Actually making an entry on my blog. Gosh.
Bought it along with several other apps in a $19.95 bundle on Macheist.com - it’s a steal :)
Directly it’s here Mariner Software but $40 normally. Just FYI - not advertising. Looks pretty cool software so far.
Saturday, 6 March 2010
Thursday, 13 March 2008
Photography
I should probably update this blog a little more often... furthermore, photos should make more of an appearance! I was inspired to make this post by a local taxi driver's photography blog which has recently been revamped.
I take hundreds of shots when out walking the fells, but also occasionally take some of the local area in general. Here's a small collection of my favourites of the local area (and a couple of walking ones and even not-so-local ones thrown in). They're not in any particular order, date or otherwise.
A neighbour's tree... looked nice against the shepherd's warning
From Coniston again...
Hoad Monument looking... weathered!
Glaxo from Hoad Hill (big lens)
Booths! (Why? Why not?)
A couple of pics on... such a lovely day.
My old workplace.
Yep... that's Barrow-in-Furness all right!
"Some old weed" as a friend put it... up at Birkrigg.
Shepherd's Delight this time!
"im in ur agricultural show lookin funneh"
Not quite so local... the O2 Dome
... and the Thames Barrier.
Le Tour de France
I take hundreds of shots when out walking the fells, but also occasionally take some of the local area in general. Here's a small collection of my favourites of the local area (and a couple of walking ones and even not-so-local ones thrown in). They're not in any particular order, date or otherwise.
Coniston copper mines area
A neighbour's tree... looked nice against the shepherd's warning
From Coniston again...
Hoad Monument looking... weathered!
Glaxo from Hoad Hill (big lens)
Booths! (Why? Why not?)
Ulverston Lantern Procession 2006 finale
(It was better than last year's anyway)
(It was better than last year's anyway)
A couple of pics on... such a lovely day.
My old workplace.
Yep... that's Barrow-in-Furness all right!
(I got mocked by kids for "bird watching" for this!)
"Some old weed" as a friend put it... up at Birkrigg.
Thought I'd captured its beauty quite well actually!
Shepherd's Delight this time!
"im in ur agricultural show lookin funneh"
Not quite so local... the O2 Dome
... and the Thames Barrier.
Le Tour de France
The highlights of 2007's lantern finale...
Finally the lunar eclipse from earlier in 2007.
Saturday, 5 January 2008
Modern LED torches: not so dim
Grabbed a Fenix L0D from this site:
http://www.glowgadgets.co.uk
I won't bother with pics as it's pretty much what you see in the youtube video that the owner of glowgadgets has done. There's probably no point in even reading my review, just watch this! It features a slightly older model of the same torch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isfuJ8ru7Xk
The tiny torch takes one AAA battery which powers a Luxeon Rebel LED. If you think LEDs are a bit dim, think again - these new chip types are literally blinding, as in you don't point them at your eyes or you *will* hurt them and get a nasty case of the temporary shinies :)
I actually work for an LED manufacturer (neither myself or the company I work for are affiliated with glowgadgets or fenix; I bought this out of personal geekiness and am reviewing it out of personal geekiness) and when dealing with Luxeon and other new chip based "light engine" type technology we do have to take care and follow certain safety procedures, that is how bright those things are out of one tiny point.
The chip in this tiny little torch (the chip itself is just a couple of millimeters in size) can put out a stonking 60 lumens, which is brighter than a standard (filament bulb) 3 D-cell Maglite which puts out around 40. At full 60-lumen power it will "only" last an hour on 1xAAA but as a general "everyday carry" torch that seems more than adequate. However it also has a very reasonable default mode of 21 lumens (3.5 hrs) or low power mode which is 7.5 lumens (8.5 hrs) - even this mode is brighter than most "bog standard" LED torches which just use 1-3 high intensity discrete LEDs (the sort you normally visualise).
I still can't get over this thing, I mean I do know what Luxeon chips are capable of (I do work for an LED manufacturer/distributor after all) but the implementation is fantastic, all the brightness and throw of a big-ol' 3-D maglite (and more!) in a package not much larger than a triple-A battery. Awesome. You may wonder why the company I work for doesn't tend to make gadgets like this to save me from ordering from a bloke in Bristol, but my answer would be that they're more into the large scale lighting and supplying to industrial markets.
Side note - I think the police tend to stick to their big maglites - you can't really club anyone with one of these ;)
The best thing though is the site, and the guy who runs it. I reckon he should've called it "Fenix Lights" as he's got the same accent and mannerisms as Peter Kay, except he's a lot funnier even if not on purpose. I've been watching his Youtube videos and reading his blog for the best part of this evening.
Highly recommended - but don't expect quick delivery if you go diving in there right now (5th January) as he's gone off to CES, Vegas until the 13th. I ordered mine on time and it was pretty darn quick, though his cutoff time is 3pm and I ordered at 3:05 so it took 2 days instead of next-day.
Again I'm not affiliated with Glowgadgets or Fenix, just thought I'd share this thing, and I'm doing so out of personal geekiness not because of where I work, just to clear up any bias theories (I liked LED tech long before starting there!) Though it helps having a related background. I'd never have known about it if I hadn't thought "those Luxeon chips we distribute at work would be nice in a torch" and Googled it.
Whilst the L0D is ideal for taking everywhere on a keyring, I think I'll get the Tactical T-1 next, as my full size beastie for walking/camping. That will do 60 lumens for TEN hours (or a more ridiculous 225 lumens for an hour and a half). The downside is it uses the more scarce and less affordable CR123A lithium cells rather than normal batteries like my L0D, but you can get rechargable li-ion CR123A's so it's not all bad.
BTW I did phone up to check on my order's progress, as I didn't fancy waiting for him to get back from CES. I got straight through to the "Doc" himself, about 2 rings, no automated systems, no call centres, as Peter Kay himself would say "No Nonsense". He operates an 0800 number but I didn't use it, as it costs money on my mobile; I called the geographical number instead. He was a very friendly chap who anyone can get on with, and he knows his stuff. I wish all businesses were like that.
Legendary torches, distributed by a legendary bloke who deserves and seemingly already has a bit of a cult following. Really chuffed.
http://www.glowgadgets.co.uk
I won't bother with pics as it's pretty much what you see in the youtube video that the owner of glowgadgets has done. There's probably no point in even reading my review, just watch this! It features a slightly older model of the same torch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isfuJ8ru7Xk
The tiny torch takes one AAA battery which powers a Luxeon Rebel LED. If you think LEDs are a bit dim, think again - these new chip types are literally blinding, as in you don't point them at your eyes or you *will* hurt them and get a nasty case of the temporary shinies :)
I actually work for an LED manufacturer (neither myself or the company I work for are affiliated with glowgadgets or fenix; I bought this out of personal geekiness and am reviewing it out of personal geekiness) and when dealing with Luxeon and other new chip based "light engine" type technology we do have to take care and follow certain safety procedures, that is how bright those things are out of one tiny point.
The chip in this tiny little torch (the chip itself is just a couple of millimeters in size) can put out a stonking 60 lumens, which is brighter than a standard (filament bulb) 3 D-cell Maglite which puts out around 40. At full 60-lumen power it will "only" last an hour on 1xAAA but as a general "everyday carry" torch that seems more than adequate. However it also has a very reasonable default mode of 21 lumens (3.5 hrs) or low power mode which is 7.5 lumens (8.5 hrs) - even this mode is brighter than most "bog standard" LED torches which just use 1-3 high intensity discrete LEDs (the sort you normally visualise).
I still can't get over this thing, I mean I do know what Luxeon chips are capable of (I do work for an LED manufacturer/distributor after all) but the implementation is fantastic, all the brightness and throw of a big-ol' 3-D maglite (and more!) in a package not much larger than a triple-A battery. Awesome. You may wonder why the company I work for doesn't tend to make gadgets like this to save me from ordering from a bloke in Bristol, but my answer would be that they're more into the large scale lighting and supplying to industrial markets.
Side note - I think the police tend to stick to their big maglites - you can't really club anyone with one of these ;)
The best thing though is the site, and the guy who runs it. I reckon he should've called it "Fenix Lights" as he's got the same accent and mannerisms as Peter Kay, except he's a lot funnier even if not on purpose. I've been watching his Youtube videos and reading his blog for the best part of this evening.
Highly recommended - but don't expect quick delivery if you go diving in there right now (5th January) as he's gone off to CES, Vegas until the 13th. I ordered mine on time and it was pretty darn quick, though his cutoff time is 3pm and I ordered at 3:05 so it took 2 days instead of next-day.
Again I'm not affiliated with Glowgadgets or Fenix, just thought I'd share this thing, and I'm doing so out of personal geekiness not because of where I work, just to clear up any bias theories (I liked LED tech long before starting there!) Though it helps having a related background. I'd never have known about it if I hadn't thought "those Luxeon chips we distribute at work would be nice in a torch" and Googled it.
Whilst the L0D is ideal for taking everywhere on a keyring, I think I'll get the Tactical T-1 next, as my full size beastie for walking/camping. That will do 60 lumens for TEN hours (or a more ridiculous 225 lumens for an hour and a half). The downside is it uses the more scarce and less affordable CR123A lithium cells rather than normal batteries like my L0D, but you can get rechargable li-ion CR123A's so it's not all bad.
BTW I did phone up to check on my order's progress, as I didn't fancy waiting for him to get back from CES. I got straight through to the "Doc" himself, about 2 rings, no automated systems, no call centres, as Peter Kay himself would say "No Nonsense". He operates an 0800 number but I didn't use it, as it costs money on my mobile; I called the geographical number instead. He was a very friendly chap who anyone can get on with, and he knows his stuff. I wish all businesses were like that.
Legendary torches, distributed by a legendary bloke who deserves and seemingly already has a bit of a cult following. Really chuffed.
Friday, 17 August 2007
Why isn't Linux succeeding? Because "Windows Is Free" (A TLUG Article)
Windows Is Free (A TLUG Article)
Fascinating article, and absolutely true. I've been down that road before, and out of the vast number of people I've helped out on the classic casual basis (I tend to keep my knowledge quiet nowadays), I think there was one person who actually wanted to pay for Windows rather than grab a copy. We're probably talking about a sample of hundreds here.
I've taken a somewhat different view these days - that if I want something to succeed, I'll buy it. It's a bit like voting - if everyone says "I'm just one person, I'll never make a difference" then er, nothing would ever change.
Similarly, if nobody 'voted' for Windows then it wouldn't exist. Back in the 95 and Millennium days I would've taken that as a blessing; but these days it's really not that bad. Despite its teething troubles, I love Vista. Mac OS X is better still. Linux is... as the article says, free. (there are sacrifices).
But I'm a minority. Most people would just rather grab a copy of the best thing on the market. This comes as no surprise to me, but it's kind of amusing to think that reducing the crackdown on piracy would actually help Windows to remain popular.
One last thought - Apple don't protect their software. Yet I bought Tiger (OSX 10.4), and at about 1.5x the price it's possible to buy a home license for 5 computers. What a bargain! If I get a second Mac, I'd happily pay this for the next upgrade. Why? Because fairness needs to be equated into it too... if the company is fair to me, and doesn't assume that I'm a criminal (this is actually quite important), then I'm happier to be fair to them in return.
Maybe this is why kids are such yobs these days, because we're all so busy accusing them of being yobs that they figure they might as well actually *be* yobs - same hassle, but more fun. An interesting metaphor perhaps, but I digress...
Fascinating article, and absolutely true. I've been down that road before, and out of the vast number of people I've helped out on the classic casual basis (I tend to keep my knowledge quiet nowadays), I think there was one person who actually wanted to pay for Windows rather than grab a copy. We're probably talking about a sample of hundreds here.
I've taken a somewhat different view these days - that if I want something to succeed, I'll buy it. It's a bit like voting - if everyone says "I'm just one person, I'll never make a difference" then er, nothing would ever change.
Similarly, if nobody 'voted' for Windows then it wouldn't exist. Back in the 95 and Millennium days I would've taken that as a blessing; but these days it's really not that bad. Despite its teething troubles, I love Vista. Mac OS X is better still. Linux is... as the article says, free. (there are sacrifices).
But I'm a minority. Most people would just rather grab a copy of the best thing on the market. This comes as no surprise to me, but it's kind of amusing to think that reducing the crackdown on piracy would actually help Windows to remain popular.
One last thought - Apple don't protect their software. Yet I bought Tiger (OSX 10.4), and at about 1.5x the price it's possible to buy a home license for 5 computers. What a bargain! If I get a second Mac, I'd happily pay this for the next upgrade. Why? Because fairness needs to be equated into it too... if the company is fair to me, and doesn't assume that I'm a criminal (this is actually quite important), then I'm happier to be fair to them in return.
Maybe this is why kids are such yobs these days, because we're all so busy accusing them of being yobs that they figure they might as well actually *be* yobs - same hassle, but more fun. An interesting metaphor perhaps, but I digress...
Wednesday, 15 August 2007
Mozy Online Backup: Free. Automatic. Secure.
Mozy Online Backup: Free. Automatic. Secure.
I've seen quite a few online backup ideas - first there's your own FTP storage on a nice big web host such as Dreamhost, but that requires you to do things manually and can be cumbersome. Dreamhost are also less than reliable these days.
For those on the Mac platform there's .Mac, but it's expensive.
If you have a gmail (cough, sorry, Googlemail) account there's gDrive as a free answer, but it's a bit "hacky" and you'll never know if Google might object and put a stop to it. Again you would need some software or personal routine for actually backing up your files.
Enter Mozy. Seems great! You get 2GB of free storage for your online backups, and software that automatically does routine online backups for you. The first one might be big, but after that it does incremental backups each time and so becomes less noticable. Your data is also encrypted, so nobody at Mozy will go er, mozying around your data, even if they wanted to. All this for free - it's good stuff!
Don't count on using it for sharing files (use Rapidshare or your own FTP for that) - it's purely for backup, and the software and general structure of the system tries to ensure this remains the case. In my opinion this is fine, it keeps the free version of the service speedy and reliable as it doesn't have the entire internet's worth of software/movie pirates piling onto it.
If you're on ADSL like me, then the prospect of uploading more than 2GB in your *lifetime* should send shivers down your spine, because uploads on ADSL are slow and drastically affect the line's performance. I think 2GB will more than suffice for most of my really important stuff such as documents, email and bookmarks. However you can get unlimited storage for $4.95/month if you feel the need.
It supports the Mac now too, which is great as I use both - and the site keeps track of each machine individually, including when you last backed it up.
One other thing - you can throttle the bandwidth so that it doesn't hammer your connection, and even choose the times in which the throttle applies (I went for 16:00 to 03:00 when we're all usually busy with the internet at home)
The only remaining problem is photos. A good photography session can bring back 2GB worth of raw files (digital negatives if you prefer), which can be worth keeping especially if you get some really high quality shots. Some photos can be priceless to yourself, even if they're worthless to others. I'm open to suggestions for offline backup solutions here, but I think a DAT drive (something like a DDS4 which is 20GB uncompressed) would be a decent answer - £50 from eBay, tapes are £2-4 each, and 20GB is enough for quite a few photos - even in raw format. The tapes are small, just sling one in your bag and store it in your drawer at work.
I've seen quite a few online backup ideas - first there's your own FTP storage on a nice big web host such as Dreamhost, but that requires you to do things manually and can be cumbersome. Dreamhost are also less than reliable these days.
For those on the Mac platform there's .Mac, but it's expensive.
If you have a gmail (cough, sorry, Googlemail) account there's gDrive as a free answer, but it's a bit "hacky" and you'll never know if Google might object and put a stop to it. Again you would need some software or personal routine for actually backing up your files.
Enter Mozy. Seems great! You get 2GB of free storage for your online backups, and software that automatically does routine online backups for you. The first one might be big, but after that it does incremental backups each time and so becomes less noticable. Your data is also encrypted, so nobody at Mozy will go er, mozying around your data, even if they wanted to. All this for free - it's good stuff!
Don't count on using it for sharing files (use Rapidshare or your own FTP for that) - it's purely for backup, and the software and general structure of the system tries to ensure this remains the case. In my opinion this is fine, it keeps the free version of the service speedy and reliable as it doesn't have the entire internet's worth of software/movie pirates piling onto it.
If you're on ADSL like me, then the prospect of uploading more than 2GB in your *lifetime* should send shivers down your spine, because uploads on ADSL are slow and drastically affect the line's performance. I think 2GB will more than suffice for most of my really important stuff such as documents, email and bookmarks. However you can get unlimited storage for $4.95/month if you feel the need.
It supports the Mac now too, which is great as I use both - and the site keeps track of each machine individually, including when you last backed it up.
One other thing - you can throttle the bandwidth so that it doesn't hammer your connection, and even choose the times in which the throttle applies (I went for 16:00 to 03:00 when we're all usually busy with the internet at home)
The only remaining problem is photos. A good photography session can bring back 2GB worth of raw files (digital negatives if you prefer), which can be worth keeping especially if you get some really high quality shots. Some photos can be priceless to yourself, even if they're worthless to others. I'm open to suggestions for offline backup solutions here, but I think a DAT drive (something like a DDS4 which is 20GB uncompressed) would be a decent answer - £50 from eBay, tapes are £2-4 each, and 20GB is enough for quite a few photos - even in raw format. The tapes are small, just sling one in your bag and store it in your drawer at work.
Is Windows Vista unable to find its own drivers? Here's your answer.
Sick of Vista not being able to find its own drivers when you plug in something as simple as a USB pendrive? Even sick of the workaround of pointing it to c:\windows\system32\driverstore over and over and over?
Yeah, so was I.
After some rummaging on Google I found this article: Pete & Laura's World: How to fix Vista driver cache
The linked blog entry contains the commands you need to put into a batch file (just create a text file and rename it to something.bat) to rebuild Windows Vista's driver cache, so that it can find its own drivers again. This is the first answer I've seen to the problem that actually works, at least without messing around turning off UAC and such - run the batch file as Administrator, and 2 seconds later your problems are solved. Fantastic.
My understanding of the problem is that badly behaved drivers (usually designed for Windows XP) try to mess with the driver cache, which has changed format in Vista. This corrupts it, and because Microsoft thought it was safe now (with all the UAC protect-you-against-yourself security features they put in) they yanked the routine from XP which used to rebuild it on startup if it was found to be corrupted. As XP drivers sometimes work with Vista - particularly with printers etc - desparate users such as myself force them on and although the hardware works, the driver cache breaks.
In Microsoft's defence they do actually warn you not to install unsigned drivers, with a big red box, but who takes any notice of those when you just want your printer to work?
Apparently Microsoft know about this only too well and are bitterly regretting the decision, and intend to eventually bring out an update to fix it. Seemingly they don't regret it enough to fix it any time soon, though! For those who are tired of waiting, this is a great relief.
Here's that blog entry again - go check out the fix.
Yeah, so was I.
After some rummaging on Google I found this article: Pete & Laura's World: How to fix Vista driver cache
The linked blog entry contains the commands you need to put into a batch file (just create a text file and rename it to something.bat) to rebuild Windows Vista's driver cache, so that it can find its own drivers again. This is the first answer I've seen to the problem that actually works, at least without messing around turning off UAC and such - run the batch file as Administrator, and 2 seconds later your problems are solved. Fantastic.
My understanding of the problem is that badly behaved drivers (usually designed for Windows XP) try to mess with the driver cache, which has changed format in Vista. This corrupts it, and because Microsoft thought it was safe now (with all the UAC protect-you-against-yourself security features they put in) they yanked the routine from XP which used to rebuild it on startup if it was found to be corrupted. As XP drivers sometimes work with Vista - particularly with printers etc - desparate users such as myself force them on and although the hardware works, the driver cache breaks.
In Microsoft's defence they do actually warn you not to install unsigned drivers, with a big red box, but who takes any notice of those when you just want your printer to work?
Apparently Microsoft know about this only too well and are bitterly regretting the decision, and intend to eventually bring out an update to fix it. Seemingly they don't regret it enough to fix it any time soon, though! For those who are tired of waiting, this is a great relief.
Here's that blog entry again - go check out the fix.
Free CD/DVD burning software
Unimpressed by the overly bloated Nero Burning ROM (and also its price tag) when all you want is a simple CD burner? Me too.
As a Windows Vista user I have some simple CD/DVD burning support built-in, but I find it unsuitable... fiddle as I might with the settings, it's a choice of either a UDF disc that doesn't seem to work on Mac or Linux (boo, hiss!) - no matter what version of UDF you set - or a 'mastered' disc which creates a fairly standard ISO9660 disc but insists on creating an image beforehand which takes as long as the burning itself.
This is where third party burning software usually comes in.
CD Burner XP Pro was good, but it was last updated in 2004 and doesn't support Vista.
Windows Fanatics pointed out (some time ago) in this blog entry an app called FinalBurner. And hoorah, it works! It's not pretty but it's relatively easy to use, low overhead, and does the job reliably.
Until there's a Windows equivalent of Linux's fantastic "K3B" burning software, this is a good option.
As a Windows Vista user I have some simple CD/DVD burning support built-in, but I find it unsuitable... fiddle as I might with the settings, it's a choice of either a UDF disc that doesn't seem to work on Mac or Linux (boo, hiss!) - no matter what version of UDF you set - or a 'mastered' disc which creates a fairly standard ISO9660 disc but insists on creating an image beforehand which takes as long as the burning itself.
This is where third party burning software usually comes in.
CD Burner XP Pro was good, but it was last updated in 2004 and doesn't support Vista.
Windows Fanatics pointed out (some time ago) in this blog entry an app called FinalBurner. And hoorah, it works! It's not pretty but it's relatively easy to use, low overhead, and does the job reliably.
Until there's a Windows equivalent of Linux's fantastic "K3B" burning software, this is a good option.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
