The BBC reports that Odeon’s reversed its decision to boycott the upcoming Alice in Wonderland film “following talks with Disney”. If you’ve not followed this story, Odeon got narked after Disney announced it was to ignore the standard ’17 weeks to DVD’, dropping the gap by four weeks. This, argued Odeon, would screw over UK cinema chains by setting a new benchmark that would reduce their potential revenue.

Disney’s stance is that by getting the DVD out sooner, it’ll reduce bootlegging. I have two helpful hints to Disney in this regard:

1. A brilliant way to stop bootlegging is to stop screwing over the international market. If you release all of your films at the same time everywhere, rather than many of them in the US first and six months later everywhere else, people will be more likely to rush out to see them, rather than reading about them in some mag, twiddling thumbs for a few days, reading more online reviews from the US, getting impatient and then torrenting the films. Note: happily, this will also deal with the ‘disappointing international box office returns’ you keep whining about regarding Pixar films that are out on Region 1 DVD by the time they finally arrive in cinemas in the UK and elsewhere.
2. You cannot bootleg a cinema experience. It’s pretty clear that many films—including a lot of those by Disney—are as much about the environment and the big screen these days as the story. To that end, reducing the potential amount of time films stay in cinemas by at least four weeks is stupid.

Now the snappily named Windows Phone Series 7 has been revealed, it’s fisticuffs at dawn between Microsoft and Apple. Well, between Microsoft and a cardboard cut-out of Apple, because no words are coming from Cupertino (bar Steve Jobs bitching about Flash every few minutes), but Microsoft’s taking swipes at iPhone at every opportunity.

The latest snipe regarding gaming comes from Oded Ran, head of consumer marketing for Windows phone in the UK. “It’s not about whether you have 6,000 different arcade puzzle games in a specific category on your app store,” he says. “It’s about how good they are—it’s not about the number, it’s about the quality.” (Source: Mobile Entertainment.)

To be fair, I agree. Quality over quantity is always the best way to go (although I’d argue the App Store offers both to gamers), but here’s the thing: for years, Microsoft has taken the exact opposite stance regarding Apple. Windows, it’s said, is better than Mac OS because it has more apps, more devs, more support (and more exciting viruses—oho!), but now Microsoft’s in the minority, it’s playing the ‘we only care about quality’ game. Right. And I’m sure Microsoft wouldn’t change its tune at all if someone could somehow magic 10,000 games for its upcoming platform out of thin air while simultaneously deleting 99% of Apple’s App Store content.

MacRumors reports that HP execs are to soon meet for discussion regarding pricing and features on the company’s upcoming iPadalike. If the Wall Street Journal is to be believed, HP’s cunning plan is to provide something “similar to the iPad in size and features” but to undercut the Apple device’s price.

Well done, HP—you’ve learned nothing. After all, hardware-oriented willy waving and low price-points worked out so well for you in the PC industry, didn’t they?

TechRadar and a billion other sites confirm Microsoft won’t be offering any upgrade pricing for Office 2010. In the UK, you’ll pay £109.99 for Office Home and Student version, £239.99 for Office Home and Business and £399.99 for Office Professional, which reportedly comes with an aversion to actual work, a slick hair-do and a propensity for leering after digital secretaries.

Microsoft’s reasoning is that “Office Home & Business 2010 represents a substantial saving over [the] comparative Office Standard 2007 suite while including an additional application (OneNote) and Office Web Apps” and claims “the majority of users will immediately benefit from the greater value and simplified setup experience offered by Product Key Cards”. The lack of an upgrade path has nothing to do with Microsoft “wanting more of your money, scumbag users who are locked into our product and yet don’t realise they don’t really need to upgrade if they’re happy with what they have—mwahahahaha”, or “sticking our fingers in our ears and going lalalalalalalalala, I can’t hear you, whenever OpenOffice.org and other dangerous competing products are mentioned”.

The BBC reports that 24 large phone operators are ganging up to give Apple a smack. The Wholesale Applications Community is aiming to offer its own take on the App Store, presumably because they want a tasty slice of profits pie.

On reading the BBC’s article, it’s hard to tell whether this is a profits grab or a genuine stab for the future of apps. The article talks about building and selling apps “irrespective of device or technology”, which could mean advanced open web apps or web apps dumbed down to work in any old system. Likewise for the quote about overcoming market fragmentation by creating a single “open platform that delivers applications to all mobile phone users”.

Long-term, web apps are a good bet. As JavaScript and HTML evolves, browser-based environments will be able to do more and more. At the present time, though, to truly support “all mobile phone users,” you’ve no choice but to drag devices down to the lowest common denominator—and when consortiums of this sort are born, compromise usually forces hands, to the point that exciting and visionary aims are ditched in favour of short-term market-share and profits. Here’s hoping that’s not the case here.