Several times recently I've needed to submit some paperwork to a bank or other business. They told me I could mail it in or fax it to them. I asked them if they would take an email with the scanned document in it. They said no, it had to be mail or fax.
What!?! Seriously, get with the times. No one uses the post office, and fax machines are old too. What's so special about a fax over a emailed digital copy anyway? Faxes are just as easy to fake as a digital copy. Heck, I would argue since the resolution on faxes is so low that digital copies are far superior.
There are definitely areas of society that are doing a poor job of adapting to all this new technology.
Friday, January 6, 2012
Auto Updating Software
A lot of software these days automatically updates itself by downloading and installing updates. Whereas this can be convenient and helpful, I've learned it can also be a bad thing.
I think I dislike auto-updating software because of bad experiences in the past. I don't have a problem when the update is a fix to a problem. But often times software developers use this auto-updating mechanism to new or unwanted software. Microsoft's Windows Update has been guilty of this, I suddenly find software on my system that I didn't want. This is frustrating for someone who likes to maintain control over their computer.
Adobe is another gross violator. Adobe products like Reader and Flash are constantly updating and reinstalling crappy Adobe software like Adobe Air. It's to the point where I won't install anything Adobe on my system.
This problem is not isolated to computers either. The other day my Internet-enabled TV automatically downloaded and installed a new firmware update. After the install the volume was greatly increased, about 3 times it's previous level. I think Vizio realized they screwed up because the next day it downloaded another update, now the volume is only about twice as loud as before.
Again, my complaint isn't with making fixes available. It's with the unilateral way in which these fixes are applied. Please, offer us the consumer a way to select the updates, update manually, or even opt out completely. Put the control in our hands.
I think I dislike auto-updating software because of bad experiences in the past. I don't have a problem when the update is a fix to a problem. But often times software developers use this auto-updating mechanism to new or unwanted software. Microsoft's Windows Update has been guilty of this, I suddenly find software on my system that I didn't want. This is frustrating for someone who likes to maintain control over their computer.
Adobe is another gross violator. Adobe products like Reader and Flash are constantly updating and reinstalling crappy Adobe software like Adobe Air. It's to the point where I won't install anything Adobe on my system.
This problem is not isolated to computers either. The other day my Internet-enabled TV automatically downloaded and installed a new firmware update. After the install the volume was greatly increased, about 3 times it's previous level. I think Vizio realized they screwed up because the next day it downloaded another update, now the volume is only about twice as loud as before.
Again, my complaint isn't with making fixes available. It's with the unilateral way in which these fixes are applied. Please, offer us the consumer a way to select the updates, update manually, or even opt out completely. Put the control in our hands.
Chrome is #2 browser
This week various tech news sites reported that Google's Chrome is now the second most used browser, behind Microsoft's IE and overtaking Mozilla's Firefox. For me this is kind of bittersweet. Don't get me wrong, I like Chrome and I despise IE. But I personally feel like Firefox is a better browser. I feel that Firefox has:
On top of all this, I would say that Firefox is just as fast and uses memory just as efficiently as Chrome.
Again, don't get me wrong. I'm pleased to see IE use is declining! I have never liked IE, any browser is better than IE. I just hope Firefox continues to gain in popularity just as fast as Chrome.
- A better UI. I've never been a fan of skinned applications.
- A larger better selection of extensions/add-ons.
- More control to customize the browser just the way you want.
On top of all this, I would say that Firefox is just as fast and uses memory just as efficiently as Chrome.
Again, don't get me wrong. I'm pleased to see IE use is declining! I have never liked IE, any browser is better than IE. I just hope Firefox continues to gain in popularity just as fast as Chrome.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
My kind of neighborhood
Check out this image of a neighborhood using Google maps:
Noticing anything about the street names? Picard Court, Ryker Court, Picard Lane, Crusher Avenue, and (to top it all off) Warp Drive. I'm thinking the developer who built this neighborhood was a Star Trek TNG fan. :)
This is located in Turlock CA. Thanks to my friend Azeem for sharing this with me.
Noticing anything about the street names? Picard Court, Ryker Court, Picard Lane, Crusher Avenue, and (to top it all off) Warp Drive. I'm thinking the developer who built this neighborhood was a Star Trek TNG fan. :)
This is located in Turlock CA. Thanks to my friend Azeem for sharing this with me.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Rapid Release Schedule
One thing I've noticed lately is a lot of software is releasing too frequently. Of course, a phrase like "too frequently" is subjective. There is a fine balance between not enough and too frequently.
The whole reason to release a new version of a product is to add new features/support and/or fix bugs in the program. So new versions of a product are a good thing. But there is a downside to releasing too frequently. The main problem is there is a "cost" associated with updating software. Every computer with that software installed needs to download and install the updated version. Sometimes this is automatic sometimes it's manual. If it's manual then a frequently release schedule means the user spends more time upgrading. Automatic is not a panacea either. Automatically updating apps can lead to problems without the users knowledge. Plus there is the problem of bandwidth. Every upgrade requires bandwidth to download and install. For each individual user this isn't a problem, but consider on a whole how much total Internet traffic is wasted on continuous updates.
Probably the biggest problem with frequent updates is in corporate use. Most larger corporations do NOT use automatic updates, they use automated tools to update the software in their enterprise. When you consider how many applications will be used in a large enterprise, and if those applications are on a frequent release schedule this creates a lot of work for the IT admins.
A good example of a "rapid release schedule" would be Mozilla Firefox. I think my only gripe with Firefox is it's release schedule. In the middle of 2011 Mozilla announced Firefox would switch to a rapid release schedule. From 2005 'til 2011 Firefox went from version 1.x to 4.x. In the second half of 2011, Firefox went from 4.x to 9.x. So in less than 6 months Mozilla went through more major release numbers than it did in the previous 6 years. And it's not just Firefox. Google Chrome and Adobe products are two more examples of software that releases too often.
Typically software version numbers are major then minor. Often times there are addition numbers for even smaller releases (like bug fixes). If you increase the major version of a product, this should indicate a MAJOR change in the product. Makes sense huh? Too bad software companies don't seem to grasp this.
The whole reason to release a new version of a product is to add new features/support and/or fix bugs in the program. So new versions of a product are a good thing. But there is a downside to releasing too frequently. The main problem is there is a "cost" associated with updating software. Every computer with that software installed needs to download and install the updated version. Sometimes this is automatic sometimes it's manual. If it's manual then a frequently release schedule means the user spends more time upgrading. Automatic is not a panacea either. Automatically updating apps can lead to problems without the users knowledge. Plus there is the problem of bandwidth. Every upgrade requires bandwidth to download and install. For each individual user this isn't a problem, but consider on a whole how much total Internet traffic is wasted on continuous updates.
Probably the biggest problem with frequent updates is in corporate use. Most larger corporations do NOT use automatic updates, they use automated tools to update the software in their enterprise. When you consider how many applications will be used in a large enterprise, and if those applications are on a frequent release schedule this creates a lot of work for the IT admins.
A good example of a "rapid release schedule" would be Mozilla Firefox. I think my only gripe with Firefox is it's release schedule. In the middle of 2011 Mozilla announced Firefox would switch to a rapid release schedule. From 2005 'til 2011 Firefox went from version 1.x to 4.x. In the second half of 2011, Firefox went from 4.x to 9.x. So in less than 6 months Mozilla went through more major release numbers than it did in the previous 6 years. And it's not just Firefox. Google Chrome and Adobe products are two more examples of software that releases too often.
Typically software version numbers are major then minor. Often times there are addition numbers for even smaller releases (like bug fixes). If you increase the major version of a product, this should indicate a MAJOR change in the product. Makes sense huh? Too bad software companies don't seem to grasp this.
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
How to use a solder sucker
If you ever venture into the world of electronics repair then you'll need to be able to remove components soldered onto a circuit board. There are different ways to accomplish this. By far the best is desoldering tool like the Hakko 808. These are basically a soldering iron and a vacuum pump in one tool. It melts the solder then sucks it out of the joint. Very effective, but also very expensive.
There are less expensive options out there. Solder wick (a.k.a. desoldering braid) is probably the cheapest. This is basically a small spool of braided copper wire. You put the braid on the solder to be removed and heat both with a soldering iron. As the solder melts it's literally wicked into the desoldering braid.
The other inexpensive way to remove solder is using a tool called a solder sucker. A solder sucker has a spring-loaded plunger that when released creates a small vacuum effect through the nozzle. The theory behind a solder sucker is simple, but getting them to work is a different matter. I've found two different approaches to using a solder sucker.
The first is to use your soldering iron to melt the solder and at the same time hold the tip of the solder sucker close to the joint. Then in one quick motion pull the soldering iron away, put the tip of the solder sucker over the joint, and press the button to release the plunger. This technique works, but it's very difficult to get it just right. The problem is you have only a fraction of a second to suck up the molten solder before it cools and solidifies. Using this method I found it sometimes took half a dozen attempts before I was successful.
The second approach is one I stumbled upon be accident but works very well. First use your soldering iron to melt the solder to be removed. Next, add still more solder to the joint. The goal is to create a relatively large blob of molten solder. Now bring in the solder sucker and as soon as the tip of the solder sucker is touching the molten solder press the button. Do NOT remove the soldering iron, leave it there. Because the soldering iron remains on the joint the solder remains molten. Molten solder, like water, has surface tension which means it will stick together. So once some of the solder starts up the tip into the solder sucker, the rest of the solder will follow it. I find this method to work very well for removing solder. It usually removes all the solder on the first try.
Now this technique may not work well if you don't have a small soldering iron tip. I would suggest you experiment first on some junk circuit boards. Good luck and happy repairing.
Monday, December 5, 2011
Phantasy Star 2 - the lost data
In my last post I talked about my failed attempt to replace the battery in my Phantasy Star 2 cartridge without losing saved games. But since I did lose my saved games, I wanted to reminisce about what I lost.
First off, let me just admit I played this game way too much. I played it as much as I did because of my obsession with perfection. I was attempting to max out everything in the game. So that said, this is how far I had taken PS2.
In an RPG game, you fight enemies to gain experience and money. As you gain experience your characters level up. As you level up, your characters become stronger. In PS2 your characters are strong enough to beat the final bosses at about level 25. But I took all of my character up to the maximum level which was 35. But I didn't stop there. At level 35 your characters have abour 3 million experience points. But I wanted to max that out as well. So I took all 7 of my characters up to 9,999,999 experience points. That was 7 million experience points of gain for no reason.
Leveling up wasn't the only thing I did, I also wanted to maximize my possessions. In PS2 Star Mist and Moon Dew are valuable items to have, yet you cannot buy them in any store. You can only find them in a few scattered chests, or use Shir (the thief) to steal them. If you've played the game then you know Shir only steals at random, and even then she steals random items. I used Shir to steal so many times that I have enough Star Mists and Moon Dews to fill everyone's possession list completely.
Even with all this, there was one area of the game I was far from maxing out. My money was only up to $3 million and presumably you can have up to $9,999,999. Considering the most expensive item in the game costs $50,000 having a bank account with $3 million is pretty impressive. Still, I would have expected my money to be higher given all the fighting I had to do to max out my characters.
Given how strong my characters were, I could defect the final two bosses (Dark Force and Mother Brain) using ANY characters. I could go into battle with the "weakest" characters such as the Amy and Shir and still defeat them.
First off, let me just admit I played this game way too much. I played it as much as I did because of my obsession with perfection. I was attempting to max out everything in the game. So that said, this is how far I had taken PS2.
In an RPG game, you fight enemies to gain experience and money. As you gain experience your characters level up. As you level up, your characters become stronger. In PS2 your characters are strong enough to beat the final bosses at about level 25. But I took all of my character up to the maximum level which was 35. But I didn't stop there. At level 35 your characters have abour 3 million experience points. But I wanted to max that out as well. So I took all 7 of my characters up to 9,999,999 experience points. That was 7 million experience points of gain for no reason.
Leveling up wasn't the only thing I did, I also wanted to maximize my possessions. In PS2 Star Mist and Moon Dew are valuable items to have, yet you cannot buy them in any store. You can only find them in a few scattered chests, or use Shir (the thief) to steal them. If you've played the game then you know Shir only steals at random, and even then she steals random items. I used Shir to steal so many times that I have enough Star Mists and Moon Dews to fill everyone's possession list completely.
Even with all this, there was one area of the game I was far from maxing out. My money was only up to $3 million and presumably you can have up to $9,999,999. Considering the most expensive item in the game costs $50,000 having a bank account with $3 million is pretty impressive. Still, I would have expected my money to be higher given all the fighting I had to do to max out my characters.
Given how strong my characters were, I could defect the final two bosses (Dark Force and Mother Brain) using ANY characters. I could go into battle with the "weakest" characters such as the Amy and Shir and still defeat them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)