Crapola: The Daily Rubbish

AT&T: There Ought To Be a Law Against Your Practice

2010-08-04T07:46:00.000-07:00

"Your smartphone requires a data plan. We have added the appropriate data plan for your smartphone. Please call 611 or go to att.com/smartphoneplans for info."

No need to let me know what the text and the stated requirements are, I've called 611 and they basically told me what its all about.

On this page: http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/articles-resources/smartphone-data-plans.jsp

It says if you use a smartphone you are required to purchase a data plan. That is simple enough to understand.

It's also quite simple to see the arrogance and overreach.

So this post is basically my way of saying there ought to be a law against that.

Its not your phone, it's my phone
I will use it however I please, AT&T will not control what phone I purchase or choose to purchase
If I do use your data network, by all means, charge my use and yes, require me to obtain a data plan.
But as a smart smarphone user, I have disabled mobile data access
I use my smart phone WiFi access (home / office) for data
I'm not even going to touch how a plan can simply be added to the account - don't you have any courtesy to ask your (business) customer before you do that? You have a big walled garden before anyone can speak to your customer representatives for any "account related questions", yet AT&T can arbitrarily change plans? Seems someone needs to re-learn lessons related to "auto contract renewal" lawsuits.

In effect this requirement is overreaching and affects/curtails my purchasing behavior and/or my use of available technology for whatever it is I deem to use it for.

My phone is my property.
Your service is yours.
I will pay for services that I use, not those I don't
You will not affect my decisions on technology purchases

I'm not a lawyer. But there ought to be a law.

Lock This!

2010-03-16T12:10:00.001-07:00

Oh, the humanity of it all. Next time you see (or hear) an ad about services to "secure your personal information", pause, and read this:

LifeLock settles with FTC over ID theft product claims

Choice tidbits:

The FTC also picked at some of LifeLock's own data security measures, saying it collected confidential information from customers and did not encrypt it. And, the FTC charged, LifeLock's databases were vulnerable to attack.

- LifeLock, in a statement, said the FTC charges related to the way the company did business more than two years ago.

LifeLock, which bills itself as "#1 in identity theft protection," has gained national notoriety with commercials that show Davis' Social Security number on the side of a truck, while Davis tells the audience that he is confident his company's services will protect him – and potential customers – from having their identity stolen. But Davis reportedly has been a victim of ID theft.

- Ouch

Sigh....

Green Apple, I'll Forgive You For iTunes 9

2009-10-06T10:44:00.000-07:00

Ballsy Green Apple Sheds Association With Ignoramus

I don't read business trade rags, so while I'm all giddy about the stand Apple took quitting its membership from the US Chamber of Commerce over global warming/climate change views, the big surprise (to me) was that its 2009, almost 2010, and it seems we still have some hopelessly ignorant, or maybe its really selectively ignorant, group of adults collectively known as the US Chamber of Commerce. Sigh...

Ok, Apple, my disgust over iTunes 9 will take a back seat to this great move :)

iTunes 9: Beware. Great Eye Candy, Fubar Storefront

2009-09-18T00:17:00.000-07:00

Yeah, Apple Design Can Go Horribly Wrong

Version 9 is the first version of iTunes I regret downloading and installing. After all these years of it being practically the only way I purchase music, this latest version's shortcomings come as a shocker.

Shopping Cart is gone
I think we all know what a shopping cart is. I don't care if you're Apple, but trying to redefine "shopping cart" into a "wish list" is, utter crapola. Get real, they're different, period.
I think we all drag and drop. Say goodbye to that too - at least from iTunes Store to your playlist - can't drag a song you want to buy to a playlist.
While this sounds strange, my music interests span different genres (who doesn't?) and that's how I create playlists. The added benefit of drag and drop to playlist *prior* to purchase is that after I do purchase the songs, they're already neatly grouped into the right "playlist"
They think everyone has a widescreen monitor greater than 1280 pixels wide
I think Apple is drinking too much of their Kool Aid. Yeah, you can't seem to resize columns in Version 9 of iTunes.
The kicker: Wish List
So you've lost the shopping cart, you can't drag a song from iTunes Store to your playlist, you can't see details of a song because of the fixed column widths, what more can this version do to make life miserable? Oh yeah, it has one more nail to drive through your skull - try finding the Wish List. Yeah, the shopping cart wannabe.

The shopping cart was ever present in your left bar (along with your Playlists). So you know where to go to purchase whatever it is you've added. Now that its been replaced by a Wish List, you'd think it would at least be easy to find - I mean, this is what drives revenue generation, isn't it?

Know where it is? It can only be accessed one way. In the Quick Links section, when you click on iTunes store. If you got confused by this sentence, you're in good company.

Sorry Apple, its a sad day indeed to know that you are quite capable of handing out crap. While iTunes 9 has some good eye candy, as a storefront its taking more than a few leaps backward - purchasing items, yes, your revenue model, is FUBAR in version 9.

Oh yeah, thanks for the Home Sharing feature. It's cool. But sadly, now that I know how bad this version is, don't expect me to propagate it to my other PC/Mac. They'll stay (v8) until these errors in judgment are fixed (hopefully)....which by the by, makes Home Sharing moot for me....sigh.

So if your iTunes usage sounds like mine, beware. I told you so.

Whole Foods = Whole Paycheck, For Some That Is

2009-09-05T08:27:00.000-07:00

An Open Letter to John Mackey, CEO, Whole Foods

RE: WSJ Article and subsequent "explanation" on Whole Foods company blog regarding Health Care Reform

I’m a fan of Whole Foods, have one less than a mile from where I live, and while I can see the distinction between a personal opinion and a company policy, you are who you are, and you are blogging on a corporate web site. It isn't Blogger, WordPress, MySpace, nor Twitter, is it?

I’m not sure what your “other credentials” are to be "invitied" to do a piece with the Wall Street Journal, so with all due respect, when you write or speak, and are introduced with a title that bears your company’s name, you are in fact, a representative of such company. I’m not a CEO of anything, and it’s comical that even a lowly director such as myself would know that.

To back track and start with a quote on socialism is hypocrisy. I think the Wall Street Journal editors got it, and used the new title quite accurately. Or did you actually think that the extent of comprehension of the reading public starts and ends with the title? Oh wait, maybe you're on to something....

BUT

Contrary to what maybe your own belief, not everyone in this country is an idiot ("get the government out of my Medicare!", and other hilarious, idiotic and utterly ignorant quotes), nor rich enough to only have issues with “transparency”....hey, maybe there is something to that "whole foods, whole paycheck" phrase - not to worry, I'm no fool, I find the quote funny, even if it has some reality to it - notice that I said "reality", not "truth", since the latter somehow denotes a lie was in place - no, its a case of "it is what it is".

With all due respect, might your cluelessness to the concept of using your company blog, and subsequently your title, to be invited to do a piece for the WSJ, extend to the reality of “lesser folk"?

John, can I call you John? I can’t complain about my bill if I don’t get one – not because I don’t have health care insurance, I do, but because my coverage doesn’t include some procedure. Do I blame my employer? No. I understand fully what the company can afford. I’m not screaming “entitlement”. Here's a term for those who have everything: inadequate.

Nobody is asking for a free ride, just a shot at security.

And that’s the bottom line. I too agree in less government intrusion, they should stick to the basics – security. And contrary to most alpha male idiots, security isn’t just about an army. It starts with ensuring that it’s people, it’s members, is secure, from within. Yeah, a person's core.

Your company strives to do that, with health and wellness, security from within – I would expect it’s CEO to understand that.

I’m not foolish, I will shop at Whole Foods, because of what it offers - quality. Yes, I’m not clueless to equate one fool at the top, to the excellent meat, produce and groceries coming from people and producers who know better.

I Told You So, Again: EV SSL Is Stupid

2009-07-14T07:27:00.000-07:00

EV SSL Certificates Are No More Valuable
Than The Cheapest SSL Certificate

Not my quote, but matches my sentiments on the abomination known as EV SSL. Sure, this latest exploit is based on a specific use case (so far, that is), but that's really not the point.

EV SSL is nothing more than a cash cow and is an abomination that ultimately damages consumer confidence in "SSL" or the "padlock" by introducing the notion of "bad SSL" or the "not-so-good-browser-padlock".

If Certificate Issuers and Authorities are supposed to be the "entrusted" source for this technology, they simply must do their job and vet applicants. Its really that simple. Higher cost? Sure. Just don't introduce abominations that question your own reason for being, damages and confuses consumers.

Anyone can create a self-signed certificate, it really is that trivial. Certificate Authorities exist to do what the name implies. Be the Authority.

Google Checkout: Just Another Paypal Thingy

2009-03-11T19:24:00.001-07:00

Rumors of Microsoft's Demise Were In Fact Greatly Exaggerated.

Rumors of Google's Dominance Even More So.

Well, it seems the Kool Aid has run out. There was a time when Google "could do no wrong". Whatever BETA they came out with was a "Microsoft Killer". Google Docs will be the "end of Office". Even trusted trade rags drank the Google Kool Aid.

Well cracks in the armor are showing. In what was once a "PayPal killer", Google Checkout, with what was once a unique offering with it's Google Adwords tie-in, has, (gasp) matched the rate structure of PayPal, and ditched it's Adwords tie-in - generating a growing revolt among merchants, small business, and just about anyone who had something to sell, all using Google Checkout.

Make no mistake, PayPal is king among alternative payment/checkout options - and I've enough experience working with retailers payment processes to know that for a fact. I'd say anecdotally it's a 90/10 ratio for PayPal.

PayPal's dominance isn't just in market share. They've been at it for a while so their product is mature, very mature. Their acquisition of Verisign's payment processing gateway operations years ago, makes them a one-stop shop for merchants of any size. Standard credit card payment gateways? Check. Not quite ready for a merchant account? Check.

To be sure, Google Checkout's features had some interesting twists, and it was definitely getting better. Sadly, "being just another PayPal" may not be enough - after all, payments should be simple right? The goal is a "one click checkout" Amazon.com-like process right?

And here's the kicker. Customer Service. Anyone who's done business with Google (unless you're huge fish) will know that support is well, almost non-existent. If you're a fan of open source deployments, where you get your help from the community via forums, and such, well that's what you'll get with Google. Forums run by their customers. Imagine that. You have forums for a service you are thinking about adopting that will form the lifeblood of your revenue flow. Yes, imagine that. I guess you could say this is what BETA really means! But um, Google Checkout isn't a BETA. Tsk tsk.

PayPal on the other hand? Yup, it's not entirely something to praise - they can't even get PayPal vs. Gateway (Payflow Pro) support telephone transferring or IVR down to this day. BUT you do get a person, and their employees patrol the forums and blogs. Not mouthpieces, actual developers and/or technical support personnel.

Just about the only exception in Google-land is Adwords - of course they can't mess with their golden cow. You do get Google-based humans for support. Otherwise, it's a bleak world. Case in point - a few weeks ago, I looked into Google Messaging Security (aka Postini). It's a paid service and wanted to communicate (email or whatever) for pre-sales questions. Total responses? Zero. Nada. Zilch. I ended up successfully deploying it, but I'm a seasoned IT guy so, in true geek fashion, difficulty = challenge. So getting slapped with a non-response didn't stop me from being their customer. Think about that statement too.

So much has been said about "evil" Microsoft, but ahem, you get almost first-class support and guidance on Microsoft forums and employee blogs! Think about that for a second. Visit any active MSDN, ASP.Net blog run by Microsoft employees, and you actually get a team member responsible for the product you are using! That's more than 1st class support - that's a dream come true!

So today, the Google shine has dulled. The reality of the Google Product Line seems to be finally dawning upon us all. Some would say, exactly what product line would that be? Fair question. As shown above, PayPal vs. Google Checkout isn't a much of a match.

Will Google Checkout survive? I'd say yes, but let's just all end the "PayPal killer" crapola talk. It'll be just one of those "PayPal thingys".

Google does crapola after all. Speculations abound, and this blog entry says what I really think is going on.

What about this free Blogger service? Uh oh. Hopefully it generates enough AdWords revenue! Or else....gulp.

Finally, let me be clear. There is a dark horse in the payments, alternative checkout services space. One that has arguably mastered the art of the checkout. Amazon.com.

Wow, it's time to wait and see how this plays out.

Adobe Store Customer Service: A Monumental Waste Of Time

2008-12-23T22:54:00.000-08:00

Buying direct from Adobe is my worst purchasing experience in years.
Failing spectacularly at point of purchase isn't a strategy for
recovery.

Hate to be scrooge, but it's 2008, we're all spoiled with one-click online shopping from even an online start-up, negating the need for telephone calls, and saving that store a ton of money by not having to run a massive customer service infrastructure.

Well, it turns out that one big name hasn't gotten the memo and is, at least to me, just one confused, undoubtedly expensive, massive mess of an operation: Adobe.

One might ask why I'd actually need to order a product directly from Adobe, and not some other online reseller, like Amazon perhaps, which would have unquestionably done an excellent job of taking the order, processing it, and fulfilling it, no calls, nor service emails from me. I have a valid answer: I was going for a cross platform upgrade from PC to MAC, which can only be done by dealing directly with Adobe. It was for Production Premium CS4.

These days, you might think that sales mattered right? After all, Adobe even blamed the lackluster adoption of CS4 as one of the reasons for recent layoffs (also covered by the San Francisco Chronicle) Maybe their CEO should look at it a little better. Is it pricing? Are your direct sales operations actually closing orders? Or are they just making a mess of things that orders aren't booked? Maybe you should stop running your own store and hand over full sales operations to resellers?

So what's going on? In painful bullet point fashion:

Phone order placed with Adobe Sales on Dec. 2, 2008. It was pleasant, and the first utterance of "done in 7 to 10 business days" is spoken.
Faxed the required LOD (for platform switching) same day. Acknowledged by Adobe.
And today is the 23rd with no end in sight...did they lose all the engineering talent and counting is a lost art at Adobe?

What, that's it? Yep, I'll spare you the Groundhog Day details. But essentially, it's been in "processing" ever since, with one department not knowing what the other department is doing. It's approved in one place, blocked in another. "Blocked?" That's actually in their own words! WTF! Excuse my French but WTF??!! Who exactly is the customer here? Did you lose an understanding of buyer and seller in addition to counting days?!!

I had sarcastically joked about being hopeful that resolution was expected before Christmas, and if that was too soon, maybe before the New Year (2009)...well, it seems the joke's on me. It's the 23rd, a couple of days before Christmas and I'm screaming humbug because of Adobe! Sigh...

Oh, did I mention that no pro-active communication is ever generated by Adobe? 100% of the communication is started by the customer, me, asking that oh so 90's question, "What's the status of my order?".

Hey Adobe! I love your products, but you've got to stop being a joke of a sales (online/phone/whatever) operation. Save money and ditch this segment of your company, hand it over to online retailers who have a clue. This might sound like a joke, but it isn't: I've had better purchasing experience with a small shop running on Yahoo Stores than yours! Not as elaborate, not as pretty nor eye-catching as yours, but guess what? They know what matters: sales (in your bigger world it's called revenue).

Don't look at the excellent Product Management and Engineering personnel/talent you have for cuts and take a long hard look at the cost of running a service operation simply because you haven't yet learned how to sell the way it's done in this one-click shopping world.

Postmortem Update 12/31/08:

Finally. My Christmas-gift-now-a-New-Year-welcome-gift-to-myself is in my hands. I guess my last call to Adobe Sales last 12/23/08, actually discussing canceling the order, lit a fire in someone's you know what.

See, during the course of this ordeal, a friend of mine who's been a Mac user for eons, was kind enough to lend me his MacBook Pro loaded with Final Cut Studio after seeing the absolute crap I was going through trying to purchase a product Adobe should be desperately trying to sell. I've known about Final Cut, but I've never used it. I have however, been an Adobe user since Illustrator first came out with a PC version (yup, I just dated myself), so my choice to go with Adobe was based on familiarity.

After a few hours of getting used to the Final Cut interface, and with a little help from friends, I loved the experience - enough for me to complete a project I originally had in mind for CS4, and ergo, ending my ordeal and go Final Cut Studio.

How did Adobe dodge a bullet? I'm upgrading to CS4 while a Final Cut purchase would be my first and therefore a full version. Economics was the main reason I extended my patience. The other? FedEx. The promise provided to me by Adobe that shipment was actually already made didn't hold much credibility - for all the reasons I already gave. Their savior? FedEx - and that all important tracking number.

Astoundingly Ignorant Wall Street Journal Article

2008-12-20T23:33:00.000-08:00

In the article, Google Wants Its Own Fast Track on the Web, a couple of technically challenged journalists of the Wall Street Journal seem to think that caching networks, CDNs, and yes, the good old concept of mirror sites is "preferential treatment". Oh my!

I'd expect this type of crapola from some newbie on the block, but from the Wall Street Journal? I wonder what's going on in that prestigious organization after it was sold.

Implementing good network architecture isn't preferential treatment - it is what it is: repeat after me, "implementing good network architecture".

Bad Apple: Erratic Apple Mighty Mouse

2008-11-29T20:42:00.001-08:00

First impressions of a Microsoft/PC drone: Well, what can I say, my new Mac Pro is one beautiful beast - a heavy, shiny and stunning addition to my desktop. And yes, it's cool.

BUT (inevitable), I already have some pet peeves. And no, I don't think its stuff that can just be lumped into a case of unfamiliarity.

Let's start with the Apple Mighty Mouse. Nope, I'm not complaining about the lack of buttons. In fact, I love it's design. But it seems to have a serious flaw - it needs some grounding, yes, the electrical kind!

Symptoms/tips:

You'll mistake it for a case of too much mouse button sensitivity. Move your cursor across the screen, and you'll hear it clicking like crazy. It's the lower right/left mouse "buttons" that are being activitated. So whatever action its defaulted to is activated....like crazy.
I ended up disabling the buttons (System Preferences)
Problem is, you can distinctly hear the clicking - at some point, you'll start to think that Apple took "mouse" quite literally...was there a poor mammal stuck in there trying to get out???
So I did some Googling and found this thread at Apple Insider - scroll down to the post of TheHerdsman - he/she's a genius.

Now you might think it's one of those "internet things" that can't pass for fact. Well, I did a simple test. Move the mouse while touching the Mac Pro body and voila! Its confirmed. Did another quick test with the keyboard - one hand resting on it (the metal parts), the other moving the mouse. Good. Yet another test, touch the base of that awesome cinema display. Sanity preserved.

Hope this helps you from doing the usual "PC thing" like, um, reinstalling the whole OS, and/or mucking around with some other settings. Actually, one might think this is a worse issue....

It seems that even tech support isn't aware of this - here's my theory on that. Most will just keep on exchanging their Mighty Mice at some Apple store, and when they give up, will likely replace by purchasing a standard mouse or a wireless one..

Proud To Be American, Ashamed To Be Californian: Prop 8

2008-11-05T22:07:00.001-08:00

The title says it all. Inequality, discrimination and prejudice will be written into this great State's Constitution. This is the sad backdrop to the historic event in the Presidency. I cheered, felt an unexplainable sense of warmth and hope. I felt one with everyone on TV, cheering, crying, celebrating.

Then morning came in California.

As I previously posted, I had stated that I wouldn't be affected by CA Prop 8 - no matter what the outcome. I was dead wrong. I am affected. I'm affected in that I'm ashamed to be Californian.

Although I am not by any measure a religious person. I was raised Catholic and studied in Catholic schools. I am ashamed to be part of that church. My journey to a more agnostic or spiritual person, and therefore shedding religious denomination, is now complete.

There are no excuses for this utter contradiction to the only real message one can get from Christ, the simple but powerful message of love. Everything else is a matter of human tradition, practice and preference.

I can and will be a better person without the illogical, inexcusable contradictions, and bigotry hiding behind religion.

Google, Apple To CA Prop 8 Backers: Make Our Day

2008-10-25T09:18:00.000-07:00

The other day it was reported that proponents of California Proposition No. 8, which seeks to remove marriage rights from gays (aka "the gay marriage ban"), were resorting to some sleazy tactics designed, at least in their minds, to intimidate businesses from supporting those against it by "outing" them. In other words, if your business didn't support their cause (Yes on Prop. 8) or were in fact supporting the opposition (No on Prop. 8), they would publish your name for all the world to see....as some form of "punishment".

Pretty bold crapola, don't you think? Well, that bold move has been met head on by a Silicon Valley powerhouse, namely Google. In essence, and rightfully so, the response is to "go ahead punks, and make our day". Read the official Google Blog about this issue. Bravo!

Update: Another Silicon Valley powerhouse faces the challenge: On Oct. 24, 2008, Apple says "make our day" 100,000 times!

I'm not gay, and truthfully, either way this goes, I'll be totally unaffected. And I guess that's just the point. I'm not stupid enough to think that gay marriage somehow affects me. But more importantly, I do know that removing and/or destroying rights of individuals, basic rights, is utter crapola.

Outlook Process Does Not End

2008-10-04T11:32:00.000-07:00

Ever try starting Microsoft Outlook and you suddenly get the cryptic error message stating that it somehow can't open a specific file - which may include some verbiage about not having permissions on that file?

Here's one annoying culprit. Third-party plug-ins that well, you didn't even know you installed! You'd be surprised at who the culprit is in my case: APPLE. Yes, the dreaded iTunes Outlook plug-in!

What gives?! This is the 2nd time iTunes has created this issue, which I'm sure has sent more than a few IT brethren into tirades trying to fix this problem, wondering what the user(s) did, going through other tests, and fixes. Ergo wasting a time and money. If you're a home user, you'd likely be screaming at your PC, blaming Outlook, and by extension, Microsoft for yet another crappy error.

Well, this time, point your fingers and focus your wrath at Apple. Yes, Apple. This wasn't the first time this occurred for me. That's why I somewhat immediately knew where to look and subsequently fix the issue.

How to fix Outlook:

Go to TOOLS -> OPTIONS
Click the "OTHER" tab
In the GENERAL section, click "Advanced Options"
At the bottom part, click the "COM Add-Ins" button
Voila! You'll find the dreadful "iTunes Outlook Addin"

At this point, I'd just UNCHECK it instead of removing it. Why? I'm playing it safe and don't want to deal with yet another issue. Besides, this does the trick/solves the problem.

Now, back to an even more basic question - WTF is iTunes doing in Outlook? Harvesting my contacts? Oh, I can go on, did you ASK me if I wanted to install some integration with Outlook? Even my anti-virus suite has the courtesy of asking me for permission to integrate with Outlook! You know, for something really useful like filtering for email viruses and SPAM. But iTunes?? Such arrogant crapola!

Yes, I'm a PC and crap can come from Apple.

How A Phone Can Help With Lost Pets

2008-09-28T18:03:00.001-07:00

I realize this isn't about crap. However, it's an experience I'd like to share with fellow pet lovers. One that maybe able to help.

I've had a feathered buddy, which you can guess from this blog is a cockatiel, for more than 12 years now. "Adopted" from a family who had to move and couldn't have pets at home.

A couple of weeks back, my buddy flew out of my hands and off to the suburban jungle where we live. I ran, no sprinted, like I've never sprinted in my life trying in vain to catch up. As many of you who've had the same horrifying experience, this effort usually is in vain. It was.

My buddy's a senior so it was quite devastating for me to think how it would be able to survive on its own. I spent about 4 hours trying - until the last hint of sunlight was gone.

In addition to the "standard operating procedures for lost pets", namely trying to involve the community by posting your "LOST PET" posters, talking to neighbors and so on, I had one thing that I found out was an invaluable tool: my cell phone.

I had recorded my buddy's songs over time - on my phone. And yes, this brute of a man uses them for ring tones. And my phone has a speaker. This combination proved to be the decisive factor.

Although I wasn't able to recover my buddy for one day, yup - my buddy spent the night somewhere outdoors, I had my speakerphone going - in essence trying to "guide" my buddy back.

Voila! Early next day, I heard my buddy "screaming at me" from somewhere outside. My buddy got close, and I mean real close finding his way home - at the adjacent property, right behind mine!

A very happy ending indeed!

Tip #1:
If you can't recover your bird in daylight, its better to stop. Birds have difficulty seeing in the dark, if at all. What this means is that you'll likely do more harm by trying to recover your bird at night. It'll likely injure itself by flying blind.

Tip #2:
I'm no bird expert, but I truly believe that my recordings did the trick. Sounds that are familiar to pets can help - and in my case, successfully.

So to all pet lovers out there - I hope this post makes your day!

Windows 2003 Active Directory Controller Trashed By Service Packs

2008-08-04T22:08:00.000-07:00

Windows 2003 Server loses all connectivity, network connections container disappears,
TCP/IP properties settings disappears and cannot be viewed nor set,
no inbound nor outbound network connectivity,
and more horrific symptoms.

I'm a Microsoft drone. I've been one for years. My toolkit is almost entirely Microsoft branded. Looking at my war chest, I see Adobe a far 2nd, not to say inferior - is there anything out there better than Photoshop/Illustrator, etc.?

So when I write about Microsoft crapola, you can pretty much bet that it's got me wound up and looking all penguin like! Uh, not really. But still, this is one of those infuriating, mind-numbing, WTF moments that make you want to meet the person, or team, responsible for this crap, and well, beat the crap out of them...doesn't matter if they end up beating me up, but just the thought of unleashing fury on someone feels like a twisted feel good moment.

OK, in what might be a sick "I still love Microsoft" move, I'll try to save you from the agony, and outright terrifying situation where your Windows 2003 Server Active Directory controllers seem to just, um, "die" and lose all network connectivity...maybe I can save Microsoft from your wrath in the process.

To make this clearer, I think it's best to go by listing the process. Even if you're not going through the same process, you may at some point, or you can skip to the horrific details which starts here, or the culprit in my own words, or finally the fix:

Our AD environment is humming along just fine (we have a Windows 2000 Active Directory environment)
Figured that with all the Windows 2003 servers we've got, it's about time we moved slowly over to Windows 2003 AD. All the prep work goes without a hitch (Adprep, domainprep, etc.)
Now comes the moment of truth, dcpromo, on the first Windows 2003 server slated to take over it's older sibling.Wow, in less than 10 minutes, we're on our way! So, reboot, and move on to DNS installation (Active Directory integrated)
The DNS installation process takes less than 2 minutes and everything looks beautiful. DNS replicated, controllers humming along. We go for an Update (knowing about the recent DNS security issue affecting a bunch of dns servers).
After the update, the requisite reboot is requested. Honeymoon over.
First sign of a problem: during the reboot process, the systems hangs at "Preparing Network Connections". Be patient, this will take about 2 to 3 minutes.
Next sign: the dreaded "At least one driver failed to start.." message. Be patient again, this will take another 2 - 3 minutes.
Finally greeted with the login screen, proceed to login. The nightmare moves up a notch.
You discover that:

your system has absolutely no connectivity to your network, your Network Connections container is empty (list of connections, including your LAN connection).
Event viewer is riddled with errors
You can't start/stop services - they'll fail miserably
And you, as Administrator, have "no rights" to do certain actions...you can't even install a driver - like your network driver, which was my first, and at the time obvious first suspect. After all, problems did start at "Preparing connections"...and then there was the "..failed driver" message. Right?

At this point, you'll probably go through a lot of gyrations and attempts, trying to recover the system. It is after all a controller in AD and after all the above symptoms (just listed what I went through, I'm sure there are more), it looks like an utterly hosed system. I did, even as far as completely rebuilding the server....more than twice. Which also meant a ton of cleaning up AD metadata...each time.

Anyway, most of you will not be as lucky. This was our first Windows 2003 controller, so rebuilding was an option - rather than wasting more time trying to figure things out. This may not be possible for most.

So, the key here, and I have to stress this point because I can't really say if it's the same exact issue you're going through. BUT if you share most of the above symptoms, and have an EVENT ID 32777 in your Event Logs (System), then chances are good that I'll save you some time.

The Culprit:

The account used by RPC is now NETWORK SERVICE (previously Local System) post Service Pack 1. I'm no AD guru, but my own interpretation of this means that all that grief was due to a permissions/account policy issue (damn, and I thought we're past NT's UGLY rule - if you're an NT MCSE, you'd know what UGLY means).

So it somewhat made sense. RPC can't communicate with the existing AD, permissions aren't granted, and since this is a domain controller, IPSec communications can't proceed. Ergo no inbound nor outbound connectivity. The brand new controller is shut off from the network, or rather it shut itself off from communicating with anything.

The Fix:

Change the RPC service back to use LocalSystem account and reboot.

Surprised? All that crap and it boils down to a one sentence fix? Yes, exactly the point. So I'd really like to meet the person, or team that came up with this great idea....and we'll likely have more than just words.

Hey, I understand the concept of least privelege, which is likely why the change was made to NETWORK SERVICE...but WTF? Don't these guys even test this stuff? I mean "killing Active Directory" seems a big deal doesn't it??! At least a courtesy warning, just like they did with Adprep and Domainprep, for such a devastating, mysterious, and well, utterly almost undocumented issue, would have worked.

And to prove the point, the fix is documented here - go through the document, it will serve you well:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/930220
but you may want to skip STEP 5, the part where it says you'll have to revert the RPC account to NETWORK SERVICE.

Fair warning if you do Step 5: if you need to reboot the server for any reason, like an Microsoft update for example, you may go through the same crap all over again. It's still the same "fix", but why be a sadist?

So there, if NETWORK SERVICE may cause devastating issues, why do it in the first place? If the real fix is going back to the original LocalSystem account...WTF?? This is absolutely utter crapola!

Excuse my French, I hope the above helps.

Vista Mojave - Also Exposes Schizophrenic Behavior

2008-07-31T06:42:00.001-07:00

After a few days of reading through industry press comments and editorials about Microsoft's Mojave Experiment, which "exposes" some truths about VISTA, it seems that Microsoft's whole point for the campaign is further validated by the "schizophrenic" attitude of said industry press folk.

Blasting the Mojave campaign as "not the right thing to do", or some type of insult to one's sensibilities, and even pointing out Microsoft's retort in their respective "analyses", well, actually proves the point.

While I agree that VISTA needs more work, lets not forget what this is: It's a MARKETING effort. It's not a "technology preview" or some black hat conference.

So these "analytical industry press folk" realize marketing efforts of Apple, and then fall back to a techie review when it comes to VISTA? Hmmm....I guess there's something to schizophrenic behavior suggested by Microsoft.

Going by the "expert analysis" and commentary, symptoms of schizophrenia and validity of the whole point of the Mojave campaign are seen in their slight by revealing comparisons to Apple's great PC and Mac dudes campaign.

VISTA campaign: "how stupid does Microsoft think we are"?
Well, how stupid does Apple think we are? Is the "cool factor" the only deciding factor?
VISTA in general: "Intel didn't even go for it"
Well, just how miniscule is the corporate adoption of Macs?
VISTA campaign: "I was wrong" isn't the best way to sell a product"
Well, how about "You're utterly boring and unimaginative and uncool if you don't buy a Mac"?

I see geckos on TV telling me about car insurance, a duck squaking at me for more insurance, people trying to convince me that test driving a car can be done online, and a whole bunch of random individuals looking content or euphoric because of some drug.

No, I'm not stupid enough to make car and health insurance decisions based on an animal, test driving is done old school on the road, and my doctor always knows best. BUT, I recognize a funny, attention grabbing, even eye-opening ad campaign that makes me look into a particular product/brand.

That's what Mojave is about. It's an AD CAMPAIGN, which I think is based on a very solid premise.

There's Just No Fixing Stupid

2008-07-01T23:17:00.000-07:00

At some point, stupid is stupid. Concealed guns in airports. Yeah, that's something we all want.

This from a crowd that warned us of "slippery slopes". Well, I guess this is why such minds constantly warn anyone who'll listen that everything is a slippery slope to insanity - they know it first hand. Only insane people can come up with such lunacy.

I guess there'll be longer TSA lines at Hartsfield-Jackson International (Atlanta), or maybe not. I mean who in their right mind would want to fly on a plane coming from, stopping over at, or destined for Hartsfield-Jackson International?

Oh crap, it's the busiest airport in the country...great, it'll be such fun flying with the possibility of guns on board planes as well. Lovely.

Another nail in the airline industry coffin I guess....

Thank You Mr. Bill Gates

2008-07-01T06:45:00.000-07:00

Dear Mr. Gates,

Thank you and Godspeed to your next endeavor!

I'm not an employee of Microsoft, nor am I "someone" in the technology industry. I am only one of the millions of people touched by Microsoft significantly. The industry Microsoft essentially built to what it is today, from the realm of the few, is my career, my passion. Thank you for lighting that fire.

I have no doubt that in the current challenge you have chosen to face, you will once again touch many more lives, in even more significant ways.

Thank you Mr. Gates.

Yahoo! Crap, It's Time To Move Your Yahoo Domains!

2008-06-03T00:46:00.000-07:00

Pssst! Here's a secret that you'll probably, unfortunately find out the hard way. Effective July 2008, Yahoo Domains (a Yahoo Small Business service) will cost you $34.95 to renew!

Ahem, time to start your moving plans. I'm not sure who's at the helm of this section of the Yahoo morass of services, but it sure seems like an episode of "Lost".

Sorry, my beloved Y! if you didn't get it, I'll point it out to you. Your domain services have nothing, zippo, zilch, nada, better to offer than other Registrars, except your great pricing. We all know there are cheaper ones, but I didn't really like the idea of my credit card details sitting on some server from God knows where..yeah, Y! had some trusted name going for it too.

So it was really just great pricing...until July 2008 of course. After which, you're up in the Network Solutions price range, which I'm also a longtime customer of. I can tell you this, as far as domain management and customer service goes, Netsol blows you out of the water. Fact is, I suffered through that really simplistic and difficult Yahoo Small Business interface...once again, only because I got what I paid for. Bargain price = bargain features and service. So I bit my lip and kept those words that can't be uttered here sealed.

You know, there's another utterly crapola aspect of this. You won't find this information anywhere...all you see is that carrot stick number of $9.95....then wham! An email notifying you of an upcoming renewal, with a slap in the face price increase note in it....Sigh, I'm no lawyer, but is this shell game legal? It's like one of those credit card offers...low APR, and absolutely no mention of that ridiculous standard APR after your "introductory rate"! ....and BTW, this is on top of an increase earlier this year...if memory serves, it was around February 2008, from $9.95 to $12.95 or was it $13.95? So in July it's $34.95! Crapola! and I thought gas price increases were ridiculous! I'm aghast that Y! has sunk this low....

My guess/theory? Yahoo's probably dumping this service. They're just reselling this service anyway. Must be part of that secret new plan to miraculously add shareholder value after rejecting Microsoft's bid. Ergo, "refocusing" on core Y! services before they get sued to oblivion...

New Loves: Nissan Altima Hybrid, Garmin Nuvi 250, Avis

2008-06-02T17:59:00.000-07:00

Nope, this isn't a post about crap(ola), rather, just sharing an enjoyable experience this past Memorial Day Weekend where I gained a few new loves, namely:

The Nissan Altima Hybrid
The reliable Garmin Nuvi 250
Avis, for offering great cars, in this case eco-friendly hybrids

...but if you really want some crap, sure, see below...

I'm no "Car And Driver" reviewer, so I won't even pretend to know what all the technical specifications of the Altima Hybrid mean, but one thing that was erased from my perception was that the new "green cars" don't have the "oomph" of a "real car". Well, I can tell you that in this case, that perception is wrong, very, utterly wrong. I drove close to 2000 miles from the San Francisco Bay Area to Seattle, WA....nope not through I5 as one would expect, but rather through the scenic Highway 1 in a Nissan Altima Hybrid from Avis as undeniable proof that green cars are really here, and deserve to be tops on anyone's list for a new car.

Why Highway 1 you may ask? Well, the drive was a key part of the trip. I've never driven north through Highway 1, and if any of you have ever driven South on CA Highway 1, all the way through Monterey, Big Sur, San Simeon...to Los Angeles and beyond, well, you'd know what I mean when I say the drive is absolutely stunning - both in scenery and well, if you love driving - curves and all, you get both. Besides, if it was just a matter of getting to Seattle, I'd rather fly than drive bored for 12 hours or more on I5!

One thing though, the drive up North on CA Highway 1, doesn't come close scenery-wise to it's southern counterpart. But the drive, well, let's just say if you love the challenge of winding/zigzag roads, this route will be an absolute joy. Warning: you have to love it, or else it can get dangerous. Drive to your abilities, and within speed limits.

Back to the Altima. Not only did this hybrid have the handling you'd want (and need) for this trip, it had the power to take this route on, with a lot to spare! And the absolute bonus? Well, since you're not driving at freeway speeds through this maze, you're using more electric power. The result? Unbelievable mileage!

How great? Let's just say by my calculations we did about 35++ mpg (I'd swear it was closer to 40 mpg) ! Why would this be something to shout about if other hybrids can conceivably do better? Maybe so, but this baby has power. If you ever take this route, you'd know just how much uphill driving there is, so 35++ with power to boot is something. How much power? Let just say cruising at 75 - 80 mph, uphill isn't a problem at all. Give the accelerator a tap and it's got torque to spare!

Now for the most important gear on board: the small, cheap but quite capable Garmin Nuvi 250. What can I say? It's the best thing since sliced bread! It's a basic GPS, but hey, I've got other contraptions to do whatever else so all I want from a GPS is great gps. And that's what I got from this unit. It's also compact and fits in your pocket. As of this writing you can get one for less than $200 from Amazon.com, and of course it qualifies for Free Super Saver Shipping! If you want a quick and easy to use GPS system, and are on a budget, this unit will not disappoint.

What can I say about AVIS? Well, they've never failed me. They may not be the cheapest rental but know what? I know EXACTLY what I'm getting. Unlimited miles mean unlimited miles, no 8-pt type gotchas buried in some contract, no "ifs", or "only"..it is what it is. I'm not sure if any other rental agency offers, or rather promotes hybrids, and if they do, bravo. All I know is AVIS does, and great ones too. They also offer the TOYOTA Prius...but as mentioned, I didn't know how great hybrids were and opted for the Altima after viewing it's specs - power was important since this was loooong drive, up mountains and whatever else.

OK fine, this blog as about crap and this post isn't quite about crap. So I'll dish some crap we went through on this trip:

It's official. A bunch of drivers in Oregon have no concept of leftmost lane = fast lane. And they've got the nerve to give you the stink eye if you finally, out of frustration, and respectfully not tailgating, overtake on the right lane.
What's up with 55 mph on I5??? I can understand slowing down on inclined curves....but straight/flat stretches?
What's up with the CA law that doesn't allow GPSs to be mounted on the windshield? Maybe its an old law covering older/bulkier models, but the Nuvi is small enough. I know its about safety, but I absolutely disagree with the notion that trying to take your eyes off the road, to glance at your GPS, in-dash (like cars that have them built-in), or worse as was my case, somewhere in the console (!) is somehow better? Furthermore, its then ok to mount it on the dashboard?? Crapola! Mount it with the provided suction cup top left of your windshield, and it gives perfect peripheral visibility of the road at times that you actually need to glance at the GPS!
As of this writing, Seattle either has a handful radio stations, or the entire radio listening population of Seattle is obsessed with Leona Lewis. Or was it payola? Whatever, by the time we left Seattle, I really didn't want to hear any of her...overkill was an understatement.
And oh yeah, while I'm singing praises for Nissan's cars, the company however, seems to be engaged in some David vs. Goliath crapola...squashing the little guy. I'm no fan of domain name squatting, but it seems that in this case "nissan.com", which is owned by someone named Uzi Nissan makes a good case for ownership of the domain - yup, Datsun rings bells to those old enough like me. Decide for yourself, read the fascinating case of what just might be a crappy example of Corporate bullying at the Nissan.com site (link isn't to Nissan Motors USA's site, it's Uzi Nissan's site).

Yeah, pretty boring crap. What can I say? It was a great Memorial Day Weekend! Hope you had one too!

Kaspersky Anti-Spam Module (KAV 6), Outlook. Ouch

2008-03-25T07:45:00.000-07:00

Well, it's another installment of software "gotchas" experience that I'm sharing to hopefully help others.

Product: Kaspersky Anti-Virus 6.0 for Windows Workstations (v. 6.x)
License type: Business/Commercial - simply means we have multiple licenses for our offices
Specific issue: Anti-Spam Module = Lost / disappearing email
Crapola meter: Utter Craploa (utter trash), out of the box

Please note the qualifying phrase "out of the box", it matters. You can reconfigure things later (of course), but likely after losing important business email. In other words, you'll likely reconfigure after realizing a horrific situation. Here's why/how it can happen, and hopefully you can avoid it:

KAV 6 for Windows Workstations is actually a powerful product. It has it's annoying characteristics, and has its share of cryptic messages that can make even an IT pro go "huh?". Unfortunately, this case goes beyond annoying behavior, it has graduated to damage in the form of lost business email.

Included in this suite of security modules is an Anti-Spam module. It integrates with Outlook (tested in our environment with Outlook 2000 and 2003). Installation itself is quick, easy and straightforward. You can choose which modules to install with the usual "Custom" installation option. Integration of the Anti-Spam module is problem free. That's where the honeymoon ends.

Upon starting Outlook, you'll get a pop up window showing you headers of email you are about to download (it's called the Mail Dispatcher). You can select items to delete - aka not download. If this feature becomes too annoying, you can even turn it off. A really cool feature. It is, until you realize that another "routine" will run on the items you didn't mark for deletion. In other words, it's Anti-Spam "intelligence" will still run on the email you cleared (didn't delete).

On the surface this is the right thing to do. After all, it was just a header you previewed. You didn't really see the content of the email. BUT, the big problem is that one of the tests is based on a word/phrase list. If any of these words/phrases are in the email, it is BLOCKED. In reality, it's really "deleted". It's not marked as SPAM. Therefore, you cannot recover it.

And just what are some of the default words/phrases in this list based on "the extensive experience" of Kaspersky (asterisks mean anything before after the word)?

* product *
* customer *
* sale *
* purchase *
* price *
* receipt *

...and so on. ARE YOU KIDDING ME? This is the "block list" for business?!! Hey "experienced" Kaspersky personnel, you maybe good at anti-virus, but you have TON to learn about Spam/UCE. This is an outrageous list that speaks "cluelessness" in this space!

If you're in disbelief, here's a screen shot of this "feature" (bottom panel, Blocked phrases):

"Call this customer...", "...update our product price..." All these emails are GONE, not in some Spam folder, no review, they're gone...that's what BLOCKED means. I wonder what type of business Kaspersky personnel had in mind that didn't use these words in standard communication internally, with vendors, business partners, etc.

Enough, this is stupid...fine FUBAR is more appropriate actually. Go ahead, scream WTF! That's appropriate too.

As you can see, you can turn this off by unchecking the "Blocked Phrases" box. It's that easy. And if you want to gamble on this with your own "experience" at spam detection, you can go through the list and uncheck as you please, add words phrases, etc. I wouldn't recommend it though...an outfit like Kaspersky obviously doesn't, you're probably better off with Outlook's own Junk Mail detection....it's not perfect, but at least it doesn't make your email disappear!

That easy, right? Well yes and no. Here's the catch: if you don't want to lose email, uncheck/modify/disable this feature BEFORE you start Outlook. Otherwise, it's too late. You are almost guaranteed to lose email - I mean just read the sample I gave for the default/built-in block list!

How do you get to that window?

Double-click the red "V" (I know it's a "K", for Kaspersky, but well, what can I say, it looks more like a "V") icon in your system tray,
click "Settings" on the top of the Kaspersky window that pops up,
click Anti-Spam on the left pane, select "Customize" in the Sensitivity section on the right panel,
and finally, click on the Blacklist tab
Uncheck as needed

In reality we have email security gateways deployed. So installing this module was our test at securing the "endpoint" - re: whatever isn't caught by the gateway will have to go through another test at the desktop level. Well, that was the plan, and as you may have guessed, that too has been trashed. We explicitly choose NOT to install the anti-spam module of Kaspersky.

Note to Kaspersky:
There's one thing a lot worse than receiving SPAM. It's losing email. In case you haven't heard the term, it's called "false positive". It's OK to be imperfect - nothing is perfect, but your design is faulty. If you know you're imperfect, you have to allow recovery in some form. That's the mark of any true experienced provider of email security solutions.

Utter Junk: Domain Solutions Central

2008-03-11T08:19:00.000-07:00

"There's got to be a law..."

Seems like this phrase is appropriate for the utter crapola spewing out of this entity named "Domain Solutions Central". They've moved from junk postal mail, to well, UCE/SPAM. If you're surprised that I've only recently received this trash in my email inbox, well, I guess I was lucky...then.

What Is It?

Well, in my opinion, what Domain Solutions Central is engaged in is simply a devious and misleading attempt at getting you to pay for a domain service. To those of us well versed with how to go about purchasing and maintaining domain names, we've all seen this before. "Final Notices" and the like, hoping that you are ignorant enough to believe such crap, to either move/change your Registrar, or pay for a domain you didn't own in the first place. The latter, paying for a domain you didn't own, is simply their way of "prospecting"...finding people to buy new domains whose names closely match yours (variations of), or a new/additional TLD.

Example:

You own "mydomain.com"
They'll harvest your contact information from the domain
They'll send you postal or electronic mail (email) marked with "FINAL NOTICE", or some other verbiage that basically equates to a warning.
They'll say that unless you do something, you'll lose "mydomain.us"

Subtle, eh? Not to say that you weren't interested in the ".us" TLD, but you never really owned it in the first place, and no, you didn't need to be warned about anything. And that's where the deviousness comes in. Warning??? Shouldn't you be "asking" if your prospects were interested? I don't get suckered into this crapola, and please, with tactics like this, who would trust such an entity?

Action? In, my humble opinion:

Sounds like something for the FTC to look into - It's UCE/SPAM/Junk mail, and it misleads consumers (www.ftc.gov). If you're prospecting, ask, don't warn.
To domain registries, I'm sure you have rules against 3rd parties mining your WHOIS databases for harvesting. I know it's difficult, but hey, here's a great example of who uses that harvested information...
To DNS RBLs, it's time for the community to respond to this UCE source
To corporate Network Admins, it's time to tweak our respective email gateways

According to the UCE/SPAM, misleading, "warning" email I received:

Domain Solutions Central
130 Church Street Suite 280
New York, NY 10007
Web: www.domainsolutionscentral.com
Email: support@domainsolutionscentral.com
Toll Free: 1-800-270-5944
Phone:1-212-671-1191

Cupid's Day: I Love HP, Absolutely Hate HPShopping.com

2008-02-14T07:42:00.000-08:00

Happy Valentine's Day to everyone! Not willing to blog about private emotions, I'll stick to professing love, and hate, geek-style.

I absolutely love HP. In my professional life, my server racks are filled with HP servers. I believe in HP/Compaq server engineering and it lives on to this day. These babies just keep humming and crunching whatever it is thrown at them, so much so, that my experience with these magnificent works of engineering over the years has made me equate the term "reliability" with "HP" - if you're thinking of having a "box" do something serious, the "core" or "critical" kind, you'll sleep better if that box has HP bloodlines.

The love fest has its kinks though, not the usual kind you can brush off, I mean irreconcilable differences that leads to an ugly divorce. The culprit? HP's "kid", hpshopping.com. I won't generalize and be very specific:

If you're shopping for an HP "custom configured" machine, stick with your reseller.

By "custom" I mean the online customization features that we all expect, ergo "standard" customized options. I actually think "customized" isn't the right term since you're just choosing from "pre-chosen" items anyway - you're just "opting" for this option, or that option....you're not exactly asking your initials be engraved on it!

What's the problem you ask? Well, it will take about three (3) weeks, to get your "customized" machine (laptop, in this specific case). Maybe I've just been spoiled over the years, but know what? "Customized" servers from Dell take about a week and half, tops, to be in our offices. Dell laptops, a week, tops.

Did I try to "expedite" things? Yes, willing to pay extra for it too. But alas, HPShopping.com isn't just inefficient, they've got some stubbornness to go with it too. We've all heard it before, "you can't change your order after it's placed". I understand that policy, but I'm not exactly saying change the machine....I'm just asking to speed things up, as it is, and I'm willing to pay for it.

In my opinion, this molasses like fulfillment process questions the validity of HPShopping.com. I could have ordered this from my reseller (should have, I know...now), received order confirmations, status, etc. (unless our SPAM gateway killed them, I don't think HPShopping sends email confirmations...sigh), and be on my merry way. There's a reason why we shop online, chief among them is "instant gratification". I gave HPShopping a shot, since I didn't have time to speak with my reseller, for a single machine that we needed. As it stands, time is exactly what we lost...by buying stuff online...a contradiction, right?

So, if you can get machines faster through your reseller, or through your local Best Buy store (pre-configured ones that is), get better service, why'd you shop for one at HPShopping?

To be fair, this experience only applies to "customized" items. If you're purchasing standard stock items like printers, inks, etc., you'll experience normal fulfillment schedules....although that's one of those "stretches" since it's to be expected. Although I have no experience with purchasing a pre-configured machine, I think things will go smoothly...but as stated I wouldn't know...don't want to know actually.

So, HPShopping, it's best we part ways. I wish you the best and hope that some day, you earn the respect that the HP brand has. You must see the error in your ways, lest you damage the well earned respect of your parent. Perception is reality to some, and although I can distinguish the difference based on experience, others will not. This is not the HP way.

Ultimate Crapola (FUBAR): PNG on Internet Explorer 7 Hell

2007-12-12T14:53:00.000-08:00

Well, as much as I love Microsoft - I'm known as the "MS drone" among peers, and live and breath Microsoft for my development work (desktop and web), I must say that this PNG-thing with Internet Explorer is utter crapola.

A short background: Prior to concentrating on "back end" stuff (aka server-side) for web work, I did a lot of design. Makes sense since I've been into this since the mid-1990s (old dog) - days when the most "interactivity" you could get from the web was email, html FORMs were unheard of, and html TABLE was still a "spec". I started shifting more into real development work sometime in 1999. I say this because I have to admit that I've not been into the UI side of things - so while I've heard of the PNG "issue" for some time - I never really bothered. Until IE 7 that is.

A lot of talk (even fanfare...I don't know why) came up about IE 7's support for transparent PNGs (alpha or index), so I thought maybe it was time to embrace this PNG thing and think about replacing some GIFs and JPEGs where it would make sense (or not, fun stuff if you will).

Well, after a few quick tests, I have to say that PNG is great, Internet Explorer's support of it is just FUBAR, Firefox support is awesome, and yes, even the newer Safari (beta at that!) on Windows has excellent PNG support.

In 2 short days of research, Internet Explorer 7 has a host of issues with PNG. The usual finger pointing exists, but the simple fact that they do exist is an issue in and of itself. Why IE is the **only** one affected, when Firefox, and (gulp!) the BETA version of Safari on Windows aren't speaks volumes to the issue. Here's a sampling:

Quicktime, PNG and IE 7 issues discussed here
Pointless "hotfix" (for PNG???) for IE 6 here
Why pointless? Show me someone who will actually muck around registry settings just to see PNG on the web, and we've discovered yet another fool
Some UAC issues on VISTA that affect PNG display, links of which I won't post since they somehow contain instructions that to me are just as pointless as the "hotfix". Why risk your system to view PNGs???
My personal pain - Security software that either does more than it should or yet another example of poorly designed security software. In my case its McAfee.

To those interested, and are going through Internet Explorer 7 PNG hell, and have McAfee installed, you can do this simple test (Windows XP):

Go to the web site with the PNG issue using IE 7
Click on Start, the RUN and type "services.mcs", this just opens up the Windows Services MMC console
You'll see a list of McAfee services running
Select McAfee Redirector and STOP it (right click), don't close MMC yet
Go back to IE 7 and refresh the page. Just for good measure, close IE7 and restart, and go to all the web sites that you've had issues with transparent PNGs. Issue should be gone
Call McAfee and discuss this with them since you'll want to re-Start the McAfee Redirector Service ...(right click, START)

So there. It really doesn't matter who's at fault. It's turning into a pointless quest for a less than valuable answer to the task at hand. The question really needed answering was "Is it time for PNG"? and not, "what's wrong with it"?

So is it time for PNG? I have my answer: it's a resounding NO.

Not with all the possible configurations of PCs out there. And no matter what "religion" you have with browsers, Internet Explorer dominates the landscape. If such a simple and trivial thing like installing QuickTime (everybody has iTunes right?), or security software (anti-x), and UAC on VISTA, is enough to effectively kill Internet Explorer's PNG support, then it doesn't matter who needs to go back to the drawing board - I don't care. The question has been answered - stick to GIFs and JPEGs for the foreseeable future.

And yes, note to my beloved Microsoft: You've got serious work to do. It's laughable that a BETA browser, Safari on Windows, has absolutely no issues, no matter what configuration is involved, for such a trivial thing as full PNG support.

Kaspersky, Sonicwall SSL VPN, and Windows Vista. 'Nuff said.

2007-11-29T11:52:00.000-08:00

Well, this is my crapola experience that I hope no one else goes through. So I'm writing this post just in case you are in the same situation and are (still) scratching your head trying to figure this out.

Problem: SSL VPN via an Active X client can't connect
Client OS: Vista Business
SSL VPN: SonicWall
Client Security: Kaspersky Internet Security ver. 7

It's not one of those Vista issues
It's not the Active X client of SonicWall either
I wouldn't blame Kaspersky, although I believe they should put a note about this on their support site (support.kaspersky.com).

The culprit: you have to explicitly exclude Port 443 from traffic monitoring

Click Port Settings....scroll and uncheck

Even if you checked "Do not check encrypted connections" in the Encrypted Connections section of the Traffic Monitoring Group, it's not enough..one would think that it would, wouldn't it? Maybe it's just me...

Anyway, I hope the above proves helpful. I'm asking for a better solution from Kaspersky since it's really a good idea to filter that port, so a more granular setting is what I'm looking for - re: "Filter Port 443, except for this particular site/connection". I'll post it if one exists.

Here's a parallel crapola situation while I was already going through the above headache: Windows Vista's infamous "Destination Folder Access Denied" pop up message.

Maybe you already know about this (I didn't) - "administrator" is an entirely new beast in Vista. You think you are, but you really not - for certain activities. I think it's a really smart move on Microsoft's part, but it can get quite irritating in the beginning.

I won't bore you with details of UAC - I now understand it better (you should too), but one of the quirks of this great feature is your inability, as a perceived administrator, to even rename files in certain "protected directories" of your system. One of those directories happens to be Program Files.

So, if your software vendor has some fix that requires you to rename, delete, move, or add files to these protected directories, you'll discover that you can't. There's a lot of frustration out there on the web about this, and some really wacky suggestions and fixes...even a "tool" that supposedly circumvents this. Well, I'm not one to judge, but I personally think that's folly...specially if there's a simple solution:

Click Start
Type CMD in the box
You'll see the Command Prompt Icon appear
Right-click it and select Run As Administrator, (yeah as the "real" administrator)
Headache solved

Hopefully, there shouldn't be a reason for you to do so, but in cases that you need to, I hope the above saves you from further aggravation.

Mighty Yahoo No More

2007-10-24T10:32:00.000-07:00

Seems like I'm not the only one who thinks Yahoo's degeneration is real. Although much different from Baseline Magazine's David Carr's experience, I'd have to concur.

Not everything is in disarray in Y! land. I still think their Yahoo Mail web interface is the best of the free web mail interfaces out there, their Developer Services are great and extremely useful, and much more. But there is a definite rot in some areas - sadly, in one of Yahoo's strengths and original "reason for being" - web directory listings.

It's not a case of bad service - reps can only do what they can based on procedure. And in this case, procedure is the problem. So in this age of instant gratification and uber-efficiency here's the saga presented in bullet point fashion to keep it short and simple:

Have an annual paid Directory listing service since 2002
Time to renew, a friendly reminder is sent via email. It even contains information you may have forgotten, like your ID. It's an annual thing, so it will help.
You try to manage your account using said ID (in the email sent)
It doesn't work, the ID is simply "lost" in the Yahoo system. It's a hellish loop in la-la land trying to, uh, get Yahoo to take money...

The "fix"? Quote (not verbatim), "Since your ID has been deactivated due to inactivity, we have to cancel your listing and you'll have to create it again".

Wow, it leaves me speechless (or is it click weary?) and simply gave up. A five year business relationship in the rocks. From a company that needs it at that....For what? Something any mom and pop billing "department" can handle? No, the "imagine the number of people we service" excuse (and it is an excuse) doesn't work. Never has, never will. Not in my book - I know there are much smarter people in Yahoo! than I am, who can handle business and technology architecture orders of magnitude larger than what I've laid hands on. It's a case of rot, forgotten basics...

I've read articles about the how and/or why Yahoo fell behind in a service they started (Search + Directory). Heck, I was even part of the era of Yahoo, Alta Vista, Excite, etc. once the "mighty ones" that all dot-coms courted (I did, in a past dot-com life)...even had the pleasure of working with great Y! people then...in their purple and yellow offices and conference rooms with creative names...Technology? Leadership? Decisions? Hmmm, too vague for me. Maybe it's just simply getting down to basics.

Don't make customers beg to give you business....sounds like a great starting point eh?

Getting Starry Eyed With Google

2007-09-12T09:02:00.000-07:00

Seems like there's enough Google fairy dust in some trade mags. The eWeek Google Watch article/post, Microsoft Blasts Google Apps with FUD, shows it's getting to be the new Kool Aid.

Nice stirring the pot post. Why some of it's crapola:

Crapola 1: Missing deadlines is by definition, ahem, a deadline. Yes, a deadline was missed, but there was one...it even says it in the phrase. And if you think missing a deadline is as bad as not setting one, well, let's hope you just keep posting on blogs and not involved in product development...and a few other titles I can think of.
Crapola 2: If the "support" item is related to the slide show on the same subject, it's off the mark...somewhat. Yes, both entities don't have 24/7 support, but the point is, if anyone has any type of IT support experience whatsoever, the point being raised was that if an issue other than the software itself came up, does business stop? I don't know about you, but the days of "how do I create a Word document" are gone.

The point of this item was more along the lines of, "Why can't I create a document"? Which means, you as an IT person, will have to go through a list:

network connectivity?
authentication?
and so on?

As someone who tried to introduce Open Office, which BTW is better than this toy, yes, it was costly, not in the licensing sense, but in the support sense.

I lost all my formatting!
I can't open this file!
You want me to "SAVE AS" what? So that our business partner can print our contract???!
I spent hours creating this mail merge document. I used your this new stuff, saved it (overwrote original Word file), and it's no longer working. Fix it.
Where's my pivot table?

Don't get me wrong, I love Google, I use one Google product or another on a daily basis...uh, like this Blogger thingamabob (not daily though). Just not obsessed with it to the point that I've lost touch with reality.

Next Generation RIA Is Old .Net News

2007-09-04T09:02:00.000-07:00

Hope you had a relaxing Labor Day Weekend.

While reading the eWeek article, 5 Steps To Next Generation Web Applications, 8/27/07 issue and also available online here, I had to stop and think about just how tough it is to be Microsoft. Here's an article about "next generation, rich Internet applications" and they get a mention, in the WPF vein...only, while this "new concept" is actually old news to those who live and breath .Net - yes, I'm one of them.

This concept of dis-connected web applications, yes, that's what they really are, isn't new, nor next generation at all. This is the Microsoft .Net mantra, being regurgitated...into some cool sounding acronym like, RIA (Rich Internet Application) or "gears" (Google Gears) or AIR (Adobe Integrated Runtime) thingamabob. I think it's another groundhog day/flashback of how evil proprietary extensions like Microsoft.XMLHTTP are...until it's re-branded/regurgitated into AJAX. Although I believe RIA has been around for some time and in fact used by Microsoft marketing flak extensively....why it wasn't "cool" then is anyone's guess...oh yeah, I forgot, it was "evil proprietary stuff" then...sigh.

Note to IT Planners: Yes, you can wait for these new technologies to mature and become available. Or, you can build them today, with a robust, tested, production framework that's been around since 2003...that is if you have the heart to consider something from a company named Microsoft.

Personally, built my first one in 2004, and more in early 2006 to take advantage of newer technology brought on by the latest incarnation of the framework and Visual Studio 2005. No need to wait for WPF. The application is in production use by Sales personnel who are almost always on the road, without Internet access, connects as needed (synchronize, update, etc.) and at will. Work whenever, wherever....the only caveat? Well, it's a Windows only application. So if you actually have Sales personnel with non Windows capable laptops (huh?) or tablets, maybe this doesn't work for your environment.

Did I need some bleeding edge stuff? Nope. Just .Net 2.0 (Windows application + ASP.Net Web Service), and SQL Compact, formerly SQL Server Everywhere, a free runtime that gives you SQL server-like client database...more than enough to meet the offline storage needs of business.

Don't get me wrong, I too am eager to see how AIR goes, and Gears....and Silverlight (I believe is what WPF/Everywhere is). But please don't wait if you have a pressing need to provide Rich Internet Applications, aka, disconnected web/desktop applications to your users. The technology has been here for quite some time.

How Our Great Idea Died - Sort Of....

2007-08-06T11:35:00.001-07:00

As a "dot com" survivor, one who was involved in it even before the term was coined, I've always had a bone to pick whenever I read/heard stories about how or why the bust occurred - mostly from Monday morning, armchair quarterbacks.

Some of it is true, but doesn't apply to all. So when I read the Inc.com article "How to Kill A Great Idea" , I had an immediate connection.

It's not exactly how things happened at i-Escrow (yes, that was the great idea I was part of), and worse, I wasn't in the same seat of power as Jonathan Abrams, the founder of Friendster, and the focus of the article, so I had no "personal exit strategy" to speak of. But it serves as a great story for those who thought, and continue to think, that it was all because of, inexperience, abuse and can all be blamed on youth and passion. If you're passionate about technology, and have that entrepreneur fire within you, you deserve to read it.

The Beer Riddle

2007-08-01T22:05:00.000-07:00

It's been some time since I've coded just for fun...just couldn't resist this one. Hmmm...it would be fun to test each result in a pub...wouldn't it? hic..

News & (Bad) Analysis

2007-07-06T07:04:00.001-07:00

2 - 1 = 1

As a longtime reader of eWeek, I find it surprising that a recent opinion piece by Editorial Director Eric Lundquist, Google's Mixed Message (Up Front, 6/25/2007 issue), misses this stunningly simple equation.

The point being made was that despite all of Google's green efforts, Google must "fess up" about it's power costs and consumption to run it's gazillion systems allowing us to search for, quote, "...vital information about Paris Hilton or box-office receipts for The Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer...".

Well I'll save Google's distinguished engineers or PR flack time and effort to answer the question: How much power does Google actually use to enable us to search for the above (and more)?

Answer: 2 - 1 = 1, or in other words, less than what it was (or will be) consuming, than it did prior to creating their own power. If as you say it costs $200 to power each server, then multiply that to any number and subtract the value of power Google is generating on it's own from alternative energy sources. To illustrate, a slightly more complex equation that constitutes fessing up:

Before green efforts: 200 * X
After green efforts: (200 * X) - Y

Save the trees, don't consume an entire page of your great magazine on a simple concept.

The Alternate and Painfully Obsolete World of Ken Magill

2007-05-28T09:27:00.000-07:00

It's a lazy Memorial Day morning...reading in bed, and wham! Time to dive into the crapola that persists in the world of Direct Marketing.

Disclaimer: I don't hate DM, as one working for an online retailer, DM is a necessity, that's why I subscribe to Direct in the first place. In the online world, it just needs a dose of reality for its own benefit, maybe even its survival.

Yes, Ken Magill, we should most definitely Put a Lid on This can of Worms - let's start with the notion that somehow the concept of email opt-in is only for those "who pack Happy Meals". Yes, let's all put a lid on your painfully outdated, quixotic, scream at the wind.

Regardless of what you think, or what CAN SPAM does, technology moves on at it's own pace - the pace of what users demand. You may want to take a quick read of the article right before your opinion piece (Email's Metric Mess, page 49, Direct Mag, May 2007), read between the lines, and start asking yourself such illuminating things like:

What? A junk folder in user's desktop email?
Just why do you think images don't appear in email? Has it always been this way?

What does this have to do with your drivel? Well, let's keep it simple and real. People are tired of SPAM/UCE plain and simple, and technology answered with an entire industry devoted to anti-x solutions (re: anti-spam, anti-adware, anti-spyware, etc.). Even the simplest and free email clients have basic junk mail filters. Unlike the offline world of postal mail, this combination does affect "deliverability", in whatever definition you want to give it.

The reality that you painfully miss is this: Yes, legitimate email is caught in this murderous funnel, along with plain junk, not because of some abstract hatred of anything resembling a marketing message, but simply because the funnel can't tell which is which. You can scream at the imperfection of technology as much as you want, but that is the reality.

Why has it come to this? Simple fact: there are those who will abuse the system and can and have. CAN SPAM has been abused, not by legitimate email marketers to be sure, but caught in the haze nonetheless. It has been abused to the point that it is absolutely ridiculous for anyone to sift through hundreds (even thousands) of email "dumped" into a Junk Folder, to find "good email". If it's tagged as Junk Mail, forget about it, the only real activity following that is pressing the DELETE ALL key. In fact, whether or not CAN SPAM exists is immaterial to those who abuse it.

The online community has demanded opt-in. As someone working for online retail, we have followed this "unspoken" rule. When double opt-in came about, those who truly understand the nature of how things can be abused, adopted it. Even with these efforts, it has been a painful battle, not against anti-x systems, but those that abuse these systems thereby increasing "collateral damage".

Do you want to save email as a marketing tool? Then do help put a lid on the can of worms. The only hope is differentiation. And the easiest way for both sides is an opt-in system, and even better, a double opt-in system. This is the only practical way to come to terms with the "unspoken rule", yes, the online standard. With a double opt-in system, there may even be a place for a white list directory of those who stand by it, a "better AOL CertifiedEmail" if you will.

You can continue to scream at the wind, ride along those who abuse the system, but in the end, everyone loses. If your email is in the same pool of junk, it will be junked. Make no mistake, upcoming technology will make the current "email grinder" pale in comparison. Unless you start truly understanding this, there is little hope for email marketing - regardless of what you abide by (CAN SPAM, opt-in, double opt-in, or just spam away).

If there is one thing I agree with you, it is that yes, we can forget this can of worms called CAN SPAM and apply the golden rule: the customer is always right. Listen.

Vital Ocean 'Carbon Sink' Nearly Full

2007-05-22T07:26:00.001-07:00

Not much more to say except that I hope those who keep spewing political crapola as their way of dealing with the issue of Global Warming get their act together.

EV SSL, aka "high assurance" certs: When Will We Call It What It Really Is?

2007-04-09T23:30:00.001-07:00

Well, at some point someones got to do it. Two experts, I assume they are, to have opinions printed in a magazine I regard very highly (it's one of the few I actually subscribe to, SC Magazine, April 2007 issue), weighing in on "high assurance" certs, the abomination formerly known as EV SSL (?), both correct, and both missing or avoiding(?) the obvious: it's not only a marketing "thingy", it's just a cash cow...a search for a new revenue stream.

In addition to being tagged as "certifiably useless", based on a Stanford study that concluded:

"The only real information a user will get from an EV certificate is that a particular web site ponied up extra cash to get one"

There are obvious questions that we should all ask: what is the definition of a Trusted 3rd Party Certificate Authority? I know I have:

http://dailycrapola.blogspot.com/2007/01/enhanced-validation-ssl-cash-cow.html

Was it simply for secure communications? Hogwash, it takes 2 or 3 clicks of the mouse to install a Private CA in IIS (likely just as simple for all other platforms) and we can all have encrypted traffic flowing
Wasn't it so that we could have a some 3rd party who we could all trust? Yeah, I remember that
Was it technology that failed? Or was it the process? Me thinks it's the latter...so will a "product" solve a process issue? Or is the process in fact the new product? But the "process" was their whole point for being, wasn't it? [loop to first bullet point]

Scott Harris: "...Ignorance or inattentiveness...we were all teaching...the yellow padlock". EXACTLY, and confusing the issue even more with a green padlock doesn't help. What's next, a padlock wrapped in chains = an "even better SSL", or perhaps encased in barbed wire for "the ultimate SSL"? Sigh....

Ok, so one study by Stanford shouldn't be taken as the ultimate source of information. Fine, I have a suggestion:
If we really want EV SSL to "cure" phishing, it's simple. STOP SELLING "LEGACY" SSL certs. Then you'll have more credibility, no confusion since no one can have a "padlock" (of any color) without being validated properly (like they should have done in the first place). Only legitimate businesses can have a "padlock". Add some accountability, like offering some guarantee to the consumer if for some reason an illegitimate business manages to obtain a cert - I'll make it easy, offer the same "insurance" provided to the cert holders...cap the liability it if they want...

Then we can all join Scott Harris to "encourage (even teach) to only do business with sites that have a padlock", not green, not yellow nor white, just a padlock.

When cert providers do that, I'll stop calling it a cash grab.

Sorry, if the excuse is "what about the smaller people"?
What about them? Validate them, give tiered pricing, period. We don't need a green bar for that to happen.

EV SSL Part 2: I Told You so

2007-03-04T17:33:00.000-08:00

Well, it seems that there's really more crapola to this EV SSL abomination.

A Standford study finds EV SSL certifiably useless.

Quote:

"The only real information a user will get from an EV certificate is that a particular web site ponied up extra cash to get one"

Ouch! But really what did the CA/Browser Forum expect? If confusion wasn't the obvious answer, well, with all due respect, seems like their project was led by sales. And worse, fracturing this whole concept of trust in the "padlock" (re: what have these trusted 3rd party Certificate Authorities been doing all this time? Issuing junk?)

Can we call it just what it is? A desperate search for a new revenue stream

I truly hope this is another early nail in this abomination's coffin.

References: Standford Paper
PDF file. Tip: Parts 5.1, 5.2 (Discussion) and Part 6 (Conclusion) contain relevant findings

Enhanced Validation SSL = Cash Cow

2007-01-23T07:11:00.000-08:00

"Web-based businesses face a crisis in consumer confidence because of phishing scams. But because of a new kind of SSL certificate, Web sites will be able to definitively demonstrate their identity, and customers will be able to confirm the identity of trusted sites"

- Tim Callan, director of product marketing for VeriSign

My crapola meter is going haywire on this one. In a couple of sentences Mr. Callan has managed to smear SSL in a big way - I take comfort in that Network World isn't exactly a mainstream/consumer magazine. But I bet Mr. Callan wishes it were and will probably take a stab at making sure this "fear campaign" does get maximum exposure.

I don't know about anyone else's experience in obtaining an SSL certificate, but if if memory serves, we did need to validate and provide business documents prior to being approved. If this process is lacking, then so be it, it should be improved. The process must be improved, but not by introducing a "new" product costing hundreds of dollar more!

Does this mean the "old" SSL is flawed? It has to be for this new product to have any merit - it's easily "phished" right? If so, and if there's no fixing it, and the only solution is the new EV SSL, then why continue selling "old" SSL certificates? Why dance around the issue?

I looked over the "features" of this new EV SSL, that supposedly protects the consumer - aka the meat, not some technical visual aid, that gives credence/weight/validity to the strength of the verification process, and unless I missed it, or if it's buried in some other document that's hidden from public view (aka the "real legalese"), it has nothing of the sort. The only mention of protection I could find is the same boiler plate warranty as standard SSL:

VeriSign SSL Certificates are covered by the NetSure Protection Plan with up to $250,000 in warranty protection. NetSure protects certificate holders against certain losses resulting from breach by VeriSign of the warranties included in your VeriSign SSL Certificate.

I see nothing in the above that adds weight to the promise of consumer protection at all - in fact it's not for the consumer to begin with, it's a protection for the holder of the cert (the buyer of the cert). If this new EV SSL is all about ensuring a business' trustworthiness to the consumer, then shouldn't a "verifier" be accountable to the consumer? What, all this for a green shade in the browser address bar? That's it??!!

Questions for Mr. Callan and the "consortium", answers in plain English please, hopefully visible to the web at large, devoid of legalese:

So if a phishing site obtains an EV SSL, is the CA (Certificate Authority) liable?
Unless the CA is held liable for "malpractice", doesn't the cycle of implied botched verification, simply propagate?
What is the remaining value of "standard" SSL to the consumer? To the site owner?
Why a new product? Can't the standard be addressed during renewal of the "standard" cert?
Wasn't this whole concept of validating the SSL applicant part of the original "trusted 3rd party Certificate Authority"? What have these issuers been doing all this time? Wasn't a trusted Certificate Authority supposed to "vouch" for a seal holder? Now we have EV SSL that basically says, "oops, not really?". What value did they have over installing your very own CA (private CA)? Was it just to simply provide secure communication? Crapola! It takes about 3 or so clicks in IIS to install a Private CA (likely the same for all other platforms) and is commonly used for internal secure communication, SQL SSL, etc.!
And by the way, certs aren't just for server SSL, what are we to make of Developer certificates? You know, the ones software makers obtain so that XP "trusts" the source of the program? Was this process also botched by issuers - and are therefore potentially "dangerous" since the process was "flawed" - any developer can obtain a digital certificate?

Talk about damaging consumer confidence and ecommerce! I think this consortium (The CA/Browser Forum) owes everyone answers. What have you been selling us in the past? Junk?

Life Threatening Crapola: Dangerious Radio Ads

2007-01-18T08:04:00.000-08:00

Real life: Driving on a CA freeway, 65mph, turn signal to change lanes, look at my rear and side view mirrors, in preparation. It may sound complicated, but all this is a perfectly executed, natural (not thought out), sequence. My final move is to turn my head to view the lane I intend to move into - at an angle that somehow still gives me peripheral vision to both the lane I'm in and the lane I intend to be in. Perfect.

As I move over to the next lane, I hear a car horn. I abandon my attempt to change lanes, a bit startled and go through this perfect sequence again. I'm dumbfounded, my eyes didn't fail me...my ears did. It was my radio, rather, an advertisement on radio.

Instead of the crapola rules about what's "morally" acceptable to hear on radio, I think it's better for the FCC to really clamp down on real life safety hazards found on everyday radio.

Funny, a web search on this topic yielded results about advertising rules in the UK. I have yet to find one (it must exist) applying to the US market (the spelling alone shows it's "British"):

Advertisements must not include sounds likely to create a safety hazard. Distracting or potentially alarming sound effects such as sirens, horns, screeching tyres, vehicle collisions and the like must be treated cautiously; they may be dangerous to those listening, especially whilst driving. In particular, they should avoid being featured at the start of advertisements, before listeners are clear about what they are listening to.

I'd say add the following to the list of potentially distracting sound effects:

a phone ringing, distinctive cell/mobile phone ring
that "warning chime" cars give off to notify you of a problem

Enough said.

Security Risk Crapola: Stamps.com

2007-01-11T22:21:00.000-08:00

Tsk tsk, people never seem to learn.

If you use Stamps.com, you maybe surprised that the latest "update" to their software requires that users disable the warning that browsers provide by default when you transfer/move from a secure (SSL/https) to standard (non-secure, http) web page.

It is required - you can't run the "latest" software without accepting this setting. An email to customer service merited a response providing apologies for the "inconvenience". Inconvenience?! Stamps.com thinks it's an "inconvenience" to have users who don't know well enough sending possible sensitive information in the clear?

Sigh....talk about utter crapola.

The Web Is In Danger...because of "non standard AJAX"..Oh my..

2006-12-27T08:49:00.000-08:00

When is a non-standard a standard? AJAX? Wasn't it a non-standard from Microsoft?

Brief on it's history:

"AJAX is not actually that new as a technology. It has been first used after Microsoft implemented Microsoft.XMLHTTP COM object that was part of The Microsoft® XML Parser distributive. As an ActiveX object in Internet Explorer 5, it was used to create the famous Outlook Web Access. You have probably seen AJAX in action for quite long in the MSDN Documentation treeview navigation.

What is new actually is the name AJAX, which was widely accepted in 2005. Other labels for the same technology are Load on Demand, Asynchronous Requests, Callbacks, Out-of-band Calls, etc. "

So lets get this straight, something that Microsoft created, is in danger if they "push it" somewhere?

Don't get me wrong, I know exactly what standards mean, and yes, sticking to them does make everyone a nice neighbor. But please, the idea that nobody can "fork" things elsewhere, whether it be suicidal, or actually creates a non-standard-today-but-renamed-standard-tomorrow, is utter crapola. XMLHttp may not be a sexy as AJAX, but it's roots are in the proprietary, non-standard world.

Square Peg, Round Hole

2006-12-19T22:23:00.000-08:00

I'm a gadget geek, but please, I'm a man, with man hands and can't really do much on a smaller laptop, much less a PDA or some smartphone doohickey!

So when I read some article ( Will Laptops Get Out-Evolved?) about the demise of the laptop via a PDA or smartphone or similar pocket thingumbob simply because of mobility and supposed "document management", well, that's just utter crapola!

There's some method to the madness when people opt for bigger, wider screens/displays when watching a video, or why the keyboard is still the best way to compose documents...unless you prefer to "talk" like your teenager in some childish quest to be "1337" in your business/professional dealings.

I'm sorry, but I don't enjoy viewing a video on a 3 x 3 screen, well, maybe if I'm stuck somewhere and I'm watching live TV - as in the Superbowl, or World Series or some bowl game! That means live TV and only if I must, as in I just have no other choice at the moment. Otherwise, watch me dump that "smart" phone while I turn to my 10-year old 27-inch Magnavox TV!

$1.99 video downloads are destined for a wide screen laptop, desktop or big a__ plasma display
phones are for talking, brief messaging, calendaring
PDAs are just like phones, sorry, I don't have the patience to figure out which finger to use to "finger type"...what? dump all those years with 10-key by touch? 100 wpm??
Storage? That's just some way for me to move files from one place to another easily...don't expect me to work on it on a phone
Document access - sure, how about document creation? You must be a masochist if you prefer to create a meaningful spreadsheet on a 3 inch screen!

Here's a clue, get connectivity down reliably, in any/all areas, while I'm mobile/moving, in an elevator or building then I'll call you a smartphone. Be as reliable as a landline legacy first - don't try to be a PC!

What's likely to replace laptops? Better tablets.

Update: As this article notes, with the right marketing, Origami or the uh, UMPC (Ultra Mobile PC) may also just be the ticket.

Stupid Job Posts: "No WYSIWYG Tool"

2006-10-22T08:48:00.000-07:00

Am I treading on dangerous ground? (10.30.2006 Update: turns out I'm not the only one) I know that the phrase "without the use of a WYSIWG tool" is common in job postings in order to express the need for talent and experience - but to anyone who actually has experience in production level web design and development, either as a grunt or a manager, this phrase is, well, stupid.

Yes, you need expert level knowledge of raw code, and must. But to think that development these days is or must be done via Notepad is ridiculous! If it is, and if some "development team" insists on this, here's what I think:

you have a ridiculously inefficient process
you are stuck in some purist notion that is good for academia, bad for business

Yes, I can do x/HTML in Notepad - that's how I started, way back in 1995, I can do ASP/.Net, JavaScript, CSS etc. etc. code in notepad, but do I? Hell no. I'll let the tool do the standard stuff, and then I'll dig into raw code - only if necessary.

It's time this requirement is rephrased. And yes you must welcome WYSIWYG tools in your business environment, in fact you must add this as a requirement - expertise in an IDE will almost certainly result in productivity.

Here's suggested verbiage for such posting:

You must have expert level knowledge of raw [insert languages here] code
You must have extensive experience in [insert wysiwg/ide tool here], or similar IDE tools in a single developer or team development environment.

Efficiency and productivty. Always good for business.

Close to Cutting Edge: Live Mail v8

2006-10-22T08:44:00.000-07:00

Well, well, finally. Progress! This new interface of Microsoft Live Mail has improved. I believe the current version is called v8.

Now, if the Live Mail team can convince the ad folk to dump that ridiculously large banner at the top of the page, then they've got a winner on their hands. No, I'm not saying "no ads", what I'm saying is better use of screen real estate. Use different ad banner sizes. The operative word here is to make ads less intrusive and more "seamless". Let users do what they need to do (it's an email UI after all, so let the user communicate!), they'll appreciate you for it, will evangelize Live Mail, and ultimately add more value (users) who aren't peeved about ads, and may actually take notice and appreciate ads (of course with better targeting). Ad "overload" is one of the reasons why people tune out, I know I do.

Again, take another look at Yahoo Mail (beta) design sense of incorporating ads into the interface. The ads don't "steal" away from the main purpose of the UI - email. Notice I'm not even suggesting the GMail look and there's a very good reason for it. Email is largely text, so having more text ads, just clutters the UI, which steals from it's purpose - I get dizzy with all that text sometimes! I use GMail largely because, well, I have it, and is a "newer" email account that has "escaped" from the scourge of spam - I'm sure that over time, it will change...by contrast I've had hotmail for, well about 7 - 8 years! The good old days....

Kudos to the Live Mail team!

Cutting Edge: Yahoo Mail (beta)...Wow!

2006-10-03T00:11:00.000-07:00

Speaking of cutting edge, if you want to see what cutting edge should be, try out Yahoo Mail, currently in Beta. You'll find it to be, hands down, the best web mail experience and interface, out there...and it's free.

It simply leaves Microsoft's Live Mail, and Google's GMail, in the dust! Compared to Yahoo Mail, they look, extremely dated. Here's the rub:

Microsoft Outlook is by far the de facto king of email client interfaces. It's emulated, and outright copied by every other mail client, or web mail/Ajax type provider out there. Yahoo mail is no exception, it has the Outlook "look". So it begs the question - why doesn't Microsoft emulate it's own creation for Live Mail? They have a stunning example in the latest Outlook web mail (that's a double Wow) client - and are quite capable of winning the web mail crown hands down!

Note to Microsoft: you've got it, flaunt it! In this particular arena, you should be the "king", and not (once again) settle for "me too" by being late to the game.

Cutting Edge? FedEx ShipManager Isn't

2006-09-25T21:53:00.000-07:00

Sometimes you just have to ask yourself how a "Top 500" ranking is actually built. Do they really go hands on with some of these winners? Hmmm...

Case in point: FedEx Locks In Customers By Tying Shipping Data To Back-Office Apps, from InformationWeek at:
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=192700339

Don't get me wrong, FedEx ShipManager is a good piece of shipping software - I don't think I'm ready to give it an award though, and certainly not "Cutting Edge" by any measure. Although the piece isn't really a comparison or "shoot-out", anyone who has used rival UPS's WorldShip can pretty much see where I'm going. UPS WorldShip flat out leaves FedEx ShipManager in the dust, in performance, features and ease of use. Even the topic of the feature article, integration, is so much more reliable and intuitive with UPS WorldShip.

Here's an interesting quote, "We allow...drag and drop names from their address books into FedEx Ship Manager" - FedEx CIO Robert Carter. Unless he's talking about a totally different piece of software, I don't think there is any drag and drop whatsoever.

Compared to UPS's WorldShip, here are some "areas for improvement" facing FedEx ShipManager which should be apparent to anyone doing a full review of software in this category:

Integration isn't without bugs and FSM (FedEx ShipManager) has problems dealing with multiple package shipping during batch and single imports with some data successfully being imported during single packages, but mysteriously drops off with multiple package shipments (i.e. ShipAlert settings)
There is no automation whatsoever to repeat shipments, nor return shipments based on a past shipments. In a catalog/retail environment, good luck...
It has no long term "usable" storage options for shipping history. It essentially doesn't allow customers to maintain a record of shipments (shipment history) - which consequently ties into the previous item on less than optimal automation for repeat shipments (return or new) . In order to maintain some history, take heed: create an export profile and store your shipments in your own database. Don't waste your time tring to decipher reports, you'll get a nosebleed.

re: it really has no "history" to speak of that you can use to "repeat" or "copy" a shipment you made in the past. All it has is a "daily history"...which is only good until the day's shipments are "closed"..yes, it's gone the next day...all you can do from that point onward is to track shipments...
Networked or not, you'd have to dedicate a machine to FSM. Why dedicated?

it has to be running before any "remote" clients can do anything

I don't think you'd want this puppy running in the background on your desktop - if you want to get other stuff done...and that's a comment from someone who has a workstation (not just a desktop - dual Xeons).

Gulp, FSM doesn't have any address validation whatsoever...ouch, even a much simpler/"less powerful" app from Stamps.com has this capability...We had to cobble up our own app, just to help FSM along...don't you think software in this category should be capable of this? Before being "crowned"?

FedEx ShipManager may have been the leader in the past, and in the past year or so, it really hasn't broken any new ground - and after being exposed to other solutions such as those mentioned above (not some custom software, the same out of the box, free software), I think this only becomes more apparent.

Ok, so who's the genius that designs theater seating?

2006-09-19T08:07:00.000-07:00

Whoever it is, he/she deserves to be chained to a seat in the first 5 to 8 rows for life - one seat per day, across all the theaters in this country. This way he/she experiences the full crapola of this diabolical design!

WTF, I actually think it's unhealthy! Likely bad for eyes, and well, overall well being. Don't you get nauseous? Yeah, it's a health risk! And if it's not classified as such, well, it's time it should!

Seriously though, if this design is actually a "business decision" by theaters, then we consumers should stand up to it, refuse to be abused this way and ask for a refund. What a great movement eh?

WTF, Road Work During Commute Hours!

2006-09-14T22:59:00.000-07:00

In California: Why would CalTrans schedule road work during or close to commute hours?

9/14/06: US 101 North, SF Airport area, around 10AM today, is an example. It didn't seem to be an "emergency" - radio traffic reported a possible schedule of closure till 2PM. Now if the traffic diversion started a 10AM, work that would last until 2PM would mean a 4 hour job.

In this time of high gas prices, air quality issues, why can't this type of work be done overnight? Has anyone done a comparative cost study? Not just the cost to CalTrans but to the larger driving public? Burning gas, exhaust, frustration, lost productivity of thousands of commuters vs. what, overtime pay of, say 100 people?

Make no mistake, I admire CalTrans for their work - specially on the bridges, it's quite amazing to see up close, and more so from the air. But what makes seemingly intelligent individuals make this kind of a scheduling decision? As if the 101 wasn't bad enough...crapola!

How the mighty have fallen: 3COM

2006-09-08T03:09:00.000-07:00

Oh how the mighty have fallen.

The demise of 3Com is well known, as is its efforts in resurrecting it's once highly respected networking brand. A recent experience in small biz/remote office networking with a 3Com product however, proves there's more than just a name for 3Com to resurrect.

Product: OfficeConnect Wireless 54Mbps 11g Cable DSL Router
Alias: 3CRWER100-75

My recent attempt at getting out of the clutches of Netgear by giving 3Com a shot was a spectacular failure. Simply put, this 3Com product is just about the most unfriendly, unintuitive, bug ridden, ok, I'll say it, POS, I've seen in a while - and I've seen many in my time.

To think that this stuff has been around for years, it's actually quite amazing that a company can be capable of such poor design...but from an "enterprise" caliber name like 3Com? Makes you wonder if their "enterprise" play is more like death throes....

To wit, these days, these things can be done by my 10 year old niece, and shouldn't require a PhD in simple wireless networking configuration:

To change settings, you're presented with a SAVE button, which somehow doesn't "fully" save your settings. To those familiar with Cisco type configurations, it's a horrendous implementation by 3Com of "running config" vs. "write to memory"...this is just my own way of making sense of what I went through in an attempt to give 3Com some credit...Alas, unlike the Cisco implementation, 3Com's running config doesn't work. All it does is test your patience....
there is an APPLY button that flashes, quite annoyingly, hinting that SAVE isn't a save. Surprise! It's not a write to memory - it's a reboot, ok it maybe it did write to memory, and then reboot. Know why I don't know? See next item;
This POS can't recover reliably from a reboot! In fact it loops forever in reboot land...and the horror isn't over, next...
You'll likely have to APPLY, er, reboot, EACH CHANGE you make....
So you think you can just do all the changes, instead of an item at a time? Like resetting the password first, then configuring IP, then security, and only after click the APPLY button? Good luck.

If you hated Windows NT (yes I said NT - this 3Com POS is for that era) for it's reboot requirements during patching and config changes, you're gonna have a grand time with this one. And the extra kick in the nuts is when you try to go to 3Com's web site to see if there's a firmware patch for this...nada. And that's after wading through marketing fluff....in the Support section...Sigh, even the web site is an exercise in futility...

So, now that I've wasted time, more than I really should have (yeah I'm a geek), my advice to anyone thinking about 3Com....think again.

Quark vs. InDesign: A Non-guru's Perspective

2006-08-16T23:42:00.000-07:00

Aside from being a developer, I'm also a designer so I get to play with tools like Photoshop, Illustrator, and Quark. A very recent catalog project introduced me to one of the latest incarnations of Adobe's power tools - Adobe Creative Suite 2.

I'm not made of money so, I opted for the Standard version - besides, I have my own power tools for whatever was missing from Standard and found in Premium - which were mostly web related tools, and well for that, it's just Visual Studio or bust for my area of expertise.

Part of this suite is something called InDesign, a page/document/book layout tool that is billed as the "Quark Express killer". Now, don't get me wrong, I've only had about a week of hands-on InDesign use for this catalog project, so if I'm off base, or even blasphemous with some of my statements, please humiliate me and do set me straight. This is honestly one of those times when I want to be set straight....

InDesign is no Quark killer, not by a long shot. To wit, my first ever side-by-side comparison on a few key points, sans marketing fluff:

Performance Winner: Quark (QXP)

Winner by a long shot. I started using Quark since v5. My current version is 7 and performance is exceptional, not as quick as v5, but runs rings around ID CS2.I have a dual Xeon beast, 1.5G of RAM, with more than enough disk space ( no I 'm not a gamer - I'm a developer and designer) and ID CS2 is painfully slow, and progressively gets slower the more "integrated" applications you use (Photoshop, Bridge, etc.)

ID CS2 is a memory/resource hog - I do have it as part of Creative Suite Std., so I don't know if this is true for standalone InDesign use.
I can't image this being much of a productive experience with anything less than my configuration. This is not a guess, a P4 HT box with 2G RAM, and ample disk space just struggles along. You can "save" resources by tinkering with display modes, of course, but it's still nowhere near QXP performance

Integration Winner: Adobe InDesign (ID)

Although ID as part of CS seems to be the hands down winner, "integration" is a misnomer. You don't really edit an image within ID, but you can "call" on Photoshop. Same for Illustrator files. ID does handle these files seamlessly, but that's not "integration" at all. This is marketing fluff

File Handling Winner: Adobe InDesign (ID)

Edge goes to ID CS2 but that doesn't mean Quark is a slouch. It handles all standard pre-press formats, in line with it's top dog standing in this industry. Excellent file handling capabilities, especially within the Adobe product line (as expected)

Ease of Use Winner: Adobe InDesign (ID)

Hands down, my personal choice. Anyone who has used Photoshop or Illustrator in the past will feel right at home in ID - of course with a few items to learn. A standard UI has been the hallmark of Adobe for some time now - good for them.

However, this "ease of use" is diminished but some stability issues - enough for me to say, "yeah, you better be quick with absorbing the UI, you'll need it due to some bugs and/or stability issues". See my comments on stability below. Basically, you'll need every ounce of experience with the common Adobe UI if you want to recover quickly from a disastrous "event".

This is where QXP falters. Help documentation isn't just lacking, it's horrible and even unhelpful. This is probably the single aspect of QXP that hinders more widespread acceptance. To this day, in v7, adding something like page numbers, a trivial task in much lesser document applications (MS Word comes to mind), is like a secret handshake among QXP users. It's quite easy to get frustrated and dump QXP if you are a new user - I almost did. Here's my reaction then when I purchased QXP 5 a couple of years ago: "this is the most expensive POS I've ever used". Over time you will overcome this feeling if you have the patience...

Yes, QXP leaves a "snobbish" impression on you. They could afford it in the past, but now with the legions of Photoshop users finding a seamless interface in ID, QXP will likely be relegated to a niche, nothing more - unless they improve this aspect of the product - it's not even the "product" per se - just friggin' document things properly

Stability Winner: Quark (QXP)

No problems whatsoever. It does what it's meant to do. QXP is your power tool for page layout projects. Just be patient, use the online documentation at the Quark web site when you run into some strange "how do I"? situations. Unless it's an extremely strange task, QXP is almost guaranteed to handle it. Yes, you may skip the inline help in the program itself - you'll save time, and frustration - it's just horribly written.

This is the one aspect of ID that scares me. Admittedly I'm a new user to ID, so if you can correct me, please do. For a "suite" that promises workflow nirvana, it has dangerous ways of doing things:

Be very careful and aware of your LINKS palette. It is the "god" of your images. If an image is not in the LINKS palette, be very afraid. Yes, it IS a problem.

Preflight is not perfect - a really bad sign. If an image is in your document, but not in the LINKS palette, ID seems to have no idea what it is. It will blow past PREFLIGHT checking, no warning, no mention, nothing.

PACKAGING leaves a lot to be desired. ID doesn't handle this efficiently. That's just a peeve, the disastrous part is that ID itself can be confused by it's own PACKAGE folder structure such that it loses LINKS!

You're saying, no problem, just re-link it ala "USAGE" in QXP right? You're about to enter hell, if you expect the same power QXP has in this regard. ID has no "re-learning" power - got 3000 images losing links? You've got 3000 images to link, one at a time....So you've got serious problems and no way to recover. Workflow nirvana? Go figure!

I haven't had a crash yet, but the first item in this post mentions ID CS2 as a memory/resource hog, so I would think you'd better be prepared if you have something less than the 2 system configs I mentioned in the Performance section. Just pray that whatever happens, it doesn't affect LINKS.

I've posted this to the Adobe community, and since it seems to be one of those "gremlins" - doesn't happen often, maybe. But the point is that it does - I should know. After a gallon of Peet's coffee, ordering in Chinese food for dinner and breakfast (yes next day), ugh - I know, but it tasted good then, working on a catalog with LINKS issues, trust me, I know these gremlins exist.

Which is better? I'd say it's a matter of knowing your strengths, and your workflow environment. There's a lot of talk about how Adobe InDesign will "take over" the Quark throne...not so fast! Aside from a consistent UI among Adobe applications, there's really nothing "Wow" about InDesign. I believe here's where it all plays out:

Quark

improve your help/documentation and general UI command structure - like please don't make page numbering some type of secret handshake! If you do, you'll should be comfortable in your throne for about 2 releases.

Adobe
- "Integration", shouldn't just be a marketing ploy, your audience is smarter than that - a casual user will just use Microsoft Publisher. At the minimum someone considering ID is probably experienced in some type of publication
- Resource hog issues are another concern - "workflow" means nothing if things don't flow from system crashes..
- Don't reinvent file handling - or at least make it smarter - this is your most serious flaw

Good sign: We're doing something other than killing ourselves and each other

2006-08-11T23:04:00.000-07:00

Finally, a breather from all the death and destruction going on these days.

Who would've thought PG&E would be a ray of sunshine (literally I guess) to our lives? This ambitious project to harness solar energy may take a few years to fruition, and may just be for California, but that's a great start. Let's all hope this is a successful endeavor that provides the framework for cleaner energy projects across the country and a real step at trying to break free from our dependence on oil.

Yes, finally, 'nuf mindless talk about "research", it's time for real action. Kudos to PG&E!

We're Melting, Not Warming - More Than An Inconvenient Truth

2006-07-28T19:25:00.000-07:00

Last week was probably the warmest weather I've experienced in the San Francisco Peninsula area. Now to those who aren't familiar with this area, we're a bit "weather spoiled". I'm no expert, but I'd peg our climate zones between 35° and 90° anything beyond this zone drives us a bit crazy. So at 107° over the weekend, well, it was nuts.

This experience prompted me to revisit the topic of Global Warming having seen the excellent film, An Inconvenient Truth a month or 2 ago. A few clicks later, I stumbled upon more videos, commentaries, and discussions about the topic, and voila! Crapola abounds!

I'm no expert, but just reading some of the comments that people have rejecting global warming, makes me sad, not angry nor combative, just sad. I can see how some can easily equate the film to politics, it's Al Gore after all, and that's too bad. This issue isn't about politics, it's SURVIVAL, maybe not yours or mine, but for today's children, or to be blunt about it, the human species.

Last I checked we all have one planet - and it's going through some major changes. Again I'm no expert, so I'll leave it up to those who are.

Podcast: Dr. Michael Oppenheimer, geosciences professor, Princeton University, shares what you need to know about global warming. (link goes to Discovery Channel)
Or if you don't have your player handy, here's the link to the MP3 (Discovery Channel)
Real Climate: Climate Science from Climate Scientists

I hope that rational thinking prevails so we can move from inaction and complacency. Please spread the word, and better yet, act.

Sorry, this time I don't have to thank you, it' s not for me, it's for all of us.

Parting Advice To Stephen Manes, PC World Contributing Editor: Get a Mac or Linux box and hush!

2006-07-27T13:30:00.000-07:00

Just when I thought this would be another crapola free day (sigh), yet another useless rant by a contributing editor of a well known industry magazine. Yo Stevie, take my advice and leave us poor "crap users" alone - I'm sure that it'll make you feel better, less stressed and hopefully write something actually useful.

On your journey, you should:

Quit kidding yourself:

the crap we use makes/made your magazine relevant;
the crap we use consequently and currently make you keep your job...you're not writing for MacWorld or LinuxWorld are you? Not to say that you can't, or don't....;
the crap we use is quite possibly the single piece of crap that elevated the technology industry into the mainstream;
the crap we use is making/made practically every other "original" and truly "innovative", something 2.0, relevant as well. BTW, I'm still trying to figure out what's out there that's really an original...
Seems like you're saying copying sounds easy, no? Copy an idea and that's all you need to do to make a billion dollars. Forget 50, just one, you know, just to keep it real.

Hint: everybody has an idea, it takes more than an idea to, um, be the dominant force in computing...

And while we're on the subject is "derivative" cool? Original? Innovative? Semantics? BTW, I'm not blasting derivatives out there, yeah you know who you are, merely stating a point - go forth and create bettr, coolr stuff...and with cute animal mascots too!

Insist on quality and security
A few posts ago, I got skewered when my comments were misunderstood as expecting 100% perfection from security vendors- you know, the people in the business of securing our systems? Turns out it's naive to think so (BTW, it really is). So if security vendors aren't expected to provide 100% security, due to the nature of things, what are you laughing at?

Quality control? Sure we all strive for that. Problem is, the path to bullet proof quality control for this crap maker could quite possibly be "monopolistic" and "closed" and ahem, more proprietary. Maintain your own OS and hardware...wait, that's Apple! Ha! Is that why they have such great quality stuff? Yup, it largely is because of that.

Um, how many times did you have to click through that Windows XP warning about possibly installing an untested/unverified driver? Was that crap manufactured by this crap maker?

BTW, check your publication's online advertising content quality control, they seem to be running those ads that trick people into clicking on them because "Your system needs to be updated". Wow....
Shake up the talent
If you're going to rant, do it in a blog, yeah, like I am. Save the trees...this space is for useful PC info.

Must have been a slow news day...not!

2006-07-27T11:27:00.000-07:00

Nope, no external links today - this post is about the crapola that went on this morning on MSNBC while I was prepping for work. TV on, listening to network news (after getting my dose of excellent local news from KTVU Ch. 2) . Not sure if this went on with other network news stations as well ( i.e. CNN, Fox, etc.):

So get this, there's a war in the Middle East, a new video from the 2nd in command of our favorite evil empire, a possible break through with an Israeli soldier release, a Tour de France fiasco, and so on....and what does MSNBC focus on for more than 20 minutes? A stupid police chase somewhere in LA County. TWENTY MINUTES - are you kidding me? On national network news? On a "slow" news day like this???! A mention maybe, since they do need some break, but 20 continuous minutes??!!! Crapola programming!

Now before someone asks why I'm venting on one hand, and um watching this "fit-for-BEST-POLICE-CHASE-video" crapola on the other, well, I wasn't. I'll save everyone the details of my early morning prep for work activities, and just say that I could hear it going on, not view it, don't have the remote handy. It's one of those things you just notice and then say, "What the crapola!", this is news?

One more thing you must know about VoIP

2006-07-26T08:28:00.000-07:00

Information Week, 7/3/06: 5 Things You Must Know About VoIP

I'm surprised to see more than one publication write about, provide details/guidance to readers, about VoIP, and not mention one critical piece of any VoIP deployment: POWER

Is it that research respondents were all from large enterprises with the capability and capacity to purchase/provide their own power? What about businesses that rely on utility power providers?

I don't know if all large companies actually control their supply of power, but I believe that beyond the UPS (uninterruptible power supply), majority of businesses have absolutely no control of this all important/critical resource. Why the big fuss? In a power loss, don't all systems shut down anyway? True, but in the world of "legacy" POTs phone lines, not all business activity shuts down, the phone will still ring, and the company can still provide some level of service. Ever seen the movie, "The Day After Tomorrow"? - all phones were down, except for the old pay phone in the basement....

I would imagine such a critical resource should be mentioned in it's own bullet point - maybe supplanting the first item in the article regarding VoIP's "inevitability" or, at the very least, deserves a mention in the 2nd point referencing VoIP's cost - you either increase your power usage, and/or necessitate some type of power architecture upgrade. Bottom line: it must be considered. It is one more thing you need to know about VoIP.

I did my own evaluation of VoIP about 2 - 3 years ago. After being wowed with the possibilities, claimed savings in toll-call costs, a relatively manageable price tag, it was almost a shoe in. We were likewise in the midst of a move to a new location, which the company purchased (not leased). This gave us the unique opportunity to build out our network architecture pretty much any way we wanted - an empty shell of a building, no shared space, full access to walls for cabling, etc. etc. In other words, it would have been the "ideal" time to get this new technology in.

We're a small business looking for ways to manage costs and increase efficiency, and in the final phase, where I overlayed our "old" POTS system with the new, I was also "guilty" of overlooking power needs. The last question (probably should have been the first) I had was, in the event of a power loss, for whatever reason, is this system resilient? The answer, is simply NO. We can install all the redundancy in hardware, get the best in switches, routers, management software, etc., bring in a networking guru to properly segment the LAN for maximum efficiency, but NONE of this matters much if power goes down. When the power goes down, you go dark. With POTs, even if our UPS systems go down, the phone still rings, business can still move.

Don't get me wrong, VoIP is definitely an enabling technology. We have a very small deployment of VoIP, through a service provider. So far it's doing well - there are toll savings and voice quality is perfect (can't distinguish from land line). But at least in our case, it is not an "inevitable" technology that will replace our old/legacy communication systems, yeah the plain old POTS phone, rather, work side-by-side with it.

Is Centralized IT Killing Tech Innovation?

2006-07-20T15:25:00.000-07:00

There is nothing innovative about inviting disaster, or to be less dramatic about things, inviting cost. After spending on a slew of "monitors" to ensure that the network isn't just tough on the outside (firewalls/IPS, etc.), but on the inside as well, with anti-virus, anti-spyware, anti-this and anti-that, asset trackers, patch management systems, another layer of network/app firewalls, ensuring no rogue wireless access points, we're suddenly saying, "yeah, bring it on employees

I have a quick answer to the situation where someone brings in unauthorized software or hardware to the office: take it home before you do damage or you're fired. An office PC, the network, and the bandwidth used, is private corporate property, period.

To the developer mentioned in the article bemoaning a less than perfect station at work: Go to your immediate manager, or boss, and ask for a quad-dual-core system with a terabyte of storage, mega LCD flat screens, and memory to the max - just make sure you have the smarts to defend your requisition. If your company is truly serious about its development team (like say you're in the software business) and knows what it's doing, then you shouldn't have any problem getting your new toy, and if you can crank out software releases twice as fast, heck corporate will even give you 2 of them, and send an extra box to your home. Come to me with a request for a joystick and I'll send you a link to Monster or HotJobs.

To the suggestion that "let users decide on hardware" and IT should just "take care of the data", well, just make sure that when the next vendor support plans (plural) invoices come in, don't point to IT when Finance bean counters come knocking. And, unless you are in an environment with fairly tech savvy employees, please make sure you listen to your IT manager when he/she asks for more staff, or more anti-this; anti-that, monitor this/that, to support the myriad devices and applications in your office. 10 employees, with 10 different computing environments, what a lovely way to increase operational costs - kudos to the suggestion. Talk about crapola!

In business, it's about productivity and adding value. If you need something, ask for it. It's not about IT "mandates", it's presenting your use case to your manager/boss, for approval/budget. If it's all good, and adds value, efficiency, productivity, then by all means, we in IT love tinkering with new toys too! We're the uber geeks, remember?! And since it's got full management support, you'll have IT support too.

I don't think IT "loves control". Management mandates and makes IT responsible for "all that stuff" - if something goes wrong, it's IT's butt on the hot seat. Any IT person with enough experience knows that a good job is ensuring that you're actually not "needed" - if you don't need me, never need to know my extension, then everything is humming along just fine, and I've done my job. No, I don't want everything to go through me, thank you very much.

Anti-virus: And you thought you were protected

2006-07-19T15:41:00.000-07:00

Well here's a bit of refreshing news from the technology world, turns out our anti-virus systems are worthless. According to the Australian Computer Emergency Response Team (AusCERT) "...the top desktop antivirus applications will let about 80 percent of the latest malware slip through."

What the ___?! Why would this outfit not name names?

Which software, which malware? These are critical pieces of information that we all need to know! If the malware is out/already in the wild, then what's the point of all the hush hush? Are they unsure of their findings thereby maybe exposing themselves to litigation if they name names?

We've got debates about the "greater good" being served when researchers "expose" flaws on their own schedule (vs. the vendors'), now we've got a supposed 80% failure rate from security vendors and it's being treated with secrecy??? If that's not a flaw, I don't know what is. **

I would think their credibility as a CERT is in question with this course of action.

**BTW, seems like this statement is being misunderstood, admittedly easily, so allow me to clarify: The context of this statement is to take AusCERT to task, not security vendors.

We all know most security products are reactive, a few are proactive, so I have no illusions of perfection. The point is that if anyone throws a number like 80% failure rate in the top desktop antivirus applications, and then not provide any useful detail in said "report", well, it's not a "report", it's crapola. Here's what this piece of crapola really said, "The sky is falling".