Apple has sued Google's phone manufacturer for infringing on 20 iPhone patents. Not so long ago, Apple and Google were a nice couple. Then, everything went to hell.

The romance began with the iPhone, even while we didn't know about it in 2006. Back then, Steve Jobs invited Google's CEO Eric Schmidt to his house, to sit at his table, and have vanilla-frosted cupcakes and tea together. It was instant love.

An Affair to Remember

They happily worked in the iPhone's 2007 launch. Google gave Apple their maps, their search, and their mail, and Apple gave Google the best spot in their new shiny device. Apple put YouTube into the iPhone and Google made YouTube to work nicely with QuickTime, moving all videos to the h.264 standard (so Apple could avoid that nasty Flash kid). Google even optimized their web apps for the iPhone, and Apple smiled.

And so they played in the new smartphone playground together and giggled at Yahoo and Microsoft and Adobe and everyone else. They were the coolest kids, they told everyone how happy they were, and everyone thought they were the perfect lovers.

The iPhone quickly became a huge success, positioning itself as the future of ubiquitous consumer-oriented computing. Just the kind that Google wants to control to deliver its highly targeted ads. Google noticed the success, and the relationship started to rupture. I can imagine the meeting between Eric, Sergey and Larry: "Whaaaa...? How did they...? Fuck, we need to get into this now." It was then that Google started to reveal its true face — and their plans for the little company they bought in 2005, helmed by the phone wiz Andy Rubin. They realized that they couldn't let Apple control the main window to the web. After all, it was their web, not Apple's.

Google presented Android, their own smartphone operating system made to imitate Apple's. Not only did they devote resources to create this, but they wanted to give it for free to every manufacturer and carrier. It didn't take much for Steve Jobs to realize that the romance was over. It was betrayal. Google was his new Microsoft. The real nemesis that could build a new dominant "Windows", and turn his early success with the iPhone into the new Mac underdog.

That was when all went to hell.

Escalating Conflict

It wasn't an open war. At the beginning, it all happened behind curtains, like when Apple allegedly stopped multitouch on Android and Google complied, realizing that they might otherwise be stepping into a patent minefield. Like the one the just got into now, with HTC as the proxy.

Steve Jobs couldn't tie his tongue, however. Back in January 2008, he was already criticizing Google and Android, pointing out that it wasn't going to be good for anyone. It was the first knife shining in the open, but it wasn't the last one.

After that, executives at Apple have been pretty clear about what they think about Google, like when Tim Cook said that Google was still trying to catch up with the first iPhone or Jobs gave his blunt-as-bricks opinion on Google's "Don't Be Evil" mantra. "It's bullshit," he said, a sentiment now shared by many.

It almost feels like this is something personal for Steve Jobs, as if he believed that a fake-smiled Eric Schmidt sat at the Apple's board, eating his food and drinking his wine, while plotting to kidnap Apple's baby since the very beginning. It seems the feeling is mutual: Schmidt delivered his own snide against Jobs and his new baby recently, pooping on the iPad as nothing more than a big phone.

Knowing how things developed, it's surprising that Schmidt stayed on Apple's board for so long. He resigned on August 2009, just as the war started to go open, first with Google grabbing mobile advertising company AdMob from Apple's hands (which forced Apple to buy Quattro Wireless). Then with Apple pissing on Google's parade by stealing Lala, the music streaming service that Larry and Sergei wanted to have.

The love affair was definitely over, and the bitter separation started. Like gangrene, the hate started to spread to every aspect in the relations between the two companies. According to insiders, negotiating the terms for maps in the new iPhone OS and the iPad was a fierce battle, to the point in which Apple went and bought their own charting company at one point. Who knows if that move was part of their poker hand—like the rumors about Apple replacing Google search with Bing—or an actual desire to get fully independent from Google.

The War for the Future of Computing

The true war, however, has started today, with the lawsuit against HTC. It names their Windows phones, but that's just a distracting maneuver. The core example in the lawsuit is Android, and that's where the real attack is. And by going against HTC, the weakest link in the chain, Apple is not only attacking Google. It's also giving a warning to every manufacturer out there: If you try to pull a Nexus Two for them, we will launch our missiles against you. Motorola—who confirmed they are working with Google—could be the next one in the list.

Jobs clearly knows that they are playing for the domination of the future of computing, the Next Big Thing. And he doesn't want this one to end like the Macintosh-Windows War. This time he has a huge lead, and he has the deep pockets to fight for it, whether that means new product development, strategic acquisitions or all-out legal battles. In the most recent Apple shareholder meeting, he clearly said this: They will use their huge mountain of cash to do everything necessary, every "bold move" needed to keep their lead, and have the whole enchilada for themselves.

There's no doubt that Jobs will use every single of Apple's 40 billion dollars to trump Google's plans, and keep their massive market share in the mobile device and applications world. But for that he will need a strong cloud structure and to get deep into the social aspect of the web. Of the latter, they got nothing. On the former, MobileMe is still a half-baked solution, and iWork.com beta has failed to gain any real traction. Maybe Apple's traditional enemy—Microsoft—would be able to help there. And maybe getting together with Facebook would slap Google where it hurts more.

On the other side, Google has the lead in the cloud, except for their failed social efforts, which are the target of jokes and extreme criticism. At the same time, while technically good, Android has failed to match the momentum of the iPhone. Android's app marketplace is still tiny compared to the App Store—and low quality too, by comparison. Apple has an easier time wooing app developers at this point, and that is a big advantage.

Overall, it seems like the two ex-lovers are in a technical tie, and are getting dirtier and bloodier by the day. Sometimes, love ends up like this.

Bill Bunten is the mayor Google, Kansas—formerly known as Topeka, Kansas. He signed a proclamation temporarily renaming the city in an effort to convince Google to make Topeka a test site for a gigabit fiber Internet connection.

According to Bunten, he hopes that changing the city's name for the entire month of March "would set Topeka apart from other cities vying for Google's attention, which include Grand Rapids, Mich., and Baton Rouge, La."

Ah well, do whatever it takes, Bunten. It's not like this is Topeka's first peculiar name change, anyway. In 1998, the city was renamed "to "ToPikachu" to honor a nationwide kickoff of the Pokemon franchise. [CJ Online]

Oh, this weird box at the center top still baffles people. Is it where you search? Is it where you submit blackmail? What sort of comments go in there? Find out in this week's edition of Gizmodo's Tips Box.

Of course tips aren't the only thing you can submit through that box since it leads you to the wonderful land of tag pages, but let's focus on the hot-hot-hot tips that came in through it this week, shall we?

We got introduced to something oddly tasty looking called the BatterBlaster by mhsrebelguy06. (Warning; Some sound plays automatically on the linked site.) Speaking of mhsrebelguy06, he also taught us about how women are amazing firewalls.

We also got to see a neat infographic shared by dfp3050 that breaks down spending and religious beliefs.

Our dear otko decided to be funny and give us a $5 tip. (I haven't received a check yet, buddy!)

CrispyAardvark has found some rather neat Lego models by 15-year-old Sven Junga:

ochee_ found weird contraptions that made me want to hug all the world's children and promise them that I won't ever shove them into one of these torture devices disguised as freaky art:

Oh, and this week there were a ton of videos dropped into #tips. Here are a few amusing-yet-far-too-weird ones:

That's some of the craziness that we've sifted through this week, but we encourage you to add to it—both silly things and serious tips.

We're proud of our comment system and commenter community. In fact, many of our posts come from items submitted to our #tips box. Gizmodo's Tips Box is a regular feature to show the funny, scary, and freaky things we just couldn't post, but want to share.

Based on its name, I thought the iLuv Premium iMM178 Vibe Plus is an overpriced sex toy, but it turns out it's a rather clever iPod/iPhone-compatible alarm clock which shake-shake-shakes you awake. Just hope the headboard doesn't hit the wall.

The idea is that you shove that mouse-looking thing under your pillow and wait for your alarm to go off. When it does, everything will get a bit shaky while a speaker blares whatever sound or music you've selected. In theory, this should wake up even the deepest sleeper, but I'm more entertained about the thought that it could move beds enough to make your neighbors believe that you're having the most precisely timed sex ever. Every single morning.

iLuv Announces the Premium iMM178 Vibe Plus, A Dual Alarm Clock with Speaker Integrated Bed Shaker for iPhone & iPod Users

iLuv releases premium new Apple iPhone-certified version of bedside alarm clock that will shake the deepest of sleepers awake

PORT WASHINGTON, NY – (March 1, 2010) – iLuv Creative Technology, the leader in innovative solutions dedicated to developing unique accessories for Apple's iPhone and iPod announces the iMM178 Vibe Plus, the next generation model from their Shake & Awake alarm clock dock series originally launched last year with the iMM153 . This Apple iPhone-certified new improved version features a sleek and slim black body design with a bed shaker that includes a speaker and volume control. iPhone and iPod users now have ten ways to wake up to their favorite music and this dock provides a 7 day – 5 day – 2 day alarm option for waking at a set time everyday, weekdays only or weekends. The Vibe Plus will be available now for the suggested retail of $89.99 at http://www.i-luv.com and other retailers.

This Apple iPhone-certified alarm clock with a premium bed shaker for iPhone and iPod includes a multitude of features and functions.

Key Features:
• Bed shaker vibrates a bed or a pillow to wake up the heaviest of sleepers and includes a 3-level volume control
• Built-in speakers featuring jAura acoustic speaker technology allow you to hear your music with depth and clarity
• Dual Alarm function for 7-5-2 everyday, weekday or weekends wake options • Time-sync function that synchronizes time for your iPhone & iPod • Large easy to read digital display with 10 level LCD dimmer control • 2 Way volume control – from the main unit or from the shaker
• Integrated universal dock for your iPod plays and charges your iPhone and iPod
Digital Dual Alarm Clock Capabilities:
• Dual alarm clock function allows a couple to wake to separate alarms • 10-Way to wake up including to iPod, FM radio, buzzer, bed shaker, iPod + bed
shaker, FM radio + bed shaker, buzzer + bed shaker
Radio Functions:
• FM stereo • PLL digital tuning technology improves the radio signal clarity
• Programmable presets for 10 radio stations

*Compatible with iPhone 3GS, iPhone 3G, iPhone, iPod Touch 2nd generation, iPod Touch, iPod Nano 1st – 5th generation, iPod Classic, iPod with video, iPod 4th generation, iPod mini

[iLuv]

You can now feed your social media obsession even further by downloading a Facebook app onto your Zune HD. Heads up though, seems that you may need to update your Zune software first. [CrunchGear]

The mobile OS running on this old Toshiba TG01 looks like Windows Phone 7 and it mostly acts like Windows Phone 7. But in reality it's a clever user interface skin covering up Windows Mobile 6.5.

Put together by a fellow named LeSScro, this interface tweak can make older WinMo phones pretend that they can handle Windows Phone 7 and will hopefully be made available soon. [Pocket Now via Mobile Crunch]

A virtually unknown company called RTC23 claims that—with Marvel Entertainment's blessings—they've created "the ultimate comic fan's TV," complete with character-themed splash screens and clever little cosmetic touches. We could barely believe it, but Marvel confirmed that they approved.

RTC23 is offering 22, 32, 42 and 55-inch LCD and 40 and 46-inch LED HDTV versions of these comic character TVs and they all look great in that extra dorky way:

Prices range from $339 to $1989 and you can order now, but be careful. While Marvel Entertainment has responded to us to confirm that they did indeed officially license these televisions, we really don't know much about RTC23 or the quality of their products—just that they look pretty fun. [RTC23 via Action Figure Insider via Nerd Approved]

Bad news for weeknights! Scientists in Korea have figured out that when you oxygenate booze, it sobers you up faster and helps prevent hangovers the next day.

But it's not all good news: by oxygenating booze, you're putting, you know, oxygen in it. And I don't know about you, but I don't want a fizzy glass of Lagavulin.

Furthermore, while the O2-booze does reduce hangovers, it also cuts down on how long you're drunk for. And hell, what's the point of that? Sure, if you're 19 and don't know how to drink it's good news, but the acquisition and retention of the perfect buzz is an artform. This would destroy it.

But really, this seems like it'll be a pretty niche product. in Korea, a company called Sunyang Co is soon to sell oxygenated soju called O2 Lin. If you want soju that won't give you a hangover and has bubbles in it, there it is. But if you want good-old normal hooch that'll really punish you the next day if you go overboard? It isn't going anywhere. [Report via io9]

Artist Molly Dilworth doesn't want to waste time showing off her work in stuffy studios. Instead, she's taking her paintings to the rooftops, with vast pieces specifically designed to be viewed by Google Earth's satellites.

There was a similar (though a smidge more lowbrow) attempt at something similar a couple of years ago, when a Canadian student tried to start a global, Google Earth-inspired game of Where's Waldo. Dilworth's images, though, will range from abstract color swipes to a type of large-scale pointillism, where pictures snap into focus only when viewed from high in the air.

As Dilworth describes it:

My work is generally concerned with human perception of current conditions; the Paintings for Satellites are specifically concerned with the effects of the digital on our physical bodies. All my work begins a series of rules derived from existing conditions. For example, the color palette for the rooftop paintings is made from the discarded paint available on a given day; the physical surface of the roof determines the shape of the painting.

She's gotten a great head start; the only hiccup is that there's no telling how long it might take for Google Earth's satellites to capture the work. But it's heartening to know that someday all of the ridiculousness found on Google Street View might be balanced out by Google Earth masterpieces. [Molly Dilworth via Inhabitat]

And a party in my pants. I still have to find my pink unicorns, though. Till then, I will keep flipping this book, which makes a rainbow to appear floating in the air, without the aid of any funky pills.

It's still as wonderfully useless and pretty as when it was published in Japan, in 2007. [Utrecht]

This comic was so unabashedly nerdy that we were *forced* to post it. [College Humor and loldwell via theNextWeb]

A million fart app developers must've just started sobbing in hysterical fear as Apple decided to reject an app because it "contains minimal user functionality and will not be appropriate for the App Store."

The app in question, DuckPhone, was developed by Nick Bonatsakis of Atlantia Software and had one simple purpose: To make your phone quack like a duck. For whatever reason, Apple didn't think that was useful enough to an average user and wrote Nick this love letter:

"Dear Atlantia Software LLC,

We've reviewed your application DuckPhone and we have determined that this application contains minimal user functionality and will not be appropriate for the App Store.

If you would like to share it with friends and family, we recommend you review the Ad Hoc method on the Distribution tab of the iPhone Developer Portal for details on distributing this application among a small group of people of your choosing or if you believe that you can add additional user functionality to DuckPhone we encourage you to do so and resubmit it for review.

Sincerely,

iPhone App Review Team"

My guess is that whoever was stuck reviewing DuckPhone really hates Jersey Shore, but the bigger issue remains: Apple's now got yet another completely arbitrary reason to reject an app. [Crunch Gear]

The DVE Immersion room might well be the most impressive holographic telepresence setup for sharing 3D Powerpoint presentations ever (better than anything you could buy), but their promo video feels like it was produced by OCP in Robocop.

The idea, as you can see in the video, is that you're not trapped in a tube like traditional telepresence setups. As for technical specifications, what they're offering is a full 1080p 60fps camera and display system, with room for 8 people on each side of a call. But I really can't get over the video, which should only be aired after 2am on select cable channels. [DVE via TelepresenceOptions]

After Sony's warning, the PlayStation Network seems to be back online and fully operational, according to reader Larry Gallant. Updated

I wanted to let you guys know that the phat PS3s are now able to login to the Playstation network and the clocks are working. I was able to login at 6:28 PM eastern time in the Boston, MA USA area.

No official word from Sony yet, however, so proceed with caution.

Update: Multiple readers are reporting that things are fixed, and they now can use their PS3s normally.

Have you been able to connect to the network? Tell us in the comments. [Thanks Larry]

It's the bane of Web designers everywhere, and it makes most modern Websites look broken and horrible. So why are 20% of web surfers still using it?

Today was supposed to be a great day for the Web. As of March 1, 2010, Google will no longer support Microsoft's Internet Explorer 6 browser-a decade-old dinosaur engineered to navigate the Web as it existed in the year 2000. Why would this be cause for celebration? Because IE6 is barely capable of navigating the modern Web and a total nightmare to build sites, services and applications for.

But ten years after its release, it's still being used by an estimated 20% of surfers. And while Google's move is one in the right direction, I'm not breaking out the whiskey and noisemakers for IE6's funereal wake quite yet. Sadly, IE6 isn't going away for good anytime soon.

Those unfamiliar with the Internet Explorer 6 saga might be wondering what the big deal is. How could the life or death of one browser be so critical to the future of our increasingly Internet-based lives? When compared to browsers of today, IE6 is a standards-incompliant antique. It debuted during a dark, dark period in Web history; In the summer of 2001, Microsoft had soundly beaten Netscape into submission for a 90% lock on the browser market and was in the uniquely powerful position to decide which Web standards it would ignore, which it would integrate, which it would halfway adopt and which it would simply make up. And IE6 is the bastard child of this hubris. It doesn't behave like any other browser on the market because it doesn't interpret Cascading Style Sheets or JavaScript according to the universal standards set by organizations like the W3C. I've heard of developers spending anywhere between 20% and 50% of their time on a project making a site work in Internet Explorer 6. I know of many others who simply chop out advanced features, enhanced interactivity and slick design elements altogether, just so their work doesn't "break" in IE6.

Why do they bother? Because nearly a decade after it shipped with Windows XP, IE6 still commands a mind-blowing 20% market share for browsers, according to the most recent statistics compiled by NetMarketShare. That's more than double the shares of Chrome and Safari combined, and just shy of Firefox's 24% piece of the pie. And that's only Internet Explorer 6. Combined with its better-behaving but by no means perfect descendants, IE7 and IE8, Internet Explorer as a whole owns 62% of the browser market. Now, browser market share is not an inexact science and the numbers vary widely from site to site and country to country, but you get the picture.

The longevity of IE6 is the result of a perfect storm of unfortunate factors. First among them: Microsoft's IE division simply fell asleep. Having emerged the undisputed victor of the late '90s browser wars, Microsoft had virtually no competitors and so no incentive to fix any of IE6's bugs. It took Microsoft more than five years to release IE7, which was an improvement over IE6, but still a disappointment for Web designers and developers. Five years! In the five years between 2004 and 2009, Mozilla released three versions of Firefox (actually, 3.5 versions to be exact). Meanwhile, Chrome has gone through four iterations in just over a year. In those five years between IE6 and IE7, technological progress on the Web was severely hobbled to say the least. After all, who cares if Firefox can do something really cool if only a handful of users will ever see it?

But Internet Explorer 7 did eventually come out, and so did Internet Explorer 8, Firefox, Safari, Chrome and new versions of Opera. And yet, IE6 remains the second most popular browser in the world (behind IE8). What gives? The chief reason Internet Explorer 6 keeps hanging on is because people are using it at work or on work computers.

As anyone who's ever used a computer furnished by their employer can attest, IT departments are slow to make any changes that might disrupt the delicate balance of their electronic ecosystems. And they sure as hell aren't going to let you upgrade or install anything yourself.

Making matters worse, Internet Explorer 6 is deeply embedded in the infrastructures of countless corporations worldwide. Back when IE6 was the only game in town, businesses invested in Intranets and browser-based apps that functioned only in IE. Why bother with anything else? Five years later, of course, a lot of businesses learned the hard way that "IE-only" actually meant "IE6-only." Oops. Now, ask yourself how much interest corporations have in re-investing more capital to fix something that, in their eyes, isn't broken. The answer is: not much.

A recent article on Dell's IT Expert Voice blog cited another reason your company doesn't upgrade to IE8 or another browser: user control. Your bosses don't want you on Facebook and YouTube, and they know that the experience of visiting these sites with IE6 will be painful enough to limit your time on them. They effectively block you without coming off as overtly Orwellian. Win win.

Finally, there are the countless folks who simply don't know any better-a contingent I was reminded of by David Walsh, a developer for the Mootools Javascript framework (for which IE6 support remains a priority). "When it comes to Internet Explorer 6, developers ask, ‘God, why do people choose to stay with it?'" he says. "But, I like to remind them that users don't care and shouldn't have to care. The one example I give is my grandmother. She doesn't know what a browser is. She just knows that when she clicks the little blue ‘e' on her desktop she gets to see the Internet."

It's not just grannies, either. I was using the computer of a 30-something year-old friend recently and mentioned my surprise to see him still using IE6. He asked me why it even mattered.

If people aren't allowed to upgrade or have no idea that they need to, then does the Google announcement inch us any closer to an IE6-free Web today than we were yesterday? "It's an important first step that I'm quite happy about," Walsh says. "But, I don't think it would be wise for developers to say, ‘Well, Google is doing it so I'm going to do it too.' I foresee at least another year or two of having to support Internet Explorer 6."

I'm less optimistic than Walsh, and that's thanks mostly to Microsoft's pledge to support IE6 until April 8, 2014-the day it officially ends support for Windows XP, the OS it was bundled with. As much as it pains me, I have to give Microsoft a tiny bit of respect for doing this. Though the company wouldn't provide comment for this story, it pointed me to a blog post explaining the method behind this madness. "Dropping support for IE6 is not an option because we committed to supporting the IE included with Windows for the lifespan of the product. We keep our commitments. Many people expect what they originally got with their operating system to keep working whatever release cadence particular subsystems have." Microsoft is basically taking the exact opposite approach to upgrades that Apple takes, which is to upgrade quickly at the expense of its users (Snow Leopard on G5, anyone?).

For its own part, Microsoft would be happy to see you stop using IE6, too. In another blog post, the company says, "Think about what technology and the Internet were like in the year 2000 – and consider how they've evolved since then. In 2000, ‘phishing' was something that happened at the lake, not online. There was no social networking, no RSS feeds, and no real blogs. It was a different time – and people's browsing needs were different."

The post goes on to explicitly recommend moving off of IE6. The problem is, corporate IT departments won't do so until they absolutely must, which may be well after the April 2014 death knell sounds. If Microsoft was smart, it would actively help businesses upgrade their IE6-based systems to IE8 (and future versions). And they would do it for free.

Why? Because IE's very survival could be at stake. If Microsoft doesn't, then Google could certainly afford to offer similar support for companies to move their systems over to Chrome. Overnight, we could see Chrome's market share balloon to 30% and all versions of Internet Explorer shrink to below 40%.

Walsh points out that Explorer's market share is being further threatened by empowered Web developers and a more educated Web-going public. "There's this assumption that people are going to go straight from Internet Explorer 6 to Internet Explorer 7 or 8," he says. "But, the thing we have to realize is that browsers as a whole have become more popular. Five years ago, most people probably didn't know what a browser was, but more and more they're able to indentify them. And as Web sites drop IE6 support, developers are going to steer people toward the browsers they like. Firefox, Chrome and Safari are going to be pitched a lot more than IE and I think those browsers have a good chance at being the next step for people."

But IE6 is something many Web developers will have to tangle with for years to come. For any Web site considering following Google unto the breach, I ask you to remember a few things. First, Google.com isn't going to suddenly stop working for folks using IE6. By dropping support, Google is saying that future upgrades to sites and services like YouTube, Gmail and Google Docs will no longer prioritize IE6 compatibility. Second, let your user base determine your course of action. David Walsh's blog, for example, is targeted at professional Web designers and developers. "My Website is 1% IE6," he says. "So I don't really care about it." (Only 5% of PopSci users are on IE6). But, you can believe a site like the New York Times will care about IE6 until the bitter end. No matter what you do, consider this comment to one the above-mentioned Microsoft blog posts:

"I work for a large financial services company with 40,000+ employees. And yes, every desktop PC and laptop runs WinXP and IE6. More than 85% of all browsing is intranet. Basic news sites etc deliver the information without the frills. For our vendors who offer Web portals (eg home loan valuations, stationery suppliers etc) - we'll simply dump them if we can't access their sites after a ‘no-IE6 revamp.'"

So, there it is. Continue at your own risk. And in the meantime, IE6's celebratory funerals might be in haste.

Popular Science is your wormhole to the future. Reporting on what's new and what's next in science and technology, we deliver the future now.

Apart from a colossal tsunami, here's another effect of the 66.6 exajoules liberated by this weekend's earthquake in Chile: NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory says that days will now be shorter because the quake shifted Earth's axis by three inches.

The change—which can only be measured thanks to computer models—will result in days that are 1.26 microseconds shorter than before. That's 0.00000126 seconds shorter. There may have been more visible changes, like islands changing its position. One of them, Santa María, may have raised two meters after the shattering land move.

This is not the first time this has happened, as every single earthquake has an effect on the planet's axis. [Business Week]

MS Paint may be beloved but it's also the butt of plenty of jokes about art skill. Project Gustav is Microsoft Research's answer: A GPU-intense multitouch and Wacom-tablet-friendly natural painting program, giving artists a genuine old-school experience, in 3D.

Sure, there are geniuses—including possibly one or two on our staff—who can make masterpieces with Illustrator and Photoshop. But the logic of Gustav, named after Klimt and Courbet, is that the training required to get good at those apps limits artists trained in traditional physical media. What this does is re-create the analogy of real oils and pastels, not just in how they stream but in how the colors blend. In fact, to make a new color, you do what you'd do in the real world, blend your paints together. You can use pens on a Wacom, twisting flat brushes them to achieve swirls and calligraphic flourishes. But you can also reach up to draw on the multitouch screen, the little HP screen shown in the pic.

I am not much of a visual artist, but for a research project, this is a gorgeous execution of a very natural experience. I didn't want to pull away from my own hideous oil, so God knows what a budding Leonardo could do. Bye bye, MS Paint. It's been, uh, swell. [Project Gustav]

It's a common thing to see on TV: the cops get a dark, blurry image of a perp, and using the magic of computers, are able to zoom in and see his face. But now that might be actually possible.

The technique, called compressed sensing, won't work like those fake programs do on TV. And it's mostly meant for scientific purposes, like shortening MRI scan times by only scanning a small amount of data and then filling in the rest.

But how can you do all the number crunching that is required to find the sparsest image quickly? It would take way too long to analyze all the possible versions of the image. Candès and Tao, however, knew that the sparsest image is the one created with the fewest number of building blocks. And they knew they could use l1 minimization to find it and find it quickly.

To do that, the algorithm takes the incomplete image and starts trying to fill in the blank spaces with large blocks of color. If it sees a cluster of green pixels near one another, for instance, it might plunk down a big green rectangle that fills the space between them. If it sees a cluster of yellow pixels, it puts down a large yellow rectangle. In areas where different colors are interspersed, it puts down smaller and smaller rectangles or other shapes that fill the space between each color. It keeps doing that over and over. Eventually it ends up with an image made of the smallest possible combination of building blocks and whose 1 million pixels have all been filled in with colors.

That image isn't absolutely guaranteed to be the sparsest one or the exact image you were trying to reconstruct, but Candès and Tao have shown mathematically that the chance of its being wrong is infinitesimally small. It might still take a few hours of laptop time, but waiting an extra hour for the computer is preferable to shutting down a toddler's lungs for an extra minute.

So yeah, it's meant for scientists right now, but this is clearly the first step to us all being about to enhance, enhance, enhance our pictures automagically. And that is damned cool.

[Wired]

A disheartening chart from Ars Technica, if you're a Firefox booster: That gentle downward slope indicates Firefox might never reach 25 percent marketshare. Why? Because companies with money care about browsers now. Or, in a word: Chrome.

Chrome is the only browser that gained marketshare from January to February, bouncing .41 percent to 5.61 percent. Even the release of Firefox 3.6 in the last two months didn't help, with Firefox sliding .18 percent (second to IE's .6 percentage point drop, which you'd assume would be sending users to alternative browsers, like Firefox).

Here's one difference between Firefox and Chrome, in a nutshell: Banners on two of the biggest, most trusted websites on the internet. Chrome's by Google. It's fast! It's nice! Switch to it!

But you know what? It is faster and nicer than Firefox. The heyday of Firefox, when it was hands down the best was when nobody with money cared about browsers that worked, that made the internet a better place. So guys on a shoestring could out-innovate and slaughter the incumbent tyrant. Now companies with resources—Google—can iterate new versions and features just plain faster. Not to mention, advertise the crap out of its browser.

Part of me really hopes that Firefox does hit 25 percent, just as a symbolic "fuck you" to the old browser regime. But the other part me thinks Chrome might do it first, even if that's a ways away. [Ars]

Microsoft's Surface tables are sweet but they have two problems: They're huge pieces of furniture and they cost a lot. Turns out, they could solve both problems by turning the system upside down, using a portable camera/projector and any surface.

Surface tables are just cameras and projectors pointing upward at a tabletop of glass. Since both of those mechanisms have become totally portable, Microsoft Research conceived of a prototype that is, effectively, portable. The advantage, beyond mobility, is that the camera can read depth in free space, so it can do 3D activities, almost like a baby Natal.

Here, in this functional proof-of-concept, you can see a drums app, where both hand interaction and stick interaction are measured when your hands are between the camera and the projection. (On a regular Surface, you'd have to touch the screen to interact.)

In the explainer shot below, you can see a more real-world scenario, where you'd set your phone on a table at a restaurant and it projects pictures and documents out, so that you and others can interact with them. We're already seeing projectors built into phones and cameras, so it may just be a matter of time before this appears. Windows Phone 8 maybe? Microsoft, of course, isn't promising anything at this point. [Mobile Surface]