Well, the high-definition format war is over.

Today, Wal-Mart – the nation’s largest retailer – picked Blu-ray.

And not only is the chain backing Blu-ray, it has announced that it will not stock HD-DVD players or movies.

Game over.

While the writing has been on the wall for HD-DVD since Warner – once firmly in both camps – announced in January 2008 that it was going to begin backing only Blu-ray moving forward, Toshiba (the HD-DVD deleloper) thought they still had a chance.

The writing became more prominent earlier this week when both Best Buy and Netflix went for Blu-ray.

Wal-Mart is the killer, however. It is officially over.

About frickin’ time…

So, why did Blu-ray win?

I think it was partly due the Playstation 3 (PS3) – that got a lot of Blu-ray players in the home and hooked up to TVs. There’s no doubt about that.

But it also came down to studio support. Most studios backed either Blu-ray or both; once Blu-ray has been out a couple of months, it was selling roughly 60/40 or 70/30 percent in comparison to HD-DVD. Near the end, Paramount and Universal were persuaded (I say bribed) to go exclusively to the HD-DVD camp, but that just pointed to the desperation on the HD-DVD front.

And – for the most part – no one but the videophiles and early adopters really cared. DVDs are still fine; upsampled DVDs for the bigger TVs put things close to to HD quality.

So – for most of the world – there was no format war. Or there was, but “I can wait until someone wins before I might buy a player from the winner.”

Well, today there is an indisputable winner.

Blu-ray.

Update 2/17/2008 Reuters confirms that Toshiba has thrown in the towel.

Well, Tim Bray says it’s the 10th Bday of XML. And, as co-inventor/developer of XML, he should know.

I have a love/hate relationship with XML (flat files are often better…), but XML is a great standard, and it’s made so much possible.

Think RSS, if nothing else.

I’m tired, working like crazy today, but I had to stop to note this Bday.

Yes, it’s that’s big of a dealio….(to me)…

Update 2/12/2008 – I was a day late. I should have posted on 2/10/2008, the real birthday. My bad.

Well, the buzz in the blogosphere is Microsoft’s unsolicited bid for Yahoo!

It seems most every year this rumor circulates the internet, but after Yahoo’s disastrous earning report last week, virtually everyone expected there to be an offer made for the internet pioneer.

So, when the previous years’ rumor turned out to be this year’s truth, no one really batted an eye.

The question/discussion was more centered around: Does such a merger/acquisition make sense (for MS, Yahoo, and/or end users)? And what will be the result of such a merger? (Will Flickr remain; will hotmail merge with Yahoo mail and so on).

I was going to write yesterday, but I was sick (still am; damn flu), but here are my initial, high-level impressions of the potential merger:

• This is a move – on both company’s parts – to counter Google. Yet will the sum of the parts actually get them even close to Google? I dunno. The No. 2 & No. 3 video rental companies (Hollywood and Movie Gallery) in the U.S. merged to try to get traction against No. 1 (Blockbuster). Since that time, the merged No. 2 retailer is busy closing stores and selling off assets. Not exactly a success story (to be fair, Blockbuster is stumbling, as well).
• This is a very clear admission by Microsoft that – despite its deep war chest – it has no frickin’ clue on how to leverage search, content and advertising online. That it is, for the most part, completely lost once it leaves the desktop. (The one exception to this is Xbox Live, which has gotten great reviews and makes Sony’s PS3 online component look like Windows 3.11 over a 2400 baud modem.)
• How can two such different companies successfully combine? Jeff Jarvis argues that Yahoo is the last old media company, and MS is the last old technology company (Microsoft-Yahoo: The Deal of the Dinos Great title). And the combined companies still won’t beat Google.
• At the same time, the two companies have so much in common, and the common areas are the arenas in which both are attempting to battle Google: The internet space (i.e. forget, for the moment, MS and Windows). Yahoo Mail, Hotmail. Both have search. Both have online ad platforms (which is what most of this merger is about). Both have made forays (usually via investment/purchase) of social networking sites. What gets cut when the merger is complete? You don’t need two email systems; two ad platforms. Lots of overlap, and that’s not even counting logistics: You don’t need two accounts payable divisions, for example, in one company. There will be cuts. (Update: Nice overview of competing products MS/Yahoo will have to merge/live with/kill.)
• This smacks of the Netscape/AOL merger, as well as the AOL/Time-Warner buyout. Those worked out well, didn’t they??

On the other hand, despite the negative comments I’ve outlined above, I think the merger sorta makes sense. Why?

• Well, Yahoo! really doesn’t have a choice. They are going to be acquired by someone. The writing’s on the wall. MS might not be the best choice, but it does generate buzz (which can help) and now that MS is run by Ray Ozzie, we might see some internet-smart changes.
• Both companies understand the common enemy: Google. If, for example, a private equity group acquired Yahoo! (another persistent rumor), it might have led Yahoo! (wisely or not) away from its interet focus.
• This merger, of course, is about money. Eyeballs and advertising. Yahoo! has the audience and internet chops; MS sure knows how to leverage almost anything to make a buck – and they have bucks to throw at products. It has potential.

If this comes to pass, will the combined companies be a greater threat to Google than each was separately?

Nah.

Google is open, distributed and insanely focused on the web (Android is an internet play; trust me). Yahoo! has the Terry Semel baggage of content; MS has its roots – and primary revenue stream – in desktop apps. Especially with MS, don’t expect the company to abandon its roots and insanely profitable products, even if the company does continue to profit on the present at the expense of the future.

Bottom line: Merger or not, Google wins. Whatever the hell that means…

Well, it’s that time of the year – to make prognostications for the coming year.

It’s a little late really – more of a Jan. 1 thingee, but last year I did them on the 6th, as well, so let’s call that a precedent.

(If you want to see how I did last year, view my 2007 Prognostications, with updates indicating how I did on each guess. I did pretty well, but my forecasts were – for the most part – pretty broad or no-brainers.)

I really have no strong opinions about this year; in many ways, I think this will be an uneventful year (boy, could I be wrong about that!).

That said, a look into the crystal ball:

• HD movie format: By the end of the year, HD DVD will be the Betamax of the HD formats, with Blu-ray the standard. The announcement of Warner Bros. re: Blu-ray support is the end of the road for HD DVD, to me. (Update 2/15/2008: It’s over; Blu-ray has won.)
• HD Standard hoses downloads: With an HD standards war in place, everyone and their brother focused on regular DVD downloads of movies and TV shows (and no one has really cracked this nut). With a standard in place, there will be more demand for HD downloads. And – with everyone whiffing on DVD downloads, it’s unlikely that anyone will figure out how to download HD (much larger) files. Again, I don’t see anything of lasting interest to happen in this space (some interesting efforts, to be sure, but…).
• Google will stay out of the cell phone biz: I do think they will bid on the 700Mhz auctions, but only so they can license that to other cell companies – with the caveat that said companies support the “open protocols” (in other words, support Android and the ad-delivery system Google has concocted). I really don’t see Google as interested in supporting a cell phone network themselves (Google has great tech; but a Google Customer Support Center?).
• The Desktop: Microsoft will essentially extended XP support and OEM installations for the near future; Vista will continue to be shunned. Apple will continue to pick up market share, especially via notebook sales. With the execption of the Mac Mini and high-end towers, Apple will become a notebook computer company in 2008 more so than any other year. Apple will be pressured to license its OS; Apple will not do so. Linux on the desktop will continue to be a niche market by Linux hackers and IT departments; no impact on the average user.
• Yahoo still won’t find its focus: Perhaps that’s a little unfair, but Yahoo – one of the longest/strongest Web brands – is just treading water while Google (the upstart) is jet-skiing away. Yahoo has – in aggregate – more traffic, but it can’t quite seem to figure out what to with it. Such was true in 2007; it will remain true in 2008. (Update 2/2/2008: With an unsolicited takeover bid by Microsoft in February, Yahoo! is showing how [sadly] irrelevant it’s become.)
• Ruby will remain a niche player: There’s been a lot of buzz around Ruby (especially with the Rails framework), but it remains a niche play. It reminds me of Python, which a lot of folks love – yet Python continues to be eclipsed by Perl, that (relatively) ancient, ugly, incredibly flexible/useful language. Both for Ruby and Python – as well as the Postgres database – standards matter. Like it or not, all servers out there have PHP, Perl and mySql support these days. Not as true for Ruby, Python or Postgres.
• There will be some sort of DRM showdown: DRM doesn’t work. OK? So, if we’re going to put it on digital media, let’s standardize it, and make it flexible enough for the average user (crackers will always break DRM, if for no other reason than to “stick it to the man”). Or get rid of it for the most part. Music is is going that way; get over it MPAA and other owners of proprietary file formats (yes, that’s you Adobe/Microsoft/others…). Open is in, and I think it’s here to stay to a much greater degree than in the past.
• RIAs vs. Ajax: Rich internet applications (RIA) – i.e. Flash, AIR (the new Flash) and Silverstream (Microsoft tries to be a Flash-killer) won’t take off this year, but Ajax (i.e. Google Maps and mash-ups) will continue to flourish. By the end of the year, any major site not featuring some DHTML/Ajax widgets will seem, well, quaint.

I don’t know – I just don’t see anything that dramatic coming down the pipe.

But – with the internet – it’s the stuff you don’t see coming that’s often the most interesting.

Warner Brothers has decided to produce only Blu-ray discs for its movies, instead of both Blu-ray and HD DVD discs.

With Apple rumored to be leaning towards Blu-ray for its computers, is this is the end of the format war?

I think so.

So – what’s going to be the next format war?

DRM?

In a move that’s really somewhat of a surprise – even considering the source – the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has filed a lawsuit that claims copyright infringement for ripping legally purchased CDs to a home computer for personal use:

Now, in an unusual case in which an Arizona recipient of an RIAA letter has fought back in court rather than write a check to avoid hefty legal fees, the industry is taking its argument against music sharing one step further: In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a Scottsdale, Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings on his personal computer, the industry maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer.

— Download Uproar: Record Industry Goes After Personal Use, Washington Post, Sunday, December 30, 2007

I thought this was covered by the same fair-use laws that allow you to use a Tivo or VCR to record shows for watching later, or copying music to cassette tapes, because your car doesn’t have CD player.

Just when you think the RIAA can’t bury its head any deeper in the sand, they find a new shovel to make that hole deeper…

Update 1/9/2007: The Post admits is got the story wrong.

It’s the time of the year for best of/worst of lists, and The Beast has an interesting list of the Most Loathsome People in Amercia, 2007, mainly for who was picked for slot No. 9 – You:

You believe in freedom of speech, until someone says something that offends you. You suddenly give a damn about border integrity, because the automated voice system at your pharmacy asked you to press 9 for Spanish. You cling to every scrap of bullshit you can find to support your ludicrous belief system, and reject all empirical evidence to the contrary. You know the difference between patriotism and nationalism — it’s nationalism when foreigners do it. You hate anyone who seems smarter than you. You care more about zygotes than actual people. You love to blame people for their misfortunes, even if it means screwing yourself over. You still think Republicans favor limited government. Your knowledge of politics and government are dwarfed by your concern for Britney Spears’ children. You think buying Chinese goods stimulates our economy. You think you’re going to get universal health care. You tolerate the phrase “enhanced interrogation techniques.” You think the government is actually trying to improve education. You think watching CNN makes you smarter. You think two parties is enough. You can’t spell. You think $9 trillion in debt is manageable. You believe in an afterlife for the sole reason that you don’t want to die. You think lowering taxes raises revenue. You think the economy’s doing well. You’re an idiot.

While the whole article is part tongue in cheek and part right on the mark, this one still resonates with me.

And we are the people who elect our representatives at all levels of government.

Yes, we do seem to be idiots…

Well, it really comes as no surprise, but Feb. 1, 2008 marks when development of Netscape Navigator ends.

While the Netscape browser (now part of AOL) has pretty much slippped off everyone’s radar over the last few years (down to a market share of 0.6%, if I recall a recent article correctly), this is the browser used by just about everyone first peering into this new-fangled thing called the World Wide Web. Heck, for most folks Netscape was the vehicle for their first trip on the internet.

Microsoft’s IE browser put the brakes on Netscape’s popularity; the acquisition of Netscape by AOL helped this decline. With the rise of the open-source Firefox and the newly resurgent Apple and its Safari browser, Netscape was relegated to the “remember when?” scrapheap.

Still, this is a piece of internet history that’s going away. It won’t be missed, but its legacy shouldn’t be forgotten.

Update: Netscape does have a 0.6% market share.

Update 2 (12/30/2007): – Henry Blodget, who’s usually pretty down to earth on such matters, suggets the Mozilla foundation buy Netscape and rename the browser Netscape Firefox, among other suggestions.

While he’s correct that the Netscape brand has a certain cachet, so does the Chevrolet Corvair, and that’s not coming back.

Blodget’s totally wrong on this one.

The people today who are familiar with Netscape are those pretty much familiar with the whole Netscape story, which includes the browser no longer relevant since version 4.2 or so. And AOL is up to version 9 of the browser.

And if the name is so valuable and a so-called selling point for (in Blodget’s view) a combined Netscape Firefox, how come only 0.6% of browsers in use are Netscape? Doesn’t seem all that valuable, now does it?

A Netscape Firefox browser would be a combination of a once-powerful but long-since-relevant tool with one that is on the ascent, and highly regarded by the geeks that help drive adoption of certain standards (in some cases).

It would hurt both names; let Netscape die in peace.

As reported by CNN, Pakistan’s former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was assassinated just hours ago by a suicide bomber.

This’ll stir up an area that’s already a tinderbox.

Yipes.

The New York Times has an interesting article (which I read through news.com) about the battle between Microsoft and Goolge, Google gets ready to rumble with Microsoft.

What struck me about the article was how much of what Google is doing that is not getting ready to rumble with Microsoft.

It’s more like Google realizes what they are doing might step on MS’s toes (Gmail, Google Docs) and so that’s a reason to tread lightly, so they don’t get MS’s hackles up until Google is in a position to not have to worry (too much) about the MS reaction/retaliation.

To me, it’s MS that’s reacting to Google, not the other way around. Before Google, search and online advertising weren’t on MS’s radar: Desktop software was. Now MS is fighting back, trying to take back some of this relatively new territory (that Google virturally [pun intended] owns).

Take Gmail, for example: While I’m sure MS was in the minds of everyone at the GooglePlex, that wasn’t the why of why it came about.

It came about because it was a natural for what Google does best – cloud-computing apps. And it had the benefit of giving more ad impressions.

Yes, it was ding on MS and Outlook/Exchange, but that was just gravy, to me.

Google was just building something only they (at the time) could. It could have well ended up in the Google dumpster, such as other highly promoted Google projects. Remember Froogle? Few do…

Remember Netscape – the browser? It didn’t come about to kill MS – it came about to harness the power of the new-fangled thing called the internet.

It appeared to be a threat to MS (remember all the talk about browser-based apps, which are only today becoming real), and MS – to its credit – turned the huge company around very quickly to address the internet.

But that was not the reason for the Netscape browser.

Ditto for Google in general. Google is moving on its own, following its own continually evolving agenda, towards something it’s not quite sure of.

Along the way, it may stumble across developments that threaten MS, but Google is not (to me) targeting MS. Google is just aware that it may cross MS along the way, be it with apps like Gmail, which compete with existing MS apps, or online advertising, which MS is getting into to “get ready to rumble” with Google.

To paraphrase Othello, “It is not the cause.”