November 16, 2008
The Small Stuff

There are a lot of reasons I prefer Mac over Windows (if you’ve read this blog regularly then you may scoff at that understatement), but let me give two examples of very small details that make a big difference sometimes.

First is the use of arrow keys and cursor movement in text. In Windows, using the left- and right-arrow keys to move left or right in text will go character by character. The up and down arrow keys only go up and down line by line–they cannot be used to jump to the beginning or the end of a line at either end of the document.

Go ahead–if you are using Windows, go to a text box or your browser’s address bar. Click somewhere in the middle, and then try to use the up-arrow key: after you reach the top line, nothing happens. You have to either keep tapping or hold down the left-arrow key until the cursor gets to the beginning of the line, or else use an alternate move (function-arrow-key?), something involving a two-handed keyboard move.

On the Mac, if you hit the up-arrow key after reaching the top, the cursor pops to the beginning of the line–or to the end if you down-arrow beyond the last line. This is such a natural and easy move that I am frankly astounded that Windows doesn’t do it. In fact, it seems to even be Microsoft’s preference–if you use MS Word for Mac, Microsoft has actually disabled this feature (at least with the up-arrow key), making it impossible for you to use it in that suite.

Another small thing that annoys me constantly in Windows is when you start an app and there is a delay in the app’s opening–sometimes for severals tens of seconds. The delay itself is annoying, but the real problem is that Windows, as far as I can tell, has no way of letting you know if the app is really opening or not. It usually looks just like nothing happened, that your command did not register. Many users think that they didn’t click the icon right or select the menu item correctly, and will wonder for a bit as to whether or not the app is actually opening. Worse, the machine will register repeated attempts to open the app, causing the situation to worsen. I have often seen people who think the move didn’t work retry opening the app, sometimes many times, only to have multiple instances of the same app open once the system has gotten around to drawing some actual windows.

On the Mac, this never happens. If you try to open an app, and you’re not sure if it registered, just look at the Dock–if the app is opening, then the Dock icon should be bouncing, or will have an indicator below showing that it has opened already. And if you happen to try to open the app again, it won’t open the same app more than once.

Stuff like this is what makes the UI so much more enjoyable.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 11:48 pm | Just one comment so far
 

November 12, 2008
Google Video Chat

That’s Google for you, always adding new features & stuff. They went and added video chat, like Skype, to their GMail service. Here’s how it works:

The service requires a software plug-in to be installed. If you don’t have it but someone tries to invite you to a video chat, then you are prompted to download the software:

Gmvd02

Gmvd03

Otherwise, you can just go to the software download page and get the software without prompting. I have installed it on Macs and PCs, works great on both, at least the machines I tried it on. Once you download the software, just install it–you’ll have to shut down your browsers for that.

Gmvd04

Once you finish the install, Google will attempt to re-open your browser and go into your Chat settings. If that doesn’t happen automatically, then restart your browser, log into GMail, go to “Settings,” and then click on “Chat.” You’ll see a new section for “voice and video chat,” in which there is a “Verify your settings” option. If you expand that, then you can make sure that your camera, mic, and speaker are all working properly. If you are logged into Skype or another program which uses video, you’ll probably have to turn that off first–usually, the video can only be used by one program at a time.

Gmvd01

Once everything is set, you should be able to see green video camera icons next to GMail chat buddies who have this plug-in activated. Just start a chat, and then under “Video & more,” choose “Start a video chat.” It’s just like making a Skype call. By clicking on the arrow button at the top right, you can make the video chat a separate window, which you can go full-screen on.

Gmvd05

To be honest, this is more useful if you happen to have GMail open all the time, which you don’t usually have; it’s not like Skype, which can automatically start up when you start your computer, so it is more useful for video chats at appointed times, unless you do keep a GMail page open all the time, or have an app which emulates a browser but is dedicated to just the one page (though I haven’t tried the video out on such apps yet).

Either way, chalk up one more very nicely-done app for Google. (Side note: my school now uses Google Apps for Education, which gives us GMail-driven accounts but with our educational domain name–and our email system got this upgrade Tuesday, just like all GMail users got–cool.) Seriously, I don’t know why most people still use Yahoo and Hotmail–I can only guess that it’s the same reason so many people still use Internet Explorer 6: because they have been using it for a long time and just don’t know that a lot better stuff is out there.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 11:26 pm | Just one comment so far
 

November 1, 2008
Google Map Directions Now Work in Japan

Gmapweb01

Well, this was an unexpected but nice surprise. Google Japan has just added the Directions feature to their maps service, something that was missing until now. I found out when someone posted that Directions now works for their iPhone on the iPhone in Japan forum.

On the web version (shown above), you can choose to find directions by car or by train. By car, you can exclude toll roads and/or give preference to “normal” roads; the results display with an option to see the Street View to get an idea of what each turning point looks like. Missing feature: not being able to click on the map to define a starting/ending point (unless it’s there and I just missed it). By train, it works just like Yahoo! Transit, but better–as it not only shows the route on a map, but it’s all contained on one page, and seems to have more options. Very, very nice.

The iPhone version is nice as well, but with a major failing: there’s no option to exclude toll roads. This is a deal-killer for anyone like myself who has a vehicle that is not allowed on toll roads. It also makes no sense as often the toll roads are jammed and local roads serve better, not to mention that the tolls are expensive and you might prefer the regular roads in any case. Hopefully, there will be an upgrade to the Maps program at some point (soon?) in the future which adds this critical option. Who knows, it may come with the iPhone firmware update v. 2.2 coming soon–the update allows for Google Street View, which means that they’re changing the Google Maps app.

Gmapdir01 Gmapdir02

Nevertheless, this is a welcome step forward for Google Maps Japan, not very long after Street View became available here.

What’s still missing: traffic information.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 2:04 pm | 2 comments so far
 

October 26, 2008
Not to Belabor the Point, But..

If you run Windows, then you should read this:

After Microsoft released an out-of-band update for a critical Windows vulnerability that allows hackers to execute a malicious Internet worm on users’ computers, security experts are strongly recommending that users apply patches immediately. Specifically, the remote execution vulnerability allows hackers to write worm code—malicious self-propagating code that doesn’t require any user interaction—by crafting a special RPC request. A successful attack would enable the hacker to take complete control of a victim’s computer, and ultimately steal sensitive financial information from their victims. In addition, once a user’s system is affected, the malicious code has the ability to rapidly self-propagate and infect every other unpatched computer in the network. …

Security experts maintain that the exploit code has actively been used in the wild, with exploits stemming from hackers who have already reverse-engineered the patch. …

Henry said that researchers detected malicious code designed to grab user credentials before encrypting them and sending them to a New Jersey-based server. Henry said that the malware has so far affected at least 3,600 users, but said that the number would likely increase significantly over the weekend.

Needless to say, there has never been a worm–not even in proof-of-concept form–that could affect Mac OS X. In the annals of OS X malware, three trojans is all I have counted, and only one of those in the wild with any real chance of having any effect at all on a Mac–and I haven’t heard of actual, real-world infections even from that one. And trojans are more about fooling the user than beating the computer’s security system.

In this case, we have not only a worm which is spreading widely, but one which can still bypass most anti-virus software; one can only be fully safe by downloading and installing a patch, something that many if not most Windows users don’t do.

According to the article:

The flaw, which affects almost every Windows operating system, is rated “critical” for many of the earlier versions of Windows, including Windows 2000, XP and Server 2003. However, the bug was given the less severe rating of “important” for Windows Vista and Server 2008.

I presume that this means that Vista users are vulnerable if, like most Vista users, they have disabled security in order to escape the unending, intrusive warnings and requests for confirmation that Vista subjects its users to. Maybe SP1 cured that (though I suspect not) and I’m wrong here–but an “important” rating means that Vista is still vulnerable.

Now, has the Mac had warnings of vulnerabilities before? Yes, but never has it suffered an onslaught as damaging and as serious as this. And this current attack is nothing new. When new vulnerabilities on the Mac have been found, users have so far not been affected by any of them–and the software update on Macs tends to allow protection to be applied quickly, just in case. See if you can find a vulnerability which allowed more than 3600 Macs to fall prey to a worm that can take over their computers. You can’t, because nothing like that has happened before, ever.

And yet, we are supposed to believe that Vista is “more secure” than Macs. Why? Because there are ways to count and parse “vulnerabilities” so that you can bean-count Vista into being “more secure.”

How about counting actual real-world, in-the-wild exploits that affect actual users’ computers?

Naw, can’t do that–it would make Windows seem less secure.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 11:42 pm | 2 comments so far
 

October 14, 2008
The “Apple Tax”

A Microsoft executive expounds:

…we’re also looking at the different things that you can get with Windows, and understanding what is really involved with what we call the “Apple tax.”

There really is a tax around there for people that are evaluating their choices going into this holiday season and going forward. There’s a choice tax that we talked about, which is, hey, you want to buy a machine that’s other than black, white, or silver, and if you want to get it in multiple different configurations or price points, you’re going to be paying a tax if you go the Apple way.

There’s going to be an application tax, which is if you want choice around applications, or if you want the same type of application experience on your Mac versus Windows, you’re going to be purchasing a lot of software. And even at that you’re not going to get the same experience. You’re not going to get things like Microsoft Outlook, you’re not going to get the games that you’re used to playing. There’s a technology tax–Apple still doesn’t have HDMI, doesn’t have Blu-ray offerings, doesn’t have e-SATA external disk drives that work at twice the speed of FireWire. And so you’ve got all of these things that are truly taxes.

You’ve also got an upgrade tax. The only machine, as far as I know, within the Apple lineup that’s actually upgradeable is the Mac Pro, the $2,800 version, which is (more expensive than) just about any PC configuration that you get from any one of our manufacturers.

Ah, where to start.

The primary fallacy in this entire rant is to take two platforms, list the faults of one and not the other, and call those faults a “tax,” as if there are no faults on the other side. The faults listed are lack of variety, limited number of applications, limited technologies, and limited expandability. All valid points to a degree, though several if not all have just as valid counterpoints, all of which you could have read here previously. With Windows systems–and the exec is talking about Windows plus PCs built for Windows, so we can take that as a group–there are just as many if not more faults. Lack of originality and style, being behind a few years in many of the more key capabilities, a horrendous resource-hogging OS, compatibility problems due to mismatched hardware and software, vulnerability to massive onslaughts of malware… I could go on and on (that’s not an impotent boast, if you read this blog then you know I can because I have). What we are left with is the question of which set of “taxes” are more onerous. You can guess which answer I would suggest.

Then there’s the fallacy of presuming customer desire. The exec talks about people wanting choices like a myriad of colors–as if color were the only element of style (that explains quite a bit)–and volumes of configurations. Apple tried to have a multitude of configurations once, and it almost killed them. They discovered that you should concentrate on a smaller number of configurations, but make sure that you get them right. There are a multitude of digital music players out there, but Apple has the lion’s share of the market, something it won because it made its product right (not the way Microsoft clawed to the top). People like cool gear, not just more colors. Apple has the cooler gear.

Similarly, the exec talks about expandability. But honestly, how many PC owners actually do that kind of thing? I would guess that more than 90% of computer owners don’t expand anything, not even RAM (which most people should). At best, this is one of those things people buy a product for and then don’t use, like most of the features on a cell phone. More often than Windows boxes, Apple tends to identify what most people will really use. A fingerprint scanner looks cool at first, but honestly, do you really need it? After a while, it just becomes this useless thing on your machine that you never use. Most of this appeal is to the geekier high-end users, not the majority of users.

Then there are the plain false claims, like the Mac Pro for $2800 being more expensive than “just about any PC configuration that you get from any one of our manufacturers.” A former student just asked me a question about this the other day so I looked into it. On the PC Connection site, I looked for dual-quad-core Xeon processor desktops at 2.8 GHz or better–what the Mac Pro has–and you have to go to the 8th lowest-priced system before you find something that’s not a Mac Pro (and it has slower CPUs and smaller hard drives, for $240 more than the lowest-priced Mac Pro). Whenever I hear of these special deals for PCs, they usually require multiple mail-in rebates and tie-on deals, and are the exception rather than the rule.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the Mac is not by any means perfect. It has its faults and weaknesses. There are many people for whom a Windows or Linux system is far more ideal.

But please, claims like this from Microsoft are just pathetically wrong.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 11:03 pm | No comments so far
 

September 6, 2008
What the Hell?

The new commercial with Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Gates is out. It is, to put it mildly, bizarrely unfunny. Watch:

Are you as mystified as I am? The commercial seems to have been written by Gates, not Seinfeld, it is so unfunny. I think the biggest line in the commercial is “they run tight.” Maybe worthy of a small chuckle, but not much more. There is the inside joke of the mug shot, but even that kinda fell flat. And I’m not the only one to think it’s not funny, but that’s hardly a surprise. And what does any of this have to do with Microsoft? Some people try to suss it out, but if they’re right, it’s so weirdly metaphorical as to require a literary critic to explain it.

Not to mention, this was supposed to be a campaign that fought back against Apple. Does it? Well, in it, Seinfeld & Gates are experts at discount shoe shopping. A hit at Apple’s prices being higher? If so, then it’s a bizarre slam, because–aside from being so indirect that most people would miss it–although Apple hardware is sometimes more expensive than equivalent PC hardware, and although Apple doesn’t make super-low-end, bargain-basement machines, neither does Microsoft. Microsoft makes software–and Microsoft’s software is more expensive than Apple’s. Windows is priced higher than Mac OS X, and Office is priced higher than iWork. So the price thing doesn’t work.

However, I am of the opinion that, even though it’s confusingly bad, Microsoft’s ad actually hits the nail on the head. Here’s why:

Apple’s “Hi, I’m a Mac” ads are perfect: short, simple, funny… and perfectly clear. You come away from the ads pleased, and understand very well the message that was conveyed, that Macs are better machines with better software, and that Windows is riddled with problems.

Microsoft’s new ad is the reverse: long (at 90 seconds), bloated, and unclear, leaving you shaking your head at what the hell Microsoft was thinking when they made it.

In other words, both commercials express perfectly how the respective products work, and what impressions users have after having used both of them.

So in that sense, the Microsoft ad makes perfect sense.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 12:16 pm | 4 comments so far
 

August 13, 2008
Sad to See…

I had been a fan of the web site Japan Probe… until they sold out and started including vapid, annoying blinking and otherwise animated ads. I hate those. So I posted that I would stop visiting the site because of the ads.

Within a few hours, the comment was deleted… and, apparently, another comment as well–the comment count on the post was 5, the number appearing was 3; I can only guess someone else chimed in.

Poor form, indeed. Advertising I can accept; people work at these blogs, and they want revenue. But blinking, flashing, moving ads? Can’t stand ‘em, and won’t. Yanking critical comments? Even worse.

I’ve gotten quite a few offers to put ads on my blog, many actually appearing valid. I just don’t like the idea in general. And if I am ever so hard up that I break down and accept them, I will damn sure have a policy wherein I will not tolerate any ad that moves even a single pixel.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 8:42 pm | 6 comments so far
 

August 12, 2008
Shoulda Used a Mac

I’ve heard that more and more on TV in the past few years–certainly it’s been making the rounds on sci-fi shows like Stargate Atlantis and Eureka. But now the Chinese know what it’s about as well. You probably didn’t notice, because of the TV camera angles and the sheer number of things to look at, but during the opening ceremonies at the beijing Olympics, Windows XP treated the crowd to the old crowd-please, the BSOD (Blue Screen of Death):

Bsod Nest Main2

This just as they were about to light the torch. Ouch! And apparently, the Chinese had moved to XP because Vista was too unstable. At least, had they been using Macs, they would have had the last image frozen with a pretty rainbow beachball.

More images, including hi-res, here.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 9:40 am | No comments so far
 

August 10, 2008
Yet Another Phony PC-Is-Better-Than-Mac Comparison

The headline blares from Electronista: “Average Mac Price Now 2X Windows PCs.”

According to data collected by the NPD group, the average Windows notebook goes for $700, while the average Apple laptop costs above $1,500, dropping a mere $59 in the last two years. And that’s nothing compared to desktop computers.

The average Mac desktop sells for about $1,000 more than the average PC desktop, which sells for a mere $550.

Oy. Here we go again. First, I was unable to find the “NPD” study data (everybody quotes them, nobody links to them, and the study is not up on their site), so I was unable to find out how the study was weighted–did they weight prices by each single available model, or by the number of each model sold, or what?

That aside, the study is horribly flawed based on one basic point: Apple does not sell dirt-cheap, bare-bones systems. They just don’t make a computer which sports a Celeron or Sempron CPU and cut corners in a lot of places. They start at the mid-range level. As I tell my students, if you want a really cheap computer, go with a Windows PC. But that does not mean that Macs and PCs of the same quality have a 2-to-1 price ratio. They’re averaging prices of cheapo units to mid-level units–not very honest or accurate. That does not take value into consideration at all.

The second flaw is the lack of attention to details, if not outright fabrications:

…a Dell Inspiron 518 tower nearing the $700 mark features two more processor cores, three times as much memory, and twice the hard drive space of an $1,199 entry-level iMac despite both coming with near-equivalent LCDs.

If you check out Dell’s web site, the Inspiron mentioned starts at $724, for the bare-bones version. No monitor, no WiFi, no antivirus, no webcam. Add these little details and the price jumps to $1173, slightly more than the $700 suggested. Then there’s the issue of “two more processor cores, three times as much memory, and twice the hard drive space.” They’re right about the cores (more on that below), but the basic Inspiron 518 has a 320 GB HDD and 2 GB of memory; the iMac has a 250 GB HDD and 1 GB of memory. So, not quite. Upgrade the Mac to match the HDD and RAM, and it’s $1349, less than %15 more expensive, not 50%. Wait for the next iMac release and all of those discrepancies will likely disappear–or the Mac might actually wind up being cheaper.

In fact, that brings up another dishonesty in the comparison: the article uses a brand-new, just-released Windows PC taking advantage of the latest CPU releases and component price decreases, and compares it to a Mac which has not been upgraded in a while. The next iMac will very likely have quad-core CPUs, and will follow the trend in other Mac lines to have 2GB RAM minimum, not to mention a 320 GB or better HDD.

Also not to mention that with a Mac, your machine will likely break down less, and tech support will be far better. Installs and maintenance will take far less of your time (what is that worth?), and you won’t have to fret about keeping malware away or keeping your antivirus up to date. Plus, the Inspiron is a big, fat box, while the iMac has an attractively slim footprint. Not to mention that the Mac runs a far superior OS. In the end, even at the current price differences, the Mac is still probably a better value. Especially in notebooks, which is why Macs are selling like hotcakes in that category.

So if you see one of the stories saying how Macs are prohibitively expensive, remind them that these overblown, biased hit pieces are a common occurrence and should just be ignored.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 4:37 pm | 5 comments so far
 

August 6, 2008
Google Street View: Japan

Japan Probe reports that Google’s “Street View” feature is now finally active in Japan. Only in major cities, though–aside from the greater Tokyo metropolitan area and the Osaka-Kyoto area, only Sendai, Hakodate, and Sapporo are included. But in the Tokyo area, almost every street is included–very few blank areas indeed!

As in the U.S., the views are in 360˚ views, which can be scrolled by dragging the cursor over any view. The images seem to have been taken over the past 9 months or so, some even more recently. Take, for example, this image of my school: we moved in in May, and that’s my scooter parked in front.

Gmap-Sv08

In the views, certain parts seem to be blurred out, especially people’s faces, one can suppose to calm fears of intrusion of privacy–though if you’re on a public street, it seems that you can’t expect too much “privacy.” Also, it doesn’t work perfectly, especially in crowded places–but the resolution is low enough that it’s doubtful you’d recognize anyone outside of a specific context (like standing in front of their house). There is a “zoom” feature allowing you to zoom in to any view by two steps, but there’s no increase in resolution–you’re just blowing up the existing image.

I appreciate that Google has this–it represents a lot of effort–but I would much rather they had worked on directions and traffic first. This is a toy, directions and traffic are tools, and very useful ones.

For those of you wanting a few interesting spots:

The base of Tokyo Tower
In front of the Tokyo Metropolitan Government Building
In front of the National Diet Building (the Japanese parliament)
The National Sumo Stadium
Asakusa Shrine Main Gate
Look to the east to see the “turd building” (atop the Asahi Beer building; it’s supposed to be the head of a glass of beer somehow)
Akihabara
Tokyo Dome (not so visible from this angle–but look across the street for the amusement park with roller coasters jammed into a city block in central Tokyo)
Sunshine Shopping Street, near our apartment (must have been early morning for (a) cars to be allowed down the street and (b) pedestrian traffic to be so limited)
Budokan!

Any suggestions or requests? Links to your favorite places of interest?

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 12:54 am | 2 comments so far
 

July 30, 2008
Microsoft: Admire the Chrome Plating, Never Mind the Turd

Part of Microsoft’s new ad campaign to resuscitate Vista is something they’re calling “The Mojave Experiment.” They found a bunch of people who had never used Vista and who had only heard bad things about it, and told them that they had a new version of Windows called “Mojave” which they wanted to show them. Predictably, all of the people were “wowed” by the demo and had a completely new and positive opinion on Vista. In essence, it’s a rehash of the old is-it-really-margarine? commercial.

Of course, it’s a complete fraud. The bad things such people might have heard about Vista could include crashes (the only bad thing mentioned explicitly in the campaign video), incompatibility with hardware/lack of drivers, it’s a memory hog and might require new equipment, the security is obnoxious with endless nagging reminders… stuff like that. This is the kind of stuff that only becomes apparent if you’re using it in real life, however; in a demo, on a powerful and carefully controlled machine with the settings just right, walking a person through the cool features with an expert on hand to assist… well, you could make almost any piece of crap software look presentable. And when you first present Vista with the Flip 3D and the Gadgets on the side and make a sales pitch about improved security without having to live through it, I’m sure anyone’s impression would be positive.

But the coolness of Flip 3D soon fades (if you were prescient enough not to get Home Basic in the first place), you begin to wonder if you really need that clock taking up valuable screen space, and the nagging security forces you to investigate successfully how to turn off the major security features so you can have a peaceful computing experience (until the first significant piece of malware hits you).

In short, a demo is not actual use, and actual use is where people have gotten the worst impressions of Vista. The demo did not show these people that they would have to pay for expensive upgrades if not a completely new computer in order to use Vista without it slowing their PC to a crawl. The shiny new and high-power machine they undoubtedly used in the ad campaign was likely tweaked such as to have virtually no chance of crashing, with the person leading the demo knowing what pitfalls to avoid. The demo did not show them that their existing printer and other hardware might not still be compatible. The demo did not have them use any of their existing software to see what problems would develop. The demo did not give them time to realize that there was really not much of substance that is not already in XP. They got a dose of flash on a specially prepared machine (which is probably what impressed them more than Vista’s features even if they weren’t aware of it), and so were snookered into giving a chrome-plated turd the thumbs up. (“Oooohh, look! Chrome!”)

An honest test would have taken these same people, given them a free copy of Vista to take home and install on their own and then use for a month, and then report back. But they didn’t do that, because they knew full well that the results would be a whole lot less impressive.

The ad site is here. Despite my version of Safari having Flash installed, the site wouldn’t play on it. Figures.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 10:59 am | 4 comments so far
 

July 9, 2008
They Make It So Easy

Partisan Windows/Mac Attack Alert! If you like Windows, move along, I’m ranting again.

An article is out in Information Week about how Microsoft is gearing up to counter Apple’s “I’m a Mac, I’m a PC” ads. Boy, they sure don’t miss a thing at the Borg Flagship; it’s only been two years since those ads started. But considering that it took them more than five years to upgrade XP to the Chrome-Plated Turd™, this is actually a pretty fast response in Microsoft Time™. The thing is, they make it so easy to shoot them down, it’s almost not even fun.

“Almost” being the operative word.

Speaking at a keynote address at Microsoft’s annual Worldwide Partner Conference, [Microsoft's VP of Windows Vista consumer marketing Brad] Brooks signified that Microsoft was ready to admit mistakes and reposition itself to tell a better story about Windows Vista, to counter attacks by rival Apple and let customers know that Vista is finally stable and ready.

Hm. It’s been only 18 months since Vista was first released, and now it is “finally stable and ready.” Funny, I thought it was best to have the OS stable and ready before it was released, not a year and a half after. Those Mac guys certainly have a lot to learn from the OS Masters in Redmond.

“You thought the sleeping giant was still sleeping, well we woke it up and it’s time to take our message forward,” Brooks said.

So, Apple is the Japanese attacking the U.S./Microsoft? Wow, ballsy.

“We’ve faced these challenges before, and we’re going to solve them again. There’s a conversation going on in the marketplace today and it’s just plain awful. We’ve got to get back on the front foot.”

So, you noticed your PR was awful, did you? Like I said, they don’t miss a thing.

He pointed to selected negative quotes from Windows XP’s first year as evidence that operating system launches can often be rocky.

I’m not an experienced expert in PR, but if you’re going to make a statement defending flaws in your product, wouldn’t it be better to argue that the other company’s product has had the same issues? If I were him, I’d have pointed out that OS X, when first released, was also half-baked and buggy for a while. Of course, it was a completely brand-new OS, which Vista doesn’t have for an excuse, but still, it would have been a better argument than “Oh, our products are always shoddy for the first year or so.” This guy is Microsoft’s VP of Windows Vista consumer marketing? No wonder they’re in the toilet.

In the coming weeks and months, Microsoft will launch a huge advertising campaign that’s been reported to be worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

I would imagine that more important than the price of the campaign would be the message and the quality. Just like MS, believing that brute force is the only key factor.

Microsoft advertised Vista to small businesses in The Wall Street Journal and USA Today the last two weeks, and plans a much larger wave of ads under the tagline “Free the People.”

Excuse me for a moment. I just snorted an entire 6-inch Subway BLT out my nose.

Brooks gave a taste of what’s coming with a few swipes at Apple and some selected highlights of Windows Vista’s features.

Like the ones they stole from Apple’s OS which was released more than three years ago? And implemented badly? Ooo! If you buy the Premium version, you can use their “Flip 3-D” method of choosing windows, which is a badly-designed rip-off of Apple’s 2005 “Exposé” feature! Make a commercial out of that!

As part of that compatibility message, Microsoft will work to reverse the widely held belief, informed by early troubles upon the operating system’s launch, that Vista isn’t compatible with many applications and devices.

“Belief”?

“Windows Vista is an investment in the long term,” Brooks said. “When you make the investment into Windows Vista, it’s going to pay it forward into the operating system we call Windows 7.”

“Buy our crappy OS now so you will be better prepared for our next version of the OS which we promise will be worth it”? Are they kidding?

Microsoft also intends to talk up Windows Vista’s upgraded security, including features like BitLocker Encryption. According to Microsoft, Windows Vista had fewer than half the security vulnerabilities Windows XP had in its first year.

Oooo! “BitLocker Encryption”! Sexy! And “fewer than half the security vulnerabilities”? That sounds secure. Notice, by the way, that they talk about “vulnerabilities,” which sounds so much better than “100,000 viruses, worms and trojans.” They’d rather talk about “vulnerabilities” despite the relative irrelevance of that yardstick because it’s the only way they can claim any kind of security advantage, however laughable, over the Mac.

Brooks even made a bold claim that Windows Vista was the most secure commercial operating system ever in its first year of release, and said “you don’t hear Apple saying that,” though he didn’t lay out the evidence for that claim.

Maybe you don’t hear Apple saying that because they don’t need to, everybody pretty much knows it already. It’s rather obvious. I’m pretty sure that every Mac OS has been more secure than any Windows release, and not just in it’s first year of release. And by the way, I think Apple has mentioned that kind of thing before.

It appears that Microsoft will also frame Windows as “a kind of language,” as that’s how Brooks referred to it in his keynote. “There are over a billion users using it today,” he said. “It’s bigger than Mandarin Chinese, bigger than English, and like those it connects people.”

Yes, having a virtual monopoly makes it so easy to claim big numbers. But numbers don’t translate into quality, especially when the numbers are shrinking despite having people locked into an OS via prior investments, habit, and inertia. If all MS can argue is “we’ve trapped lots of people into using our product, and they’re finding it difficult to escape,” I’m not sure that’s going to sell extremely well.

Microsoft is finally starting to come around to the fact that it can’t just sit back and let others define it.

Again, the monopolistic, 800-pound-gorilla mindset. MS didn’t have to define itself if people had little choice; the fact that they feel it necessary to do so now shows that MS has finally realized that they are becoming more and more vulnerable.

And at least in that one way, they are very smart.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 11:21 am | 2 comments so far
 

July 7, 2008
They Gotta Be Going Somewhere

It’s not entirely clear how accurate it is, but a survey (PDF) done by the Ponemon Institute (yeah, I know) for Dell claims to have found that on average, about 10,300 laptops go missing at the 36 biggest airports in the U.S. each week. Averaged out, that’s about 40 laptops lost at each major airport every day. The frequency of reported loss is not equal, though; LAX has the highest, reporting about 1200 lost each week, or about 170 per day. 69% of those lost at major airports are never recovered.

Even stranger, the place where people lose their laptops most is at security checkpoints–airports report that 40% are lost there. 23% are lost at the departure gate, 9% in restrooms, 7% at food service, 6% at clubs or lounges, 6% on transport systems, and 4% each at retail shops and ticketing counters.

Something sounds fishy here. Assuming the data is accurate, then even accounting for intentional theft being higher at airports than elsewhere, that still sounds like a very high number. Even people who carry laptops belonging to their companies understand how expensive they are; I don’t know of many people who treat the things casually. A laptop is not exactly something that you just put on the seat next to you and then forget about, like a dog-eared paperback.

Some of the locations sound strange too. Why 40% at security? It’s not as if the laptops are out of your sight for very long. Even if you account for people in front of you “accidentally” picking up your computer, it still sounds high; again, it’s a place where people tend to be wary of stuff like that. And restrooms? How the hell does that happen?

So, being the cynic that I am, I have to wonder exactly how many of those “lost” laptops are actually stolen by the people claiming to have lost them, using the airport as a convenient excuse? Seeing as how large companies most likely reclaim such losses via insurance, it seems likely that employees might consider such theft “covered” and therefore more attractive.

But there’s another possibility: the survey was commissioned by a computer company selling a security system> I am always suspicious of “research” released by people trying to sell you something.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 9:03 am | No comments so far
 

June 26, 2008
The “Wow” of Vista’s Failure

WownowwreckWindows Vista just took another hit: Intel decided not to upgrade 80,000 of its workers to Windows Vista. This after the OS has been available for businesses for 19 months, and SP1 is now available. The reason: it just wasn’t worth it. And that pretty much says it all.

If you look at the market stats, you’ll see that Vista continues to rise anemically, gaining only 1% of computer users per month, a gain which can be explained perhaps almost completely by people who are simply buying new computers and either don’t have the option of getting XP, or who don’t know that such an option might exist. I have a student who bought a Windows machine, hated Vista, and tried to install XP–but then found, sadly, that her computer needed drivers which the maker ironically does not provide for Windows XP. That’s ironic because one of Vista’s weaknesses is a lack of drivers; the poor student was screwed either way.

With people using Vista only when given no other choice, it really is hard not to see Vista as an unmitigated disaster. Microsoft is in such bad condition that Apple has seen fit to let their next OS version to be “featureless,” to consist almost purely of under-the-hood improvements–suggesting a ramp-up to something even bigger down the line. This while the iPhone 3G is waiting to explode its market share (currently at 8%, likely to jump to 10% by the end of this year), and perhaps bring more and more people to the Mac.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 9:41 am | 4 comments so far
 

June 24, 2008
Computer Illiteracy

Here’s another scary story of malware destroying an innocent person’s life. The IT department for Massachusetts’ Department of Industrial Accidents did a negligent job of configuring a 53-year-old worker’s computer, leaving antivirus protection disabled, leaving his computer wide open to attack. The computer became riddled with trojans and viruses, causing all manner of porn to download onto the computer. The same IT workers noted that the computer had unusually high wireless traffic, causing them to inspect the computer, where they found loads of porn in the browser cache–including child porn. These same inept IT workers didn’t bother to make a quick check to see how the porn got there–they just assumed the user was a pervert, accused him, and promptly destroyed the man’s life. The man who used the computer was instantly fired, without being given a chance to do more than quickly protest his innocence before being thrown out of the building. He was immediately stripped of his last pay, his insurance, all his benefits. His wife was hospitalized for stress, and the couple now face horrendous insurance costs.

The prosecutors, apparently so lured by the prospect of jailing a child porn viewer (probably a career-boosting case), didn’t bother to look for alternate explanations; they just accused the man–a former firefighter with no criminal record–and plastered him with a reputation as a child pornographer. Never mind that a quick search would have unveiled the fact that no URL was entered before the computer accessed 40 sites in 60 seconds, one example of how malware was responsible for the porn. No matter that child porn was just part of the vast amount of bizarre porn found on the computer, indicating not a child porn user but instead a malware script randomly accessing porn sites.

The hapless 53-year-old was arrested and charged last August. His friends deserted him, his family mostly turned away. His wife, however, remained loyal to him, and hired the attorney who got a forensic expert to look at the computer. That expert found the machine crawling with malware–something the prosecutors would have found instantly had they bothered to make even a perfunctory forensic check. But as I said, the DA didn’t bother–he likely just smelled a juicy, easy victory that he could ride to public office, and jumped on it. Probably figured that it was the accused’s job to find any exculpatory evidence–or else he just didn’t care. Once the defendant’s expert found the malware, two experts hired by the DA confirmed the analysis and the case was dropped.

So, when his innocence was proven, did his old office hire him back? Not a chance. Despite the fact that it was the office’s responsibility for the computer that got him fired–they gave him an infected computer and then fired him for it–they “stand by” their decision. Not even any word that the IT department workers, who both misconfigured the computer and blamed the computer user for the porn, were punished in any way.

The DA in charge of the case, by the way, apparently did not have the least inclination to have a simple check performed on the computer, a check that would have revealed the problem–but this very same DA, in a case earlier this year, went to a great deal of trouble to perform an “extensive review of phone records, financial transactions, and other documents” in order to clear a corrupt Romney aide of the charge of impersonating a police officer, something the aide has a reputation for doing. An innocent man gets railroaded while a slimy political operative gets cleared? Sounds like a great DA’s office they have over there.

But the way the porn malware case was handled is nothing new; I reported four months ago about a case where a substitute teacher was convicted of exposing her students to porn, and faced a 40-year sentence–when it should have been clear that a malware attack was responsible. She has since been granted a new trial, but is still in danger of being convicted–the prosecutor there apparently still thinks she forced porn on her students.

In the more recent case, the man whose computer was bombarded told reporters that was had no idea what was happening because he was computer illiterate. But the IT workers who were responsible for the whole affair have no such excuse, neither do prosecutors, who had full access to technical experts. They were simply negligent–or worse.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 11:47 pm | 4 comments so far
 

June 22, 2008
Jumping on the Meme Bandwagon

Haseatun

Somewhere, there’s a guy with the handle “vanderleun” who is either severely peeved, is the single most embarrassed person on the planet this week, or is both. On June 16th, there was a discussion thread in the comments section of a blog titled “Lawyers, Gun$ and Money,” a liberal political blog. The post itself poked fun at a blog post by a liberal-turned neocon commenting on Michelle Obama, the mythical “whitey” tape, and the Obamas’ supposed intentions. The “Lawyers” writer gave a subjective summarization of the neocon’s blog post, called it a “shorter” version of the post, and put it in blockquotes. In the comments section, “vanderleun” gave a stilted criticism:

As a participant in the thread that follows the link to neoneocon, I should like to point out that the quote you excerpted

does not exist

in neoneocon’s post. Nor does it exist in the comments.

The post’s writer then explained what “shorter” means, and vanderleun came back with:

I am aware of all internet traditions and also of literary conventions in which placing something in quotes or in a blockquote means that your are quoting that person.

But here you are not.

And thus began a flash in the pan. Commenters at the blog loved the “I am aware of all Internet traditions.” One commenter decided to fuse memes and so made up one of those cat-with-bad-spelling photos, riffing on the “Internet traditions” concept. Others saw it, and very soon popular blogs started reporting on it. From there, it took off to monumental proportions, until everyone in sight was making up the “Internet Traditions” images (my own contribution to the meme is seen at top). A blog started which collects and displays the various take-offs, and–of course–someone started selling T-shirts. All this after just a few days.

This is an excellent demonstration of the dynamics and effects of social networking, where an offhand comment can explode into an international riot within mere hours.

And it goes to show that when you post something on the Internet, no matter how innocuous or obscure you believe your writing is, you have to be very careful of what you say, but even more cautious of where and to whom you say it.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 1:09 pm | 3 comments so far
 

June 16, 2008
Obama vs. McCain: Communications and Technology Policy

Here is a video of a debate between surrogates for the Obama and McCain campaigns on Communications and Technology Policy. Former FCC chairs Reed Hundt (speaking for the Obama campaign) and Michael Powell (McCain campaign) face off on issues of Network Neutrality, Media Ownership, and other pressing issues of the information age.

What struck me most about this debate was the stark difference between the two. One of them showed himself to be sharp, clear, well-spoken and thoughtful of evidence, support, and meaning; the other dealt in platitudes about witnessing marvels, vague and theoretical to the point of obfuscation, long on stories and short on substance, dismissive of specifics, condescending, and a sop to big business. It is not even a little challenge to see these differences or figure out who is dealing what. Hundt, quite frankly, swept the floor with Powell. Which was not quite fair, considering what each was given by his candidate to deal with. But you get that feeling the Hundt probably would have done it anyway, evidence notwithstanding.

Here’s something to do: while watching this video, ask yourself–which of these would you rather have as a boss?

Update: The thought just occurred to me: it seems that Hundt came armed with specific policy points, factual evidence, examples, concrete arguments–while Powell came prepared with little more than flowery language, anecdotes, and general college-level Econ theories dressed up with technobabble buzzwords, expecting that to be the level of the debate. In short, It was Hundt bringing a gun to Powell’s knife fight.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 11:56 pm | 4 comments so far
 

June 8, 2008
Introduction to CSS ( CSS Tutorial )

I’m teaching an evening class this semester on web page design, and I hope to get around to CSS this time. Of course, it helps to actually know CSS–which I didn’t–so I dove in recently. Now, I’ve known about CSS for years, and got slightly familiar with it five years ago when I started this blog–it was necessary to customize the blog’s appearance. But back then, it was mostly just taking a pre-made CSS style sheet and altering numbers and image URLs until I got what I wanted. I didn’t learn how to actually write CSS myself.

So I started looking around for an acceptable tutorial on CSS–and that’s not easy to do. Most tutorials for stuff like this which you find on the web are terrible. Either they’re written in so disorganized or unclear a fashion that you can’t understand it, or the writer assumes you know a lot already without even mentioning what you need to know before reading the tutorial. It’s incredibly helpful to find a tutorial somewhere that is understandable, and where you don’t quickly run into something leaves you completely befuddled. I found a few sites that seemed fairly good, but none that explained everything to my satisfaction. I had to go to several sites to find enough explanations that told me what I needed to know.

So here’s my own try. For this, I will assume that you know basic HTML–which you have to in order to get started with CSS, frankly. (If you don’t know HTML but want to, here’s what I use to teach it in my college course.) If you know about tags (commands) and attributes, basic rules, and have an HTML vocabulary that allows you to make a basic web page, then this tutorial on CSS will be understandable–I hope. Let me know what areas might trip you up.

If you already know or are not interested in CSS, just skip over to the next post. Sorry about the length of this post, but I didn’t want to hide the lesson under the fold.


CSS is a kind of coding related to HTML. It allows for much greater control of the formatting of a web page. Regular HTML allows for some format control, but it is very limited, like using a really basic, bare-bones text-editing program. CSS allows for much finer control, like a more advanced word processing program.

There are three ways to add CSS to a document:

  • in-line
  • internal (embedded)
  • external (as in a style sheet)

In-line CSS is CSS coding which is independently inserted into an HTML tag. For example:

<p style="color: red;">This text will be red.</p>

will result in the text turning red. As you can see here:

This text will be red.

The CSS is in the tag attribute "style." There is no need for other CSS code to be placed anywhere; the code is independent.

Internal CSS is where you define certain styles within the head of a web page, and then refer back to those styles within HTML tags throughout the page. The value here is if you want to apply the same style in many different points in your document, but don’t want to insert the CSS code again and again at every point you need it.

External CSS is where you define your styles in a separate document called a style sheet. This allows you to define the styles for many web pages, all at once. Instead of defining the styles again and again in each page’s header, you define the styles once in the style sheet. Every web page links to the style sheet once in the head. After that, references to these style definitions in the web page code will draw from the style sheet’s definitions. This way is best for maintaining a single style over an entire web site (such as in this blog).

In this tutorial, we will begin by using internal CSS. This will allow us to later take this knowledge and apply it to in-line or external CSS.


Next, we need to understand selectors. In internal CSS, you put them in the head of your document; in external CSS, you put them in your style sheet. They define a style which can be applied in an HTML tag in the body of a web page.

Since we are doing internal CSS, then within the head command, you will add the command:

<style type="text/css">
</style>

And then within that command, you will place the selectors. Each selector begins with a name followed by properties inside curved brackets; the properties include declarations, each which take up a line and end with a semicolon; each declaration has a property followed by a colon, and then the value. Here’s what it could look like:

<style type="text/css">

selector {

property: value;

property: value;

property: value;

}

selector {

property: value;

property: value;

}

</style>

There are three kinds of selectors:

  • element
  • class
  • id

Following is an explanation of each type of selector. (Note that there are more than three types; we’re just looking at the main three.)


An element will change the effect of an HTML tag. For example, a <blockquote> command in HTML will have the effect of indenting text by a half inch in a paragraph separate from the preceding and following text. If, however, you define an element style for the <blockquote> command in CSS, then every use of that command will result in different effects. For example:

blockquote {

background-color: lightblue;

}

If you add this style, then every <blockquote> you add to the web page will have a light blue background, no exceptions. For example:

Here’s what that example might look like in practice.

A nice feature of elements is that they allow you to create your own HTML commands. If the element you create already exists (for example, "blockquote") then the style you define will be added to the command’s existing properties. However, if you create an element which is not already an HTML command, then it becomes a new command with the properties that you define. For example:

blah {

background-color: lightblue;

color=darkblue

}

This will create the command <blah> which you can then use to apply the styles you defined. However, it should be noted that some CSS styles will not work with all tags; for example, text-indent CSS properties will only work with existing block HTML tags like <p> or <blockquote>. I don’t know (at present, at least) of any way to create new block-level tags.


Next, a class allows you to add styling to a variety of HTML tags, or to some tags but not all instances of them. For example, what if you want some of your blockquotes to have light blue backgrounds, but some not? In such a case, you would introduce this selector:

.blueback {

background-color: lightblue;

}

Note that the class selector begins with a period.

Here, you have introduced a new class called "blueback." You can call the class anything you want within the naming rules (to be safe, keep it one word, lowercase, avoid punctuation or symbols). You then activate the class by adding the attribute class="classname" (no initial period) to any command that can use it. For example, you could add this to the <blockquote> command, the <em> command, the <b> command, and so forth.

At this point, however, you might wonder if it’s almost as much work to add the selectors and the tag attribute than it is to just add the CSS directly within the tag. But this example only has one declaration, which is "background-color." You can add as many as can apply, for example:

.blueback {

background-color: lightblue;

color: red;

font-weight: bold;

font-size: 16pt;

}

With that many declarations, it is much more economical to simply add the "class" attribute to any particular command.


Finally, we have id selectors. They begin with a number sign (#) whereas classes begin with a period (.). They are almost exactly the same as class selectors, except that they are supposed to be used with only one tag per page, instead of with many tags. This is for special cases where the position of an object on a page, as defined in CSS, is unique and does not exist elsewhere. However, since the class selector can do the same thing, id selectors are in a way redundant–but are still widely used anyway.


Now, for those of you who enjoy learning a few quick tricks now and then, here’s a fun one. Have you seen web pages where stuff changes when you pass the mouse over it? Text changes color, size, etc.?

This can be accomplished by duplicating a selector, adding ":hover" to the name of the second version of the selector, and changing the declarations in the hover version to be what you want. For example:

<style type="text/css">

.blueback {

background-color: lightblue;

color: red;

}

.blueback:hover {

background-color: lightgreen;

color: blue;

font-size: 120%;

}

</style>

The above will take whatever commands it is applied to, add a blue background and red text–except when you hover the mouse over the text, whereupon it will take on a green background, and the text will turn blue and slightly larger. You will notice that this effect is used in this blog when hovering over links. It changes post titles from black to red, and in-post links from plain to underlined.

However, you can use the alternate :hover effect almost anywhere you can imagine, to whatever effect is possible. Try hovering the mouse over this paragraph, for example.


Naturally, there is a lot more to CSS, but what we have covered up to this point will get you a fairly long way. Of course, one of the most important points in learning a new language is vocabulary. Above, I have covered grammar and syntax–but to really use CSS, you must be familiar with–or at lest possess a cheat sheet–showing a lot of the possible properties and values. So I have created an independent cheat-sheet page which you can print out and use whenever you are coding CSS. It doesn’t have all properties that are out there, but it’s a long list with most of what a beginner would want or need.

In a later post, I will wrap up by explaining how to take what we’ve learned here and apply it to in-line or external CSS formats.


I hope that this tutorial serves to introduce you to CSS in as simple, clear, and useful way as possible. If you’re in my target audience–HTML coder who doesn’t know CSS very well yet–and you tried out this tutorial, please leave a comment to let me know how it achieved its goal. If you had a problem somewhere, please let me know where it was and what the problem was. Thanks!

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 10:03 am | 7 comments so far
 

May 16, 2008
The GUI, version 2.0

You must see these videos. This is what computers will be like in the near future.

This technology is called “Multi-touch.” Apple’s iPhone already uses it. For example, you use two fingers to squeeze or expand a photo, so it gets bigger or smaller. But the iPhone is just the simple beginning. Soon, Multi-touch will come to your personal computer, and it will make the GUI even more natural, even more easy to use. There is no mouse, just your hands on the screen. Keyboards appear on the screen when you need them, and disappear when you don’t need them.

In the videos below, engineer Jeff Han demonstrates the use of Multi-touch on a large screen, either a panel like the top of a desk, or even a large screen on a wall. You can use all ten fingers to control different points on the screen to create all kinds of amazing effects. If the screen is big enough, more than one person can work at the same time, doing very complex jobs in a very simple way.

Expect a Multi-touch personal computer to be released in the next year or two. I would not be at all surprised if Apple is the first to come out with one. When you think about it, Apple’s Dock works quite well in this context; with a few modifications, you can see the Dock growing quite naturally into this technology. The iPhone is a primitive example of how this can be applied, showing that Steve Jobs is seeing how this will be the UI for the future. The iPhone’s swipe, pinch/squeeze, and the virtual keyboard all play into this. This even makes me re-think the idea of the Art Lebedev keyboard being the “keyboard of the future”–instead, virtual keyboards within the monitors will be the norm, instead of little LCDs or OLEDs in the keys themselves.

There have been rumors that Apple has been working on tablet computers, touch-screen computers, and–important to this technology–resolution-independent displays. I am beginning to sense that this is a big movement in Apple, signaling the trend of the GUI for the next decade and beyond.

Just like today’s technology makes the “futuristic” sets of he original “Star Trek” seem quaintly archaic (compare the iPhone to the Communicator), this multi-touch screen technology is going to make the even more futuristic sets of “Star Trek: The Next Generation” seem even more out of date.

Stumble it!
Written by Luis at 2:44 am | 4 comments so far
 

April 28, 2008
Pwn to Own–Real-Life Edition

Remember the recent “Pwn to Own” competition, where it was claimed that Windows security was so much better than Mac security, because the Mac was cracked nearly instantly on day 2, but the Windows machine lasted until day 3?

Well, people are learning the hard way that these competitions don’t necessarily reflect real life:

Hundreds of Thousands of Microsoft Web Servers Hacked

Hundreds of thousands of Web sites - including several at the United Nations and in the U.K. government — have been hacked recently and seeded with code that tries to exploit security flaws in Microsoft Windows to install malicious software on visitors’ machines.

Could it possibly be that this Windows flaw was not used at the competition because it was worth a lot more in the real world than it was in a hacker’s competition? Um, duh. Were such hacks not so valuable on the black market, the Windows machines at the competition probably would have been hacked immediately. That doesn’t mean that Windows is more secure–precisely the opposite, in fact. Mac hacks are relatively valueless enough that hackers would rather use them to get a free laptop. Windows hacks are valuable enough to sell to people who want to do serious harm.

So far, Mac security woes remain almost completely on the hypothetical level: reported vulnerabilities, proof-of-concept malware, and hack-purely-for-show demonstrations, which are almost the only examples used to claim that Mac security ain’t so great. The only other examples are social-engineering trojans which depend on tricking humans into circumventing the OS security, and even those number at two, possibly three.

Windows security, on the other hand, comes up short in the real world: tens of thousands of pieces of malware, worldwide virus and worm threats, attacks causing disruption and a great deal of time and money spent on containment and repair, and countless attacks on personal machines. Just this last week, my boss told me that his browser became completely useless because every time he tried to go to a web site, porn and other spam links were substituted; his security software (kept up-to-date) somehow missed it in screening and could not repair it, and so now he’s going to have to reinstall the entire OS and all his software. Many of my students who use Windo