Tag: Technology

Uncategorized

Retro lift

Posted on by
Lift like TARDIS that only goes to the 70s

Lift like TARDIS that only goes to the 70s

We’re moving offices at the moment as we’ve completely outgrown our small serviced offices and have signed a lease on an entire floor in the building literally across the road (so no wacky races with vans and things will be required). The building across the road is perfectly fine, but the landlord hasn’t quite finished refurbishing it yet and has a few things still to do, including the refurbishment of one of the two lifts. One lift is all modern with digital controls and voice floor announcements and all that jazz, but the other, although functional, is still as it was installed when the building was built in the 70s.

It’s totally retro, with big clunky buttons, wood paneling, an old fashioned floor indicator panel above the door (which doesn’t work) and inside the emergency phone cabinet is this fully functional dial telephone (pictured). It actually works too! It’s like going back in time 20 years.

I’ve also added a third monitor to my Mac Pro at work, because I’m greedy and I can. It was a spare monitor I had at my Dad’s house, liberated from the Rhydio office in 2006, and so I thought I’d put it to good use. Very soon I’ll wonder how I worked without it and be wanting a fourth one, which will be entirely possible since my Mac Pro has 4 monitor ports.

three-monitors

Because I am greedy

Uncategorized

iPhone

Posted on by

iphone-tripleMy old mobile didn’t survive Federation at New Year. I pulled it out of my pocket at about 1.00am and it had gone bonkers; it was just flashing numbers up on the screen and the keypad wasn’t responding. Removing the battery and restarting it dealt with the crazy numbers, but didn’t do anything for the keypad. I don’t remember getting it wet or bumping it into anything, but nonetheless, it was fucked.

I’d been holding off getting an Apple iPhone until the New Year anyway and the death of my old phone combined with the death of my last iPod in October left few excuses not to then get one, so I did. I absolutely love it; principally because it combines an iPod and a phone into one single device that’s 100% compatible in every way with my Mac computers, rather than some sort of third party bodged compatibility as provided by other manufacturers. It’s a total dream to use and allows me not only to make phone calls, listen to music and send texts but also read and write e-mail in a way that’s actually easy and works properly, and also to surf the web using what’s stops very very short of being a proper web browser.

Of course, I’ve had derision from many people for buying it, whose complaints tend to be centred around the same few issues:

  1. You can’t send picture messages.
  2. You can’t text more than one person at the same time.
  3. It’s too expensive.
  4. You can’t record videos.
  5. It doesn’t have 3G.
  6. You have to use O2.

I’d like to officially submit the following responses to these points so that people can shut the fuck up about them once and for all:

  1. I’ve never sent a picture message in my entire fucking life.
  2. Incorrect. Firmware 1.1.3 allows multiple text recipients.
  3. I could have easily spent more on an iPod Touch and a separate phone of similar quality. I’d also have ended up with two devices in my pocket.
  4. Oh noes! How will I fill up YouTube with meaningless rubbish now?!
  5. It connects to your wireless network at home and the EDGE data connection is plenty fast enough for what you need it to do when you’re not at home.
  6. Frankly, anything’s better than the utter piece of shit that it’s T-Mobile’s awful cellular network. I can now make phone calls from inside my Dad’s house.

Any perceived compromises made are outweighed by its clear and irrefutable benefits. It’s great, for example, being able to listen to music and then have a phone call put through directly to your headphones without having to change devices or have a second device embarrassingly ring away in your pocket because you can’t fucking hear it. The iChat-style text messaging system is splendid, taking what Blackberrys do to a more logical conclusion. Google Maps works exactly how you would expect it to. It’s also frighteningly easy to download music off iTunes with it, although whether or not that’s a benefit is subjective of course.

If I had any complaints about it it would be that the camera isn’t particularly good and that they’ve been a bit slow in opening it up to third party developers. The former I can’t do anything about, but the latter will be resolved in February, apparently. I want an SSH client, an IRC client and an iChat client without having to use some sort of web application bodge. I expect my wishes will be granted relatively quickly.

So no, it’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but then nobody is being forced to buy it. Indeed, because of its price many people are being forced not to buy it, which I suspect is more of a motive to pick holes in it than people will admit to. It reminds me of those pricks who bray “oh yeah, well, I could have got a BMW but I got something much better instead“, whilst driving a fucking Passat or something.

Uncategorized

Nuclear energy for the win

Posted on by

Congratulations, New Labour, you’ve finally proven that you are capable of making a rational, informed and sensible decision instead of pandering to holier-than-thou lobby groups, following political correctness and inflicting knee-jerk policies upon this weary populace that you so often forget have the power put you on the other side of the House of Commons.

I say that without an ounce of sarcasm. It’s perfectly obvious that nuclear power is the only realistic way to generate enough power to satisfy our baseline requirements over the coming decades without further contributing to global warming (sorry, “climate change”). Renewable energy sources have and will continue to have their place, contributing wherever they can to the National Grid, but they cannot hope to generate enough reliable power on their own to cater for our present requirements, let alone future requirements.

There is nothing to fear with nuclear reactors. Everyone who’s against the idea shrieks “Chernobyl” at the mere mention of the word, as if they’ve been programmed to do so by the short-sighted anti-nuclear propaganda that’s been pushed around over the past 30 years. But Chernobyl was a bad reactor. It was of a design that has not been used since and will never be used again. It required a team of technicians to work around the clock to prevent it from blowing up, whereas modern reactors require a team of technicians to work around the clock to prevent them from shutting down.

Three Mile Island is another example used by the anti-nuclear lobby as a reason why nuclear power is bad. But using Three Mile Island in that way is a total own goal. The Three Mile Island incident proved how safe reactors are when something goes wrong. All the safety devices kicked in when the problem was detected and the reactor was shut down. Surely that’s what we want to see? What would they rather had happened?

It’s a brilliant decision, and I don’t say that of New Labour lightly.

Uncategorized

Mac Mini Memory Mayhem

Posted on by

I’ve just spent the last hour and a half attempting to upgrade the memory in my Mac Mini from 1280Mb to 2Gb by replacing the remaining 256Mb module with a second 1Gb module. The new 1Gb module works fine, but in the process of upgrading I’ve somehow managed the fry the first 1Gb module; it no longer functions. If you didn’t know, taking the Mac Mini apart to upgrade the RAM is not for the faint hearted, requiring an odd assortment of tools including a putty knife, a 1p coin and some post-it notes, so having a net end result of zero is not really what I wanted!

The bust DIMM is still in warranty, in that I bought it less than 12 months ago, so I shall see if they’ll replace it. It would be easier in this situation if it was the new one that had broken, but they might find it a little suspect that the old one stopped working during the upgrade procedure that put the new one in. At the end of the day it would only be another £15 to replace, but still, it’d be a waste.

I’ve also Leopardized the five Macs that Chris and I use between us using the stonking “family pack” that Apple offer, whereby if you want to install Leopard on five computers then you only pay £130 instead of £80 x 5 = £400, which is what Microsoft would make you do, except the £80 would be £240 in their case. I don’t mind paying for software if it’s reasonably priced, but £240 for Microsoft Windows is just fucking ridiculous and I’m glad that I’m no longer subjected to the Microsoft upgrade path.

Uncategorized

Acorn computer redux

Posted on by
Archimedes A400/1 series

Archimedes A400/1 series

In my younger days I used to own and cut my teeth on several examples of Acorn computer, starting with a BBC Master 128 and ending up with an Archimedes A440/1 which I used up until I went to university, at which point the price of a new Risc PC (the indirect successor to the Archimedes) versus a normal x86 PC forced me, reluctantly, into the PC and Microsoft world. I always remember the computers and the operating system (RISC OS) very fondly and at a couple of points since the millenium I’ve dabbled with second hand examples such as an A5000 and a Risc PC, although I sold both on because I had other priorities at the time.

You can still buy new RISC OS based computers but I can’t justify £800+ on what is essentially a nostalgic toy. So I took a look on Ebay for a suitable example of an Acorn computer that was dead cheap but had sufficient specification for me to indulge in my nostalgia and access all my old data, perhaps even convert it to a modern format. I needed something relatively simple too, as some Risc PCs can get awfully complicated and they don’t age well with their complicated case designs that have parts that can break easily.

Acorn A7000

Acorn A7000

I found an A7000 for thirty quid. It’s the “original” A7000, as opposed to the A7000+, which was an updated version with more onboard memory, a faster processor and I think it had more video memory too. Mine has whatever the original A7000 processor was, 20Mb RAM, 1.2Gb hard disk and a CD-ROM drive. Those specifications may not seem much now, but these RISC machines always made fantastic use of their resources. The hard disk has 78Mb of stuff on it and, to quote the seller, it’s “full of crap”. Once the OS has loaded there’s still 18.5Mb of usable RAM free, and that’s even after the video controller has used some.

I intend to perform a couple of upgrades to it, nonetheless. First it needs a network card for it to be any use to me whatsoever, which isn’t a problem, I’ve just won one on Ebay for £20 or so. I’m also going to replace the CD-ROM drive with a newer, cleaner unit. I don’t need to do this, it’s just a matter of vanity as the existing drive is discoloured and case is otherwise very clean. I also have a stick of RAM from a previous Risc PC that I owned briefly which will take the RAM to 36Mb, not that it needs that much, but I might as well have it if I have the part lying around. Finally, I’m going to see if I can upgrade RISC OS from 3.6 to 4.something. RISC OS 4 is the development from RISC OS 3 that was completed and taken to market by a company other than Acorn after Acorn dramatically decided to stop making their fine computers in 1998 in favour of set-top boxes.

The A7000 is a “cut down” version of the Risc PC, designed for and marketed to schools and other buyers who could not afford the relatively expensive Risc PC. The Risc PC is a larger machine with much better upgrade options and less integrated components, making them easier to upgrade. I do however prefer the A7000 as it’s much smaller and neater and I don’t really need the upgrade path that the Risc PC offers. I don’t need special expansion cards nor do I need further internal drives. A bit more video memory might not go amiss though, and in that regard if the opportunity to replace it with an A7000+ came along I probably would go for it.

Acorn Risc PC

Acorn Risc PC

The ultimate Acorn RISC machine would be the Risc PC StrongArm J233, which was the last production machine they made before they stopped making computers. This machine is very rare as it was massively expensive and was only produced for a short time. Acorn were going to make a successor to the Risc PC called the Phoebe, which was going to have an amazing specification and would run RISC OS 4. They even got to the stage of taking pre-orders but then dramatically cancelled it at the last minute, selling the rights to RISC OS to another firm who continued to develop it. They’ve since gone bust completely. It’s a real shame because they were such an innovative company that made splendid computers; they deserved better.

If you’re interested in the history of Acorn and their various products then I’ve found a couple of very interesting websites that cover it in some depth. One of them is written by a guy who intends to collect as many examples of Acorn computers as he can. I’d love to be able to do that but I fear that I would be made to live in the garage, along with the collection itself.

  • Chris’ Acorns – this is the bloke who intends to collect the lot. Has some links to PDF versions of product brochures, which are fascinating, plus detailed pictures of the machines he has so far, inside and out.
  • A technical history of Acorn Computers – not updated for some years now, but then since they stopped making Acorn computers in 1998 it doesn’t really matter.
Uncategorized

I know nothing about these complicated machines!

Posted on by

I didn’t write this, but I think that it’s a splendid analogy, so I’m going to rip it off and post it here. It relates to the assumption on the part of many people that because someone works with computers that they’ll be happy to field personal technical support requests at the behest of their friends and family in their spare time. The question posed is do you think that the following actions would be acceptable, and if not, can you explain how it would be different if you replaced the mechanic with a person who works in IT and the car with a computer?

  1. Call your friend who is a mechanic at home, at dinner time.
  2. Tell him your car is not running right or won’t even start.
  3. Tell him you saw a neon sign while driving that said your car wasn’t running right, so you pulled in and let these strangers install Fuel Helper, Pot hole blocker, Wheel assistants, a special radio station and an engine watcher, all of which you now “need”.
  4. Ask them if they mind talking you through figuring out why the car won’t run properly. Laugh really loud and say “I know nothing about these complicated machines!”, because they love to hear that.
  5. Tell him you have no tools.
  6. When he asks you to open the bonnet and have a look, ask him “Where is the bonnet?” Optional: Tell them your cousin tried doing “something” to fix it, but you don’t know what it was and the problem is worse now.
  7. While looking at the engine, read them the very long serial numbers of the parts. Because mechanics have them all memorised for all cars.
  8. Always keep asking if you should turn things “left or right?”.
  9. Ask them if they see the part near the other part. Because they can see through the phone.
  10. Ask then if the problem has anything to do with the new garage door you installed.
  11. After they patiently talk you through checking for “fuel and fire”, and it still doesn’t work, ask them if they can drive thirty minutes to your home on their day off and come fix it. Whine about how much you need your car.
  12. Have them do all this for just a cup of tea and a thank you.
  13. Pretend to understand when they say not to believe neon signs saying your car isn’t running right. Just smile when they say you need to regularly schedule maintenance on your car, and to use only well known mechanics.
  14. Repeat the whole process every 60-90 days. Call from your family member’s house because you tried to fix theirs and you’ve messed up their cars now. Tell your friends too, have them call to have their car problems fixed as well.
Uncategorized

5th incarnation of iMac

Posted on by
New iMac

New iMac

Apple have released the latest version of the iMac, the “all in one” computer where you get what looks like just a monitor with a keyboard and a mouse. It’s not a new concept, either in terms of Apple themselves (since the original iMac came out nearly ten years ago) nor in terms of computing in general, making reference to the days when many computers and terminals were manufactured in this format.

The new iMac has clear evolution with its predecessor, which is a departure from the predecessor’s own evolution; until now, with the exception of the third and fourth generation iMacs (which were outwardly identical with different guts), each iMac has been significantly different from its predecessor. I think it looks quite nice apart from the black surround on the screen. I prefer the glossy white Mac style, as does Chris, but I do like the aluminum design; that’s working well with a number of models in the Apple range at the moment.

The new iMac brings with it the latest designs of Apple keyboard, which are shipped with the new iMac and Mac Pro and are also sold separately. As far as I can tell and ignoring eBay, you can now no longer buy the old style keyboards. This I have mixed feelings about, for two reasons.

Firstly, here is the new wired keyboard. It’s nice looking and very slim, but is basically a laptop keyboard. Indeed its keys are identical to those on my Macbook. This is not to say that I dislike my Macbook keyboard, I don’t, but using a laptop keyboard with a desktop computer doesn’t feel right and I think I’d prefer a “proper” keyboard.

But then we move on to my second concern. The wireless version of this keyboard really is just a Macbook keyboard in an aluminum case, with the same number of keys and the same keyboard layout. Previously the wired and wireless keyboards were identical in their appearance, size and layout, so why Apple have chosen to force a differently sized keyboard on those who want a wireless model is beyond me. I could just about cope with the “full size” wired keyboard, laptop keys or not, but this would just piss me off.

But this happens every time. Apple are very good at trumping themselves with the design of their products and they’re not afraid to be radical. Every time they bring something out that looks unusual people are either totally in love with it straight away or say that they’ll never get used to it, but always do.

Returning to the subject of the iMac, I think that Apple could improve the scope of this product very easily. iMacs come with a built-in monitor, as you can see, but they also come with an extra monitor port on the back to which you can connect a second screen. The trouble with this is that no second screen, even Apple’s standalone displays, will match the iMac and you’ll always have this odd juxtaposition of mismatched equipment if you do choose to connect a second display.

The solution to this is simple. Apple should sell a range of monitors that look just like iMacs. They’d be easy to produce, since they would actually use iMac shells and iMac screens; they’d just not put the guts of a computer inside. They already have all the tooling and components available to do this, and I think it would be a great way of allowing people who use their iMac as their primary work computer to use a matching second display without having to plump for a Mac Pro which, although nice and fast, are expensive when compared to the iMac.

I’ve done a mockup of what such a setup might look like. Tell me that this isn’t a good idea? If it happens, you read it here first ;)

Mockup of dual-screen iMac

Mockup of dual-screen iMac

Uncategorized

Mac Format dumbs down UNIX for no reason

Posted on by

I bought Mac Format magazine at the weekend, which was the first and will be the last of such occasions. Aside from the fact that it was six quid for what is actually a very thin magazine, and ignoring the fact that the “full version” software supplied on the accompanying DVD was, in fact, a restricted demonstration version (presenting a clear violation of the Trade Descriptions Act), I was particularly appalled at one of the features in the magazine which concerned itself with Mac OS X’s UNIX underpinnings.

One of the things I like most about Mac OS X is that it can be as simple or as advanced as you wish to make it. If you are a UNIX-head like I am then your familiar environment and tools are there if you want to use them. But if you are quite the opposite and you’re a floral trouser wearing designer hippy then you most certainly do not ever need to go anywhere near the operating system’s UNIX like features and interface. This is in stark contrast to modern Linux desktops, which are trying their hardest to become like this but still rely on the shell (command prompt) to a degree and thus force its users into its UNIX world on a reasonably regular basis.

So this article in Mac World attempted to introduce the “normal” Mac OS X user to the operating system’s UNIX base by describing the Terminal program and presenting a basic command, which was:

/sbin/fsck -fy

This command was “translated” into English by the author of the article and the translation read “run a filesystem check on the system binaries directory“.

This, as anyone with even a basic knowledge of command prompts let alone UNIX specific command prompts will know, is an absolute load of bollocks. Yes, fsck is the program that checks file systems, similar to “chkdsk” or whatever on Windows, this is true. But it is certainly not true to say that “/sbin/” is somehow an argument passed to fsck to tell it just to check the contents of the sbin directory. sbin is merely the path on the disk to fsck. The arguments to fsck are “-fy”, which in this case are quite irrelevant and in no way tell fsck to just pay attention to a particular directory.

This might sound pernickety, but this is simply misleading and represents unnecessary and frankly dangerous dumbing down, something which the BBC News website is guilty of on an almost daily basis in articles in their technology section. If you’re going to introduce Mac users to the wonderful and historical world of their computers’ operating system’s origins then either do it properly or not at all. UNIX is complicated and difficult to use; this is a commonly known fact and it makes no apologies for it. As discussed previously Mac OS is pretty unique in that you don’t even need to know that UNIX exists in order to use it, so there’s no reason to try to dumb it down for its users. You’d be better off pretending it doesn’t exist.

Of course, it’s entirely plausible that the author of the article actually believes what he’s writing and that, from his point of view, he isn’t dumbing anything down at all. If this is the case then I ask how he got the fucking job in the first place and to whom I should apply to write the column in his place.

It totally winds me up when “technical journalists” dumb things down to the point where they actually don’t tell the truth, whether they are aware that they are doing so or not. Whatever good intentions they have about making technology news understandable and accessible to “normal” people, it should be acknowledged that computers aren’t always point-and-click and not everybody is or can be a computer expert. How some of these people are paid for their drivel staggers me.

1 2 3 4 5