Technology

To Update or Not To Update?

Felipe Martino Gagno Ceotto — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:33:00 GMT

That is the question really, isn’t it? It has been more than a couple of days that Apple has released its 3.0 update for the iPhone / iPod touch OS, and I haven’t updated my iPod touch (1st gen) yet. Why? Well, because I’m not sure it is worth the £5.99 I will have to part with (US$ 9.95 if you are in the US). I know that eventually I will end up updating it because I like having the most updated software and I don’t like being left behind, and also because £5.99 is an amount I allow myself to spend on totally unnecessary things.

The update is only paid for iPod touch users, not for iPhone users, and I don’t really understand that choice. People that have an iPhone 3G will get the most of the update, while people with an iPod touch 2nd gen will get a little less or perhaps the same, and people with an iPod touch 1st gen like me will get a lot less. So really, I don’t think I should pay the same £5.99 that people with an iPod touch 2nd gen will. If I had an iPhone 3G or an iPod touch 2nd gen I wouldn’t be thinking about this, I would have updated it the same day the update came out.

So, what will I get with the update? I’m going to be able to buy audio books and movies using the wi-fi connection of my iPod. I didn’t even know I couldn’t do that before, I knew I could buy music and podcasts, because I do do that, but unfortunately audio books don’t work for me, I’d rather read, and I don’t watch movies on my iPod screen, which I find to small for that, if great for other things. I should really get the cables to connect it to the TV, but I haven’t done that yet. So far, the new feature I mentioned is, then, nothing. Not for me, anyway.

I will also get the landscape keyboard on my emails and notes, which is a nice feature and I would pay £0.39 to have. :) Spotlight Search is the feature I would enjoy the most, and that is worth the price of a good application, say, £1.99. Finally, the copy, cut and paste, which is something that should have been there since the beginning and that I will also appreciate, and would also pay another £0.39 to have. So I would pay £2.77, or, rounding up, £2.99 for the update, gladly.

Those are the main features advertised that are compatible with the first generation of the iPod touch, while Stereo Bluetooth and Peer to Peer Gaming will be available for the second generation and those are really new and cool features, for which I would gladly add the rest of the money (£3.00), but since I’m not getting them, why should I pay for it?

Other features included are parental control, which for now doesn’t do me any good but I get why it is there, automatic wi-fi login which is also really nice although there were (mostly free) applications that did that already, creation of iTunes accounts from the iPod, which is really not something that I will use, now that I already have an account, new languages which are also not a big use for me because the languages I speak and write were already there, push notifications, which is also really nice, third-party game accessories, which once gets into the market could be very cool, although I’m not sure the iPod touch 1st gen will get that.

Also, there will be improvements to Safari, like auto-fill and faster performance, syncing of Notes, which I hope works over Exchange because if it doesn’t will be useless to me too, and the “Shake to Shuffle”, which is something the latest iPod nano already had and although it is cute, it’s no big deal, I don’t see myself using it that much or appreciating it more than touching a button on the screen to do the same.

So, yeah, at the end of the day, I will end up updating my iPod to the new version, but still, I have paid already for the 2.0 update before, which was worth the money because of the Genius and the App Store (without which I would never have bought the iPod touch), and I really would not like to pay again for an update that will get me some new and nice features, but not as many as it really has, and especially, I wouldn’t like to pay the same as the other people who are getting more for it, it just doesn’t sound fair, don’t you think?

Reviewing Dell Vostro 1510 Laptop

Felipe Martino Gagno Ceotto — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 15:48:07 GMT

I have just bought a Dell Vostro 1510 laptop at work for my own use and I thought it would be interesting to write a review about it now that I have used it for a week or so, although my "thing" is not really reviewing equipment. Since I consider myself quite an advanced user, I think I can do this. :) You should know that I'm moving from a Sony Vaio VGN-A215Z, so that's what I'll be comparing it to.

First of all, let me say that I prefer Dell to Sony when it comes to laptops and computers in general, for simple reasons: I can change and tweak the hardware configuration of a Dell computer when buying it a lot more than with Sony, and I can get better configurations with Dell for a lot less than Sony. Although Sony laptops do look cool, Dell now has a line of computers that also look cool (the XPS line), and I wouldn't spend £200 more with Sony just so my laptop looks cool. If I really wanted to look cool, I would buy a Mac. :D

I had a really old Dell laptop before that Vaio, and it worked great for a long time. Actually, it's still working, although pretty slow (it's a Pentium III), but for basic operation it works just fine, although it is quite heavy (it weights more than 3 kilos). This new one is obviously a much better machine, a lot better than the Vaio as well and it has been working quite well so far. Its design is somewhat simple and not too fashionable, except for the top (which you'll really only see when it's closed) that is glossy black and it does look nice. But, hey, it's a Vostro and the same configuration with an XPS would cost me almost an extra £100 (and it would have longer battery life and less weight, but...), and since the company I work for is paying for it, I'm not spending on looks.

It is a little lighter than my "old" Vaio, but like I mentioned, for a little more I could get a lighter laptop, but I don't carry it around that much, only when I travel and it's not a heavy weight for that. It is running Windows Vista Business SP1, and it's doing it quite well, not freezing, running everything smoothly and quickly, multi-tasking like the Vaio's Centrino never really could, so no complaints there. My current complaints are about design.

Although I'm not wanting to look cool or fashionable or anything like that with my laptop, I do want practicability and efficiency, and I can already spot some problems there. First, the speakers are on the sides, beside the keyboard, which looks odd but mainly takes space from the keyboard. And there lies my main problem with this laptop. Although the keys are regular sized, there are less keys due to the keyboard being narrower because of the speakers, but I guess that with some time I'll get used to the small Ctrl and the placement of the Shifts and all that, but I'll never forgive them for taking out the Home and End keys. Oh, yes, you do have that functionality, by pressing Fn + Left Arrow (Home) or Fn + Right Arrow (End), but that means using two hands (the Fn key is on the other side of the keyboard) and pressing two keys for these simple but very useful operations. I catch myself having problem with that every 2 minutes.

I do love the DVD drive not having a tray. It works like a charm and it's one less part to brake or to take space, although when Windows hangs and don't eject your CD, you'll need a reboot to get it out of there, and I suppose that if your laptop fails completely you'll have to open it to get your CD or DVD back, but how many times has that happened to you? It also has plenty of USB ports (4) and cool touch-buttons for music, and also a SD card reader. I don't like that, if setup to sleep when you close the lid, it sleeps when the lid still has some 20 degrees to finish closing.

I guess that's all I have to say about it so far. It's a good machine, specially if you want good performance but you don't want to spend a lot of money. If you have a little more to spend, I would suggest going for the XPS line before even looking to buy a Sony Vaio, and if you still have more money and you want to look really cool, buy a MacBook Air. :) I bought a 15.4" screen because I didn't care for the weight, but there are lighter 13" versions (the Dell Vostro 1310), and the 13" XPS is absolutely great as well.

Online Maps Are Good!

Felipe Martino Gagno Ceotto — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 10:49:31 GMT

I was reading this article on BBC today, online maps 'wiping out history', and I couldn't believe what I was reading. For me, this is just another example of someone who cannot cope with the fact that the Internet is changing their jobs, just like the librarian I wrote about in this other article.

This article now is about the president of the British Cartographic Society, Ms Mary Spencer, saying that the Internet maps are leaving important landmarks that are part of History out, and that people will miss that, but that is so not true! Online maps probably have a lot more landmarks than regular paper maps, and they do have the historic landmarks such as churches, museums and others, and also the restaurants, pubs, and much more. They're just not displayed all at the same time due to a nice resource that is the dynamic way they are presented (and because that would be impossible to read), contrary to the static way a paper has to be. This has a disadvantage, I guess most people would say: the person using the map has to ask for it, but at least Google Maps and Google Earth have presented the users with several options to even show whatever has been marked in a certain area, even if you haven't asked for something in specific.

I'm going to talk more about Google Maps than Live Maps and the others because it's what I'm used to use more. So, if you search for the Royal Albert Hall in Google Maps, it will tell you where it is (check it here), and or course, it will show you a photo of the place, its address, telephone number, web site, and a lot of information a regular map wouldn't. But I get the point, if I wasn't looking for the Royal Albert Hall specifically I wouldn't see it in the map straight away as a point of interest... that is, if I'm not looking at the satellite view, since this case in particular would show me a big and interesting ceiling in that area which would make me wonder what it was, and Google Maps would have told me. But that's easily solved, let me explain how.

If you're in Google Maps and you don't know what you're looking for in a certain area, you can do the widest and wildest searches possible, for example, you could search for places of interest, South Kensington, London. That search would come up with the Royal Albert Hall, the Science Museum and the Natural History Museum that Ms Spencer said that were missing, plus Harrods, and a lot of other points in the surrounding areas which a regular map wouldn't even think about showing. Another missing landmarks pointed by Ms Spence were some churches, like the Worcester Cathedral. Well... I searched for churches, Worcestershire and there you go... Google Maps came with a list of 1580 churches near Worcestershire, UK, including the first in the list, the Worcester Cathedral.

My point is: don't tell me the information is missing from those maps, because it isn't. It takes some getting used to, such as everything else. Just like looking at a paper map, you need to learn some conventions, such as that a cross symbol represents a church, and several others, and I would say that our modern online maps are easier to learn. Ms Spencer said that "[online maps are] diluting the quality of the graphic image that we call a map", but I say it is actually increasing a lot the quality, presenting us with simultaneous street maps, satellite image, and even geographical and geological information. She also mentions that "the consequence will be long-term damage to future generations of map readers, because this skill is not being taught in schools" but I believe that the only thing happening is that the skills are changing and perhaps that is not being grasped by the cartographic society, because online mapping and specially the easy access to satellite images are definitely a threat to their profession as it is, in a certain way, and it is causing changes to it, and almost everybody is resistant to changes.

I always liked maps as a child and I played a lot with my Atlas, "travelling" around the world, and I remember downloading the first version of Google Earth, and how many hours I spent "travelling" to different places and finding interesting information, and a lot more information than I could find in my Atlas. I still do that today, and although I had fun and learned with "regular" maps, I think I learned a lot more with the modern online maps. Although the mentioned Open Street Map is a very interesting initiative, I don't see it as something different from Google Maps, since Google Maps (and a lot of the others) let you share your information as well, adding places and all, and having corporations behind these maps is not necessarily something bad.

Once Upon a Time There Was Privacy

Felipe Martino Gagno Ceotto — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:23:04 GMT

Once upon a time there was a little girl called Privacy. Privacy had a rough childhood, having suffered a lot while trying to grow up, and being invaded and broken several times. Her mother, Civil Liberty, tried to create a better environment for her whenever it was possible, but Government, a man hungry for power, was always trying tear little Privacy into pieces. The thing was that Privacy had the keys to several places that Government wanted to go to but Privacy wouldn't open the doors all the time. Whenever Government got too close to forcing Privacy to open doors she didn't want to, Civil Liberty would be called and came to protect Privacy, although it wasn't always possible for Civil Liberty to be there and Privacy ended up giving away some keys, sometimes, but that's life. Then the Internet was bourn, and the Internet gave a big boost to Liberty's cousin, Anonymity, which was then able to provide easier ways for Privacy to live and keep her keys, and everything was beautiful for a while. But nothing goes unchanged in life.

Nice little tail, isn't it? I wish I could say that Privacy lived happily ever after, but we're not there yet so I can't say it, and from the way things look right now, that is definitely not the end of it. Unless we do something to stop all this nonsense. I'm talking about the brilliant idea (insert sarcastic laugh here) detailed in this BBC article of some ministers of the UK to hold information of every phone call made and e-mail sent in the UK. I've been meaning to write about this for a while now but it is such an important issue that I've been postponing it to try to write well about it.

As mentioned by a Home Office spokesman, data is really a crucial tool for protecting national security and preventing crime. What he fails to mention is that its privacy is also crucial for the people's freedom, and although the Government can make promises about how this data will be used, once it is in their hands they can change their promises and History tells us that they will always change their promises over time. Another concern is how this can fall into the wrong hands, even while the Government is still just trying to do good with it (in theory), and the recent leaks of data that happened from within the Government don't help.

There has been some criticism already about how secure this data will be when held, and that it "should only be held if - and only if - it can be demonstrated that an appropriate system of checks and balances is in place and the security of the information being stored is of paramount concern", but I say it should not be held at all! One thing that is a common place for whoever works with data security is that nothing is ever 100% secure. An unplugged computer, turned off and held inside a safe is still subject to a security break. The possibilities might be slim, but they are never zero. The data about phone calls and emails today are virtually secure because it is scattered between companies that unless presented with a court order, can't provide them to anyone.

If we continue down this path, we will soon be in a society that is much like the one in George Orwell's 1984, or, to quote something more recent, Alan Moore's V for Vendetta. Put together this hit against privacy with the path they are taking towards censorship with movies and games, and what you have is a nice recipe for a huge Big Brother Awards. It is incredible that this is happening in a country like the UK, where because of its culture, size, geographic location and history, people are used to freedom, and this is very noticeable: it was one of the first things I came to appreciate when I first moved to London, and I don't even come from a place with freedom problems!

Because the people from here are used to freedom I trust that they will not let this happen. The ministers and MPs must remember that they are there to represent the people and that the people can take them out of their positions if not happy with their actions. And I hope that people also remember that.

Stealing Wireless Connections

Felipe Martino Gagno Ceotto — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:52:58 GMT

It’s been a long while since I’ve written something here, and I have to apologize for last time. It was the worst post I’ve ever done. It’s not an excuse but it was really late and I was not in a good moment there. :)

I meant to write this a while ago, but I didn't have the time, so despite the fact that the moment is gone now, I'm going to write it anyway, especially because I think the discussion shouldn’t have stopped. Last month another person was arrested in London for stealing a broadband connection. This raised a discussion on if it is right or wrong to arrest people for using someone else's wireless connection without permission, or even better, if stealing wireless is wrong.

Unfortunately, the Communications Act 2003 says that a “person who (a) dishonestly obtains an electronic communications service, and (b) does so with intent to avoid payment of a charge applicable to the provision of that service, is guilty of an offence”, which of course gives legal basis to arrest whoever is stealing a broadband connection. Although it is legal to do this kind of arrest, I’m totally against it and I believe there are more dangerous people out there to be arrested.

Some people are comparing stealing wireless connections to reading a book using someone else’s light or even to reading a newspaper over someone’s shoulder because the stolen person doesn’t really lose anything, but other people are comparing it to getting the apples off of a tree that is inside someone’s yard but has branches hanging out the wall. I think both comparisons are not entirely correct and it has proven really hard for me to find a good analogy of what I think that stealing a broadband connection is. The thing is that when you steal someone’s broadband that person loses momentarily some of its broadband speed.

I wouldn’t like someone speeding down my broadband while I’m using it because I’m a demanding user and I use 100% of what my broadband connection gives me most of the time, but when I’m not using the computer at home, say, during work hours, my broadband use is reduced to a minimum and since I can’t store my bps’s for later, I wouldn’t mind having someone putting it to a good use, and here comes my point: I can, like everybody else, close the access to my wireless connection, and I can leave it open, it is my choice. If I leave it open from 09:00 to 17:00, Monday to Friday, that won’t do me any harm and it might help other people but if these arrests keep happening nobody will use my willingly open connection in fear that they might be committing a crime, and there is no good way for me to advert that during that time I don’t mind other people using my wi-fi connection.

There is also another option which is to set your wireless router with quotas allowing your home computers to use up to 100% of your connection and other computers to use only whatever is free at the moment, so if I’m home, someone connecting to my wireless network won’t be able to use my broadband connection, or will be able to use just 5% of it, but if I’m not home or if I’m using only 10% of it, other people will be able to use the remaining band. That’s actually the perfect solution because “outsiders” will use only the spare band. The down point here is that this is not something simple to set up and not all routers allow this.

But, setting up the protection in a wireless router is quite simple and nowadays all the routers come with instructions to do this on their quick start guides, so if someone has let its own wireless network open, one could assume it was on purpose, on a gesture of good will, wouldn’t you think? It’s like leaving an open tap all day wasting water and then complaining about someone taking a little of the water you’re not using for anything. That’s not robbery, it is good use! The only thing you have to make sure is that people are not leaving you with less water when you need to use it, don’t you agree?

Anyway, I believe that the law has to be adapted for this case, and users maybe need to be a little better informed on how to close their wireless networks or how to share it properly if they want to. A lot of people in the community share their wireless connections because they want to, and this law is making that difficult, in my opinion. And to change this, people need to continue discussing the issue.

Minority Report - A Step Forward Already

Felipe Martino Gagno Ceotto — Wed, 30 May 2007 15:55:08 GMT

This is going to be a quick post... I just have to talk about this, since I've posted something related to it just a couple of days ago.

Oh well... I almost didn't believe it when I read today the headlines saying that "Microsoft waves in Minority Report-style computing era". They're releasing a screen just like the one I was talking about on my last post. Well, not everything like that, just the part about the multi-touch screen, they haven't got to transparent screens yet. It's called Microsoft Surface, and according to the article, it was top secret until now.

It looks beautiful, but the screen on Jeff Han's project looked just a little better, especially because of the way the applications were interfacing with the user. The applications seemed to be completely developed thinking about the multi-touch environment, but while Microsoft's screen has most of the same features, it shows something of an inheritance of the single-touch environment... I don't know, maybe it's just me being a bitch when it comes to MS. :)

Either way, I'm glad to see these technologies coming our way.

Minority Report

Felipe Martino Gagno Ceotto — Thu, 24 May 2007 16:51:05 GMT

It's a great movie, isn't it? It is based on a very good short story by Philip K. Dick, but we are here to talk about a particular point about the film, not the short story. Everybody probably remembers the computer with which Chief John Anderton looks at and plays with the images sent by the pre-cogs. It had two amazing features: the glass screen and an amazing interface.

Think about it, a multi-touch screen built with transparent LEDs and instead of "touch" it would receive signals from multi magic mice, one in each finger, and you've got yourself a Minority Report interface. The multi-touch screen that has been developed by Jefferson Y. Han's team already seems to have some of the interface concepts used in Minority Report, which looks great.

So, am I dreaming here? Could we have that soon? I would absolutely love that. Actually, the biggest change here is the software interfaces that were changed to accept the multi-touch, which is amazing; I've been waiting for a big change on the way we interface with software for a while. It seems very natural to interact with software like that, doesn't it? At least on the demo video.

I don't know who was an inspiration to whom, but I'm hoping this comes to our reality as soon as possible and I hope someone takes my idea and puts the three technologies I linked here together to create this amazing device!