Thoughts from the Shelf

New legislation that is to be brought in will now mean motorists caught driving whilst on a mobile handset could be sent to jail for up to two years. The change in policy has come about as the altered laws involving mobiles and driving that were introduced in September are said not to have had the desired effect on motorists.

Using a mobile phones while driving was first banned in 2003, but since then thousands of drivers ignore the law each day, despite an increased £60 fine and penalty points being introduced in September.

Under the new guidelines most motorists caught using mobile handsets whilst driving will still face the increased fine and penalty points that was introduced in September. The changes however will give courts more power against anyone who has an accident whilst on their mobile, the result of which could be a dangerous driving conviction and a two year jail term.

Increased penalties do not solely apply to accidents but any driving that falls short of what is deemed safe. Sending text messages, speeding and over taking whilst on a mobile could therefore result in the increased penalties. The laws also include using Sat-Nav devices whilst driving.

Motorists who cause death on the road could additionally be prosecuted for manslaughter, a charge that carries penalties up to life imprisonment.

The change in policy comes at a time when the safety of using mobile hands free kits whilst driving has also been thrown into question, with one large transport company already banning employees from using them.

Findings from the Transport research Laboratory had suggested that driving whilst using a mobile handset could be more dangerous than drink driving. Other reports have also suggested using a mobile behind the wheel puts a drivers concentration at the same levels as the drink drive limit.

With hands free kits also being declared unsafe, it is suggested that it is actually speaking to someone not in the car themselves that is deemed distracting and is therefore dangerous.

“What we think that is to do with is that the passenger can see the traffic around you and can maybe pick up on your body language cues, and then modify the conversation accordingly.” Said Dr Nick Reed

I agree with the fact that driving whilst using a mobile phone is not only irresponsible but can impair someone’s driving ability, but to make such a stark comparison to drink driving is more a scare tactic in my opinion.

I can understand how concentration levels may temporarily drop whilst a mobile call is taken, but this is for the duration of the call, and no way does someone remain under that reduced state of awareness for anything like the length of time a driver under the influence of drugs or alcohol does.

If talking on a hands free kit is distracting, so too is talking to passengers, however I doubt the government will advise against car sharing!

Drivers who do answer a mobile whilst driving certainly do not set out on their journey with the intention of breaking the law, and it is a split second decision to answer the call. This does not justify it, but this point is intended solely to make the comparison with a driver under the influence who sets out intentionally breaking the law, knowing full well his ability to drive will be impaired for the entire duration of their journey. Yet people who do use a mobile handset could still end up with a two year jail term along side people the steal, rape and murder.

It is the culture of using electronic device behind the wheel that needs to be tackled, and with increased policing this culture would change.

“We’d like to see police on the streets taking action. The best deterrent is for a motorist to be either pulled over themselves or know someone else who has been stopped.” RAC

Unfortunately increased penalties which result in jail terms will only send otherwise law abiding members of society to an already overcrowded prison system, whilst proper criminals get increased parole, home sentencing and ASBO tracking.

The UK watchdog Ofcom toady upped the pressure on internet service providers who consistently provide slower broadband speeds than those advertised. It is estimated that thousands of internet users are not getting anything near the broadband speed they signed up for, and it seems frustrating bottlenecks are a common problem for broadband users.

Ofcom have warned that broadband firms could face formal action if they fail to provide accurate information about the broadband speeds that customers receive. It was said that an opt out clause should be written into broadband contracts so if specific information about the speed on a users line is not provided they can cancel the broadband contract without penalty.

Ofcom has said that new regulations should come into place in early 2008 and should ensure that broadband providers don’t oversell broadband packages in advertisements.

As part of the new plans Ofcom suggestion ISP contact customers two weeks after installation to provide them with information on their actual line speed, allow customers to switch to a different provider if unhappy with the service they are getting, and commercials should give more prominence to the factors that affect broadband speeds.

That said broadband speeds are not always the sole responsibility of the ISP, and factors ranging from telephone wiring, to distance of exchange, to computer maintenance can all affect the speed of a customers broadband package.

I have a BT broadband package which is up to 8Meg, and I for one have been receiving significantly lower broadband speeds than this. You can check out you speed using you home PC or by using your postcode with the Broadband Speed Test from BT. BT now say my line supports 6.5 Meg, it is in fact lower still!

The Ofcom warning comes at a time when Britain has been warned its economy will suffer if an ultra-fast internet network is not developed. Currently most of Britain’s existing network is based upon old copper wiring instead of more efficient fibre optics.

As part of Googles expansion into new areas on the web, the search giant has released an open academic project in Google Knol. Live in beta sceptics have said that the project which is aimed at competing directly with Wikipedia, is a way of increasing revenue as Wikipedia entries currently feature so high within Google search results.

With the project aimed at getting people to contribute knowledge it will function very much like the existing Wikipedia, but will address several key floors its rival has been criticised about recently. With Knol entries, authors of articles will build up professional reputations by preventing articles from being edited by participants unknown to the author, and by disallowing multiple contributions to a single topic, both of which differ in Wikipedia.

Google have also stated that they will not serve as an editor and will leave this solely to the discretion of the author of the article. It does mean that different Knols could exist on the same subject whose credibility would directly compete with each other, but Google has stated that this will only lead to more credible articles.

Google will also allow authors to serve adverts on their written pages,

“If an author chooses to include ads, Google will provide the author with substantial revenue share from the proceeds of those ads,” said Udi Manber, Google vice president.

Recent statistics have demonstrated the popularity of free information sites, with Yahoo answers now said to draw 120 million users worldwide. Yahoo Answers, with 400 million Answers is the second most popular education/ reference site behind Wikipedia. Yahoo Answers has however recently attracted criticism regarding the quality of answers it provides, and is said to actively encourage bad research.

The quality of Wikipedia articles has also been scrutinised with several high profile cases demonstrating government institutions editing articles to reflect them in a more positive light.

These criticisms of the top two educational/ reference sites is said to be every teacher’s worst nightmare, and by locking articles to the author Google is certainly attempting to create a more accurate knowledge base. However it is thought that academics wont be willing to contribute to a project where the credibly of competing articles will be judged but the masses. Academics are already very weary where they publish content and I think it remains to be seen whether Google Knol will be a platform that inspires confidence to academic authors.

Social networking site Bebo yesterday announced plans to link up with rival Facebook that will allow software developers to create applications that can be used across both sites. With nearly 100 million the move will provide developers with the opportunity to develop compatible features for both networks.

Recently The Shelf documented plans from Google to create Open Social, a similar cross network development strategy for which a number of big social networking sites signed up for, excluding Facebook. Open Social was supported by Myspace which alone has 110 million users.

Facebook had huge success after first opening up its network to developers, and now within a few hours the same application could be run on Bebo. Since Facebook started to allow third party applications six months ago thousands of applications have been developed for the social networking site.

As part of the deal however Bebo profiles will not be able to link directly to Facebook users, a step that acknowledges both Facebook and Bebo audiences use each social network for differing purposes.

“We think people use social networks for different things: Facebook is a great social utility, whereas you use Bebo to share media and entertainment.”

Bebo is part of the Open Social alliance as well and is the only network to complete deals that cross both alliances. The interaction of both APIs will be live by early 2008.

I read today about a new feature of the search engine Ask that is aimed consumers who are becoming increasingly concerned about their online privacy. AskEraser will allow users to opt for the deletion of personal search query data that would otherwise get stored on Ask’s servers.

It is not uncommon for search engines to store personal search data from users, but in an online culture that increasingly involves using search engines to quickly and effectively find desired content, users are becoming ever more concerned about the lack of privacy that comes with using them.

Advertising too plays a massive role on the internet and adverts on search results are no exception. With access to user data advertisers can better target their intended audience, meaning an increased return on the investment of advertising. In essence better placed adverts are more likely to generate sales, and on the basis of this stored user search data is a valuable commodity.

As search engines are becoming a necessity for more and more people this search data is ever present, and it is the misuse of this data by search engines that people are growing increasingly concerned about.

An extra concern has been highlighted with several high profile cases recntly where personalised search data has been requested by government institutions in civil law proceedings, challenging the existing privacy policy most search engines endeavour to abide by. This does raise the concern of how secure user data is, even when protected by a strict privacy policy.

In August 2006 AOL was also forced to publicly apologise after it released the search queries of more than 650,000 of its US subscribers to help in academic research. Users names were not released however the search queries released did contain personally identifiable data.

Facebook too recently came under fire when a new advertising system, discussed on The Shelf last month, led to over 50,000 complaints on privacy invasion from its users.

Such high profile cases can however lead to change. Recently Facebook altered its targeted adverts that were previously severed on the social network based on past purchases. This is now an optional service, and as such users can opt-out of the recieving such adverts.

Search engines too have are going to increasing lenghts to calm concerns of how personal search data is used. Over the past year the big players in the search industry have now confirmed they will delete search histories after a set period of time, ranging between a year and 18 months.

With this latest development, the launch of AskEraser, Ask is hoping that by giving users the chance to delete search query data almost immediately, (in contrast to market leader Google who waits 18 months), they will attract a new breed of users who are more concerned about their privacy online. By being the first search engine to physically erase information about a user’s searches from its servers Ask is certainly going where no engine has previously been, and is AskEraser demonstrates an innovative way to differentiate itself from other search engines.

According to internet measurement firm comScore, ‘Ask accounted for 4.7% of US searches during October. Google took the lion’s share with 58.5%, with Yahoo accounting for 22.9% and Microsoft for 9.7%.’ Whether the addition of this service will change those figures dramatically remains to be seen, and I for one remain sceptical.

My scepticism stems from major drawback to the service, and that is that Ask has just signed a five year agreement with Google to deliver ads alongside its search results. As part of the deal search data will be sent to Google in order to choose relevant ads, and Google is under no obligation to erase the data sent to it, regardless of the user’s AskEraser settings.

Google has also stated that it has no plans to implement such a tool in the future, so for now search data form search queries on Ask, for which ads are served, is still being stored by Google.

A freak accident occurred this weekend which left me without the use of a mobile phone. For the past five years or so I have mulled along with my present phone provider 02 which by and large has been more than satisfactory, collecting annual handset upgrade as and when they are available to me. Thanks to my handset being rendered useless however I was now in a position where I would be paying a monthly line rental fee for the remaining 7 months without actually being able to use my included minutes. Not only this, but the thought of seven months without mobile was not an option, being that it is essentially my only point of contact.

I did have the option of claiming off my mobile insurance, but with a £20 excess and lengthy claims process, I was looking down other avenues. It was then that somebody told me of the recent trend of third party mobile operators buying existing contracts out in order to get you to switch mobile phone networks.

After hearing about this option I popped into my local Jag shop at around 5.00pm on a Saturday and was quickly approached by two sales assistants attempting to make their last sale of the day. It is worth pointing out that I am very much a sceptic with scenarios like this, and in the past have mainly sorted out similar contracts online, allowing me to make a decision somewhat impartially without the sale banter that is thrown around in store.

As the friendly formalities passed I explained my situation and was promptly passed a sequence of four handsets, the Sony Ericsson K850i, W910i, a newer Nokia offering and the Samsung U700, pretty much the latest models currently available. I hadn’t recently looked at the latest offerings but they are newer models of popular handsets that I had previously come across, including my own the Sony Ericsson W850i.

Having seven months left on my contract the next step was to make a quick call to my existing mobile network provider. Currently on a the Online 30, a £30 monthly contract providing 400 talk minutes and 1150 texts, I was offered each handset on an Orange 18 month contract at a cost of £35 providing 500 minutes and up to 3,000 text messages. How anybody could go through the required 100 text messages a day and use 3,000 texts a month however bemused me.

So the drawback so far was entering into another contract, but as mentioned I would be likely to do so in seven months time anyway. Second my existing line rental still had to be paid. The next step was informing me that I would have to downgrade my current 02 contract to the Online 20, £20 a month, and they would give me the £140 cash up front to pay the remainder of the contract.

By including an up to date handset free of charge, and £140 cash back I couldn’t help but wonder where the money was for them. The entire contract would cost £630, minus the cash back leaves £390. Take the handset that retails for £299.95 on Pay as you Go, that leaves £90 for an 18 month contract. In terms of profit for the Orange this is more likely to take around the £340 mark over the 18 months as they possibly pay £50 a handset.

This still means that I receive an enhanced package for under £18 a month, which goes to Orange and for that they have to provide 500 talk minutes and near unlimited texts on my service. If text messages are deemed free this means for every anytime talk minute included on the package Orange will receive 0.27 pence. This doesn’t seem a lot to me.

To make things even better value three months insurance and a range of handset extras are also thrown in.

Add on top my existing insured handset retails for £100, and when the eventual claim came through if sold for £50 it would be the equivalent of nearly three months free line rental. Not stopping there the figures look even further out of Orange’s favour when you consider the option of reducing my contract after 12 months to £20 in a similar fashion, and moving to another network in tweleve months being bought yet out again.

After mulling this over I did ask the shop assistants where they make their money, not that I would believe their answer but having done my fair share of sales I find it interesting to see their response to such an awkward question. The response I got was that it was better to make a little profit than nothing at all, and at the moment it is more a numbers game with a drive to get people on to Orange in the hope of contract renewals in the future as opposed to short term profits.

I am interested to gage people’s opinions and similar experiences, as even as a sceptic, this deal looks very much in favour of the consumer.

I don’t mind admitting when I have been suckered in to a television show, as was the case in the summer with an alternative show One Tree Hill, after all there are prices to pay to keep the peace. Although I find the endless fight for control of the evening TV schedule more tiresome than actually watching shows that I detest, there is a hidden reason to fight on, and that is you actually end up liking shows you previously thought of as trashy. An embarrassing dilemma.

This was the case with the latest series of ‘I’m a Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here’, another reality television show that in my opinion has run its course and is just a cheap way of guarantying high ratings. Unfortunately there are far too many similar reality TV programs dominating program listings that in my opinion stifle creative programming. For me seeing these programs scheduled day in day out only boosts the appeal of the government funded broadcasting agency we have in BBC that can afford to sacrifice (or rather risk) guaranteed viewing figures in return for quality programming.

That said, (and I say this bowing my head), I experienced first hand how easy it can be to become engrossed in these programs. After giving up the fight for the remote on no more than two occasions I found myself strangely curious about the background of these ‘celebrities’ that I had never heard of.

My next step was Google and a quick search for Janice Dickinson (eventually finishing runner up), an America ex-supermodel who had returned to fame allegedly on another reality TV series in the State ‘Americas Next Supermodel’. My how her ‘Oh Man!’ American catchphrase sent chills down my spine but still I found myself reading articles about her claims of over 1000 one night stands, paternity tests for Sly Stallone and rumblings with Dulf Lundren. I couldn’t help but think whether this is what made Rocky V such a good film

Next up was Cerys Matthews, who only after hearing her sing a acoustic song in the jungle did I recognise her voice, non other than the lead singer of Catatonia. Cerys then went on to develop a close relationship with Marc Bannerman, who again I had no idea who he was but looked somewhat familiar. A Google query later and I found it was that guy who played Gianni di Marco in EastEnders in the days the Italian brother him and Bepe ruled the square in mafia gangster style.

This said they were not all the so called celebrities were completely foreign to me, and I did recognise Gemma Atkinson for one, Rodney Marsh two and thirdly Anna Ryder Richardson for some strange reason.

With all this said it wasn’t the celebrity status of these people I found interesting, but more my inquisitive nature of finding out who these supposedly well known people actually were that got in me tuning in each night. It turns out I’m not the only one either with over 10 million viewers regularly tuning in.

I am however relieved the series has finished with Christopher Biggins the eventual winner as I feared I may be stuck wasting 45mins a day forever. I shall put up a stronger fight for the remote when the eighth series comes round.

On Monday The Shelf posted about plans to launch a new lower cost HD player in the New Year. It seems that the race to find a superior format is heating up again after The Shelf posted about the rival DVD formats in August.

Today Michael Bay has once again expressed his support for the Blu-ray format after announcing on his blog that a Transformers 2 movie would not be in the pipeline due to Paramount signing exclusively to its rival HD. Mr Bay later swiftly u-turned after apparent pressure from Paramount regarding its decision to back HD.

The latest criticism from the Transformers director it not so much expressing his opinions on either format, instead he launches into a conspiracy theory detailing how Microsoft is doing its utmost to ensure neither format comes to dominate, instead paving the way for digital downloads.

On a quote from his website Bay said “What you don’t understand is corporate politics. Microsoft wants both formats to fail so they can be heroes and make the world move to digital downloads. That is the dirty secret no one is talking about.”

He goes further to say “That is why Microsoft is handing out $100m checks to studios just embrace the HD DVD and not the leading, and superior Blu-ray. They want confusion in the market until they perfect the digital downloads. Time will tell and you will see the truth”

Bay clearly has an allegiance to Blu-ray, but besides the fact that a little more data can be held with this format, we are yet to see an offering from either format that looks better in hi-def. If anything the Transformers in HD actually booted the appeal of HD, with superb built in interactivity.

Although the allegations of HD payoffs are unfounded, both formats do make funds being available to boost their appeal. It is true however that Microsoft support downloading as a preferred alternative. Apple has a similar stance although they do back Blu-ray as a studio format.

I definitely think that movie downloading has a future, and as mentioned in yesterdays post is and industry estimated to grow to 350 million euros by 2012. As yet however bandwidth limitations are playing their part restricting the download industry for now, especially considering one HD movie is enough to use up a month’s download allowance on some UK ISPs.

It’s my opinion that one day data storage discs will become obsolete, where we will view movies on demand in our preferred formats, not the studios. For now however Blu-ray and HD have a very real battle to resolve, and my concern is that if a dominant format doesn’t come through both format, as well as consumers, will miss out.

Microsoft have announced that as of Tuesday 11th of December 2007, UK Xbox gamers will be able to buy films through their Xbox consoles, a move which puts the Xbox in direct competition with everything from television to internet download services.

This move makes the Xbox the first games console to offer a video on demand service, although the PS3 is intending to launch a PlayTV service in 2008 which will provide a similar function to SkyPlus.

Each film will cost gamers from £2 to £4.50 with the download then remaining on the games console for two weeks. Launched in the States in November, as well as the UK the service will be rolled out in Canada, Ireland, France and Germany, with an initial offering of 40 titles available in HD format.

The movie download market is growing at an exceptional rate, and as domestic broadband speeds mature the industry will continue to grow. It is estimated that by 2012 the film download market could be worth 350 million euros in Europe alone.

Data compiled by vgchartz.com indicates that there are 1.6m Xbox consoles in the UK, which would give Microsoft a healthy market to build on as a download distribution platform. However, the Xbox still trails the Nintendo Wii in sales by two to one, and the PS3 has already shifted 4.8 million units in the UK, providing Sony too with a healthy download distribution platform after the launch of its own video on demand service.

This to me seems very much like a pre-emptive strike, trying to establish the Xbox as the dominant video on demand gaming platform before Sony’s offering early next year. I have the feeling with three times as many UK units sold, the PS3 will get a healthy share of the movie downloads market in due course.

Following on from a post on the difference between Blu-Ray and HD on The Shelf back in August, it seems the heat has been turned up further in the battle for the dominant format with news of the upcoming launch of a cut price HD-DVD player.

In response to the growing success of the PS3, primarily due to a cut price model that still comes equipped with Blu-ray player which trippled sales in North America over the thanks giving holiday season, HD had said it will launch a similar cut price player after Christmas in an attempt to level the playing field.

The new SHD7001 standalone High Definition DVD player from Venturer offers 1080i video output via a direct HDMI connection to your HD ready TV. It also comes with Dolby TrueHD (5.1channel) sound completes the SHD7001 HD experience.

As well as providing a less costly HD player for HD ready TV’s, the SHD7001 is also backwards compatible, meaning existing DVDs can also be played. It goes even further stating that this HD offering will actually enhance the viewing experience of normal DVDs.

Bonus features can be accessed through broadband via an Ethernet connection, as well as a range of other broadband enhanced features such as access to viewer forums and other interactive offerings.

There are no fixed prices released for the player yet but the SHD7001 is thought to break the magic $200 barrier, the price that would undercut any Blu-ray offering as a result of cheaper manufacturing methods. It will be available exclusively on the QVC shopping channel on the 29th December.