Google extends Windows Phone support for Exchange ActiveSync until July 31st

Google originally announced its plans to cutoff Exchange ActiveSync support for new users today, January 30th, but the company has revealed to The Verge that it plans to extend this to July 31st. In a statement issued to us, a spokesperson says the company will “start rolling out this change as planned across all platforms but will continue to support Google Sync for Windows Phone until July 31, 2013.”

The change of heart follows Microsoft’s requests for Google to extend its Exchange ActiveSync support for six months. It appears that Google has honored Microsoft’s requests, allowing Windows Phone users to continue using Google Sync until July 31st. According to our own sources, Microsoft is preparing an update for Windows Phone to support CardDav and CalDAV protocols. We are reaching out to Google to confirm whether the extension will also apply to Windows 8, which is affected by the removal — we’ll update you accordingly.

Update: Google has confirmed this extension is only for Windows Phone. A workaround for Windows 8 and Windows RT users is available, but there is no solution for calendar support just yet.

via Google extends Windows Phone support for Exchange ActiveSync until July 31st | The Verge.

Judge Koh finds Samsung infringement of Apple patents was not willful, won’t triple damages

Judge Koh finds Samsung infringement of Apple patents was not willful, won't triple damages

Judge Lucy Koh has decided on several post-trial motions from Samsung and Apple in their long running patent case, overturning one key element of the jury’s ruling while upholding several others. What was overturned was the jury’s ruling that Samsung’s acts of patent infringement were willful, which meant Judge Koh could have tripled some parts of the $1 billion+ in damages granted to Apple. On the other hand, she also rejected Samsung’s request for a new trial, and invalidated two claims a wireless patent it holds. AppleInsider posted the decision to Scribd, which you can find embedded after the break, hit the source links for a few other looks at the ruling and what this means going forward. Naturally of course, it’s not over yet (it’s never over) as each company can still appeal elements of the ruling, and other appeals in the case are already ongoing.

 

via Engadget

Apple Announces 128GB iPad 4

ipad4-128gb

It what seemed to be hasty decision without a trip to a keynote event, Apple introduced their latest iPad 4 with 128GBs of storage via a press release. While 128GB is overkill for most people it does have a place in the market. More and more industries are switching to paperless solutions and the iPad is a perfect fit. Both designers working with large image files and doctors with MRI and Cat scans will benefit from the increased storage.

While most users can get away with their data in the cloud some people just don’t want to go that route. While I do use iCloud I have no interested in storing 128GBs in it because honestly Apple has a hard enough time restoring 2GBs.

The new iPad will be available starting February 5 for $799 for WiFi only and $929 for WiFi + Cellar. Sprint has confirmed that they will be carrying the new iPad at launch.

Click here to read the press release from Apple.

 

 

via Life On My Mobile 

Unlocking A New iPhone Is Now Illegal, But Jailbreaking Is Still Safe — What It All Means For You

xlarge

It can be easy to get “unlocking” and “jailbreaking” confused, but the two terms mean totally different things. Unlocking refers to freeing your phone to work on any carrier instead of just the one you bought it on. Jailbreaking is the process of circumventing Apple’s security measures in iOS to install tweaks, hacks, and mods that aren’t allowed in the App Store.

The U.S. Library of Congress has ruled that it is now illegal for you to unlock your smartphone if it was bought after January 26th, 2013. Carriers can still legally unlock your device for you, but it’s illegal to go through a third-party unlock vendor.

Jailbreaking your iPhone has been kept legal through 2015 under an exemption in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The crazy catch is that jailbreaking the iPad has technically been made illegal, while the iPhone and iPod touch both remain exempt. So jailbreaking is safe mostly, but unofficial unlocking is not. This is important to mention as the iOS 6.1 jailbreak approaches.

Keeping up with the U.S. legal system is very confusing, so what does all this unlocking and jailbreaking legal jargon mean for you?

Carriers Win

“You’ll probably start seeing unlock vendors close up shop”

Unlocking has historically been a grey area for the U.S. government. Third-party companies have been making money selling cheap unlocks for smartphones without the carriers’ permission, and carriers don’t want customers unlocking their devices on the side. That means savvy customers could just switch service providers while they’re still under contract.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) weighed in on the DMCA’s recent banning of unofficial unlocking in a new blog post today:

While we don’t expect mass lawsuits anytime soon, the threat still looms. More likely, wireless carriers, or even federal prosecutors, will be emboldened to sue not individuals, but rather businesses that unlock and resell phones. If a court rules in favor of the carriers, penalties can be stiff – up to $2,500 per unlocked phone in a civil suit, and $500,000 or five years in prison in a criminal case where the unlocking is done for “commercial advantage.” And this could happen even for phones that are no longer under contract. So we’re really not free to do as we want with devices that we own.

Entities like ChronicUnlocks make good money selling unlocks on the cheap, and they work. ChronicUnlocks is perhaps the most legitimate third-party service, and it is currently not unlocking smartphones that were bought after the DMCA’s ruling went into effect last weekend. That’s a small group right now, but it will encompass many more people as new phones keep coming out.

While you won’t probably get sued for unlocking the iPhone you bought in 2013, you’ll probably start seeing unlock vendors close up shop. Or at least fade away. The Library of Congress won’t review the DMCA again until 2014, but there’s an online petition you can sign asking the White House to rescind the decision.

Safe To Jailbreak

Jailbreaking the iPhone is totally legal still, which has never really been an issue in the past. There hasn’t been one notable U.S. lawsuit related to jailbreaking, so you don’t need to worry about the feds crashing through your door for installing Cydia. And the specific update to the legality of the iPad is really a non-issue. There hasn’t been a court case to specifically enforce a ban on any form of jailbreaking. It’s all up to the interpretation of the courts if someone decided to prosecute.

“keep calm and carry on”

“While a DMCA exemption is nice and all to tip the legal scales even more in favor of the jailbreakers, I don’t think they’re critical to the legality of jailbreaking,” said renowned jailbreak hacker David Wang (@planetbeing) in an email. Wang is currently working to release the public jailbreak for iOS 6.1. “I think jailbreaking is legal, with or without the DMCA exemption, so the lack of it does not significantly impact us, the people who develop jailbreak tools,” said Wang.

Jailbreaking your iOS device on your computer at home is totally safe. Some try to sell jailbreaking services on sites like Craigslist, and that could cause issues if iPads are involved. But there has been nothing in the history of jailbreaking to warrant concern at this point. Do as the British do: keep calm and carry on.

 

via Cult of Mac

Stanford seizes 1 million processing cores to study supersonic noise

In short order, the Sequoia supercomputer and its 1.57 million processing cores will transition to a life of top-secret analysis at the National Nuclear Security Administration, but until that day comes, researchers are currently working to ensure its seamless operation. Most recently, a team from Stanford took the helm of Sequoia to run computational fluid dynamics simulations — a process that requires a finely tuned balance of computation, memory and communication components — in order to better understand engine noise from supersonic jets. As an encouraging sign, the team was able to successfully push the CFD simulation beyond 1 million cores, which is a first of its kind and bodes very well for the scalability of the system. This and other tests are currently being performed on Sequoia as part of its “shakeout” period, which allows its caretakers to better understand the capabilities of the IBM BlueGene/Q computer. Should all go well, Sequoia is scheduled to begin a life of government work in March. http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/29/stanford-seizes-sequoia-supercomputer/

Twitter’s New Transparency Report: Governments Still Want Your Data

“All your Tweets are belong to us… with a court order. Twitter’s second transparency report reinforces what many already know: governments want online user data, and to yank select content from the Internet. Twitter’s first two transparency reports cover the entirety of 2012, so there’s not a deep historical record to mine for insight. Nonetheless, that year’s worth of data shows all types of government inquiry—information requests, removal requests, and copyright notices—either on the increase or holding relatively steady. Governments requested user information from Twitter some 1,009 times in the second half of 2012, up slightly from 849 requests in the first half of that year. Content-removal requests spiked from 6 in the first half of 2012 to 42 in the second. Meanwhile, copyright notices declined a bit, from 3378 in the first half of 2012 to 3268 in the second.” http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/01/28/2027200/twitters-new-transparency-report-governments-still-want-your-data?utm_source=rss1.0moreanon&utm_medium=feed

Google pledges fight over government access to users’ email

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Google will lobby Washington in 2013 to make it harder for law enforcement authorities to gain access to emails and other digital messages. In a blog post on Monday, linked to Data Privacy Day, Google’s chief legal officer, David Drummond, said the tech giant, in coalition with many other powerful tech companies, will try to convince Congress to update a 1986 privacy protection law. He cited data showing that government requests for Google’s user data increased more than 70 percent since 2009. In 2012, Google said, it received 16,407 requests for user data affecting 31,072 users or accounts, more than half of them accompanied by a subpoena. “We’re a law-abiding company, and we don’t want our services to be used in harmful ways. But it’s just as important that laws protect you against overly broad requests for your personal information,” Drummond said in the post. The U.S. Electronic Communications Privacy Act, passed in the early days of the Internet, does not require government investigators to have a search warrant when requesting access to old emails and messages that are stored online, providing less protection for them than, say, letters stored in a desk drawer or even messages saved on a computer’s hard drive. The current system also makes complex distinctions, many disputed in courts, between emails saved as drafts online, in transit, unopened or opened. Some of them are to be released with subpoenas, which have a lower threshold than search warrants as they often do not involve a judge. A warrant is generally approved by a judge if investigators have “probable cause” to believe that their search is likely to turn up information related to a crime. Google, Microsoft Corp, Yahoo and popular social media site Twitter – among others – have resisted turning over customer data. They have put in place policies, based on the constitutional protection from unreasonable searches, that require search warrants for access to content of private communications. Privacy activists say the outdated law should be reformed to extend the constitutional right to privacy online, but legislation limiting government requests will not face an easy road. Last year, Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, introduced a bill that would have updated the current law. It triggered a wave of concerns from the police and FBI that new restrictions would impede crime investigations and possibly endanger victims. “After three decades, it is essential that Congress update ECPA to ensure that this critical law keeps pace with new technologies and the way Americans use and store email today,” Leahy said in a statement on Monday. His privacy legislation died in Congress last year after his counterpart in the House of Representatives, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, a Republican, drafted another version of that bill, which also tackled other issues but stripped out privacy reform language. Last year, Goodlatte said he was willing to consider the privacy law reform, but that the timeline then was too short for a “thorough examination.” Leahy has now included the change of privacy laws as one of his top priorities this year. http://news.yahoo.com/google-pledges-fight-over-government-access-users-email-234520748–sector.html

App.net Adds 10 GB of Storage for Users

We’ve reported in the past about App.net, the little subscription based social media platform that could, and as of Monday the site has added 10 GB of storage on top of Alpha, the ad-free Twitter-like service.  Use of App.net comes at a price of $5 a month, or $36 for a year.
Most enticing to hear, Jon Mitchell of ReadWrite speculates that App.net may in fact start offering the social media portion of the site for free, now that the cloud storage business model can support it.
The prospect of a privacy-respecting social media platform had me think of this article on Gizmodo.  Will there ever be a day when the dominant social media platform isn’t the one that sells off our information to the highest bidder?  A platform where the focus isn’t so much on advertising and deception but on straightforward social interaction?  It’s hard to say if this model will ever take off, but the web 2.0 utopia it aspires to is definitely something worth getting excited about.

http://www.technologytell.com/gadgets/111741/app-net-ups-the-ante-with-10-gb-cloud-storage/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+gadgetell+Gadgetell+-+www.gadgetell.com

Google+ moves up to second place in social networks

Last year, many people dismissed Google’s Google+ social network as a “virtual ghost town.” That was then. This is now. According to GlobalWebIndex, Google+, with 343-million active users, has become the second largest social network globally. As Vic Gundotra, Google’s senior VP of engineering, observed, “That is a lot of ghosts”

Facebook is still the top social network, but Google+ has moved into second place. (Credit: GlobalWebIndex)
Facebook is still the biggest of the social networks by a large margin. By GlobalWebIndex’s count Facebook has almost 700-million active users. The research group defines active users as those who used or contributed to a site in the past month

All three of the major global social networks, Facebook, Google+, and Twitter are growing by leaps and bounds. “Data collected in GWI.8 (Q4 2012) demonstrates the continued shift in usage from localized social platforms to global ones with huge growth for Twitter, Google+ and Facebook. The fastest growing network in 2013 in terms of “Active Usage” was Twitter which grew 40% to 288m across our 31 markets (approximately 90% of global Internet population). 21% of the global Internet population now use Twitter actively on a monthly basis. This compares to 21% actively using YouTube, 25% actively using Google+ and a staggering 51% using Facebook on a monthly basis.”

Say hello to the new look of Google Plus (screenshots)
Even with Twitter’s growth, however, “Google+, who despite being branded a failure or ghost town by large portions of the media, grew in terms of active usage by 27% to 343m users to become the number 2 social platform. Interestingly for Google, YouTube (not previously tracked by us as a social platform) comes in at number 3, demonstrating the immense opportunity of linking Google’s services through the G+ social layer. This is also a key indication of why Google+ integrated with the Google product set is so key to the future of search and the Internet.”

Indeed so, I’ve long thought that Google’s integration of Google Plus into many of its services would lead to massive growth. But, just because people using Google services such as Gmail or YouTube got a Google+ membership didn’t mean they’d actually use the service. So, what I find more interesting is that GlobalWebIndex’s data indicates that Google+s’ members are actively using the social network rather than just their attached Google services.

Mind you, I don’t find this much of a surprise. I’m a member of most of the popular social networks and Google+ is easily my favorite of them.

Where is Google+’s growth coming from? It’s not at the expense of Facebook or Twitter. Instead, like them, Google+ is cannibalizing smaller, local social networks. “The growth in the large, global social platforms is coming broadly at the expense of local services like MeinVz, Hyves, Copains d’Avant. Even more interestingly, we are seeing a large decline across the board in local Chinese services with Tencent Weibo, Kaixin, Sina Weibo and QZone all declining substantially, up to 57% in the case of Tencent Weibo.”

Looking ahead, it appears that the global networks, led by Facebook, Google+, Twitter and YouTube, will all continue to grow at the expense of the local social networks. Will Google+ eventually catch-up and pass Facebook? Possibly, but it won’t be soon. Even with privacy concerns and annoying notifications, Facebook is continuing to maintain its dominant position.

via Google+ moves up to second place in social networks | ZDNet.

Facebook legal notice could get you cash, so don’t trash it

Facebook recently sent a legal notice to users that may appear daunting at first glance, but before you relegate it to the trash bin you ought to take a look at it – it could mean cash in your pocket.

The notice is meant to notify some of its U.S. members that their names, profile pictures, photographs, likenesses, and identities were unlawfully used to advertise or sell products and services through Sponsored Stories without obtaining those members’ consent.

“Sponsored Stories” is targeted advertising that uses information about your friends to sell stuff to you.

To settle a class action lawsuit (Angel Fraley v. Facebook) resulting from those allegations of unlawful use of its members’ content, the social network is proposing to pay $20 million into a fund to be used to pay members who appeared in the sponsored stories.

If you received the legal notice from Facebook, you may be paid up to $10 as part of the settlement.

There’s no guarantee you will get the money, however.
As the notice points out: “The amount, if any, paid to each claimant depends upon the number of claims made and other factors detailed in the settlement. No one knows in advance how much each claimant will receive, or whether any money will be paid directly to claimants.”

Since as many as 100 million Facebook members may be affected by the settlement, and the fund would be exhausted after paying $10 to 2 million members, there’s a good possibility that the alternative distribution scheme outlined in the settlement will be implemented.

That alternative would divvy up the money among a number of non-profit organizations involved in educational outreach that teaches adults and children how to use social media technologies safely, or are involved in research of social media.

According to the long form of the legal notice [PDF], those organizations include the Center for Democracy and Technology, Electronic Frontier Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, Joan Ganz Cooney Center, Berkman Center for Internet and Society (Harvard Law School), Information Law Institute (NYU Law School), Berkeley Center for Law and Technology (Berkeley Law School), Center for Internet and Society (Stanford Law School), High Tech Law Institute, (Santa Clara University School of Law), Campaign for Commercial-Free Childhood, Consumers Federation of America, Consumer Privacy Rights Fund, ConnectSafely.org, and WiredSafety.org.

You can fill out a claim form and see what happens.

The Fraley case began winding its way through the courts in March 2011, when five Facebook members, including two minors, maintained they claimed to represent a class of people injured by the Sponsored Stories.

In June 2012, Facebook and its opponents in the litigation announced a $10 million settlement in the case in which all the money would go to social service organizations and advocacy groups involved in the protection of children in the context of social media.

About a month later, the federal judge presiding over the case — Judge Lucy Koh, who also presided over Apple’s successful intellectual property case against Samsung in the U.S. — recused herself from the case without an explanation.

Judge Richard Seeborg, who took over the case from Koh, subsequently rejected the $10 million settlement . In denying the proposed settlement, the judge maintained that Facebook did not adequately justify the size of the final deal.

A deal with a new settlement amount was hammered out in October and received preliminary approval from Seeborg in December.

via PC World

Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Baskerville 2 by Anders Noren.

Up ↑