Dec 5 2007

I’m writing this from my OQO 02 – Woohoo!

Thank you, Santa!

Stylish black box

OQO 02

OQO 02 first boot to desktop

Nov 16 2007

This my entry for the Thoughtfix N810 Giveaway contest.

Should there be an embedding problem for your browser, you can access the clip via this link also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFLz9skxOvI

Updated 4/1/2008: Since we now have our own server I can embed the video.

Mar 18 2005
Just as quick as it appeared earlier this week, it was gone again.
Something about an OS X feel to Google? Thanks to some caching and clever guys,
you can now see what GoogleX was about. I like it :)

Click here to read more …

Mar 10 2005
I’m wondering what Apple’s response will be to the “Super Shuffle”.
Playlistmag reports that a Taiwanese company
just announced this clone. It looks exactly like the iPod
Shuffle but also has an FM tuner and voice recording capacity. Nice to have
extra features – an FM tuner would be nice on any iPod. At Engadget there’s even a link to the cloned Apple ads. Where will all this fit
together legally?

Click here to read more …

Mar 10 2005
It may be sacrilege to some, but anybody can finally do it with CherryOS from Maui X-Stream

The release had been promised for late 2004, but after some delays
and now amidst some controversy (reportedly it would be a reworked version of
the open-source PearPC project and contain it’s code left &
right! ) it’s now available.

Don’t expect any blazing speed. Just
like with VirtualPC (software to emulate a PC on your Mac)
you are running an Operating System on top of an Operating System, so there is
some drag like when you’ve got weeds clinging to the fin on your
windsurfer. CherryOS is mostly geared to PC users who want quick access to a Mac
for web testing and running light applications that don’t have a Mac OS X
equivalent, …

System requirements are a Pentium / Athlon or later
(the faster the better) with 512MB RAM, 5GB HDD space available, an optical
drive and Windows XP Pro or Home.

It’ll be fun to run the trial in
some spare time. The trial download requires some registration, but should be
publicly available.

Click here to read more …

Feb 28 2005
Mozilla released FireFox 1.0.1, a security update to
v1.

Interestingly the first (Windows) machine I installed it on,
the default browser was reported as being FireFox 1.07.

Click here to read more …

Feb 20 2005
Surprise, surprise! [ MacMinute | Steves Digicams ]

Among
plenty of new & updated digital camera announcements last week; Canon
introduced an 8MP Digital Rebel XT (also known as 350D outside
the U.S.) last Thursday! Who would have thought?

The Digital Rebel
XT is reportedly a bit smaller & lighter and has more creativity options
than the Digital Rebel. With it’s black look instead of silver it looks a lot
better. (note that all reviews & previews show black models, while Canon’s
product page shows a silver model) There are too many updates to mention: custom
functions, selective metering & AutoFocus, improved flash metering, DigicII,
USB2, better battery life, etc. … it really inches close to a 20D, for quite a
bit less money (roughly 2/3rd). I could and likely would have settled for the
Rebel XT, had it existed a few months ago and saved me … Oh well.

Yesterday at Costco, I saw a young guy (early 20’s) ready to buy the
Digital Rebel (6MP) saying “Yes, that’s the camera. They have it.” to his
parents. While they were all looking at it and clearly ready to make a purchase
with parent’s approval; I informed them “You may like to know there is a new
Digital Rebel with 8MP which was announced just 2 days ago, and it’ll be the
same kit and price.” He and his parents thanked me several times. :) I love
it when you can stay close on technology’s heels and help someone. Granted,
Costco has a good return policy for it’s members; but don’t you hate it when you
buy something and the next week they announce something new? Or as in this case
the newer model is already out but hasn’t hit the shelves yet and you didn’t
know?

Click here to read more …

Feb 20 2005
We almost hurt ourselves laughing when I read that Microsoft released
two tools to help fight malicious software and spyware. Sure, it’s a good and
long overdue move in general for the user base; but … is Microsoft really
going to un-install Windows itself? Or at least some components? And, hey,
you’re not supposed to run this particular software application => swipe!

Anyway, for those using Windows XP. You may want to have a look at
the:
- Malicious Software Removal Tool
- Microsoft Windows AntiSpyware (beta)

For the non-XP users and more paranoid XP users among us; I still
stand behind AdAware from LavaSoft.de who’s SE Personal
edition is free for home use. It’s easy to use, gets frequent updates and
performs well.

Click here to read more …

Dec 2 2004
Edit: Thanks to Dan for pointing out in the comments that this is in
fact a hoax .

Received via email. I
don’t know how your “home computer” looks, but mine takes up quite a bit less
space ;-)

“Scientists
from the RAND Corporation have created this model to illustrate how a “home
computer” could look like in the year 2004. However the needed technology will
not be economically feasible for the average home. Also the scientists readily
admit that the computer will require not yet invented technology to actually
work, but 50 years from now scientific progress is expected to solve these
problems. With teletype interface and the Fortran language, the computer will be
easy to use. ”

You need a driver’s or boating license to
operate that computer? Or is that the pre-mouse functionality for left &
right? ;-)

I guess, in all (not counting Spam, Viri & such) we
did good on the computer front, but how about those robots and personal flying
cars from the Jetsons?

Click here to read more …

Nov 28 2004
Is that 16:9 TV truly 16:9 or only 15:9? And other flat screen
observations

Time for a “Buyer Beware”.

Don’t you love
the looks of a big flat screen TVs? Ultra thin yet with a big bold image. After
quite some time on a 14″ home TV and with many advertised specials, it just may
be time to upgrade. While comparing models, I just accidentally discovered that
many advertised Widescreen / 16:9 TV sets are only 15:9.

Yesterday I
saw an 30″ Audiovox 15:9 LCD TV, which made me think (first time seeing 15:9)
“Now why would they make a 15:9 TV while everybody else makes 16:9 sets? It
doesn’t make sense” (apart from a cheaper panel for a cheaper price) The answer
is: “Many larger panels are 15:9, but the companies are not truthful about that
ratio.” And, unless you know about some of the details to pay attention to,
retailers of course will not tell you, because they want to sell that screen
sooner rather than later.

Simple math proves the findings:

TV set X with actual number of pixels shown = 1280 wide x 768 high;
which is the most common flat panel TV resolution.
1280 / 768 =
1.66666667
1.66666667 * 9 = 15
15 <> 16

To get a
16:9 ratio the result should be 16 / 9 = 1.77777778
Which means that
with
(a) 1280 horizontal pixels you need 720 vertical pixels ( 720 *
1.77777778 = 1280 )
(b) 768 vertical pixels you need 1365 or thereabout
(1366) pixels ( 768 * 1.77777778 = 1365.33 and 1366 / 768 = 1.778 )
for
true 16:9 wide-screen.

It seems that TV manufacturers use the 1280 x
768 panels produced for computer screens because of their “cheaper” price,
rather than using more expensive (as they are less common) 16:9 ratio panels;
but always advertise them as 16:9 Widescreen.

So, if you are
shopping for a TV now or in the future, you may want to keep the following in
mind: Make sure you’re aware of the Plasma vs LCD advantages & disadvantages
( plasma screens have serious burn in issues and the screen loses half it’s
original capacity in about 4000-6000 hours ), skip EDTV and other low pixel
panels (640×480, 800×600 and what not) etc. If the pixel resolution is not
advertised, ask for it. If the clerk doesn’t know, doesn’t want to say it or
skips the issue with “oh this is plasma, it doesn’t use pixels”, like we heard
today, step away.

Fact is that every pixel matters, most certainly
when you spend anywhere from $1250 to $8000. 20″, 23″, 30″ or whichever size
flat panel TVs with 1280×768 pixels will NOT show a true 16:9 image. The image
will be cropped (= you lose some), stretched (= distorted heads and
other oddities
) or shown with black borders (= isn’t widescreen nice
without the black bord.e..r…s like on a 4:3?! What the? From personal
experience: I don’t like black borders viewing a DVD on a widescreen set
)

Are there any true 16:9 sets. Yes, there are a few very expensive
1366×768 sets and Samsung makes 1280×720 panels, I believe, in more reasonable
sizes.

My advice: Wait for the price to come down and let both HDTV
technology mature & 16:9 panels become mainstream before making the
investment in an expensive panel.

Interesting stuff to read so you
can make an informed decision:
* LCD TV
buying guide
with How to buy an LCD TV in 8 easy steps
* Plasma TV buying guide with How to buy a Plasma TV in 10 steps ; Plasma TV half-life and Plasma TV burn in
* Plasma vs LCD

Click here to read more …