that build major portions of the Internet - companies like
Verizon, the reconstituted AT&T, Comcast, and BellSouth - are
facing a dilemma. On one hand, demand for Internet and broadband
services has never been higher, and it's growing all the time.
On the other hand, the Internet-based services which broadband
connections make possible erode the telecommunications companies'
core businesses.
For example, the forthcoming capability to stream current
television shows and first-run movies via the Internet doesn't
bode well for services like Comcast's cable television business
(or satellite-based TV services). Why subscribe to HBO if you can
stream the movies you want over the Internet, whenever you want,
for less money? Voice-over-Internet-Protocol (VoIP) services such
as those offered by Vonage and Skype enable computer-to-computer
phone calls via the Internet, along with video and conferencing
capabilities, and can even call "out" to standard phones. VoIP and
technologies entering the same arena (like instant messaging)
strike at the heart of telecommunications companies' bread and
butter: standard telephone service, often provided via exclusive
franchise agreements. Telecoms are already losing (primarily
young) customers who are dropping their landlines in favor of
mobile phones. In the near future, they stand to lose even more
customers to VoIP. (Particularly businesses: VoIP is attractive
compared to business rate telephone and conferencing services,
especially for international calls.)
And, just to make things more awkward, while demand for broadband
services continues to grow, the amount of revenue a given amount
of bandwidth generates for telecommunications companies has
dropped as much as a hundred-fold in the last decade. Major
bandwidth which would have cost millions of dollars a month
in the mid-90s now costs tens of thousands of dollars per month.
(This phenomena also scales down: my home business bandwidth bill
is currently about 20 percent of what it was in 1996, and I have
access to about 18 times the bandwidth.) True, the expenses
telecoms incur to install that bandwidth have also declined, but
not as quickly, and in some cases they're going up: acquiring
right-of-way to put fiber in the ground is getting more difficult,
and costs to upgrade hardware and construct mammoth networks
are increasing, in part due to external factors like rising
energy prices. Here's a quick way to summarize the rollout of
U.S. broadband networks, even if it's over-generalized: the easy
stuff has mostly been done, and from here on out expanding network
capacity gets more expensive.
**Defining Tiered Access** -- The major telecommunications
companies who create broadband networks look at their declining
revenue growth and increasing costs, and see a not-so-rosy future
for broadband networks (not to mention their revenue bases).
And then they see the millions and billions of dollars being
earned by companies utilizing existing broadband-enabled Internet
services, and essentially say, "Hey, we _built_ the networks those
companies are riding on! Shouldn't we be getting a bigger slice
of that pie?" It's even more galling when those Internet companies
aren't paying much (or anything) for bandwidth on a particular
network. Let's say Vonage buys all its bandwidth from Verizon
(which isn't true, but play along). How do you think BellSouth
might feel about Vonage offering VoIP service to BellSouth voice
customers over the Internet, and maybe encouraging those customers
to roll back or even discontinue their voice telephone service?
All without Vonage paying to access BellSouth's broadband network?
You can see why BellSouth might be upset, and at the same time,
you can see why Vonage wouldn't see anything wrong with the
situation; after all, they're already paying big bucks to Verizon.
Although that example is fictitious (most large-scale Internet
services have to purchase bandwidth and specialized network access
from several providers at many locations), the idea is simple:
since all data transmission on the Internet is treated with
more-or-less the same priority, Internet companies can use the
telecoms' infrastructure to provide competing services and,
in some cases, even steal their customers.
So, telecoms are looking for ways to generate and increase revenue
from big Internet companies using their broadband networks.
Additional revenue streams would mean more money for the telecoms,
but also attract the investment capital necessary to build out
advanced networking capacity and capabilities. After all, lenders
and investors are mainly interested in backing projects which
have hope of turning a profit. The question is: what can
telecommunications companies offer the big Internet players
which would sweeten the deal and entice them to pay - or,
at least, pay _more_ than they are now?
One idea is to create programs whereby Internet companies
can pay telecoms to have their data treated preferentially.
Say you run an Internet company that provides streaming video:
what if you could arrange for your data to be delivered faster
and more reliably over certain major telecommunications networks?
Wouldn't that give you an advantage over your competition, keep
your users happier, make you look better, and, thereby, improve
your business? Wouldn't that be interesting to you? That idea is
the essence of tiered access: for a fee, the telecoms could grant
some Internet data a higher priority over other data.
Again, as a practical matter, Internet access already _is_ tiered.
In general, Internet access fees paid by companies and individual
Internet users are proportional to the amount of bandwidth
they receive. ISPs have been offering tiered access for years,
encouraging users to upgrade from dialup to broadband services,
and from "slow" technologies like ISDN and low-end DSL to "world-
class" DSL, wireless, and cable modem solutions. Businesses face
the same decisions on a larger scale, buying bandwidth, network
access, and access to colocation facilities at varying rates
depending on the services they need.
**The Crux** -- If implemented, tiered access schemes would change
one of the Internet's fundamental (if abstract) principles: that
all data is treated with the same priority, regardless of type,
origin, or destination. Under tiered access, data from preferred
sources or services would get special treatment; depending on the
provider, that information might traverse dedicated network links,
enjoy the lion's share of available bandwidth at bottlenecks,
or be routed more quickly than other data. Whatever the means,
preferred data would travel on the telecoms' Internet network
more quickly and with greater reliability.
Telecommunications companies essentially look at this idea as
innovation: they're creating new premium services which are
valuable to online businesses, and which can be paid for at
premium rates. An AT&T executive recently argued tiered access
wouldn't change the way the Internet operates for everyday users;
instead, tiered access would create new communications channels
in addition to existing Internet infrastructure. Although few
technical details of possible implementations are available,
it's pretty easy to imagine scenarios where the telecoms'
claims would be true. Many different types of businesses
and organizations require reliable and secure data transfer
mechanisms - think banks and financial institutions, governmental
agencies, manufacturers, government contractors, and media
companies. In the "old days" these industries often set up their
own private networks - an example would be the networks used by
now-ubiquitous ATM machines. Nowadays, the tools these industries
use are based on Internet technologies, and so those businesses
want to use the Internet. Through tiered access, telecoms would
essentially offer these organizations the benefit of reliable,
private networks with the advantages of the Internet.
But tiered access doesn't have to stop there: telecoms could
partner with Internet companies like Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft
to ensure _their_ data was also handled preferentially, or let
customers upgrade their service so any data they request is
treated with priority - and this is where the polemics get
pretty thick. Telecoms argue that charging Internet companies
for preferred access is only fair, since many of those companies
are currently getting a "free lunch" on the telecoms' Internet
networks. Revenue from tiered access would enable telecoms
to build the next generation of Internet networks.
Internet companies, conversely, argue that tiered access would
create an Internet where only the richest players can get their
data through reliably: unless Internet companies pay telecoms
"protection money," they can't count on their data getting
through to users effectively.
One objection to tiered access is technical - although, without
knowing the specifics of how tiered access systems would operate,
it's hard to evaluate. Generally, network engineers prefer
"dumb" transparent networks to network architectures which use
so-called "intelligent" data management. Historically, networks
which try to move as many bits as possible as quickly and
transparently as they can have achieved better performance and
greater reliability than networks which analyze and apply policies
to data transmission and routing. Telecoms have argued that
treating the entire Internet as just one "dumb pipe" prohibits
them from creating the new types of networks and data services
tomorrow's online businesses require. On the other hand, the
proliferation of firewalls, access technologies, security tools,
and other extensions to basic Internet operations mean that,
in practice, today's Internet isn't nearly as "dumb" as it used
to be, although many major backbones and interconnection points
are still remarkably transparent.
**The Politics** -- In U.S. politics, "net neutrality" is not a
new topic, but it's rapidly moving from conference rooms and
offices to the floor of the U.S. Congress. Several draft bills
before Congressional committees in 2006 have contained provisions
intended to mandate network neutrality (as of this writing,
none have made it out of committee). In August 2005, the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) adopted a set of principles
outlining a policy which largely embodied common ideas about
network neutrality, after it had imposed a small fine on Madison
River Communications in March 2005 for blocking Vonage's VoIP
service to its local phone customers. Nonetheless, in legal
terms the Internet is an unregulated information service within
the United States.
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260435A1.pdf>
Underlying the pro and con arguments regarding network neutrality
legislation is the notion of Internet service as being subject
to "common carrier" regulations developed for telephone networks
(and, before that, telegraphs and railroads). Under common
carrier laws, owners of a system are not allowed to leverage
their ownership to undercut third-party services. In the United
States, Internet service is _not_ subject to common carrier laws.
The networks which comprise the Internet are privately owned and
managed, and, despite that policy statement from the FCC, they are
largely free of government regulation. For the most part, network
operators can do whatever they want - it just happens to have been
to their advantage, thus far, to keep their networks comparatively
transparent to each other.
Telecommunications companies argue that legislating network
neutrality would amount to the first significant regulation of
the Internet, and, in the end, would amount to government-imposed
price controls for Internet services. Without pricing freedom -
a concept near and dear to many sectors of the American economy -
telecoms say they won't be able to roll out new advanced network
services. They simply won't be able to raise the money: the bulk
of revenue potential from anything telecoms can build would be
gobbled up by Internet companies, many of whom would be paying
little or nothing to access the network.
Internet companies and advocacy groups argue sites like Yahoo,
Google, and YouTube might never have come into existence if
they'd had to pay telecommunications providers for premium network
access. New technologies like instant messaging, digital media,
and VoIP (and, indeed, more controversial technologies like peer-
to-peer file sharing) may never have been developed if tiered
access schemes had been in place.
Moreover, some argue tiered access could limit consumer choice.
If (for instance) RealNetworks pays for preferred access but
Apple does not, suddenly RealNetworks' online music offerings
can look more attractive than iTunes - not on the basis of service
offerings or product merits, but simply because RealNetworks'
data gets to some users faster and more reliably. Smaller
businesses might not be able to get into the fast lane at all,
thus preventing their products or services from reaching that
critical mass to become "the next big thing."
Advocacy groups extend this concept beyond the business sector:
political organizations, non-profits, and "citizen journalists"
(e.g. bloggers) might have their voices squelched because they
can't afford to buy into the telecoms' fast lanes. Furthermore,
telecoms could simply choose not to sell preferred access to some
businesses or technologies, or, more chillingly, publishers of
particular political viewpoints. Perhaps Verizon thinks VoIP
technology is cutting too deeply into its traditional telephone
service offerings: well, there's nothing on the books which says
they are _required_ to sell preferred access to companies like
Vonage or Skype. Telecommunications companies say they would never
block or degrade Internet services on their networks, since doing
so would be a public relations nightmare and cost them customers.
That might be true, but opponents argue that U.S. consumers
typically don't have enough choices for broadband service for
market forces to play a major role in telecoms' access policies.
<http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/exclusives/50442.html>
**Stay Tuned** -- The debate over network neutrality will only
heat up in the coming months, and you can expect punditry from
both sides. In the end, it may be important to remember the debate
largely originates with telecommunications companies' desire
to get at a larger share of the money being earned by major
players in the Internet economy, like Google, Amazon.com, Yahoo,
Microsoft, and Apple, as well as whichever companies turn out
to be the leaders streaming video, television, and movies to
consumers. Given the economic and political power wielded by
telecoms, it's almost certain they will succeed: it's just a
question of how, and if the method in which they succeed turns
out to be the slippery slope predicted by the naysayers.
Garmin StreetPilot 2720 Ups the Ante for Car Navigation
-------------------------------------------------------
by Adam C. Engst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
It's been six months since my last entry in our ongoing survey of
GPS devices with voice navigation, and in my most recent article,
I wrote generally nice things about the Magellan RoadMate 760.
Its closest competition from Garmin, the StreetPilot 2720, arrived
for evaluation just before a pair of trips, one from San Francisco
to Seattle, and another from our home in Ithaca, NY, to New York
City. Overall, the StreetPilot 2720 offers nearly the same feature
set as the similarly priced RoadMate 760, but with a finer
attention to detail and to usability, and it comes out as the
preferred choice between the two. Moreover, with the StreetPilot
2720, I'm a bit hard-pressed to suggest improvements; Garmin has
done a fine job and I can imagine only a few places where Garmin
could extend the unit's capabilities. Both devices are commonly
discounted to about $700, though some lesser-known vendors
discount the RoadMate 760 even more.
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbser=1264>
<http://www.magellangps.com/en/products/product.asp?PRODID=1091>
<http://www.garmin.com/products/sp2720/>
Though I encourage you to check out the previous articles I've
written on the topic, in short, these devices accept a destination
address, calculate a route to the destination, provide spoken
turn-by-turn directions, and recalculate quickly if a mistake is
made (either by the GPS or the driver) or if the driver chooses to
deviate from the recommended course for whatever reason. Although
I can't recommend that anyone buy one for driving familiar routes
in a small town, I consider these GPS devices utterly essential
for long trips in unknown territory or for navigating complex
areas in big cities.
The two significant features that set the RoadMate 760 apart from
its predecessor, the RoadMate 700, are SayWhere, which speaks the
name of upcoming roads along with the turning directions, and
SmartDetour, which automatically calculates a new route if the car
spends too much time crawling in traffic. Predictably, Garmin's
StreetPilot 2720 offers extremely similar features, so that's
where I'll start.
**Chatty Mappers** -- The RoadMate 760's voice synthesis of street
names was a highly welcome improvement over previous devices
that could speak only the turn details ("Turn left in point
five miles"). However, the RoadMate 760 used recorded voices for
the turn details, resulting in different voices within the same
set of instructions, which was constantly jarring. In contrast,
the StreetPilot 2720 uses a very high quality synthesized voice
for both street names and turn details, so the spoken directions
come in a single, naturally spoken sentence. Though I couldn't
compare the voice qualities side-by-side, my impression is that
the StreetPilot's text-to-speech synthesis was better, and its
pronunciation of uncommon names was more accurate, if not perfect.
Plus, many roads have multiple names or numbers, and the
StreetPilot 2720 spoke only the first one, which felt more fluid
than the way the RoadMate 760 would slog through all possible
names.
Unfortunately, I hadn't been able to test the RoadMate 760's
SmartDetour capabilities in real-world traffic (since there isn't
any traffic in Ithaca), but driving in San Francisco, Seattle,
and New York City with the StreetPilot 2720 provided numerous
opportunities to test its detour capabilities. As far as I could
see, it didn't automatically suggest detours as the RoadMate 760
supposedly would have, but when we manually asked for a detour,
it did a good job of quickly finding an alternate route. Equally
unfortunate was my failing to ask for Garmin's GTM 10, an optional
FM traffic receiver that can receive real-time information about
traffic, road construction, and weather-related problems in
selected cities. When connected to the StreetPilot 2720, it can
theoretically receive such information and suggest alternative
routes. That would have been wonderful when attempting to drive
from Queens to Staten Island, a 45 minute trip that can take
several hours due to the astonishingly awful traffic on both
the Belt Parkway and the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway.
The interface for selecting these alternative routes could be
improved in all of these GPS devices. They usually enable the
user to specify how far off course a detour should go, and we
were also able to identify specific roads as being problematic.
Those are fine options, but we found the entire process somewhat
mystifying - when we were stuck in slow traffic, we had no way of
knowing how far out of our way was reasonable, and since we weren't
familiar with the roads, we had no way of knowing which ones to
identify as problematic after the one we were on. Plus, when we
asked for a new route, we had to scroll through the turn list
manually and try to decide if it was better; the StreetPilot
2720 didn't provide any way of comparing the old and new routes.
Once, while poking along in construction-related traffic near
Grants Pass, Oregon, we asked for a detour and luckily noticed
that the predicted arrival time to Ashland, Oregon had increased
by 40 minutes - the detour would have worked, but would have taken
us hugely out of our way. A better interface would provide several
different route options, sorted by the increase in time/distance,
and with the turn list for each easily scannable.
**Intangible Experiences** -- Much of the effort of creating
an effective interface comes in the small touches, and here's
where I think Garmin currently has the lead on Magellan.
For instance, although the RoadMate 760 automatically switches
from its standard flat map view to a 3D view when approaching
a turn, the StreetPilot 2720 (and this was true of the StreetPilot
c330 I reviewed earlier, too) usually shows a 3D view with
perspective, scaled to show both the current location (larger)
and the next turn (smaller, since it's further away).
This approach proves tremendously intuitive, and the StreetPilot
2720 switches to a flat map view only when the current location
and the next turn are many miles apart.
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=08121>
Years ago, I was driving with my friend Sandro in Seattle,
and as he gave me directions, he would always tell me what the
next turn would be as soon as I'd made the last one, even if it
wasn't coming up right away. It was his New Year's resolution,
he said, and I remember being quite impressed with how easy
it was to follow his directions, since I always had a good
sense of what was coming next. Though I can't remember what
the RoadMate 760 did precisely in this regard, my impression
is that the StreetPilot 2720 did a better job of mimicking
Sandro's approach, particularly when the next turn was coming
up quickly.
The RoadMate 760 provided a countdown of how long before we'd
arrive at our destination, but we had to do the math to figure
out what time that would be. The StreetPilot 2720 takes the
opposite approach by default, giving the arrival time and letting
us figure out how long that was away; it matches better with the
way we think.
Finally, although we didn't end up changing the defaults much,
the StreetPilot 2720 makes it possible to customize the display
and other behaviors in a wide variety of ways. I could easily see
someone finding a particular default annoying, so the capability
to change them is welcome.
**Physical Details** -- Although the RoadMate 760 and StreetPilot
2720 are more alike than different, the StreetPilot wins out.
The StreetPilot 2720 internalizes the external antenna that
the user must raise on the RoadMate 760 (both can accept more
sensitive external antennas if necessary), and yet its satellite
reception was just as good. It wasn't perfect, though, and in
the skyscraper canyons of New York City and the depths of Northern
California's sodden redwood forests, its capability to lock on
to the satellite signal was poor. It wasn't a problem on the
rural Highway 101 in California, but we experienced some stress
in Manhattan for a number of blocks before it was able to
determine our location and provide the essential directions
to Queens (if only it could have told us that getting into the
Midtown Tunnel wasn't for the faint of heart).
Though I can't compare the screens of the two devices side-by-
side, I can say that the StreetPilot 2720's screen is excellent;
despite driving in sun and wearing sunglasses, I never had a
situation where I couldn't read it easily. Garmin also includes
a snug plastic cover that protects the screen when you are packing
the StreetPilot or merely stuffing it in the glove compartment
to hide it while parked.
The StreetPilot 2720 was also the first of the GPS devices
I've used that came with a beanbag mount rather than a gooseneck
attached to a suction cup. I'm a convert - the wonderfully
adjustable beanbag mount, which has a non-stick plastic on
the bottom, was utterly stable, unlike the shaky gooseneck mounts,
and it was easy for Tonya to grab it off the dash to enter a new
destination address or otherwise work with the interface without
having to lean forward. The only downside was occasionally
knocking loose the power connector on the back, which forced
the device to reboot. Garmin also includes an infrared remote
control to enable the passenger to navigate the interface without
leaning forward, but we weren't impressed. Its keys didn't map
particularly well to the touch-screen interface of the StreetPilot
2720, and despite putting in new batteries, button presses were
often ignored.
Initially I was put off by the StreetPilot 2720's onscreen
controls for volume, since it was fairly difficult to adjust
the volume up and down to account for the increase and decrease
in road noise as the car moved faster and slower. It seemed that
a physical knob would have worked better. But then I discovered
a preference for automatic volume control linked to speed, after
which the only times I had trouble hearing the instructions were
when music or a podcast were playing too loudly.
Oddly, the StreetPilot 2720 doesn't contain a speaker. Instead,
the speaker is integrated into the power plug. This didn't prove
problematic in any of the cars I tested in, but I could imagine
a situation where it might be more convenient to have the plug
in a position where it couldn't double as a speaker.
**Where Next?** For the most part, the GPS companies are focusing
their product improvements in several main areas: music, hands-
free cell phone use, traffic reporting, XM radio, photo
presentations, and additional point-of-interest data. Of these,
it clearly makes sense to integrate an MP3 player into the same
device, since it's awkward to jury-rig an iPod with only a single
power outlet in the dash. And yet, Apple has done such a good job
with the iPod interface that I fear a music-playing interface in
a GPS would be a constant irritant. That's not to say it couldn't
be done well, with features such as automatic pausing of playback
to speak directions and easy toggling between music and map
displays, but I'll have to see one to believe it.
Similarly, features like enabling hands-free cell phone use via
the speaker in the GPS, XM radio, and including traffic conditions
in routing make a ton of sense, particularly (from the perspective
of the manufacturers) for differentiating between models and
keeping the price high. On the other hand, being able to show
photos on the screen (on the battery powered models, of course)
feels utterly extraneous; it may be easy to do, but it's also
easy to ignore.
I do look forward to the promised Travel Guide add-on feature
in the Garmin StreetPilot c550; it provides recommendations
for restaurants and other points-of-interest. We often found
ourselves using the point-of-interest database to look for a
nearby restaurant, and then trying to evaluate the likelihood that
any given restaurant was halfway decent based purely on the name.
The best strategy we came up with was to look for a cluster of
similar businesses in close proximity, since restaurants and gas
stations, for instance, tend to be located near one another,
so heading for a cluster proved the best way to find a good meal
or cheap(er) gas.
<http://www.garmin.com/products/sp550/>
Travel Guide sounds like a good start, but what I'd really like
to see is the integration of local knowledge into these devices,
mediated through a user-driven Web site. Imagine if it were
possible to rate existing points-of-interest and add comments
about them, uploading the details to a site and downloading
ratings and comments from others. Take it another level and the
user community could also correct the few mistakes in the map
and point-of-interest databases, thus increasing the value of
the system for all users. Although both Garmin and Magellan
allow custom point-of-interest databases, neither has shown
any indication of opening up the entire database to the user
community yet; perhaps TomTom or another company will make the
first step to involve users in the evolution of the product.
Hot Topics in TidBITS Talk/15-May-06
------------------------------------
by TidBITS Staff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The first link for each thread description points to the
traditional TidBITS Talk interface; the second link points
to the same discussion on our Web Crossing server, which
provides a different look and which may be faster.
**The Long & Winding Road** -- Readers discuss the recent court
victory of Apple Computer versus Apple Corps, including the
relative values of the two "brands." (8 messages)
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tlkthrd=2993>
<http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/823/>
**Two Corrections in TidBITS 827** -- Following up on last week's
correction regarding screen shot keyboard commands, readers bring
up Snapz Pro X and a key combination in Mac OS X to capture screen
images to the Clipboard. (3 messages)
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tlkthrd=2994>
<http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/824/>
$$
Non-profit, non-commercial publications may reprint articles if
full credit is given. Others please contact us. We don't guarantee
accuracy of articles. Caveat lector. Publication, product, and
company names may be registered trademarks of their companies.
For information: how to subscribe, where to find back issues,
and more, see <http://www.tidbits.com/>. TidBITS ISSN 1090-7017.
Send comments and editorial submissions to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Back issues available at: <http://www.tidbits.com/tb-issues/>
And: <ftp://ftp.tidbits.com/issues/>
Full text searching available at: <http://www.tidbits.com/search/>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
--
If you want to unsubscribe or change your address, use this link
http://emperor.tidbits.com/webx?unsub@@.3c557dc4!u=306a67f9
