Despite — or in some cases because of — Google’s insistence on pushing forward with new web browsing technologies, the tech giant continues to dominate the browser demographics for desktops as well as mobile phones and tablets. Not only has Chrome been on the rise for people at home, but also on the go. Via numbers from StatCounter Global Stats for mobile and tablets, only Chrome and to a much lesser extent the Android-based UC Browser and IE Mobile have increased their market shares since December 2012, the first month of collected data (click to embiggen).

For fellow computer users, and where many concerns stem from as Google phases out older technology, Chrome is even more dominant than on the mobile market. Again according to StatCounter GC, Chrome holds a remarkable 52.96% of the desktop browser market share. The gap between Chrome and everyone else has been widening since May of 2012, however Microsoft’s newest browser, Edge is looking to change things provided you’re running a Windows 10 machine.

Edge doesn’t yet have a release date, but it something I’m eager to check out. It is seemingly looking to streamline the web, something I can get behind as separate tabs and locations for things like favorites, recently visited, current downloads and my reading list are all found in different areas in Chrome. Edge’s “Hub” will place them all in one easy to access area, however it isn’t all sunshine and rainbows with Microsoft’s latest browser. While the company is promising support for existing Chrome and Firefox extensions, that support will not be arriving until a later date. No official word on Silverlight being compatible with Edge, though recent history suggests it would be as all Windows 8 devices, including the tablet Surface Pro 3, are. It would be a stunning (though in my opinion welcome) reversal if Windows 10 and by extension Edge, was not Silverlight compatible. An introduction video to Edge can be found on YouTube.

Already some sports fans are finding themselves caught in the crossfire of the browser battles, specifically those looking to watch games on Sky TV, the preeminent broadcast of English Premier League soccer games in the United Kingdom. Sky — working with BT Sports — recently negotiated a new cable deal where Sky holds broadcast rights to 126 EPL matches per season, three times as many games as BT Sports will broadcast. On the Sky Go page there is a message regarding the incompatibility:

Until Edge is officially released — and probably for some time after — Chrome remains the undisputed browser champion. If Microsoft really does aim to “blur the line between consumption and creation” as the Edge preview video suggests, Windows 10 and Edge will drop Silverlight support and force broadcast companies to update to new and better technologies. What I don’t want to see is Edge allowing massive companies to sit on their hands at the cost of time and frustration for customers.

(Header image via Microsoft)

The live-stream app Meerkat went live on the Android market today. It’s still in Beta form, so things may not be perfect just yet, however as TechGraphs overlord David Temple explained over a month ago, Meerkat — and Periscope — both offer a new way to broadcast video.

Meerkat’s rules page doesn’t clearly define what you can or can’t stream as it is more of an outline of features.

Once you jump into the legal area of their terms of use one can see the company strictly prohibits broadcasting copyrighted material — as do the content creators. HBO has already sent out takedown notices to people streaming the new Game of Thrones season via Meerkat, though perhaps the company is in the takedown notice mood. Other creative minds have gone the opposite way and are embracing Meerkat. Entertainers such as Jimmy Fallon, Snoop Dogg and Jim Gaffigan are sprinkled among Meerkat’s leader-board in order for them to be easily found. If you are so inclined to follow them on Meerkat, expect a push notification when they begin a new broadcast.

Within each cast there is a chat room for interaction between viewers and the broadcaster. One of the pillars of Meerkat is the ability to cast in the here and now, however the company has also added ability to schedule a future broadcast. The quality of the available casts seems to be dependent on the the strength of the caster’s internet connection. In my brief experiences those doing in an office or home setting have had a quality better than Vines — even with their new 720p broadcasts — however what I assumed to be 4G/LTE connections stuttered and froze from to time. Part of it could be the app is still in Beta or it could be that the heavy bandwidth required to stream is too taxing on user’s non-WiFi networks.

These are urky broadcasting rights waters we’ve waded into. From takedown notices, muted streams on Twitch.tv due to music rights to being wary of narcs taking you down in person for an illegally stream boxing match, the gap between producers and end-users appears to be widening.

(Header image via Meerkat)

As we lead in to tomorrow night’s fight of the century and the most expensive pay-per-view ever, HBO and Showtime – the premium cable companies that joined forces to produce the event – are kissing their biceps following their jab-hook combination that knocked online streaming sites to the mat.

Yesterday a federal judge granted HBO and Showtime a temporary restraining order against boxinghd.net and sportship.org, two sites which advertised unauthorized free online streaming of the bout, but have since removed all related content.

Deciding Judge George Wu wrote:

“Plaintiffs have established that they will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of immediate relief. Among other things, Defendants’ threatened infringement would strip Plaintiffs of the critical right of first transmission and publication of an extremely valuable live sporting event, would interfere with Plaintiffs’ relationships with third parties, is likely to damage Plaintiffs’ goodwill among consumers, and will deprive Plaintiffs of revenue that will be difficult or impossible to calculate, but is likely far in excess of any amount that Defendants could repay to Plaintiffs in damages even if the amount could be calculated.”

At time of publication, both sites are unavailable. Deadline.com reported on Wednesday that “where big splashy photo of the two boxers and a ‘click here’ to watch the weekend fight, now there is pretty much nothing.”

The mega fight will cost viewers $100 to watch in HD ($90 in standard definition). According to Forbes, the fight is expected to earn $300 million in PPV revenue or more.

Online streaming sites aren’t the only ones being watched. The Guardian ran a piece Tuesday which brought light to the existence of pay-per-view cops.

On the night of the big fight, the PPV cops – who are not real police, though one company says many former law-enforcement officers are in their ranks – will attempt to find bars showing the fight without having paid licensing fees. If they help promoters nail establishments that have not paid, the companies say they can make hundreds or even thousands of dollars.

The cost for a bar or restaurant to purchase a license depends on the occupancy of the building. But for many establishments, it’s costing about $5000. The bigger the occupancy, the higher the cost. And many bars have decided it’s simply too expensive to carry the fight.

Meanwhile, other bars certainly will try to fly under the radar. These PPV cops are searching for those that duck the expensive license and purchase the residential PPV charge of $100 to show the fight illegally.

One firm’s ad offers $250 for every illegal location found for these enforcers. Another firm advertised on Craigslist. And it’s not all just show.

From The Guardian:

A bar in Lake Elsinore, California, shut down after paying a $23,000 fine for illegally showing a Mayweather fight. J&J Sports Promotions, which licenses fights and has partnered with G&G, has also filed more than 1,600 lawsuits against businesses illegally showing PPV events since 2010. In 2009 it won a $112,800 default judgment against a bar in Arkansas. It settled for $50,000 with a bar that showed the Mayweather-Victor Ortiz fight in 2011. “I’m not in business to sue people,” the J&J president Joseph Gagliardi told the Los Angeles Times. “But I’ve got to do it for one reason: to protect the clientele who are doing it right.”

Fight night piracy is down for the count. Bloodied and brawled, this one looks like a loss.

(Image courtesy of Justin Matthew)