Like regular contributor Davey Winder, I have my hobby-horse subjects. Every so often he writes about his dislike for the slow evolution of “hacking” from industry-insider compliment to mass-media warning label. For me, 2021 was the year “streaming” took a turn for the worse.

From the outset, it was something of a fake jargon term, loosely covering all delivery of media (sound as well as video) without an initial download to local storage. Mostly, people would throw the term around when a sporting event, Royal wedding/birth/defenestration, or record-breaking volcanic eruption spiked interest in unfolding events. Streaming was a sign you were on the leading edge of the home multimedia revolution.

Then, things started to get a lot more complicated. Both Facebook and YouTube took the video captured by their phone apps and beamed it onto a web page with potentially millions of viewers, either “live” or on-demand. This concept has been curiously slow to take off, and seemed to have many fans in the upper reaches of the IT product design business, with almost zero support down in the more variably connected lives of everyday consumers. Too much faff; kills the battery; need to change your phone twice a year to keep up with the software, they said.

Protesters use Facebook Live to gain both attention and new followers to their cause

Personally, I have a valid interest in this game because my partner has been a habitual visitor to both Parliament Square, and Speakers’ Corner, as part of her permitted exercise circuit during COVID-19. It turns out she’s pretty good at talking to the various tribes inclined to turn up in those locations, no matter their affiliations or, in my view, how crazy some of them might be. This was all very well until I was shown a YouTube video: of course, it shows Sandra in the midst of a lot of chaps, almost all of whom are holding smartphones.

My concern is, if something goes amiss in this vast focus of the world’s protests, how do I guarantee staying in touch? Her new mates will instantly say ‘Telegram’, but to my mind, watching that video, the main obstacle to asking what time tea wouldn’t be the government snooping on the data packets; it’s all those guys connected live to YouTube or wherever, uploading around a MB a second of streamed video. Not forgetting all their buddies who watch, rather than stream, in the crowd. Telegram won’t do me any good in a small area occupied by 10,000 people all trying to update their social media, no matter how unbreakable its encryption. Encrypted or not, secret or not, worthy or not – all data packets look the same and get an equal shake when the bandwidth metre is on 100%.

Pumping raw footage onto the internet

The key problem here is contention. Almost everybody forgets, when benchmarking their internet speeds and crowing about 5G signals, that they’re not making a single hop over-the-air instant connection. No matter how fast the radio signal portion of the link might look on your benchmarking software of choice, it will be connected to a backhaul: a piece of fibre with often substantially less capacity than the radio side of the cellular connection. Remember, quite a lot of the earlier backhauls from the days before 2G or 3G were even contemplated, were made over ISDN copper circuits. That’s an absolute maximum of 128Kbits/sec per cell tower.

Yet, nobody noticed. People like me, whose lives are run by an influx of messages, might have occasionally spotted the odd delay, but these were in the order of a few seconds and, rarely, several hours. People don’t think about how this performance is achieved and what it means for them. In the case of the modern-day protest march in central London, led by the Pied-Piper-like figure of Piers Corbyn, “contention” hardly does the technology justice. Corbyn’s favourite protest trick is literally blowing fire: when he spits out a ten-foot fireball, people nearby do two things. One, they step smartly back, and two, they take a picture, or stream a video. While they do that, the local infrastructure gives each phone a piece of the actual underlying bandwidth, divided up between all the in-range users. Tens of thousands of them, sometimes.

Firebrand Piers Corbyn knows how to ignite the phones of passers-by

Streaming is probably the most profligate bandwidth consumer of the modern era, and worse than we dared to imagine because the whole vlogger/streamer culture is itself controversial. Streaming brings with it a certain guarantee of validity: no editing, no picking and choosing, just the rawness of an uninterrupted feed. This appeals to those with a slightly paranoid outlook, as viewers – and the range of protests in central London that attract streaming vlogger coverage are also right from the modern conspiracy theory playbook. In fact, they’re so driven by paranoia that the fossil copies left behind of their live stream sessions get deleted from common social media platforms within hours of them finishing – whether by the site managers, trying to kowtow to government public order requirements, or by the originators, convinced that the “live faithful” are their only true friends, it matters not. The evidence self-disappears.

Which, for techies beleaguered by over-adventurous partners, really doesn’t help me figure out the best solution to our ongoing need to communicate. I wouldn’t mind something like Telegram, and yet not quite so politicised: something that lets me run a message window on my PC, which tells me the round-trip delay (if any) for each of my contacts, and optionally has links from there to the bit of Google that shows you their location and journey history, if they’ve turned that stuff on.

An influx of 5G-ready smartphones

I remember an improbable Scottish business unit of Telefónica, the Spanish phone company, demonstrating something quite like – but not exactly the same – as this: the bandwidth requirement for such a thing is apparently pretty low, though I expect the battery life might not be a big winner. I’d like to see how those functions would work on a modern phone like the Nokia X20, which amazed me with its stamina doing sat nav duty before Christmas, for instance. As for our need to stay in touch, we have found that short SMS messages are still the most predictable platform in a big meeting or event.

I talked over the whole streaming thing with a senior colleague, and he was surprisingly negative on the subject. “Give it a few months and everyone will be doing it,” he said. I didn’t see why he was right for some time after that, when strange twists of fate left me with a small bucket of 5G-capable phones. After only a few weeks of not very diligent fiddling, I see his point – one of those major benefits to the long delays produced by lockdown and by truck driver shortages is that the phone makers have been sitting back and thinking carefully about what features they can present, and what software they can wait to be written before releasing their new models.

You’ve been streamed: will we all be doing this in a few years’ time?

With at least a year’s delay in all manner of sectors from COVID-19 or from simply trying to restart after the pandemic, there has been lots of free developer time to address the more difficult and time-consuming features. Suddenly, in 2022, even the cheapest 5G phones have both the horsepower and the code to support much more compute and communication-intense functions. Barriers to being live online were a big part of the reason why doing this was only of interest to – to be polite about it – fanatical types. With these actual new-generation devices in the hands of practically everybody, the more contentious and fame-hungry vloggers are likely to disappear behind the sheer volume of more mainstream interests and past-times.

Google has announced that it will be shutting down its YouTube Go service from August as the company looks to shift users over to the main YouTube app.

Launched back in 2016, YouTube Go was created as a lightweight alternative to the main app for users contending with connectivity issues, data prices, or low-end devices. The app allows users to watch videos offline to work around these issues, as well as offering features such as nearby sharing.

From August, however, the service is coming to an end, with YouTube encouraging users to move across to its main app or access the platform via its website instead.

With the widespread improvement of lower end devices, Google said its main app now provides users with a “better overall experience” with features that can’t be accessed via the Go service – such as the ability to comment, post, create content, as well as the dark theme.

“When we launched YouTube Go in 2016, it was designed for viewers in locations where connectivity, data prices, and low-end devices prevented us from delivering the best experience in the main YouTube app,” Google said in a blog post.

“Since then, YouTube has invested in improvements to the main YouTube app that make it perform better in these environments, while also delivering a better user experience which is inclusive of our entire community.”

To solve these user issues in YouTube Go’s wake, the main app now includes improved performance for entry-level devices, as well as those that watch videos on slower networks. Additionally, Google said it is providing extra user controls that help to decrease mobile data usage for viewers with limited data.

The YouTube app does support offline video viewing, but users must pay for YouTube’s Premium membership which is currently priced at $11.99/£11.99 per month.

“Using the main YouTube app, YouTube Go users will be able to participate in creation and community and have access to an overall improved user experience,” Google said.

Salesforce is launching a streaming business TV service called Salesforce+ that will roll out as part of its Dreamforce conference in September.

The company is designing the service on the digital content models used by companies like Netflix and Peloton but aimed at a business audience. The content will initially be created entirely using its internal team, under the brand name Salesforce Studios. Over time, though, it hopes to encourage more community content.

"The people watching Disney+, the people watching ESPN+, are the same people watching Salesforce content in a business setting, so why wouldn’t we follow that sort of direction? That’s really the genesis of this idea," explained the company's senior VP of brand marketing Colin Fleming in an interview about the new service.

The initial Salesforce+ content features new shows and content the company has already produced and distributes through its YouTube channel. One example is its 70-episode-strong Leading Through Change series, which launched in March 2020.

Other content on the service will include Connections, which features innovations with marketing executives from different companies, and a career advice series called Boss Talks. Another show, Simply Put, will be a short form program featuring simple explainer videos for complex business topics.

The initiative will be the conduit for the company's Dreamforce event next month, which moved online last year due to the pandemic. The event will be mainly online this year, with in-person attendance by invitation only.

Salesforce+ Dreamforce coverage will feature four broadcast channels with a combined 100 hours of initial content: Prime Time, Trailblazer, Customer 360, and Industries.

Prime Time will feature news announcements and customer case studies. Trailblazer will feature interviews with industry leaders and previews of Salesforce products. The Customer 360 and Industries channels will feature more case studies and innovation stories.

The company added that viewers would be able to customize their content into collections focusing on different topics, such as artificial intelligence (AI) and financial services. They will also be able to ask questions via the platform and get live answers from presenters during the Dreamforce event.

Amazon has announced it will acquire Hollywood studio Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) in a deal worth $8.45 billion to boost its Prime video streaming business.

MGM, founded in 1924, is home to blockbuster franchises past and present, including James Bond, the Rocky movies, and The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings franchises.

"The real financial value behind this deal is the treasure trove of IP in the deep catalog that we plan to reimagine and develop together with MGM's talented team," SVP of Prime Video and Amazon Studios, Mike Hopkins, said in a press statement. "It's very exciting and provides so many opportunities for high-quality storytelling."

Hopkins also said MGM productions have racked up more than 180 Oscars and 100 Emmys. MGM has around 800 employees worldwide.

While the deal means Amazon will get its hands on MGM's recent movies and around 17,000 television shows, it won't get any films from before 1986, which are still owned by Warner Bros. It also won't get MGM's huge production lot, which is now occupied by Sony Pictures.

Amazon will only own half of the James Bond franchise — the other half belongs to Barbara Broccoli and her brother, Michael G. Wilson, who also retain complete creative control over the franchise.

MGM Chairman of the Board of Directors Kevin Ulrich said in a statement that he was "very proud that MGM's Lion, which has long evoked the Golden Age of Hollywood, will continue its storied history, and the idea born from the creation of United Artists lives on in a way the founders originally intended, driven by the talent and their vision".

"The opportunity to align MGM's storied history with Amazon is an inspiring combination," he added.

Amazon outbid competitors, such as Apple and Comcast, by offering 40% more cash, according to reports from the New York Times. MGM has been quietly shopped around by financial institutions for prospective buyers for months now.

The MGM deal is Amazon's second biggest, following only its Whole Foods acquisition in 2017 for $13.7 billion. The deal follows AT&T's decision this month to merge Warner Media with Discovery to create a movie and TV company worth more than $130 billion.

The acquisition is subject to regulatory approvals. If approved, MGM will join Amazon's other entertainment, including IMDb TV, Twitch, and Box Office Mojo.

When you stop to think about it, satellite TV is an astonishing technical achievement - a communications relay in orbit around the planet which allows us to beam live footage from across the world directly into our homes. While this is a staggering accomplishment, however, there’s more to running a satellite television network than the satellites themselves.

In this week’s episode, we sit down with Peter Simpson, CTO of UK satellite network Freesat, to discuss the challenges involved, how to balance the technical requirements of broadcast TV and on-demand streaming, and why data is so essential for the continued success of the industry.

Footnotes

• Blaze your career path with these 7 high-tech freelance jobs
• Why customer experience is a top opportunity for growth
• The IT Pro Podcast: How analytics can keep your business afloat
• Why digital experience is vital for success
• How do you build a great customer experience?
• What is big data analytics?
• IT Pro Panel: Defining DevOps
• Why predictive analytics is a top benefit of cloud for SMBs
• How to become a DevOps engineer
• The IT Pro Podcast: DevOps for fun and profit
• Structured vs unstructured data management
• ITV and Google Cloud partner to fortify streaming capabilities
• Infrastructure is everywhere — and so is your data
• IT Pro Live: Scaling enterprise DevOps with a platform team approach

Subscribe

• Subscribe to The IT Pro Podcast on Apple Podcasts
• Subscribe to The IT Pro Podcast on Google Podcasts
• Subscribe to The IT Pro Podcast on Spotify
• Subscribe to the IT Pro newsletter
• Subscribe to IT Pro 20/20

Adobe has officially killed off Flash Player, the browser plugin that helped define the early internet.

The iconic plug-in was discontinued on 1 January, almost 25 years after it was first launched. Adobe will not be rolling out any further security updates and the company is set to block all Flash content from 12 January.

Despite the sunset date being scheduled for 2020, the majority of browsers had already jumped ship. As of 2018, less than 5% of worldwide websites used Flash, with most favouring Javascript for running multimedia features. Other, more secure alternatives also included HTML5, WebAssembly and WebGL.

The decision to sunset the plug-in was first announced in July 2017 due to dwindling demand, as browser makers opted to integrate the software’s capabilities within their own offerings.

Flash was also plagued by various security concerns. In 2015, for example, security firm Recorded Future discovered that Flash Player comprised eight out of 10 top vulnerabilities leveraged by exploit kits, with more than 100 exploit kits and vulnerabilities affecting the technology. There were also reports of Flash being exploited by North Korean hackers, who used it to access Microsoft Office documents, web pages, and spam emails.

Nevertheless, Flash Player managed to write itself into internet history. The software’s unprecedented capabilities shaped the way users interact with multimedia content offered by an array of industries, such as gaming, education, and video.

The final nail in the coffin for Flash came in October 2020, when Microsoft rolled out an optional update for Windows 10 that permanently removed Adobe Flash from the operating system and prevented it from being re-installed. The company released the removal tool prior to 1 January 2021 in order to help customers test and validate their environments for any impact that might occur by the removal of the software.

Starting later in 2021, all APIs, group policies and user interfaces that govern the behaviour of Adobe Flash Player are expected to be removed from the legacy Microsoft Edge and Internet Explorer 11.

Google has announced that it's become the first company to bring Netflix to its lineup of smart displays.

Google will immediately add Netflix streaming capabilities to the Nest Hub and Nest Hub Max, making it a do-it-all household hub. You can get your streaming fix by linking your Netflix account to your Google Home or Google Assistant app.

The Nest Hub and Nest Hub Max will allow you to open and control Netflix by voice. All you have to say is “Hey Google, open Netflix” or “Hey Google, play Breaking Bad.” You can also pause and play using your voice.

If you have the Google Nest Hub Max, your controls get another dimension, as its camera allows you to use gesture controls. If you want to pause or resume your stream, simply look at the Nest’s camera and raise your hand.

While the ability to stream Netflix on Nest smart displays is nice, these are hardly ideal streaming devices. They have relatively small screens, 7-inches on the Nest Hub and 10-inches on the Nest Hub Max, and so-so sound, plus they aren’t something you want to carry around the house.

That said, they primarily live in the kitchen or your home office, which aren’t favorable spots for a clunky tablet. So, while it may not be your primary streaming device, it’ll serve well as an additional streaming device when you’re in these areas.

Netflix has added a new feature that lets you easily remove programs you're no longer watching.

The “continue watching” row on the Netflix homepage allows viewers to jump back into a show or movie right where they left off. That’s great if you actually want to go back to it and don’t mind others on your account seeing what you’ve been watching.

You’ve always been able to remove titles from that row, but it meant sifting through your account settings on a web browser, going into your profile and parental controls, clicking on your viewing activity and then discarding the titles you no longer wanted to populate the “continue watching” row.

It was a lot of work for a minor annoyance. Eventually, as you watch more new titles, those nuisance titles slide down the list and out of view anyway, but they’re still there.

Netflix’s new solution to the problem is simple. When you hover over the title, you’ll see a few options including the ability to give the title a thumbs up or thumbs down. At the bottom of the list, you’ll find “remove from row.” Click on that choice, and the title disappears from your “continue watching” list on the homepage.

The feature is currently available for Android phone and tablet users with iOS users receiving the update on June 29.

Netflix is also adding a feature that lets you go to specific episodes without having to click on a title’s landing page first. These are small moves designed to make Netflix’s homepage experience more user-friendly.

Microsoft has announced that it's pulling the plug on its Mixer game streaming service.

Microsoft entered the game livestreaming arena in 2016 when it purchased the newly released Beam. Renamed Mixer, Microsoft wanted the platform to compete with Amazon Twitch.

Though it started out strong, it never reached a level where it was a serious Twitch competitor.

On Monday, Microsoft announced it will shut Mixer down, with plans to enter a partnership with Facebook Gaming.

During the next few weeks, Mixer users will be transitioned to Facebook Gaming before the platform shuts down completely on July 22. At that point, mixer.com will redirect to the Facebook Gaming landing page.

Current Mixer Partners will slide into a partner status with Facebook Gaming. Throughout June, Mixer Partners will earn double payment for their month’s earnings.

Any unused channel subscriptions, Mixer Pro subscriptions or Ember balances will be paid out via Xbox gift card credits. Streamers who use the Mixer monetization program will be eligible for Facebook’s Level Up program.

The move to partner with Facebook appears to be strategic and will help Microsoft out in the long term. Microsoft has made it clear that it’s not done in the gaming world. In fact, it’s working to improve overall gaming experience.

After a planned release of xCloud game streaming sometime this year, it will partner with Facebook to bring the service to Facebook Gaming. The transition may not be as smooth as hoped, as some reports say most Mixer users are unhappy about the move and may jump to Twitch.

Netflix will donate $5 million to support organizations that create long-term opportunities for entertainment creators, youth and businesses in the black community.

To help black creators develop more television and film stories, the streaming service will share $1.5 million in donations between Ghetto Film School, Film Independent Project Involve, Firelight Media, Black Public Media and other Black-focused organizations.

“Tackling racism and injustice in meaningful ways means creating long-term opportunities for the Black community,” said Reed Hastings, CEO, Netflix.

“The main role we play is through our funding of and member viewing of important content like ‘When They See Us.’ As an additional step, today we’re committing $5 million to nonprofits dedicated to creating direct opportunities for Black creators, Black youth and Black-owned businesses.”

Netflix is donating $1 million in grants to black youth organizations, including Know Your Rights Camp, The Posse Foundation and Black Girls Code. It is pledging $500,000 to black-owned businesses in Los Angeles that have been economically hurt by the coronavirus pandemic.

The company is also matching 200% of its employees’ donations to charitable causes.

Netflix will announce the benefactors of the remaining $2 million soon. New initiatives to support long-term opportunities for the black community should follow in the coming months. The streaming service also updated its list of genres with a Black Lives Matter category. Two of its series - “When They See Us” and “Dear White People” - saw large increases in viewership following the police killing of George Floyd.

Netflix has a history of donating to important causes. The company created a $100 million fund to help film and TV industry employees affected by productions canceled or postponed due to the coronavirus pandemic. It also pledged to pay talent guarantees to cast members affected by the shutdown of film and TV productions.

This week marked the launch of HBO Max, HBO’s all-new and much-talked-about streaming service. The company reportedly plans to spend $4.5 billion on the project in the coming years and hopes to have 50 million HBO Max subscribers come 2025. HBO also foresees the service generating billions in annual profits as it takes on established streaming platforms such as Netflix, Disney Plus, Amazon Prime Video, Hulu, Apple TV Plus, Peacock and others.

HBO Max rings in at $15 per month and offers 10,000 hours of programming that appeals to just about every audience, not just avid HBO watchers. HBO says users can expect a cheaper subscription option in the future. In addition to its $15-per-month service, HBO plans to release an advertising-supported subscription to take on services like Hulu and Peacock.

While HBO Max certainly is an attractive prospect, its price is an issue for some. The $15-per-month subscription falls in line with HBO’s other streaming platforms, but it’s pricier than the streaming platforms it’ll compete with.

Netflix currently charges $9 per month for its most basic plan, and Disney Plus charges its subscribers $7 per month. Hulu, on the other hand, offers two plans: an ad-supported plan costing $5.99 per month and a premium ad-free plan for $11.99 per month.

Many industry analysts have called HBO Max’s pricing “unreasonable.” According to a study prepared for The New York Times by the global research consultancy Kantar, many of HBO’s customers are already looking to cancel their accounts, attributing the cancellations to the high cost of HBO’s services.

To date, HBO Max offers its subscribers a wealth of content. The platform features the usual HBO suspects, including “Game of Thrones” and “The Sopranos,” but it also boasts evergreen favorites like “Friends” and “The Big Bang Theory.” Harry Potter fans will also be pleased to find all 8 films streaming on HBO Max. DC fans will be similarly overjoyed, as the platform boasts Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman flicks.

While HBO won’t go away anytime soon, the company has committed to focusing its efforts on redirecting subscribers to its new streaming platform. It remains to be seen how many of those subscribers will transition to HBO Max — if any at all.

Hedge fund Elliott Management has agreed to finance a high-stakes patent lawsuit against the streaming service Quibi, according to people familiar with the matter.

Elliott has agreed to fund the suit by interactive-video company Eko. In the suit, Eko claims the new streaming service violates its patents and has stolen its trade secrets. As part of the financing, Elliott will take an equity stake in Eko.

The lawsuit concerns “Turnstyle,” a Quibi feature, which the company describes as a groundbreaking technology. The feature allows users to change between landscape and portrait orientation in real-time without sacrificing video quality.

Eko, also known as Interlude US Inc., claims this is a copy of its “Real Time Switching” tech and has demanded Quibi cease using its Turnstyle tech or license it. Eko is suing for a preliminary injunction and damages as a result.

A Quibi spokeswoman denied the company infringed on Eko’s patent and called the lawsuit meritless.

“Our Turnstyle technology was developed internally at Quibi by our talented engineers and we have, in fact, received a patent for it,” a company rep said in a statement last month. “These claims have absolutely no merit and we will vigorously defend ourselves against them in court.”

Eko originally filed its lawsuit in Los Angeles federal court in March 2020. A hearing on its request for a preliminary injunction is expected to take place as soon as this week.

Elliott Management, headed by billionaire Paul Singer, is no stranger to litigation financing. The fund, which manages upward of $40 billion, is known as one of the world’s most aggressive activist investors. Elliott’s connection to Eko stems from Singer’s ties to the tech scene in Israel, where Eko was founded, and to some of the interactive-video company’s investors.

YouTube is yet to say whether the imposed low streaming quality across Europe will also carry over to its Live service, something which many businesses may come to rely on during increased demand for virtual conferencing.

The company announced today that it will lower the standard of its streaming quality in the UK and EU in order to prevent a much-feared internet-speed bottleneck, as thousands are confined to their homes due to the coronavirus outbreak.

However, when we asked whether the decision also applies to YouTube Live, parent company Google failed to provide an answer.

“While we have seen only a few usage peaks, we have measures in place to automatically adjust our system to use less network capacity,” said a spokesperson for the Google. “Following the meeting between Google’s CEO, Sundar Pichai, YouTube's CEO, Susan Wojcicki, and Commissioner Breton we are making a commitment to temporarily default all traffic in the EU to Standard Definition. We will continue working with member state governments and network operators to minimize stress on the system, while also delivering a good user experience.”

YouTube Live seemed like a viable option for many companies looking to stream conferences and events that otherwise face cancellation or postponement, given that governments across the globe continue to advise against mass public gatherings.

The company added that the reduced quality of streaming in the EU and UK would last for around a month and was an action taken in cooperation with governments.

Europen commissioner for internal market and services Thierry Breton praised Pichai and Wojcicki for the move:

“Millions of Europeans are adapting to social distancing measures thanks to digital platforms, helping them to telework, e-learn and entertain themselves,” he said. “I warmly welcome the initiative that Google has taken to preserve the smooth functioning of the Internet during the COVID19 crisis by having YouTube switch all EU traffic to Standard Definition by default.

"I appreciate the strong responsibility that Mr Pichai and Mrs Wojcicki have demonstrated. We will closely follow the evolution of the situation together.”

YouTube is the second streaming service to announce that they are reducing their streaming quality due to the coronavirus outbreak, following Netflix’s decision on Thursday.

Weak Wi-Fi signal and frustrating speeds could be the result of workers connecting their devices to the internet using a 2.4GHz band over a 5.0GHz band, researchers claim.

Connections via 2.4GHz bands are conventionally seen as the better option for users who prioritise the need for range, over absolute speed.

Tests by Australian broadcasting association Enex, however, found that 2.4GHz Wi-Fi performance is generally lower in both capability and range when compared with connections via the 5.0GHz band.

Furthermore, while 5.0GHz bands are thought to be more affected by obstacles such as walls or doors, most Wi-Fi devices on this band provided better data streaming than 2.4GHz Wi-Fi performance.

"The 2.4 GHz band is often promoted as a better choice for longer range communications. However, Enex's findings did not support this," the report concluded. "Operating in the 5 GHz band appears to be the best choice for consumers under all circumstances.

"The 5 GHz band also has the benefit of more recent technology developments which includes features such as directional beamforming and MU/MIMO (with up to eight antennas and multiuser sub-channels)."

The research found considerably greater levels of data throughput using 5.0GHz bands as opposed to 2.4GHz bands when testing 43 devices in small office environments.

When testing at the closest distance of five metres, 30% of devices were unable to achieve rates of 100Mbps using the 2.4GHz band. For the 5.0GHz band, by contrast, most devices hit speeds above this threshold at five metres. When tested at 50 metres, the majority of devices performed badly, but connections via the 5.0GHz band yielded better results.

When tested through brick and plaster walls at the Enex facility, 2.4GHz connections also underperformed versus 5.0GHz connections.

Just 26% of devices using the 2.4GHz band were able to support data rates of more than 10Mbps over 25 metres. Around 40% of connections using the 5.0GHz band, however, were able to support data rates of 80Mbps or more.

Enex concluded there is a wide variation in Wi-Fi performance offered across a range of devices, and more expensive devices did not necessarily lead to greater performance.

Meanwhile, in many cases, significantly lower-priced devices outperformed many of the more expensive devices when tested in real-world scenarios.

Google Chromecast is a highly versatile little device that plugs into the back of your telly. Typically, setting up a Chromecast requires access to a Wi-Fi network, but it’s also possible to use it without a traditional internet connection. This flexibility makes Chromecast an attractive option for various environments, offering users the ability to cast media from multiple devices directly to their displays.

The Chromecast device is compact and cheap, designed to plug directly into a display's HDMI port, transforming a dumb TV into a Smart TV. Whether using a smartphone, tablet, or laptop, users can easily connect their devices to the Chromecast to stream content seamlessly. This functionality makes Chromecast an ideal choice for those who need a portable solution while traveling or for setting up permanent media capabilities in homes and meeting spaces.

In professional settings, Chromecasts are good for meeting rooms lacking dedicated video conferencing equipment. As businesses increasingly adopt hybrid meeting models, Chromecasts provide a cost-effective solution for smaller companies needing reliable video capabilities without the expense of high-end equipment. This adaptability ensures that teams can conduct presentations and collaborate efficiently, regardless of the room’s technical setup.

Typically, a Chromecast is configured to connect to a Wi-Fi network, enabling it to access online streaming services and apps. However, there are instances when Wi-Fi may not be available, such as during travel or in locations with restricted network access. In such cases, alternative methods, like using a mobile hotspot or an Ethernet connection, allow users to continue enjoying Chromecast’s features without interruption.

Fortunately, Chromecast offers workarounds to enable streaming without direct Wi-Fi access. These include utilizing the device’s Guest Mode, which allows casting from devices without network access, or employing an Ethernet adapter for a wired connection. 

These solutions ensure that users can maintain their viewing and presentation needs even when traditional Wi-Fi connections are unavailable, underscoring the device's versatility and practicality in diverse scenarios.

1. How to use Chromecast without Wi-Fi: Guest Mode

To connect a Chromecast without using a Wi-Fi network, it’s important to first ensure your device supports this capability. Your Chromecast should be running the latest software and firmware to maximize compatibility with various devices. Guest Mode is one solution, although it’s unavailable on older Chromecast firmware versions.

Once activated, Guest Mode turns on a Wi-Fi beacon within the Chromecast, allowing compatible apps to discover and connect to it. This mode enables users to cast content to the Chromecast without needing to connect to the same Wi-Fi network.

The automatic pairing process is facilitated by an inaudible short audio signal emitted by the Chromecast, containing a four-digit code detectable by nearby devices. If the automatic pairing fails, users can manually enter the code displayed on the TV or monitor to connect to the Chromecast. This ensures a flexible and accessible way to use Chromecast even when a direct Wi-Fi connection is unavailable.

2. How to use Chromecast without Wi-Fi: The Google Home app

If using Guest Mode is not working, you can stream the display feed of an Android device directly to the Chromecast using the Google Home app. This process, known as screen mirroring, allows you to display your device's screen on the Chromecast without requiring a Wi-Fi network. Here’s how to do it:

• Open the Google Home App:
  • Launch the Google Home app on your Android device.
• Select Your Chromecast:
  • Locate your Chromecast device from the list on the home screen.
  • Touch and hold the icon of the desired Chromecast.
• Start Screen Mirroring:
  • Tap Cast, then select Cast screen.

Screen mirroring works differently from wireless display features, which have been part of Android since Jelly Bean 4.2. It generally provides smoother output with less lag and choppiness compared to traditional wireless display options. Screen mirroring with Chromecast requires Android 8.0 or later, but most Android users should already have a compatible version, as devices running older versions are now rare.

Keep in mind that while screen mirroring does not require an internet connection for local content display, certain apps and services may still need internet access for streaming content. This method is particularly useful for displaying local photos, videos, or presentations directly from your device to the TV.

3. How to use Chromecast without Wi-Fi: Ethernet cable and adaptor

Using an Ethernet cable is a reliable solution for operating a Chromecast without Wi-Fi. This method provides a stable and fast connection, ideal for streaming high-quality content. However, it requires an Ethernet adapter that supports both power delivery and network connectivity. Follow these steps to set up your Chromecast with an Ethernet connection:

• Connect the Ethernet Adapter:
  • Plug the USB end of the Ethernet adapter into your Chromecast. Ensure you have an Ethernet adapter designed for Chromecast, which typically combines a USB power supply and an Ethernet port.
• Attach the Ethernet Cable:
  • Connect an Ethernet cable to the adapter’s Ethernet port.
  • Run the other end of the Ethernet cable to your router or another network access point.
• Power the Adapter:
  • Ensure the adapter is plugged into an electrical socket to provide power to the Chromecast.

Once connected, the Chromecast will automatically switch to using the Ethernet connection instead of a Wi-Fi network. This setup is particularly useful in environments with unstable or unavailable Wi-Fi, offering a more consistent streaming experience. Ensure that your network supports DHCP, as static IP configurations are not supported on Chromecast devices.

Considerations

• Model Compatibility: Ensure that your Chromecast model supports Ethernet connections. While Chromecast Ultra comes with an Ethernet adapter in the box, standard Chromecast models require a separate purchase of a compatible adapter.
• Network Speed: Using Ethernet generally provides faster and more reliable speeds than Wi-Fi, reducing buffering and improving streaming quality, especially for 4K content.

4. How to Use Chromecast Without Wi-Fi iPhone: Personal Hotspot

Use an iPhone Personal Hotspot

You can also use a Chromecast with an iPhone by creating a personal hotspot. This method allows the Chromecast to connect to the internet using the data connection from your iPhone. Here’s how:

• Go to Settings on your iPhone.
• Tap Personal Hotspot and turn it on.
• Connect your Chromecast to the hotspot using your iPhone’s Wi-Fi name and password.

This setup lets your Chromecast function as if it were connected to a traditional Wi-Fi network, making it ideal for streaming when no other connection is available. Make sure your mobile data plan supports hotspot usage to avoid unexpected charges.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) plans to hand over regulatory oversight of US internet service providers to another federal agency when net neutrality laws are revoked.

The FCC and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) have entered into a 'Memorandum of Understanding', a draft agreement that will see the two agencies work together to ensure internet service providers stick to their promises to maintain a free and open internet, but critics believe enforcement would happen well after any infringements occur.

FCC chairman Ajit Pai announced plans last month to scale back current net neutrality laws that prevent ISPs from throttling speeds, restricting access to certain web content, or charging more for faster access. The rules, which were introduced under President Obama in 2015, are expected to be reversed when the Republican majority FCC gathers to vote on Thursday.

Pai said the move would "return jurisdiction to the FTC to police the conduct of ISPs", and that they would both "work together to take targeted action against bad actors", according to Reuters. The FCC has overseen ISPs under Obama's net neutrality rules, effectively classifying the internet as a public utility - this wouldn't be the case under the FTC.

Under the Restoring Internet Freedom Order, expected to replace net neutrality laws, agencies would no longer prevent ISPs from charging more for faster access, but instead require them to disclose whether they are placing restrictions on traffic, or favouring specific websites over others.

The agreement would see oversight return to the FTC, which will be able to investigate the activities of ISPs if they are considered to have deceived the agencies and customers over their practices.

However, the memorandum has been criticised by fellow FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, who alongside Jessica Rosenworcel represents the Democratic minority on the commission.

"The agreement announced today between the FCC and FTC is a confusing, lacklustre, reactionary afterthought: an attempt to paper over weaknesses in the chairman's draft proposal repealing the FCC's 2015 net neutrality rules," said Clyburn, speaking to Ars Technica.

Critics also argue that the proposed changes essentially allow ISPs to commit to whatever guidelines they choose to follow and that ISPs are already making moves to take advantage of the relaxing of net neutrality regulations. Comcast, one of the largest providers in the US, immediately deleted a "no paid prioritisation" pledge from its website, on the same day that Pai announced his plans.

"Not only is the FCC eliminating basic net neutrality rules, but it's joining forces with the FTC to say it will only act when a broadband provider is deceiving the public," said Chris Lewis, VP of broadband advocacy group Public Knowledge. "This gives free reign to broadband providers to block or throttle your broadband service as long as they inform you of it."

More than 20 industry leaders and early internet pioneers have publicly denounced the FCC's proposals, including Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak and world wide web inventor Tim Berners-Lee.

In an open letter to senators and representatives who have oversight of the FCC, they said: "We are the pioneers and technologists who created and now operate the internet, and some of the innovators and business people who, like many others, depend on it for our livelihood.

"The FCC's rushed and technically incorrect proposed order to repeal net neutrality protections without any replacement is an imminent threat to the internet we worked so hard to create. It should be stopped."

22/11/2017: US to axe net neutrality

The US is set to repeal net neutrality laws established to prevent the monopolisation of internet traffic by larger companies.

The plans were unveiled by Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chairman Ajit Pai, a noted opponent of net neutrality rules who has already removed a number of regulations since his appointment by president Donald Trump.

The proposal will be voted on when the FCC meets on 14 December. The five-seat body is currently controlled by a Republican majority, and Pai's plans are expected to be approved with few issues.

"For almost 20 years," Pai said in a statement, "the internet thrived under the light-touch regulatory approach established by President Clinton and a Republican Congress."

"Under my proposal, the federal government will stop micromanaging the internet. Instead, the FCC would simply require internet service providers to be transparent about their practices so that consumers can buy the service plan that's best for them."

The FCC currently classifies internet providers as utilities - meaning that they are not allowed to artificially limit the speeds of certain web traffic or to charge certain companies more than others to allow customers to access them.

In practice, the removal of net neutrality rules means that US broadband providers could be free to throttle internet speeds for customers trying to access websites and services that aren't their commercial partners, effectively creating 'fast lanes' and 'slow lanes'.

For example, if a broadband provider owns its own video streaming service, it could greatly slow down - or even outright block - traffic to rival services like Netflix.

Equally, ISPs could charge customers for access to fast lanes that stream games or movies.

Alongside the net neutrality rollback, Pai has also announced his intentions to remove restrictions on telcos that prevent them from reaching more than 39% of US households - a further effort to prevent monopolies.

The move has been roundly condemned by digital rights and internet advocacy groups, who claim that removal of the rules will cripple competition and innovation, creating a market where only major companies will be able to afford speedy connections to customers.

"The FCC's new approach invites a future where only the largest Internet, cable, and telephone companies survive, while every start-up, small business, and new innovator is crowded out," said Electronic Frontier Foundation legal director Corynne McSherry, "and the voices of nonprofits and ordinary individuals are suppressed. Costs will go up, as ISPs take advantage of monopoly power to raise rates on edge providers and consumers alike."

Consumers appear to share this view. In fact, a poll of president Trump's own voter base conducted by competitive networks association Incompas in July found that 70% felt that the internet has improved in the two years since president Obama enacted the net neutrality regulations.

The prospect of repeal has also drawn criticism from major tech companies like Google, Facebook and Netflix, who fear the destruction of the 'open internet'.

"We are disappointed that the proposal announced today by the FCC fails to maintain the strong net neutrality protections that will ensure the internet remains open for everyone," Facebook vice president Erin Egan said in a statement.

Conversely, telcos welcomed the news, saying that the decision will put the reins of innovation back in the hands of private investors without being hampered by excessive government oversight.

US telecoms giant AT&T called the rules a "brief and ill-conceived experiment", and stated that consumers have little to fear.

"Make [sic] no doubt, the circulation of this order will bring the 'sky is falling' crowd to the fore, and they will foretell a day when websites will be blocked, content censored and internet access controlled by ISP overlords," wrote Joan Marsh, AT&T's executive vice president of regulatory & state external affairs. "Such claims, while great for fundraising, are as nonsensical now as they were a decade ago when they were first prophesied."

"Importantly, the adoption of this order will restore the careful balance needed between ensuring internet freedom while continuing to attract private investment in broadband facilities - investment that is essential to delivering on the promise of broadband for all Americans."

The FCC, for its part, has pledged that it will maintain a close watch on the practises of ISPs after the repeal.

According to the New York Times, officials said that the throttling of content could be viewed as a breach of competition regulations, and that such breaches would be investigated by the Justice Department or the Federal Trade Commission.

Over the past few years, organisations across many industries have discovered an increasingly important gap in their data infrastructure. Traditionally, organisations have focused on providing a place to store data. But in order to make use of data, they have realised they're missing a method of sending it to destinations like applications. This gap is being filled by streaming platforms like Apache Kafka.

Apache Kafka was first created by Linkedin, and was open sourced in 2011. Thousands of well-known companies are now built on it, for example Airbnb, Netflix and Goldman Sachs, to name a few. It is a distributed stream processing engine for building real-time data pipelines and streaming applications.

How it works

At a basic level, Apache Kafka is a central hub of data streams. It transforms an ever-increasing number of new data producers and consumers into a simple, unified streaming platform at the centre of an organisation. It allows any team to join the platform, while central teams manage the service, and it can scale to trillions of messages per day while delivering messages in real time.

Central to Kafka is a log that behaves, in many ways, like a traditional messaging system. It is a broker-based technology, accepting messages and placing them into topics. Any service can subscribe to a topic and listen for the messages sent to it. But as a distributed log itself, Kafka differs from a traditional messaging system by providing improved properties for scalability, availability and data retention.

The overall architecture for an Apache Kafka environment includes producing services, Kafka itself and consuming services. What differentiates this architecture is that it's completely free of bottlenecks in all three layers. Kafka receives messages and shards them across a set of servers inside the Kafka cluster.

Each shard is modelled as an individual queue. The user can specify a key which controls which shard data is routed to, thus ensuring strong ordering for messages that have the same key.

On the consumption side, Kafka can balance data from a single topic across a set of consuming services, greatly increasing the processing throughput for that topic.

The result of these two architectural elements is a linearly scalable cluster, both from the perspective of incoming and outgoing datasets. This is often difficult to achieve with conventional message-based approaches.

Apache Kafka also offers high availability. If one of the services fails, the environment will detect the fault and re-route shards to another service, ensuring that processing continues uninterrupted by the fault.

Uses

Kafka takes on legacy technology across many different areas, including ETL, data warehouses, Hadoop, messaging middleware and data integration technologies, to substantially simplify an organisation's infrastructure. In many cases, Kafka can replace or augment an existing system to make data more consistently available, faster and less costly to deliver.

The use of Apache Kafta is on the rise. A recent survey by Confluent revealed that 52% of organisations have at least six systems running Kafka, with over a fifth having more than 20.

Kafka is used broadly in the cloud, with the most common use being in some combination of virtual private clouds, public clouds and on-premises.

Apache Kafka can be used in a variety of different ways for many different use cases. The past few years has seen a surge in the number of companies adopting streaming platforms. With this approach, they are able to build mission critical, real-time applications that power their core business - all the way from small to large-scale use cases that handle millions of events per second.

Many organisations are seeing significant benefits from their use of Kafka. Because data is available, shared and immediate, companies can create new products and significantly transform existing ones to take advantage of new market opportunities.

In addition to creating new opportunities, companies are leveraging Kafka to be more efficient and transform existing processes. It makes building data-driven applications and managing complex back-end systems simple. Other business benefits include reduced operating costs according to 47% of organisations surveyed by Confluent, improved customer experience and reduced risk.

Most organisations are facing an explosion of data coming from new applications, new business opportunities, IoT and more. The ideal architecture most envision is a clean, optimised system that allows businesses to capitalise on all that data.

Traditional systems used for solving these problems were designed in an era that pre-dates large-scale distributed systems, and they lack the ability to scale to meet the needs of the modern data-driven organisation.

Streaming platforms are designed to solve these problems in a modern, distributed architecture. There are three benefits of streaming platforms that are of increasing benefit to organisations.

Messaging done right

In traditional enterprise messaging, there are the message queues and buses that connect many internal systems. Some companies run hundreds or thousands of individual messaging brokers, each independent and tailored to a subset of apps. Classic messaging systems are neither distributed nor scalable, and often support only one or a handful of applications.

By comparison, a data streaming platform is built on a distributed systems foundation, and scales to an entire company, supporting many of the kind of core applications messaging systems are used for and more.

Hadoop made fast

One way companies come to streaming is while implementing a big data project, and discovering their real-time needs. Like a data warehouse or data lake, streaming brings together data from across the organisation.

A good data streaming platform should be built to run queries, jobs or applications continuously. Batch processing is a non-starter, because 24-hour data is seen as stale.

Data integration made scalable

There have been whole generations of technologies that do nothing but handle data movement. EAI and ESBs handled quick, low volume data flow, while ETL handled slow, large volume, scalable data flow. Here, companies were traditionally forced to choose between latency or scalability and flexibility. One way to view a streaming platform is as an up-levelling of these systems where there doesn't need to be a choice between these options.

The most important point to consider is that a data streaming platform is, in its final form, an application development platform that enables continuous, scalable streams throughout a company. It does more than get data from place to place and munging it on the way; it is an infrastructure platform for building tomorrow's most advanced real-time applications.

A data streaming platform is a step change from traditional systems, able to meet the demands of a real-time world. They are designed to handle many types of data streams from across the business - including massive datasets - and distribute them in real-time.

BBC iPlayer freeloading is set to end in September.

Since the BBC's streaming site launched in 2007, Brits have only been asked to pay the full licence fee if they watch live broadcasts, but not for catch-up TV, a policy that costs the BBC around 150 million annually.

That is set to change as of 1 September, with catch-ups, downloads and live broadcasts all requiring viewers to shell out the 145.50 annual fee.

The change was announced last year, but the BBC has only now confirmed how much longer web users will get a free ride.

"From 1 September 2016 you will need to be covered by a TV Licence to download or watch BBC programmes on demand, including catch up TV, on BBC iPlayer," the TV Licensing website notes. "This applies to any device and provider you use."

That includes watching online via a laptop or tablet, as well as accessing BBC shows via another streaming services, such as Amazon or Roku.

Of course, anyone already paying the licence fee is covered; there is no extra online charge, nor a charge to listen to radio via iPlayer.

But what happens if you're paid up, and take your tablet to watch a BBC show at someone else's house who hasn't stumped for the fee? Don't worry, the TV Licensing team has thought of that.

"If you already have a TV licence for your address, you will be covered to download or watch iPlayer when you're on the go, provided the device you're using to watch or download programmes isn't plugged into the electricity mains at a separate address," the website reads. "If the device is plugged in at a separate address, you will need to be covered by a licence at that address."

Yes, really: you're legal so long as you don't plug in. The fine for unpaid fees tops out at 1,000.

Security researchers have warned that Game of Thrones fans may be at risk of malware when searching for pirate copies of the hit HBO series.

Research carried by RiskIQ identified over 450 pirate content sites serving malware to people trying to download or stream illegal versions of Game of Thrones. It said that recent investigation it carried out showed that 6 in 10 consumers access pirated content and 75 per cent of it is often used as the bait to serve malware.

The firm used its virtual user technology across five countries, running Google searches for Game of Thrones download or streaming content and interacting with the resultant list of URLs as real users would.

It said that even with the ongoing efforts of the show's creator to shut down illegal websites, at the end of ten days of scanning it identified more than 450 unique sites serving malware. Of these, the company identified 323 unique sites and 571 unique pages on those sites serving malware and 127 unique sites and 668 unique pages that had recently been flagged by other security organisations as malicious, although its virtual users weren't infected.

"While we're increasingly hearing that pirate sites are to be avoided, our recent research into people's behaviour shows that the message is being ignored by many", said Ben Harknett, VP of EMEA at RiskIQ.

"Specific examples like this will hopefully make it more real for people and result in a change in behaviour. It's not only your internet safety that you put at risk, but your employer's as well if you use your personal devices to access corporate systems".

The research was conducted earlier in May with virtual users launched from the US, UK, Germany, France and Netherlands. Of the malicious pages detected, 34 per cent were spreading malware through malicious ads.

T-Mobile CEO John Legere has apologised for a profanity-laden tirade directed at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), in which saw he asked the digital rights group "who the f*ck are you anyway?".

Legere's rant comes after EFF criticised a T-Mobile move to allow customers to watch videos from certain providers such as Netflix and Hulu without eating into their mobile data allowance.

This service, called Binge On, and available for free, was supposedly enabled by optimising' video streams and scaling them back to a lower bitrate, which translated to a resolution of around 480p.

A report by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, however, accused T-Mobile of throttling all of the video content passing through its network.

Rather than altering the content in any way, the telco confirmed that it just slashed the amount of available bandwidth to around 1.5Mbps.

This happened "even when the phone is capable of downloading at higher speeds, and regardless of whether or not the video provider enrolled in Binge On".

It also affected videos being downloaded for later viewing, or saved to another device via tethering.

Certain services, like Netflix, can adapt to changing bandwidth and reduce stream quality on-the-fly. Others cannot, resulting in stuttering video and repeated buffering.

"It's pretty obvious that throttling all traffic based on application type definitely violates the principles of net neutrality," the EFF wrote.

It also stated: "This is a significant consumer harm that runs afoul of well-established open internet principles."

Legere, however, was quick to respond to the accusations, refuting them in a video posted on Twitter.

"There are people out there who are saying we're throttling'. That's a game of semantics, and it's bullsh*t. That's not what we're doing," he said.

Instead, he claimed that by being able to opt-out, customers remained in control. He also claimed that "mobile customers often don't want or need full, heavy, giant video data files".

Legere was also critical of the "special interest groups" who were raising objections to the feature.

"We give customers more choices, and these jerks are complaining? Who the hell do they think they are?" he asked

In a direct response to one of the most active and widely known online rights organisations, he asked "who the f*ck are you anyway, EFF? Why are you stirring up so much trouble, and who pays you?"

Legere was widely ridiculed for his outbursts, and has since apologised for any offence caused to the organisation and its supporters in an open letter.

He also reaffirmed his company's commitment to the principles of net neutrality. "T-Mobile is a company that absolutely supports Net Neutrality and we believe in an open and free Internet," he wrote. "That is who we are. It's what we do. It will never change."

He refused to apologise for the outbursts themselves though, saying "I don't filter myself, and you know that no one at T-Mobile filters me either but I'm not going to apologise for that."

Spotify and Apple Music are going head to head. With billions to be made, and the market for music streaming growing larger by the day, can Apple's service supplant the current king of the hill?

Spotify vs Apple Music: history

Apple Music has been a long time in the works. Back in 2014, Apple finalised its acquisition of Dr. Dre's Beats brand, including both Beats Electronics and Beats Music. The purchase of Beats Music, a pre-existing streaming service, led many to speculate that Apple was planning to set up its own online music platform.

The company's Worldwide Developer Conference in early 2015 proved the rumour mill right, and Apple Music was officially unveiled.

Launching at the end of June 2015, the service features 24/7 online radio station Beats 1. Music, human curated playlists and more detailed ways of interacting with artists.

Spotify is by this point a well-established player in the music industry, with a vast catalogue and millions of subscribers. Nevertheless, it's clear that Apple is gunning for Spotify and, during the launch, founder and CEO Daniel Eck tweeted simply: "Oh ok."

Spotify vs Apple Music: subscribers

The Apple Music service, which appears as a preinstalled default app in iOS 9, has apparently gained 11 million members since its launch in June. However, since the three-month free trial period doesn't elapse for another month, this may drop as users are asked to start actually paying for it.

Spotify, by contrast, is doing much better in the subscriber stakes, boating 75 million active users, 20 million of whom are paying customers. Having been around longer, it's also much more stable.

Apple Music has been raked over the coals in recent weeks for its multitude of bugs, glitches and hiccups, including one flaw which could see thousands of pre-existing songs accidentally deleted from users' libraries.

Spotify vs Apple Music: celebrity endorsement and criticism

The debate between Apple Music and Spotify has been a heated one, particularly in the artistic community.

Spotify had its fair share of public spats with artists before Apple Music even launched Taylor Swift notably pulled her entire catalogue from the service in November last year but Apple Music's launch really ramped up the tension.

Swift in particular has been a big focus of the argument. After she fell out with Spotify, the artist turned her ire on Apple Music, penning an open letter that lambasted their policy of not paying artists royalties during users' free trial periods.

The letter gained widespread media attention, forcing Apple to reverse their policy within less than a day. This quick about-face pleased the mighty Taylor Swift, whose back catalogue including smash hit album 1989 is now available on Apple Music (and not Spotify).

Swift later took a stinging swipe at Spotify in a Vanity Fair interview, saying "I found it really ironic that the multi-billion-dollar company reacted to criticism with humility, and the startup with no cash flow reacted to criticism like a corporate machine."

Others are somewhat less than complementary of Apple's efforts, though. Ex-Oasis guitarist Noel Gallagher has hit out at the service, calling Apple Music's global radio station "some kind of George Orwell sh*t".

In an interview with the Varvet International podcast, he lambasted the idea, saying "how can you be so arrogant that you can say, We now f*cking own world radio'?"

He was also vocally critical of the Connect feature, that lets fans have more access to artists and their day-to-day lives. "Who cares what f*cking Thom Yorke is up to? Seriously, who gives a sh*t? I'd find it creepy if everyone wanted to know what I was up to."

Another target of Gallagher's trademark vehemence was Tidal, the streaming service set up by Jay Z that purports to be by artists, for artists'.

"They were like, We're going to f*ckin' save the music business.' And I'm just sitting there, thinking you might want to write a decent chorus for a f*cking start. Never mind f*cking royalties and the power of music'. Write a tune. F*cking start with that."

Tidal was born out of music creators' alienation with Spotify and the traditional streaming model, leading to some of the world's most popular artists signing up for exclusive deals.

These can be early release deals, exclusive singles, or in the case of artists like Prince, putting their entire catalogue exclusively on Tidal.

Spotify vs Apple Music: the future

Spotify, with an existing user-base that dwarfs all competition, is unlikely to be going anywhere any time soon. However, Apple Music may prove to be a serious long-term rival.

Spotify's inherent problem is that music is an expensive industry - the company claims that it has paid $2 billion to artists and copyright holders since it started in 2008. The licensing of popular music costs money, and Apple has enough capital behind it that it could simply outspend Spotify to get the biggest and best artists first.

The real test though will be whether, people are still willing to pay for Apple's service once the free trial ends.

Spotify vs Apple Music: features

By now, Spotify is established enough that we shouldn't have to explain it. However, if you've been living under a rock, Spotify is an on-demand music service built in the traditional streaming model; it's Netflix, but for music.

Among its main strengths are the fact that its platform-agnostic meaning you can use it on Android, Windows Phone, iOS or through the web app and that it links with Facebook, so users can share what they're listening to.

Apple Music boasts some decidedly shinier features, such as Beats 1 radio. A global, always-on radio station, Beats 1 boasts a cast of all-star DJs like Zane Lowe, Elton John and Dr Dre, playing a huge variety of different styles and genres.

It also incorporates a feature called Connect, which acts sort of like a social network for music stars. Fans follow their favourite artists, and Apple Music will display a newsfeed of pictures, updates, songs and playlists from them.

One of the things Apple appears to be proudest of, however, is that all of its playlists are human-created. "Algorithms are really great, of course, but they need a bit of a human touch in them, helping form the right sequence" Beats co-founder Jimmy Iovine said in a Guardian interview.

This would appear to be a dig at Spotify, but despite the multitude of playlists that Spotify has compiled for seemingly every mood, all of Spotify's playlists are curated.

Using big data analytics tools like Spotify's Truffle Pig, the company makes playlists based on a number of variables and criteria, and then refines them by hand based on users' listening habits.

Spotify vs Apple Music: fees and pricing

Pricing structures are a tricky issue, and especially so in the case of Spotify. The service's primary draw is its free tier. You can listen to unlimited music, but it's supported by ads. The 9.99 per month premium tier naturally removes these, but it also gets rid of a few other restrictions.

For example, mobile users can listen to the artists, albums or playlists for free, but only in shuffle mode they can't directly select tracks, and they have a maximum number of skips per hour.

It's a good deal for all parties. The free tier is more than functional enough, especially for casual users, but the benefits of premium (like higher-quality audio) are enough that many will consider switching of their own volition.

Apple Music also has a free tier, but compared to Spotify's, it's downright truncated. Free users won't be able to play, save or like content from Connect, have limited skipping privileges on the Apple radio stations and, crucially, have no access to the Apple Music instant streaming library.

To compensate for this, Apple instead offers an unusually-long three-month trial period for new users. However, as noted above, the trial period will be ongoing for everyone for another two months, meaning there's no evidence of how it will fare as a paid-for service.

It does have an ace up its sleeve in the form of the family subscriptions, however. Single subscriptions cost 9.99 a month the same amount as Spotify but Apple also offers a family membership for 14.99 a month.

Provided via the pre-existing iCloud family sharing, this enables up to six people to use the same Apple Music account, with separate playlists, recommendations and libraries. It's an absolute steal for families, and beats Spotify's similarly-themed offering into a cocked hat.

Spotify vs Apple Music: catalogue

According to the company, Spotify's catalogue is around 30 million tracks. Although the iTunes library has 40 million, only three-quarters of these are available through Apple Music, leaving the two services neck-and neck in terms of rosters.

What Apple Music does have that Spotify lacks is an unsurprising number of exclusives. Dr. Dre's latest album Compton, for example, will be released exclusively on Apple Music. Pharrell also released his single Freedom exclusively on Apple Music, as part of the 30 June launch.

Compared to rivals Apple Music and particularly Tidal, Spotify's standing in the artistic community does not carry a huge amount of weight. While it's unlikely to be starved of new music and major releases, it's also not going to be seeing the same amount of exclusive releases as Cupertino's offering.

Spotify vs Apple Music: restrictions

In a rather unexpected masterstroke, Apple has removed one of its biggest stumbling blocks for Apple Music. Rather than tying users into the Apple ecosystem, Apple Music is available across iOS devices, Macs, PCs and, coming in Autumn, Android phones.

By removing one of the most egregious aspects of Apple's software and services policy, Apple has opened itself up to the die-hard Android fanbase, a segment that might otherwise have been locked out.

Spotify vs Apple Music: user interface

Apple has come under fire for its confusing interface, and rightly so. While it admittedly looks very sleek and, well, Apple-ish, it's hard to navigate if you're just after a quick blast of the Beastie Boys.

Spotify's layout is a lot simpler, cleaner and easier to use, but it does lack the visual panache of Apple's. That said, from a pure functionality standpoint, Spotify wins this round hands down.

Spotify vs Apple Music: verdict

There's honestly not a huge amount between these two services. They've got a similar number of tracks, virtually identical pricing options and no real drawbacks for either.

If you're after a free streaming service and are willing to put up with only slightly obnoxious ad breaks, Spotify has a far more complete functionality to offer. However, if you're an existing iTunes user with a large and well-maintained library, Apple Music will integrate it beautifully.

For our money, Spotify is still just about edging out Apple Music, but we wouldn't hesitate to recommend either, and we've got no problem calling this one an even tie.

Apple has been told to pay $533 million (340m) after losing a patent dispute against Texas-based Smartflash, which claimed the iTunes creator had infringed on copyrights relating to how its music service accessed and stored downloaded songs, videos, and games.

Although the company first referred in 2013 to iOS apps developed by Game Circus and KingsIsle Entertainment in its argument, Smartflash later decided to extend this to the whole iTunes service.

Both mentioned developers served as defendants in the case, but this was dismissed from the claim in 2014.

Apple said in a statement that Smartflash does not have grounds to claim for such ownership: "Smartflash makes no products, has no employees, creates no jobs, has no US presence, and is exploiting our patent system to seek royalties for technology Apple invented.

"We refused to pay off this company for the ideas our employees spent years innovating and unfortunately we have been left with no choice but to take this fight up through the court system."

However, the jury said Smartflash had a legitimate claim in its three filings, saying it first innovated the techniques to manage the storage of audio, video, game and app files, including the technology used by Apple to ensure the files had been correctly purchased before adding them to the library.

Smartflash originally claimed for $852m (550m) in damages, which was proportionate to the number of iOS and OS X devices sold, but said it was happy with the result. The company has also successfully filed cases against Google, Amazon and HTC, with Samsung its next target for the same patent claims.

The Sunday night Super Bowl brought sneak peeks of some of the most exiting sci-fi TV shows and films to come this year.

This week also contained exciting developments from the science world, with fresh hope for patients with locked-in syndrome, and a new way to use wasted computer heat.

Here's our roundup of the best of the rest from around the web this week.

Science

- Two teams of scientists are developing portable devices that will allow patients with locked-in syndrome to communicate with doctors and loved ones.

- Start-up company Project Exergy is working on a way to convert the wasted heat from computers into heat for the home. This will be done via a processor acting as a server for household devices.

- SAFFiR a robot firefighter developed by scientists at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University has been tested and has successfully extinguished its first fire. Watch the video below.

Film

- Universal's Steve Jobs biopic will land in cinemas on 9 October, it has been revealed, with the troubled project now definitely (probably) starring Michael Fassbender in the lead role.

- New previews for Jurassic Park and Tomorrowland debuted at the Super Bowl, and you can watch both videos below.

- The Theory of Everything actress Felicity Jones has been announced as the star of a future stand-alone Star Wars movie, set to be directed by Gareth Edwards and released in December 2016.

- Graham Moore, screenwriter on The Imitation Game, and Andrew Hodges, author of the book on which the film is based, have won the 27th annual USC Libraries Scripter Award for their work.

TV & Streaming

- The Pirate Bay returned this week after being taken down following a Swedish police raid in December. The seizure of servers and equipment affected multiple websites.

- A teaser trailer for the Heroes reboot Heroes Reborn premiered during the Super Bowl, featuring returning cast member Jack Coleman and new addition Zachary Levi. Watch it below.

- Disney is reportedly looking to launch a service that would give Dish's Sling TV subscribers access to Marvel and/or Star Wars content.

- YouTube is experimenting with allowing viewers to switch between multiple camera angles while streaming, testing the feature on a single video. See for yourself here.

Gaming

- Sony has sold Sony Online Entertainment (SOE) to investment management firm Columbus Nova, resulting in its rebrand to Daybreak. SOE is probably most famous for creating the massively multiplayer online role-playing game, EverQuest.

- Shares in Electronic Arts have risen after the firm's most recent quarterly profit report revealed revenue had jumped almost 40 per cent year-on-year.

- Industrial Toys is launching its first game Midnight Star a first person shooter for mobile that appeals specifically to "core" console gamers.

City of London Police have arrested a man in Manchester on suspicion of running a series of illegal sports streaming websites.

The arrest was carried out by the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit (PIPCU) with support from the Greater Manchester Police.

The 27-year-old man was taken to a local police station for questioning.

The man was arrested at his home in the North West by the City of London Police's specialist IP unit where detectives discovered an "industrial size streaming operation", including 12 computer servers streaming a wide range of sporting events from across the world, which have since been seized and taken away.

The suspect was believed to be operating streaming sites that allow unlawful access to subscription-only TV services, which is said to be costing the industry more than 10milllion.

"Today's operation is the unit's third arrest in relation to online streaming and sends out a strong message that we are homing in on those who knowingly commit or facilitate online copyright infringement," said DCI Danny Medlycott, the newly appointed head of PIPCU.

"Not only is there a significant loss to industry with this particular operation but it is also unfair that millions of people work hard to be able to afford to pay for their subscription-only TV services when others cheat the system."

Police have not named the site that has been taken out of action.

The unit was launched in September 2013 and is tasked with the job of protecting UK organisations from intellectual property theft. In July, the unit served pop-up adverts on websites that contain copyrighted material, warning customers the site is undergoing a criminal investigation.

It also seized 200 websites touting counterfeit goods in June in a joint operation with Europol and US law enforcement agencies.

Amazon has splashed out $970 million in cash for video streaming website Twitch, ending months of speculation.

Judging by the comments made by Twitch CEO, Emmett Shear, the firm was not short of suitors. Google was reported to be in talks to buy the streaming site for approximately $1bn in May. However, it was Amazon that offered the more compelling deal.

"Today, I'm pleased to announce we've been acquired by Amazon. We chose Amazon because they believe in our community, they share our values and long-term vision, and they want to help us get there faster," Shear said on the Official Twitch blog.

"We're keeping most everything the same: our office, our employees, our brand, and most importantly our independence. But with Amazon's support we'll have the resources to bring you an even better Twitch."

Twitch was launched in 2011 and has grown to become one of the world's most popular websites. In July, 55 million unique visitors viewed over 15 billion minutes of content on the site.

In a statement, Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO of Amazon said he was impressed with how far Twitch has come in three years.

"Like Twitch, we obsess over customers and like to think differently, and we look forward to learning from them and helping them move even faster to build new services for the gaming community."

The deal is subject to close in the second half 2014, subject to regulations.

Apple isn't known for its market-leading cloud services. MobileMe, the company's last attempt, was better known for its reliability problems which CEO Steve Jobs tacitly acknowledged in his keynote introduction of iCloud. The new cloud service is still consumer-oriented and shares some of the same features as MobileMe, but there's still some items of interest for businesses.

So what is iCloud?

iCloud stores your calendars, contacts, emails, documents and photos on Apple's servers. This content is then automatically pushed to your Mac/PC and all your iOS 5 devices. If a change is made on one device, such as a new calendar entry on your iPhone 4, this new information will automatically appear on all your other devices.

5GB will be provided free for storing emails, documents and backups of your iOS device settings.

5GB will be provided free for storing emails, documents and backups of your iOS device settings. More storage will be available for a fee, the details of which have yet to be announced, but you can synchronise books and music bought from iBooks and iTunes, as well as your photos, without those files using up the free 5GB.

Emails from Apple's no-fee, ad-free me.com email service will also be synchronised as part of iCloud.

iCloud will be built into new versions of the existing iOS Mail, Calendar and the Contacts/Phone apps. Documents can be accessed using a new Documents in the Cloud app, as well as the paid-for iWork apps. It's unclear whether third-party apps will be able to access iCloud services, especially Documents in the Cloud.

iCloud doesn't sound very different from Google Apps.

Some of iCloud's features match much of what Google Apps does already, such as synchronised contacts and calendars as well as push emails. There are some features that are unique to iCloud though.

Photos and videos recorded on your iOS device, as well as texts, ringtones, iOS and app settings, will be automatically backed up to iCloud. The backup process will occur whenever the iOS device is being charged.

Photo Stream, as Apple calls it, will store your most recent 1000 photos in the cloud for 30 days. The uploads will occur automatically. Macs and PCs will store all of your photos permanently (in either iPhoto on a Mac or the Pictures folder on Windows), but on iOS devices photos will have to be moved to an album to be saved permanently.

Does that mean Apple is now encouraging us to use web apps as Google does?

Although it's highly likely there will be web apps for accessing contacts, calendars and photos, as there is now with MobileMe, Apple is emphasising how calendar and contacts data can be used on your computer using existing programs such as Outlook and through apps on iOS devices.

What about music?

Unlike before, iTunes Store customers can now redownload any music they've previously bought. Any new music you buy from the iTunes Store will now be pushed to your computer and up to 10 iOS devices using the iTunes in the Cloud feature. We hope this new Automatic Downloads feature will be made available to third-party developers.

What about music I've already bought?

iTunes Match will scan your iTunes library and identify music acquired from other sources, as long as the iTunes Store stocks those tracks. 256kbps AAC versions of those songs will then be pushed to your devices. If iTunes Match can't find your song, then you'll have to manually upload your tracks to iCloud.

We hope iTunes Match works using the song identification algorithm in the existing Genius music recommendation feature, rather than the ropey Duplicate Track finder feature which simply looks for identical track information.

Unlike the rest of iCloud, iTunes Match will cost $25 a year. We're still waiting for confirmation, but it's likely any iTunes Match tracks will stop working if you cancel your subscription. British pricing has yet to be announced.

iTunes in the Cloud sounds like more faff than simply using Spotify.

We'll reserve final judgement until we actually try it, but it's worth remembering Spotify isn't available in North America which is still Apple's single biggest market.

What if I don't want to use iCloud?

iCloud will be enabled by default in iOS 5. We assume it'll be possible to turn it off, but we're still waiting for confirmation. We're also waiting for details about how it will deal with capped data plans and slow WiFi connections.

When will iCloud be available?

iCloud will be available this autumn when it will be rolled out in tandem with iOS 5. A handful of features, such as redownloading music you've already bought, is available now.

How much will it cost again?

5GB of storage will be available for free, with more storage available for a fee yet to be announced. iTunes Match will cost an extra $25 a year.

Motorola Mobility plans next year to sell a product that lets consumers stream video to mobile devices, such as tablet computers and mobiles, in their home, a top executive for the company said yesterday.

The product, announced at the Reuters Global Media Summit, will be showcased at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) right after Motorola spins off Motorola Mobility, which includes its set-top box and mobile business, from the rest of the company on 4 January.

Daniel Moloney, president of Motorola Mobility, sees the offering as a first step in his efforts to combine set-top box and mobile technology to eventually allow consumers to view any content anywhere on different devices in the next five years.

"It's one consumer proposition that will come sooner rather than later," Moloney told the Reuters Global Media Summit yesterday.

While much of the technology already exists for such offerings, one thorny issue is for equipment makers or operators to forge agreements with programming providers for the right to let consumers carry content around.

This is why the streaming product would initially only send video to devices being used within the home. Moving content outside the home could take much longer, Moloney said.

And after being sold a separate gadget, to be offered via service providers, the home streaming product will eventually be integrated into set-top boxes, the executive said.

While Moloney said it would be up to service providers whether to charge an extra service fee for the device or not, they could offer it as a way to discourage higher-value customers from switching to another service.

The home subsidiary, which included set-top boxes and cable network equipment, represented almost a third of Motorola Mobility sales in the third quarter with revenue of $912 million (583 million) compared with $2 billion in revenue from mobiles.

Moloney said he saw Motorola Mobility generating operating profits in an eight to 12 per cent range in the next three to five years.

While the home business already had a profit margin of 8.4 per cent and an operating profit of $77 million in the third quarter, the mobile phone business only just turned a tiny profit of $3 million in the quarter for the first time in almost three years. This gave it a profit margin of 0.1 per cent.

But Moloney said that both parts of the business have to reach the eight to 12 per cent range under the plan.

Motorola Mobility will trade under the MMI ticker on New York Stock Exchange after the split. The rest of Motorola, which sells technology to governments and corporations, will change its name to Motorola Solutions and will trade under the MSI symbol, also on NYSE.

A church in Scotland has taken the innovative step of coming up with its own iPhone app so parishioners unable to attend church can still follow services in real time.

Like many churches, St Andrew's in Bo'ness, West Lothian has been streaming its services in real time over the web for several years. But in extending the concept to the mobile space, St Andrew's is breaking all-new ground.

"I was able to sit in my car on the Royal Mile in Edinburgh and watch the morning service live," The Herald Scotland quotes parishioner Neil MacLennan, who helped develop the app, as saying. "Essentially you could watch the service anywhere which had a 3G network."

Aside from the obvious benefit of parishioners still being able to follow services on their iPad or iPhone (second generation onwards) even if they're away on holiday, the app is also a valuable way for the ill or housebound to stay in the loop.

St Andrews' Reverend Albert Bogle, who worked with MacLennan on the project, said he hoped the app would open up "a whole new world" and promised versions for Blackberry and Nokia would follow and no doubt Android too in time.

The pair hope the app can be expanded to other parishes, especially with the Church of Scotland facing a 6 million budget deficit and flagging attendances. "What we have developed is not some big secret to be kept in Bo'ness," MacLennan said. "We want other churches to try this and we'll be happy to help them on their way."