• $1.99 the price Apple currently sells TV shows for – it’s also a dollar extra for HD, and it’s expensive
• $1 the price Apple is gunning to sell TV shows for, which could help it take on Hulu
• $30 the price they want to charge for all-you-can-eat monthly Apple TV subscriptions source

• 
• We’ve been playing with Google Buzz since last night, and we see a lot of potential here. It builds on some already solid foundations, and does things that prior players in this field – specifically FriendFeed – couldn’t do because of lack of scale. That said, we think Google has PR problems that Buzz largely amplifies. Here are our thoughts:

Google’s Good Buzz

• It has users! Google handled Buzz’s launch better. Wave introduced its platform without users, so while it was technically adept, it gave users no incentive to join. Buzz solves that problem by plugging into Gmail’s wide usership.
• It’s easy-to-use Another big problem with Wave is that while it was technically executed well, it was so complex to use that Gmail users couldn’t grasp it easily. Buzz’s interface is simple by design. There are options, but they’re fairly simple.
• It notifies! Perhaps the biggest mistake that Wave made was that it had no built-in notify feature via e-mail; it was designed to replace it, really. You had to check it to see if people were bugging you. Buzz is tied directly to e-mail.

Google’s Bad Buzz

• Do we need another? If Google had created Buzz three years ago, it would have seemed revolutionary. Now it just seems like Google’s trying to catch up. Facebook has this market cornered; why spend time focusing on this specific angle?
• It eats wave’s lunch Even with all the differences, most users will compare Buzz to Wave. Many people already see Wave as a failure because it never answered a simple question: Why? Buzz is closer to that answer, but the effect is that it neuters Wave.
• Can’t make up its mind The biggest problem Google faces is one due to its size. Google is so big that they try get involved in everything. Apple is successful right now because their decisions are deliberate. Google’s aren’t, and they seem indecisive. source

• This has been going on for more than four days now. I contacted my internet provider and they said it is out of their control.
• An anonymous Iranian whose internet is getting gummed up • Regarding his frustration with the Web. Iran has already shut down Gmail permanently – we blame Buzz – and has only been allowing limited access to the Web in the wake of the anniversary of the 1979 Iranian revolution. Google confirmed that they’ve had a sharp drop in traffic from Iran this week. “Whenever we encounter blocks in our services we try to resolve them as quickly as possibly because we strongly believe that people everywhere should have the ability to communicate freely online,” Google wrote. “Sadly, sometimes it is not within our control.” source

• It’s not like I sit there and feel the same way I did with iPhone where I say, ‘Oh my God, Microsoft didn’t aim high enough.’ It’s a nice reader, but there’s nothing on the iPad I look at and say, ‘Oh, I wish Microsoft had done it.’
• Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates • Regarding his take on the iPad versus the iPhone. In his opinion, Apple didn’t knock it out of the park. Keep in mind, though, that Gates has been wrong before – he said something similar (in fact, about the same) about the iPod before MS came out with the Zune a few years later. source

• Well, this seems like a rejected app waiting to happen. Opera, the creators of a not-terrible also-ran Web browser, have created a version of the app for the iPhone which makes Web sites load really fast due to compression technology. Problem is, Apple has notoriously blocked apps that duplicate the phone’s basic functionality. This oughta be fun to watch. source

• We remember IRC back in “the day.” Internet Relay Chat, as the nerds called it, was a dangerous place and you never knew quite what you were getting into. Warez? Porn? Malware? Some dude who pretended to be your Internet friend but was really a 50-year-old man? And Chatroulette, a webcam-plus-anonymity phenomenon starting to get mainstream attention, is the 2010 version of IRC. Which is why it’s a minor (and fairly disturbing) phenomenon that will soon be forgotten. Here’s why:

• This is old-school Why, do you ask, is this old school? Because it takes all the adventure of the Internet, the risk and reward, and puts it on your screen. Back in 1996, this wasn’t the exception. This was the rule. This is the dangerous end of the Internet, the dark neighborhood at 2 a.m. It’s like Craigslist at its best.
• Not Web 2.0 at all Chatroulette’s interface is simple, but ragged. It isn’t forgiving. Like HotOrNot, you get one chance to make an impression. You don’t start relationships here. You see people. Then you don’t. There’s no friendly face here. This is the opposite of social media. It’s antisocial. Just like IRC!
• Oh, there’s nudity Perhaps the one factor which ruins Chatroulette’s chances of being anywhere near as popular as Facebook is that half the people on it are perverts. It’s not safe for work at all. Some people get a kick out of the anonymity, while others use it to be socially depraved. You’ve been warned. source

• terrible When Google launched its Nexus One, it forgot to offer something obvious it usually doesn’t offer for its products – live phone support. Users loudly complained.
• better Google just started offering it, over a month after they launched the freaking phone. About time. It only covers status and shipping issues, though. WTF, guys? source

• Sure, it’s a product Steve Jobs doesn’t show off, but it doesn’t mean people still aren’t excited. The photo-editing tool, which is available as a free trial, reportedly has 200 enhancements big and small. It also hasn’t been updated in a couple of years. So it’s due. source