Monday, August 28, 2006
How to Make Windows Useful
When you first install Windows, what do you get? Admittedly, it's a pretty naked system. There's not much in the way of usable applications on a new Windows installation. Sure, we have Notepad as a text editor, Word Pad as a word processor (pu-leez) and we have a calculator. There are a couple of other applications, but the bulk of any work to be done is going to have to be done with what's there. Oh, we can't forget Internet Explorer. Now, that's not a web browser; it's just a portal to download Windows updates. That's it. Period.
So, what good is a new Windows installation? I guess it's a pretty cool place to install other software, such as Microsoft Word (a real word processor to replace Word Pad) and Firefox (a real web browser.) Of course, many people install a variety of specialized software for certain applications they use the computer for. For those folks, a new Windows installation is often a clean slate on which to draw. However, on the surface, Windows in and of itself just isn't that useful.
I noticed this gleaming deficiency in Windows over the last few years and decided to do something about it. I set up a website where users can go and download useful Windows applications to approximate the functionality of, say, a Linux system.
To answer this problem, I have created a website containing links to download very useful utilites. These utilities include WinVI, TightVNC, the DivX and XviD codecs, among many others. To visit this site, click here. Hopefully, this will help Windows users get some usefulness out of their systems. I know it certainly has helped me.
Enjoy!
So, what good is a new Windows installation? I guess it's a pretty cool place to install other software, such as Microsoft Word (a real word processor to replace Word Pad) and Firefox (a real web browser.) Of course, many people install a variety of specialized software for certain applications they use the computer for. For those folks, a new Windows installation is often a clean slate on which to draw. However, on the surface, Windows in and of itself just isn't that useful.
I noticed this gleaming deficiency in Windows over the last few years and decided to do something about it. I set up a website where users can go and download useful Windows applications to approximate the functionality of, say, a Linux system.
To answer this problem, I have created a website containing links to download very useful utilites. These utilities include WinVI, TightVNC, the DivX and XviD codecs, among many others. To visit this site, click here. Hopefully, this will help Windows users get some usefulness out of their systems. I know it certainly has helped me.
Enjoy!
Awesome Download Speeds
Fall semester is starting and with it, I have a Java programming class (CS 3230). It looks like it's going to be a fun class where I will learn to basically be a Java expert. Hopefully, this will be one of the four last classes I will ever have to take (until I decide to further my education by persuing a Masters.)
During the course of the lecture today, my instructor indicated that we will be using the barebones Java compiler (command line). I have no problem with this as I generally like working on the command line. It gives me this curious sense of power and control. Microsoft's GUI feels to me like death warmed over. I feel like much of the control over the operating system is hidden from me, but this is a discussion for another time. When my instructor said that we will be using the barebones compiler, he also mentioned that there are graphical IDEs out there for Java and that his personal favorite is one called Eclipse. He said that if we want, we can install an IDE and play with it, but that we really should learn to write code and compile it using the least common denominator.
Well, I kept what he said in mind and decided to try installing Eclipse on my Linux box, Persephone. I chose to install it on Persephone because my Windows boxes are missing the Java SDK. I decided that since it is so easy to connect to Persephone that I would do all of my Java stuff from there rather than deal with Windows. Besides, Windows doesn't do the CLI thing very well.
So when I went to download Eclipse, I selected the directory to save it to and clicked [OK]. At that point, the Firefox download manager opened and showed the download status. Never once during the 117MB download did the speed dip below 1024KB/sec. Yes, that's 1MB per second download. It took all of about a minute to download that 117MB file.
That was my adventure with surprisingly high download speeds today.
During the course of the lecture today, my instructor indicated that we will be using the barebones Java compiler (command line). I have no problem with this as I generally like working on the command line. It gives me this curious sense of power and control. Microsoft's GUI feels to me like death warmed over. I feel like much of the control over the operating system is hidden from me, but this is a discussion for another time. When my instructor said that we will be using the barebones compiler, he also mentioned that there are graphical IDEs out there for Java and that his personal favorite is one called Eclipse. He said that if we want, we can install an IDE and play with it, but that we really should learn to write code and compile it using the least common denominator.
Well, I kept what he said in mind and decided to try installing Eclipse on my Linux box, Persephone. I chose to install it on Persephone because my Windows boxes are missing the Java SDK. I decided that since it is so easy to connect to Persephone that I would do all of my Java stuff from there rather than deal with Windows. Besides, Windows doesn't do the CLI thing very well.
So when I went to download Eclipse, I selected the directory to save it to and clicked [OK]. At that point, the Firefox download manager opened and showed the download status. Never once during the 117MB download did the speed dip below 1024KB/sec. Yes, that's 1MB per second download. It took all of about a minute to download that 117MB file.
That was my adventure with surprisingly high download speeds today.
Thursday, August 10, 2006
Automotive press writers are...
...wus butts!! Specifically, I am complaining about this article where Bill Howard complains about 12 things typically found in cars these days that are "bothersome."
The comments I really disagreed with are the ones about all this automation. Bill wants to have fully automatic, push-button transmissions without mechanical linkages. Sorry Bill, but the more complexity you build into a system, the more prone it will be to failure. I don't know about you, but I don't want to have to "reboot" my car just so that it will shift into third gear. That could be a real annoyance.
Aside from the inconvenience of having to occasionally restart your car to clear techno-glitches is the near complete loss of control afforded to the driver. I was reading an article not long ago that suggests that by the year 2020, we could have completely automatic cars that remove the driver completely from the equation. Yeah, the car drives itself. Um, not while I'm in command, you don't! There are some of us out there who actually enjoy driving. We like to have control of the car. We like to feel the steering wheel in our hands and the exhilarating rush of driving through a canyon or down a scenic byway. Sure, there's always going to be human error, but that's an integral part of learning to live. Removing the driver from the equation only satisfies those concerned with numbers: the pencil pushers who make a living telling us how unsafe and treacherous our highway system is. It would also make the highway scene in Minority Report look not so far-fetched.
What would a comment like that do to those of us who like manual transmissions? We actually like using a manual clutch and lever to control the car. If the predictions are true and we do have fully automatic cars by the year 2020, it wouldn't be that far down the road and there would be folks out there advocating that we eradicate manual transmission automobiles completely and make them adapt the more acurate computer control. I know that sounds a bit out there, but I'm afraid that as we give up control, there will be more and more people willing to take it from us.
I've also heard that in the near future, automatic transmission motorcycles will be mass produced. Now, if you're like me, you see a statement like that and you think, "Well, that'll just take all the fun out of the motorcycle." You see, riding a motorcycle is a feat of coordination. You use your entire body to drive the vehicle. You use not only your hands to steer, but you use your hands and feet to shift gears, go and stop. It's really fun when you get it down. Removing that capability from the people will make them not want to buy or ride motorcycles (and maybe that's the point; I don't know.)
Anyhow, I just get really steamed when I read the automotive press and they sit and pan a car because it's not this or it's not that. I can understand why cars get better ratings for things like performance and comfort, but to beat a car up because it's lacking a DVD satnav. As for me, I couldn't stand having a satnav in my car because I'd have to listen to the damn thing tell me how to get to and from work every day. It seems to me that that would get annoying very quickly. Besides, if I'm out on a trip, I can use my trusty atlas (if I can ever find it.)
Technology in cars is great. I think power windows and door locks are wonderful inventions. Are they necessary? That all depends on the type of car and the owner. But, I don't think that just because a car has more techno-gizmos on it that it's a better car than another. Why don't we, instead of loading our cars with gizmos, focus our technology on making better, more efficient, and more reliable engines and transmissions. Let's make the world a better place, not a more complex place.
The comments I really disagreed with are the ones about all this automation. Bill wants to have fully automatic, push-button transmissions without mechanical linkages. Sorry Bill, but the more complexity you build into a system, the more prone it will be to failure. I don't know about you, but I don't want to have to "reboot" my car just so that it will shift into third gear. That could be a real annoyance.
Aside from the inconvenience of having to occasionally restart your car to clear techno-glitches is the near complete loss of control afforded to the driver. I was reading an article not long ago that suggests that by the year 2020, we could have completely automatic cars that remove the driver completely from the equation. Yeah, the car drives itself. Um, not while I'm in command, you don't! There are some of us out there who actually enjoy driving. We like to have control of the car. We like to feel the steering wheel in our hands and the exhilarating rush of driving through a canyon or down a scenic byway. Sure, there's always going to be human error, but that's an integral part of learning to live. Removing the driver from the equation only satisfies those concerned with numbers: the pencil pushers who make a living telling us how unsafe and treacherous our highway system is. It would also make the highway scene in Minority Report look not so far-fetched.
What would a comment like that do to those of us who like manual transmissions? We actually like using a manual clutch and lever to control the car. If the predictions are true and we do have fully automatic cars by the year 2020, it wouldn't be that far down the road and there would be folks out there advocating that we eradicate manual transmission automobiles completely and make them adapt the more acurate computer control. I know that sounds a bit out there, but I'm afraid that as we give up control, there will be more and more people willing to take it from us.
I've also heard that in the near future, automatic transmission motorcycles will be mass produced. Now, if you're like me, you see a statement like that and you think, "Well, that'll just take all the fun out of the motorcycle." You see, riding a motorcycle is a feat of coordination. You use your entire body to drive the vehicle. You use not only your hands to steer, but you use your hands and feet to shift gears, go and stop. It's really fun when you get it down. Removing that capability from the people will make them not want to buy or ride motorcycles (and maybe that's the point; I don't know.)
Anyhow, I just get really steamed when I read the automotive press and they sit and pan a car because it's not this or it's not that. I can understand why cars get better ratings for things like performance and comfort, but to beat a car up because it's lacking a DVD satnav. As for me, I couldn't stand having a satnav in my car because I'd have to listen to the damn thing tell me how to get to and from work every day. It seems to me that that would get annoying very quickly. Besides, if I'm out on a trip, I can use my trusty atlas (if I can ever find it.)
Technology in cars is great. I think power windows and door locks are wonderful inventions. Are they necessary? That all depends on the type of car and the owner. But, I don't think that just because a car has more techno-gizmos on it that it's a better car than another. Why don't we, instead of loading our cars with gizmos, focus our technology on making better, more efficient, and more reliable engines and transmissions. Let's make the world a better place, not a more complex place.
