Related articles

• This one came from reader barrychuck, who was curious about our remote control situation. Actually, barry recommended that we check out Ricavision’s much-hyped Vave 100 remote control based on Windows SideShow technology. However, emails to Ricavision went unanswered and, given a disconnected main phone line, we think it’s safe to say that the Vave died before a unit was ever even shipped. Too bad—looked like a cool product. The Maui platform, as shipped from AMD, included a USB IR transceiver and a standard media center remote control with the same boring look as the units that’ve been around since 2005. Functional, but hardly flashy. Additionally, maintaining line of sight might be a problem for users with equipment tucked away in a rack. On the same feedback page, heltoupee mentioned using an iPod Touch as a remote. So, I went out and bought a Touch in order to test the concept. An App Store title called Mobile Air Mouse looked like the most promising solution for turning Apple’s audio/video player into a touch-screen remote. The software’s most notorious feature is tapping the accelerometer functionality built into both the iPhone and iPod Touch, letting you mimic a mouse in much the same way Gyration’s Air Mice have for years. More interesting to us, though, was that the software doubled as a track pad with four separate layouts: function keys, Web browser control, a standard keyboard, and a media-oriented layout. Right now the software works over WiFi, but we're hoping that it'll soon take advantage of the recently-enabled Bluetooth functionality on the Touch as well.  Why does the Air Mouse trump a standard media center remote? The touchpad functionality means you don’t need a mouse, and the built-in keyboard means you can do away with that peripheral, too. Granted, a $200+ iPod Touch makes for an expensive remote control, as does a $200+ iPhone with a monthly plan. For the folks who already own one or the other, though, $6 for the software through the App Store is ridiculously inexpensive coming from a world of $250 Harmony remotes. We originally ran into issues using Mobile Air Mouse with our HTPC, but the problems turned out to be related to the integration of PowerDVD 8 and Windows Media Center. Upgrading to PowerDVD 9 or using ArcSoft’s TotalMedia Theatre instead fixed those initial speed bumps. For use with video playback, Mobile Air Mouse works well. We had a bit more trouble with the software playing back music. While it behaved well in Windows Media Player proper, it didn’t want to follow directions in Windows Media Center. Not perfect, but certainly a step in the right direction. One other downside to going this route is the lack of universality enabled by a device like the Harmony One. In other words, you’ll still need to turn on your TV, pick the right source, turn on your receiver, pick the right input, and turn on your PC. But as a replacement for the boring (and functionally-limited) Media Center Remote with which our Maui box shipped, the iPod is a suitable substitute. Kudos to heltoupee for the suggestion—this one turned out to be a real winner in the face of Ricavision’s dead Vave.

• Wolfgang Gruener What is it: 2007 Apple iMac, MacBook, MacBook Pro, MacPro, Mac mini; Dell Dimension C521, E521, Inspiron 1501, Latitude 131L, OptiPlex 740 Why we chose it: Let's start with Apple. There are friends who you never thought could be friends. If you are an Apple aficionado and have visited Steve Jobs keynotes in recent years, then you probably know all too well how those Power-whatever machines drove those mighty Xeon machines in the ditch and smoked one Photoshop benchmark record after another. There was lots of strange schadenfreude against Intel and unshakable enthusiasm for Apple, which you just knew would last for an eternity. But here is 2006 and Steve Jobs and Paul Otellini are best friends. How did that happen? You could speculate that Apple really did not have a choice in times where the Power architecture was outmuscled not only in terms of performance but especially in power efficiency and Apple was in dire need of a different supplier. We are still a bit dazzled that Apple went with Intel and not AMD, as the green team, at least from our view, would have been a better fit for the mentality of the Apple camp. But then, Steve Jobs has the kind of sales talent every company would kill for. Jobs could tell us the snow is black and we'd all believe it: In that view, the Intel proposition was really child's play. Nevertheless, the bottom line is that Apple made one gutsy move that could have resulted in a riot in the Apple crowd. The numbers, however, prove that it was the right decision. The company sold 30% more Macs in the most recent quarter (1.61 million) than a year ago (1.24 million). Plus, the user benefit is obvious: Besides more performance, Mac users get closer to a wealth of x86 applications and Windows guys have a real chance of getting their hands on a cutting edge-style machine without having to move to an entirely new system. We patiently will wait for the final version of the Bootcamp software. Dell-AMD Finally! Jeez, Dell, what took you so long? It appears that everyone always knew it was a matter of time when Dell couldn't resist the pressure of consumers asking for AMD anymore. I remember asking a PR representative in 1999, if AMD wouldn't be a great move for Dell and I heard the same "we are always evaluating other technologies ..." phrase then as I did earlier this year - when an analyst floated the rumor that a Dell-AMD announcement was very likely for this year. I discussed this topic with many tech journalists, including Charlie Demerjian from the Inquirer and we were quite certain that Dell would not go with AMD this year. A major concern was AMD's potential production capacity, which was rumored to be running around 90%+ even without Dell being a customer. Charlie was confident enough to put a bet on it against VoodooPC president Rahul Sood. I chickened out and turned Rahul's offer to join Charlie in this bet down, luckily, I have to say. As we know today, the Dell-AMD announcement came and Charlie had to do his IDF coverage in a bunny suit. But, if you remember, even Intel appeared to have been caught on the wrong foot: In a rather memorable email to Intel employees, Intel CEO Paul Otellini expressed his disappointment over Dell's move. But in the end, Dell had little choice, but to offer AMD processors to its customers. Starting with 4P servers, it was obvious that demand for Opterons were skyrocketing and HP and Sun were grabbing market share from Dell, practically unchallenged. Moving down the ladder to the desktop and notebook came a bit late, but was a natural extension of this strategy. Rumor has it that Dell used its bold AMD announcement to negotiate new prices with Intel, but - true or not - there is little doubt that Dell has made the right decision for its customers and itself - we just wish the company would have made this move three years earlier. What it means to you: More choice for everyone, that's what this industry should always be about. Bridges were built this year, enabling new products strong enough to be considered part of the most significant hardware announcements in 2006. The AMD-Dell announcement (we should not forget that Lenovo also adopted AMD) is especially significant, as it will strengthen AMD: A stronger AMD will promote healthier competition, in which AMD will be able to not only tease Intel once in a while. The result should be more innovation in the microprocessor segment than we have seen before, especially with ATI now being part of AMD. Predictions for 2007: Keep an eye on AMD becoming much more visible in the Dell lineup. Today, Dell is selling AMD mainly in entry-level configurations. Don't be too surprised seeing AMD's new processors, Kuma and Agena/FX, in the company's XPS series of notebooks and desktop computers. Apple is a tough one. People went bankrupt over betting on Apple products for the new year, so I will be very careful here. But I will say this: Apple will build a breakthrough entertainment PC based on Intel processors, it will roll out quad-core enthusiast Macs with more graphics capability and it will offer an UMPC-like touchscreen mobile computer, based on Intel ULV processors in 2007. Article Coverage: Apple announces Intel-Macs Dell's AMD computers now available Paul Otellini "incredibly" disappointed by Dell decision

• Using the Touch-Screen LCD We've talked enough about getting everything to work. So now that it's running, what can the touch screen do? When media is not being played, the Frontview application will display a lot of customizable information on the touch screen. Things like local weather, temperature, time, and news will be displayed. In addition, the screen will show information about the HTPC itself, such as data about the CPU, hard drive, and network usage. The display really comes to life when playing music or video with either the iMedian HD or Vista Windows Media Center. Playing music or video with these applications will switch the LCD into media-information mode and will display information like file type, codec, length, and more. However, the graphical equalizer that shows you what you are hearing is more fun. The display can also be used as an interface to media even when the main display is off or being used for something else. The Frontview Media Player can be controlled from the touch screen directly and used to launch music or video to view on the 7" LCD display. After launch, the LCD can still control volume and change media, even while playing video in the background. Real-World Benefits of the Touch-Screen LCD Let’s face it: the touch screens are really the core feature of these three HTPC cases. This is why their price is relatively high and it is what differentiates them from the competition. The touch screens certainly look very impressive and they add a notable amount of bling factor to the home-theater room. However, in real-world use we didn’t find them to be especially practical in most situations. Why get off the couch to use the touch screen if you have a remote control? In this sense, the touch screen is a definite step backward as far as a user interface tool goes. It’s certainly no killer app in this respect. What about the visual component? The screen itself is nice, but how useful is it? Yes, it can display a movie, but why would you choose to watch a movie on a 7" screen when it is attached to your HDTV? Sure, the graphic equalizer is nice to have when playing music or a movie, but once again that’s firmly in the bling category and doesn’t offer any tangible utility. The best practical use for the touch screen I can think of is for audio. In many cases, an HTPC might be connected to a large display such as a digital projector that the user wouldn’t want to turn on except when watching a movie. In this situation, the touch screen is perfect as a convenient interface to access your music library without wasting the projector bulb’s limited life. Or perhaps a user might want to leave the main LCD or plasma display off when playing music to save energy. Regardless, the ability to access music without having to turn on the main display is the most compelling functionality that the LCD touch screen offers. Of course, while we have downplayed its usefulness, we can't ignore how the bling factor alone will attract many to invest in one of these cases. The LCD touch screens are certainly attractive and they'll definitely get noticed by your guests. LCD Panel Comparison Two of the three cases used identical LCD panels. The Thermaltake DH102 and Moneual 972 both used Soundgraph's 7" iMon OEM touch LCD, which is based on a Samsung 7" TFT LCD panel. Silverstone's CW03 used a Hitachi C100 7" LCD panel with similar specifications and an identical native resolution but it had a much higher maximum interpolated resolution: Screen:Hitachi C100 7" LCDSamsung 7" TFT LCDNative Resolution800 x 480800 x 480Maximum Resolution1920 x 12001024 x 768Brightness300 cd/mm350 cd/mmViewing Angle (L/R/U/D)65/65/45/6165/65/50/60Response Time30 ms25 ms As you can see, the only difference of real note is the maximum interpolated resolution, and we can't think of a good reason to run the small 7" screen at 1920x1200 unless you wanted to interpolate the text down so small it would be completely unreadable. With everything else being so close to equal, we don't think the difference in LCD-screen quality is a factor worth considering when choosing between these three units.