BlogSpout

MacWorld 2008 - Something in the Air...

2008-01-14T11:34:00.001-08:00

Well here goes nothing... I figured I might as well contribute to all of the rumors and guessing that's going on about what Apple will announce tomorrow at MacWorld Expo.

Apple has displayed huge banner posters at Moscone with the phrase, "There's Something in the Air"... to which many have surmised that Apple will be releasing a WiMax solution on laptops and on iPods. Perhaps...

If Apple has chosen to deploy a new networking technology, I predict it will be a) cutting edge b) power- (as in electricity consumption and battery-life) conscious.

Here's a slight change of subject, please bear with me. I have been playing with XO "laptops" from the OLPC ("One Laptop Per Child") project. These are amazing pieces of hardware; they're designed as an educational tool for children in developing countries. They run Linux. They have a (revolutionary?) new user-interface with a new desktop paradigm called "Sugar". Oh... they're priced at about $200 in very large quantities.

So what could this all mean? ...
More importantly for this post, perhaps, they support 802.11b/g *and* 802.11s MESH NETWORKING. What does this mean? It means that if you have a collection of these laptops "near" one another... and one is connected to the Internet, (technically speaking) they could all be connected to the Internet. Or, it means that they can locally network with one another seamlessly. The more mesh "nodes" on the network, the more (potentially) reliable the network could be...

There's another interesting mesh project going on at Johns Hopkins University called smesh. They claim they can do VoIP over their mesh while roaming between meshpoints... seamlessly.

Now it occurs to me that when I was younger, Apple was almost the exclusive provider of computer technology in the K-12 arena. And it occurs to me that MESH NETWORKING (as implemented on the OLPC, at least) provides a collaborative means for learning, and sharing.

Further, it seems that Intel was part of the OLPC board of directors, and that, as of last week, they've taken themselves off of that board... and that there is a competing hardware platform (embodied in the $300 Classmate laptop) that is trying to sell into the classrooms of the developing world (and thereby compete with the OLPC).

It should be noted that, at present, the OLPC is not available for purchase in small quantities, or in developed (i.e. USA, Europe) nations.

We also know that Apple, as of a couple of years ago, transitioned their entire Mac line from the PowerPC processor architecture to Intel x86 processors. Intel has appeared prominently in past MacExpo keynotes; one would think the partnership is strong.

I have no "source" of data other than my brain, so I'll offer the following: Wouldn't it make sense for Apple to make a strong comeback in K-12 computer hardware with a product that is software-compatible with the OLPC, available for purchase by families and educational institutions in the US, supports and interacts with OLPC mesh networking?

They could create a laptop with processors from Intel, that implements 802.11s, runs MacOS, allows for MacOS accounts that were OLPC-desktop-restricted...

And, they could put mesh nodes in all of their portable devices, such as iPhones, iPods, and the like.

I hope I'm right... Leave a comment if you think this sounds reasonable...

QuickBooks2006 incompatible with Vista!?

2007-01-24T23:01:00.000-08:00

I am amazed and dismayed.

I just received email "signed" by Mr. Brad Smith, Senior Vice-President of QuickBooks indicating that QuickBooks 2006 would not be compatible with Microsoft Vista. Let me see if I can be more precise; Mr. Smith says:

If you choose to upgrade to Windows Vista
We recommend that you use QuickBooks 2007 (and Point of Sale v6.0, if applicable). QuickBooks 2007 is the only version of the software built to run on the new Windows Vista operating system.
Again, we apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. If you would like to send us feedback on QuickBooks and Windows Vista, please visit our Windows Vista Resource Center at www.quickbooks.com/support/vista.

Huh? Apologize for "any inconvenience"??? QuickBooks (Intuit) should be begging its users to stick with QuickBooks... in spite of the difficulty that Windows Vista will ultimately cause them. They should be actively berating Microsoft for creating such headaches for them and their customer base.

Intuit should be shipping upgrades to their QuickBooks 2006 product that make it compatible with Vista (while remaining compatible with existing versions of Windows)... at no charge. This is how a company that values it customers (and is concerned about them leaving) behaves.

Instead, we (paid customers) get a letter announcing the "inconvenience" of a forced upgrade to QuickBooks 2007 (Pro goes for $179.95- there appears to be no upgrade pricing - this is essentially the price I paid for QuickBooks 2006... on year ago).

(Never mind that QuickBooks (even "Pro") is constantly badgering me about signing up for this or that for-money service from Inuit... be it PayRoll, accepting credit-cards, or what have you).

Waitwaitwait... why would Intuit take a stand here? They have 87% market-share (a whopping $750,000,000 in 2005) in this area... and so... why wouldn't they demand their users pay another tax to stay with their product? After all, that's precisely what Microsoft is doing with Vista...

Don't get me wrong: I'm not in any great hurry to upgrade to Vista... but I know there will come a time in the not-so-distant future when new computers will ship only with Vista... and unless I have an IT department that would qualify me as a company big enough to run "real" accounting software, I'll have a hard time downgrading to an XP installation on such machines.

It's time for the customers of Intuit to band together and seek an alternate solution. Establish a plan, and knock that 87% in half for 2007. That should deliver a clear message to Mr Smith. The attitude and language of this forced-upgrade announcement are outrageous.

If you have any interest in migrating away from QuickBooks, please drop a note here. If you know of an alternative for very small businesses, please say so... and say why you like the product. Thanks.

Yahoo mail trying to Imitate Google Mail??

2006-10-23T23:19:00.000-07:00

I just logged into my Yahoo mail account. I don't do that very often as I keep my "main" mail on Google mail. Yahoo greeted me with a "try out new Yahoo Mail beta" interface... so I said yes (I'm not really sure I had an option), and then after being shown a short tutorial (pretty nice, but more on this later), I was viewing my Yahoo mail in their new interface.

It looks and feels like a "Web2.0 app"... by which I mean that when you click on buttons and things, you get new content without full page reloads. Not fully "Web 2.0" mind you... there were no borders with rounded corners. Hm.

So what's really new?

Well, I would have thought that when you re-design your interface, you would go all out... and "leapfrog" the competition. That is to say that you would wait until your technology and feature-set was clearly superior to the competition. In this case, I'd say that although the interface is "better" than the prior Yahoo Mail interface, it is in no way superior to the competition -- which in this case, is Google Mail.

In several basic ways, they're similar. There's a window showing who sent you mail and when and what it is about. And you can click on those messages to view the mail. All without entirely reloading the page.

Oh yes: Yahoo made a big deal of teaching about how you could move mail messages using (drum-roll) drag-and-drop... except that I couldn't complete the (otherwise nice, simple, and informative) tutorial at this point because for some reason, I couldn't perform their multi-select in my browser... hmph.

Maybe drag-n-drop is marginally nicer than what Google has in this area.
But in several important ways, the new Yahoo Mail interface is inferior.

Why not fix search?
Yahoo could have attacked the single biggest issue with Google's email interface (in my mind): search. WHAT?!? Did I just say that Google search was lacking!?? Yessir. You see, when you search your email in Google search, you can't search on word fragments.
That means that if I get email from betty15@some-unknown-place.com, I can't search my email for "From: betty" and find those messages. Somehow, I need to remember that Betty's email was "betty15"... I can't tell you how many times I've relied on my (future) ability to search and find my email only to spend waaaay too much time searching in frustration for the oh-so-important email.

Why not add tagging?
If click-update-without-reload (otherwise known as AJAX) and (to a much lesser extent, yet with high correlation) rounded borders on boxes aren't prime identifying features of Web 2.0 applications, I would have to say that "tagging" is. That is, the new way (the Web 2.0 way) of sorting data is not by putting it in folders, but by "tagging" it. The idea is: "don't move the data around (even metaphorically), instead, create simple labels for it...

The benefit of such a scheme is tremendous. How many times have you wanted to sort an email into two (or more!) folders... because it logically belonged in BOTH? Most email systems don't let you do this... maybe the very best (that support folders) might allow you to copy the message into both folders... yuck: now your disk-space requirements start going up. Tagging lets you just say, that the message contains informatinon about "travel" and "entertainment", and so you don't have to choose which (of those two folders) to place the email in.

Purists/theoreticians/academics might point out that just because a user-interface depicts folders, that the names of folders could be considered tags, and that internally, a system that allowed you to copy a single mail message into more than one folder wouldn't actually need to create a second copy of the message, but could instead rely on a system of folders with references to messages or something similar.

While this is true, I would argue that it requires more *work* for the end-user. Select message, copy-to-destination-folder. Select-message; copy-to-destination-folder. Compare this with the tagging recommendation system exemplified by http://del.icio.us...

Ads make the Difference
In Google mail, I get to see text ads (that are "tuned" to the text in the mail message I'm viewing). However, Google has the decency to do two things: their ads are neatly coralled in box to the right of my window, and the ads are all text-based. No graphics. No flashy animation. No pop-in-front boxes that you're forced to dismiss.

To be fair, I haven't yet seen pop-in-front boxes on the new Yahoo Mail beta. But I have seen plenty of large and small graphics-based ads. They seem to be for all of the usual topics that you usually get (email-) spammed with (I wonder why that is): mortgages, check-your-credit-rating, and open-a-credit-card. Wow.

I was particularly "intrigued" (?) by a rather large graphical ad for "Nextag"... which claimed, "comparison shopping for mortgages, online-degrees, products, travel and more". First, the ad depicted a young college (?) aged woman sitting in front of a laptop... (I had difficulty believing she represented the average mortgage comparison shopper). But secondly, the list itself was puzzling. I've been watching a lot of "one of these things is not like the others" on Sesame Street with my 2-year-old son... and found several problems with this list... Comparison-shopping for online-degrees??? Talking about this improves the company's reputation how?? And I couldn't figure out what things I might buy that are not products?? But that's fine... if that's what Nextag wants... however: is that the image that Yahoo wants to portray?

I think Yahoo is missing the mark on this upgrade. Maybe I should do Yahoo a favor and stop complaining about their ads. I should close my account with them. It would be simpler and quicker.

Amazon Unbox: Avoid it like the plague

2006-09-19T00:12:00.000-07:00

I wish more people read my blog. Because I think this is a really important issue. I am so sick of reading about DRM and the abusive intentions of the content "owners"...

Cory Doctorow has presented an incisive examination of Amazon's new digital content service called "Unbox".

I'm really totally confused... after reading Cory's article, I expected that there would be at least some sort of price break for becoming enslaved to this service... so I checked on prices for "Napolean Dynamite"... and found the DVD could be purchased from Amazon for $14.99, while the Unboxed edition would cost $17.97... (which included the dubious privilege of allowing me a high-res version viewable on a computer and a version viewable on a portable device... woohoo).

Oh... and I noticed that Unbox won't work on my Apple MacOS machines...

That's funny because I'm pretty sure you can watch all the movies you buy on Apple's iTunes Music Store on your PC... with QuickTime - which works well on both Mac's and PC's.

A quick look shows that (randomly, for instance), "Pirates of the Carribean" goes for $9.99 on iTunes, and for $13.11 as a DVD from Amazon. That seems more reasonable (at least it's cheaper, and there is no installed software consuming my "spare" CPU power that may invalidate my QuickTime file with no notice or appeal). Apple's movies are a slightly lower resolution (640 x 480) than what you might get from a DVD.

Amazon's decision to endorse this particular business model would seem to be really really really dangerous... they've spent years fighting the naysayers who said they could never be profitable, that their model couldn't work, etc. etc. and now have quite a following of loyal customers...

... and I count myself as one of them.

If it weren't for Cory's article, I probably wouldn't have read the fine print in the Unbox agreement and would have just click-signed it. Why? Well, because Amazon has always treated me well. Before this, I would have thought they implicitly agreed with Google's "do no evil" clause.

Will this policy change how people feel about Amazon? Should it? Tell your friends to beware...

I'm sure I'll continue to buy my books from Amazon... but I will certainly keep my eyes open. I like Amazon - I want them to do well. I hope they rethink their DRM business model...

PC Setup (part 2)

2006-07-23T12:33:00.000-07:00

As I return to "Installing my PC" fresh from a relaxing night of sleep, I realize I have to connect to the internet and really-fast download any security updates from Microsoft, install them, and reboot my PC. And hope that I'm not attacked in the interrim.

Why am I so worried about being attacked by viruses? Because. Because I've seen how swarms of people can become unproductive for (at best) an afternoon... or sometimes days... while a company's IT department scrambles to block the virus propagation, and ultimately irradicate it.

The problem is: I don't have an IT department. It's me. If my machine goes haywire, I'm the guy who has to fix it. (Or, I suppose: call somebody to come over and fix it... which has to be even more costly in time and money).

So: I start by customizing the user accounts on my computer. I change the name of the administrator (all-powerful) account, and give it a password. I create a user-account (without administrative privileges!) and give this account a password too. Then, I visit the security settings on the machine. I turn on Windows firewall, and enable Windows updates.

My machine shipped with Norton Antivirus software installed. I contemplate running it... wait: it's already running! And: it's asking me if it can circumvent (or trump!) the Windows firewall... I think about this for a moment, and decide that long-term, I won't be running Norton antivirus... so I'm not going to enable it now.

The whole antivirus industry bothers me a bit. The industry makes money by first scaring people into believing that their computer will become a boat-anchor within minutes of being connected to the internet... unless you purchase (and install) their software. Norton is currently owned by Symantec. Here's an article reporting that Symantec says that (Microsoft Windows XP successor) "Vista" will be less stable than Windows XP. That would seem to be ok if it weren't for the notion that Symantec profits by convincing people that Windows is insecure. And maybe it is. I just don't like hearing about it from the company with $4.1 billion/yr (2005) in sales.

Ok: I'm ready. I connect to the Internet. To be fair, I should let you know that I have a hardware firewall/router between my PC and my DSL modem. That should block an enormous amount of stuff from spontaneously annoying any services running on my PC.

I've already downloaded and installed Mozilla Firefox as my preferred browser. I'm not going to (in general) use MS Internet Explorer 6 to browse the web... for a couple of reasons. One reason is, simply, that MSIE doesn't do such a good job at conforming to HTML standards. That is, it doesn't faithfully follow the "instructions" of HTML... and so I'd rather use a browser that works harder at this. A second reason is that I wholeheartedly oppose a "feature" that MSIE supports: the ability to download arbitrary "ActiveX" code and execute it in the browser. I particularly don't want this done without my consent (which I would never give... except to run MS Windows Update).

Microsoft requires the use of ActiveX plugins when you run Windows Update... which means that you must use MSIE to run Windows Update. Other browsers don't support ActiveX plugins (partially because they are 100% MS Windows-centric). So: while you're downloading and installing patches, Microsoft can take full control over your machine. There's really no reason to require this: one could implement Windows Update without requiring the use of MSIE.

And: for a similar reason, I never intend to run MS Outlook. I'll likely run Mozilla Thunderbird instead. Numerous viruses have been written to exploit Outlook's ability to run certain attachments without first asking the user for confirmation. And then, these attachments can programmatically access the user's addressbook, and send copies of themselves to other users. One might pause for a second and ask why Outlook needs to provide scripting commands powerful enough to do this damage... or why anybody would choose to use (and pay for) Outlook when there are other, better, safer, alternatives (such as Thunderbird).

Ok: so I connect to the Internet. And run Windows Update right away. There are already 37 patches available for my machine, which I download and install.

Now I'm getting close to being able to start some real work...

My next project... is to repartition my disk and install Linux...

PC setup is difficult...

2006-07-23T11:07:00.000-07:00

I finally did it. I bought a brand-new PC (as in "a computer that runs MS Windows") yesterday. Surprisingly, it is my first. Not the first Windows PC I've worked on... by a long shot. Just the first PC that I ever purchased and configured for myself. I've been a software professional for more than 20 years. But at work, all of the Windows machines came pre-configured from the IT department. At home, over the past 20 years, I've owned different types of Apple computers (and even a few Sun computers!).

Have you seen the Apple commercials recently? They're pretty humorous... the one that got my attention recently shows the "PC guy" stuck in his box, lamenting about how he will have to uninstall software and drivers that came pre-installed that he doesn't want, and then spend time installing security patches and updating drivers... all before doing anything productive. The Apple guy just gets out of his box and goes off to make use of the computer... to create music, edit photos, create movies... whatever.

Watch the video: it's fun.

As an Apple owner, I chuckled when watching this... but: surely it couldn't really be that bad, right? Surely this was some exaggeration for effect, right? It's advertising... intended to create fear... *right*?

Well, my first impressions indicate otherwise.

My PC (from HP - they seemed to have the best performance * capacity per dollar during my search) was very professionally packaged in a single box - PC, keyboard, mouse, documentation-kit. I had purchased a nice monitor already, and intended to use that (actually to share it via a KVM switch) with my Mac.

So: I opened it up, and plugged it in; plugged in it's keyboard and mouse. Right away I had a "problem"...

The keyboard and mouse that came with this current-generation (it's July 2006) PC had "PS2 connectors". (My Apple keyboard and mouse are USB). Think about that: there are these two dedicated "PS2" connectors on the back of this PC that serve no other function than to connect a keyboard and mouse to them. Now think about the timeframe: the PS2 keyboard connector was introduced by IBM on the "Personal System 2" series computers back in 1987. That's almost 20 years ago. Apple has been using USB keyboards and mice since 1998 - that's 8 years ago. So: back to my problem. I have a Microsoft USB wireless mouse (yes Microsoft) that I have used on my Apple for quite some time... and that I had used at work for some time (on a Windows XP computer). Surely, I could just plug this nicer mouse into my brand-new PC and things would work fine, right? Wrong. During the initial configuration, (setting the country, timezone, etc.) the system failed to recognize the mouse... I had to use an old PS2 mouse -- and restart the computer to recognize it -- before I could complete this initial configuration.

Step 2. I have been careful to not connect the computer to the Internet (via my home DSL network) yet. I have been warned that the average time it takes for an unprotected PC to be hacked after connecting to the internet is under 40 minutes... (and that was a year ago). So I look to make sure I can re-install the software my machine shipped with... in case something bad happens.

A frenzied look through the packing box shows that I didn't get any CD's or DVD's in my box! Is something wrong? Did they forget to send me "system restore" media? I decide to act cool-headed and read the gray HP "PC Troubleshooting and Maintenance Guide". Mind you, this is not the glossy, colorful "My HP Pavilion PC" guide that looks so much more inviting. No, it's an 8.5" x 11" black-and-white "manual"... that eventually, on page 18, explains how to make System Recovery Media.

There are warnings indicating that you can only make 1 set of media... you can only do this one time! I wonder if I should fully configure my machine... get it "just right" before making the recovery media or not. If something goes wrong in the interrim... my recovery media will be bad. And: in order to get things running "properly", I'll have to connect to the internet... so: it's possible I will have contracted a virus before I create my recovery disks. Rats. I decide that I should create recovery disks that are as close as possible to what I got "out of the box".

Maybe I don't understand this system recovery thing correctly. Reading elsewhere appears to indicate that HP/Microsoft has created a separate restoral directory (or partition?). I can't risk it. The maintenance guide advises creating restoral media... so I start doing this. I am further advised that the media I create will only work on this one computer... (hm... I wonder if it's encrypted with some unique number it finds in the processor...)

I start the restoral media creator program... which advises me that I'll need either 3 DVD-R's or 18 CD-R's to complete the process (!! wow). I opt for DVD's. My new system shipped with a fancy LightScribe all-format DVD/CD reader/writer. And it's surely faster at writing DVD-R's than my 2x unit on my older Apple... It asks me to insert a DVD-R... ok. I start to time the write process... first it has to think about what to write (I don't time that), then: the write starts... it looks like it completes in about 5-7 minutes... great. I should be done with this pretty soon. Wait: it starts to verify the disk... and takes 25 minutes (!!!) to complete this task. Wow. I'm sure it's important to verify (since, after all, I can only create this media once) but 25 minutes!?? Something just doesn't make sense here.

The whole process takes me ONE AND A HALF HOURS to complete.

My Apple MacOS X computers shipped with system restore dvd's... and separate installation CDs for certain 3rd party software. At this point, that would easily be worth $150.

Time for bed: connecting to the internet will have to wait for morning.

Google Checkout looks cool!

2006-06-29T01:15:00.000-07:00

[Updated: 6/30/06]
Google has launched a new product: Google Checkout (recently referred to as "GBuy" in the media) which allows consumers to purchase items online.

This is cool.

There's a snazzy "video" - watch it. Read about it on the Google Checkout Tour site.

As soon as I saw this, I expected that PayPal's days were numbered... but alas, I no longer think that's true...

What's Going On?
It appears that the way this works is that (as a buyer) you register your credit card(s) on your Google account, and can then use these to make purchases on participating vendor sites without revealing your credit card numbers (or email) to those vendors. Pretty cool. And that seems pretty easy.

PayPal Killer? Not yet...
I recently had the "pleasure" of setting up a very small site with PayPal. The idea was that people would register with the site and could then purchase tickets for a one-time event. Sounds simple. All of the PayPal literature made it sound simple... if somewhat expensive. As a non-business, PayPal would charge (a small site) 2.9% + $0.30 for each transaction. Ouch. Nonetheless, I pressed forward. I was amazed at the difficulty I had interpreting PayPal's documentation and interfacing with their system. As I look back on the guidance given today on PayPal's site, they indicate that custom integration could take a programmer between 2 and 20 days. It took me just under 2 (and I thought that was a long time), so: I guess I'm not the worst programmer out there.

So, when I saw Google announce that they would charge 2% + $0.20 per transaction, I thought: "Wow: that's clearly the end of PayPal... just give it time". I figured the Google docs and API's would be rock solid and dead easy to use.

Not so fast.

I started signing up as a Google merchant... and realized that Google is pretty much set up exclusively for receiving BUSINESS payments... and not person-to-person transactions. I got that hint when it asked me for my business federal tax ID number (or credit-card and social security number). I thought: wow: PayPal never asked for a social security number for personal accounts. I'm pretty sure that I set up my PayPal account long ago with just my name, address, and bank account number.

PayPal lets you "email money" to anybody with an email address.

Maybe this tax-ID/social security number stuff is "just" a new Patriot Act regulation.

Or maybe Google needs something like this to authenticate you... (since PayPal uses 2 "micropayment" deposits to your bank account for this purpose)

I have yet to implement a test-case merchant shopping cart on Google Checkout.

More details to follow...

Streaming TV...

2006-05-28T16:15:00.000-07:00

I just did it. I watched my first TV episode as a legitimate "vidcast".
I'm not talking about some small-time video. I'm not talking
about watching a bittorrent of a recording somebody made in
their living room.

I'm talking about an episode of "Alias" broadcast on abc.com. They
have the entire season "online"... for viewing whenever you want.

It's at http://dynamic.abc.go.com/streaming/landing - not
difficult to find... you wouldn't need this blog to get
there.

You can also watch the last 5 episodes of Lost, the last 5 of Desperate
Housewives, or the last season of Commander in Chief.

I had missed the last two episodes of Alias. Normally, I time-shift
these with ReplayTV (to Tivo; as Pepsi is to Coke).

Ok: so the last episodes - the end of the season... and the end (?)
of the story weren't really that great. Sort of a big "let's kill
the bad guys" thing... with enough uncertainty that there could be
a Star Trek -style movie sequel... or something.

But the cool thing was that I was watching what might be called
the beginnings of "IP TV" - that is, TV that you watch on your own
time, without having pre-recorded it, and without needing to find
a copy that somebody else made.

One wonders just how much Steve Jobs had to do with this... with
the somewhat recent acquisition by Disney of Pixar (of which Steve
was CEO; now, he serves on Disney's board of directors).

For comparison, I thought I'd visit the the online video offerings of NBC, CBS,
and FOX - to see what shows they offered for streaming viewing. There's nothing
on any of these sites that comes close to what ABC is offering. Nothing.

NBC has a bunch of annoying clips. I say annoying because they're between 15 seconds
and 5 minutes long. So: you have to spend all of your time clicking around the site
looking for something. Certainly, you can't go watch the last 5 episodes of "The Office"
or "My Name is Earl" or "Scrubs" or "Conan O'Brien".

CBS has a nicer layout... and appears to be trying to sell episodes for 99 cents. Likely
to compete with Apple's Itunes... which is selling episodes of ABC programming for
download to your iPod. But wait - CBS on demand appears to only be selling the last
season of "Survivor"... ! for now... What's even more strange is that the older season
episodes, #1-#6 go for $1.99, while the more recent #7-#15 go for $0.99 each.
And there's a strange-sounding "Go Rent" button attached to these... presumably to
highlight the notion that whatever you may think, you don't "own" the things you
pay money for.
You can watch Letterman elsewhere on the site in a piecemeal fashion -- it's easier
to navigate than NBC's site, but still, not completely enjoyable.

FOX doesn't do much better. There's lots of information on the shows... play-by-play
descriptions of what happened in each episode of 24... but no video to speak of.
Compared to ABC, very disappointing. Sure, FOX says they'll be running season 5 of
"24" in 2 hour segments on Fridays... but that just means that I'd have to program my
Tivo/Replay to record it. What a waste. ABC is far ahead of the game here.

[[I am in no way affiliated with ABC.com, Disney, Pixar, or Apple.]]

NSA: Please help me.

2006-05-12T09:15:00.000-07:00

USAToday reported recently that the NSA has compiled an enormous database
of the phone transaction records of millions of Americans.

People are rightly concerned. It's good to see this covered in the news.
Maybe we should hold local debates on the topic as well - it would be interesting
to get the average person involved in the discussion - both to learn what s/he
thinks, and perhaps to broaden the perspectives of the general public.

I don't want to justify the existence of this NSA phone database. Or of
continuing to collect data that adds to it. But: I want help with a problem.
I want access to a slice of this database.

I want to know who's been calling me.

Too much phone spam.
I estimate that for every "legitimate" phone call I receive - that is, a call from
somebody I know and care to talk to - I receive 5 that are junk, phone-spam,
telemarketers. I consider each of these phone-spam calls to be trespass. It's
an invasion of my home. Noise pollution. Interruption. Trespass.

I think many Americans would agree. None of us purchased a phone line for the
privilege of having telemarketers call us. None of us (I hope!) sits around at night
hoping for a phone call that would lower his mortgage with some unbelievable
offer that is just too good to be true.

Postal junk mail is bad enough: at least I don't (yet) pay for my mailbox.

CallerID is a joke. It doesn't work for *any* of these phone-spam calls. So: my
phone-answering technique is reduced to this simple rule: if you don't identify
yourself by caller-id when you call me, your call goes to my answering machine.
If you don't start talking (and aren't selling me something), I'll probably won't
pick up the phone and talk to you. Phone-screening: What a waste of my time.

I'm sure that the caller's true identity is in the NSA database. And the NSA probably
knows something else: they probably know if a single marketing corporation has
hundreds of phone lines owned by companies with different names... that these all
effectively originate from one place. They probably have all sorts of fancy ways of
cutting through identity subterfuge that telemarketers use.

I'd like access to this information.

I think it would help us consumers. Help us to get rid of this abuse of our private
property - the peace and quiet we expect at home.

What Would Jobs Do?

2006-02-27T14:21:00.000-08:00

It's predicted that Apple will make one or more "big announcements" tomorrow... at 10am PST. Whatever happens... make sure to check out Engadget's "What Would Jobs Do" contest results...

Speculation is that the announcement could be an updated MacMini w/ Intel inside, or perhaps a new video iPod with a larger touchscreen display

And then there's the Barron's article suggesting that (perhaps not tomorrow) Apple will buy Disney.

If you haven't seen it yet, stop by Engadget's page where they hosted the "What Would Jobs Do" (3) contest... this is where people send in their ideas for the "next thing" that Steve might/should release... the entries range from ideas that make you say, "hm... that makes sense" to... "that's amazingly funny" - check it out.

Why not a 20-blade razor??

2006-01-31T09:55:00.000-08:00

Some time last year, somebody suggested that there was an ongoing "arms race" in shaving technology. I'm talking about disposable razor blade systems. "If a few is good, more is better"... This seemed ridiculous to me... what little did I know...

It all started when somebody pointed me to this satirical post on TheOnion.com... [Warning: there's "strong" language on the Onion's article; if you're likely to be offended, don't click on it]. Ok: here's the link. I say "satirical" because I assumed that it was meant to make fun at the idea that 3 blades on your razor was plenty... (I'm still using 2-blade technology) or maybe even ridiculous... who would possibly add even more blades?

But, now it's happened. Gillette is introducing their new Fusion 5-blade razor product. There's news that indicates we'll see ads for it during the SuperBowl this weekend. Wow: 5 blades. There's a fancy Flash presentation on the Gillette website detailing the features of this product. Who knows... maybe I'll have to try it... maybe it's really great.

It just sounds silly.

Google Video Store... not perfect

2006-01-10T23:29:00.000-08:00

I've come to expect perfection from Google. At least an open-minded attempt at perfection in a "do-no-evil" sort of way. I'm part of the minority. I regularly prefer to use Apple MacOS products over Microsoft Windows products. Partly because they're a helluva lot easier to use. And they provide a helluva lot more features. Features I care about. Not features like, "we're getting rid of the registry after N decades because it was a really stupid idea to start with". But I digress.

Google products can be sorted into 3 categories:

Things that run on any computer (because of web standards).
Things that run Windows and Mac (because Google created special packages for these two OSs)
Things that run only on Windows (and might someday run on Mac's... maybe).

The most important things belong to category 1 - products like, Google search, Gmail, Google Talk (actually, Google Talk straddles categories 1 and 3; you can use a jabber-compatible messaging client to connect to the Google Talk server, but the Google Talk client runs only on Windows), and the web-hosted video.google.com video viewer.

As of today, Google Earth has transitioned from category 3 to category 2!!! (Hooray - thank you - I wish it had happened sooner). I'm sorry for all of the Linux users out there... presumably, you still can't run Google Earth... (yet I've heard that it's possible to run Google Earth on Linux via WinE).

Category 3 is troubling. Because it indicates that Google has decided that "people not running the Microsoft OS are not (so) important Google customers". Ouch. That hurts. Early versions of Google Video didn't offer transcoding... so a bunch of videos couldn't be watched on Mac's. Google fixed this with a spiffy transcoder and flash player that I blogged about before.

As I indicated, Google Earth went thru a long PC/Windows-only phase.

And now Google announces the Google Video Store... with titles from CBS, the NBA, and more available for purchase... HOWEVER: many titles are "Category 3"... they're accompanied by a little message, "Sorry, purchasing this video requires Windows 2000 or Windows XP." Huh!?

Why not transcode the video into the superior mpeg4 format? Apple provides QuickTime viewers for Windows machines... and surely there are alternative mpeg4 viewers for Windows as well. Or make several formats available? The Wayback Machine has figured this out and offers many videos in multiple formats, often including mpeg4... in fact, it looks like that site is a reasonable alternative to video.google.com for individuals wanting to publish their videos.

No web videos of CES keynotes?

2006-01-06T08:21:00.000-08:00

The Consumer Electronics Show started this week in Las Vegas. As often, the opening day keynote was delivered by Bill Gates. Checking the CES web site, transcripts are now available, but - surprisingly, since this is a show about technology - there are no webcasts posted on the CES website!

This is amazing. In a world where major conferences from Sun (JavaOne, Network Computing), Apple (MacExpo, Mac Developers Conference), and others routinely share their keynotes via video webcasts from their websites, it seems really strange that the premier consumer electronics show in the country doesn't maximize its use of current technology to share its keynotes with a much much wider audience than could directly attend the show.

Well, Microsoft is apparently more tech-savvy than CES... Bill's CES keynote is available from their website...

And Intel's keynote by Paul Otellini is available on Intel's website... WAIT - ONLY if you view it with Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.5 or better and Windows Media Player 9. Huh!??!? Didn't Apple and Intel just enter into a new relationship... where Apple decided to convert its processor line from IBM/Motorola's PowerPC to Intel processors!?? And didn't Microsoft just re-announce the end of support for Internet Explorer on MacOS?? They suggest "that Macintosh users migrate to more recent web browsing technologies such as Apple's Safari."

Oh look: now Yahoo has posted Terry Semel's keynote on their vidcast beta website... it's good to see that they're using state-of-the-art technology - mpeg4 - for their streaming.

Still no sign of Google's Larry Page keynote from Friday... (why isn't this available on video.google.com!??)

It seems that CES is all about creating buzz... and ultimately providing the opportunity to sell new product. This could be enhanced many-fold by rebroadcasting the video associated with the keynotes.

No more Internet Explorer on Apple Macs - who cares?

2005-12-19T09:27:00.000-08:00

It is being reported today here that Microsoft will cease development of Internet Explorer for Apple Macintosh computers.

Thank you.

Now, when people tell me that they're using a Macintosh, I don't have to ask, "what browser are you using?" - I know that there's a 99% chance that they'll either be using the Apple-supplied Safari, or Mozilla's Firefox.

Stop using Microsoft Internet Explorer (IE)

2005-12-03T11:33:00.000-08:00

People don't seem to get it. When I say that I refuse to use Internet Explorer to browse the web, many people look at me quizzically, with a funny "huh?" on their face. Why not? Because there are too many bugs in Internet Explorer (IE) - it's just not safe to use.

Here's another report of a serious bug in IE... that allows a user access another program (and thereby gain access, potentially, to information that the owner would have assumed was secure).

This problem is compounded by the number of security bugs that exist in Microsoft's operating systems... and by the enormous market-share these products enjoy.

This isn't my any means the first of these bugs. And don't get me started about how big a security hole is introduced by IE's ability to download and run Active/X plugins.

So, what do I use? Mozilla Firefox. Yes, there are other choices. For me, Firefox combines a large enough audience with some very good features. And, it's evolving in open-source-time - that is, new versions come out every quarter or so. And I have the comfort of knowing that if I really wanted to fix something or make a change, I could download the sources and do so.

Stop accepting the mediocrity of the browser that ships with your Windows-based PC. Download Firefox. Convert to Firefox. And browse with confidence.

Why are John McCain and Hillary Clinton advising California voters?

2005-11-07T16:44:00.000-08:00

I just received a letter from Arizona Republican Senator John McCain urging me to vote for California proposition 77. This message was paid for by Governor Schwarzenegger's California Recovery Team. Last week, I received a "special message" from New York Democratic Senator Hillary Clinton urging me to vote no on proposition 75. This message was paid for by the California Democratic Party.

Maybe I should be happy: 1 Republican senator and 1 Democratic senator wrote to give me advice.

I'm more concerned about why these senators from out-of-state think it's in their best interest to give advice to California voters on their issues at home.

[[Originally, I posted my opinions on these propositions - I think that detracts from my primary message/concern, and so I've removed that here]]

More Fair Trade Coffee

2005-11-04T00:15:00.000-08:00

As I posted earlier, I only recently discovered the whole notion of Fair Trade Coffee somewhat accidentally, by venturing to this site while perusing current del.icio.us links. Since I enjoy drinking coffee, I decided to learn more about this type of coffee... in particular, where could I get some, and would it be really expensive?

I started by visiting my local Trader Joe's... and was surprised that I could only find one package that was labeled Fair Trade. Other prominent labels included "organic" and "shade grown". I ended up buying some coffee (not the Fair Trade stuff) that I wasn't really satisfied with in the end...

Some time passed. I found myself visiting relatives in northern California, and remarked that I particularly liked the coffee that they drank on this particular occasion. They said they got it from the local Long's drug store... The coffee we drank was labeled "Brazilian Hazelnut" from Santa Cruz Coffee... (normally I don't like flavored coffees, but the Hazelnut was very subtle). I visited the Long's, hoping to buy some coffee to take home, and found the shelves almost entirely bare.

So, I found the website of Santa Cruz Coffee, and decided to order 4 pounds of it. It arrived nicely packed a few weeks ago. ALL of their coffees are labeled Fair Trade Organic! The stuff is really great - I can't recommend them highly enough. And visit their website. It's got an informative education section. So far, I've tried the Brazilian Hazelnut, the Nutcracker Cinnamon Hazelnut, the Santa Cruz Full City, the Bean of the Earth, and their Vanilla Viennese Decaf.

Ok: Why did I get flavored coffees if I said I didn't like flavored coffees? Because there's some confusion about which coffee is which on the website. At my relatives' house, I had tasted the "Brazilian Hazelnut", but there was no such coffee listed on the website... so, I tried ordering both of the hazelnut-like coffees. It turns out that the coffee described on the website as "Hazelnut" arrives labeled as "Brazilian Hazelnut"... so: that was the one I was looking for.

My least favorite is the Cinnamon Hazelnut. My favorite oscillates between the Brazilian Hazelnut and the Full City.

I seem to like mildly nutty-flavored coffees. Next, I'm going to look for a Chickoree flavored coffee from New Orleans...

Steven Colbert's Ears

2005-11-03T14:42:00.000-08:00

I can't get them out of my mind... at least while watching the show - the Colbert Report. You may know that the "Colbert Report" is a show on Comedy Central... following Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show". Steven Colbert used to be a correspondent (?) on the Daily Show, and has since spun off his own show - "The Colbert Report".

Ok: what's the problem? The other night, I was watching the Colbert Report, and early in the show, Steven mentioned that his show was getting all sorts of critique in the blogosphere... including a comment on how one of his ears sticks out differently than the other one. Wow. I had never noticed that. Although I've faithfully watched "The Daily Show" for years, I had never noticed this before.

Now, I can't help but notice it. It's now very distracting. It takes away from my concentration on the heavy thoughts expressed in The Colbert Report. Watch it.

Google Video - WOW

2005-09-27T12:47:00.000-07:00

Ok. Wow.

Google just posted (ok, I'm a day or two behind) about their updated Google video technology... and is introducing it with the ability to watch UPN's "Everybody Hates Chris" for 4 days... This is really awesome.

I had a prior post about an earlier version of Google video (which appeared to be usable only on MSWindows) which I had saved in draft form because I thought maybe it was too rant-like... but: since that problem is now obsolete, I'll publish it and refer to it.

I'm running a DSL connection and ... this is actually watchable. And, it's not a 64x64 thumb-sized "window"... it's big! Try it!!

Nevertheless, I hope this awesome use of technology and bandwidth doesn't proclude the introduction in the US of truly high-bandwidth Internet... such as that available in Japan, and (as reported by slashdot) now introduced in the UK.

May I See Some ID?

2005-09-22T00:49:00.000-07:00

It happened again. And I think it's about time I write about it.

I was making a small purchase by credit card when the cashier asked me, "Can I see some ID?" - not, "Can I see YOUR ID?" but just "some" ID. Ok, I'm not really picking on the language... Dutifully, I pulled my driver's license from the same wallet I had just pulled my credit card out of. Now the key here (I forgot to include this in the original post), is that the cashier NEVER looks at my face to see if the ID matches me... hence, it really isn't ID!

Now wait -- isn't there something suspicious here?

I've been assuming all along that, "Can I see some ID?" means that somebody is trying to protect me... except that I really don't understand how this system is supposed to work.

Suppose I'm a thief. Hypothetically, please! Suppose I just got finished pickpocketing a wallet... so: suppose I look at the ID in the wallet, learn the guy's name, and practice his signature 10 or so times. Now... suppose I go buy something with one of the credit cards. When the cashier asks, "Can I see some ID?", I confidently pull out the driver's license. I sign the receipt and walk away with my goods. Now: how was the owner of the credit card protected??

There may have been cameras, etc. but specifically, what good did showing the ID of the wallet serve??

If my credit card is stolen, I call my credit card issuer and report it stolen... and sure: I'm "protected" for transactions purchased within some time and price window. But isn't that just covered by some form of insurance that the credit card charges to merchants (and therefore, indirectly, to me) through their service fee? Or what about the exhorbitant rates that some credit card companies charge... 19%... 22%... 26%...!??

So again, I'm confused: what purpose does me pulling out my driver's license serve? If I'm not purchasing an age-controlled substance (say, liquor), what right or need does the merchant (or cashier) have in looking at my ID?

All of this leads into a blog for another day... have you ever considered how insecure the entire credit-card system is? Given that all sorts of third parties have your credit card information, and given that no identification is required to use a credit card by phone, why isn't this an ENORMOUS problem?

Fair Trade Coffee

2005-09-21T00:51:00.000-07:00

Ok... this is a pretty random post for me...

I was trolling the del.icio.us home page... to see what I might find... and ran across a blog that somebody had linked to... with both an interesting name... and possibly talking about an interesting topic: "Green Fair Trade Coffee". So: not being as green and hip, and up-to-date as I probably should be, I googled, "fair trade coffee"... and found this site... Of course, I also had to consult wikipedia here and here just to be sure... [[and during this sojourn, I discovered the definition of the "Second World" which had been bothering me for some time (tho' apparently not enough to actually go out of my way to look it up), since we seem to count from first to third lately...]].

Anyway, this all seems pretty reasonable to me... especially with designer coffee drinks going for US$ 3 or more...

So: from now on: I'll be looking for organic fair-trade coffee...

Now... maybe I should spend some time figuring out why farming the world over seems to need subsidizing... have we colluded to form the problem? Or is the problem (of requiring subsidy) intrinsic somehow?

Superheating Water

2005-09-17T12:37:00.000-07:00

I have a confession to make. I've marveled about this before... talked about it among friends... Daily, I am re-fascinated each time I heat a cup of water in the microwave... daily, at least on days that I drink instant coffee instead of taking time to make a pot.

I've found that if you take a smoothly glazed coffee cup, fill it with water (mine is always filtered), and heat it in the microwave... not quite long enough to make it boil (for me, this is 2 minutes on "hi")... you'll end up with a very interesting cup of hot water.

At this point, if you're not careful, when you add the instant coffee, you'll end up with an "explosion" of hot coffee. The first few times I did this, I had coffee all over the countertop and all over the floor. More than half of the water "exploded" out of the cup.

Now, I add the coffee slowly (with a spoon)... and watch... as each addition of coffee causes the mixture to boil a bit.

Not that instant coffee tastes "great", but I'm convinced that my instant coffee tastes better this way than if I boiled a pot of water, and added it to a cup filled with a teaspoon of instant coffee.

Here are a few links for further reading.

Migrating iTunes and iPhoto repositories on a network

2005-09-16T17:12:00.000-07:00

I just bought a 2GB SanDisk CompactFlash card for my EOS20D. Great: now I can take upwards of 400 pictures (in superfine jpg mode), or 195 pictures (in RAW mode)... but: I now realize that I don't have enough space on my PowerBook laptop to hold even one more 2GB download.

The good news is that I have a new MacMini on the home network... with roughly 63GB free on it.

So: what's the "right" way to transfer these photos to the MacMini...? I will likely want to view the photos from the PowerBook... even while I travel... so: I'll want a subset repository (perhaps photos with ratings of 3 or more "stars")... What's the right way to do this?

I have a similar problem with my iTunes music...

So far, (I haven't researched this much yet: decided to blog before discovering the result), I have found:

How to transfer files from your PC to your Mac but this doesn't really deal with maintaining the repository on a home network.

I suppose I should start by perusing the online help... and then Apple's support website...

Katrina Diaries

2005-09-16T12:01:00.000-07:00

My sister and her husband were fortunate enough to have left New Orleans more than 24 hours before Katrina hit. She, her husband, and her cats are all ok. After some discussion, I was able to convince my sister to start a blog about her ongoing experience... the evolving uncertainty of what remains... and what to do next...

Google Video requires Windows??

2005-08-21T07:51:00.000-07:00

I just tried to watch a video on Google Video... a somewhat new beta-level (preview) service offered by Google. I picked up a link to a video from a friend's blog and when I clicked on it... nothing. You see, I'm running MacOS X. And, Google video requires you to download the Google Video player... which only runs on Windows. Or so it would seem...

So: I have to ask a few questions: first off, why do we need yet another video format? And, in particular, why not use the highly acclaimed mp4 format? In particular, I guess I'm talking about the amazing compression available with H.264, ratified as a part of mp4. Apple's Quicktime 7 supports playback of mp4 on Apple and Windows platforms... and Quicktime 7 Pro allows you to create H.264 mp4 videos from either platform. (The Windows version of Quicktime 7 Pro is in "preview 3" as I write this). I'm sure there are other H.264 authoring environments on Windows, as well...

Now: back to Google Video... I'm not sure what they're trying to achieve yet... but other video archive sites have sensibly included lots of mp4 video. For one thing, it looks really great. For another, you can achieve much larger (on the screen) video images for a given amount of bandwidth. Unfortunately, the whole world doesn't have 20+Mb/sec internet connections like they do in Japan.

Ok... as I dig into this... it's getting more interesting... I'll probably have to split this post into several more somehow... apparently, Google Video player is based on the VideoLan VLC 0.8.2 player which is available for both Windows and MacOS X... the key is "based on"... apparently, there are patches which have been applied to this player... so far, I haven't found a link where somebody is offering a MacOS X port of the VLC with the Google enhancements... but I'll keep looking and maybe work on it myself.

Now, interestingly, it appears that VLC is a video player to end all video players... (!) It supports all sorts of video formats... that is, it transcodes from one format to another... and provides a sort-of universal streaming server...

Choosing blog site names is hard.

2005-08-19T21:59:00.000-07:00

So, I've just renamed this blog from to "blogspout". Somehow, I thought that http://blogspout.blogspot.com would be funny. It turns out that an amazing number of other names that I tried were already used... things that I didn't expect would have been thought of... had been.

Among the list were: "noncents" (this was my favorite at the time)... and "blogopoly"... and "blogocity"... and "nonon"... and "noton"... and "linear"... and "nonlinear"... and "grok"... and "grokthis"... and "grokme"... and "grokit"...

Given that I'm somewhat new to blogging, maybe "blogspout" is a bit pretentious... we'll see how it goes.

Let me know what you think about the name. Should I keep it or keep looking?

Apple's new "Mighty Mouse"

2005-08-04T10:27:00.000-07:00

It strikes me as strange that much of what is written seems to tell history badly. And also misrepresents the current state of affairs.

Various articles are claiming that "it's long overdue" that Apple support a multi-button mouse. That's just plain misleading. Apple's MacOS has supported a multi-button mouse for years. I have a 3 button mouse installed on my iMac. It works great - all of the buttons do what I expect. I have a scroll-wheel. It works too. Fantastic. So: what's the problem?

The "Mighty Mouse" is the first multi-button mouse that Apple is selling for their computers.

Multi-button mice were most likely introduced long-ago on Unix computers. I remember using a 3-button mouse on SunOS 1.1 back in 1985. It appears that X-Windows, developed at MIT in conjunction with DEC (Digital Equipment Corporation, later bought by Compaq, later bought by HP) first supported three-button mice for the widespread public.

What are Good Blog Topics?

2005-07-28T23:58:00.000-07:00

Ok. So, I'm new to blogging. So, I thought I'd spend some time trying to figure out what types of things should get blogged about... and what shouldn't. Maybe I have too much time on my hands, but it seems like this organization might be helpful.

See what others have said about this. Surely somebody has.

windows media vs mp4

2005-07-28T23:52:00.000-07:00

Ever watch a webcast of say a corporate announcement from Apple, Sun, or Microsoft? Ever consider which one appears to sound the best and look the best? I just watched the "Longhorn is now called Vista" video on the ms website. Wow. What a completely unimpressive piece of streaming video. I'm sure it looked great if you were there live, but this "video" sure looks sad.

Now: compare with Apple's latest developer conference videos in quicktime/mpeg4.

Or: with Sun's keynotes from their latest JavaOne conference in RealPlayer...

Comments?

2004-11-02T10:41:00.000-08:00

Leave comments here... if you stop by... say so.

Start

2004-11-02T10:07:00.000-08:00

Here's my first post... it's election day. So far, it sounds like the lines are unusually gi-normous. I'm expecting a Kerry victory - we'll see what happens.

Starters

2004-11-01T11:04:00.000-08:00

Ok: this is just to get started here. Comments on Java, politics, Go will follow.