Google:

Starting today, Android Market, Google Music and the Google eBookstore will become part of Google Play.

Google creating a media hub to compete with iTunes is smart. Google too often fires out numerous projects and they rarely mesh and gel. To be competitive when it comes to stuff you can shove on to a device, centralising everything makes a lot of sense. But Google Play? It’s an odd piece of branding. Apple’s ‘App Store’ and ‘iTunes Store’ are pretty dry but they’re also balanced brands used as a container for disparate things. With Google, however, you get:

Store up to 20,000 songs for free and buy millions of new tracks

You ‘play’ songs—fair enough. And music is fundamentally a leisure activity. There’s also the well-known play icon, so the brand works well here.

Download more than 450,000 Android apps and games

Fair enough for games, but for apps? I’m not thinking ‘play’ when I use iA Writer, Brushes or many of the other productivity apps on my iPad. It seems strange to use ‘play’ as a descriptive word for housing Android’s apps.

Browse the world’s largest selection of eBooks

Do you ‘play’ a book? Reading is typically split between education and leisure, and ‘play’ is often very much the wrong word for the former.

Rent thousands of your favorite movies, including new releases and HD titles

This works similarly to songs, in the sense that you ‘play’ movies, although it’s easy enough to argue that this isn’t necessarily the best branding for movies that are research- and education-oriented.

I realise I’m overthinking this and many people simply won’t care nor think much about Google’s brand for its centralised resource for downloading apps and media; but to me the brand smacks of something that would be used for entertainment purposes only, and it isn’t suitable for apps that aren’t games and books/movies that aren’t primarily intended for fun.

EDIT: Sam Radford on Twitter makes an excellent point:

Though iTunes makes no sense for buying books, apps, movies, games, magazine, etc.

Of course, iTunes itself has mushroomed from an MP3 player into a media hub, but he’s right that the branding no longer makes sense—and it hasn’t for a while. Perhaps, then, it’s more about what we’re used to, in which case Google’s challenge will be in ‘training’ people to realise that Google Play encompasses everything—not just leisure apps and media. (Mind you, Google’s other challenge, judging by its past, will be in sticking with something for the long-term, too, and not axing/reworking its offering on a whim.)

Vlad Savov, reporting for The Verge:

Acer Global President Jianren Weng has been quoted at CeBIT today reiterating something he said at the beginning of December: ultrabooks will drop to the crazy-low price of $499 in 2013 and compete directly against Apple’s iPad.

Wow. That’s pretty bold. I guess the ultrabook thing’s worked out great for these guys, and they’re making money hand over fist, in order to make such dramatic price-cuts!

Speaking with Christoph Pohlmann of Acer’s laptop team, we learned that the current $799 / €699 price for the Aspire S3 is too low for Acer to actually generate any profit from it. The company is merely breaking even when selling its entry-level ultrabook model and the venture is only made worthwhile by the higher-specced SKUs pulling in a surplus.

Oh.

You’ve got to hand it to the DVD guys. Clearly responding to the kind of dickishness I wrote about recently, they’ve now set upon a course of action that will—shock!—enable you to unlock your DVDs and format-shift them to digital. Hurrah!

What’s that? There’s a catch, you say, Michael Weinberg, reporting for Public Knowledge?

The program, which would have merely been ill-advised had it been announced ten years ago, today stands as a testament to the ability of movie studios to blind themselves to reality.

*popcorn*

The entire program is designed to give consumers a way to take movies they already own on DVD and turn them into more portable digital files.

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me…

As reported by the LA Times, the first phase in this process is to let DVD owners bring their DVDs to a store

Sorry, what was that?

As reported by the LA Times, the first phase in this process is to let DVD owners bring their DVDs to a store

Right. I thought I’d gone insane for a moment and you’d said the first phase in this process is to let DVD owners bring their DVDs to a store! That would be bonkers!

As reported by the LA Times, the first phase in this process is to let DVD owners bring their DVDs to a store

Oh.

that will handle the digital conversion. Tsujihara described this process as allowing consumers to convert their libraries “easily, safely and at reasonable prices.”

If only there was a way for people to convert their libraries easily, safely and at reasonable prices at home, with, say, a PC or a Mac and a copy of Handbrake or similar software. Although, clearly, that wouldn’t help regarding the ‘safely’ bit, because, as we all know, Handbrake has a little-known ‘fire shuriken from your display’ feature that is randomly activated. [SUB: PLEASE CHECK THIS INFO PROVIDED BY A DVD GUY]

Oh, but hang on! This is about money, isn’t it? These guys want you to pay again for the content you’ve already bought and have therefore finally figured out a typically inept industry means of having you do so. Those scallywags! But really: taking your DVDs to a store? Waiting while the conversion is done? Waiting for some unspecified point in time where “Internet retailers like Amazon.com will email customers to offer digital copies of DVDs they previously bought”? Saying that ‘eventually’—presumably when cars fly through the air and meals are consumed in exciting sci-fi pill form—consumers will be able to put DVDs into PCs that will upload a copy, like how, um, Handbrake works right now?

If only there was a business model in a similar field that already existed, that wasn’t totally stupid, and that these guys could use as the basis of their own.

In What the iPad 3 really needs: fewer stupid articles about the iPad 3, I report on a couple of iPad articles, one of which talks about competing tablets and argues their features should be welded to the iPad. In the comments, Oliver Mason argues:

While I fully agree with most of your article […] the one thing I disagree is the stylus issue: since I bought an Adonit stylus I can use the iPad to replace paper for just jotting down notes in a way that is not possible with one of the ten built-in ones. Maybe it’s been too long since I did finger painting as a kid. True, it is easy-to-lose, but for me it really made the iPad that little bit more useful. One of the few issues where I think Steve got it wrong.

I haven’t felt this myself when using the iPad, and that’s primarily because certain input devices (be they a finger, a mouse, a stylus, or a joypad) are better for certain tasks. I don’t often jot notes on my iPad, and, these days, consider that kind of writing increasingly a niche activity. What I think’s most important is to get the default right in terms of what the user assumes is required. To my mind, a tablet with a stylus is arguing that the stylus is the best way to interact with the device—something Samsung tried to hammer home in its Galaxy Note advert (TUAW). But in over-emphasising a single-touch pointing device, you run the risk of detracting from what makes modern tablets so appealing from an interaction standpoint: multitouch. Being able to more fully immerse yourself in dealing with content by manipulating it directly is leagues ahead of a layer of abstraction that a pointing device provides.

I don’t doubt that there are some cases where a stylus is beneficial, and there are loads of third-party options available for the iPad that people can add to their set-up if they feel the need. But I think Steve Jobs got this dead right: by default, just you and the device is the set-up that is most intuitive, usable and forward-thinking.

As the iPad 3 gears up to smash the industry in the face, the internet is being pelted by articles that say—shock!—the iPad 3 is doomed! It’s rubbish! Its competition is about to nonchalantly zoom past, leaving Apple once again like it was back in the days when it didn’t have a clue.

This is all true. Especially if you ignore the fact that today’s Apple has a clue. And that the iPad has sold more rapidly than anything else Apple has ever released. And the fact competing tablets are selling poorly, bar the Kindle Fire, which is only currently available in the USA. And that everyone and his dog is writing an ‘iPad is actually rubbish’ article, because, clearly, there’s lots of interest about the iPad. BUT LET’S IGNORE ALL THESE THINGS, BECAUSE!

First up today with a slice of crazy: come on down, Eric Zeman for Information Week, with What iPad 3 Really Needs: Revised OS.

Apple’s iOS is starting to get a little long in the tooth. There, I said it. The overall look and feel of the operating system has not changed since its 2007 debut.

Users and developers love it when operating systems change in terms of look and feel all the time. They think it’s just great. And I agree with Zeman: now literally millions of people are familiar with and enjoy using iOS, it’s the perfect time to RAKE IN THE FACE! But, tell us, Zeman, what specifically should Apple do?

What would I like Apple to change? Well, I’m no design guru, but I am sure Apple has enough creative juices to turn out a more visually appealing operating system.

“Make the logo bigger!”

 I’d like to see a sharper-looking operating system, with fewer curves and more corners. Not Windows 8-style corners and blocks, but something that has cleaner lines to it.

“Make it squarer, but not too square! Make the colours more—I don’t know—voguish.” (Every designer, everywhere: HEADDESK!)

The operating system could use some more features, but that will always be true of any platform. Things that iOS lacks that other platforms capitalize on? Widgets, the ability to control files/folders […]

Now that Microsoft has aligned the look of its PC, tablet, and smartphone platforms, it would behoove Apple to do the same.

“Hello? Doc Brown? I’m stuck in 2007, before the iPhone and iPad, when everyone thought an OS X tablet was the best idea ever! I can’t get out, and the DeLorean’s broken down again. HEELLLPPP!”

*zemanmighthavetomarryhismothersadface*

We need a new contestant! Come on down, Roger Cheng for CNET, with iPad rivals catching up: Can iPad 3 keep them at bay?

Apple should be blowing us away with the iPad 3, but it probably won’t.

Bold! Let’s hope you have a really good article that explains why this is the case and won’t just bang out a list of pointless specs that companies are using in a desperate attempt to differentiate their otherwise similar offerings and that consumers don’t care about, yet that tech pundits seem oddly infatuated by!

The latest rumors call for a higher resolution screen on par with the iPhone’s Retina Display, a possible upgrade to the iOS software, and possibly a few other improvements. That’s certainly enough to draw the Apple faithful and sell a ton of iPads.

SUB, PLEASE CHECK: DID APPLE’S 55+ MILLION IPADS ALL GO TO THE ‘APPLE FAITHFUL’?

But with the rapid advances that the competition is making, will it be enough to secure the company’s continued dominance in the tablet business?

SUB, PLEASE CHECK: DID STRAIGHTFORWARD IPAD 2 UPGRADE MAKE IPAD SALES FALL OFF A CLIFF?

So, Roger Cheng, please educate as as to what the iPad lacks, and what Apple should unveil tomorrow!

At first glance, the [Kindle] Fire’s biggest advantage is price. It’s hard to argue with a $200 tablet.

Price! The iPad is too expensive, which explains its lack of sales. *onlytensofmillionssoldsadface*

Sure, the specs aren’t the greatest, and it feels sluggish at times, but it’s not a bad experience for the price.

Everyone likes sub-standard experiences if they are cheaper!

Another key feature is the access to Amazon Prime and its streaming video service. Apple has iTunes, but it doesn’t have its own dedicated service for streaming video for a low flat rate.

Man, if only streaming video apps existed for the iPad.

The Kindle Fire also boasts its own custom Silk Browser, which is supposed to enable faster Web surfing through a cached architecture. It’s debatable whether Silk is that much better.

‘Debatably faster’ is always a good selling point, I find.

The [Asus Transformer] Prime uses Nvidia’s quad-core processor, which on paper means two more cores than the iPad’s dual-core chip

MOAR POWER! Everyone loves specs. Apart from consumers, who really couldn’t give a monkey’s about specs.

But the Prime’s best feature is its detachable keyboard, which makes it a virtual laptop.

Man, if only you could pair an entirely-optional-if-you-really-want-one Bluetooth keyboard with an iPad.

The tablet also has Ice Cream Sandwich, the latest flavor of Android meant to bridge the gap between the smartphone and tablet user interface. Only time will tell if that’s a true advantage.

‘Time will tell if this feature is a true advantage’ is always a good selling point, I find.

Say what you will about the 5-inch Galaxy Note, the [Samsung] Galaxy Note 10.1 is a tablet that makes sense. Its main advantage, like its 5-inch brother, is the S-Pen stylus, which works extremely well on the larger surface.

Man, if only you could get an entirely-optional-if-you-really-want-one stylus for the iPad. And if only people generally had ten styluses attached to the ends of their arms. And if only we weren’t in 2012, instead of the year poor Zeman is stuck in, when a stylus for a tablet still seemed like a pretty neat idea.

Of course, these tablets all have their share of weaknesses as well,

But we’ll subsequently ignore those entirely and won’t address them, because otherwise this article makes no sense.

but that doesn’t take away from the fact these features are ones that iPad users would certainly appreciate,

Every iPad user I’ve ever met has said they want a ‘debatably faster’ browser, features that may or may not be a ‘true advantage’, and an easy-to-lose, pointless stylus!

and indicate that gap between Apple and its rivals isn’t as wide as most people think.

Apart from in terms of sales. And profits. And usage. And quality apps. But none of these things matter if there aren’t enough cores or styluses on stage tomorrow. I HOPE YOU’RE LISTENING, TIM COOK!