Everyone expects Apple to announce on Tuesday a new online movie store. People and analysts seem all to be very excited by the prospects of being able to see movies on the go. Everyone also expects Apple to release a “true” video iPod to enjoy these movies at a better resolution than current iPods. Everyone? Not everyone, I couldn’t care less and I am sure that once the fad is over, most will share my point of view.

I consider myself quite a heavy iPod user. I subscribe to many podcasts which I listen to mostly in my car. When I run out of podcasts I listen to my music library. Most of my podcasts are of the audio kind as I cannot (legally) drive while watching my iPod. I could imagine myself watching tv episodes of 24 or Prison Break on a portable device if instead of driving to the office I had to use the bus, but probably not content that exceeds in length the duration of my ride as this really destroys the experience. Since most national flights are relatively short (specially if you remove the periods where you are not allowed to use electronic devices), there aren’t many opportunities to actually see movies. As you can see, even with a larger screen and better battery life than current iPods, a true video iPod isn’t very appealing to me.

There is a scenario in which a video iPod could make a lot of sense. That would be in the car, for the kids in the back. This would allow parents to carry their collection of movies without having to be scared of scratched or broken disks.

The truth is that there already is a true video iPod. It is called the Sony PSP. This is in theory a great portable device that allows users to play games, listen to music and watch movies on a decent screen. However, the device is failing miserably to take the market by storm in any of these categories. I imagine that those who expect the video iPod to be successful think that Apple may be able to develop a better user interface than Sony to make it more attractive. I disagree. I believe that the failure of the PSP has nothing to do with usability or design. We simply do not have enough time to watch movies on the go.

Watching a movie requires a complete immersion for two hours (or more). This is something that I do less and less because all of the alternative entertainment options (sports, family, internet, etc.) that compete for my limited spare time. The same applies to shorter video content. Even though I enjoy Screen Cast Online as well as Leo Laporte’s Mac break I have much more trouble finding time to watch vodcast episodes than their audio counterparts.

When I choose to see a movie it is usually at home, on a big screen or at the movie theatre, certainly not on a the small screen of a portable device. So, is that future Apple movie store useless to me? Not really. It could save me a trip to Blockbuster or give me access to an immensely large catalog of movies. For example, one of my favorite movies, “The Quiet Man” featuring the late John Wayne is not something that I am sure to get at my local video store (note for the younger, I am not that old, the movie was already old when I first saw it). However, if I decided to buy it, it would need to have at least the same quality I get from a DVD, so that I could enjoy it on my TV, otherwise it would just be useless to me.

Does that mean that I wouldn’t buy a larger screen iPod? Probably not. However it would have to offer additional features. After all, the reason why I bought my iPod with video in the first place was the brighter color screen that allowed me to see the album cover art as well as my contacts with greater detail.

I was talking to a friend about the WWDC experience, trying to convey the excitement that such an event brings to Mac programmers. At some point he asked me, so what did you learn? I started talking about how nice it was to be able to ask questions to Apple engineers who were able to explain some of the concepts that I needed to understand in order to complete my Professional Crossword Designer project.

That is nice, he said, but what about the courses? That is when it stroke me. I didn’t really care about the formal training. I attended WWDC mainly to understand the direction Apple was setting for Leopard and to meet other Mac developers (as there aren’t many others where I live). My friend wanted to know what I had learned in a traditional sense, but the world has changed. I do not know in detail the new APIs, just the general picture. If I do need to get into the details I know the information will be available to me on the Internet. I do not have the luxury of infinite spare time to learn something that I am not sure I will ever need. The problem is that in general we do not know what we will need to know a year from now, let alone in five or ten years. That is why the traditional model is crumbling.

Universities are the best example of this traditional model. Students spend four years or more learning material that should prepare them in theory for a life long career. That was useful until a couple of decades ago, but in most cases, it is becoming less and less useful in this changing world.

This doesn’t mean that we should abandon our goal to give students a general basic education that will help them understand the world we live in. Everyone should have a solid understanding of mathematics, physics, biology, economics, politics, history, geography, literature and philosophy. We cannot expect children to learn voluntarily on their own. However, at college levels it is a quite different and I am quite sure that higher education will suffer dramatic changes over the next decades. E-learning is progressing rapidly and I would expect that more and more careers will rely heavily on this kind of tools to reduce the cost of education. In such a context, tutors are likely to play an increasingly important role as students will need help sorting out among the increasing levels of educational material available, while teachers should see their importance diminishing.

For me, this new model is exciting and opens lots of new possibilities. After all, I always try to stay current, listening to podcasts on all kinks of different topics while in my car. However, I see some inhibitors to the widespread adoption of this new model. The main one is lack of interest or curiosity. Too many students only learn because they are told to do so and for the fear of exams. Without supervision they would probably do something else that provides instant gratification (partying comes to mind).

I think that part of the problem is our society which judges people on many scales but rarely true accomplishments. However, while society is important, we cannot expect others to define what is important or not for ourselves. We are the ones who must strive to become better in each aspect of our live day after day.

Yesterday I flew to Chihuahua (Northern Mexico) to participate in a roundtable about databases with Oracle and Microsoft representatives. The plane was slightly late and despite the best efforts of the organizers who got us (the Oracle Architect and myself) in a police car that raced us to the Convention Center we arrived a couple of minutes late. Unfortunately, the organizers, in order to stick to the schedule, had decided to start without us and replace us with with salespersons from our respective companies that were at hand on the exhibit floor.

Too bad because I was really looking forward to dicuss the subject of the future of databases. With three sales representatives on stage (MS had sent a Marketing Manager to talk about the matter) the conversation rapidly moved to mundane subjects such as price, support plans and training.

The truth is that such a discussion is really needed. Databases have gone from being the stars of the client/server era to become a commodity (at least in the eyes of many of my customers) in the Internet age. This doesn’t make any sense.

When we talk about SOA, the databases are almost a second thought. That is because in most cases the database never connects directly to the ESB. Instead, the data is exposed through services, normally hosted on an application server. This may change as people start talking about Event Driven Architecture. EDA is complementary to SOA as both rely on the use of an ESB and therefore are not mutually exclusive.

In a SOA environment, the ultimate goal is to allow enterprises to implement BPM (Busines Process Management). In this scenario, the business processes run outside the applications in a process engine that coordinates the enterprise services. The users interact with the processes, and processes, in general do start only in response to a user request.

With EDA, the IT community recognizes the limitations of some of these premises. We must acknowledge that in some cases, processes will have to start automatically in response to external signals coming from different types of systems ranging from SCADA devices to databases. Databases should be able to communicate events to the ESB. These event are the normal evolution of triggers. Today advanced databases can easily send events from a Java based trigger using JMS. However, I think that we need to move to a higher level of integration, such as the MQ datablade for Informix databases which allows to post MQ messages through a standard SQL call.

When we talk about modern architectures, such as SOA or EDA, XML and security are very important topics. Should we privilege XML storage and retrieval speed (as favoured by Oracle in its current database release) or XML processing speed (which IBM has achieved in its DB2 v.9 release). In most cases the later is far more important, but most of the general public does not understand the implications this has on application performance. Database security is changing very quickly too. We used to think of this topic as a totally separated from application security. Today we are moving to a single point of authentication using LDAP and databases have to be part of this new infrastructure.

The conclusion is databases are evolving fast to adapt to a quickly changing environment. Most programmers and DBAs seem however to have failed to keep up wih the changes. That is too bad because databases are at the cornerstone of any advanced IT infrastructure.

Last week Apple announced that Google CEO Eric Schmidt would join it’s Board of Directors. This led to all kinds of rumors, ranging from a merger of both companies to preparing Job’s succession.

The fact is that this is a weird announcement. From my point of view, Google and Apple have very different views of where personal computing is heading. On one hand there is Google that, like most other tech companies is convinced that internet applications are the future and that the PC as we know it is doomed. On the other hand, Apple is fighting as hard as it can to make it’s computers relevant by releasing software they hope will maintain the end-users interest in using computers.

From my point of view, in many ways Google has more in common with Microsoft than with Apple, since it is clear to me that they share the same vision for the future of the PC. It is true that MS is updating Windows later next year with Vista but frankly, if they really viewed Windows as a strategic product, they would have upgraded it much sooner. Instead MS as spent millions working on .Net and its server products (SQL Server, Sharepoint, Biztalk, etc.).

The main difference between MS and Google is that Google is executing its vision far better than the Redmond based company simply because Google can move much quicker as they do not need to care about how their web strategy will negatively impact older product lines.

So, what do I expect from Eric Schmidt at Apple? I think that Apple Board meetings will be much more interesting than before. Don’t get me wrong, I am sure that I would enjoy talking to Al Gore, as he seems to be a very nice and interesting guy, but from a technological perspective, conversations between Jobs and Schmidt should create lots of sparkles as two completely different visions compete heads-on. This is exactly how innovation is produced.

I guess that everyone within the Mac community is quite excited with the upgraded Mac models. This is quite natural as the new models improve on already very competitive machines. It will be harder than ever to try to argue that Macs are more expensive than PCs.

However, I am still a little disappointed. I wanted Apple to release a new version of FrontRow in time for the holiday season to better compete with Windows Media Centre. I guess that will not happen this year. It is becoming clear that the September 12 event will be centered around the iPod and the launch of a new online video purchase/rental service. So, this year will not see the launch of a PVR from Apple, built around the Mac mini.

I guess that I shouldn’t be too surprised. There are still many competing standards for delivering high definition to the home. However, if I were Apple I would probably focus on delivering a great experience to cable customers, at least in the U.S. The problem is that Cablecard 2.0, is apparently not ready for prime time.

I hope that the new version of Front Row, to be included in Leopard, as Steve Jobs indicated during it’s WWDC keynote will include PVR functionality, otherwise I would be really disappointed. In the meantime I still expect that during the September 12 event there will be some kind of enhanced Airport express with video capabilities that will help bring the Mac closer to the living room television.