Blackmagic Computers

“We don’t know how to build a $500 computer that’s not a piece of junk.”

“Netbooks aren’t better at anything.”

Those two quotes are both from Apple CEOSteve Jobs. The first was during an earnings call in late 2008 when Jobs fielded a question about why Apple wasn’t cutting prices amid the rising success of netbooks. The second came on Wednesday as Jobs was unveiling the iPad.

Apple has made it clear all along that they had no plans to build a netbook. And true to their word, they haven’t. But that doesn’t mean that Apple didn’t feel there was a need for a device that resided in between a full laptop and a mobile phone — in fact, that’s squarely where Apple is positioning the iPad. With it, they feel that they’ve created a $500 (for the baseline version) device that is superior to every netbook out there.

Meanwhile, Google has decided to target the market in between the laptop and the mobile phone as well. But whereas Apple is anti-netbook, Google is very pro-netbook — they just want to make them better. That’s the reason behind Google’s Chrome OS, as Google clearly laid out during its unveiling event late last year.

And so yes, we once again have Google and Apple on a collision course.

Now, it remains to be seen if people who buy an iPad will do so instead of buying a netbook. At first, I’m not so sure that will be the case. But it stands to reason that eventually, this will happen. And as Jobs’ comments on stage on Wednesday made abundantly clear, that’s Apple’s idea too. In their eyes, you shouldn’t buy a cheap, underpowered PC, you should buy an iPad, their anti-netbook.

Google, which plans to release its first Chrome OS-based netbooks in time for the holiday season next year, can’t like that plan too much. They have promised that netbooks that run Chrome OS will be better than current netbooks because they’re dictating certain minimum requirements (such as big keyboards) to manufacturing partners. But Chrome OS netbooks won’t be able to match the sex appeal of the iPad’s multi-touch screen. However, what they can offer is a familiar experience (much more like a traditional laptop then an iPad), and that will be appealing to a lot of people.

And what’s interesting is that for either of the two to be massive hits, they both will need consumers to continue to feel comfortable moving away from traditional software applications such as Microsoft Office. But their plans to get consumers to do that are very different. Google wants everyone to move towards doing everything on their apps in the cloud. Apple, as they made clear with their overly-long iWork for iPad demo on Wednesday, wants everyone to move towards using iPhone OS-based apps.

And that’s why this battle coming at the end of this year will be interesting to watch. Both Apple and Google are very popular with consumers, but their offerings are very different — while aiming for the same market. And as two companies that were once as close as could be, it’s also fascinating to watch the tension and awkwardness as they now compete in an ever-growing number of areas.

If this market between laptops and smartphones proves big enough, perhaps the two frenemies can once again find a common ground and band together to defeat their common enemy: Microsoft. But the obvious strategy for this used to be that Google would attack Microsoft from the bottom with its Chrome OS netbooks, while Apple attacked from the top with their premium computers, leaving Microsoft squeezed in the middle. With the iPad now clearly aimed at netbooks thanks to its pricing and Apple’s positioning, everything is different.

The following guest post was written by Edo Segal (@edosegal).

Earlier last week, as the day was coming to an end and I was speaking with my 5 year old at bedtime we shared the highlights of our day. I started by telling him the company that created the iPhone is about to come out with . . . I paused—how do I describe it?—well, a “big iPhone” I said. About this big, I gestured holding my hands about 10 inches apart. “Wow, Amazing!” was his instant reaction as his eyes lit up. Even my 5-year-old knows that bigger is better, especially when it comes to tactile interfaces. In fact, the advantages are probably more obvious to his generation than it is to ours.

For this first generation born into a world of the iPhone, Wii and soon the Xbox’s Project Natal, the distance between the metaphor created by these devices and the reality of their interaction is constantly shrinking. My wife is currently doing her PhD research on the merits of tangible interfaces for young children in education and the data is telling. There is no doubt that there is great potential to enhance learning with tactile computing. Through that lens the “Bigger iPhone” is akin to a bigger yard to play in or a bigger room. This insight is telling. For these kids the iPhone’s primary function is by no means a phone. It is first and formost a gaming device, followed by a networked camera, followed by everything else. Through this lens one can see the importance of the iPad in the historical trajectory of our human-computer interaction. What’s lost in all the complaints about what the iPad is lacking (multitasking, camera, etc.) is that people need to view the iPad on more than its merits as a first-generation product. Rather, they need to understand it in context of the evolutionary arc of computing.

Don’t think about the iPad as just a computer. Its true potential lies in its potential as a communications device. Already, it functions as an electronic reader, helping to bring the world of books to computers. But there is video and audio too, with the potential for VoIP apps and even one day a camera for video messaging. The artificial walls that separate our notion of communications and computing are being broken. It is time for the dawning of communications apps. Think about it. It makes absolutely no sense that we have these parallel universes on our devices that are relics of technologies past. The notion of voice as one stack of technologies and the rest must perish. Communications, both audio and video, will be weaved into the fabric of the app space. For example, an API should allow developers to integrate Skype-like P2P communications into their apps opening a new world of utility.

Only a company like Apple can have this kind of leverage over the telcos and only in the very near future will they be able to bring about this change. This goes for the iPhone as well as the iPad. The two are joined at the hip through 140,000 shared apps. In their dash to fortify their lead against the hordes dressed in Google colors, Apple must use its window of opportunity to push the envelope on what one can do with a touchscreen computer, but not yet with an Android-powered device. They must learn from their OS wars with Microsoft. Google will continue to copy their every move as did Microsoft before it. Fueled by their advertising money printing presses, Google gives away what Apple attempts to sell. This means Apple must drill deeper into the telco stack. Think of visual voicemail as a simple prelude. But they will have to go much deeper, making the communication experience itself evolve. Video calling will be made a reality with iChat for iPhone OS, and not just one-to-one calling but conference calling. Many claim that video calling is just a gimick and that it has never really caught on despite being available decades in one form or another. To them I would argued that it has never been attempted by a company with product-design excellence like Apple and furthermore it has never been integrated into a vibrant app ecology with tens of thousands of developers applying their creativity.

By opening up the communications stack via the API in a holistic way and introducing video and P2P realtime data transport, Apple will open a new world of communications apps that will further blur the lines between computers and communications devices. Imagine Xbox Live-type experiences where a group of teenagers fire away while being on a group audio chat, calling Hertz to reserve a car while seeing the agent and using swipe gestures to choose your car, even playing REAL strip poker (see illustration).

Utilitarian business communications, social interaction and gaming will all evolve and co-mingle on the platform. The iPad doesn’t need anything other than a data connection to function as a phone as well as everything else.

Whether they like it or not, the telcos will be relegated to running efficient data pipes competing on price and service. The iPad will further blur the lines between device categories and contribute to the coming confusion. As I wrote in a prior post this will significantly impact the media world as well.

Here’s another prediction: the coming iPad and next iPhone will have a front-facing cameraand rest assured it will be put to good use. The lines between a device you put up to your face (a phone) and a next-gen communication device you speak at will continue to collapse. The fact you put it in your pocket or carry it around will also not define it as a “phone” anymore. In many ways the legacy technologies are coming full circle. You can be sure that when the inventors of the Internet sat down and brainstormed the topology of the network they used the metaphor of a phone number to explain the notion of it being a phone number of a computer. Now the phone number is the IP address of a person. It follows you in a nomadic form that is true to the human condition.

Extending this metaphor one can recognize another potential gap in the strengths of the forces aligning themselves against Apple. Namely, Facebook monopolizing the social graph. We carry with us on our “phones” our most intimate of social networks. Your contact list coupled with the frequency of communication you have with those people on your device makes for the most useful social graph of all. Without users needing to do anything they don’t do already, that social graph could be made extremely useful. Not a network of hundreds of people you didn’t want to say “No” to and friended despite your better judgement, but rather an intimate network of your real friends and family with a simple proximity threshold based on communication frequencies. Having someone’s nomadic IP (phone number) is an indication of a real relationship. Apple is in a position to capture that and control this namespace and add value to it. They already own Me.com and can build out that core MobileMe service to become the equivalent of a DNS service for telephone numbers by resolving them to peoples names. Think of it, a phone number is unique and is mapped to a person. It’s not so useless after all. With number portability people are holding on to these numbers with the same vigilance that some IT folks hold on to our static IPs.

What Apple should do is move Me.com to a freemium model ASAP and start amassing a high value social graph that will have increasing returns for the future of its platform. There is no reason for them to give up the addressable space of users to Facebook and Google when they own the point of origination and the best way to access consumers, their nomadic IPs. So there you have it: the path for Apple to combat the two other majors, who are all inching onto each others turf in more ways then one.

The winners, like with all such competitions (as long as no one wins), will be us. Welcome, iPad. Me and the kids are waiting.

Sometimes tips come in that seem too good to be true. Take today, for example. I got a tip that Bill Gates’ new site, The Gates Notes, was running on a Linux-powered server. This would be ironic since Gates is of course the founder of Microsoft, which is Linux’s biggest competitor in the server market. It would be the equivalent of catching Gates or CEO Steve Ballmer being caught using (and not just signing) a MacBook at a conference. So is it true?

A quick search on Netcraft shows thatthegatesreport.com sure enough looks to be running on the Linux OS. But wait. The results also say that web server is Microsoft-IIS/7.0. That doesn’t sound right, so what gives? Well, it turns out that because Gates is using Akamai to mirror his sites’ content in the event of massive traffic (or more specifically, something like a DDoS attack), this data is being filtered through there. Akamai uses Linux for its servers, so that’s what OS is being passed back to Netcraft. But at the same time, to make things more confusing, the Akamai servers are still passing back the correct server header for Gates’ site: Microsoft-IIS/7.0.

How do I know this? Because the same thing happened in 2003 when it was humorously, but erroneously reported that Microsoft was using Linux servers to run microsoft.com. In fact, the same thing was going on: Microsoft was routing its traffic through Akamai, which again, runs Linux boxes. Microsoft has since apparently changed to its own servers since then so that they now correctly return Windows Server 2003 as their OS. That is likely what The Gates Report is running on as well given the Microsoft-IIS/7.0 web servers.

So sadly, no nice bit of irony here, it would seem. But if you haven’t yet done so, take the opportunity to check out Gates’ site, it’s really well done and full of good information.

Let’s look back at the week that was in Microsoft news. Here were the top stories:

Windows 7 leads the way to record quarter for Microsoft: Sales of Windows 7 and a recovering economy helped Microsoft set a record second quarter with a 60 percent jump in profit, to $6.66 billion.

Microsoft releases slew of Windows 7 updates:Microsoft has released a few fixes for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2, including another stability and reliability update.

Microsoft: Office 2010 system requirements same as 2K7: If your current computer can run Office 2007, or if you just bought a new desktop/laptop, it can run Office 2010. If your computer is currently running Office 2003, you’ll have to check the requirements to be sure it can run Office 2010.

First build of “next-generation” Windows Home Server leaks: Windows Home Server codename Vail (also referred to as WHS version 2) has been leaked, and the details are juicy.

Zune 4.2 update points to Zune phone, European support: The newly released Zune PC software 4.2.202.0 has support for phones as well as new localizations. Ars takes a look at what this could mean.

Bing rings 70% search rise for Microsoft sites: Microsoft sites saw a solid 70 percent gain in searches throughout 2009 thanks to the successful launch of Bing, but it still remained in fourth place.

One day after latest fix, Microsoft investigates new IE flaw: Microsoft is investigating a new set of vulnerabilities in Internet Explorer, disclosed to the company one day after the sofware giant issued an out-of-band security bulletin for its browser.

Windows Mobile devs to Microsoft: where’s our money?: Some Windows Mobile developers who have sold apps on the Windows Marketplace for Mobile have yet to see a dime from Microsoft.

Could Microsoft have fixed “Google hack” prior to attacks?: Microsoft has admitted that it was aware of the flaw in Internet Explorer a few months before it was used against the 33 companies in the recent Chinese attacks. One security researcher believes that a faster patch turnaround may have prevented the particular attacks Google and others saw.

You can follow Microsoft news at

Do we even need to summarize what this week’s top Apple news was all about? Aside from iPad mania, Apple also announced a record fiscal quarter and the Ars staff opined on what we want out of iPhone OS 4.0 and more. Read on for the good stuff.

Apple announces the iPad: Apple CEO Steve Jobs took the stage today in San Francisco to announce the iPad, a cross between an iPhone and a Macbook that aims to change the way we use the Web and consume digital media. Details inside.

Hands-on, first impressions, and Photo gallery of Apple iPad: We blogged the live event and we’ve put our hands all over the new iPad. Photos of the event and the device within.

Insanely great? Ars reacts to the Apple iPad: The Ars crew weighs in on the iPad announcement with a mix of quick takes and more extensive thoughts. Read on to see what John Siracusa, Eric Bangeman, Jon Stokes, and other Ars editors think of Apple’s latest.

12 things we want to see in iPhone OS 4.0: It’s no understatement to say that the iPhone has radically altered the smartphone market since its introduction. That doesn’t mean there isn’t room for significant improvement, however. Here’s our list of things Apple can—and should—fix in the next version of the iPhone OS.

Why Amazon won’t launch its own tablet, but will use Apple’s: The era of the Kindle is over, and Amazon knows it. Amazon isn’t abandoning the e-reader market just yet, but the company is taking steps to bring its Kindle Store to everything with a screen, including Apple’s tablet. The Kindle will stay fresh via software updates, but don’t look for more Amazon-branded hardware.

Rage against the Mail machine: the genesis of Letters: Inspired by a call for an open source e-mail client geared towards power users, independent Mac developers are rallying around the cause. Ars spoke with NetNewsWire’s Brent Simmons and elected project leader John Gruber to get an idea of the proposed application’s focus.

First look: Google Voice’s improved Web app for iPhone: Google is still stuck in iPhone no-man’s-land when it comes to a native Google Voice app, so it made improvements to its mobile Web offerings instead. Now, iPhone and webOS users can enjoy many of Google Voice’s features from the browser, and we liked what we saw.

Internal Apple town hall expected to discuss iPad: Ars has learned that an employee town hall has been called for Thursday. It’s expected that Steve and perhaps other executives will address the company about the newly released iPad.

And because we know you guys loved the liveblogs (they were the top traffic items of the week!), here are the two we did last week that you can play back to your heart’s content:

Ars liveblog of Apple Q1 2010 earnings call: Ars liveblogged Apple’s Q1 2010 earnings conference call. It was yet another record quarter and there were plenty of allusions to the upcoming event, where we were promised joy and excitement.

Liveblog: Apple’s “our newest creation” event: The event we had all been waiting for! Ars liveblogged the event (as best we could, that is) where every detail of the new iPad was demoed in detail.

Have a great (and warm) weekend, everyone!

Good news came today for iPhone users who enjoy unlimited data plans, but often find themselves running low on minutes. According to two different developer accounts, Apple has lifted the ban on transmitting voice over IP traffic across the AT&T 3G network.

According to a press release published by VoIP company iCall (hat tip to Engadget), Apple’s release of the updated iPhone developer SDK made it possible for iCall to enable VoIP over 3G. The release of the 3.2 SDK yesterday was iPad only, though some expect this functionality to spill over into the iPhone. fring, makers of the another VoIP iPhone application, has confirmed that the restriction has been lifted. It, too, has an updated application (hat tip to Slashdot) available for download that makes use of the AT&T 3G network.

You may remember back in October when AT&T changed its stance regarding iPhone VoIP traffic on its network. This, of course, was after the FCC began an investigation into Google Voice rejections in early August. There are currently two developers with updated VoIP applications that we are aware of, but it seems likely that more will follow in the weeks to come.

What is peculiar about this situation is the wording in iCall’s press release stating that an updated SDK was responsible for the change. It seems more likely that Apple simply changed the wording of some of its developer agreements, making it kosher for developers to make the changes. However, if that’s all it took, why did Apple wait so long before opening up the floodgates?

The Electronic Frontier Foundation can’t believe it: the FCC’s network neutrality draft rules, if adopted in their current form, might give Comcast permission to flat-out block BitTorrent—precisely the scenario that led to the rules being drafted.

It’s a shocking claim, if true. Could FCC Chair Julius Genachowski’s big push for network neutrality actually authorize the very conduct it was (ostensibly) drafted to prevent, indiscriminate blocking of the bluntest kind?

A massive loophole?

The EFF is concerned about a particular pair of clauses in the current draft rules (PDF) for network neutrality. Those clauses impose no obligation on ISPs to permit “the transfer of unlawful content” or the “unlawful transfer of content.” In other words, ISPs don’t have to be “neutral” about illegal content, and those trafficking in it can’t complain to the FCC is their content is slowed, blocked, throttled, folded, spindled, or mutilated.

If there was any doubt about this, another section of the draft rules make it clear: “Furthermore, we have no intention of protecting unlawful activities in these rules.”

Fred von Lohmann, an EFF copyright lawyer, sees danger here. “That means that so long as your ISP claims that it’s trying to prevent copyright infringement, it’s exempted from the net neutrality principles and can interfere with your ability to access lawful content, use lawful devices, run lawful applications, or access lawful services,” he said last week.

Today, the EFF ramped up the rhetoric, saying that the rules have “a loophole that would theoretically permit Comcast to block BitTorrent just like it did in 2007 — simply by claiming that it was ‘reasonable network management’ intended to ‘prevent the unlawful transfer of content.’”

But it’s important to remember that the rule isn’t new. The FCC’s Internet policy statement (PDF), drafted back in 2005 by a very different FCC, set out four “Internet freedoms.” The first said that “consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice.” The policy statement never provided protection for unlawful content.

It was this policy statement that was regularly cited in the Comcast case, when the ISP was accused of interfering with BitTorrent traffic, regardless of the content being transferred. The company received a wet-towel-snap-to-the-backside from the FCC for its actions.

The other key point is that the new draft rules do not craft an exception to net neutrality for ISPs who are “trying” to stop unlawful content transmission; the exception only applies to actual transfers of unlawful material. Under the EFF’s reading of these provisions, an ISP could simply throttle all Web streaming video traffic on the grounds that some of it is unlawful. An ISP could block access to BitTorrent. Particular Web sites like The Pirate Bay could simply be blocked wholesale. Services like Rapidshare could be axed on the same ground. Access to Usenet could be curtailed. In essence, anything could be blocked so long as ISPs could show they were “trying” to stop unlawful content.

Fortunately, this isn’t what the draft rules say; the exception only applies to content that is in fact unlawful. The flip side of this is a positive statement: “The nondiscrimination principle would prohibit broadband Internet access service providers from favoring or disfavoring lawful content, applications, or services accessed by their subscribers.” That’s pretty clear. Any ISP that attempts to do something like block BitTorrent outright would quickly block “lawful content” and would run afoul of the new nondiscrimination principle.

The “reasonable” trump card

But von Lohmann’s a sharp lawyer, and he’s not crazy. So what is he talking about? What appears to worry him is the fact that the exceptions both exist under the broader heading of “network management.” And “network management” is defined as “reasonable practices employed by a provider of broadband Internet access service.” Thus the worry—could an ISP get away with claiming that some particular block is “reasonable”? What if 70 percent of the content blocked was unlawful—would that be “reasonable”? What about 80 percent? 90? 95?

Future administrations might well agree that throttling a P2P protocol is reasonable, given that some high percentage of its content is unlawful. And you can bet that groups like RIAA and MPAA will try to make this happen.

The draft rules do address this scenario, though. The FCC says that “it appears reasonable for a broadband Internet access service provider to refuse to transmit copyrighted material if the transfer of that material would violate applicable laws.” But it adds that “such a rule would be consistent with the Comcast Network Management Practices Order, in which the Commission stated that ‘providers, consistent with federal policy, may block… transmissions that violate copyright law.’”

In other words, this isn’t quite a free for all in which the rules on being “reasonable” could be twisted to justify any practice. The FCC provides explicit guidance on dealing with copyrighted works, and that guidance says clearly that ISPs cannot block an entire protocol like BitTorrent (this was the Comcast order being referenced) as they seek to stop the unlawful transfer of copyrighted works.

The rulemaking on net neutrality is ongoing, and the FCC wasn’t willing to comment officially on interpretations of the draft rules. However, FCC sources did make clear to Ars that, in their view, the draft rules would not lead to the EFF’s nightmare scenario. It is important to note that the FCC is conducting its rulemaking in order to learn about potential problems with its ideas, and the language of the rules may still be tweaked significantly.

What is crystal clear is that the draft rules do allow targeted ISP blocking of illegal content on P2P networks, assuming that the particular method of identifying such traffic passes legal muster (i.e., isn’t classed as “wiretapping,” which is a potential pitfall of deep packet inspection methods). As footnote 230 notes, “We also propose that broadband Internet access service providers may take action to counter unwanted or harmful traffic such as spam and malware, may decline to carry unlawful traffic, or may decline to carry traffic if the transfer of the content is prohibited by law, including copyright law.”

Apple introduced its newest product on Wednesday—the iPad—suggesting that it fits in a space between an smartphone and a laptop. Both of those products typically have an integrated camera, so many folks were left scratching their heads when the iPad had none. Evidence buried within the iPad SDK suggests that Apple was ready to include one, but we’re wondering if its omission even matters to most consumers. Our feeling is that, despite the complaints, that lack of a camera won’t affect the iPad’s popularity or usability.

Screenshots of the Contacts application running in the iPad Simulator (part of the developer tools Apple released yesterday) reveal that Apple included a full interface to take a photo to add to new or existing contacts. If a contact doesn’t have a photo, you can click the blank space to add one. The user is then presented with the option to “Choose Existing Photo” or to “Take Photo.” Choosing “Take Photo” brings a pop-over to preview and take a picture. The apparent completeness of the feature suggests that Apple was prepared for the iPad to include camera hardware—if not in the current iteration, then perhaps in a future one.

However, does the iPad really need a camera? The iPhone has a camera capable of decent still shots and fair-to-middling video. It’s also a pocket-sized device comparable in size to many digital cameras—it’s size and ergonomics are suited to using it as a camera. The iPad, on the other hand, is 7.5 x 9.5 inches, which is easily bigger than most digital SLR cameras. The 9.7-inch screen would be great for framing (almost like using an 8×10 view camera!), but the device itself doesn’t seem like it would be very good for taking pictures.

Still, MacBooks have a built-in iSight, handy for videoconferencing via iChat or Skype, or taking gratuitous Facebook profile pictures. Surely such functionality would come in handy on the iPad? If you think about it, though, a webcam sitting in your lap and pointed up at your chin isn’t the most flattering angle, and holding it upright for an extended period doesn’t seem like it would be very comfortable either. We know there are some people who use video chats for keeping in touch with far-flung family, but the impression we got from a lot of folks is that the novelty of a video iChat wears off after only a couple sessions.

The iPod touch—another small, handheld Apple device—also got left out of the camera club with the most recent hardware update. Even without a camera, though, Apple recorded a 55 percent year-over-year growth in iPod touch sales last quarter. An integrated camera may have boosted that number a bit further, but the lack of camera doesn’t seem to be hurting the iPod touch by much.

iPhone OS may be ready for a camera-equipped iPad in the future, if Apple ever decides to include one. But we don’t feel the lack of camera will have any significant negative impact on the current-generation iPad’s sales.

At the close of trading Thursday, Microsoft announced the results for its second quarter of fiscal year 2010, which ended December 31, 2009. Revenue of $19.02 billion, a 14 percent increase from the same period of the prior year, set a new a record for the company. The three other financial measures—operating income ($8.51 billion), net income ($6.66 billion), and earnings per share ($0.74)—all were up year-over-year, 43 percent, 60 percent, and 57 percent, respectively.

So what is Microsoft’s explanation for the positive growth across the board? Its latest client operating system. “Exceptional demand for Windows 7 led to the positive top-line growth for the company,” said Peter Klein, chief financial officer at Microsoft. Furthermore, the recession hit the holiday quarter pretty badly in 2008, and while Redmond could not avoid it, its reaction in the form of various cuts is now paying off. “Our continuing commitment to managing costs allowed us to drive earnings performance ahead of the revenue growth.”

Microsoft revealed that it had sold over 60 million Windows 7 licenses through the second quarter (which would explain the huge growth we’re seeing in market share numbers). This not only made it a record quarter for Windows units in general, but it makes Windows 7 the fastest selling operating system in history.

When discussing the results from two quarters ago, Microsoft said it would defer some $275 million of revenue from prepaid upgrades to Windows 7. Microsoft actually ended up deferring $1.71 billion in revenue, which is about $0.14 of diluted earnings per share, relating to the Windows 7 Upgrade Option Program and presales of Windows 7 to OEMs and retailers before general availability. Taking that number into consideration, the revenue would actually total $17.31 billion, or about $0.60 per share.

Microsoft will be discussing second quarter results and the company’s business outlook on a conference call and webcast, which we are liveblogging.

Gamers weren’t happy with the news that Bioshock 2 would launch with SecuROM, and limit the number of times you would be able to install the game on different systems. 2K Games has heard your complaints, and the company has removed the SecuROM activation limits, and assures you that now you just have to worry about Games for Windows Live activation limits.

The official site has the news. “There will be no SecuROM install limits for either the retail or digital editions ofBioShock 2, and SecuROM will be used only to verify the game’s executable and check the date. Beyond that, we are only using standard Games for Windows Live non-SSA guidelines, which, per Microsoft, comes with 15 activations (after that, you can reset them with a call to Microsoft).”

This is, apparently, what people asked for when contacting the company. “Many of you have used Batman: Arkham Asylum as an example to me, which uses the exact same Games for Windows Live guidelines as us as well as SecuROM on retail discs, and now our SecuROM is less restrictive on Steam.”

So instead of a dude named SecuROM punching you in the gut, a dude named Games for Windows Live is going to hit you. Feel better? Some people like the ability to earn Achievement Points while playing games, but for others, Games for Windows Live is just one more damn thing to have to log into before playing your games. The 360 and PS3 versions of the game are starting to look a little more attractive.