Mac 'n' Steve, please!

Evolution

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 18:51:00 +0000

The communication is the information

The information is the relationship

The relationship is the network

The network is the computer

The computer is the medium

The medium is the message

Picasa Web Albums

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Mon, 16 Oct 2006 23:48:00 +0000

Google makes Picasa, a fairly straightforward and free photo-editing program for the PC. They've added a great new photo-sharing feature in the newest version called Web Albums. All you need is a Google Account and you can upload your photos to a Web Album archive via the Picasa program... but not all of your photos, and definitely not a lot of of your photos, only up to 250 MB of them!

What? 250 MB? So many people have 5+ megapixel cameras today; how many of them do you think know how or actually have the time to scale their images down? If you ask me, they shouldn't have to. A typical high-resolution image is ~ 3MB; with a storage quota of 250 MB, that's only 83 images!

For the love of all things intelligent, am I the only one wondering why they just don't merge the photo storage quota with Gmail's? I'm still only using 1% of my Gmail mailbox quota and I've been using it for quite some time now.

Honestly, what the fuck are they thinking? You need a Google account for Picasa's new Web Albums service (or any other Google service) and at the core of every Google account is Gmail with nearly 3GB of storage! What on earth is anyone going to do with 3GB of storage for email alone?

Wake up Google, or hire me when you're ready to improve.

Irony

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 04:48:00 +0000

The most usable defintion in Webster's dictionary for irony is:

(1) : incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result
(2) : an event or result marked by such incongruity

After all the pro Mac talk I've been spewing, I was half expecting my PC to blow up in anger and retaliation against the Mactopia I have been building in my mind, talking and writing about in this blog for the last several months.

Not so, I finally got around to firing up my 'new' Mac Mini to actually start doing something with it instead of just talking about it all the time (as you can see I do). I installed a few small apps, did some small OS X updates, installed some medical software and then bang... a CD gets stuck in the drive. The first thing I tried were some Unix commands like drutil and disktool but these don't do shit if OS X no longer detects a disc in the drive (which System Profiler did not).

A search for the problem brought me to a few Apple user sites as well as an Apple support page that advised to:

restart holding down a mouse button after the startup sound, which 'sometimes' releases optical media from a drive.

and if that didn't work to:

restart holding the x key after the startup sound, and on restart trying to eject from iTunes or iDVD.

and if that didn't work to:

restart and access Apple's Open Firmware utility by holding down Command, Option, O, F, then typing 'eject cd' at the command prompt.

Well the first two didn't work and before trying the third option I had to find out what the Command and Option equivalents were on a PC keyboard. No biggie, I learned from this page and others that Command = Control and Option = Alt on a PC keyboard. Good enough I thought, that's similar to the very well-worn Ctrl-Alt-Del key combination to enter the BIOS on a PC.

Several minutes and restart attempts later...

Why can't I get this fucker to access the Open Firmware utility?

...and more Googling:

I found a page where a fellow had the same problem, he couldn't access the Open Firmware using the mapped keyboard combination on his Logitech keyboard. He went on to learn from Apple this was a known issue with Logitech keyboards -- they seem to be the only keybaords that do this and Logitech didn't plan on fixing it. Thanks Logitech. Can you guess what kind of keyboard I have?

Okay I thought, I'll buy an Apple keyboard; they're only $40 -- even I can afford that. So, who sells Apple keyboards in my hometown? Anyone, anyone? That's right, no fucking body; well practically anyway:

Future Shit? No stock.

Worst Buy? No locations in my city.

Staples? Well, yes, it's right in their flyer but the cow on the phone at the local store curtly told me "Staples doesn't carry Apple products and never did".

I told this unloving cow to find a PC keyboard and shove it halfway up her ass, then to remove the PC keyboard and replace it with an Apple keyboard when one finally did arrive in store... this time shoving it all the way up. In this way, I said, she could more easily distinguish the product using her ass* and that that should prove more useful to her than her eyes.

So I guess you're wondering where the irony comes into play. Well, the irony in this little adventure is that my Mac mini has been sitting on my desk looking pretty for a long time now and the first time I actually try to use it, it practically fucking breaks on me to the point that I now have to take it in for service, lest I void the warranty by cracking the plastic bitch open myself. For a device that was supposed to allow me to forget all of -- okay, some of -- my Microsoft woes, I'm sure off to a rip-roaring start, aren't I?

Wait, it gets better. Since I couldn't do anything else, I opted to install the OS X.4.8 update, on the off-chance the problem would correct itself after its installation. After restart, the actual DVD-R drive no longer shows up in System Profiler at all. See, it just keeps getting better.

Ahhh, the glory days of the PC. Hark, hark, wherefore art thou PC? How I have forsaken thee!

I called Apple Support and apart from being flabbergasted by the finer details of the standard warranty support agreement, I learned that intel Macs don't have Open Firmware. So even if I bought a new Apple keyboard I would still be racking my brain trying to eject this fucking CD -- the 'last resort' from all the solutions I read through indicated that the eject cd command via the Open Firmware utility was just that, the last thing that can potentially fix the issue before needing to take it to the geniuses at the Apple Store or some other authorized Apple dealer (the last thing to do without voiding the warranty, that is).

Here are the Finer details of Mac support:
Apple's 1-year warranty = they agree to fix it if it's a hardware issue; if it's determined to be a 'software issue', then I pay to have them fix it.

What the fuck? What if the smart alec dweebs at the Apple Store have access to better software utilties that can force eject the optical drive, utilities that I do not have access to? Is it then still called a software issue? It better fucking not be is all I have to say. And what if it's thought that my non-Apple-based-software CD that's stuck in the drive is somehow the culprit? Will that also be deemed a software issue?

Only time will tell, and of course I will let you know the fallout.

In conclusion, I have to say that if this DVD-R drive is a dud and therefore an 'official' hardware issue (to Apple), cool; my drive will be replaced and I'll be able to get on with my life using my new Mac. If not, and it is somehow deemed a software issue by the hypointelligent Apple geniuses**, then I may have to rip someone a new asshole at Apple.

Follow-up:
A couple days later after not playing with it at all, I turned it back on... the CD-ROM mounted on the desktop and ejected without a hitch. I needed to cool off and be away from it, and vice versa for the Mac incidentally. Since that initial frustrating debacle, our relationship has been going very well.

* rectal orifice, to be more specific
** which, by the way, require an appointment booked in advance to see

Concept: Integrated iPod Car Audio

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Tue, 19 Sep 2006 00:22:00 +0000

iPod Car integration is cool and all... but I have an idea that takes it to a whole new level, one I beleive makes more sense and would be far more enjoyable to the rich folks that can afford most of the iPod-available cars anyway.

I'm publishing this idea because I don't think anyone else but Apple could patent an iPod-specific device, which is what I'm proposing and presenting here. If someone else likes this idea and patents it as something similar (i.e. an iPod-like device), so be it. The publication date of this blog entry will show when it was presented by moi. Yes, I may lose out on millions... but I've got a ton of other ideas I think Apple and other companies would love to hear.

On with it then...

One shouldn't need to bring their iPod every time they take a road trip or drive to work. An integrated-iPod car stereo with wireless access would be much smarter (and better). The car stereo-iPod should have:

external wi-fi Internet access* via residential/public access points for iTunes Music Store access (with built-in one-click purchasing, of course)

incoming wi-fi access to car-iPod node from wireless computers via Bonjour or any standard wifi router/access point

The car iPod acts just like any other Mac computer with wireless access. For example, when the car is at home in the driveway, a user can drop music files on the car-iPod node from another networked Mac computer (okay sure, PCs too) inside the house.

Wireless security
Incoming transfers are set with an option on the car stereo interface and enabled only to authenticated users for the next 30 minutes - 5 hours for example, after which the wi-fi transmitter turns off (so wireless radio is not always transmitting). Another cool option would be to have a pencil-push style button (or another design which prevents accidental toggling) on the back of the car's keyless remote transmitter to turn on the car's wi-fi radio from inside the house. Access to the car's iPod node is authenticated by encrypted login access over the wireless connection. Permissions can be set on the car stereo-iPod to to allow access only from certain MAC addresses.

Your driving down the highway and get that song in your head that you really like, the one that you don't have on CD or on your iPod; imagine the freedom of being able to listen to that song then and there in all its multi-speaker system glory -- with angel's trumpets and devil's trombones as Alex so eloquently put it. That sure beats the hell out of singing the song to your bored wife.

Benefits

no need to bring iPod with every time you go for a drive

ability to purchase music while in car via car stereo-iPod interface

iPod can't be stolen; unless it's done the "old fashion" way (the whole car)

security: incoming wifi access turned on only by car-stereo interface or button on car remote

separate 'admin' login via https to change car-iPod default settings, allow a new MAC address to connect, etc.

* San Francisco offers city-wide wireless access to the Internet... and it's only a matter of time until other cities follow suit.

Macs are healthier for you

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Thu, 07 Sep 2006 15:46:00 +0000

More people would be healthier if they used a Mac. I don't need to be a doctor with an extensive background in IT to qualify that statement (but I suppose it doesn't hurt). Really though, how can I make such a claim?

It's very simple. On a Mac, the premise is to do things easily. Because the operating system is so well constructed and blended with the Mac's included software, you get things done quickly. In essence, it is better...

"We have the technology. We have the capability to use the world's first intelligent personal computer. The Mac will be that computer. Better than it was before. Better, stronger, faster."

That's right, packed into a small box for < $1000 you get the Six Million Dollar Man! So then, why will a better, stronger, faster Six Million Dollar Man make you healthy?

Because the faster you get stuff done on your computer, the more time you have to be away from it... which means you have more time to be outside, plant a garden, ride your bike, walk, have sex, hang out with friends, drink water, play with your kids, ride your motorcycle*, call your mom, or cook a healthy meal (or call your mom and cook a healthy meal at the same time). In general you will have time to interact more with nature and people, and not a computer screen -- I fully endorse a technology which allows people to do that.

On the 'Macs are too expensive' argument...
What most people don't get is that they are actually paying a lot more to own a PC. Time is money and by using Windows on any given day you are wasting considerable amounts of time and energy trying to fix problems; problems already thought out by the designers and engineers of the Mac. You are wasting energy and time on an interface that was not built with you in mind at all, whereas on a Mac the human experience is the integral component; it was built from the ground up as a computer for people -- the main ingredient is you.

By using Windows you spend more time frowning, decreasing your productivity and therefore quality of life. All this leads to precious minutes, hours, and for those who will only ever use Windows, months (and possibly years) off your life. That's precious time wasted on inferior human interface technology when you could be spending that time on real human interface technology: hanging out with your friends, playing with your kids, hosting a barbeque, or going on a hot date with your wife/business associate/Physics lab partner/goat^**, etc. Are you getting the idea yet? Macs are for every human... even those of us who make mistakes⁺.

Hell, if that doesn't sell you, buy one because they use less power⁺⁺, are smaller and will de-clutter your home...

...because even your mom can post photos and make a web page
...because it's all you'll ever need (even if you need to use Windows)
...because you will be able to use it to your full potential
...because you won't have to fix it, or your parents', friend's, relative's, or neighbour's if they had one^~.

But most importantly, buy one because you will smile when you use it. It's true... an Apple a day keeps the doctor away. Get a Mac and be healthy.

Rx: Apple Mac, once daily, repeat until finished - IM

* preferably with a helmet, Pete (and anyone else reading this)
** shephards high up in the mountains of Greece have needs too you know!
⁺ those who continue to use Windows after reading (and understanding) this blog
⁺⁺ enough that you will notice a decrease in your electricity bill^~ I will never get back all the time spent fixing parents', in-laws', relatives' and friends' PCs over the phone, while visiting or by remote networking. I don't exactly consider this quality time with family & friends.

The Paul Thurrott virus

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 20:02:00 +0000

A couple months back I was reading through the comments of a juicy article on Paul Thurrott's website, either Supersite for Windows or his Internet Nexus. It may have been his review of OS X Tiger -- I didn't bookmark it and for the life of me I can't find this article again, but it was followed by a generalized Mac vs. Windows commentary war.

In the battle that ensued, one of the pro-Mac comments was something like: "two words: zero viruses*" or "no viruses on a Mac, 'nuff said" or some variation on that theme. Paul himself rebutted the comment with something to the effect of**:

" 'There would be more viruses [made] for the Mac if there was more money in them' [since everyone uses Windows] "

In other words, since so few people use them, virus programmers don't waste their time writing viruses for the Mac. I was floored when I read this. What a whopper! First, the fact alone that he makes no acknowledgment about the zero-virus computing environment on a Mac or the impact this has on the world and its computer users, to me says very little about Paul's (supposedly) unbiased ability to appraise information technology... of any kind. Second, by saying this, Paul makes an assumption that only a Microsoft zealot could make; the assumption of course inherent in his words is that Apple would do nothing about the surmounting threat of these WMD (viruses) on the Mac platform, that they would respond reactively to the problem instead of proactively, and that the inevitable result would be just as many viruses (100,000+) on the Mac as on a Windows PC.

This tells me that Paul Thurrot is very shortsighted. He underestimates and shows little regard to the company that has always led the way in the personal computer industry and has supplied just about every innovation that the company he seems to love so poorly and continuously attempts to reproduce (but markets so well). In essence, Paul assumes Apple would fall prey to the same problems that plague Windows because he cannot take view of technology from any place except the vantage point of a Microsoft mentality. What else can be expected? His entire world is Microsoft and the sub-minimum-level-of quality products they produce.

Paul's response also brought up some other feelings in me...

Because of his grand reputation as the source for most anything "Microsoft" and "Windows IT", many people respect what he has to say. And with the kind of following Paul Thurrott has, his comments have a way of assuaging the pain some⁺ Windows users feel about continuing to use (and perhaps considering to leave behind) a product that is less secure⁺⁺. In my opinion his words come dangerously close to saying flat out: "continue to invest in Windows even though it's inferior", simply "because more people are using it".

As a consequence of this dogma, his readership is massaged into thinking they should trust that "Big Brother" (Microsoft in general, but Anti-virus/Anti-spyware/Security vendors as well) will develop new defences to keep us 'safe' from all of the viruses, scumware and other shit Windows allows through its pores.

I don't know how or why anyone working in IT would downplay or at the very least would not highlight the significance of a virus & pest-free environment. Not long ago when I was an IT Manager I hated the constant cleanup that was necessary on Windows PCs, no matter how much they were locked down^~.

Hey Paul, if all your Windows IT Professional buddies decided to jump from a cliff in the name of the almighty^~~ , wou...

...never mind.

Hmmmm, any doctors out there thinking this sounds a lot like the pharmaceutical industry? Intelligent people know if the medical establishment aka industry was actually about medicine and, of all things health, it would never have grown into the multi-trillion dollar industry that it is; hospitals wouldn't be growing so fat, and more doctors might start to use their brains again. It's obvious that the medical industry as it exists today is very much not about health, and we are getting sicker and sicker because of it.

Likewise, with our computers. Is my computer experience as a Windows user better because I have to spend an extra $75/year on resource-sucking Security Suite bundles? Do any of us want to? No, but your computer wouldn't last five minutes without one if you use Windows. This is not unlike the current state of the conventional medical establishment; in our Microsoft Windows world the emphasis (and obsession) is on the anti-viral, the anti-pest, and not the computer's "innate" ability to prevent these infections. Likewise in conventional medicine, the emphasis is on drugs and not using natural methods or one's natural ability to heal and cure disease. You see the ads on TV all the time for the flu-vaccine, blood-sugar and cholesterol lowering drugs, anti-virals, athritis meds, and the list goes on (they don't bother with antibiotics anymore -- no money in those). The exact same theme goes for computers too:

Windows has no natural ability to heal itself so it needs to rely on "drugs" (i.e. other anti-infection products) just to keep it working...

...when the emphasis could be on using a healthier computer, one that was designed first, or rather, one that was actually designed; one that uses an operating system steeped in time-honoured traditions (37 years and counting), and one with an interface that gives you the human centre stage.

Sadly this hasn't been the case for about fifteen or so years in the computer industry (much longer in conventional medicine), but things are starting to change in both arenas now. It's very interesting that Computers and Medicine, two industries that seemingly have nothing to do with each other on their own, actually have a lot in common, share similar histories, and are changing in the same way. Guess what else? The only ones vital (and still laughing) about all of this are the big security software vendors, like Computer Associates, Macaffee, and Symantec -- the two latter of which dominate the home PC market. In my opinion they're loving life, sitting back and thinking: "Wow, our customers really are fucking stupid, I mean all they have to do is use a better computer and they don't."

Think about it like this. Every time a virus author or spyware maker puts out a new threat that exploits the crumbling foundation of Microsoft Windows, they mock its poor, poor construction. I think if these "programmers" were to tell you the truth, they would probably just say: "Stop using Windows you dummy, that's all you have to do!" Of course, they would never do this because then they'd have nothing to do! The Internet is a veritable playground of exploitable Microsoft Windows computers, and for a cracker this is autoeroticism of the highest order... though any nine-year-olds of this breed would probably just say "it's the funnest, most bestest playground ever":

"Grandma, come look, I just got into the City Hall's Windows 2003 Server... and it was soooooooo easy!"

"Oh, isn't that lovely dear... don't forget to eat the peanut-butter celery sticks I brought you"

I'm not a cracker or a virus programmer, but I know enough that the most successful people of this 'trade' would not get hired by security companies (like CA, Macafee, Symantec, etc.) or Police forces, etc if they didn't try to constantly break your Windows computer. That being said I'm quite certain there are other breeds of crackers in it purely for the mischief factor, and with no desire to get hired by anyone.

* Todd Woodward, Symantec Security Response Researcher, asserts the same.

** I wish I could find this page again to quote the commenter & Paul exactly, but I'm not far off the mark here.

⁺ the more conscious Windows users, that is

⁺⁺ and less intelligent, and counter-productive... I could go on you know.

^~ I've seen 3 GHz P4 computers reduced to the performance one expects of a 386. Why? Because Windows is poo.

^~~ Microsoft of course... what were you thinking?

Ideas

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Sat, 19 Aug 2006 15:50:00 +0000

Apple's 'Ideas' or 'Concepts' department (I imagine they have such departments) should consist of creative brainstormers like me... not just programmers, computer scientists, electronics specialists & wizards or other supergeeks, but also less technical, imaginative thinkers and 'ideas' people like me. Maybe they do. I think I should be a part of such a group.

Regarding technology, the "future" is only cool when you make things that are way ahead of their time for people to use now. Apple makes some really amazing stuff but it seems to me they have to hold back a lot (and wait for the larger market to play catch up) because so many of its potential customers are obsequious Microsoft robots stuck in the dark ages; not becuase they want to be but because it's all they know and are capable of comprehending. Beleive me when I say I'm not speaking out of hate, I am not a hateful person. But I really feel in my heart that Microsoft, in general, is like a thought suppressant on humanity.

This is lost potential energy and that is very sad to me. It is like keeping a child prodigy from achieving his highest or renting a sportscar with a speed governer. Maybe this has to do with what Tim Berners-Lee said in 1999 about the NeXT Computer. I would love to talk shop with Steve Jobs one day. I think I will.

I'm poor. I'm rich with ideas... and I'm hungry*.

Some freebie ideas to follow...

^* and foolish, and available

RBC

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Sat, 19 Aug 2006 00:20:00 +0000

I think it's pretty sad that the richest bank in Canada has a) the crappiest looking website, and b) the 'bare minimum' level of encryption for a financial institution offering online banking. Mind you, I don't really care for the tactics of most banks today, though I have found some better than others... choose the lesser evil I guess.

So, since I had the time, here are all of Canada's Banks in descending order of the encryption strengths used on their sites:

Banks with 256 bit encryption:
Canadian Western Bank
Laurentian Bank of Canada
TD Canada Trust
Teachers Credit Union

Banks with 168 bit encryption:
ING (sheesh, the dutch are always different... isn't that vieeeeerd?)

Banks with 128bit encryption:
BMO
CIBC
Citizens Bank of Canada
National Bank of Canada
Royal Bank (RBC)
Scotiabank

If you want a little perspective, even eBay & PayPal use 256 bit encryption. You may or may not find it interesting (I do) that these companies take security more seriously than the wealthiest bank in Canada. Most signing authorities offer 128 bit SSL certificates for about $100/year.

So let us thank the RBC for splurging on its several million customers when it comes to financial security on the Internet. You rock RBC!

google/microsoft

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Fri, 18 Aug 2006 16:02:00 +0000

Out of curiosity I entered google.com/microsoft into my browser the other day, and what do you know... there's a page there!

There's nothing on this page to make one think it's Microsoft specific other than this image of the rolling green hills we all know and loathe... errr love:

And as you can see it is even more stripped-down than the standard Google search page; i.e. there are no links above the search field (web, images, groups, news, etc.). Also, using the search on the page doesn't do anything special, it just spits out the expected Google search and not the contents of Bill Gates' personal fileserver -- damn!

Anyway, I figured if Microsoft has the extreme privilige and honour of owning its own root google.com subfolder, I thought that others must surely share this privilige too... not so!

google.com/apple was the first one I tried (of course), which resulted in this very friendly Google 404 message:

So then I tried a few others, mostly big companies like Sun, Cisco, Intel, AMD, IBM. I even tried Yahoo. Okay, Yahoo is Google's main contender so it stands to reason... but what about the rest?

Hmmm... would any readers care to shed some darkness?

Google apps follow-up

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Tue, 15 Aug 2006 03:18:00 +0000

In my previous post about Google's application offerings for the PC, I was discussing how these apps enable Windows users to make better use of their PC and how they are inspired by the built-in features on a Mac. To be fair, Spotlight is the only Mac feature I can think of that goes the other way (i.e. was inspired by Google first) since Google's Desktop Search was around before Spotlight which launched with OS X Tiger (10.4). The point is these apps Google provides are designed to give Windows users the opportunity to work smarter, or to be more specific, make Windows work more like a Mac.

In the sense of their enormous and constant growth, you could say Google is becoming the new 'Microsoft'. But whereas Microsoft has always been exploitative of Apple, Google pays homage to them (so far anyway). Pretty soon the phrase "Microsoft of Borg" won't apply, it will be "Google of Borg"! Poor Bill, first Netscape and now Google.

I think that makes Google awesome and I'm glad they provide these applications. Reproducing OS X's features to improve the experience for the rest of the world (using an inferior computer system) is case in point for how Google recognizes OS X as the superior computer system. This is quite the compliment to Apple I think, but they are used to it now. It didn't take long for history to repeat itself; I guess it never does in the computer industry.

Becuase of this, some people perceive Apple as being self-righteous and that turns them off. But hang on a second -- what if you were using technology that was better and smarter, and nearly everyone else you knew was using one that just plain wasn't? Wouldn't you try to change that if you could? Here is an analogy that I think will help illustrate what some people miss:

Two identical twin sisters each have toddlers the same age (genetic fitness for both moms is the same and medical history is unremarkable). One sister's toddler is very energetic, and already walking, talking, and toilet training. The other sister's toddler is 'healthy', but constantly irritable, still crawling, hasn't uttered a word, nowhere near ready for toilet training, and gets at least 4 ear infections/year. This mom purposely got pregnant when she learned she'd be receiving a government assistance cheque for much more money than she makes at Walmart.

The sister with the healthy toddler nursed for two years, eats very healthy - mostly organic foods, takes no medications and does Yoga three times a week. The sister with the 'slower' toddler raised her son on formula, eats like shit - mostly processed foods, takes clonazepam for anxiety, smokes, and never exercises.

Could other factors I didn't mention influence one's health? Absolutely... but does that mean you're supposed to sit back and do nothing, hoping little Billy will soon become healthy and start learning despite his excessively delayed development? Fuck no! If she cares to listen, you do you damndest to teach Mom #2 how to eat better and live a healthier lifestyle.

What if you then learned that everyone in the same town as Mom #2 lived and raised their children in a similar way? What if you did your best to teach them to live better and healthier (within their means) but they responded with:

"Fuck you treehugger, don't tell me how to live my life. You think you're so fucking great with your clear skin and your pretty hair. I'm happy with my life and so are my kids. Go back to your fucking Yoga class and stop bothering us".

Maybe you would give up in this case too. This playful example is not as extreme as you're probably thinking. It is easily extended to the Mac vs. Windows arena. The difference is this: in my 'real-life' example above we can all easily say Mom #1 does better for herself and her son. But when it comes to computers, we are far more delusional. We either take advice from computer-savvy family members who only have experience with Windows, or we listen to so-called authorities that tell us "there is no such thing as better, it only depends on what you need to use the computer for"...

... when in reality it distills down to this, and only this:

Do you want to use a smarter, more well-thought out computer system? Do you want to focus on your work and not on the things that prevent you from focusing on your work? Do you want to create a more pleasing work environment, use your computer more effectively and have fun at the same time?

Did you notice that none of the above questions have anything to do with "what you need to use the computer for". In my opinion that statement is really just a copout designed to lead people toward buying a PC. You see this situation in Dell TV ads & flyers or with the overly helpful* sales associate at the local Circuit City, Best Buy, Future Shop, etc.:

"Okay, I see... you want to type documents, check email, surf the Internet, and maybe watch a DVD? Oh, then a PC is definitely the best choice for you".

What a steaming pile of shit! The cheaper price tag on the PC is the clincher every time. But nobody tells these poor saps that over the next 3-4 years of owning their PC they'll be losing hours & days in lost productivity and therefore wasting more money, that the PC will only be zippy for a month or so as long you don't use the built-in web browser, that it won't break entirely as long as you have anti-virus, anti-spyware, a decent firewall and all the right drivers, that it will go out-of-date faster, that it will take up way more space in your den, weigh ~20 lbs, and waste excessive amounts of electricity. All this when they could spend a little more up front to buy a Mac and start using their computer right away, instead of being used (and abused, and tortured) by Windows.

The idea of these Mac-imitated apps Google makes for Windows is no different than the subculture of Windows users who make their PCs look and (attempt to) work like a Mac by skinning Windows to look like OS X. If you do an exact phrase search in Google (using quotes) for either of the following, you'll get (# of hits):

"make Windows look like a Mac" (313)
"make Windows look like OS X" (69)
"turn your PC into a Mac" (34,500!)

For anyone interested, one such program that will do this is FlyaKiteOSX.

Now do the opposite search and note the difference in hits:

"make Mac look like Windows" (5)
"make OS X look like Windows" (4)
"turn your Mac into a PC" (0)

It's not surprising that people want to do this, but it's odd in a way too. So why don't these people just use a Mac if they so badly want their Windows computer to look like one? Well... I think it mostly has to do with money and software. Money as in the purchase price of a Mac and software as in available titles for the Mac.

Three things I think will change these obstacles to Mac ownership are: the Mac mini, Boot Camp, and the expanding growth of Apple & third-party software titles for the Mac. The Mac mini definitely makes the "Macs are too expensive" rant less of an issue. In Boot Camp you've got Windows if you want it or really need it. And as for software, just go to the Apple Store and see for yourself. You can still use MS Office or you can 'go out on a limb' and try Pages and Keynote, Apple's new Word Processor and Presentation applications included in iWork '06.

Perhaps this little treatise will help these folks to start using the actual computer system they so fervently try to mimick by hacking Windows on their PC. Perhaps the world of lay Windows users will start to catch on as well.

Now, as I see it, the only thing Apple hasn't taken care of is a migration utility to make the complete transition (if desired) from a PC to a Mac. i.e. all document data, email & address books, Internet favourites, etc. Sure there are third-party tools and brief help is provided on the Apple website, but I think a lot more people out there would quickly dump their PC for a Mac if they knew they could migrate ten or more years of their "Windows" life on their own; without the need to pay an IT guy/gal to do it for them. If there was enough desire from tired Windows users I think Apple would do this (that is, if Microsoft's lawyers haven't stipulated that they can't).

I will highlight soon some easy methods to migrate to the Mac from a PC... and that's another post.

^* overly helpful to make a sale

Anti-malware

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 15:07:00 +0000

Anti-malware is a sort of umbrella term for software that disinfects your Windows computer in some way. All Windows computers have always required anti-virus software and for the past 3-4 years anti-spyware software has been necessary as well (unless you don't care to use your computer, but prefer to be used).

Everybody needs a firewall whether using Mac, Windows, Unix or Linux so we won't get into them except to mention Microsoft's extreme generosity for bundling one into XP SP2 in the summer of 2004. This provided the first built-in firewall for Windows XP and came about six years after it was crucial for Windows to have one. Considering the amount of Windows computers around the globe connected to the Internet, it's a good thing Microsoft has in mind the interests of its customers by making security of its flagship product a top priority*.

"Gee, my lowly P3/1GHz isn't cutting it lately, it used to run the same things I do now just fine. I must have to upgrade to a newer P4 3GHz processor, right?"

NO you stupid Microsoft robot! It's the sloppy, bloated, resource-bleeding code Microsoft keeps pumping out that makes your PC obsolete long before its time! **

Rant complete... for now. Now then, on my Windows computer (P3/1 GHz, 768MB RAM) I have what I consider to be the best Internet suite of 'disinfectants' available - Computer Associates; anti-virus, anti-spyware, a proper firewall and anti-spam software that injects into Outlook and OE. At one time, and with all of these counter measures in place, my Windows PC worked like a well-oiled medicine cabinet. As far as these measures go it is as sterile as it can get, but why is my 'poor old' PC behaving like a sloth? I haven't installed new hardware or software (apart from MS updates that is). I haven't removed or changed anything, and yet it still is not nearly as snappy and responsive as it used to be. So what gives?

Well, my theory is there is a new from of malware that hasn't been identified or classified yet -- let's call it 'shitware' for the sake of this discussion. Perhaps with all the 'anti' measures in place for Windows, someone is trying to tell us something... and if nobody is trying to tell us something then maybe we should just figure it out for ourselves. Virus... anti-virus program, spyware... anti-spyware program; what shall we call the next threat inevitably on the horizon for PCs?

I think the company that produces a system so unmistakably gifted at picking up infections and spreading filth should be honoured in the naming of such a new threat. Yes, like bacteriology and virology in the real world, I beleive the new shitware should carry the namesake of its susceptible host. Thus, this new form of malware could simply be called 'antiMicrosoftWindowsware' for which the leading security software manafacturers will no doubt have to create an Anti-antiMicrosoftWindowsware program.

On a Windows PC there is such a focus on keeping it free from infection, it just isn't right. It is like telling someone they must get used to those 1-2 days of hell when they are sick at home with the flu, over-medicated, unable to get any work done, miserable, and delirious... telling them to get used to that feeling all year round. Many don't think of it like that but that's what's happening right in front of you during your Windows "experience" a lot of the time. On a daily basis over 90% of us⁺ (that use computers) interact with a technology that is unintuitive, counter-productive and much, much, much more susceptible to infection (and therefore malfunction and failure) than any current Mac, Unix or Linux computer.

To take a snapshot of our collective intellect at this moment in time would show a sad and bleak existence to future generations. This is what I mean by comfortable masochism; we have gotten to like and don't see any need to leave this overly dependent relationship we have with Microsoft Windows. It is a co-dependency really, because we have gotten so used to the shit that we actually beleive we like it, so we stick by it. This is a mix of Stockholm syndrome and brainwashing in my opinion.

I think future generations will look back at us and say "Wow, people were actually pretty stupid for a while there - that better was available and they didn't bother with it for so long because of the initial difference in cost alone".

Eventually we will manage to get out of this funk. Good always conquers bad. It has to... otherwise we will wipe ourselves out and become manna for the cockroaches.

* Sarcasm

** Using half the CPU speed & memory resources sold with PCs today, almost any popular Desktop Linux will run circles around Windows XP in terms of general performance (i.e. Ubuntu, Mandriva)... and their free!

⁺ Us = we = humanity

Google makes Windows work like a Mac

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 20:49:00 +0000

Google makes some pretty cool apps that you can install on your Windows PC; two examples are Google Desktop and Picasa 2. Both programs are great because they offer much more functionality than the default utilities included with Windows ('Search' and 'Paint') and both simplify many of the common tasks people do every day. Guess what else, both are made for Windows only. But why aren't they developed for the Mac?

Diehard Windows fans would likely answer that with the very tired "only 5% of the world uses a Mac so they don't bother". And while that's been true in the past for some applications, it's not the reason here. The real reason is that the Windows-only Google apps which are designed to be easy, fast and fun (and generally make your Windows experience 'better') do so because they imitate features built-in on a Mac. In other words, Google uses the Mac as a prototype of sorts to improve the experience for its Windows user-base.

Google's Windows offerings and their 'equivalents' on a Mac:

Google Desktop
Google Gadgets*
Picasa 2

≈
=
≈

Spotlight
Dashboard
iPhoto

Google's web offerings and their 'equivalents' on a Mac:

Page Creator
Blogger

≈
≈

iWeb**
iWeb**

The harsh reality is that even though it's inferior, over 90% of the world still uses Windows, so all it comes down to is a business decision -- if you want to grow you have to focus on the majority. Google knows this and so does Apple. It's why Apple has put out Boot Camp. I don't think this project necessarily excited Steve Jobs but he definitely saw the necessity. That's not to say it upset him either, read on.

Think about it metaphorically: let's say you create and innovate an amazing technology, one that revolutionizes how every human interacts with a computer. Somebody else more cunning copies the idea and look of the software (poorly, mind you), mass markets it for use on cheaper, bulkier hardware... and away things go for the next 20 years until the entire planet is saturated with the shit copy of your original.

Now rewind a bit... back at the company you co-founded with your best-friend and not long after launching that revolutionary computer, you're stripped of all decision-making power and positioned to be fired by the new CEO (who is formerly a soft-drink company President) and his cronies -- you resign before the board drops the axe. You are devastated but because you still love what you do, you go on to assemble a team to form a new company and invest from your own pocket to get it off the ground. The company you left then sues you because some of its key employees followed you to the new company. You settle and as a condition are restricted to build workstations only (as opposed to personal computers). A bigwig investor sees you on a TV show and joins in, providing the first major source of venture capital. Your company then creates a UNIX computer that some authorities proclaim is the "best UNIX computer ever" and on which is authored the 1st version of the WWW by a very intelligent programmer -- another technology that revolutionizes how every human interacts with a computer (and the main reason we use the Internet today). More big investors join in and with the added momentum your company goes on to enjoy well-known customers like the CIA and Swiss Bank. The UNIX system continues to grow in popularity until eventually the whole company gets purchased by the first company you co-founded (the one that previously fired you) for $427 million ($420 million more than you put in). The soft-drink guy (who pissed away lots of money, played too much golf and did little to advance the company while you were out) is gone now and you happily run the company again. You use the framework from the UNIX computer to plan a dramatic operating system overhaul of the first revolutionary computer you built and it becomes an instant success. Around the same time you make a portable music accessory that also becomes an instant success and design a store⁺ to go with it that sells more music than Starbucks does coffee -- and both of which revolutionize the music industry and computer industry, again. Over the next few releases of the new operating system, you add many new features and applications that your customers want to use and include them in the sale of every computer.

Wait, I didn't mention that after leaving the first company and while getting the second one going, you buy a computer graphics company from a Greek Mythologist and turn it into an animation studio that goes on to make the most successful animated films in history. That studio eventually gets bought by a small world (after all) for $7.4 billion ($7.39 billion more than you invested).

Out of breath yet? Dizzy from all the revolutions? Well, we're finally back to today and the people that have been using the shit copy of your original are starting to catch on, though more slowly than you'd like. Your goal is simple, you want them to use yours instead of the copy based on yours. You have a choice: you can wait a few years for them to slowly pull away (it's not that easy after so many years of mental abuse) or you can give them the ability to make the shit copy they are so used to and hesitant to pull away from to run on your computer.

And that my friends is as concise a history as I could manage to show you how Boot Camp has brought things full-circle between Windows and the Mac. So, of all the people that have formally only owned a PC with Windows who then buy a Mac mini and run Windows with Boot Camp... how many do you think will prefer to keep the behemoth, electricity-wasting furniture on top or under their desk to the tiny 6.5" square, energy-efficient decorative piece that runs Windows too? Not too many in my opinion.

Remember the intelligent fellow I mentioned above that invented the WWW? Keep in mind he did this back in 1991 on a computer conceived 20 years ago by Steve Jobs and NeXT! He is actually a 'Sir' now; Sir Tim Berners-Lee was Knighted for his achievements by the Queen of England in July 2004 and in January 2005 was named Greatest Briton of 2004. Here is what he had to say in 1999 about the NeXT Computer (the predecessor of Mac OS X) on which he ran the first Web server and created the first web browser⁺⁺ and editor:

"The NeXT interface was beautiful, smooth, and consistent. It had great flexibility, and other features that would not be seen on PCs till later, such as voice e-mail, and a built-in synthesizer. It also had software to create a hypertext program. Its failure to take over the industry, despite all these advantages, became for me a cautionary tale. NeXT required users to accept all these innovations at once - too much."

The current Mac with OS X is the evolution of NeXT Computer's technology^~ and philosophy. So I ask you, are you ready now for a computer that's ahead of it's time, easier to use, a pleasure to interact with, and doesn't get sick?

* Google Gadgets is bundled with Google Desktop

** iWeb is a webpage creation application included in iLife '06, you must pay for web hosting either with .Mac or externally; hosting is free using webspace provided by Google Page Creator and Blogger

⁺The iTunes Music Store is powered by OPENSTEP, a stripped-down NeXTSTEP, developed in partnership with Sun Microsystems.

⁺⁺ Before NCSA Mosaic, before Netscape Navigator, and four years before Internet Explorer 1.0, aka Spyglass Mosaic.

^~ NeXTStep evolved from the BSD family of UNIX; UNIX was originally developed in 1969 (as UNICS).

The Consciousness of...

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 21:55:00 +0000

Integrated

Open

Standards-adopting

Pleasure

Right-brain + left-brain

Compact

Love

Clean

Quality

Solid

Natural

Organic

Fresh

Excitement

Advancing

Innovative

Nourishing

Food

Expressive

Clear

Evolution

Grow

Create

Unix-based

Conservation

Water

Quiet

Dynamic

Proactive

Cannabis indica

Freedom

Sharing

Roots

Rewarding

Foward moving

Leading

Collaboration

Thinking before doing

Elegant

With

Homeopathic (remedy)

Homeopathic

Ortho

Whole

Holistic

Revolution

Healthy

3-dimensional thinking

Spherical

Harmony

Olive oil **

Soba

Fruit

Wood

Isolated neoplasm

Grains, greens, nuts & fish

Verticality

100% Woolen sweater ⁺

Synthesis

Conformity

Respect

Beard

Thought

Freedom Train

Blue pill

Carotene

Adaptable

Oneness

Volkswagen

High

Snake

Mega

Company

The Future

Mind

Oprah

Big thing, small package

Beach

Passion

Inspired

Breathed

World

Inclusive

David Suzuki

Fidel

Energy^~

Endothermy

Einstein

Yin

The Country

Immunity

Feta

Apricots

Order

Anabolism

/

Patchy

Closed

Standards-ignoring

Indifference

Left-brain

Bulky

Jealousy

Sloppy

Quantity

Porous

Artificial

Lifeless

Weary

Ennui

Advantaging

Poor reproduction

Depleting

Candy (Junk food)

Suppressive

Constipated

Stagnation

Consume

Annihilate

Purely proprietary

Waste

Crude Oil

Noisy

Resisted & sedentary *

Defensive

40 oz. Colt 45

Imprisonment

Avarice

Surface

Life-force sucking

Sloth-like advances

Following without listening

Domination

Doing before thinking

Drab

Against

Pharmaceutical

Antipathic

Meta, Para

Segmented

Partial

Oppression

Plagued & medicated

1-dimensional thinking

Linear

Melancholia

Crisco

Semolina

Poker chips

Tin

Malignant neoplasm

Factory-farmed chicken

Lateral spread

100% Acrylic blanket ⁺⁺

Division

Anarchy

Exploit

Clean-shave

Dictatorship

Comfortable masochism

Red pill

FD&C Red #2 + FD&C Yellow #5

Crippled

Multiplicity

General Motors

Low

Eagle

Micro

Corporation

The Dark Ages

Penis

Jerry

Small thing, big package

Dungeon

Apathy

Gambled & Sold

Defecated

USA! USA! USA! USA!

Compartmentalized

Stephen Harper

Dubya

Mass^~

Exothermy

Hitler

Yang

Suburbia

Susceptibility

Philly Cream

AZT

Entropy

Catabolism

\

* ↑ μ_k leads to ↑ E, where E = Nμ_kd ; ** Cold-pressed, extra-virgin
⁺ Hand-woven by Grams ; ⁺⁺ $8.97 from Walmart during Rollback

^~ where E= mc²

Preamble

noreply@blogger.com (IM) — Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:59:00 +0000

This blog will not be your typical Mac vs. Windows banter, there are plenty of other sites for that. Instead, discussion here will be largely historical and philosophical, and only on occasion geeky.

I will make claims that some may find farfetched, especially diehard proponents of Windows. I don't expect these people to easily comprehend most of the comparisons, analogies, metaphors, and whatever else I will use to show that people have been using the wrong computer system for far, far too long.

I will draw from the history of the personal computer industry, namely the personalities, motivations and resumes of its key players (Steve Jobs & Bill Gates) to offer my explanations on the industry and market today, and predictions for the direction things will go tomorrow.

I will be writing what I have to say and also what I think people need to hear. The thoughts and ideas I will be sharing here have been circling my mind for many months; it's because I tend to plan things to death before doing them that I haven't gotten around to publishing until now. If these humble and not-so-humble thoughts and ideas reach their intended target fruitfully, I will have achieved my overall goal in doing this -- encouraging people to use a more intelligently designed computer.

The audience I'm most interested in reaching is that of lay PC users; those using Windows all these years because it's all they've ever known, or if asked why they use Windows will tell you: "it's cheaper to buy a PC", or "PC software titles are more widely available", and the very regrettable "I have to use what everyone else is using". I find the first two resasons to be the most common but only the first and last are still reasonably valid. For those belonging to the 90+ percent-of-the-world-using-Windows group, the time has come to challenge these reasons.

Oh, I should probably mention that up until very recently I didn't even own a Mac. Like many, this wasn't by choice (I'll elaborate in later posts). I was still and very unfortunately using Windows.

In my life thus far, I have learned that often one's character or nature is best understood when perceiving it from without. In this case I mean to say that it took a long-time and unhappy Windows user (slave, rather) to fully appreciate the innovation, fluidity and "thought" that went into the Mac. Yes "thought", the kind of thought that benefits and advances humanity in a profound way. Unlike all versions of Windows (including Vista), it was this kind of thought that was put into the Mac operating system right from the very beginning, and most notably with OS X. Real thought that is, not the poor reproductions of Mac technology ever-present in all Windows operating systems... right from the very beginning (MIcrosoft Windows 1.0).

I think sometimes you have to experience all of the various attributes of shit before you can fully appreciate the beauty, feel, sound and taste of an Apple, and no less, the intelligence of the blossom that preceded it.

I expect this blog will be met with enjoyment, contempt, laughter, and everything in between. I can't wait to welcome all of it, after all, everything I'm writing about is true.

In vivo veritas...

...but with wine it flows more freely.