File synchronization through the cloud

Online or "cloud" storage and synchronization services are nothing new.  There are tons of players out there such as Dropbox, Google Drive, Microsoft SkyDrive, SugarSync, Ubuntu One, iCloud, etc.  The way these apps operate is pretty much the same; a client app runs on your computer/phone/tablet that uploads and synchronizes files and folders with their online servers.  So if you install the software on two computers, if you modify a file on one computer it automatically updates the same file online (cloud) and on the other computer.  These services can be useful, but I've pretty much avoided them.  I do have both a Google Drive and Ubuntu One account, but I use them merely for online storage - no synchronization.  I login with a web browser to these sites to upload/download files.

Just recently I discovered a new cloud storage and synchronization service that has me excited (unlike all the ones mentioned above).  It's called Seafile.  Seafile (like all the services above) is free for personal use up to X number of GBs, but here's what I like about Seafile that sets it apart:

1. Seafile is open-source.  I've always liked the idea of open-source software, even if I don't bother to download and look at the code.
2. Seafile uses strong AES encryption.  The others might use AES encryption - it's hard to know, they don't always say.
3. Seafile encrypts my data BEFORE it is uploaded, and is only decrypted once it's downloaded back to the computer.  Also, the encryption password is never uploaded off the client computer.  What this means is my data is safe end-to-end.  Seafile themselves can't decrypt my data off their hard drives.  Hackers and computer data thieves can't decrypt my data.  Governments can't decrypt my data (although recent news stories may suggest otherwise).
4. It's fast, stable, and extremely convenient.  I've been using Seafile for over a month now without a single issue.
5. The Seafile Server component is also freely available.  So anyone who wants to run their own Seafile server could easily do so.
6. They offer client software for Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, and iOS.

There is another open-source cloud solution called ownCloud.  I haven't tried it, but a lot of reviewers say it's slow and buggy.  So I went with Seafile and I'm glad I did.

The only downside to Seafile I've found is the space.  Most cloud services offer 5GB for free, but Seafile only offers 1GB for free.  This is fine for me as I only synchronize a few MB worth of files.

If you're looking for a cloud storage and synchronization service give Seafile a try.  If you currently have a cloud storage and synchronization service but are concerned with the security of your data, give Seafile a try.

Gunnar Optics

A while back I learned of a product called Gunnars, which are basically high-tech glasses for those who work on computers.  I've had a pair of Gunnars now for about 3 months and this is my review.

First a little background.  For people such as myself who work on computers all day, we face health issues - the best known is carpal tunnel syndrome.  Well, if you believe the marketing engine behind Gunnars then there is another hazard out there in the form of harsh lighting conditions.  Most computer users have made the switch from the old analog CRT monitors to the newer flat panel monitors.  One unseen downside to this switch is the light quality of these monitors.  All flat panels (except plasmas) use either tiny fluorescent tubes of LEDs as the light source.  Both of these light sources do not produce consistent warm light but have a large spike in the blue spectrum of light.  To make matters worse, most offices are illuminated with overhead fluorescent lights.  So the user is being bombarded with strong blue-light all day long.  So far all of this is fact, not some marketing spin.  Fluorescent and LEDs do emit disproportionately high levels of blue light, and blue light carries the most "energy" and would therefore be the hardest for your eyes to process.

Now, Gunnars claim their glasses cut down on this blue light which in turn reduces eye-strain.  But the big question is, do they actually deliver?  After 3 months I can say the answer is most definitely yes!  Right from the beginning I could feel a difference. Before Gunnars, at the end of the work day my eyes were tired and strained, but with Gunnars my eyes feel much better.

There is however one downside to my particular Gunnars - comfort.  The shape of my nose is such that I have a hard time finding comfortable glasses.  I rarely wear sunglasses because they are so uncomfortable on my face.  And the Gunnars are no different.  At the end of the day my eyes feel great, but my nose is sore.  Last year I got my first corrective pair of glasses in my life - I ended up selecting a pair of Flexon frames.  These are the first ever glasses I can wear without pain on the bridge of my nose.

So would I recommend Gunnars?  That depends.  They're not cheap - expect to pay about $100 for non-corrective lens, more if you need a prescription.  So you will probably only benefit from them if you spend a lot of time in front of a computer.  If that's you, then I recommend trying them.  But don't do what I did which is purchase off their web page.  Instead, find a local store that sells Gunnars and go try them on.  That way you can find a pair that's comfortable on you.

Linux will never be mainstream until...

So this is a little rant about Linux.  But first let me clarify - I like Linux!  While getting my undergrad we used Linux and Unix servers.  And even though I work and develop on the Windows platform, I still run Linux virtual machines and I want to see the Linux platform succeed.  That said, Linux will never truly succeed and become mainstream until they make a lot of changes.  Three that I'm always stumbling on are...

GUI not command line
Linux seems to have this huge obsession with command line applications and setting program configuration manually via configuration text files.  Even as a developer I tire of this quickly.  It's so much nicer to open a graphical program and click a checkbox to enable a feature.  The last thing I want to do is run a command line tool and try and remember the syntax to add the setting to a text file.

Distribute compiled binaries
If you want to download a program, chances are the program is distributed as the source files leaving it up to you the user to compile the program.  Are you serious!?!  I'm a developer with the know-how to compile applications and I don't want to do this.  So what's the average person suppose to do?  Fortunately companies like Ubuntu compile common applications to make it easier.  But what if the application you want is not one Ubuntu offers?  I'm all for offering the source files, but also offer compiled binaries to make it easier for the casual user.

Tar/GZip suck, stop using them
This is closely related to distributing compiled binaries, but the Linux development community is seriously in love with tar and gzip.  It's to the point where if a company also distributes Windows binaries they might distribute them in tar/gzip format.  I don't care what platform you're working on, tar/gzip are old and suck!  I recently downloaded some files for Windows.  The tar/gzip file was 15.8 MB in size and the raw tar file was 59.1 MB in size.  Compare that to 13.5 MB for pkzip and 9.82 MB for 7Zip.  Pkzip and 7Zip are both available for all platforms and wipe the floor with tar/gzip.  So please stop using tar/gzip.

Sorry for the rant, but again I want Linux to succeed but until they make lots of changes such as these three, Linux will never truly succeed.

Why I hate newspapers

In keeping with the theme of my previous post, I wanted to talk about why I hate newspapers.

1. I dislike reading.  If I'm going to read something it's going to be something I find interesting such as a technical document, scientific article, etc.  Not the newspaper.
2. I hate the smell of newspapers.  I don't know if it's the paper, the ink, or a combination, but newspapers have a distinctive smell and I hate it.
3. I hate the way newsprint rubs off on your hands.  They use the cheapest form of printing which results in the inks rubbing off as you read it.
4. I hate the feel of the paper.  Newspapers use the cheapest paper they can find and I don't like the feel of it.  The difference between newspaper and high quality paper is significant.
5. Newspapers cost money.  Whether it's a one-time fee from a newspaper machine or a regular subscription, you're still paying money for what is available elsewhere for free.
6. There are far better "electronic" alternatives (more on that later).
7. It's a huge waste of time, energy, money, and resources.  How many trees go into making newspapers every year?  How much gas is burned delivering it to houses?

To me there is absolutely no redeeming quality to newspapers.  The "content" they provide can be gotten off the Internet for free on sites such as cnn.com, nbcnews.com, local TV stations, etc.  You can get classifieds and jobs off craigslist and monster.com.  Store sales, ads, and coupons can get viewed going to that stores website.  And the best part is, all of this "electronic" content can be easily searched using a computer, something you can't do with newspaper.

It's no secret the newspaper industry is really hurting.  Less than a decade ago the newspaper ads brought in about $17 billion dollars annually in the US.  Today that number is less than $4 billion and dropping.  As an industry you can't sustain losses like that and continue.  Already major newspapers throughout the US have been closing.  The whole industry is in a downward spiral that will not stop in my opinion.  As newspaper revenue drops they have no choice but to reduce the content of newspapers.  But as content decreases, the number of subscribers will decrease also.

I don't think I'm alone in my projections here.  Most younger people won't touch a newspaper, they prefer something electronic.  So newspapers are clinging to the "older generation."  But once they pass on, no one will be left and they will be forced to close.

In my opinion, the newspaper industry missed a golden opportunity here by not looking forward.  A decade ago they should have shifted their focus to an online presence.  The goal is to create online content that people want enough to be willing to pay for an online subscription.  In addition to news, opinions, ads, classifieds, etc. they should have taken advantage of the benefits afforded by the electronic medium.  For example, show a map centered around the readers location and put a "dot" on the map where ever a news event took place.  Then people can see news events that happened near them.  Yes, such a system would require tons of money to develop, but all the newspaper houses throughout the US could have pooled their resources and created such a system.  This would have prevented sites like craigslist from "eating their lunch."  But as it stands, it's too late.  The damage has been done and I don't think they will recover.  I think the industry will die.

Why I hate the Post Office

This might sound a little strange, but I hate the Post Office.  As far as I'm concerned they offer no service I want and I wish I could stop receiving mail completely.

Why do I dislike the Post Office so much you ask?  Simple, most of the mail I get I don't want.  Most of the mail I get is "spam" or junk mail, which no one wants.  This comes in two forms.  The first is mail addressed to me.  Magazines, brochures, ads, etc. from companies I've purchased from.  These aren't so bad because you can usually contact the sending party and request they remove you from their mailing list.  This takes time and it's a hassle, but it can be done.  The second, and most common, is mail that was not addressed to me or anyone.  Basically some company paid the Post Office to drop this mail into everyone's mailbox.  What I hate the most about this mail is there's no way to "opt out."

All of this junk mail, whether addressed to me or not, is such a huge waste.  I get sick when I think about how much time, energy, and resources were wasted to print and deliver this mail just so I can throw it away and fill up the landfill.  I mean, how many trees a year are cut down to send out junk mail and catalogs?

Any information that I want/need doesn't come by mail anymore.  Everything like bills, statements, letters from friends and family, etc. is sent electronically.  Yes, there are times you need to send something physical, and that's what package shipping companies like UPS and FedEx are for.  I don't mind the Post Office when they are delivering a package, but mail needs to stop.  In my opinion the Post Office has made only 2 good decisions in the last two decades.  First is flat-rate boxes.  Shipping a box without having to worry about the size or weight is convenient and nice.  The second is forever stamps.  Until such time as letters are a thing of the past, stamps will continue.  And never having to worry about rate increases is nice.

So when people talk about the Post Office having financial difficulties, closing offices, reducing services, cutting delivery days, etc.  I welcome these.  To me this is good news!  Whatever it takes to force the Post Office to realize their future is in direct competition with UPS and FedEx and not as a letter carrier is a good thing.

You might point out that the USPS is the second largest employer in the US (behind WalMart) and as such their downfall would result in millions of lost jobs.  As far as I'm concerned that's no reason to keep the Post Office around in it's current form.  One hundred years ago you didn't dial anyone's phone number.  Instead you merely picked up the phone and an operator picked up the other end.  You told him/her who you wanted to call and they literally "patched" you to the other person's line.  But with the advent of phone dialing tens of thousands of operators lost their jobs.  Should we still have operators to dial for us given a better way was inverted to call someone?  No.  By the same token, should the Post Office employ millions of people to deliver letters when a better way to communicate has already been invented?  No!

Really, the Post Office is in a downward spiral that will not end for a long time.  As mail volume drops, they have no choice but to increase postage rates.  But as postage rates increase, people will increasingly turn to electronic ways of sending information.  This death-spiral will continue until, as I said, the Post Office is reduced to only delivering packages.  So the sooner the Post Office gets to that goal, the better.

Access Violation in CPropertySheet::DoModal

One "feature" about MFC that has always annoyed me is when you create a wizard or property sheets, calling CPropertySheet::DoModal results in an access violation.  This problem is discussed in detail in Q158552.  In short, MFC tries to modify the dialog template, but the dialog template is stored in a read-only page.  This results in an exception.  The operating system catches this exception, changes the page to read/write access, and tries again.  So really this is just a nuisance if you're debugging your application because it breaks on the exception every time.

Well, turns out it can be more than a nuisance.  If you're testing with Microsoft Application Verifier enabled, you cannot debug your application further.  AppVerify is designed to catch buffer overruns by using read-only memory pages.  So when CPropertySheet::DoModal attempts to write to a read-only page AppVerify steps in and puts a stop to the show with a "VERIFIER STOP 0000000000000002" error.

So how can you get by this?  You could disable AppVerify, but testing with AppVerify enabled is a good thing.  It helps you catch other bugs that would normally go undetected.  But I found a simple technique that allows you to keep AppVerify enabled.  Use Visual Studio's resource editor to change the font of the wizard pages.  The default font is "MS Shell Dlg."  You can change this to any font, but I recommend "Tahoma" as this is the font the Visual Studio resource editor uses when the dialog is set to "MS Shell Dlg."  This means your dialog units will be the same which makes arranging controls easier.  Other good font options are "MS Sans Serif," "Microsoft Sans Serif," or "Arial."  These are also generic fonts with the same or similar dialog units.

The reason this works is because of what MFC does.  It checks the font of the wizard/property page and if it doesn't match the font of the wizard/property sheet, it makes a copy of the dialog template and changes the font back to the system default.  This new dialog template is read/write so when processed inside CPropertySheet::DoModal it won't cause a problem.  And if you're following along, changing the font of the wizard/property pages will not change your product at all.  Since MFC changes the font back to the default it doesn't matter what font you change it to, the look and feel of your product will not change.

The Number Sign

In today's short and very random post, I wanted to talk about the number sign (#) - in particular the different names.  This symbol has at least three different names; 1) number sign, 2) hash, and 3) pound sign.  The official name (at least in North America) is "number sign."  In Europe it's called "hash."  What's interesting is most Americans call it the "pound sign" which is most likely because when used in the context of a telephone it's called "pound" or "pound sign."  But what's the origin of this "pound" name?

Let's start off by looking at the typical keyboard layout in North America.

You can see the number sign is located above the '3' key.  Now let's look at the United Kingdom keyboard layout.

If you look at the '3' key you'll see a different symbol.  This symbol (£) is called "pound sterling," or sometimes just "pound."

So the reason why the number sign is often times called the "pound sign" is because on the US keyboard layout the number sign takes the location of the pound sterling symbol.

Hopefully this gives you reason to ponder the next time someone says "pound sign."  That's an inaccurate name that probably dates back more than a century now.

Children's books

Now that we have two little kids in the house we're reading a lot of kids books.  I am absolutely shocked by how many kids books have typographical errors in them.

First off, kids books don't have A) lots of words or B) very long words.  [BTW, when I say "kids" I'm referring to 1 - 2 years old.]  So errors should be very easy to catch.  I'm an engineer and I'll be the first to admit my spelling and grammar are not the best.  So the fact that I'm catching all these errors just means there are most likely more errors that I'm missing.

Secondly, the whole idea behind a kids book is to help teach kids how to read and write.  How can kids be expected to grow up and speak proper English when the authors of their books can't even read or write.

So what are some of these errors you ask?  By far the biggest error is using the word till when they mean 'til. 'Til with an apostrophe is short for until, but so frequently the author uses till, as in "to till the soil."

Probably the second most common mistake is using round instead 'round (again short for around).  So the popular kids song goes, "the wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round."

Both of these errors are similar in that A) it involves contractions and B) both forms are legitimate English words which means you can't rely on a computer spell-check to correct the mistake.

And there are tons of other errors such as improper punctuation.  When listing 3 or more items use commas to separate them (or depending on the situation even semi-colons, but again we're talking about kids books so the list should never be so complicated as to require semi-colors to separate the items).

Most of the books we have were given to us as gifts or hand-me-downs.  There is no way I would ever spend money on a book like this in the store, I don't want to support authors who can't proof read something as simple as a kids book, or be bothered to have someone else check their work.

STL String Class

So it's kind of funny, I chose the name for my blog because I'm a software developer, and yet very few posts deal with computer programming.  But today's post is very much about computer programming.

My preferred programming language is C++.  When working in C++ you pretty much need a good string class to help out.  One of my favorite string classes is the MFC class CString.  The downside is it's only available to MFC apps and sometimes you're developing non-MFC apps, or writing for other platforms.  Another common string class is the Standard Template Library (STL) string classes; std::string and std::wstring.  However, I've found the STL string classes to have some major drawbacks.  I have two main problems with these classes.

1)  They implement few useful functions compared to other string classes.  The STL string classes do not offer the ability to A) perform case-insensitive searches and compare, B) format a string like printf, C) lowercase/uppercase a string, or D) tokenize a string using delimiter characters just to name a few.  These are all very common tasks and the STL string class doesn't implement them.

2)  The second problem is a crash bug that shouldn't be.  Take the following code for example

char *sz = NULL;
std::string str(sz);

This code will result in a crash 100% of the time.  If you pass NULL into the constructor of an STL string it will crash.  This shouldn't be.  A string class that accepts pointers should check them for NULL before dereferencing them.

The STL string class has a few benefits.  First, it's pretty much ubiquitous these days.  Every C++ compiler includes a version of the STL library so you can always count on it being there.  Also, whereas it doesn't offer many advanced functions it does offer memory management and the most basic of functions.  So it's better than nothing.

I think what shocks me the most about the STL string classes is how poor they are compared to the rest of the STL.  The STL container classes like vector, list, and queue are extremely well written and I use them a lot.  So I would have expected the string classes to be better than they are.

Even though CString is my preferred class, I actually use a different string class in most of my projects.  Years ago I wrote my own string class, which I've continued to improve over the years.  It is pretty much the best of all the string classes I've come across.  The function names very closely follows that of CString.  I've also profiled the class for performance against both CString and STL.  The STL (because of it's simplicity) is faster than CString.  My class is as fast or faster than the STL.  Plus I've added additional functions I've felt CString was missing such as constructors that perform printf style formats.  So it's the best of both worlds; the speed and performance of the STL string classes, with all of the functions in CString and then some.  I guess the only downside to the class is it calls some Windows APIs and therefore is not cross platform.  But other than that it's a really nice, fast, and stable string class.  I truly wish I could upload this class for everyone to use, but alas I developed it at work which makes it the property of my employer.

Helium

Recently we had a birthday party for our 2 year old.  As with many parties for kids we had Helium-filled balloons.  But part of me feels like this was a horrible waste of a useful resource.  I know, that sounds a little odd to regret buying Helium-filled balloons, but let me explain.

As anyone who's taken chemistry knows, there are only two gases lighter than the average density of air; Hydrogen and Helium.  Because Hydrogen is highly inflammable (think Hindenburg), balloons and dirigibles are now filled with Helium.  But people don't realize Helium is a precious commodity that, depending on how you look at it, is NOT renewable.  When Helium is present in the atmosphere, because it is lighter than air, it rises.  It continually rises higher and higher in the atmosphere until eventually it bleeds off into space.  The same is true of Hydrogen, but Helium (unlike Hydrogen) is chemically inert so it can't react with anything making it heavier and thus keeping it in the atmosphere.  What this means is once Helium becomes airborn, it's only a matter of time until it's gone.  Helium is the second most abundant element in the universe, but it's extremely rare on Earth.  Only 5 parts per million of the atmosphere is Helium, and most of that is in the extreme upper atmosphere where we currently don't have the ability to extract it.

You might be asking yourself, if Helium is so rare in the atmosphere how or where does the Helium we use come from?  It may shock you to learn Helium is extracted from the ground, in the exact same way as natural gas.  There is Helium trapped in layers of rocks underground which is extracted and separated from other gases.  I believe up to 10% of raw natural gas underground is Helium.  If you're wondering how the Helium got in the ground in the first place, it turns out Helium is the by product of radioactive decay of several large elements such as Uranium.  That's why, to some degree, Helium could be considered a "renewable" resource because even though we take Helium out of the ground, there's always elements decaying creating more Helium.  That said, I highly suspect man is extracting Helium and using Helium at a greater rate than it's being created.  And that's why I feel like the Helium-filled balloons were such a waste.  We used Helium strictly for decoration when Helium has so many other uses such as cryogenics, dirigibles, inert gas environments, etc.  So in the future if I need MRI medical scan but the MRI machine isn't operational because there is no Helium to cool the super-conductive magnets, I'm sure going to wish I didn't waste the Helium on balloons.

AntiVirus Software

For a while now, a big topic in the tech industry is antivirus software.  With so many viruses, trojans, and malware out there, you need to do something to keep your computer (and it's data) safe on the Internet.  The general consensus is you need a good antivirus program.  But I'd like that challenge that assumption.  I got my first computer in 1994 and I've been on the Internet since day 1.  In the past almost 20 years I have never had a virus attack my computer.  But this wasn't because of really good antivirus software running on my computer - the truth is I have never installed AV software onto my computer.  I've managed to stay virus-free strictly through safe computer practices and commonsense.

Before I talk about how I stay safe, I wanted to briefly talk about the history of computer viruses and antivirus software.  In the 80s and 90s, computer viruses were spread from computer to computer via floppy disks (as the Internet didn't really exist).  At the time pretty much all viruses would destroy your data or make your computer useless until you reinstalled the operating system.  Starting in the late 90s, virus writers learned that there is monetary value to the data they were destroying.  The data might contain credit card numbers, bank accounts, a list of email addresses that can be sold to others, etc.  They could even "hijack" a computer and use it to attack others.  So the goal of virus writers had pretty much changed 180 degrees during.

As for antivirus software, in the 80s and 90s your choices were very limited, and few of them were free.  But as long as you were careful about what floppy disks you stuck into your computer you were pretty much safe.  Soon the now heavyweights of the industry (Norton, Symantec, McAfee, etc.) released good AV software.  But once your software was out of date, you might as well be unprotected.  Moving into the 2000s and they offered online subscriptions that kept itself up to date (so long as you kept giving them money).  Fortunately nowadays there are a ton of good free options out there including Microsoft Security Essentials, Avast, AVG, Ad-Aware, MalwareBytes, and Avira just to name a few.

But I personally can't recommend any antivirus program regardless of cost.  Why you ask?  Simple, all antivirus software suffers from the same problem - loss of system performance.  In order for antivirus software to function properly it needs to be fully integrated into the operating systems.  It's not enough to scan files, it must "watch" what every program is doing on the system at all times and be ready in an instant to stop a program it deems to be suspicious.  This level of integration means everything on your computer runs slower.  I wish I had benchmark numbers, but installing any AV program significantly slows down your computer!  In fact, I've often said that having AV software installed on your computer is only slightly better than having a virus on your computer.

Despite this system impact, AV software is just a necessary evil, right?  Well, there have been a number of articles released in the past year or two (from technical places like Toms Hardware) that question the effectiveness of AV software.  They found most AV software does not fully protect the user but in fact only gives the user a false sense of security (in addition to slowing down everything they are doing).  So why not ditch AV software altogether and replace it with good practices and commonsense?  That's exactly what I've done for almost 20 years.

So what exactly am I doing (or not doing)?  For starters, be careful what you download and run.  I'll only download and run software from trusted sites (Microsoft, Adobe, Google, etc.).  If there is a file I wish to download and run but I don't know the site, I will first download and install the file inside a Virtual Machine.  That way if the file ends up being a virus it cannot infect my machine.

Secondly, protect your browser/email program against infection, since most viruses will enter your machine via web page and/or email.  For the love of God don't use IE or Outlook.  These are the most targeted and insecure pieces of software.  I recommend Firefox and/or Chrome for a browsers and Thunderbird as the email client.

Next, it's important to keep your computer and all it's software up to date.  On a regular basis run Windows Update as well as updates for other software (such as your web browser, email, Flash, etc.).  There's nothing worse than getting a virus simply because you were running an older version of a program.

The last step is to protect your computer against forced attacks.  Other than keeping your computer up to date, the most important thing is to run a firewall.  If your router has a built-in firewall, enable it (and make sure your router firmware is up to date while you're at it).  Chances are, that's all you need to do.  You can run a firewall on your computer itself - it's just redundant.  I disable firewalls when I'm in my home network (as I trust all my computers), but I enable firewalls when on strange or foreign networks.  Unless you do a lot of home networking, just enable the firewall on your computer and be done with it.

There you go, those simple steps should allow you to be safe on the Internet without the issues associated with AV software.  Oh, if you're wondering "how do you KNOW you've never had a virus if you don't run AV software?"  Easy - there are simple ways I am willing to double-check my computers for viruses without suffering the problems of AV software.  Those methods are:

1. On average every 2 years I reinstall the operating system on my computer.  Before reinstall the operating system but after backing up my data, I install one or more AV software programs to my computer.  This allows me to scan my system and verify I'm still virus free, and since right afterwards I reinstall the operating system the AV software is completely blown away.
2. I can boot my computer into read-only mode using what's called Windows PE.  From WinPE I can scan my files to ensure there are no viruses.  And since this is read-only mode, when I boot my computer normally the AV software is gone.
3. About once a quarter I backup my data onto an external drive.  I can then plug that drive into a test computer (or Virtual Machine) with AV software installed and again scan my data.

I hope I've challenged the conventional thinking about AV software.  You can be perfectly safe without an AV program installed.  If however you absolutely must install AV software, might I suggest a program that allows you to disable real-time protection and only perform a scan at your request.  Microsoft Security Essentials has such a feature, but I'm sure others do as well.  This is a good compromise as you get some protection but without all of the system impact of real-time monitoring.

Sci-Fi Review - Star Trek: Deep Space 9

Last time I talked about ST:TNG, so the next show in succession would be Star Trek: Deep Space 9 (herein referred to as just "DS9").  DS9 is definitely a show I've had mixed opinions about.  When it first aired in 1993 I watched the first season or two before I lost interest.  I think what turned me off was how radically different DS9 is from TNG.  Whereas TNG takes place on a Federation starship exploring the galaxy, DS9 takes place on an alien space station.  Very little technology is Federation, and many of the characters aren't Starfleet.  To me these changes were just too much and I stopped watching the show after the first few seasons.

Years later I went back and rewatched DS9 and it was then that I realized these differences were actually the shows strengths.  I believe the best aspects of DS9 are the character developments as well as the story writing.  Because the location and character differences between DS9 and TNG it allowed for stories that would never have worked in TNG.  TNG is set inside the Federation which depicts this perfect human future where crime, poverty, and disease are pretty much gone.  Compare that to DS9 which is set in an alien space station with many non-human races which allowed for "darker" plots and characters developments such as cheating, stealing, murder, betrayal, war, etc.

As for the cast, you have the leader in the form of Benjamin Sisko.  Sisko is a big departure from Picard (and not just because he's black).  Sisko is a widower and a father.  We also discover quickly that he is a religious icon to the Bajorans.  I think Sisko's character took a few years to get going.  But in later seasons you see the depth of his character and the acting ability of Avery Brooks.  There are even episodes where Sisko makes very un-Federation decisions such as lying, cheating, and even being a party to murder.

Kira Nerys is second in command and a Bajoran.  She grew up a terrorist fighting for her freedom.  She has some violent tendencies just like Worf (which is a trait I didn't care for), but unlike Worf they don't bother me in her character.  I think it's because Kira is trying to change her ways and forget her past.  On DS9 Kira kind of represents the "religious" aspect, which is another departure from TNG.  TNG was all about cold hard technology, a future where religion is seemingly gone.  But with Kira and the Bajorans they bring an religious element to the show which is nice to see.

Jadzia Dax is the science officer on DS9.  Dax is kind of the voice of reason, knowledge, and experience.  She is a non-human species and has the memories of multiple previous lifetimes.  This is used to write good episodes, but unfortunately sometimes they wrote so rather bland episodes based around this.  As a result, my feelings about her character are definitely mixed.  I never did understand why she left the show with one season left.  Did she choose to leave or was she written out?

Julian Bashir is the young and very eager doctor on the show.  He is one of my more favorite characters, especially in later seasons when it's revealed he was genetically altered as a child (which is illegal in the Federation).  So Bashir's whole character is a contradiction in the "perfect" TNG Federation.  But his "super-human" abilities make for some great story lines.

Miles O'Brien is a supporting character they brought over from TNG.  I was so glad they did this as his character is so likable.  He represents the "everyday man."  He's married with a family.  Another big distinction is he's not an enlisted officer in Starfleet.  They did a lot of great stories around O'Brien, many of which seemed to be to his detriment - such as being accused of a crime he didn't commit, forced to endure prison time for a different crime, and being hunted down and attempted to be killed for no good reason.  The characters of O'Brien and Bashir had a great onscreen rapport.

Odo is the stations shape-shifting security officer.  I think he was mainly written into the show to showcase the recently created CGI ability to morph characters and shapes.  At the time this was groundbreaking and had only been seen in big-budget films such as T2.  I liked Odo's character as one who likes order and is puzzled by social interactions.  I guess you could say he's a fastidious introvert - something I can totally understand.

Being added to the show halfway through, Worf is the second character to be brought to the show from TNG.  I didn't care for Worf in TNG, but his character is a little more likable in DS9.  I think it's less that his character is likable, and more than the introduction of his character made possible additional stores such as the war with the Klingons.

Quark is the station's Ferengi bartender.  Quark epitomizes everything the Federation is not; lying, cheating, stealing, gambling, drinking, sex, manipulation, extortion, etc.  But his character is so much fun on the show.  The constant cat and mouse game between him and Odo is fun and even serves to lighten the mood of the show.  Odd that is takes such a "dark" character to lighten the mood and bring humor to an otherwise dark show.

Jake is Sisko's son and one of those characters that didn't get as much screen time as he deserved.  He did have the ongoing friendship with Nog (a Ferengi) which served to show that even in this less than ideal location people could overcome their differences and befriend others.  I liked that the writers took Jake in a different direction - it was expected the son of a Starfleet captain would himself join Starfleet, but he didn't.

Ezri Dax was written in to take the place of Jadzia after she left the show.  Even though she was only on the show for 1 season, it felt like a large number of the last season's episodes revolved around her.  This included love affairs with both Bashir and Worf.  Ezri was not a favorite of mine.  I found her character to be a little whiny at times.

The last character I want to talk about is Elim Garak.  I guess you could say I literally saved the best for last as Garak is easily my favorite character in DS9. Technically Garak is not a main cast member but a supporting cast member - although he's probably in at least half of all DS9 episodes.  Garak is the ultimate mysterious character.  He's a ex-spy which means by nature he doesn't want to discuss his past.  So you learn bits and pieces about his character over the 7 years of the show.  He has some of the best lines such as "lying is a skill like any other - and if you want to maintain a level of excellence you have to practice constantly."

Of course, no analysis of DS9 would be complete without mentioning the war with the Dominion.  The Dominion was introduced at the end of season 2 and became the single largest ongoing plot in the show.  The Dominion is one of the most well-crafted foes in any show.  The main antagonist is actually 3 different species of aliens.  The Dominion is portrayed as technically superior to the Federation which puts the Federation is a uphill battle to the very end.  These episodes are griping and powerful and one of DS9's best attributes.

Another big change with DS9 was the introduction of large plot lines spanning multiple episodes.  In TNG no plot line spanned more than 2 consecutive episodes.  But with DS9 they wrote plots that spanned 10 or more episodes - making the war with the Dominion possible.  Yes this is more common nowadays (e.g. Lost, 24, and Prison Break), but back in the 90s few TV shows did this.  Broadcasters were afraid that by having such long plot lines that unless people started watching at the very beginning they wouldn't choose to start watching a series in the middle for fear of being lost and confused.

With everything I loved about DS9, there were a few things I didn't care for.  Later on they introduced the character "Vic Fontaine."  He's a holographic singer/performer set in the 1950s/60s.  Ugh, these episodes are so boring.  And any of the episodes where they visit the parallel universe are bland.  But other than those two exceptions, DS9 has really good writing.

My favorites DS9 episodes are "Paradise," "The Wire," "Civil Defense," "Improbable Cause" / "The Die is Cast," "The Visitor," "Statistical Probabilities," and all of the Dominion story arc episodes.

So that's my rundown of DS9.  Easily one of my favorite shows, just a hair below TNG on my all-time favorite shows list.  If you're a Star Trek fan and you've never seen DS9, or if you didn't care for it and stopped watching, I encourage you to give it another try.

Project Dreamcast - Repair part 3

Continuing the repair from last time, I'm still working on the GD-ROM drive.  I received the surface mount radial capacitors and I need to remove the old ones and solder in the new ones.  I have a lot of experience working with through-hole components, but very little experience working with surface mount components.  There are several possible ways of removing surface mount capacitors.  One common technique is to use a heat gun.  I've even see videos of people literally pulling them off (no heat) - but this could damage the board.

I decided to try the two soldering iron method.  Using two irons, you heat up both pins at the same time and then pull the part off using the irons.  I borrowed a soldering station from a friend to use as the second iron.  This method worked pretty good.  I got all the caps removed with no issues.

Before installing the new caps, I tested their ESR.  The 100uf/16V and 100uf/6.3V tested at .3 and the 47uf/6.3V tested at .7.  These numbers are lower than the expected maximum in the chart from last time, and significantly lower than the previous values for the old caps.

Soldering in the new caps was more difficult that I had expected.  It took longer to get the caps soldered into place.  And with some of the caps placed close together, it was hard to get my soldering iron down on the pad.  But I eventually got then all soldered into place.

I reassembled the GD-ROM drive and tested the system.  Here's where I got the bad news.  It will spin the disc, and the laser lens will move up and down trying to focus, but it will not move the laser assembly up and down the track.  This tells me something is wrong with the GD-ROM drive, it's not even seeing the disc so it won't try and read the tracks.  This is a loss of functionality.  Before replacing the caps it would move the lens and could at least ready music CDs.  But now it won't ready any disc.

So I must have messed something up.  Perhaps I created a short when soldering on the news caps.  I need to remove the circuit board and have a look under magnification.  It could be something as simple as the ribbon cable not seated properly.  And if all else fails, I may remove these new caps and replace them with through-hole capacitors which are easier to solder.

All that said, this Dreamcast is actually on the back-burner for right now.  I managed to get my hands on a second Dreamcast.  This one also came from eBay for $5.  It's the rare black USA Dreamcast including the controller.  It was listed as "broken" because it made a loud noise when you turn it on.  I've already found and fixed the problem.  The lens assembly moves back and forth on two metal rails.  These metal rails are held in place by screws.  One of the two rails popped out of place.  I put it back, secured the screw, and now the system works perfectly.  It read game discs, music CDs, as well as burned CDs such as DreamShell.

This new Dreamcast is going to be the system I mod going forward.  At some point in time I'll come back to this white Dreamcast and attempt to finish the repair.

Sci-Fi Review - Star Trek: The Next Generation

Continuing my Star Trek review, this time I wanted to talk about Star Trek: The Next Generation (herein referred to as just "TNG").  I would have to say that TNG is my favorite TV show of all time!  This show ran from 1987 - 1994, the golden years of my childhood if you will.  I was an impressionable 12 when TNG started.  I'll admit, I first started watching the show because it was set in space and had great special effects.  It was only after I grew up that I realized this show had everything from a well rounded cast, great acting, and superb writing.

Speaking of the cast, I'd like to briefly talk about each of the characters.  Starting at the top you have Captain Picard.  Let's face it, Picard is great because of the incredible acting of Patrick Stewart.  He played this role so perfectly.  Picard is confident and strong, and yet knows his weaknesses.  He is the perfect person to lead the show.  Second in command is William Riker - and here I have mixed feelings.  My problem isn't with Jonathan Frakes acting ability - more the character bio.  Riker is portrayed as a "ladies man."  Just as I didn't care for this attribute in Kirk, I don't like it in Riker.

Next you have Commander Data who was by far my favorite character period!  I loved the fact he was an android, no emotion and all logic.  Yet with a poor grasp of humor and social interactions.  Who knows, maybe this character resonated with me because of traits I see in myself.  Anyway, Brent Spiner played this character perfectly.  Some of my favorite episodes are Data-centered.  After Data you've got Geordi La Forge.  I always liked Geordi and his ability to diagnose and fix problems.  I think one reason I liked Geordi was because later in life I would get a Bachelors of Science in Engineering, although at the time TNG was running I had no idea I would become an engineer.  So inside I had the tendencies of an engineer but I didn't realize it yet.

The character of Worf never really spoke to me.  Obviously as a Klingon he's portrayed as more of the "don't think just smash it" mentality which is definitely not me.  I think Michael Dorn did a great job playing the role, and he has a commanding voice.  Even though his character was far from my favorite, he did provide some great comic relief.  The part where Q asks Worf if he's "eating any good books lately?" for example.

The ships doctor, Beverly Crusher, was a strong but caring female role.  I liked her character and I felt like she deserved more screen time and plots centered around her.  On the flip side you have Deanna Troi.  Whine, whine, whine.  Easily my least favorite character and the one I could do without.  And frequently when you have a Deanna episode you have her mother Lwaxana Troi - easily my least favorite reoccurring character.  There's just something about these two characters that make them so annoying to me.

Beyond the characters, TNG had some incredible visual effects.  They still look good today, which is saying a lot when you consider this show is 20 years old not to mention this was a weekly TV show with a limited budget.  I believe this is largely due to the fact that all space scenes were shot using models (this was before CGI took over).  For the longest time CGI space ships looked very fake.  They've since advanced to the point where it looks as good (or better than) models.  But back in the last 80s and into the 90s, shows could either use primitive CGI or real models.  Models were more expensive to make and shoot, but provided a more realistic show.  To go with the visuals you have the audio.  TNG (and all Star Trek series for that matter) is one of the few shows that uses a full orchestral audio recording.  Which is funny because when you think about "orchestral music in a TV show" you think that's not for me.  But it was perfectly executed and when you watch an episode you don't even realize it's there, but if it were missing you wouldn't enjoy it as much.

The writing staff on TNG was one of the best having produced many well-written episodes.  My favorites were "The Inner Light," "Data's Day," "Starship Mine," and "Times Arrow."

I could literally go on for days about TNG.  Such a great show with a lasting legacy.  I own all seasons on DVD and watch them end to end every couple of years.

Project Dreamcast - Repair part 2

Last time I talked about the repair efforts on the Dreamcast GD-ROM drive.  The new laser will read CDs, but will not read game discs.  As I said, I don't know if the trimmer needs adjusting or not.  But before I go that route, I wanted to check the rest of the GD-ROM drive.

Removing the entire GD-ROM drive assembly reveals the circuit board for the GD-ROM drive.  The GD-ROM circuit board has a total of 10 surface mount electrolytic capacitors on it.

Capacitors are frequently the cause of old electronics going bad.  Is it possible these old caps are preventing the GD-ROM drive from reading discs?  I just so happen to have an ESR meter which is the best way to test a capacitor to see if it's good or bad.

When testing ESR values, lower is better.  A high ESR value means the cap is going bad.  Here is a table of the capacitors, their rating, the current ESR, and the expected ESR value.

As you can see, every single capacitor has a higher than expected ESR value.  So before I try adjusting the trimmer on the laser, I want to replace these capacitors with new ones and see if that helps.  Unfortunately I don't have any surface mount capacitors in my parts box, so I'll need to order new caps.  I'll continue repair efforts in my next post once the replacement parts arrive.

The last thing I'll mention is the manufacture of the GD-ROM drive.  The initial manufacture of the GD-ROM drives was Yamaha, but later on Sega switched to Samsung.  From what I've heard, the Yamaha drives are much more reliable.  From other repair work I've done, I've run into a lot of bad capacitors on Samsung products, so I won't be surprised in the least if the capacitors are the problem with this drive.

Sci-Fi Review - Star Trek

As a self-proclaimed "nerd" I realize there is one thing missing from my blog - my personal views and opinions on classic Science-Fiction.  In this first installment in a series of posts I'll talk about Star Trek... the original Star Trek from the 1960s.

I'll start off by saying I LOVE Star Trek!  Star Trek is easily my favorite Sci-Fi program, beating out other heavy-weights such as Star Wars and Stargate.  As a kid I loved the space scenes, the futuristic nature of the show, the special effects, etc.  But as I've grown up with Star Trek, I've come to realize what makes Star Trek truly great isn't this "technical" aspect of the show but it's the character development and Gene Roddenberry's depiction of the future.  I guess you could call Gene the ultimate optimist.  His view of humanity's future was extremely positive.  In Star Trek he depicts a future with very little crime, disease, or pollution - one in which all mankind has learned to get along with everyone else, and in which the "goal" that drives people forward isn't the acquisition of wealth, power, or money but the driving force is betterment of mankind as a whole and increased knowledge and understanding.  That in and of itself is very radical thinking.  It creates this positive world in which you, the viewer, find yourself wanting to be a part of.  To see a future where you don't have to worry about food, money, or illness and can instead focus on learning and helping others is very captivating.  That's kind of the background of Star Trek in general.  But let's talk specifically about the Star Trek from the 1960s.

Even though I LOVE Star Trek, I just cannot watch the original Star Trek.  The problem has always been the low production value, I have a hard time getting past things like blocks of foam painted to look like rocks.  Having been born in the mid 70s, I grew up in a world post Star Wars.  This set a new standard for special effects in Sci-Fi.  So when I try and watch the original Star Trek, I have a hard time.  As such I've only seen a few episodes end to end.  And yes, it's hard to judge an entire show based upon one or two episodes.  I really should go back and sit down and watch the episodes.

Even though I haven't seen much of the original Star Trek, I have seen enough to know what I like and don't like.  Starting at the top, I never cared for Kirk.  He's portrayed as a "ladies man" which to me isn't what Sci-Fi is about.  I don't watch Sci-Fi to watch someone "hit" on every sexy alien they find.  Spock on the other hand, I always liked his cold hard logical aspect.  Beyond the big two - I liked Scotty the engineer, although I felt his accent was a bit thick.  Many of the other characters had less of an impression on me.  I liked that Gene included different nationalities, races, and sexes in his future.  Although the true impact of this is probably lost on me having grown up after the race and general equality movements of the 60s and 70s.

As for the technology of the show - some of the futuristic ideas have already become reality.  If you compare the Star Trek communicator to a modern cell phone (in size, design, and function) you'll find they are nearly identical.  We obviously don't have large star ships and faster than light space travel, but I would argue modern super computers probably exceed what is depicted in the show.

I guess to sum up, although the original Star Trek series isn't for me, it did lay the necessary groundwork for the future Star Trek series.

Project Dreamcast - Repair

As I said in my previous post, the Dreamcast I bought on eBay was listed as "broken."  When I got the unit I plugged it in and turned it on.  The system powers on and the welcome screen comes up.  The controllers work as does the VMU.  But the system will not read any discs; neither Dreamcast games nor music CDs.  This is actually a very common problem with the Dreamcast - in fact it's probably the single biggest problem that happens to Dreamcasts.  The lasers they used in the system tend to wear out quicker than other CD players and games systems.

Step one is always clean the laser lens.  Very carefully use a Q-tip and rubbing alcohol to wipe the lens.  You can also use compressed air as there is a second lens further down that you can't reach.  Neither of these worked for me, so I moved onto the common "fix" found on the Internet.  Every CD/DVD laser assembly has a trimmer that adjusts the power of the laser lens.  Note, a lot of people call this a potentiometer, but the technical name is a trimmer, or sometimes a trimmer potentiometer, or even a trimpot.  Here is a picture of the Dreamcast laser trimmer.

If you turn this trimmer clockwise you increase the power to the laser, counterclockwise to decrease the power.  The idea is to increase the power to the laser just to the point where it reads discs.  Increased power reduces the life of the laser, so this is at best a short-term fix.  Some people report that counterclockwise worked for them, but this doesn't make any sense.  Either way, you SLOWLY turn the trimmer clockwise and retest.  This is a long slow process of increasing the trimmer, testing, increasing again, etc.

Following this process I got it to read music CDs every time.  But game discs are another matter.  I got it to periodically read game discs, but most of the time it failed.  After several hours trying different settings, I decided to punt and try installing a new laser.  I purchased a JVC SPU-3200 laser assembly.  This is a functional replacement part for the Dreamcast.  Here's a picture of the new laser.

Replacing the laser was surprisingly easy.  There is one important task to remember when installing a new laser.  To protect the laser against static electricity, there should be a solder ball on the bottom of the laser.  You need to use a soldering iron to remove this solder ball.  After doing this you can reassemble the Dreamcast and test your new laser.

With the new laser installed, I tried a music CD.  It read the disc perfectly - this is good, I know the new lens is working.  However, it still won't read game discs.  At this point I'm not panicked.  I honestly don't know if new laser assemblies ship calibrated or not, so all I might need to do is calibrate the laser.  However, before I touch the trimmer on this new laser, I want to look at the rest of the GD-ROM drive circuitry.  What if there is another problem that is preventing it from reading game discs?  Next time I'll cover the continued effort to repair the Dreamcast.

Project Dreamcast

After the success of Project Genesis and Project TG-16, I have my next project to work on - a Sega Dreamcast.  I've never played a Dreamcast before - in fact I know very little about the system.  What I do know is the console was probably one of the most underrated and overlooked video game consoles of all time.  It was ahead of its time in many ways.  The Dreamcast was the first console to offer built-in network and Internet connectivity, it was the first to offer progressive video output, the first 128-bit system, I believe it was the first to offer a keyboard and mouse, and it had a lot of unique titles not found on any other console.  Add to that it was about half the price of competing systems.  Unfortunately the console was short-lived.

I recently picked up a Dreamcast off eBay.  I got the console, two controllers, a VMU, Unreal Tournament, and power and video cables all for $20 delivered.  The reason the console was so cheap is because it's "broken."  It may sound odd, but I'd actually rather get a broken Dreamcast than a working one.  Why you might ask?  Well fixing a console is as much fun as playing it in my opinion.  And after fixing it up I'm going to mod the console to improve it and make it special and unique.  I'll document the entire process here.  Unlike Project Genesis and TG-16, I'm going to document this as I go.  Both of those projects I completed them before making a single post.  But this one I'll post as I go, which hopefully will help others to see how I go about trying to diagnose, repair, and mod the console.

Before I talk about the repair efforts, I wanted to give my impressions of the console.  First, I am surprised by the size of the console.  It's a very small console.  Secondly, the controllers feel nicer than I was expecting.  I especially like the analog thumbstick.  It's been my opinion that most analog thumbsticks are stiff and/or move in a clunky manor.  But the Dreamcasts thumbsticks are (pardon the expression) a dream!

Next time I'll get into the repair efforts on the console.

Is my hard drive dying?

I remember back like 10+ years ago, one way to tell if a hard drive was dying is the number of bad sectors on the drive.  Occasionally you scan your drive, and if that scan comes back with bad sectors you know your drive is slowly dying and you might want to consider a new drive.

Recently at work a drive in a server machine had been causing problems, and sometimes even crashing the machine.  When you reboot the machine, the BIOS reported a hard drive failure.  So I ran a sector scan which came back with 0 bad sectors.  I wasn't expecting that, I was for sure there would be a lot of bad sectors.  Well it turns out, most newer hard drives employ a little technique to make you think the drive is still doing great when in fact it is dying.  They have extra sectors on the hard drive which are held in reserve, there is no way for the operating system to access these sectors.  When the hard drive detects a bad sector, it stops using that sector and replaces it with one of these reserved sectors.  So to the outside world the drive is still running great, but internally the failures have begun.

It turns out there is a way to detect and track this.  Newer hard drives have what is called S.M.A.R.T. (or Self-Monitoring, Analysis and Reporting Technology).  Basically the drive tracks statistics about it's own operation; number of hours in use, number of reads and writes, etc.  One of the stats it tracks is number of reallocated sectors.  Checking the S.M.A.R.T. stats on the failing drive I found over 5,000 reallocated sectors.  Indeed, the drive was failing.

So how do you read these stats?  There are tons of free and commercial tools that read and display this info.  I like Defraggler by Piriform.  In addition to reading and displaying S.M.A.R.T. data it is a great disk defragger, and it's free!

XBMC

For a while now I've been considering creating a Home Theater PC (HTPC).  I've definitely been dragging my feet on this, there's no big rush here.  I've even considered a Roku as a cheap box that will do 80% of what a HTPC does.  A friend of mine said I should look into a free open-source piece of software called XBMC.  Without even trying XBMC I brushed it off as something I wouldn't be interested in.  Several weeks later, for some reason I decided to install it and give it a try.  And I'm glad I did because I sorely misunderstood what XBMC is.

In short, XBMC is a media playing software for your TV (or computer).  You provide it "media" and it "plays" that media on your TV.  So what media can it play?  Well here's where I was in the dark.  I assumed there were two main types of media it would play.

1. Pictures, music, videos, and DVDs on your network.  It's very common for people to store these types of media on their computer or something like a NAS box.  Whereas I do have some of this media, I don't want to watch it on my TV.  I already have a computer and I can view it there.
2. A TV tuner card for broadcast TV.  Hook up an antenna and watch, pause, and record live TV.  This is something that very much interests me, but I don't have a TV card yet.

That's what I *thought* XBMC did.  And like I said, I don't need it for media on my network, and I don't have a TV tuner card.  So I assumed XBMC was useless for me.  Boy was I wrong!  What I didn't know is XBMC has a third source of media - the Internet!  There are dozens of official plugins and hundreds of unofficial plugins that grant you access to pretty much any video source on the Internet.  You can view TV programs from major networks like ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, Spike, History Channel, MTV, SyFy, HGTV, etc.  The list of channels, both broadcast and cable, surprised me.  You can also view content from Internet sites like YouTube, Hulu, Amazon, VEVO, Revision3, etc.  There is so much Internet content available through these plugins you could never watch it all.  If you want to get rid of cable/satellite TV then you should seriously consider XBMC.  Even without a TV tuner the amount of content you can watch is overwhelming.

Is the PC industry dying?

If you read a lot of technical news articles and commentary like I do, then you've probably seen predictions that the PC industry is dying.  They all point to the rise of smart phones and tablets as the leading killer of the personal computer.  I'm not going to argue, these devices have taken away market share from the PC, and these newer devices have their place.  But I think people are overreacting.

To me, I think the underlying issue here is how people "use" data.  I think that working with a computer you are either "consuming" data or you are "creating" data.  Consuming data would be tasks like reading a webpage, checking your email, watching a video, playing a video game, etc.  All of these tasks, the main flow of data and information is toward you the user.  Creating data is obviously the opposite.  If you're writing a paper for school, editing video/audio, putting together a business presentation, etc.  With these tasks the flow of information is opposite, from you the user.

So what does this have to do with smart phones, tablets, and PCs.  Simple, I strongly believe (and I think most people would agree) that smart phones and tablets are great "consumers" of information but awkward at best at producing data.  If you have to write a 20 page paper for a class in school, are you really going to compose it on a phone or tablet!?!  No, you'd sit down with a real computer and a real keyboard.  So as long as people need to create data, the need for PCs will there.

Again, it is true that smart phones and tablets are eating away at the PC segment.  But I predict this will be a temporary trend.  A lot of people only use their home computer for "consuming" tasks like checking email and surfing the web.  For these people, a smart phone or a tablet makes sense.  So when the time comes for them to buy a new PC because their current PC is outdated, they will buy a smart phone or tablet instead.  But once everyone who should have been using these devices over a PC has made the switch, the market share will stabilize.

There is one more really big thing that most people are oblivious to.  Most people don't realize that the single biggest market segment for computers is businesses.  Corporations spend a lot more money on PCs than the home user.  And most businesses need computers to do their job.  Most employees sitting behind a computer are "creating" content and not consuming it.  Therefore that computer is hard to replace with a smart phone or tablet.

This is why I firmly believe the PC segment will be around for a long time.  It may take a small hit in the short term, but the industry will go on and thrive.  What's more, Windows continues to be far and away the world's most used platform with >90% of the total computing market share.  So everyone is hot to trot over new things like Android and iOS, but these have a long way to go to catch up to PCs and Windows.