Researchers at the University of California, Davis, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering have developed 1000-core processor which will eventually be put onto the commercial market.
The team, from t developed the energy-efficient 621 million transistor “KiloCore” chip so that it could manage 1.78 trillion instructions per second and since the project has IBM’s backing it could end up in the shops soon.
Team leader Bevan Baas, professor of electrical and computer engineering said that it could be the world’s first 1,000-processor chip and it is the highest clock-rate processor ever designed in a university.
While other multiple-processor chips have been created, none exceed about 300 processors. Most of those were created for research purposes and few are sold commercially. IBM, using its 32 nm CMOS technology, fabricated the KiloCore chip and could make a production run if required.
Because each processor is independently clocked, it can shut itself down to further save energy when not needed, said graduate student Brent Bohnenstiehl, who developed the principal architecture. Cores operate at an average maximum clock frequency of 1.78 GHz, and they transfer data directly to each other rather than using a pooled memory area that can become a bottleneck for data.
The 1,000 processors can execute 115 billion instructions per second while dissipating only 0.7 Watts which mean it can be powered by a single AA battery. The KiloCore chip executes instructions more than 100 times more efficiently than a modern laptop processor.
The processor is already adapted for wireless coding/decoding, video processing, encryption, and others involving large amounts of parallel data such as scientific data applications and datacentre work.
E3 2016 has officially come to a close, and despite the fact that Activision and EA were absent from the show floor, my experience of the show was that it was actually quite vibrant and filled with plenty of intricate booth displays and compelling new games to play. The same cannot be said for the ESA’s first ever public satellite event, E3 Live, which took place next door at the LA Live complex. The ESA managed to give away 20,000 tickets in the first 24 hours after announcing the show in late May. But as the saying goes, you get what you pay for…
The fact that it was a free event, however, does not excuse just how poor this show really was. Fans were promised by ESA head Mike Gallagher in the show’s initial announcement “the chance to test-drive exciting new games, interact with some of their favorite developers, and be among the first in the world to enjoy groundbreaking game experiences.”
I spent maybe an hour there, and when I first arrived, I genuinely questioned whether I was in the right place. But to my disbelief, the small area (maybe the size of two tennis courts) was just filled with a few tents, barely any games, and a bunch of merchandise (t-shirts and the like) being marketed to attendees. The fans I spoke with felt like they had been duped. At least they didn’t pay for their tickets…
“When we found out it was the first public event, we thought, ‘Cool we can finally go to something E3 related’ because we don’t work for any of the companies and we’re not exhibitors, and I was excited for that but then we got here and we were like ‘Uh oh, is this it?’ So we got worried and we’re a little bit upset,” he continued. Malcolm added that he thought it was going to be in one of the buildings right in the middle of the LA Live complex, rather than a siphoned off section outside with tents.
As I walked around, it was the same story from attendees. Jose, who came with his son, felt similarly to Malcolm. “It’s not that big. I expected a lot of demos, but they only had the Lego Dimensions demo. I expected something bigger where we could play some of the big, upcoming titles. All it is is some demo area with Lego and some VR stuff,” he told me.
When I asked him if he got what he thought would be an E3 experience, he continued, “Not even close, this is really disappointing. It’s really small and it’s just here. I expected more, at least to play some more. And the VR, I’m not even interested in VR. Me and my son have an Xbox One and we wanted to play Battlefield 1 or Titanfall 2 and we didn’t get that opportunity. I was like c’mon man, I didn’t come here to buy stuff. I came here to enjoy games.”
By cobbling together such a poor experience for gamers, while 50,000 people enjoy the real E3 next door, organizers risk turning off the very audience that they should be welcoming into the show with open arms. As the major publishers told me this week, E3 is in a transitional period and needs to put players first. That’s why EA ultimately hosted its own event, EA Play. “We’re hoping the industry will shift towards players. This is where everything begins and ends for all of us,” said EA global publishing chief Laura Miele.
It seems like a no-brainer to start inviting the public, and that’s what we all thought was happening with E3 Live, but in reality they were invited to an atmosphere and an “experience” – one that barely contained games. The good news, as the quickly sold out E3 Live tickets indicated, is that there is a big demand for a public event. And it shouldn’t be very complicated to pull off. If the ESA sells tickets, rather than giving them away, they can generate a rather healthy revenue stream. Give fans an opportunity to check out the games for a couple days and let the real industry conduct its business on a separate 2-3 days. That way, the ESA will be serving both constituents and E3 will get a healthy boost. And beyond that, real professionals won’t have to worry anymore about getting shoved or trampled, which nearly happened to me when a legion of frenzied gamers literally all started running into West Hall as the show floor opened at 10AM. Many of these people are clearly not qualified and yet E3 allows them to register. It’s time to make E3 more public and more professional. It’s your move ESA.
We asked the ESA to provide comment on the reception to E3 Live but have not received a response. We’ll update this story if we get a statement.
AMD has released a short video where its lead system engineer Louis Castro running Doom on its Summit Ridge, Zen-based processor.
This means that the silicon is in good shape and the processor was taped our probably late last year with no major issues. AMD’s CEO Lisa Su has already said that the desktop version shall arrive first, and this was the CPU demonstrated in the video.
Summit Ridge is not an APU and doesn’t have a GPU core. AMD engineers were using a discreet GPU probably from one they found out the back.
The Summit Ridge is an FM4 socket processor and half dozen of them are shown in the video.
At its E3 2016 press conference today, EA said that DICE and Motive were working on a new version of Star Wars: Battlefront for release in 2017. Visceral Games are creating an action-adventure game with an “original narrative set in the Star Wars universe with all-new characters.”
Respawn Entertainment is developing “a different style of gameplay” which takes place in a different timeline we have yet to explore with our EA Star Wars titles.” In other words, almost every EA studio is flat out making something Star Warish.
And while the company didn’t make any mention of it at the news conference, the preview video it showed fans offered a very brief glimpse of a player wearing a PlayStation VR headset, while an X-Wing’s cockpit was shown on screen. That’s likely to stoke anticipation about a reboot of the classic 1997 title “X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter.”
EA and Lucasfilm signed a multiyear licensing deal in 2013. Due, in large part, to the strength of “Star Wars Battlefront,” EA handily beat its earnings estimate in its most recent quarter. Star Trek Bridge, the simulation of the Bridge inside of an Enterprise, a big VR commitment from EA looks like a fun game too.
AMD’s Zen chip will have as much as 32 cores, 64 threads and more L3 cache than you can poke a stick at.
Codenamed Naples, the chip uses the Zen architecture. Each Zen core has its own dedicated 512kb cache. A cluster [shurely that should be cloister.ed] of Zen cores shares a 8MB L3 cache which makes the total amount of L3 shared cache 64MB. This is a big chip and of course there will be a 16 core variant.
This will be a 14nm FinFET product manufactured in GlobalFoundries and supporting the X86 instruction set. Naples has eight independent memory channels and up to 128 lanes of gen 3 PCIe. This makes it suitable for fast NVMO memory controllers and drives. Naples also support up to 32 SATA or NVME drives.
If you like the fast network interface, Naples supports 16x10GbE and the controller is integrated, probably in the chipset. Naples is using SP3 LGA server socket.
The first Zen based server / enterprise products will range between a modest 35W TDP to a maximum of 180W TDP for the fastest ones.
There will be dual, quad, sixteen and thirty-two core server versions of Zen, arriving at different times. Most of them will launch in 2017 with a possibility of very late 2016 introduction.
It is another one of those Fudzilla told you so moments. We have already revealed a few Zen based products last year. The Zen chip with Greenland / Vega HBM2 powered GPU with HSA support will come too, but much later.
Lisa Su, AMD’s CEO told Fudzilla that the desktop version will come first, followed by server, notebook and finally embedded. If that 40 percent IPC happens to be across more than just a single task, AMD has a chance of giving Intel a run for its money.
VMware is aiming to help businesses get a better handle on the security of the computers their employees use. The new TrustPoint product the company announced Monday uses software to make it possible to track and manage computers easily and quickly, without taking up a whole bunch of data.
The software allows companies to detect what devices are on their networks, along with which ones are being managed by IT. That helps businesses understand if they have machines operating outside the reach of their security systems, which could be a problem for protecting company data.
In addition, businesses will also be able to use TrustPoint to handle operating system imaging with VMware’s technology, so it’s easier for them to patch systems that are managed with TrustPoint.
It’s all part of VMware’s ongoing push into the enterprise endpoint management market, which has proved increasingly popular as employees bring their own devices to work and security threats have intensified.
TrustPoint is powered by technology from Tanium. In addition to detecting unmanaged devices, TrustPoint can block those devices from connecting to company networks, so they don’t get access to key data.
Computers running TrustPoint communicate with other devices near them that are running the software, so that it’s possible for a group of computers to all get a software update by having pieces of it pushed to several different devices using TrustPoint. Once the pieces of the update have been downloaded, TrustPoint can coordinate the transfer of information between computers so that each one gets a complete update.
VMware has said that TrustPoint is particularly well-suited to rolling out Windows 10, which more and more companies are gearing up for. As part of that transition, the system can upgrade a device with a consumer Windows 10 license to Windows 10 Enterprise, so people can use other administration tools to manage it, too.
A new Mozilla fund, named Secure Open Source, will provide security audits of open-source code, following the discovery of critical security bugs like Heartbleed and Shellshock in key pieces of the software.
Mozilla has set up a $500,000 initial fund that will be used for paying professional security firms to audit project code. The foundation will also work with the people maintaining the project to support and implement fixes and manage disclosures, while also paying for the verification of the remediation to ensure that identified bugs have been fixed.
The initial fund will cover audits of some widely-used open source libraries and programs.
The move is a recognition of the growing use of open-source software for critical applications and services by businesses, government and educational institutions. “From Google and Microsoft to the United Nations, open source code is now tightly woven into the fabric of the software that powers the world. Indeed, much of the Internet – including the network infrastructure that supports it – runs using open source technologies,” wrote Chris Riley, Mozilla’s head of public policy.
Mozilla is hoping that the companies and governments that use open source will join it and provide additional funding for the project.
In a trial of the SOS program on three pieces of open-source software, Mozilla said it found and fixed 43 bugs, including a critical vulnerability and two issues in connection with a widely-used image file format. “These initial results confirm our investment hypothesis, and we’re excited to learn more as we open for applications,” Riley wrote.
The SOS fund “fills a critical gap in cybersecurity by creating incentives to find the bugs in open source and letting people fix them,” said James A. Lewis, senior vice president and director of the Strategic Technologies Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, in a statement.
The SOS is part of a larger program, called Mozilla Open Source Support, launched by Mozilla in October last year to support open source and free software development. MOSS has an annual budget of about $3 million.
To qualify for SOS funding, the software must be open source or free software, with the appropriate licenses and approvals, and must be actively maintained. Some of the other factors that will be considered are whether a project is already corporate backed, how commonly is the software used, whether it is network-facing or regularly processes untrusted data, and its importance to the continued functioning of the Internet or the Web.
This weeks E3 won’t be entirely dominated by VR, as some events over the past year have been; there’s too much interest in the prospect of new console hardware from all the major players and in the AAA line-up as this generation hits its stride for VR to grab all the headlines. Nonetheless, with both Rift and Vive on the market and PSVR building up to an autumn launch, VR is still likely to be the focus of a huge amount of attention and excitement at and around E3.
Part of that is because everyone is still waiting to see exactly what VR is going to be. We know the broad parameters of what the hardware is and what it can do – the earliest of early adopters even have their hands on it already – but the kind of experiences it will enable, the audiences it will reach and the way it will change the market are still totally unknown. The heightened interest in VR isn’t just because it’s exciting in its own right; it’s because it’s unknown, and because we all want to see the flashes of inspiration that will come to define the space.
One undercurrent to look out for at E3 is one that the most devoted fans of VR will be deeply unhappy with, but one which has been growing in strength and confidence in recent months. There’s a strong view among quite a few people in the industry (both in games and in the broader tech sector) that VR isn’t going to be an important sector in its own right. Rather, its importance will be as a stepping stone to the real holy grail – Augmented or Mixed Reality (AR / MR), a technology that’s a couple of years further down the line but which will, in this vision of the future, finally reach the mainstream consumer audience that VR will never attain.
The two technologies are related but, in practical usage, very different. VR removes the user from the physical world and immerses them entirely in a virtual world, taking over their visual senses entirely with closed, opaque goggles. AR, on the other hand, projects additional visual information onto transparent goggles or glasses; the user still sees the real world around them, but an AR headset adds an extra, virtual layer, ranging from something as simple as a heads-up display (Google’s ill-fated Glass was a somewhat clunky attempt at this) to something as complex as 3D objects that fit seamlessly into your reality, interacting realistically with the real objects in your field of vision. Secretive AR headset firm Magic Leap, which has raised $1.4 billion in funding but remains tight-lipped about its plans, prefers to divide the AR space into Augmented Reality (adding informational labels or heads-up display information to your vision) and Mixed Reality (which adds 3D objects that sit seamlessly alongside real objects in your environment).
The argument I’m hearing increasingly often is that while VR is exciting and interesting, it’s much too limited to ever be a mainstream consumer product – but the technology it has enabled and advanced is going to feed into the much bigger and more important AR revolution, which will change how we all interact with the world. It’s not what those who have committed huge resources to VR necessarily want to hear, but it’s a compelling argument, and one that’s worthy of consideration as we approach another week of VR hype.
The reasoning has two basis. The first is that VR isn’t going to become a mainstream consumer product any time soon, a conclusion based off a number of well-worn arguments that will be familiar to anyone who’s followed the VR resurgence and which have yet to receive a convincing rebuttal – other than an optimistic “wait and see”. The first is that VR simply doesn’t work well enough for a large enough proportion of the population for it to become a mainstream technology. Even with great frame-rate and lag-free movement tracking, some aspects of VR simply make it induce nausea and dizziness for a decent proportion of people. One theory is that it’s down to the fact that VR only emulates stereoscopic depth perception, i.e. the difference in the image perceived by each eye, and can’t emulate focal depth perception, i.e. the physical focusing of your eye on objects different distances from you; for some people the disparity between those two focusing mechanisms isn’t a problem, while for others, it makes them feel extremely sick.
Another theory is that it’s down to a proportion of the population getting nauseous from physical acceleration and movement not matching up with visual input, rather like getting motion sick in a car or bus. In fact, both of those things probably play a role; either way, the result is that a sizeable minority of people feel ill almost instantly when using VR headsets, and a rather more sizeable number feel dizzy and unwell after playing for extended periods of time. We won’t know just how sizeable the latter minority is until more people actually get a chance to play VR for extended periods; it’s worth bearing in mind once again that the actual VR experiences most people have had to date have been extremely short demos, on the order of 3 to 5 minutes long.
The second issue is simply a social one. VR is intrinsically designed around blocking out the world around you, and that limits the contexts in which it can be used. Being absorbed in a videogame while still aware of the world and the people around you is one thing; actually blocking out that world and those people is a fairly big step. In some contexts it simply won’t work at all; for others, we’re just going to have to wait and see how many consumers are actually willing to take that step on a regular basis, and your take on whether it’ll become a widespread, mainstream behaviour or not really is down to your optimism about the technology.
With AR, though, both of these problems are solved to some extent. You’re still viewing the real world, just with extra information in it, which ought to make the system far more usable even for those who experience motion sickness or nausea from VR (though I do wonder what happens regarding focal distance when some objects appear to be at a certain position in your visual field, yet exist at an entirely different focal distance from your eyes; perhaps that’s part of what Magic Leap’s secretive technology solves). Moreover, you’re not removed from the world any more than you would be when using a smartphone – you can still see and interact with the people and objects around you, while also interacting with virtual information. It may look a little bit odd in some situations, since you’ll be interacting with and looking at objects that don’t exist for other people, but that’s a far easier awkwardness to overcome than actually blocking off the entire physical world.
What’s perhaps more important than this, though, is what AR enables. VR lets us move into virtual worlds, sure; but AR will allow us to overlay vast amounts of data and virtual objects onto the real world, the world that actually matters and in which we actually live. One can think of AR as finally allowing the huge amounts of data we work with each day to break free of the confines of the screens in which they are presently trapped; both adding virtual objects to our environments, and tagging physical objects with virtual data, is a logical and perhaps inevitable evolution of the way we now work with data and communications.
While the first AR headsets will undoubtedly be a bit clunky (the narrow field of view of Microsoft’s Hololens effort being a rather off-putting example), the evolutionary path towards smaller, sleeker and more functional headsets is clear – and once they pass a tipping point of functionality, the question of “VR or AR” will be moot. VR is, at best, a technology that you dip into for entertainment for an hour here and there; AR, at its full potential, is something as transformative as PCs or smartphones, fundamentally changing how pretty much everyone interacts with technology and information on a constant, hourly, daily basis.
Of course, it’s not a zero sum game – far from it. The success of AR will probably be very good for VR in the long term; but if we see VR now as a stepping stone to the greater goal of AR, then we can imagine a future for VR itself only as a niche within AR. AR stands to replace and re imagine much of the technology we use today; VR will be one thing that AR hardware is capable of, perhaps, but one that appeals only to a select audience within the broad, almost universal adoption of AR-like technologies.
This is the vision of the future that’s being articulated more and more often by those who work most closely with these technologies – and while it won’t (and shouldn’t) dampen enthusiasm for VR in the short term, it’s worth bearing in mind that VR isn’t the end-point of technological evolution. It may, in fact, just be the starting point for something much bigger and more revolutionary – something that will impact the games and tech industries in a way even more profound than the introduction of smartphones.
What is the point of E3? I ask not in a snarky tone, but one of genuine curiosity, tinged with concern. I’m simply not sure what exactly the show’s organizers, the ESA, think E3 is for any more. Over the years, what was once by far the largest date in the industry’s annual calendar has stuck out in various new directions as it sought to remain relevant, but it’s always ended up falling back to the path of least resistance – the familiar halls of the Los Angeles Convention Center, the habitual routine of allowing only those who can prove some industry affiliation to attend. For all that the show’s organizers regularly tout minor tweaks to the formula as earth-shattering innovation, E3 today is pretty much exactly the same beast as it was when I first attended 15 years ago – and by that point, the show’s format was already well-established.
There’s one major difference, though; E3 today is smaller. It now struggles to fill the convention center’s halls, and a while back ditched the Kentia Hall – which for years promised the discovery of unknown gems to anyone willing to sift through its morass of terrible ideas. Kentia refugees now fill gaps in the cavernous South Hall’s floor plan, elevated to sit alongside a roster of the industry’s greats that gets more meagre with each passing year. This year, attendees at E3 will find it hard not to notice a number of key absences. The loss of Konami’s once huge booth was inevitable given the company’s U-turn away from console publishing, but the decisions of EA and Activision to pull out of the show this year will be felt far more keenly.
Hence the question; what’s the point? Who, or what, is E3 actually meant to be for? It’s not for consumers, of course – they’re not allowed in, in theory, though the ESA has come up with various pointlessly convoluted ways of letting a handful of them in anyway. It’s for business, yet big players in the industry seem deeply dissatisfied with it. It’s not just EA and Activision, either; even the companies who are actually exhibiting on the show floor seem to have taken to viewing it as an addendum to the actually important part of the week, namely their live-broadcast press conferences. Once the realm only of platform holders, now every major publisher has their own – and if EA and Activision’s decision to go their own way entirely, leaving the E3 show floor, has no major negative consequences for them this year, you can be damned sure others will question the show’s cost-value next year.
The problem is that the world has changed and E3 has not. Once, it was the only truly global event on the calendar; back then, London had ECTS and Tokyo had TGS, but there was no question of them truly challenging E3′s dominance. The world was a very different place back then, though. It was a time before streaming high resolution video, a time before the Internet both made the world a much smaller place, and made the hyper-local all the more relevant. Today, E3 sits in a landscape of events most of which, bluntly, justify their existence far better than the ESA’s effort does. Huge local events in major markets around the world serve their audiences better than a remote event in LA; GamesCom in Germany and TGS in Tokyo remain the biggest of those, but there are also major events in other European, Asian and Latin American countries that balance serving the business community in their regions with putting on a huge show for local consumers.
In the United States, meanwhile, E3 finds itself assailed on two sides. The PAX events have become the region’s go-to consumer shows, and a flotilla of smaller shows cater well to specific business and social niches. GDC, meanwhile, has become the de facto place to do business and for the industry to engage in conversation and debate with itself. The margin in between those two for a “showcase show that’s not actually for consumers but sort-of lets some in and is a place for the industry to do business but also please spend a fortune on a gigantic impressive stand” is an increasingly narrow piece of ground to stand on, and E3 is quite distinctly losing its balance.
A big part of the reason for that is simply that E3 has an identity crisis. It wants to be a global show in the age of the local, in an age where “global” is accomplished by pointing a camera at a stage, not by flying people from around the world to sit in the audience. It wants to be a spectacle, and a place to do business, and ends up being dissatisfying at both; it wants to excite and intrigue consumers, but it doesn’t want to let them in. The half-measures attempted over the years to square these circles have done nothing to convince anyone that E3 knows how to stay relevant; slackening ties to allow more consumers into the show simply annoys people who are there for work, and annoys the huge audience of consumers who remain excluded. The proposed consumer showcase satellite event, too, will simply annoy companies who have to divide their attention, and annoy consumers who still feel like they’re not being let in to the “real thing”. Meanwhile the show itself feels more and more like the hole in the middle of a doughnut – all these huge conferences, showcases and events are arranged around E3′s dates, but people spend less and less time at the show proper, and with EA and Activision go two of the major reasons to do so. (It’s also hard not to note, though I can’t quantify it in figures, that more industry people each year seem to stay home and watch the conferences online rather than travelling to LA.)
The answer to E3′s problems has to be an update to its objectives; it has to be for the ESA to sit down with its membership (including those who have already effectively abandoned the show) and figure out what the point of the show is, and what it’s meant to accomplish. The E3 brand has enormous cachet and appeal among consumers; it’s hard to believe that there’s no demand for a massive showcase event at the LA Convention Center that actually threw its doors open to consumers, it’s simply a question of whether ESA members think that’s something they’d like to participate in. From a business perspective, I think they’d be mad not to; the week of E3, loaded with conferences and announcements, drives the industry’s most devoted fans wild, and getting a few hundred thousand of them to pass through a show floor on that week would be one of the most powerful drivers of early sentiment and word of mouth imaginable.
As for business; it’s not like there isn’t a tried, tested and long-standing model for combining business and consumer shows that doesn’t involve a half-baked compromise. Tons of shows around the world, in games and in other fields, open for a couple of trade days before throwing the doors open to consumers over the weekend. Other approaches may also be valid, but the point is that there’s a simple and much more satisfying answer than the daft, weak-kneed reforms the ESA has attempted (“let’s let exhibitors give show passes to a certain number of super-fan consumers” – really? Really?).
E3 week remains a big deal; E3 itself may be faltering and a bit unloved, but the week around it is pretty much the only truly global showcase the industry has created for itself. That week deserves to be served by a better core event, rather than inexorably moving towards being a ton of media events orbiting a show nobody can really be bothered with. The organizers at the ESA need to be brave, bold and aggressive with what they do with E3 in future – because just falling back on the comfortable old format is starting to show diminishing returns at an alarming rate.
R, designed specifically for statistical computing and other data analysis tasks, has become increasingly popular in recent years as both data volumes and interest in data science have exploded. IBM says that R is among the languages it used to develop its Watson natural language/machine learning platform.
Dinesh Nirmal, IBM vice president of development for next-generation analytics platform and big data solutions, will join the R Consortium board of directors.
“IBM is deeply invested in open-source software for computing applications like data science,” Nirmal said in a statement released by the Consortium. “And as a long-time member of The Linux Foundation, it’s a natural fit for us to extend our commitment to collaborative development by joining the R Consortium.”
Big Blue joins Microsoft and RStudio as Platinum members of the Consortium, a non-profit project under the Linux Foundation’s organizational umbrella. (Donations of at least $100,000 are required for Platinum sponsorship.) Google, Oracle and Hewlett-Packard are also among the technology companies that sponsor R Consortium, which aims to promote use of R, create infrastructure and best practices for the R community and support the annual useR conference.
The Consortium has awarded several grants to projects seen as useful to the R community, such as R-Hub, a planned service for developing and testing R packages, and Simple Features for R for easier geospatial analysis in R.
MediaTek’s R&D teams are working with European-based car vendors to develop the company’s automotive electronics and virtual reality (VR) offerings.
Digitimes claims that having developed SoCs for smartphones, mobile devices, and connected home appliances, MediaTek is stepping up development of chips solutions for auto electronics and VR applications.
MediaTek is focused on in-car entertainment systems, and will be using its partnership with China-based NavInfo, a digital mapping service provider to help out.
NavInfo will sell subsidiary AutoChips (Hefei) and will also form a strategic alliance in which MediaTek will make an investment of US$100 million.
MediaTek will be developing VR for handsets and will support Google’s Daydream VR platform.
Meanwhile the team is flat out improving its IC solutions for Internet of Things (IoT) and wearable device applications. It is pretty sure that this will become the third largest segment after mobile devices and connected home appliances such as digital TVs. In fact the only two areas that MediaTek does not appear interested in is server and augmented reality (AR) applications.
Not so long ago it was impossible to check up on your ex without getting a Farmville invite, but since then it seems that gaming has moved away from Facebook and onto mobile phones. Speak to the Facebook games team though, and they’ll tell you that Facebook is a bigger part of the gaming industry than ever.
“To answer the broad question of ‘Where is Facebook Games today?’ the right answer is today we’re everywhere. When I say we’re everywhere what I mean is we work with developers on just about any system that they’re on. They’re on mobile devices, PCs, desktops, Macs, whatever it’s going to be, consoles as well,” says director of global games partnerships Leo Olebe, a gaming veteran who’s worked in marketing for BioWare, Kabam, Zynga and more.
“We have a very strong and overall healthy gaming business. There’s a lot of people that are participating in the Facebook Games ecosystem as a whole and we’re just really passionate about making sure that people have the power to share the stuff that they love.”
He points particularly to Facebook’s recent work with Riot and League Of Legends and the simple ability to log into your PlayStation 4 with Facebook and share screenshots and video directly to your Facebook news feed.
League Of Legends saw 4 million players connect their League of Legends account to their Facebook accounts, which resulted in 15 million new friend connections.
“Yes, we have a really incredible and thriving developer and publisher community that’s on Facebook, people playing all sorts of games from Candy Crush to social casino games but then also participating through the rest of the ecosystem as well,” Olebe says.
Facebook also shared some stats with GamesIndustry.biz: over 550 million people play games that are connected with Facebook every month on desktop, mobile and console and more than 30 million people have connected their Facebook account to either PSN or Xbox Live. Of course, Facebook is also the owner of virtual reality pioneers, Oculus VR.
With Facebook Games Arcade, the company is looking at finding new ways for people to discover and access games when they’re using Facebook on desktops. The company pointed out that users currently can choose from over 500 games including Clash of Kings, Family Guy: The Quest for Stuff and Angry Birds Friends to name but a few.
On the development side, it says developers earned over $2.5 billion on Facebook’s web platform in 2015 and 15 per cent of time spent on Facebook.com is gaming.
“What we’ve done is we’ve become even more sophisticated about how to really think about the 1.6 billion people that are on Facebook. What I mean by more sophisticated is we’ve developed a whole suite of products that developers can use to really understand the people who are playing their games and loving their games. Whether that’s Facebook Login and friend finding, analytics, sharing products, a lot of people use our mobile app install ads to do user acquisition, [so] we have audience network tools,” explains Olebe.
“The most sophisticated publishers and developers out there truly understand that Facebook is a global platform”
“There’s no one thing that everybody has to use but there’s a lot of different things that are valuable to different publishers and different developers in different ways so we really wanted to adapt all our platform products to be flexible as their businesses change as well.”
Calvin Grunewald, engineering manager for games at Facebook elaborates:
“One of the goals from an engineering team perspective is that we want to let game developers build, grow and monetize their apps,” he says.
“It’s a really cool time to be a developer and it’s a really cool time to be working in the platform business just because you get to facilitate social connections on all of these platforms and developers are hungry for them.”
So with Facebook playing such a large role on console, PC and mobile what preconceptions do people still have about Facebook and games that are just downright wrong?
“If anything I think it’s that people still have this idea that Facebook’s place in the global games industry and business is somehow limited to games that you play on the web,” says Olebe.
“The most sophisticated publishers and developers out there truly understand that Facebook is a global platform and assists not only with user acquisition but also heavily with sharing and engagement. We really operate everywhere that gamers are.
“There are misconceptions out there, but I think only because people have an old understanding of Facebook as social games on the web and haven’t spent as much time thinking about all the different avenues where we play.”
Software giant Microsoft Corp is selling about 1,500 of its patents to Chinese device maker Xiaomi, a rare departure for the U.S. company and part of what the two companies say is the start of a long-term partnership.
The deal will also include a patent cross-licensing arrangement and a commitment by Xiaomi to install copies of Microsoft software, including Office and Skype, on its phones and tablets.
Both companies declined to discuss financial terms of the deal.
“This is a very big collaboration agreement between the two companies,” Wang Xiang, senior vice president at Xiaomi, said by telephone ahead of the deal.
Analysts said Xiaomi’s ambitions to be a major player outside China were hampered by weak patent protection and a fear of a prolonged legal battle.
“This deal might just give them enough of a patent trove to move to Western markets,” said Sameer Singh, a UK-based analyst. “Their position in China has been under constant attack from even lower-end Android vendors, so moving overseas is now a necessity.”
Shipments of Xiaomi phones fell 9 percent year-on-year in China in the first quarter, according to Strategy Analytics, and its market share dipped to 12 percent from 13 percent, squeezed not only by Huawei and Samsung Electronics but also smaller contenders including Oppo and Vivo.
Wang said the acquisition of Microsoft patents, which included voice communications, multimedia and cloud computing, on top of some 3,700 patents the Chinese company filed last year, were “an important step forwards to support our expansion internationally.”
Xiaomi launched its first U.S. device earlier this month, a TV set-top box it developed in cooperation with Alphabet Inc’s Google, which owns the Android operating system it and most Xiaomi devices run on. Xiaomi has also launched a tablet which runs a version of Microsoft’s Windows operating system.
Jonathan Tinter, corporate vice president at Microsoft, said the company was keen to tap into Xiaomi’s young, affluent and educated users by having its products pre-installed on their devices. He declined to go into detail about the patent deals, but said the overall deal was something “we do only with a few strategic partners.”
Microsoft has cut licensing deals with many Android device makers over the years, but has had less luck with Chinese manufacturers.
Florian Mueller, a patents expert who consulted for Microsoft in the past, said it was rare for Microsoft to actually sell its patents, adding “it’s possible Microsoft found it easier to impose its Android patent tax on Xiaomi as part of a broader deal that also involved a transfer of patents.”
Atari has signed a deal with SIGFOX which provides dedicated communications for the Internet of Things (IoT). The cunning plan is to build a global partnership to develop a line of new connected devices based on Atari’s iconic brand.
The cooperation will bring together Atari’s brand and creative power with SIGFOX’s unique value proposition: connecting the physical world to the Internet through a simple, reliable, low-cost, energy-efficient solution. Currently operating in 18 countries and registering over 7 million devices in its network, SIGFOX is on its way to establishing one global, seamless network that provides ubiquitous connectivity for billions of objects.
The collaboration will cover a wide range of new Atari products, from the very simple to the highly sophisticated, providing customers with an easy way to know at any time where the devices are and what their status is.
The initial product line will include categories such as home, pets, lifestyle and safety. By connecting to SIGFOX’s network, the products will benefit from its competitive advantages: a long battery life and a simple solution that does not require local Internet connectivity and pairing. As soon as the battery is inserted in the object, it is immediately connected to the network.
SIGFOX CEO Ludovic Le Moan said:
“Atari, which has disruption rooted in their DNA, was quick to envision the transformative role that the Internet of Things can play in interactive entertainment,” said. “Our network bridges the virtual and physical worlds simply, reliably and inexpensively and this collaboration will launch a new dimension to gaming, while supporting features that are limited only by the imagination.”
Atari Fred Chesnais, Chief Executive Officer said that SIGFOX was doing well at transforming the way people are connecting to their objects in a simple and intuitive way.
“By partnering together and using SIGFOX’s dedicated IoT connectivity, we are going to create amazing products with our brand. We look forward to our collaboration with SIGFOX and releasing new products to the mass market on a global scale,” he said.
A recent Chinese-language Economic Daily News report claims that Mediatek wants the spun off business to drive VR sales. It all sounds pretty good but MediaTek have sort of denied the rerport.
Well we say sort of denied it. What it has told the Taiwan Stock Exchange that it was not the report’s source, which is not quite the same thing.The spin off could go ahead, but MediaTek is denying that it told the EDN its cunning plans. But then again the EDN did not name its source either. Without a denial from the company we are none the wiser.
MediaTek’s VR unit was set up between end-2015 and early-2016 to focus on the development of the company’s VR solutions for handsets, the EDN thought.