Geeky Baldismstag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//22008-08-16T19:01:12ZI'm bald, I'm a geek, and I have an opinion. Check in every now and then and see how silly it is.Movable Type 3.33AOL in 1994tag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.5522008-08-16T18:15:16Z2008-08-16T19:01:12ZIt was the summer of 1994. I had managed to install a 2400-baud modem in my PC running DOS 6.22 (no easy task in itself, ever heard of a DMA interrupt?) and was feeling my oats. I plugged the 3...Ron Enderland
It was the summer of 1994. I had managed to install a 2400-baud modem in my PC running DOS 6.22 (no easy task in itself, ever heard of a DMA interrupt?) and was feeling my oats. I plugged the 3 1/2" floppy containing AOL 2.0 into the slot and began the install.
The software found my modem and dialed an 800 number. About a half-hour later, I was a full-fledged AOL member with my very first email address (renderland@aol.com, go ahead and harvest that one, spambots ;-).
AOL ran quickly enough over the old modem, but when I upgraded to a 14,400 later that year, it absolutely screamed. I soon began accumulating many free hours by referring friends. I didn't feel a bit guilty doing so, because it was worth every penny I paid for it (around 25 bucks a month).
I picked up quite a few gigs as a fledgling penman via the Writer's Area. There were the freebies at first, followed by gigs that paid modest fees.
When I wanted to kill a little extra free time, I searched through the profiles. In those freewheeling days, people would post lots of information about themselves, AND answer polite emails! Thus I exchanged correspondence with the great columnist Mike Royko and Dodger reliever (formerly Cardinal) Todd Worrell, among others.
When I got Windows 95, I also surfed the web via a direct dial-up. The web was a vast, uncharted territory, according to AOL. They couldn't be held responsible for any virii contained in files that you obtained from archie searches, one of the few internet services that they offered then. Pretty scary stuff.
They have sucked for some time. And the way they do the hard sell when users try to quit is the stuff of legend.
But I have fond memories of the kinder, gentler, more personable AOL of 1994. If the company is to survive, that perception will have to return.
Frankly, I think Microsoft has a better chance of getting that rep than today's AOL.]]>
Mirsky's WOTWtag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.5482008-08-08T04:09:44Z2008-08-08T05:21:24ZIt was like a glorious fireball streaking across the worldwide web's sky. It was so bright and beautiful that you knew it wouldn't live long. It was Mirsky's Worst of the Web. My web surfing experiences began in 1995. One...Ron Enderland
Wikipedia entry,
Mirsky's Worst Of The Web (WOTW) was devoted to showcasing what Mirsky considered "the worst web sites ever". WOTW was the first well-trafficked site to feature "bad" web sites for entertainment purposes. His commentary was short on constructive criticism and long on insulting the web site layout, content and graphics, and sometimes the web designers themselves.
What I remember was gut-hurting hilarity. The sites were bad to the extreme, and Mirsky's commentary was like rich whipped cream on top of a perfect dessert.
Here are a few recollections that I have:
A site that sold horse sausage, complete with lots of gory photos of horses being turned INTO sausage.
A software sales site created by a man (I'll never forget the name, Martin Fung) for whom English was a second, or possibly third language. The site had obscenities innocently dropped into its sales pitches, and a cartoon image of a pool of urine.
A web page at a major university's web site (unfortunately I can't recall which one) touting the convenient locations of nearby liquor stores.]]>
this site, which may well have qualified as a candidate itself.
Mirsky reportedly got burnt out and quit looking for sites in middle 1996. Mirsky.com became an online t-shirt sales site.
There are certainly some funny sites on the web today, but none as hilarious as Mirsky's, circa 1995, and his tireless searches for the worst that the web had to offer. I miss him, and hope he's doing well.
A few Mirsky WOTW winners still proudly survive: Here, here, here, and here, among others.]]>
Let's All Weep for Barry Bondstag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.5432008-07-30T19:14:14Z2008-07-30T19:25:48ZBarry Bonds can't get a job. A recent Sports Illustrated article outlined the steroid user's travails in that no team wants him. His agent (who would apparently deal with the devil himself) is talking about investigating the possibility of collusion....Ron Enderland
this article.
I hope Bonds never plays again. I hope he goes to prison for perjury. I hope his records get an asterisk, which is baseball's ultimate penalty. Just ask the family of Roger Maris, who did absolutely nothing wrong, but received one anyway.
But instead, look for the grotesquely muscled "superstar" to be wearing pinstripes soon. Look for the "faithful" fans to boo at first, then become hysterical supporters with his first tainted home run.]]>
Shark Tank, One of My favorite Online Stopstag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.5342008-07-16T18:13:47Z2008-07-17T02:04:17ZThis one's for you, Anonymous (for Obvious Reasons), THX1138, Fatman, Mad Hatter, Cowgirls (both the original, and #2), Chicago, Roland, Bogey1, bear in a box (who works somewhere on the other side of the International Date Line), fluffyjacket1984 (who has...Ron Enderland
Computerworld's Shark Tank. I became an instant fan.
The premise behind Shark Tank is that funny and/or frustrating in a funny sort of way things happen in the IT trenches. And we might as well laugh at them, because it's more fun than crying, and you get in big trouble for bringing weapons to work!
ST has gone through some changes over the years. While always relying on a daily email to get the stories out, and archiving a couple year's worth on their site, a while back they switched to a short email teaser. The rest of the daily account is on their site.
I was disturbed at first. I had created a rule, first in Lotus Notes, then in Outlook when my company switched, to send the daily Shark to a folder to be browsed when the day wasn't going well.
But Computerworld added another feature at the same time: comments on the daily tale.
At first, I was taken aback by the number of people whose comments consisted of how lame the story was, and how ST had gone to pot. What was with these people? If they hated the concept so much, what were they doing there?
Enter JIM THE BOSS.]]>
JTB thoroughly outraged the whiners. Who was this buffoon who posted in all caps and made such bizarre comments? He was making it difficult to complain about these crap ST tales!
Anyhow, JIM caused a mass exodus of the joyless. One anonymous fire-breather hung around for about nine months before he too finally left for less light-hearted pastures. What is left is a cadre of folks from all over the world who have always-pertinent commentary about each day's entry. Oh, and the occasional noob who feels the need to correct JIM's grammatical errors!
And the stories themselves, more often than not, still rock. I've been fortunate enough to have five of my own published. I look forward every weekday to that little escape and the bantering with my online friends after the actual posting.
So if you're a harried geek, or just appreciate a good-natured laugh at the expense of the clueless, check out Shark Tank. And if you're into bombastic tales of self-importance, you can check out where most of the departed detractors have taken up residence: CW's other hangout, Shark Bait.
Just don't be too offended if the next ST account and/or commentary is about YOU!
ZDNet, What's up with Ed Bott and His Comment Section?tag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.5262008-07-04T22:33:59Z2008-07-04T23:34:12ZSome of my earliest, happiest memories of computing involve the fine folks over at ZDNet. From the mega-cool PCMag utilities to the excellent informative journalism that is found in their print publications, my overall impression of this publishing house is...Ron Enderland
For years, Microsoft has occasionally updated its Windows Update client software automatically on systems that are configured to check for updates. This has been true even when Windows Update is set to simply check for (and optionally, download) updates but not to install them. (snip, snip)
Unlike previous Windows Update updates, this one isn’t sneaking in under anyone’s radar. In addition to the Microsoft Update blog, this update will be documented in an updated version of Knowledge Base article 946928 (“Information for network administrators about how to obtain the latest Windows Update Agent”) and will be available for download there.
Gee, that's nice of Microsoft, isn't it? To actually TELL you before it forces an update on your system (unless you completely opt out of Windows update alltogether)? Of course, Bott's take on this is that it is necessary, polite, and overall, just peachy-keen.
I guess we're all allowed our favorite operating systems. I guess that if threats of operating system shutdowns, taking away of functionality, and possible legal prosecution if you can't prove your software is legitimate is your thing, then Microsoft is for you.
But that's not what makes me bad-crazy about Bott's style. No, it's the difficulty in responding with an opposing viewpoint at his blog that really gets my dander up.]]>
this blog entry.
I was attempting to come to the defense of reader martin23, who expressed his disappointment in the article, pointing out that it seemed to contradict a stand that Bott had earlier taken.
Of course, these are all opinions here, no clear right or wrong. Bott responded with a retort, then was joined by his minion of fellow Windows fans who frequent his blog.
I basically told martin23 that he was wasting his time here with his opposing views, neither Bott nor Windows could do any wrong at this particular forum.
My comment was promptly deleted.
I posted again, wondering why.
That comment was yanked within minutes as well.
Bott then posted the following:
About Talkback moderation
This is reposted from an earlier thread:
If you've posted a comment here recently and found that it was deleted, this message is for you.
As I've said repeatedly, I am not a moderator here. I do not have access to the tools that manage TalkBack message boards. I cannot delete a single TalkBack comment, and I can only edit my own posts. If your comment is deleted, that action was taken by a ZDNet moderator.
Posts get deleted for a variety of reasons. The most common are that they engage in name-calling and abusive behavior. The second most common is that they are off-topic.
Readers have made it very clear they are tired of off-topic posts and of flame wars, and the moderators are responding to that request. If you want the world to read a news article about something you find interesting, start your own blog and post it there. Or find a blog post or news article that is relevant to that topic and post it in the discussion under that post. But don't post that off-topic link or comment here: The moderators are taking a firmer line on these posts, in the interests of improving the TalkBack section for everyone.
Comments that are directly relevant to the content of a post are always welcome. Contrary points of view are welcome and even encouraged, as long as they are relevant to the topic of the current post and don't violate other terms of service.
The full terms of use are here:
http://www.cnetnetworks.com/editorial/terms.html
Meanwhile, if you have a problem with this policy, please don't complain about it here. That's not the point of this Talkback thread, and your comment will probably be deleted as off-topic. To contact the editors of ZDNet about this or any other policy, use this form:
http://zdnet.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/zdnet.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php
So I responded a final time, saying that my comment WAS on-topic, that I was attempting to support an opposing view that was getting badly spanked by Bott and his fans.
That one lasted about a minute before being yanked.
Fair enough. I made this post:
Completely off-topic. Absolutely, positively against the stated comments policy. In case it DOES get deleted, here it is:
Commenting weirdness
Is anyone else having any problems posting opposing viewpoint comments at Ed Bott's blog without having them swiftly deleted?
Posted by: bbbaldie_z Posted on: 07/03/08 (Edited: 07/03/2008 @ 09:21)
Twenty-four hours later, still there.
So apparently, you can get away with posting comments that are all over the map, discussion-wise, at ZDNet as long as you pick your spots.
Try an opposing comment at Bott's blog, or defend someone else with one, and see how long THAT takes.]]>
The Door Is Open?tag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.5242008-06-26T17:45:09Z2008-06-26T18:23:31ZThis article by Computerworld's Cyber-Cynic, Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, says that MS has fubarred their desktop scenario so badly by dropping XP (despite customer pleadings to the contrary) and pushing Vista that the door is wide open for Linux and Macs...Ron Enderland
This article by Computerworld's Cyber-Cynic, Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, says that MS has fubarred their desktop scenario so badly by dropping XP (despite customer pleadings to the contrary) and pushing Vista that the door is wide open for Linux and Macs to take over a significant chunk of the desktop market.
I agree to a point.
Yes, Vista is crap, for many reason, not the least of which is found here. Yes, for every Vista apologist on comment boards, I would estimate that there are at least five detractors, probably ten. Yes, it's finally the dream OS as far as the RIAA and the MPAA are concerned.
But what is going to have to happen is that PC manufacturers get fed up enough to tell MS to shove their pre-install policy where the sun's rays fail to penetrate.
Do you really think people would go out and buy Vista to run their computers if it wasn't already installed? Take a look at Vista's store shelf sales to see the answer.
Microsoft, which was nailed by the DOJ way back in 1994 for "monopolistic" practices that strongly discouraged PC manufacturers from offering any operating system but theirs, has apparently complied with the letter of the law, as far as the government is concerned.]]>
the lack of crapware kickbacks is what makes an inherently more secure Vista-less machine cost more from Dell.
My next machine will be a no-brainer. I'll buy a bare-bones system from TigerDirect or a competitor and install my own FOSS OS. And I also offer to do the same for a select group of friends. I could probably be persuaded to do so on a commercial basis, as well. Once you get past the setup process, Linux just WORKS.
But a whole bunch more folks like myself will have to get fed up, or, more importantly, the PC manufacturers will have to feel the pinches that make it in their own best interests to offer Vista as an optional included install CD rather than a pre-installed OS.
If that ever happens, THEN look for Linux to make some serious inroads on the home users' desktop PC's.]]>
Vista to Firefox: Thou Shalt Not!tag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.5162008-06-15T19:16:48Z2008-06-15T19:53:57ZA non-computer-literate (that sounds less harsh than computer-illiterate ;-) friend asked me for some advice yesterday. He told me that his virus scanner was popping up and bugging him for money to stay current. I told him I'd come over...Ron Enderland
A non-computer-literate (that sounds less harsh than computer-illiterate ;-) friend asked me for some advice yesterday. He told me that his virus scanner was popping up and bugging him for money to stay current. I told him I'd come over and kill it off and install AVG, which wouldn't die (although I'm not 100% sure it doesn't nag you anyway).
I regretted my promise when I sat down in front of his screen and encountered Vista, it all its glory.
Oh well, I thought, surely a simple uninstall of whatever timed-death-crapware came with his system (PC-Cillin, in this case) combined with an AVG install shouldn't be too much trouble. And for good measure, I would install Firefox, with a few of my favorite add-ons. He was excited about the automatic spellcheck feature that came with the browser, too.
So I started downloading both programs. I instructed the system to save the big AVG file, and install the smaller Firefox one. My buddy has AT&T's budget DSL, so it was taking a while.
I watched the download dialog for Firefox disappear as the file completed, and waited patiently for the install to begin. It never did.
Oh well, this is Vista, the single most despised operating system in history. What did I expect? So I tried the download again, this time indicating that I wanted to save the file. I was annoyed that the download started from scratch, ignoring the cached copy that existed somewhere.
My annoyances were only beginning...
I made certain that the box to close the dialog when the download was complete was UN-checked. Yet, when the file made it all the way in, the dialog once again vanished. No prob, I'll just browse to the download location.
The Firefox-Google Toolbar install was not there.
I checked the Recycle Bin. Nope.
OK, I thought, maybe the Google combo package won't work with Vista (although simply deleting the file with no explanation would be bad form). So I went to Mozilla.com and downloaded the straight Firefox install. For good measure, I created a new folder and sent the download there. Once again, the dialog that I had instructed to stay open disappeared upon download completion. So I again browsed to the folder.
No Firefox install.
The 46 MB AVG download was nearing completion, so I waited to see what would happen with it. The download completed, the dialog stayed open, and the file was sitting right where it should have been.
I'm not going into any more annoyances with the PC-Cillin uninstall-AVG install, but trust me, there were some.
I didn't do a whole lot of Google searching, because I'm busy enough already. But I did note that many Vista owners have managed to install the stable and beta releases of Firefox on Vista machines.
But, in the tradition of closed-source software, I found no solution for my issues. So I simply told my friend to contact my son (someone who knows more about Vista than me) if he still wanted Firefox.
Next time I'll be smart enough to ask what OS any would-be helpees has before agreeing to have a look.
Firefox Buzztag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.5132008-06-10T02:21:59Z2008-06-10T02:40:30ZFirefox, you've come a long way! IE had around a 95% share when Firefox 1 was released. Now it's down to about 66%. Firefox has steadily grown in popularity, netting a 25% share according to my own sites' statistics. Firefox...Ron Enderland
this one show just how much buzz has developed around Firefox 3, due any day now. I've been running the 3.0b5 beta that comes with Hardy, and it is amazingly faster than 2.0, which was no slouch.
So here's to you, Mozilla team, for helping to dethrone the Microsoft mess that computing has become. Forget Google, Ballmer the Clown. Open source is what will do your corporation in.]]>
A World Without Microsofttag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.5022008-05-14T04:30:27Z2008-05-14T04:31:27ZI woke up feeling funny yesterday morning. The sun was shining brightly through the window, but it was the same window that the setting sun uses to illuminate my bedroom! Strange... I went to the sink to shave. Being slightly...Ron Enderland
I woke up feeling funny yesterday morning.
The sun was shining brightly through the window, but it was the same window that the setting sun uses to illuminate my bedroom! Strange...
I went to the sink to shave. Being slightly OCD, I tend to notice small things. Thus, I noted that the water was swirling counterclockwise down the drain. I live several thousand miles north of the equator, this made no sense at all.
So I thought I would log on and check out the news. But when I moved the mouse to wake up my sleeping system, it looked...different.
The start button was gone, replaced by a little orange circle.
My brand-new machine that I had brought home from Best Buy two days earlier had come with Windows Vista. This didn't look anything at all like Vista.
I pressed the little orange circle. The menu popped up, but again, it looked...different. It was leaner, I guess. It was more to the point. But I missed all of the cool visual stuff that Vista would do.
Where was my Vista? What had happened? I looked for Internet Explorer but couldn't find it. But the Start button had a menu choice called “Internet,” and there was something called Firefox Web Browser there. I opened it, and sure enough, there was my Google home page. Thank goodness not EVERYTHING had changed. I went to cnn.com to try to find out why things were so weird all of a sudden.
The headlines looked pretty much the same, wars, typhoons, outrage over gas hitting $2.00 a gallon...HUH? It was nearing $4.00 when I filled up last Monday!
Again, strange, but by now my slightly OCD eye had been caught by an ad for TigerDirect.com: Get a loaded PC for $199! Wow, that sounded cheap. So I clicked on it.
The TigerDirect site gave the details: Intel dual-core E2200, 1 gig of RAM, 200G hard drive, speakers, multimedia reader, DVD burner, and Ubuntu 8.02.
I was familiar with everything but this Ubuntu. What was that? I typed Ubuntu into Google and was directed to their website. The site was pretty cool, actually, until I started reading about this Ubuntu thing. Then, I became puzzled.
Ubuntu was an operating system. That rang a bell. I had heard the techies at work refer to Windows XP as an operating system, and how much better it was than Vista. It seemed like I had even heard them mention Ubuntu, as well, in those breakroom conversations that they had that I had eavesdropped on and found nearly impossible to keep up with.
I looked the site over for Vista machines. I didn't find any! There were Macs, bare-bones systems with no operating systems, and others with operating systems like Fedora, PCLinux, and SUSE. But no Vista, XP, or Windows anything.
Well, my mama didn't raise no fool. That 200 buck computer must be missing some pretty important features to be that cheap. So I read the fine print.
The hardware all seemed to be in order, though I'm no expert. But it was when I read the details of this Ubuntu that my head really began to spin.
It seems that Ubuntu comes with an office application that handles word processing, spreadsheets, slide shows, and even a database. Gee whiz, that sounds like Microsoft Office Professional! When my copy of Office Standard expires in three months. I'm going to have to shell out 300 bucks to keep it from dying! And Office Professional costs a lot more than that! This was insane!
Ubuntu also came with an email program, a whole bunch of games, software for graphics, a music player, and a bunch of other stuff, too. And it said that thousands of other programs were available through Synaptics Package Manager. Aha, THAT must cost a lot.
But in the meantime, I get all of that for 200 bucks??? I had just shelled out $499 (that sounds better than 500 bucks, doesn't it?) for a system that sounded a lot like this one, except that I would have to pay for Office to keep working, and also Norton Security Suite. Plus it had a lot of useless icons on the desktop for stuff like AOL.
AHA! THAT was what was missing! I went back to the fine print, yep, sure enough, no mention of firewall, spyware killer, or virus protection. Obviously, this Ubuntu stuff let you get infected with anything that came along, sort of like my last computer did when I ignored the Norton warnings about updates stopping unless I paid up.
To confirm my suspicions, I typed “Ubuntu spyware” into Google. Lots of returns, I went through a few. Hmm, the biggest issue seemed to be ads on websites! And most people recommended installing something called Ad-Block on Firefox to stop them. And it was FREE!
So I tried “Ubuntu viruses.” I went to the site at the top which told how to install virus protection under Ubuntu. The instructions seemed a little geeky, but right at the top it said you probably didn't need to, unless you were running a network of Ubuntu machines! But if you DID want to install it, you could. It didn't say how much it cost, though. THAT was probably the catch.
It was then that I noticed a flashing little icon at the bottom of the screen. Remember, I'm borderline OCD. Anyhow, I clicked on the icon and it told me that Ubuntu had updates available. Wait a minute, I was RUNNING Ubuntu? I guess so. I said okay, then it asked for a password. I didn't think I had one, but I tried the one I used at work. It worked here as well. What was THIS going to cost?
After a few minutes of downloading and installing, it said it was up to date. So I closed it.
So this is Ubuntu. Hmm, it's different looking, but everything seems to be about where I expect it. I inserted a CD full of our vacation pictures that I had picked up from Walgreen's last week. Yep, there they are, in that program that popped up.
So if everyone's running Ubuntu all of a sudden, where are all of the Vista and XP computers? I typed XP into Google. There were some returns about Extreme Programming and something called an xml parser. Hmm, what about Vista? Vista lighting, City of Vista, Vista tools, nothing about Windows Vista.
This was getting even weirder. So I typed “Microsoft Windows” in.
The top entry was from Wikipedia. According to the article, Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer developed Microsoft Windows as a commercial alternative to Free Open Source Software. The program was ahead of its time, according to the article, and caused Linux developers to get to work building GUI desktops. A year after Windows' release, Microsoft folded.
I got up and splashed cold water in my face in the bathroom. THIS time, I noticed that the water was swirling CLOCKWISE. I went back to the computer to discover that it was back to normal. Yep, there was that Vista desktop that I had seen before I went to sleep last night. The Wikipedia page I had been viewing now was a lot longer in length, and gave a history of Windows from 1.01 to Windows Server 2008.
About then, my Norton security program popped up and reminded me that I had 88 days left to pay for it. My news alert icon popped up and said that gasoline had reached an average price of $4.01 a gallon in the US. I hit the back button to find TigerDirect (I had a hard time finding that button, BTW) and the $200 system was gone. In its place was a system that cost $549.99. It came with a dual core processor, 1 gig of RAM, a 400 gig hard drive, and a DVD burner. Oh, and Windows Vista Home Premium. And trial versions of Norton security suite and Microsoft Office.
I suddenly had a sick feeling in my stomach. Then, I went to Google, (or rather, MSN search, which is what popped up, I wish it would STOP DOING THAT!!!), and typed in Ubuntu. Thank God, it was still there.
Postlogue: Would hot systems cost 200 bucks, or gas still be under two bucks a gallon if the comical collection of circumstances had not fallen into place for Microsoft to end up dominating the OS market? Probably not. In fact, with the literary license I used here to have the FOSS movement existing at the time of Windows' inception, an argument could be made that the movement itself might never have come to be without an obnoxious Microsoft to spawn it. But still, just think of what a world that runs on open source software would be like...
"Every Home Will Have a Computer"tag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.4982008-05-04T18:54:23Z2008-05-04T22:14:19ZI used to hear that a lot back in the 60's and 70's. Not only would every home have a computer, but it would be doing things like controlling our appliances, lights, and security systems. Well, some of us have...Ron Enderland
Storm bot will continue to get larger and larger. Want to spam? Rent the Storm bot. It's available for hire.
It's just a shame that computers must be sold with Windows, unless you want to jump through some hoops. The thought of supporting Linux is a scary one for PC manufacturers. It shouldn't be. Sure, it's different, but once a system is up and running, keeping it going under Linux is a snap. I personally like living on the "bleeding edge" and running Ubuntu, but there are many more stable releases out there for those who aren't into upgrading so often.
What's even more sad is that Dell will sell you a PC with Ubuntu on it, but it costs more than a Windows-equipped one. Why? Because of the lack of crapware kickbacks.]]>
The PC manufacturers get a boatload of bucks from the AOLs, Nortons, and McAffees of the world by pre-loading their dreck on brand-new pc's. Many noobs are unconcerned that the stuff they're running will die after three months unless they pony up cash, so they let it go. The now unprotected computers are soon part of the zombie network.
I don't think futurists saw this coming when they were making their predictions about a computer in every home.
It's a wretched mess, and will likely stay so as long as Microsoft is allowed control over the number of new pc's that are manufactured.
Vista demonstrates how impossible it is to create a secure operating system in a closed-source world. Sure, you can run Vista in protected mode and avoid many bad guys, but how many people do? Asking home users to answer yes or no a hundred times a day to whether or not they want potentially risky actions performed is idiotic beyond belief.
Linux has this right. You can only do so much as a user. You have to be system root to be able to break things.
Unfortunately, it IS possible through social engineering to cause Ubuntu users to harm their systems. Many Ubuntu forum moderators now carry signatures that warn users against EVER running "rm -fr" type commands. It's a shame that this is the case, but scum will always be with us.
But I would feel a lot better about all of the millions of computers flying off of store shelves if I wasn't sure that the majority of them will someday be sending me spam.
Upgrading to Hardy Herontag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.4932008-04-27T19:24:18Z2008-07-17T17:55:12ZI have upgraded a couple of computers to Hardy Heron this last week. My desktop machine at work (Dell 620) went nearly flawlessly. The only hitch was weird screen resolution on one of my two monitors. That was fixed with...Ron Enderland
this forum. I untarred the update (located here) and ran the script that came with it. VMWare was back!
However, my brother still has compile errors on his system (not sure what it is). He's going to wait until VMWare releases a version specifically for Hardy.
Another bit of strangeness: My second hard drive had exactly the same files on it as the first! This was resolved by editing /etc/fstab and changing it from /dev/hda to /dev/sdb1. Strange, but easy to spot and fix. Note: I was informed of a better solution, using the actual UUID of the drive. Now, its wandering is a thing of the past. Typical fstab listing: UUID=f13f7091-63a3-4d4e-b4b7-a8e7945f683f /home ext3 nodev,nosuid 0 2]]>
Those were the problems. Now the benefits.
The Firefox beta is screaming fast! I had heard that that was the case, now I have experienced it for myself. About half of my add-ons survived, including my favorite, Adsense Notifier. Down Them All, Auto-Former, and Adblock Plus also work fine with the Firefox 3.0b5 beta.
I finally have "normal" desktop effects. My onboard video wasn't hot enough to get them in Gutsy without weird issues, but I finally have the fade-in, fade-out effects, as well as programs graying out when they are cranking away on a processor-intensive task. As much as I hated Windows' desktop fanciness, I must say that I enjoy how Ubuntu does it. I also notice absolutely no difference in performance.
I had to change the audio output plugin in Amarok to alsa, as autodetect didn't find anything. That took about two seconds to figure out. Amarok is back to fetching album covers from Amazon again, too. Hooyah!
Of course, let's not forget the warm and fuzzy feeling you get from running FOSS. Not only that, but my two-year-old hardware screams with Hardy on it. I wonder how it would perform with Vista?
R.I.P. RIAAtag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.4732008-03-21T06:07:43Z2008-07-05T00:00:39ZWhen Hitler was in the midst of gaining world domination, he underestimated an enemy. Germany's rousing defeat at the hands of Russia during the winter of 1942-43 was the beginning of the end of the Nazi regime. The RIAA, a...Ron Enderland
When Hitler was in the midst of gaining world domination, he underestimated an enemy. Germany's rousing defeat at the hands of Russia during the winter of 1942-43 was the beginning of the end of the Nazi regime.
The RIAA, a fitting comparison to the fuehrer, has made major assaults on its home territory by suing everyone from prepubescent children to grandmothers who don't know how to power on computers. However, the corporate entity's future fate is sealed by going after the same enemy that whupped the Germans: Russia.
They pressured the Russian government via bribes or whatever to shut down allofmp3.com. No problem, now there are a handful of Russian sites offering the same deal, music for about a dime a song. And in case the RIAA should manage to buy enough Stoli to get them shut down, there are plenty more where they came from.
The end result is slow death for an entity that exists solely to make money off of the talent of others by charging exorbitant middleman fees. I don't know about you, but I'm certainly not shedding any tears.
What did these clueless morons do to get in this mess, anyhow?
Simple. They ignored technology, and the benefits thereof. They also ignored what their customers wanted. It doesn't matter how big you are, or how many politicians you have in your pocket, thumbing your nose at paying customers will put you out of business.
The RIAA has stubbornly stuck by their CD package for nearly 25 years. And while the price of media and digital recording technology has fallen to the point that it's practically free, record companies still try to sell CD's at the same price that they cost when introduced.
I have a sub-$100 car stereo that plays mp3's from CD's, USB drives, or camera flash drives. I can put over 30 hours of music on one drive if I wish. Standard CD's give you a bit over an hour of music, then have to be changed for more. Do you think I want to mess with the only musical format that I can buy in a store?
Another problem: consumers don't want to pay a dollar for a song.
I used to get TWO songs on a vinyl 45 for that price.
Ten cents a song is an acceptable price, and double that wouldn't chase me away. There should be plenty of room for everyone to make a nice profit with a twenty-cent song. Even middlemen.
Thirdly, DRM is universally despised by all but its corporate proponents. Windows Vista has enough built in to choke a fast dual-core processor. It's there for the benefit of the RIAA and their nearly-as-clueless cohorts, the MPAA. It benefits Joe Consumer not a whit. And it keeps fast hardware from translating into a fast operating system.
Imagine if the RIAA were to extend an olive branch to Russian music businesses. They already have the infrastructure for fast, efficient distribution of files. They also have a good reputation among consumers. While they gouge fat corporate middlemen, they take good care of folks who put $20.00 at a time on their credit cards and have no issues whatsoever with security, dishonesty, or other shenanigans. The Russians couldn't care less about US copyright law, but they know that if a customer gets ripped off making a credit card purchase, it's curtains for them. After all, their competition isn't Napster, iTunes, or Yahoo. It's free file sharing.
But say the RIAA was to approach them with hat in hand, and cut a deal where they sell songs for, say, twenty cents in exchange for no more hassles. The RIAA gets ten cents a song to do with as they wish out of the deal.
Here's where it gets better: they put the word out to all of the "legal" music sites that the price of RIAA and record company fees has just dropped. Odds are that if the middlemen reduce their cut to ten cents per, iTunes and the rest could probably meet that twenty cent mark. Oh, and also, DRM insanity is no longer required.
The end result would be Russian music sales existing successfully alongside equally successful more mainstream offerings, everyone making money (albeit not as much for the fatcats as in the pre-mp3 days). Consumers would get what they want: music that is DRM-free and of digital quality. Everyone wins, even the RIAA.
Of course, the price scale could be adjusted according to quality. If a consumer insisted on CD-quality, it would cost a premium.
But a standard mp3, say about 160 kbps, would be a twenty-cent item.
There's your business plan, RIAA. Either accept it, or die. If you choose to die, save some money to hire pallbearers.
Microsoft Didn't Always Sucktag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.4712008-03-16T19:30:18Z2008-03-16T21:50:52ZI'll never forget the day in 1993 that I excitedly unpacked my first PC, plugged everything in, and watched with keen delight as that first DOS prompt appeared. I was happily running MS-DOS 6.2. Somehow, that friendly CLI (on which...Ron Enderland
I'll never forget the day in 1993 that I excitedly unpacked my first PC, plugged everything in, and watched with keen delight as that first DOS prompt appeared.
I was happily running MS-DOS 6.2. Somehow, that friendly CLI (on which I ran a wonderful, long-lost GUI called Geoworks) turned into the vile monster that is Vista.
What happened? Why?
The plain and simple fact is that when you run a CLI, its brand name doesn't matter nearly as much as when you begin depending on a GUI.
I remember playing around with DR-DOS and NDOS as command-line shells. They all looked and acted pretty much the same.
And Geoworks provided a graphical desktop, complete with rudimentary multitasking, as did Desqview and Windows 3.1.
But by 1995, things had changed. 32-bit operating systems became the state-of-the-art, and a prepackaged GUI was an integral part of the deal. Witness OS2/Warp and Windows 95.
While booting into a CLI was possible with Windows 95, there was no such thing as an add-on GUI that would run in 32 bit mode on top of it. So you were stuck with Microsoft's product, unless you wanted to take a walk on the wild side and give IBM's product a try.
Indeed, OS2/Warp beat Windows 95 to the marketplace by a goodly margin, but Bill Gates' farsightedness in getting PC manufacturers to sell their machines with Windows preinstalled made any inroads IBM might have gained temporary at best. At worst, people denounced the alternative to Windows as a misbehaving problem child capable of destroying data. I heard personal experiences from two different buddies.
So, for better or worse, Windows was in charge. And that was when Microsoft started getting ugly.
The monstrously wealthy corporation was getting themselves and their stockholders rich with new PC licensing. But it wasn't enough. The company decided to go after pirates.
Windows XP had to "phone home" to work. That in itself was a pretty strong deterrent to piracy. However, OEM license keys got posted on the web, and MS considered that enough of a threat that it installed a heinous, diabolical program called Windows Genuine Advantage.
WGA's sole purpose in life is to notify you and Microsoft if it determines that your copy of Windows XP, Office, or whatever is not legally bought and paid for.
At that point, July 2005, Microsoft officially began sucking, as far as customer service was concerned.
Beginning then, all customers were viewed as potential pirates, unless WGA proved otherwise.
MS has attempted to create a business environment that requires its 100% usage for a business to function. But open-source technology plugs into MS's protocols just fine, as long as developers can get their hands on the details. Of course, MS does their level best to keep such protocols secret, with threats pf lawsuits against anyone who would reveal them.
What you now have is a corporate entity that is inherently evil in the way it does business.
And that's a shame, because I have fond memories of using MS-DOS in its various flavors, and making it work with a variety of GUI desktop interfaces.
Will Microsoft Ever Figure this Out?tag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.4672008-03-04T19:54:49Z2008-03-04T20:33:52ZThere are a smattering of I Love Windows Vista websites out there. However, these are dwarfed into insignificance by the legions of those who are unimpressed to a greater or lesser degree. I don't run Vista, I never intend to....Ron Enderland
There are a smattering of I Love Windows Vista websites out there. However, these are dwarfed into insignificance by the legions of those who are unimpressed to a greater or lesser degree.
I don't run Vista, I never intend to. I'm a happy Linux camper, and XP will be the desktop of choice at my place of employment for the foreseeable future.
But it seems that a major bugbear that people have with Microsoft's latest and greatest(?) is its bizarrely different interface.
Microsoft, who generally seems blissfully unaware of what is popular among the masses, has, since Windows 1.0, seen fit to radically rework the UI with each release.
Up until Vista, the practice was more or less tolerated by its customers. But now, the rebellion of users befuddled by the Vista experience is evidenced by downgrades to XP (and a small but growing number of Linux converts).
Microsoft, it's time to take a long, hard look at one of your hated rivals, and the way they do business.
Linux is basically a command-line driven interface. If you like, you can put a GUI on top of it. I prefer Gnome. Others prefer KDE. Xfce, or plain old X.
The reason that you select and stick with a particular GUI is that it suits your purposes. The GUI may be periodically updated, but sweeping changes in its appearance and function simply won't happen overnight.
However, the minds behind Windows don't see things that way. Their OS, which is bound tightly to its GUI, requires much getting used to by its users with each overhaul. And that, oh clueless ones at Redmond, makes people angry.
For example, I was a happy Windows 2000 user for three or four years. XP's soft and fuzzy interface was nothing but a resource hog to me, so I adjusted the system for best performance via system/advanced settings. With Vista, such a tweak is still possible, but it has to be done in a very geeky manner. I'll just pass altogether.
So here's what Windows needs to do, if it wants to still be sitting on top of the OS market ten years from now: model the Windows platform after Linux. Have a bare-bones OS running at command-line level, and put a GUI on top of it that changes slowly and gradually. Make your needed security tweaks at the CLI level, and keep their effects on the piggybacked GUI minimal.
That will likely never happen. First of all Microsoft would have to admit that someone has a better business plan than they do. That would require a grasp of reality. It's easier for Redmond to simply take advantage of the stranglehold that they tenuously have on the home user and business market to ram changes down millions of throats.
Second, Microsoft quit running a GUI on top of a command line interface many years ago. With the release of NT, they made a firm, unbreakable commitment to making the GUI and the OS the same, for better or worse.
The good news is that organizations that refuse to listen to their customers and/or make changes are destined to fail. Microsoft has begun a decline which will slowly but surely result in their being supplanted by the Next Big Thing. I just hope that the next company who rules the desktop is more concerned with winning and keeping customers than it is with impressing itself.
A Few Hours that I Wish I had Backtag:www.baldguyweb.com,2008:/blog//2.4632008-02-27T17:04:15Z2008-03-16T19:29:27ZWell, occasionally I have to be reminded that you should just was pick your battles. I just wasted several hours on a comment board at the otherwise excellent Ziff-Davis website. The subject was Ed Bott, Windows worshipper, and his gleeful...Ron Enderland
Well, occasionally I have to be reminded that you should just was pick your battles.
I just wasted several hours on a comment board at the otherwise excellent Ziff-Davis website.
The subject was Ed Bott, Windows worshipper, and his gleeful take on how people hated XP as much as they do Vista, and how one day soon it will all be moot as people learn to love Vista.
It turns out that many of his followers share his philosophies.
In short, it's a quagmire that a Linux fan would should stay away from at all costs.
Some people just don't get Linux, FOSS, or the fact that the war for the desktop is not over, it's only begun. And trying to convince them otherwise is like attempting to teach the proverbial pig to dance.
I know that some simply don't pull for the underdog. People who have never been to Florida loudly cheer for the Miami Hurricanes to crush Florida A&M. Yankee fans exist all over the country, screaming for them to get to the World series, ignoring their hometown team that's had some losing seasons lately.
And Microsoft shills love their operating system, and the overall "trusting" nature of Ballmer and company.
TigerDirect (or any other online retailer that you trust. I trust TigerDirect). Put together a barebones (i.e. no OS) system. I just created a pretty sweet one with Intel dual-core, a gig of RAM, a DVD burner, and a 19" flat panel monitor for $529, plus shipping (about 30 bucks). This system is CONSIDERABLY hotter than the 600 dollar WM offering. Install Ubuntu, or a similar user-friendly Linux on it. Now, let Grandma learn how to compute free of DRM, WGA, and calls to Redmond to activate things. While you're at it, tell her all about spyware, viruses, and trojans, and have a good laugh about how the poor Windows users have to take proactive measures against them or else get infected.
Honest to goodness, there is simply no compelling reason for home users to run Windows. And you, the Linux proponent, can make it happen one user at a time.]]>