The iPhone, which has sold millions of handsets, is the world’s most popular smart phone. However, Nokia claim that key pieces of technology, of which Nokia has patents for, were used by Apple, and the company had not signed the contract to use the technology, and had not paid to useit.

Nokia claim that several aspects of the Apple iPhone have originated from Nokia “innovation”, including security and encryption and wireless capabilities. More than forty different corporations are in partnership with Nokia to use this specific technology, but Apple is not one of them.

The company’s Legal and Intellectual Property Department said that the “basic principle” in the mobile industry is that certain companies research and built technology, and other firms need to compensate the researchers for this.

Since its release, the iPhone has been a major hit around the world and somewhat on the forefront of the mobile industry. Apple’s profits continue to grow from the iPhone, whilst Nokia makes loses. If Nokia can prove that a significant amount of technology used in the iPhone is owned by them, I wonder what the long term effects will be. Surely Apple will have realized that they wouldn’t have gotten away with using patented technology without permission for ever. That is if they are proved liable.

I wonder if this will be the re-incarnation of the Skype and Jotlid issue which put Skype’s future in serious doubt. Will Apple be able to continue to sell the iPhone with the current capabilities it has. Nokia claim every release and version of the iPhone has used the patented technology. Could we see some big changes in the iPhone as we know it.

We’ll have to wait and see what the outcome is.

“Amazon for example, says that people with Kindles now buy 3.1 times as many books as they did before owning the device. That factor is up from 2.7 in December 2008. So a reader who had previously bought eight books from Amazon would now purchase, on average, 24.8 books, a rise from 21.6 books.”

I am a profound follower of all things technology. I adore to keep up to date with the latest gadgets and reading is another huge factor in my life. But the eBook I am not entirely sure about. For example, I can read a book on a computer, and I suppose I could do with reading a book on an electronic device. But personally, I like to have the book in my hands. I like to be able to feel the thickness of the book, touch the cover, flick through the pages. When I have the books sitting on my shelf I feel total ownership over them. You don’t get this with an eBook. It is much more convenient but I am not sure it will wipe books out for hundreds of years like some people are suggesting. What are we do to? Tear our books apart because their on the machine. And we’re always going to have some form of books anyway: some people won’t discard of them, those who aren’t sure about technology, and those classic originals that will never purposefully be destroyed.

There is a woman in the article who says she lives far away from a bookstore and that the local library doesn’t interest her. I think this is one of the few reasons why people would turn to mainstream eBooks.

But I just don’t understand why this revolution is causing the American people to read more. I didn’t think that a piece of technology would be able to revolutionize something as ancient as reading. I understand that it’s more convenient, and I personally would purchase one so that I can carry books around - but I’d never forget about my hardbacks and paperbacks sitting on the shelf.

It’s still exactly the same content. You are still reading the same story - I would of potentially thought that people would have put their foot down and moved away from the idea of the eBook. I guess I just have a different opinion.

However, at present there are loopholes in the Amazon service, as shown in this quote. I can see this as a huge reason as to why people may be turning to eBooks - there is just too much opportunity for people to dump the market and read books purchased by friends:

But she has actually never paid for an e-book. Exploiting a loophole in Amazon’s system, Ms. Englin has linked her Kindle to the Amazon account of some nearby friends, allowing all of them to read books like “The Lost Symbol” at the same time — while paying for them only once.

“I read much more, I tend to read faster for some reason, and I read a greater variety of things,” said Ms. Englin, adding that this is nearly the same as lending a physical book to friends. “We haven’t really looked closely at Amazon’s terms of service. But I do suspect we are breaking the rules.”

Overall I’m not saying eBooks are a bad idea - and I do enjoy the convenience. But I believe that this type of book targets only a selected audience and many, especially elderly people, will stay with regular books.

Do you like to have the book in your hands? Have you started to read more since the release of the eBook Reader? Is the price of the eBook Reader potentially putting you off purchasing one? Do you own an eBook? Do you enjoy using it?

Let us know what you think, in a comment.

Amichai Shulman, employee of Imperva, says that only one in every one thousand people that the phishing e-mail was sent to would fall for the trick, claiming that most other people can recognize it as a scam or instantly disregard it. Other experts of different security firms appear to agree with Shulman has to say. He believes that the number of people on the list automatically suggests to him that this attack was down to keylogging.

Mr. Shulman’s idea does seem possible. WIth all of the internet advertising, recommendations from professionals and information given out in leaflet form and across the interwebs, there are very few people in this number that would fall for such a scam because people seem to be well educated about it nowadays. But not every user is identical - for example, one e-mail may be sent out to a power user who understands the dangers, and another to a grandmother who is not up-to-scratch on computer security and may use her computer to send e-mails to family members. It certainly is food for thought.

Have you been affected by this “e-mail attack?” Do you have any thoughts on it? Do you agree with Mr. Shulman? Have you been a victim of phishing or keylogging in the past? Let us know, in a comment.

The Nintendo Wii was released by Nintendo in 2006 and had sold 52 million by June of this year, blowing both MIcrosoft’s Xbox and Sony’s PlayStation 3 out of the water. It originally retailed in the United States on its release date at $249.99, but now Nintendo wants to slash the price of the Wii by 20% of the current market price. The only question is: will it encourage you to buy it?

Earlier this year, Microsoft and Sony made public their plans to decrease the price that their respective consoles cost, while Nintendo chose to increase the price of the Wii in the United Kingdom to around about $380 or almost £200. However, Nintendo has now agreed lowering the price in the United States and Japan will be beneficial - boasting that doing so may encourage “50 million” potential first time Wii buyers in the United States.

I personally believe that the Wii is a good console, but at present it is quite overpriced. Children take great interest in this console and although most parents will try their hardest to make their children happy, some people just cannot afford it. Of course, those in the United Kingdom are already upset that they pay more than the United States for the console, while Nintendo put the prices up even higher in the UK and lower the cost in the United States and its origin country. According to a source, Nintendo may also lower the price in the United Kingdom at a later date. In terms of the design of the Wii, it’s a great device, and I don’t think that Nintendo can drag another 50 million buyers out of the United States, but the price drop will help.

Do you already have a Nintendo Wii? If so, do you find it good value for money at the price it currently is? If you don’t have it, would this price change make you consider purchasing one? Do you think the current and new price are good buys? Any other thoughts? Let us know, in a comment.

The latter party accept that Wikipedia’s content can be propaganda and a bad source for information. This, combined with the fact that Wikipedia could be held for libel law cases if providing incorrect information, is why I believe Wikipedia is making a massive change to the way it operates its website. I’ve blogged about Wikipedia losing its novelty before with this move, but now that this operation is going to be rolled out “within the next couple of weeks”,  I think it’ll be interesting to what other people think about it.

Wikipedia is going to prevent new or little-known users from editing articles about human beings and some companies and charities, with their alternations going live instantly. These alternations would have to be reviewed by an editor before they would make it to the site, reducing the chances of libel cases and reducing the amount of unreliable and unsourced information that is published on the site.

Will Wikipedia indeed lose its novelty of “anyone can edit”. Of course, some articles are locked to some users when they are little-known anyway, so will it make a difference? You must look over all points: the good news is that the articles on Wikipedia about human beings and companies are likely to contain information which you can trust, but the bad news is that Wikipedia is losing a part of what makes it the site it is and makes it so popular.

Wikipedia say that 80% of 259 English users questioned whether or not the move should go ahead agreed that it was a good idea. The operation has went ahead on the German Wikipedia for over a year now, so is it really as bad as some people think? I would, personally, never trust Wikipedia as a sole source of information for research even when this move goes ahead - it’s no guarantee for me. The trial will last two months.

I think that it will both benefit and damage Wikipedia. It may draw new users in with its increased reliability, but it may take away its novelty, and upset some users who love the site the way it is. Will you trust Wikipedia more after this move? Would you prefer Wikipedia to stay the same? If you don’t use Wikipedia, would this move help you to start relying on it? What are your views on this change? Let us know, in a comment.

However, the results are questionable, because the survey was conducted before Microsoft made their new search engine, Bing, public and before Yahoo! and Microsoft made a deal to work together in the search engine sector. The survey, conducted by the University of Machigan, investigates popularity and satisfaction with American consumers and then concludes a total rating out of one hundred. It’s fair to say that the difference between the results of all but one of the competitors in the survey is not too much - with AOL, Microsoft (not Bing), Ask and Yahoo! all in the seventies. However, Google rocketed ahead its rivals, with 86/100. It confirms that Google still is the most popular search engine and is preferred by many internet users - but it should be noted that with two of the world’s biggest and most powerful companies - Yahoo! and Microsoft, pairing up, and with Bing going online since the survey, perhaps Google is more endangered by its rials than this survey shows at first sight.

it is also noted that sometimes the ratings in this survey don’t translate into expected moves in the marketplace. Personally, I believe as much as other search engines grow in popularity, Google may have the advantage. With their position in the industry already, I think that it will be quite a while until we see Google in grave danger of its leadership. Google provides excellent services - unique and popular, and this latest upgrade, with the speed exceptionally pleasing, I believe that those true die-hard Google fans will find it incredibly difficult to leave the site.

Have you reverted from one search engine to another? If so, why? Do you think that Google’s latest upgrade to their search engine will draw back users and keep the ones that it already has? Do the search engines satisfy your needs? Will Google ever be beaten? What are your thoughts? Let us know - leave a comment.

Yesterday, Twitter was knocked offline for almost two hours, while Google noticed problems with its services, primarily Gmail and YouTube, and Facebook users reported slow connection times. Max Kelly, Facebook’s chief official in charge of security, told CNET: “It was a simultaneous attack across a number of properties targeting [Cyxymu] to keep his voice from being heard,” and the three companies now say they are working with each other to gather information that could explain exactly what happened.

The services believe that the hackers used the denial-of-service or DOS method, in which the hackers will inundate the servers of websites to overwhelm them and leave them unable to operate. Today (Friday) is the first anniversary of the breakout of conflict between the Russian Federation and Georgia, and so link have been made to suggest that the DOS method was used to render the sites useless for “Cyxymu” to give his opinions, which are traditionally supportive of Georgia. Does this suggest that the hacker may have been from Russia?

Although some have suggested other potential methods of bringing down the sites, some experts have suggested that spam attacks are unlikely. Experts have also said “Cyxymu” and other such bloggers. All of the services have emphasized that no personal data of the site users has been taken.

However, Graham Cluley of Sohpos said: “Those behind the latest attack may be using it as a means of highlighting the vulnerability of the sites we take for granted.” I quite agree with what Graham Cluley has to say. If attacks like these are so easy for hackers to carry out and bring down or delay some of the world’s most renowned websites, then how easy will it be for hackers to hack the same websites with more dangerous methods, such as endangering my personal details? I believe that Facebook, Twitter and Google should think about publishing more details about how they work to prevent dangerous attacks. We’re all familiar with those Privacy Policies, but is it about time we have more information about how they protect us? I think so.

Has the attack on these sites worried you? Are you concerned that your personal data may be vulnerable if attacks are so easy for hackers to carry out? Did you experience delays with the services yesterday, and if so, for how long? Has the attacks made you think twice about using these services? Whatever you think, let us know, in a comment.

As it nows looks likely that Skype may close, many people are starting to take a look around the internet for possible alternatives, if the worst does come to worst. I have compiled a list of great Skype alternative.

1) JAJAH - Unlike Skype, this service does not require you to download any software. All you have to do is sign up, enter your telephone number, enter the telephone number that you want to call. Then, the service will call your phone and the phone you want to contact, connect your call and that’s it. Calls are entirely free from JAJAH to JAJAH phone users and is very well-priced for other calls, and limited calls can be free from the UK, and the United States and other popular countries. The site claims to, on average, save the user 98% on their international phone bills, and offers a number of other services and addons for your browser. Calls cost just a couple of cents in the United States.

Click to visit JAJAH’s website.

2) Voipbuster - Although the website seems to look a bit outdated, this service is also reliable and provides good rates. Its rates calculator on its homepage will give you a good idea of how much a call will cost you. You can also use your regular phone for this service, although you do need to download some software. Similar to Skype, you can call from computer to phone, from phone to phone, through text message and in and access call. You purchase credits and then use them - and the rates are quite reasonable, with some popular places free for users of another service on the site.

Click to visit Voipbuster’s website.

3) ooVoo - We may have seen it before, but it is a good service. Although it offers primarily video chatting, and its not a strict alternative, it does offer good quality videocalling and multiple user video calling for good prices. I would describe it doing just about everything that Windows Live Messenger does, plus a little bit more and does it better. With video calling, web video call, video chat room, high-resolution video, video recording and messages and webcam effects, it’s not identical to Skype but its very well priced and if you can deal with webcams and microphones and computers, it’s a great alternative.

Click to visit ooVoo’s website.

4) Gizmo5 - This alternative also have great rates and also allow you to make calls from your mobile phone and your computer. Available in several languages, this good looking site is useful, but does require you to send some software to your mobile phone via their application. It also incorporates typical instant messagnig facilities - it’s a good idea to check it out. Also available for your tablet, and also claims to save you up to 98%.

Click to visit Gizmo5’s website.

5) iChat - A good alternative for Macintosh users, as they can feel safe and in good hands with the manufacturers of their computer. With good prices, great facilities and a quality service, its a very good alternative for Mac users. A powerful instant text messaging application, video calls and audio calls. However, no landline or mobile calls, unfortunately.

Click to visit the iChat website.

Hopefully these alternatives will prepare you if the worst comes to worse. If you’ve used any of these services, you have any recommendations and experiences, or if you have any good alterantives, please leave a comment and let us know.

When eBay purchased the VoIP-service in 2005, for $2.6 billion, the agreement did not include a piece of code which is necessary to power Skype and its operations. Because of this, eBay has been forced to license the code from the 2001 company of the founders, Joltid, which claims to be the “leader in peer-to-peer communications.” It is its “peer-to-peer communications” and rights to code that allows Skype to do what it does. Joltid has now told eBay that it is considering ending its licensing agreement, meaning that eBay will no longer have the ability to run Skype. eBay has confirmed that if Joltid does revoke the agreement, then it is quite likely that Skype will have to shut down.

Skype is used by over forty-million users worldwide and is responsible for 8% of vocal communications over the internet. It has been confirmed that Skype is the biggest operator in its field, and recently, the company said that they expect its 2011 revenue to be over $1 billion, but this will clearly not be the case if the license eBay holds to the code for the software is revoked. The possibility of Skype closing has left millions of its users concerned that they will no longer be able to easily and cheaply keep in contact with friends and family who live overseas.

When eBay purchased Skype in 2005, I think that it had a great bargain on its hands. However, I think that it was quite foolish of the company to propose a deal and accept an outcome where it would not own the code that makes Skype work. Without that, Skype is nothing, and if communications and discussions broke down and the founders decided to stop eBay and Skype using this technology, then eBay may have quite frankly wasted that $2.6 billion, as eBay will not have re-generated this amount yet, not to mention the time dedicated to it. The deal, I feel, should have included the right to use the technology without limits and without there ever being a possibility of losing this right.

The matter is now in the hands of the English High Court of Justice, and eBay is demanding that Joltid continue to allow it to use the technology that makes Skype what it is.  eBay says it is attempting to develop a piece of technology similar to what it once had rights to use from Joltid, but it claims that it will be very expensive and that it may not present all of the functionality that users once had when Skype was using Joltid’s technology.

Not only that, but eBay is bound to become unpopular with those millions of users that have fallen in love with Skype. I’m sure over the coming weeks there are bound to be a lot of questions for the two companies. The case will go to trial in June 2010, and eBay still says there is a likely chance Skype will close because of the problems that the new technology would pose. I’m wishing that this clearly great piece of technology that is well-loved by millions of people around the world does not come to a sudden standstill, and that those loyal customers are not forced to find a more expensive alternative.

What do you think? Do you use Skype? If so, has this announcement upset you? What will you do if Skype closes? Has Joltid done the right thing? Leave a comment, and let us know your thoughts.

Bokodes are 0.1 inches in diameter and have the ability to hold thousands of times more data than the barcodes we currently find on our products. Research has been carried out at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and some involved in the project have already suggested numerous reasons and possibilities as to why this technology is better than the traditional barcodes and how they could be incredibly helpful to us.

It has been suggested that the Bokodes, which can be interpreted by a mobile phone camera, have the ability to store nutritional information of edible products among other uses. The researchers claim that this is a better alternative to the usual barcode, as not only does it take up much less space on the product packaging, but it can also convey information to the human being, rather than just to machines.

The technology uses light, a tiny LED embedded onto packaging of products, and all I can say about this concept is it is very impressive. If you were to stand in front of a product and take a picture of its Bokode, then you would receive the information that Bokode conveys (for example, nutritional information) but taking a picture of it from either up close or a distance, and when that picture goes out of focus, the information becomes clear to the camera.

However, what is really impressive, is that if you’re standing from a distance, then all of the nutritional information of all the products you take in one picture will be visible, and if you stand at a different angle, other products will give you recommendations on price, conveying to the customer that the product that it is attached to is cheaper and is for their consideration.

However, at present, the units are expensive to make, at almost $5 each. However, the researches say that Bokodes they are developing that require no energy and are simply reflective rather than in LED form, will cost about 5 cents, making the venture much more possible. The company also say they are looking into Street View possibilities, meaning that Bokodes could be placed on stores and when Google Street View vehicles picture them, menus and prices could be taken by Google automatically and placed on the website with the store, rather than Google having to manually enter this data.

The reason that this post is so long is entirely down the fact that this is such a great concept, that it’s getting me quite exited about the future of this technology. We’ve seen similar things like this, such as the QR Codes, which in some countries, such as the United Kingdom, and in many parts of the world, didn’t catch on very well. For example, hardly anybody in the United Kingdom (and trust me, I live here) was asked what a QR Code is and have they ever used one, would probably tell me that they had no idea. So my only worry about this concept is, will it ever catch on, or will the non-technologically minded people in a country boycott the idea and so it could never take off?

I mean, the possibility of going to a set of library shelves, taking a picture of the area where you know the book must be because of the author’s surname or the Dewey Decimal  Number, and instantly being told where the book is, I find a great piece of technology either way. But will it every catch on? I’m not sure. Let me know what you think, in a comment. I’ll be delighted to hear your thoughts.