Speaker 1: Get in touch with technology with tech Stuff from how Stuff,
Speaker 1: What'stop Coming? Hello again everyone, and welcome to tech Stuff.
Speaker 1: My name is Chris Polette and I am an editor
Speaker 1: of how Stuff works dot Com. Sitting across from me
Speaker 1: as usual because we're actually splitting this episode into two parts,
Speaker 1: is senior writer Jonathan Strickland. Didn't we do this already? Yes,
Speaker 1: we did, but it turned out to be longer than
Speaker 1: we thought. Yeah, the episode about the Year in Tech
Speaker 1: for two thousand and twelve ended up Chris and I
Speaker 1: ended up being chatty Cathy's and uh, I think according
Speaker 1: to Tyler, the full length episode was about an hour
Speaker 1: and seventeen or eighteen minutes long, which we thought was excessive,
Speaker 1: so we decided to split that into two. So now,
Speaker 1: without further ado, we bring you part two of the
Speaker 1: year that was the Tech of two thousand and twelve.
Speaker 1: What happened other executive shakeups? We just did a recent
Speaker 1: episode about two big names leaving big companies. Uh, we
Speaker 1: had four Stall leaving Apple. He was the fellow who
Speaker 1: was Scott four Stall, who was kind of in charge
Speaker 1: of iOS and and there were several things that kind
Speaker 1: of led up to his Uh, departure from Apple, he
Speaker 1: went into an advisory position, but then would eventually leave
Speaker 1: the company. I don't think he's actually left yet, still
Speaker 1: in an advisory capacity, but UM. One of the many
Speaker 1: problems with his tenure was the Maps app for iOS.
Speaker 1: When I the iPhone five was announced in Io S
Speaker 1: six was coming out, the Maps feature was heavily promoted
Speaker 1: in those releases because it was something that was It
Speaker 1: was the native turn by turn map application for the iPhone,
Speaker 1: and it replaced other apps that had been supported on
Speaker 1: the iPhone previously and now we're no longer supported. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: there was a problem. It was not always accurate. UM.
Speaker 1: Some people had real problems with the Maps app. I
Speaker 1: I only used it a couple of times. My wife
Speaker 1: has an iPhone and so we used it on her
Speaker 1: device and I used at the same time, I had
Speaker 1: Google Maps running on my Android phone, and while it
Speaker 1: gave us different routes to get to the same destination,
Speaker 1: in both cases the the route would have gotten us there,
Speaker 1: so there wasn't any problem along those lines. We weren't
Speaker 1: put on any phantom roads or sent in wild googe
Speaker 1: ghost chases or anything, but there were other reports of
Speaker 1: some pretty notable problems with the maps app, like finding
Speaker 1: out that the bridge that you need to cross is
Speaker 1: actually four miles further up the street than where you
Speaker 1: were told to turn, which could and in disaster for
Speaker 1: someone who is slavishly devoted to following the directions that
Speaker 1: their phone is giving. UM. I'm not saying that they're
Speaker 1: out there. I'm just saying that if they are out there,
Speaker 1: they're probably buying a new car now because their old
Speaker 1: one has been washed out the sea. Yeah. The other
Speaker 1: the other guy who who made big headlines in leaving
Speaker 1: UM apparently at some kind of a mutual agreement that
Speaker 1: he was going to be leaving, at least according to
Speaker 1: to the sources within the company and to him that
Speaker 1: that would be Steve Sinowski, who was instrumental at Microsoft
Speaker 1: and getting the brand new release out the door, Windows
Speaker 1: eight UM. He uh was took the stage and introduced
Speaker 1: the Microsoft Surface tablet as well as Windows eight UH
Speaker 1: two to you know, decent response, UM and then UH.
Speaker 1: Within a couple of months there was the news report
Speaker 1: that he was leaving Microsoft effective immediately, which the effect
Speaker 1: to immediately part suggested that perhaps it was a corporate
Speaker 1: decision to replace him, but The official word seems to
Speaker 1: be that it was a decision reached by both parties. Sonovski,
Speaker 1: for his part, says that whenever you finish a project,
Speaker 1: it's natural to go ahead and think about what else
Speaker 1: would you like to do? Um, I don't know, I
Speaker 1: don't know, I don't know. The departure to me seems
Speaker 1: pretty sudden for it to be mutual. If it were mutual,
Speaker 1: I would imagine there would have been more of a
Speaker 1: gradual transition plan, something that wasn't so sudden, because when
Speaker 1: it's that fast, it sends a very sharp message to shareholders. Now,
Speaker 1: if you have a transition plan and you say, all right,
Speaker 1: now that we've got Windows eight out, Sinofsky's decided he
Speaker 1: wants to pursue something else. Now we've got this transition
Speaker 1: plan in place, then you could ease sharehold is into
Speaker 1: that and it won't be quite as big as shock.
Speaker 1: That's see to me, that's the real giveaway to me. Now,
Speaker 1: I could be completely misinterpreting that, but that's how my
Speaker 1: brain works, y'all. Well, another big Microsoft news they released
Speaker 1: a tablet, the Surface Tablet. Yes now now Windows eight
Speaker 1: UM runs on tablets and computers and it's got a
Speaker 1: couple of different interfaces, one of which is designed to
Speaker 1: look very much like UM its Windows Foam software. UM
Speaker 1: the Surface uses a variant on this, the Windows RT,
Speaker 1: and it looks very very similar to that UM surface.
Speaker 1: UH makes news for a couple of reasons. Not only
Speaker 1: is it a brand new tablet from Windows UH for
Speaker 1: Microsoft and uses this new version of Windows, but it's
Speaker 1: it's Microsoft taking UH its hand at manufacturing hardware as
Speaker 1: well as software, not just for the Xbox gaming system,
Speaker 1: but for a tablet computer too, right, which which caused
Speaker 1: a lot of of of kerfuffle. I mean, you had
Speaker 1: people asking does this mean that Microsoft is going into
Speaker 1: direct competition with its partners? Because Microsoft is really known
Speaker 1: for providing the operating system and then other companies provide
Speaker 1: the hardware. And that's that's traditionally how they've done their
Speaker 1: work with computer systems. That you know, they they provide
Speaker 1: the operating system, but you buy your computer from some
Speaker 1: other company. For Microsoft to get into the hardware business
Speaker 1: with tablets, that sends the message of well, now they're
Speaker 1: in the business of actually making the devices as well
Speaker 1: as the operating systems, which puts them more in a
Speaker 1: camp similar to Apples, although Microsoft still license its operating
Speaker 1: system out to everyone else, so that's different from Apple. Obviously,
Speaker 1: Apple is very much a closed system. Uh, and Microsoft
Speaker 1: kind of straddling the line here. Microsoft or its part
Speaker 1: was essentially saying that the tablet was more to you know,
Speaker 1: it is a consumer device and they do plan on
Speaker 1: selling it to consumers, but that it was also more
Speaker 1: to show the capabilities of Windows eight so so as
Speaker 1: to get more hardware developers interested in creating devices specifically
Speaker 1: with the Windows eight operates system in mind. UM. It
Speaker 1: will be interesting to see how this plays out. I
Speaker 1: know that I was reading articles that suggests that surface
Speaker 1: sales have not lived up to expectations, but without having
Speaker 1: gone into further detail, I honestly can't speak more to that.
Speaker 1: It could very well be that it was a misleading headline.
Speaker 1: Often when you read these headlines, they say one thing,
Speaker 1: and then when you dive into the data, you realize
Speaker 1: that this might not be uh accurate, accurate, an accurate
Speaker 1: description of what's actually going on. I have seen similar
Speaker 1: reports for both Windows eight and for the surface UM.
Speaker 1: And it may be too that what is success for
Speaker 1: a smaller company isn't success for company to size. Uh
Speaker 1: and with the clout of a Microsoft so and plus
Speaker 1: I point, um, I think part of the Windows eight
Speaker 1: thing is original equipment manufacturers. Um haven't the computer sales
Speaker 1: of sales and computers have been off a little bit
Speaker 1: anyway this year, um, so I think that may have
Speaker 1: a part to play in. A Plus, we have the
Speaker 1: holiday season uh rapidly approaching as we are, we're sort
Speaker 1: of in the middle of it, but we're coming to
Speaker 1: the time when people are buying new stuff for a
Speaker 1: lot of people. And then by the time the airs
Speaker 1: will be over exactly so um, there will probably be
Speaker 1: new headlines generated after that. And also keeping we have
Speaker 1: to keep in mind Windows eight is such a dramatic
Speaker 1: departure from the previous versions of Windows that it could
Speaker 1: be causing some people to hesitate because it is. I mean,
Speaker 1: when you look at it looks so different from the
Speaker 1: previous versions of Windows that it can it can intimidate
Speaker 1: some people, you know. There there is a learning curve
Speaker 1: to picking up an operating system, particularly one that, at
Speaker 1: least upon first glance, is so dramatically different from the
Speaker 1: ones that you're used to. So I'm sure that's playing
Speaker 1: a role as well. Uh, if people are in general
Speaker 1: having positive experiences with Windows eight, I would imagine that
Speaker 1: that would that would even out pretty quickly. Well, Plus
Speaker 1: the the the recession is still fading and it's not
Speaker 1: moving as rapidly as as a lot of people would like.
Speaker 1: And so people who are happy with their Windows XP,
Speaker 1: Windows Vista, and Windows seven computers are probably not upgrading
Speaker 1: um just because they want to as quickly as they
Speaker 1: might have otherwise. Now, of course, Microsoft was not the
Speaker 1: only company to release a tablet this year. The iPad
Speaker 1: many came out from from Apple. Um still confuses me, Chris, seriously,
Speaker 1: answer me. Why would Apple release a smaller verse another
Speaker 1: iPad that's priced in such a way that it ends
Speaker 1: up competing with the iPod Touch, which in my mind
Speaker 1: really already is a smaller version of the iPad. Well,
Speaker 1: it's gotten very confusing this year as Samsung has come
Speaker 1: out with the second version of its Note and Chris,
Speaker 1: can you answer me a question, why would you create
Speaker 1: on a phone the size of a small tablet and
Speaker 1: then call it a fablet because that's just wrong? And
Speaker 1: then Google came out with the Nexus ten, which is
Speaker 1: now competing with a segment of the tablet market. Um,
Speaker 1: it was avoiding by creating the next to seven. Okay,
Speaker 1: I own a next to seven, um, which, by the way,
Speaker 1: I like. I got the Next to seven early. I
Speaker 1: ordered it as soon as it became available, and I
Speaker 1: got it within a week, And um, it's nice tablet.
Speaker 1: I like it, and I don't use it as frequently
Speaker 1: as I'm sure some people use their tablets, which I
Speaker 1: think proves my my the suspicion I had, which is
Speaker 1: that tablet is just a form factor that's not really
Speaker 1: for me, because even though I love the operating system
Speaker 1: and I do enjoy using the tablet, I just don't
Speaker 1: pick it up that frequently. Um. But yeah, the NEXTUS
Speaker 1: ten is now. Well, it is interesting because now Google's
Speaker 1: competing against the iPad space and apples competing against the
Speaker 1: seven inch tablet space, which is something that Steve Jobs
Speaker 1: had said he wasn't interested in doing ever that he
Speaker 1: you know, uh, he was focused mainly on iPad and
Speaker 1: iPod Touch was kind of like that that was viewed
Speaker 1: more as an iPhone without the phone, and the iPad
Speaker 1: was a tablet, and that there wasn't any interest to
Speaker 1: get into that seven inch tablet market. Um, obviously things change,
Speaker 1: and you know, sometimes things change. Steve Jobs may very
Speaker 1: well have been fully behind the iPad many before is
Speaker 1: passing because usually these these products have been in development
Speaker 1: for a couple of years before they hit the market,
Speaker 1: And it may very well be that he had changed
Speaker 1: his mind but then didn't want to tip the cards
Speaker 1: when he said like, no, we're not interested in that
Speaker 1: market and cannibalized sales of existing iPads. It's still confuses me.
Speaker 1: It's the pricing that confuses me. It's because, I mean,
Speaker 1: the iPod Touch goes up higher than the lowest end
Speaker 1: of the iPad many, So why would you buy a
Speaker 1: high end iPod Touch when you could get a low
Speaker 1: end iPad Man, I just don't get it. And then
Speaker 1: there was the iPhone five. I mean, if only someone
Speaker 1: could explain it to me, I know, I'm not a
Speaker 1: finance guy, and a new version of the iPod tuch,
Speaker 1: because I mean, who would Okay, I'm done. Um. Yeah.
Speaker 1: There were quite a few new products from from Apple,
Speaker 1: many of which were in the iPad line. They had
Speaker 1: a new MacBook design that really blew a lot of
Speaker 1: people away. I read one report that essentially said they
Speaker 1: considered the MacBook, the new redesigned MacBook to be the
Speaker 1: best laptop computer on the market today, just all around
Speaker 1: the best laptop. That's that's not those aren't my words. UM,
Speaker 1: I don't own a MacBook I. The only Mac I
Speaker 1: have as an iMac. So they released a new iMac
Speaker 1: this year that's very very thin. But um in in
Speaker 1: tacking off the Mac and Apple faithful news. Um, they
Speaker 1: came out with the I've had three and then only
Speaker 1: a few months later it came out with the actually
Speaker 1: that was the new iPad. The new new iPad came
Speaker 1: out only months later with a completely redesigned connector, forcing
Speaker 1: people to with with equipment that used the old style
Speaker 1: connector and wanted one of these new devices. And this
Speaker 1: includes the iPhone five and the newest um iPod devices
Speaker 1: that use the new lightning connector, which is a smaller
Speaker 1: connector than the old devices used to buy adapters or
Speaker 1: that would make them work with their old equipment. We're
Speaker 1: talking alarm clocks, speaker system and some of those docking stations.
Speaker 1: You can't really use an adapter on anyway. You you're
Speaker 1: essentially saying, well, unless I just use older equipment like
Speaker 1: in other words, I don't trade in my old iPod,
Speaker 1: I just keep it and just it will permanently be
Speaker 1: attached to this dock from here on out. Uh, that's
Speaker 1: pretty much what you would be stuck with. But on
Speaker 1: the on the flip side, the nice thing about the
Speaker 1: lightning connector was that you can plug it in either way. Like,
Speaker 1: you know, there's no wrong way to plug it in
Speaker 1: to the dock, so you don't have to worry about, oh,
Speaker 1: is this face up? Is it face down? Am I
Speaker 1: gonna be am? I gonna break this by trying to
Speaker 1: plug it in this way? You don't have to worry
Speaker 1: about that anymore, which is kind of nice. But yeah, um,
Speaker 1: it was kind of a shock to iPad owners who
Speaker 1: had bought the new iPod pad when it came out
Speaker 1: in the early part of two thousand twelve, with just
Speaker 1: you know, like six or seven months later, a new
Speaker 1: new ip iPad came out and that was I heard
Speaker 1: more than a a little grumbling about that. Not But
Speaker 1: first of all, come on, you're not forced to buy
Speaker 1: these things. That's true. I can I can understand if
Speaker 1: you were, you know, if somehow you had this compulsion
Speaker 1: where you had to buy every single Apple product as
Speaker 1: soon as it came out. But really, get some therapy.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, no one is making you buy
Speaker 1: these things, so I don't know they're all I go
Speaker 1: back and forth on this one. There were also a
Speaker 1: lot of people angry at Apple this year because because
Speaker 1: they were found um um for in the legal system
Speaker 1: against Samsung depending on where you are exactly, because because
Speaker 1: in other countries they found for Samsung, um yes, and
Speaker 1: this these were were patent lawsuits. Many people were angry
Speaker 1: at well actually either or both Apple and Samsung for
Speaker 1: fighting these uh what seemed to be interminable patent lawsuits
Speaker 1: over what infringed on who's patent um But this this
Speaker 1: is an ages old practice, this predates the computer industry.
Speaker 1: Um and uh just there was a fresh round of
Speaker 1: this and uh things like uh the the United Kingdom
Speaker 1: forcing Apple to um to claim on its website that
Speaker 1: Apple one against Samsung because Apple's products were clearly cooler,
Speaker 1: and so they had to post on their website that
Speaker 1: obviously they weren't infringed upon because their opponents patents or
Speaker 1: products were not nearly as cool as Apples, and therefore
Speaker 1: Apple was There was a point where Apple was forced
Speaker 1: to essentially apologize. Yes, they apologized because their products were cooler,
Speaker 1: and they they tried to bury this information on the website,
Speaker 1: and the courts got angry with Apple for doing this
Speaker 1: because it was hidden at the very bottom and the
Speaker 1: foot of its page, and they wanted it displayed more prominently. Right. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it was one of those things where yeah, I just
Speaker 1: got pretty ridiculous. But essentially they the courts founded in
Speaker 1: in favor of Samsung in those cases, but in the
Speaker 1: United States it was the other way around. And um,
Speaker 1: it's it's still a very complicated mass. Patent wars often are,
Speaker 1: and uh it's you know, one of those things where
Speaker 1: in one nation you could be found to be in
Speaker 1: the right and in another nation it could be the
Speaker 1: other party. And it's a mess, man. I mean, as
Speaker 1: a consumer, you just hope that what however, it turns
Speaker 1: out that you're still able to get access to the
Speaker 1: products that you like. Um, you know, because one of
Speaker 1: the things that can come out of these patent wars
Speaker 1: is that sometimes courts will support a company's claim and
Speaker 1: and uh prevent the other company from selling uh that
Speaker 1: particular product or line of products within the country. We've
Speaker 1: seen that happened in Europe a few times, particularly in
Speaker 1: places like Germany, where um, these patent wars turned really
Speaker 1: really ugly. So yeah, that was a big story throughout
Speaker 1: two thousand twelve. Was the Apple Samsung battle, which of
Speaker 1: course you know continues to this day, so I don't
Speaker 1: expect that to disappear anytime soon. Oh. Another story that
Speaker 1: happened early, early, early in two thousand twelve that I
Speaker 1: meant to mention when we were talking about the shake
Speaker 1: ups Rim alright, the co founders of Rim, who were
Speaker 1: the co CEO of of Rim, this is the company
Speaker 1: that of course makes BlackBerry phones, they resigned, which was
Speaker 1: not a huge surprise because the company had been in
Speaker 1: some some trouble. Uh. They had been struggling quite a
Speaker 1: bit with their product lines and with the market share
Speaker 1: and just the public's perception of BlackBerry. The playbook tablet
Speaker 1: that came out a couple of years ago did not
Speaker 1: do well. Um, it was just it was just a
Speaker 1: series of setbacks for the company. And so the co
Speaker 1: c e O s resigned in early in early two
Speaker 1: thousand and twelve. So that was a big story too,
Speaker 1: and I meant to mention that earlier. But As far
Speaker 1: as other products that came out, the only other one
Speaker 1: that I jumps out at me is Nintendo's We You Yes,
Speaker 1: because it was the first next generation console to hit
Speaker 1: the market. Depending on who you ask, is it is
Speaker 1: late this generation console. Yeah, it's kind of hard to say.
Speaker 1: I mean, like it's not like we have version numbers
Speaker 1: that we could refer to. But the WU is of
Speaker 1: course the the high definition first HD console that Nintendo
Speaker 1: has has created. Um. And it also has the crazy
Speaker 1: wacky controller with the the display incorporated directly into the controller.
Speaker 1: And um, yeah we did. We did an episode about
Speaker 1: we use, so we don't need to go into it.
Speaker 1: But that was another pretty big story um for for
Speaker 1: hackers this year. And I mean the good style the
Speaker 1: Raspberry Pie was making headlines, which is basically a computer
Speaker 1: on a board. Um and uh, you know, people are
Speaker 1: really the people who came out with and intended it
Speaker 1: to be sort of an educational tool, basically an inexpensive
Speaker 1: computer that people could use to learn how to program
Speaker 1: computers from sort of from the ground up. But other people,
Speaker 1: people who like to take things apart and make new
Speaker 1: things with them. Hackers um also like it because you
Speaker 1: can do all kinds of other You can use them
Speaker 1: as very basic computers to run all kinds of different projects,
Speaker 1: things like robotics. I mean, it's it's kind of this.
Speaker 1: This along with things like the art we know UM products,
Speaker 1: as well as the connect censor, These these sort of
Speaker 1: off the shelf components are making it easier and easier
Speaker 1: for hackers to build really super cool stuff. Now in
Speaker 1: some cases the stuff is is meant for sort of
Speaker 1: an artistic expression. It's not necessarily a practical uh product
Speaker 1: that's coming out of this, but it's it's to me,
Speaker 1: it's just as relevant as any other form of artwork.
Speaker 1: It's a kind of a way to express oneself, to
Speaker 1: use creativity. Uh. There takes a certain level of skill
Speaker 1: and knowledge to be able to to create something that
Speaker 1: works and is aesthetically pleasing in some way. So I
Speaker 1: find these sort of things very exciting, both from the
Speaker 1: educational standpoint and from the artistic standpoint. I really am
Speaker 1: pleased to see more of those things come out. And
Speaker 1: we've heard about other very cheap computer on a chip
Speaker 1: systems since then as well, So that's an interesting trend
Speaker 1: and I hope we see that continue. UM I had
Speaker 1: a couple of big science stories. Oh I did too.
Speaker 1: I wanted to mention a couple of other UM companies
Speaker 1: really quickly. We don't have to get into it. We've
Speaker 1: done individual episodes about many of these things. One positive
Speaker 1: one was Google making sure that um, uh there's people
Speaker 1: of Kansas City have their daily dose of fiber um Google. Yes,
Speaker 1: they're they're rolling out, still rolling out as of the
Speaker 1: time we're recording this. UM. The Google Fiber high speed
Speaker 1: Internet access. Kansas City was one of those places that
Speaker 1: UH competed to be the first UM fiberhood and basically
Speaker 1: they had people signed up from and say this is
Speaker 1: where I live. And uh, Google chose the places that
Speaker 1: were more highly populated with potential customers as places to
Speaker 1: roll out there high speed internet access offering first for
Speaker 1: for logical reasons. They you know, it's expensive to to
Speaker 1: start this kind of networking from ground the ground up.
Speaker 1: But um, so far it seems to be a success. UM.
Speaker 1: And in more sad tech news, we've had the bankruptcy
Speaker 1: of Kodak earlier again in the year UM and uh
Speaker 1: you know the patents sell off there. UM. You know,
Speaker 1: a once mighty film camera company has just had difficulty finding.
Speaker 1: It's uh, it's niche in the new place of things.
Speaker 1: Even though digital cameras have been among its offerings. UM
Speaker 1: still not gone, but certainly has has fallen somewhat. But yes,
Speaker 1: science stories, we had the Mars rover for example. Yes, yeah,
Speaker 1: the Curiosity Rover was one of those stories that that
Speaker 1: definitely captured attention and imagination. In two thousand and twelve,
Speaker 1: I had the the honor and privilege of being invited
Speaker 1: onto this weekend text coverage live coverage of the touchdown,
Speaker 1: which meant that I was up at twelve thirty in
Speaker 1: the morning here on the East coast. But it was
Speaker 1: a small price to pay to be a part of
Speaker 1: a team that was really talking about the excitement behind
Speaker 1: this sort of exploration. One of the many things that
Speaker 1: was really cool about the Curiosity Rover landing was the
Speaker 1: way they landed the rover through using a skycrane. The
Speaker 1: if you guys don't remember, the rover weighed over a ton,
Speaker 1: and at that size, they could not use traditional methods
Speaker 1: of landing a rover on the surface of Mars without
Speaker 1: risking damage to the rover's equipment because usually what they
Speaker 1: would do is use booster rockets to slow the descent
Speaker 1: and set down the rover, or they would use an
Speaker 1: air bag system and essentially drop the air bag from
Speaker 1: a certain height and then the rover would bounce on
Speaker 1: the surface of Mars and then extract itself from the
Speaker 1: the air bags. They couldn't really do that with the
Speaker 1: size and mass of this particular device. Now they use
Speaker 1: the skycrane, and in the past those methods have not
Speaker 1: always worked as effectively as they scientists had hope. So
Speaker 1: this brand new method using the skycrane was sort of
Speaker 1: a scary proposition. We weren't sure what was going to happen. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and and it meant that a lot of the the
Speaker 1: operation had to be automated because the delay in signals
Speaker 1: from that point in space to Earth Man that there
Speaker 1: would be like a fourteen minute delay between getting a
Speaker 1: signal and being able to send a signal back, So
Speaker 1: you couldn't make minute corrections, uh, any anything close to
Speaker 1: real time. You had to plan for as much as
Speaker 1: you could in advance and hope that the system worked
Speaker 1: the way you intended it to. And in this case
Speaker 1: it worked amazingly well. The the the craft descended, it
Speaker 1: slowed a little bit in the atmosphere. It used a
Speaker 1: parachute to slow itself a little bit further, and then
Speaker 1: used booster rockets to slow the decent even more, and
Speaker 1: then lowered the rover on a crane attached to the
Speaker 1: rockets until it touched down on the surface of Mars. Uh.
Speaker 1: The cables broke away from the rover the the landing,
Speaker 1: the skycrane itself flew off and crashed several hundred meters away,
Speaker 1: so that the rover would not be damaged by the
Speaker 1: crash that was supposed to happen. Yeah, and it worked.
Speaker 1: And that was I mean, the reaction in mission control
Speaker 1: when they got confirmation that the rover had touched down
Speaker 1: safely was I mean, it's such an expression of joy
Speaker 1: and excitement that, you know, it was hard to keep
Speaker 1: a smile off your face to see all these nerds
Speaker 1: dancing around. And I say that with absolute affection. I
Speaker 1: really I was. You know, I got to watch it
Speaker 1: live too, because I was covering it. And it was
Speaker 1: one of those things that just makes you feel really
Speaker 1: optimistic to see something that you would think, gosh, that
Speaker 1: just sounds insane, and yet they pulled it off. It's
Speaker 1: really a testament to what we can achieve if we
Speaker 1: really put our minds to it. So, um, it was
Speaker 1: a pretty great story. And then, of course that's just
Speaker 1: the beginning of the story. The real story is the
Speaker 1: stuff that the rover is discovering as it is doing
Speaker 1: its mission on Mars, which again that's stuff that we're
Speaker 1: still finding out about today. Some of that became like
Speaker 1: a some little all false positives about stuff that got
Speaker 1: us excited at first, and then further discussion and further
Speaker 1: examination seemed to negate some of those early UH discoveries,
Speaker 1: things like UH. At first, they thought that maybe there
Speaker 1: was methane present in UH in amounts large enough to
Speaker 1: suggest that perhaps something organic could have been on the
Speaker 1: surface of Mars to produce that methane. But then after
Speaker 1: considering the possibility that the methane could have been brought
Speaker 1: along with the rover from Earth UH and doing some
Speaker 1: further tests, it seemed to indicate that that was a
Speaker 1: premature assumption that the methane itself was not present in
Speaker 1: any significant amount on the surface of Mars. But you know,
Speaker 1: take some of you you you lose them. Yeah. Another
Speaker 1: another flawless touchdown was a guy nam Felix pum Gardener,
Speaker 1: who uh didn't jump on the surface of Mars was
Speaker 1: a little closer to home. But he did set a
Speaker 1: new record for or set the record. I know, setting
Speaker 1: a new record is redundant, but Uma said it set
Speaker 1: a brand new height from which he jumped from essentially
Speaker 1: space to parachute down to the surface of Earth and
Speaker 1: landed flawlessly. Yeah, your your mileage may vary as far
Speaker 1: as the term space goes. But but he did jump
Speaker 1: from a height greater than anyone has ever jumped before,
Speaker 1: and he did it. Uh, And it was again something
Speaker 1: I watched live and again it was terrifying, absolutely terrifying
Speaker 1: to see this man step out on a tiny ledge,
Speaker 1: the ledge the size of a skateboard, attached to the capsule,
Speaker 1: hanging over absolutely nothing, looking down at the at the Earth,
Speaker 1: and then just letting go and falling. Keeping in mind
Speaker 1: that for the first portion of his descent he had
Speaker 1: no control over his orientation or attitude at all in
Speaker 1: the air because there wasn't enough air resistance for him
Speaker 1: to be able to position himself the way a skydiver
Speaker 1: would in a traditional jump. So I mean watching him
Speaker 1: kind of tumble was my heart was in my throat. UH.
Speaker 1: And then once he was able to use air resistance
Speaker 1: to help orient himself, it was smooth falling from there. Yes, yes,
Speaker 1: and I agree with you at um. Watching him tumble
Speaker 1: around like that and made me think that he was
Speaker 1: going to black out. Thankfully he did not and and
Speaker 1: was successful in in landing. Uh. Slightly more successful than
Speaker 1: a bear named Bruno who decided to jump from slightly
Speaker 1: farther out into a block of cement did not end
Speaker 1: as well. Those of you who are Loony Tunes fans
Speaker 1: will know what I'm talking about. But Jonathan's looking at
Speaker 1: me funny, which means he probably wants to hurry up
Speaker 1: now that we're going along and talk about the Higgs boson.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Yes, the Large had Drawn collider. This is
Speaker 1: This is actually the last story I have on my list.
Speaker 1: The Higgs Boson is a theoretical particle that would help
Speaker 1: explain why matter has mass, Why does matter have mass?
Speaker 1: What is it that makes matter have mass? Uh? And
Speaker 1: the Large Hadron collider they were talking about this would
Speaker 1: be one of the reasons that they would conduct experiments
Speaker 1: there is to see if there's any evidence for the
Speaker 1: Higgs Boson particle. So this particle theoretically would explain why
Speaker 1: matter has mass if it in fact exists. Uh. Mathematically
Speaker 1: it all seems to work out. But the problem is
Speaker 1: that we did not have observable or experimental data that
Speaker 1: would prove its existence. It was just one of those
Speaker 1: things that it would be awfully convenient if it did exist,
Speaker 1: because then it would explain this UM. Some experiments and
Speaker 1: at the LHC this year brought up some data that
Speaker 1: seems to support the existence of the Higgs boson. I
Speaker 1: say seems to support because the science US were very
Speaker 1: careful to say that while it was very encouraging and
Speaker 1: it could potentially be evidence that the Higgs boson, it
Speaker 1: is in fact a thing and that they did in
Speaker 1: fact observe it. Uh, they you know, they want to
Speaker 1: continue to study and replicate the study to make certain
Speaker 1: that that is in fact the case, which of course
Speaker 1: is the way good science happens. If you discover something
Speaker 1: in science, you do want to try and replicate that experiment,
Speaker 1: uh prebably get someone else to replicate if you can, uh,
Speaker 1: to make sure that what you have observed is in
Speaker 1: fact a real phenomena and not just something that was
Speaker 1: um due to instrumentation error or human error or something else.
Speaker 1: And uh, and so it may very well be that
Speaker 1: we have uncovered the evidence of the Higgs boson, which
Speaker 1: would be interesting. Then I know there are plenty of
Speaker 1: physicists out there who we're hoping that perhaps it would
Speaker 1: be something else, because it would mean something new to find.
Speaker 1: The worry is that, or one of the worries is
Speaker 1: that if we do prove the existence of the Higgs boson,
Speaker 1: that we have answered one question and it kind of
Speaker 1: makes us hit a dead end and we can't find
Speaker 1: out more about the fundamental nature of matter in in
Speaker 1: that particular avenue because of that, which would be kind
Speaker 1: of sad. Um. So that's kind of interesting to me,
Speaker 1: the idea that if you answer a question, it's kind
Speaker 1: of sad because the answer is the end, and then
Speaker 1: you have to find new questions to ask, which to
Speaker 1: me is just as exciting. But then I'm not a
Speaker 1: physicist who's dedicating my entire life upon upon one part
Speaker 1: of particle physics. Um. And And honestly, I can't really
Speaker 1: speak about this to any greater length because I mean,
Speaker 1: I have a layman's understanding of the whole thing. I mean,
Speaker 1: I know what a hadron is. That's about is as
Speaker 1: detailed as I can get. Still fascinating to watch. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean too. It means that we are slowly increasing
Speaker 1: our knowledge about some of the fundamental forces that uh,
Speaker 1: that are in our universe, like the strong nuclear force.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's one of the four fundamental forces. It's
Speaker 1: the strongest of the four and UH and these experiments
Speaker 1: help us understand more about that fundamental force and to
Speaker 1: to understand why it works the way it does. UM.
Speaker 1: Very exciting stuff and I am so pleased to hear
Speaker 1: about the successes at the LHC, because you know, when
Speaker 1: it was first being built and when it was first
Speaker 1: coming online, it had so many problems early early on
Speaker 1: that it was a bit nerve racking, you know. You know,
Speaker 1: they had delays because of helium leaks, they had delays
Speaker 1: because of birds with baguettes. It was one of those
Speaker 1: things where you didn't want to you did want to
Speaker 1: see him fail, but you were starting to get a
Speaker 1: sinking sensation that it was gonna be a lot harder
Speaker 1: than you thought. And then once things got turned around,
Speaker 1: you know, the the information coming out of the LHC
Speaker 1: was very exciting. And they still have, i mean, countless
Speaker 1: experiments to run. So it'll be interesting to see what
Speaker 1: other information we uncover using those that that enormous machine
Speaker 1: to learn more about our universe, agreed put Chris. Yeah,
Speaker 1: well I'll tell you. I uh, I have to disagree
Speaker 1: with my earlier statement. There was a lot of stuff
Speaker 1: that happened. Yeah, it didn't seem like it when I
Speaker 1: went back over it. But then I started looking at
Speaker 1: my notes from you know, all the titles that I
Speaker 1: take notes and keep all my notes for tech stuff
Speaker 1: in one place. I started thinking, Oh, well, then there's that,
Speaker 1: and oh there's another story I just hadn't thought about. Yeah, again,
Speaker 1: it was a lot. There were there were stories that
Speaker 1: were and and like some of the things like the
Speaker 1: SISPA PIPA stuff, the mega upload stuff. Um, you know
Speaker 1: that that kind of thing is gonna affect policies moving forward,
Speaker 1: the Internet outage in Syria and Libya, that that stuff
Speaker 1: is going to definitely play a bigger role in two
Speaker 1: thousand and thirteen. Um, A lot of this we see
Speaker 1: as the continuation of trends, in the escalation of trends,
Speaker 1: and I expect that that two thirteen will have even
Speaker 1: more of that, well, we may see some pretty um
Speaker 1: dramatic outcomes to some of these stories. The McAfee story alone,
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm curious to see how that plays out
Speaker 1: and whether you know whether or not this becomes one
Speaker 1: of the biggest mysteries of of Internet personalities that I
Speaker 1: can think of. If what McAfee says is all true,
Speaker 1: then it's got to be one of the craziest like
Speaker 1: uh character assassination attempts ever, because the information that's come
Speaker 1: out that McPhee has, the things that McFee has uh
Speaker 1: supposedly done, according to these allegations, is so different from
Speaker 1: what he claims to have happened that you wonder, all right,
Speaker 1: if that's true, If what McAfee saying is true, someone
Speaker 1: is going to great links to to really drag him
Speaker 1: through the mud. So what's the story behind that? And
Speaker 1: if in fact McAfee is fibbing and the allegations are true,
Speaker 1: that alone is movie material. In fact, if a movie
Speaker 1: is not made about McAfee at least from inspired by
Speaker 1: what McAfee has done, I will be shocked. And again,
Speaker 1: there are still a couple of weeks left after we
Speaker 1: record this. In two thousand twelve, Um, Bradley Manning just
Speaker 1: went on trial for the Wiki leaks scandal, which didn't
Speaker 1: happen in twelve, but you know, the trial is started
Speaker 1: in motion now, so um, you know there there's still
Speaker 1: some other things that will happen and other other things
Speaker 1: that have been said into motion before this. So may
Speaker 1: just be a year of big news. Yeah, yeah, we'll
Speaker 1: have to wait and see. Well, uh, guys are next
Speaker 1: episode will be the one you've all been waiting for
Speaker 1: where Chris and I will sit down and grade ourselves
Speaker 1: for our performance from last year's predictions rama. Uh, and
Speaker 1: so you wanna stay tuned and listening to that one.
Speaker 1: And if you guys have any suggestions for future topics
Speaker 1: that tech stuff can cover, I highly suggest that you
Speaker 1: write us at tech stuff at Discovery dot com or
Speaker 1: send us a message on Facebook or Twitter or handle
Speaker 1: of both of those is text stuff hs W and
Speaker 1: Chris and I will talk to you again really soon
Speaker 1: for more on this and thousands of other topics because
Speaker 1: it has stuff works dot Com