Two Slashes

It’s not uncommon for thieves to eye up anything they can swap around for a quick buck on eBay. Sunglasses, electronics…anything they can get a decent price for to make it worth their deal. And the worst part is that for the most part, these transactions are untraceable - unless the victim notes the serial number, and sees that serial number in a picture on eBay, chances are it’ll be across the country in a week.

One of the biggest “cash cows” for thieves is an iPod. In short, that Apple “luxury” you get when you overpay for the damn thing is only lining the thief’s pocket with even more green when they steal it and try to turn it around for cash. Exhibit A: 8072 listings (at time of posting) in the Apple iPod category on eBay. Now, I’m no expert, but usually when so many people are getting rid of something, most of them are either illegitimate or the product sucks and people can’t get a refund. (I wouldn’t be suprised if it was that second option, even though I know for a fact it isn’t; they’re decent devices, but there are better products for cheaper that can do so much more, and with a lot more expandability. However, now’s not the time for me to tangent into this. Maybe next post…)

That’s why when Apple proposed a way to disable the iPods from charging when they’re used on a computer they’re not supposed to be, I came to wonder what the f*** the Cupertino crew’s thinking. Sure, iPods are great targets for thieves, but implementing something like that is just asking for problems. I’ve got plenty of real-life scenarios, too.

1. At my (old) high school, most computer classes (and some others) allowed the use of MP3 players when the students were to be working on projects (which, in reality, was at least 75% of the time).

   Now, seeing as these are teenagers who don’t charge anything up unless it doesn’t even turn on, these people needed a way to power their players when they ran dry. And with a computer sitting right in front of you (99% of them being a Mac, no less), what better way than by plugging the thing in?I’m not questioning this practice; I actually see it as a sign that the students are “exploiting” their surroundings (in a good way), so to speak. But if the next generation iPods are going to check that the computer is theirs before even bothering to charge, you’re going to find that the students start to get mightily ticked off when that so-called “guardian circuit” is set off and their iPod becomes a very expensive “luxury” paperweight.
   

2. What happens when you buy a new computer, or have to do some serious renovation to your current one as the result of some damaged or failing hardware? Windows makes you reinstall, some of your applications might need another license purchased; in short, it’s a lot to deal with just getting the computer up and running. But now let’s add a new iPod into that, after the thing follows Windows in saying “This isn’t the same computer - buy a new license.”
3. Some people sync players between multiple computers; some they own, some they merely play the songs off the iPod while they work there (which is something the kids at school also did). While I assume that computers sharing the authorization on an account would share a code, what would become of the iPod when the fun-loving, music-seeking soul brings their player to the library?
4. I’d love to see a “security code” that matches the user’s computer manufactured into a wall charger a third-party accessory like a boombox. Those things aren’t ever going to be receiving authorization codes for iTunes, so plugging an iPod into one of those would be like forcing your player to commit suicide.

The worst part? If this actually gets implemented into anything, chances are other companies will follow with similar (though obviously not violating the patent) solutions. The same “monkey see, monkey do” approach Microsoft and Apple share when it comes to new OS features. Pretty soon it won’t be an MP3 market anymore so much as a “music brick”. And the fact that this is a hardware approach, buried so deep into the player as it is, certifies that while people won’t be circumventing this with any ease, any user with the know-how to repair it, well…can’t. It’s like putting Lo-Jack on a car and finding that the police arrest you for being in possession of the Lo-Jack-enabled car, “hot” or not.

Remember the famous saying? “Locks only keep honest people honest.” That wasn’t referring to any digital lock…that was referring to physical security locks like on a door. Digital locks like this novel theft deterrent, and even plainer and more simply, DRM, aren’t the ideal solution in this day and age.

A better idea, or one that would at least require far more know-how to deal with, would be to build the protection into the firmware in such a way that the user needs to enter a PIN (from the box, maybe, or displayed when they first authorize the iPod for the first time, or maybe user-set at initial setup) and needs to be used to charge and/or sync the device. This code would be embedded permanently into non-rewritable memory (preferrably encrypted, checksummed, and all that jazz to prevent tampering), would resist resetting with one of the Apple factory resets. Not only would that require an extreme amount of skill to remove by anyone other than an Apple techie, but it’d ensure the device could only be used by anyone who had the code.

Oh, and did I mention that it should be optional to set up, to avoid any outcry of people inconvenienced by their ATM code from avoiding the product. In this way, users can pick either the antitheft system, and a slight inconvenience, or ignore the security to avoid the hassle. Let the paranoid have their security, and let the lazy have their hurdle-less sync.

Enough rambling. Apple, if by some extremely odd chance you’re reading, I could use a bit of cash.

Once upon a time, I wrote a short blog post about the way to get the best computer for you. I wrote that piece as the result of a few people asking me for my opinion on what would make a decent machine for what they do; I figured that the more people I could help, the better.

Now, I don’t get a lot of traffic. But sites like FastWeb do. I have an account primarily to help me look for scholarships, but it’s turned out to be a veritable goldmine of humor and other things one generally wouldn’t associate with a college site, at least in my experience. But when I found that FastWeb decided to post a computer recommendations article of their own, I just had to review what it recommended.

FastWeb primarily posts articles for members only, so I’ve gone ahead and made a PDF of the article for your quick reference (nothing fancy) so that you can read it in its entirety if you want, but I’ve got plenty of choice excerpts that might help you get the bigger picture.

Memory: Random Access Memory (RAM) is a temporary storage area for data currently in use. It allows multiple programs to run simultaneously without slowing down your system. The more RAM you have, the faster your computer will run. The amount of RAM is measured in gigabytes (GB) or megabytes (MB). It is a good idea to get a computer with at least 512 MB of RAM. Consider getting more RAM if you will be using your computer for multimedia purposes, like watching movies and downloading music. If you plan on having your computer for a long time, look for a computer with easy-to-access memory slots that will allow you to upgrade your memory.

Kudos for recognizing that more RAM is better, fail-points for saying that it makes the computer faster in such a way that it sounds like it’s the only thing that improves performance. Now, I’m sort-of happy with the recommendation made, but the point of the matter is that it all depends on what operating system, software, and activities you run and do with the PC. My Toshiba laptop came with 256 MB standard; it ran just fine under Linux. I added another 512 MB and saw a bit of an improvement with Windows, but I haven’t noticed any change with Linux because it worked well already.

And did anyone catch the subtle “piracy ‘hint’” buried in there? Look again. Since when is downloading music solely a “multimedia” activity?

Hard Drive: The hard drive provides permanent storage for your computer. Look for computers with at least 20 GB of hard drive space.

Alright, you just got through explaining that more RAM made multimedia work better, and you just suggested everyone go download their music. Now…if I’m going to do that, I’m going to need a lot more storage than that. My music library alone (let’s not even get into my video collection) already fills at least 105% of that drive. Hell, Vista would barely install on that, let alone with enough room for you to save any of your work or install anything else (in fact, would it, once you subtract the space for the FAT and partition table?). Try adding another 0 to the size, or multiplying that by at least 4, and we’ll see then.

Software: The software you need will vary by school and program. Whether you get a PC or Mac, expect to have Microsoft Office XP, which includes Excel, Word and PowerPoint. Many schools prefer students to have the Professional edition of Microsoft Office instead of the Home edition that is usually included with new computers. Make sure you make this distinction when purchasing your computer.

Oh, there’s plenty more than that. I need to question when this article was written though. Office XP? How quaint. I’m confused on the “Home” version of Office, though - since when has Office been offered as a “home” package? And what school requires more than the basic Word/Excel/PowerPoint trio? Surely Outlook Express or *cough cough* Thunderbird is sufficient to check e-mail, and one could get away with OpenOffice? The truth is, you’ll figure out once you get to the school what you can get away with, what you need, and what’s merely for entertainment…like Unreal.

Like I keep saying…figure out what you do with a PC, figure out what works for your situation and budget, and get only what you need. And if you can, get it cheaply/free (while remaining legal, of course).
Even as this is a poor excuse for an educated recommendation, thanks to the author, Ms. Kulla, for an amusing read.

Note: I realize this is somewhat qualified to file under “Geeky”, but I think it can safely stay out due to the fact that I’m not going to get overly technical with anything the average (l)user wouldn’t pick up.

Web browsing, e-mail, chatting…they’re all things we do on a daily basis (and in my case, so does checking my site hit statistics, among other things). And for as long as anybody’s known them, they’ve been strictly two-dimensional. You point, click, and read in an interface designed for you to get the most out of what you want to look at, rather than staring blindly at a 1000-pixel-tall toolbar or a progress bar bigger than the grin on your face when you order your favorite meal.

The point I’m trying to make is that the delivery systems are two-dimensional because the content they deliver is two-dimensional as well. The text on a web page, for instance, doesn’t all consist of WordArt and Flash, especially if the people involved in designing the site had any shred of common sense. In short, there’s absolutely no need to add in a z-coordinate when the information displays just fine using x and y. It’s overkill, and it overcomplicates things.

Not to nitpick anything in particular (especially on an app that’s still in development), but I’ve come armed with examples. Take a look at 3D-Mailbox, for instance. This e-mail client promises to revolutionize the way you look at your e-mail by (what else) giving you a 3D interface with which you can act upon your communications. The e-mails file in one-by-one looking like various beachgoers, and where they go in this “oasis” designates how important they are. The fat people wading too far out into the shark-infested waters are spam, while the scantily-clad women tanning nearby are the trusted e-mails.

Now, here’s my first gripe: Why should my e-mails get so separated that there are only a handful at any one location? I prefer being able to stare at the big picture, but if I have to navigate around so much to do make a mental picture for myself, you’ve ruined everything. Why do unread e-mails go here, read e-mails go here, things the program can’t tell are spam here, and this here and that there? (Yes, I realize the bottom half of the application is a standard e-mail list…but if you’re going to the trouble of making a 3D app to do away with a standard “old-fashioned” list, why should that even be necessary? Eh? Eh? I’m waiting.)

Not to barrage the developer even more, but remember what I said about site traffic statistics? Yup…the same people that brought you 3D Mailbox have also developed a way to see who’s on your site…in 3D. Explain to me why I need to see a Greyhound drop off a few people when someone finds Two Slashes via Google. How about I just open up my copy of FireStats and read about the person who just showed up.

It gets worse beyond these too. If it weren’t for the fact that Second Life has a game(-ish) concept behind it, I’d almost call it a chat client.

Does anyone remember the old Microsoft-developed IRC (Internet Relay Chat for you newbs), aptly called Microsoft Chat (not to be confused with the Microsoft Network or any other Microsoft (blank) application)? That crazy application that turned your “bland” IRC-based communications into a fun, yet colorless, comic strip. Yes, the very same one that bungled up IRC standards so badly, the people who actually know how to use a proper client (who are still horrified when they find MSChat users spamming configuration settings to control their character’s emotional state) shudder and go into fits of rage. (Though on the other hand, I have to commend MS for providing users with a very serviceable free IRC client for their operating system…provided it was used in a standard “line” mode rather than with the comic garbage.)

There are times and places to go right ahead and use the third dimension.  But when it overcomplicates even the simplest of day-to-day tasks, there’s obviously been a step way too far over the line.  People refurbish old computers and sell them (or give them away to relatives) for use as basic web browsing and e-mail rigs.  I don’t get why these should be just as powerful and expensive as the usual gaming rig to look at what would be represented by any other application as meaningful text.

The day I need a three-dimensional client for anything is the day my communications can no longer be expressed in text.  I mean, I thought concepts like the bubbly IncrediMail were horrible (and why the f**k is it still around!?)…but then again I should have realized that if there’s a market for emoticon-splashed messaging, it was only a matter of time.  What’s next - an e-mail client that projects a hologram of some long-since U.S. president to announce new messages in “Ye Olde Englisch”?

(Finally…a post worthy of avoiding the ‘Geeky’ label. At least, I think so…)

There have been plenty of ways in which people have been able to filter out their communications. For example, e-mail allows you to read any message you want, whenever you want, without having to read the others first. Voicemail has gotten to the point where you can do the same, a la iPhone (I say “Blech!” at the iPhone, but to be honest this is a very useful feature, one that should have been implemented ages ago).

But while these are useful, you still have to deal with the notifications (in most cases) that someone’s even trying to get in touch with you. Most cell phones beep (by default) when you’ve got voicemail or a new text message (of course, this can be disabled), and you can hide yourself on most instant messaging services by marking yourself as Away and setting your client to not harass you. And let’s not even get into the spam circles of junk mail/e-mail/phone calls…

But while you can do all of that with the “current-generation” of communications, what about some of the older things…things that haven’t changed much in years. Yes, I’m talking about your standard hardwired telephone.

While some people find that simply having a single cell phone and dropping the house phone in favor of giving everyone their cell phone number is a way to reduce bills, the typical household still has at least one landline running to their home. It’s great as a communications device; it’s simple and it works, and you don’t have to worry about recharging it (short of a cordless handset…but since you generally don’t put those in a purse or pocket and forget about them for a week, they still follow my point). But where’s the ability to screen calls, or filter out the obvious junk.

If there’s one thing I believe the typical phone service needs to stay in the game at this point, it’s the ability to allow their users to filter their callers. Sure, there’s a Do Not Call list, but has anyone actually followed that, and how many people can actually be bothered to notify the FCC (or whoever the heck deals with the violations) that someone has indeed violated it.

At this point in the game, I would have envisioned a web-based and phone-based system for setting up call screening. Nothing overly elaborate, but perhaps a list of recent calls with the option to block them always or at a certain time (useful for neighbors with no sense of night and day ), a la this s***ty mock-up. Believe me, people will take advatange of something that they can make as routine as their e-mail, without having to jump through hoops.

Now obviously, with such blocking power, there would have to be a way to get around this. So for that, I figure some of the more important government numbers would not be subjected to such blocking, as would important divisions of corporate agencies, such as a debt collector notifying a resident that they’re a few months…the list is endless, but no doubt it would help.

Of course, what to do with the screened calls? That could be another option; for some, the voicemail would probably be an ideal place, like your nightowl neighbor, but for others, what about playing the phone-disconnected three-tone “whistle” and message? And all the while…no phone ringing at 3 AM, or because of some quirky insurance salesman interrupting your dinner trying to sell you condoms because of a new “per-child insurance tax” your policy is being subject to.

I think it’s about time the tried-and-true methods got a bit of a revamp. Change is good…especially change that doesn’t interfere unless it’s specifically set up to. Come on…this shouldn’t be something that people need to install a phone company’s worth of equipment in their home for some peace of mind…but what do you think?

Ladies and gents, your attention please.  (And yes, I realize a non-computer-related post is well overdue…but…)

In the boredom that has ensued over the past week, I’ve managed to implement a number of new features into SkipTo, including the beginnings of a more configurable interface.  Pretty soon, you’ll be able to swap out a lot more than just the icons for shortcuts. ;)  You’ll notice the hard work I’ve put in in the build count too; this is build 34.

In summary, the new features:

• Tab-key autocomplete/cycling through shortcuts.  This also fixes a bug in the previous release where SkipTo died when you pressed Tab.  (My fault, I should have checked that before I released it.  Ah well, the update’s here.)
• Slightly modified preferences pane with some new options, including controlling the tab key and the shortcut count.  (Note that these require a restart, as SkipTo only checks these settings at startup.  This may be changed, but it’s far safer to save and restart.  At least, I think so.)  You’ll also notice some preliminary options added regarding the keyboard…these are disabled as I’m still working on implementing them…but soon you can use more or less than just Alt+Spacebar.  I hope.
• The shortcut count reminds you of special shortcuts when it is set to ‘Always on’.  (No, the reminder doesn’t appear in either of the other two modes because you can’t Tab to them…they’re built-in, and with the exception of the About box, I feel that you should type the complete word as additional confirmation of your action.)

What are you waiting for? Download it!  (The source code for this build has not been uploaded, and remains from the previous version.)