I have been consciously waffling on posting about the iPad for over a month. For those of you who know me, I am neither a champion of Apple nor Microsoft. I am not really a full on Linux geek, either. I am comfortable on all platforms. I have obtained (not bought, but not stolen) an iPod touch and enjoy using it, for the most part. I say all this to assure you that the following is not fueled by any specific love or hate for the overall Apple products.

I am a computer and technology Geek. I give all platforms equal chance.

This being said, I do not want an iPad.

Wait. What? But you must ant an iPad. You have an iPod and you like gadgets. Get an iPad. You’ll like it!

That’s right. No iPad for me, please. And now I’ll tell you why:

It’s an iPod touch made bigger.

With so much hype surrounding the iPad, one may first think that this must be a wonderful, revolutionary device, but it isn’t. There have been pads before and there will be better pads to come. Some may be coming sooner than you think. Apple themselves have already made one “pad” called the Newton. So what makes the iPad so newsworthy? It accomplishes everything that the iPod touch does in a bigger package!

Huh?

That’s right, it is just a big iPod touch. It does have more screen real-estate and applications can be made that are only available on the iPad, but when it comes down to it, the only thing that would be better in any way on an iPad than an iPod would be watching movies or consuming other visual content. Even this has it’s trade-off, namely having to hold the device at the proper angle to comfortably consume this content. Okay, so people that want to drop $500 (well actually up to $1200) to watch a movie or surf the web on the toilet, reclining on the couch, or reclining in the easy chair would be happy. After all, why watch a movie on a TV when you can enjoy it having to hold a 1.5 pound screen in your lap?

I DO see where the iPad COULD be useful. It is an intuitive device, so someone who is technology inept could work well on it.

[Yes, I am saying that the iPad could be a "Laptop for Dummies" device. If you don't agree, tell me why!]

So far, this is stuff that has been spewed endlessly by others and I’ve just been reiterating already tired material.

Well here is where I go into why I personally am becoming frustrated with where Apple has gone with their technology. I have a number of media items (songs, pictures and movies) housed on my media PC  that just won’t fit on my 16 GB iPod. In fact, unless my iPod (or an iPad) had approximately 300 GB of storage, I wouldn’t be able to hold the media that I would want to be available to a device like the iPad. I happily live with a storage limitation on my iPod due to it’s size and the fact that movies are just not all that great to watch on it. The iPad however, opens up the more comfortable large media consumption that the iPod just couldn’t deliver. And here lies the real problem in the iPad: the only way to get the full capacity of the iPad is to use remote files. This wouldn’t even BE a problem if it weren’t for the fact that the only way to use remote files on the iPad was through streaming services. Why can’t the iPod or iPad sync wirelessly with a FULL library? I have a LOT of media files. It would be very difficult to have to pull up iTunes (or even another media manager), select the file I want moved over, and then hook up the device and sync it. That’s not even considering the fact that it HAS to be in a certain format. If I could remotely browse my library (while I was on the same Wi-Fi network) and pull a desired file on demand, I would want it. I would want an iPad so bad that I would be doing some very degrading things right now to get one. Sure, I want expandability. Sure, I would LIKE a camera. But for what this device is, it lacks a very core functionality that it could easily have that would truely make it the revolutionary device that it is being touted to be.

There are a lot of Android tablets coming out VERY soon and I am pretty sure that networking and file browsing will be a basic function in these devices, allowing for exactly what I’m looking for. Not only will these devices offer more functionality in a basic way, they will be expandable. Will they overtake the iPad, unfortunately they will probably be looked on as too “complex” by the technophobic masses to be as widely accepted as the heavily mass-marketed iPad. Woe is the world.

Someone please make a device that truly embodies portable media consumption. I beg you!

-Mike

I wished upon a star until it landed on runway 9.

That brings me to point two: they make it sound as if it makes charging it so much more convenient. Look, if I could use my iPod while it charged and not be bothered by a tethered cord, this thing would be worth its weight in gold. But I can’t. If anything, this device would inconvenience me MORE. Right now I am typing this rant on my iPod while in bed next to my sleeping wife. It’s damned convenient, I would say. If my battery were to get low, I plug in my bedside AC adapter and continue on my merry way. I couldn’t do that with the Powermat. Well, I could if I wanted to hunch over the bedside table. I could also listen to music. But the point is that it would be an inconvenience when I do most of my charging. And another inconvenience is that additional case or adapter I would need to use it.

And now we come to the final point: the adapter necessary for the Powermat to work. Devices are not yet built with inductance coils already in place to charge them (with the notable exception of a pricey Dell laptop). You are getting rid of three long cables for a kit of inductance coil dongles. I understand that these come in a nifty case, though. That’s good, because I didn’t want to have anything bulky in the way or small enough to lose. Now I have both and that nulls each other out, right? Alternatively, you could pay them MORE money for special cases for COMMON devices so you don’t have to keep up with the dongles (at least not the ones they offer a case for).

Oddly enough, these are only issues I have with how it is being sold. I actually DO want one as it WOULD reduce some cable issues for cell phones and cameras. I wouldn’t want it as an iPhone or iPod accessory, but that is because I use my iPod heavily. Those who put theirs down for the night to charge could consider it, though.

Well, I feel so much better to have shared this little frustration with you.

Have fun!
-Mike

We do have another Just_A_Site project that could be worked on called JustAReviewSite, but right now it is on wordpress (like this blog) and I don’t think I want a cookie cutter site for that type of content.

John and I also have another project in the works that I am not ready to talk about that much. It is not really going under the Just_A_Site family of sites. It is going to be a semi-performance-art type of endeavor. I don’t know how long it will take to design and build, but it will be comedic in intention.

Just decided to pen a few of my thoughts today. No news or funny or anything.

So I have kids of a sufficient age that I cannot avoid being aware of Hannah Montana. As sad as that is, it came as an even greater surprise that Miley’s bad attempt at rapping came across just about every geek or tech blog/podcast that I regularly consume. Of course me mentioning it further just propagates the news-worthiness of this particular item. Therefore, in Gumpian fashion, that’s all I have to say about that.

Onto actual news.

The Peek Pronto offer on Engadget

If you didn’t know, the T-Mobile Sidekick has been experiencing a heinous outage that’s going on a week from what I’ve overheard in a T-Mobile store (and doubly confirmed by Cali Lewis in GeekBrief #643). Engadget reports that Peek will give disgruntled T-Mobile Sidekick users a free Pronto in a move they fittingly described as a “sucker punch”. But does the Pronto look familiar? Black PDA-sized device dedicated solely to email? I remember selling these back in 2000 at a CompUSA. It was called a BlackBerry. As I recall, those things are still in use, only as cell phones. Who thought that it would be a good idea to take a BlackBerry and remove the cellular calling features and application expandability so that it only handles emails, just like it did ALMOST A DECADE AGO?

Oh, wait.

It has a color screen. And the service is ONLY $20.

If someone is seriously using the $20 service fees being lower that a $55 basic BlackBerry cell plan that includes cell minutes and data access, they need to be reminded that the difference is really just the cell plan and the BlackBerry still does SO much more. If they aren’t planning to have a cell phone, though, I could see where the device might have enticement. But what type of lifestyle do you live in which instant email access is essential, but cellular access is not? I may want to change my lifestyle. I would personally love to have my primary contact over email. Less talk, more type would be glorious. To bad most people insist on verbal communication to ensure the subtleties contained within are available to reinforce their message.  Sarcasm is treasured beyond all in some circles I associate with.

Sidekick users (and any others who might come under a similar offer), DO NOT be swayed by the lure of a free device offering a sub-standard service. Microsoft will get the outage fixed soon. If they don’t, you can keep you text, email, and PHONE service intact with another smart-phone, not a glorified circa 2000 Blackberry and a prepaid cell.

Has Blu-ray not already hit the mainstream? You can already get a Blu-ray burner for your PC. The Sony Playstation 3 already has a built-in player. How many households already have a PS3? In addition to the PS3, aren’t we already on the third generation of Blu-ray players? I say tvpredictions.com is a bit behind the times on this study. HD-DVD has already succumbed, leaving Blu-ray as the premium option for the home theater. While I may not have a player myself, it is not due to the availability, it is due to the total upgrade cost of my system (or what I like to call Nintendo Entertainment System. Old school, baby!) versus the lack of gainful employment. You can’t exactly call me mainstream in the home entertainment area. I’m more like swirling in an eddy downstream.

I just saw this and had to add my views.

-Mike

I have a Netgear SPH200W phone and live in a suburb type area. While Skype has only released numbers for my area a very short time ago, I can say that not having an incoming number does not make a significant impact to the service expectation when out of your house. I recently lost my primary employment and since I was about 20, my cell phone has always been provided to me by my place of employment. As I did not have any speakable income to rely upon for a monthly cellular bill, Skype seemed a good way to be able to have an open line of communication available. This being said, this post is based upon three solid months of a WiFi Skype phone being my primary “cell” phone.

The raw facts are this:

• Once you leave your house or a connected hot-spot, you cannot receive calls. You do have voicemail, but those alerts won’t come to you either until you connect to a hot-spot.
• You are dependent on open hot-spots.
• You have no control over the quality of a hot-spot.
• The service carries a fraction of the cost of a cellular service.

So you may be thinking that the facts make this sound like a pain in the ass to use. Contrary to this, I actually found that using a WiFi phone has it’s advantages. Cost is the biggest advantage. An unexpected advantage, though, is that I found that I was in control of communication. If I didn’t want to be reached, you couldn’t reach me. I still had a pay-as-you-go solution for kid emergencies, but most of my friends and family knew that I had the Skype and that was it. They could leave me a message and when I got it, I could return the call if I felt I needed to. We have gotten so used to having a cell on us that many people forget that it is not REQUIRED to answer every ring. Furthermore, it was a little surprising who was put off that I wasn’t going to be immediately available for contact at all times. My closest friends and family were all good with it, but some people seemed to be upset that I wouldn’t be able to take their call immediately if THEY wanted to contact me. These were people that I am not their emergency contact or close support group. I really wondered why they would need me all that badly. The answer was that they wouldn’t. So it was nice to have a buffer from those that I don’t have to have immediate contact with. After all, this was how things used to work when answering machines were the big convenience.

Next you would think that it would be hard to get a hot-spot. Not so. I can tell you that Burger King and some medical offices have completely open hot-spots, but auto shops normally don’t. You would think that a shop where you have to wait for an hour to get your car fixed would have one, but no. Schlotzkey’s, on the other hand, rules! Great sandwiches AND open WiFi! Residential areas are also a good thing here. Another unexpected benefit came from the WiFi issue. I couldn’t drive and talk. BOOM! Instant safer driver. If it wasn’t important enough for me to sit at the nearest hot-spot, I couldn’t make the call. It’s not that it wasn’t easy enough to find a hot-spot, but I suddenly found that I annoyed my wife a lot more with stupid questions. If I had a decision to make at the grocery store, I had to make it. It would be nice for grocery stores to have WiFi, though. They are just to big to pickup the signal from the CiCi’s pizza next door. That is really the only time I missed having a cell. To bug my wife about what type of frozen pizza she wanted (as if I didn’t already know).

Some of the time the hot-spot wasn’t of high quality. But if I had a good signal, the other party normally told me that I sounded fine. I take that as quality is not a big issue here. So really, most of the seemingly negative fact had beneficial balances, if you don’t feel that you MUST be connected at all times. The only other thing I really kind of missed about being tied to the Skype phone is that all it does is be a Skype phone. No games, no browser, no ringtones. What I really want to do now is get a WiFi ready BlackBerry or maybe a Nokia N97 and use a Skype application on a more robust platform. While I still don’t have really gainful employment, $700 for that equipment (especially just for review purposes) is not really an option for me. But I am looking at using Skype to host a dedicated number for my little computer consulting side business. The fact that I can just leave the Skype phone in the cradle when at home and then check it when convenient when out, makes this a GREAT business solution with a low cost of ownership in my eyes.

If anyone wants to donate the equipment to test Skype on other platforms, let me know.

-Mike      (a.k.a. itninja)

If you came back from the potential awesomeness that was contained in the above link, here is a serious question:

Why have tablet PCs never caught on?

I want one so bad it hurts sometimes, but I am a huge geek. The iPhone took off even bigger than the original iPod did. Common depictions of the future show natural interaction directly with a display as being natural progression. This would make it seem that the next big thing should be a touch screen laptop or tablet PC.

Thing is that they have been out for a long time already. The only huge advancement seems to have been multi-touch technology (the pinching motion to zoom a screen on the iPhone). Apple is bringing out a 10-inch tablet and Microsoft is countering with the book style, dual 7-inch Courier. The big boys are counting on interest to be there in the touch computing market. But will it be?

If you can type on one of the screens of the Courier, I could see it displacing a large portion of netbook sales, but otherwise I think both devices will fall short of expected main-stream acceptance. I believe this for the same reason that I have not bought my own tablet PC. The screen is too small.

Sure a lot of people are buying netbooks these days for a portable browsing solution. But the price that a 10-inch tablet PC commands puts it into the price range of a good laptop. When I’m looking at spending over $1000, I want to get something that has functionality beyond word-processing and web-browsing these days. Sure the Apple may play music, double as an eReader, or basicly be a large iPod touch, but is that really worth the price of a fully functional laptop? Even though I WANT one, I still say no.

What they need to do is make a 14 or 15 inch laptop with a multi-touch screen and full laptop specs. I would expect it to cost a little more than a standard laptop, but it would be WORTH it.

When the devices fail to get the mainstream interest they are looking for, they will say they don’t really care because they were just fleshing out the technology, but don’t be fooled. The tech is already in use and they are just not willing to make it useful to its fullest potential.

Just my two cents, though.

-Mike

Who seriously uses Wikipedia as a trusted source?

A ton of college students and Joe Schmoe. And who can blame them? It’s fast, free and easy.

But is it a good idea?

I believe the better question is: Are the alternatives really all that much more trustworthy? The fact is that WikiPedia is just like ANY reference source. You don’t REALLY know who wrote it (unless you ARE the one who wrote it, of course).

Wait, wait, wait! What do you mean “you don’t know who wrote it?” The fine people at EB wrote that good Ol’ encyclopedia for us! Who are you to say they’re wrong?

But who are you to say they are RIGHT? The fact is, encyclopedias are written by humans. Often written by humans without credit to the author. Is that author an expert on the subject? What were the sources used for the information? Even a BAD research paper is required to have sources in order to be accepted as a bad research paper. Otherwise, it may as well be a work of fiction. And this is my point. Most accepted reference sources don’t site THEIR sources or don’t even give writing credits. So the question is: Why should we blindly trust them?

Ok, so maybe I’m putting blind faith in classic sources. But why trust Wikipedia? I heard that they are just publicly written articles without any editing.

But therein lies the beauty of Wikipedia. It IS a set of publicly written articles. But who else would want to write an article about a semiempirical quantum chemistry method, developed by Roald Hoffmann (Extended Huckel method) but someone who was ACTUALLY interested in such an obscure topic. Not someone who is just simply assigned the topic. Not only that, but instead of no editing at all, the whole thing is edited by the public at large. That means that if someone who knows the subject BETTER comes along, they can change it. Yep, just like that. In addition to that, an article must have SOURCES to be valid. That means that if the subject is important to you, you can track down where the author got THEIR information and verify its validity.

So is Wikipedia the perfect source? Should I use it for ALL KNOWLEDGE?!!

NO!! Egads you are dense, mysterious inquisitive voice! It just means that you can verify that the article is telling a reasonable approximation of the truth. Maybe. Fact is, Wikipedia gets errors, vandalism, and attacks like many other sites and references. While the big guys in the encyclopedia world are quick to disagree that the error rate could be relatively close between their product and Wikipedia, there are studies that show just that.  The Wikipedia article that mentions this (reliability of Wikipedia) even sites the source and says that it was not a peer reviewed study.

You see, there is really no way to be sure of the source of your information unless YOU wrote it, but then it is not a reliable source outside of yourself. It is a catch-22 from which there is no real escape. I,of course, just don’t believe that a paper should be counted against due to Wikipedia being sited as a source yet not if some independent article or paper is cited when the party reviewing the work is not studiously following up on the sources for full verification. And by that I mean track down the bastard that wrote the source and BEAT the truth out of him (or her). Or at least read the damn source articles. It would be much easier to allow a citing to Wikipedia.

So what moves me to take time out of studies and family to write about it? The use of the term “democracy” by people who are chosen to have the mantle of leadership of our country bestowed upon them. Why does this bother me? That’s an easy one that any 8th grader should be able to tell you: We do NOT live under a democracy, we live under a REPUBLIC! To be exact, we live under a constitutional republic. It even says so on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States).

Wait. Wikipedia?

That’s right. I used Wikipedia as a reference. I know your professors, parents, or other people told you Wikipedia is wrong because it is publicly edited. But can they provide sources for their information? Oh, wait, that information can actually be gotten from Wikipedia, too. Anyways, this is another whole subject that I will address later. **edit: or now. Right here.*** Just trust my judgment for the moment.

So WHY does this irk me?

I was watching president Obama the other day and heard him reciting some drivel about preserving our democracy. Then I realized, anytime I heard Obama or any other politician speak, they referred to our government as a democracy.

These are the people who are the law-makers, law-enforcers, and law-interpreters (or as they are best known; the legislative branch, the executive branch, and the judicial branch; in order) and should know our system the BEST. The real troubling thought is that they DO know the system and that they are purposely using this terminology to lull us into submission. After all, if we think we know what’s going on, we will not question it.

So what is the difference?

There is a world of difference. I am NOT just picking over semantics here. Besides the fact that a republic is truly what we should (and still do, but barely. But again, I digress), a republic is a government where representatives speak for the masses while a democracy is where the masses speak directly. Democracy has been called “Mob Rule” in the past, and for good reason. In a Democracy, every person does have the power to put forth his or her interests, but on the other side of the coin, the majority easily crushes the minority. This gives a feeling of power to the people, which is why it would be a preferred term for the politician to make us feel all warm and cozy. The big downturn to democracy is that it QUICKLY shifts into oligarchy! This is called the “Oligarchical Shift” or the “Iron Law of Oligarchy”. While the Iron Law theory says that all types of government will eventually shift into oligarchy, a republic MAY be the exception to the rule.

Those who crave power may genuinely look to force us into a democracy to see the  shift to oligarchy solidify their power. That is just pure conjecture on my part, though.

This is where some MAY say, “But wait! Wasn’t Rome a republic and it turned into an oligarchy eventually, too?”

Well, yes and no. Rome WAS a republic at one point, but before it was an oligarchy, the republic was taken over by a dictatorship. This was NOT a natural shift. And besides that, our fore-fathers weren’t dimwits. They specifically sought a way to keep the majority threat of pure democracy under control. This brought a Constitutional Republic into being (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_republic, yep more wiki). That means our government was thought up by a group of guys who saw how things deteriorated in the past and tried to prevent that.

So here is the point of the history lesson today:

I see the current use of the term “democracy” as a deliberate attempt at weakening our governmental checks and balances to allow politicians on a national level to pull more power into the federal government than there should be. And I don’t appreciate it.

Does that mean I’m conservative? Maybe. But if you see the same trend, the only way to stop it is to speak up. Ironically, democratic behavior is the only way to keep our republic in check. It’s funny, but I have a feeling that this was intended at some level by those clever fore-fathers.

If you are here, you may be of the geek persuasion. At least that is what the authors here are. Being that as it is, I thought the site linked above to be of the highest quality in informative yet geeky fare. If the admin of that site reads this post, kudos to you for making what many would consider a dry subject interesting enough to be read and yet still informative enough to hold the attention of a professional in the same field.

I have added this blog to MY favorites and fully intend to keep reading.

I just had to post this up somewhere. I don’t know if this was an actual clip of a British talk show, but you need to listen to it.

My favorite part of this interview:
Guy: Well some of them aren’t built so that the front doesn’t fall off at all.
Interviewer: Well wasn’t this one built so that the front wouldnt fall off?
G: Well obviously not.
I: How do you know?
G: Well cause the front fell off……

This just goes to show that the best comedy is unintentional comedy.

Wow. Blue

Anyways…

So a thought occurred to me a few moments ago: Why do I have three browsers when I only use one?

I could say that it is due to web design work, but we both know that I would be lying then. Well, I know why I have two of them. Firefox is my current browser of choice and Internet Explorer came pre-installed on this operating system (or when I am logged into Kubuntu, Konqueror is the pre-installed). The pre-installed choice is quickly forgotten about. So why do I have a third, unused browser just taking up space? I downloaded Google Chrome at the time because, like smoking, it was the cool thing to do. But then I disengaged from the in crowd, distanced myself from the “I want to think I am non-conformist, but I am really subconsciously just conforming to my idea of nonconformistism to be secure in conforming to something” crowd, and even chided myself for making such a bad after-school-special joke about it being the “cool thing to do”. I  looked at why I actually installed Chrome. It was the interest in how browsing could be changed and made better. I read the comic and was genuinely impressed with some of the ideas that they decided to implement into this new browser. So why am I having to ask myself why I still have it? That’s easy. It’s incomplete. I know several people (including myself) who flocked to Chrome because of its intuitive interface and faster rendering. I tried to switch to it exclusively but kept having to pull this or that up in Firefox because it was easier or there was no plug-in  support for Chrome yet.

Unless you want to go through the trouble of using the Dev Kit, you just can’t mold Chrome into your own functional browser… yet.

They said they were going to be adding the ability to add plug-ins and add-ons (as you can easily do in Firefox), but where is that functionality? Where is the RSS integration? Where are the small things that would allow me to take advantage of this fast rendering and independent threaded beast that I long to be alone with? I still will have Chrome installed and might even jump on it every now and then. I just wish that since some of the code comes from the Mozilla project, I could use my favorite Firefox add-ons and manage plug-ins. Just adding this functionality would have me dropping Firefox as my main browser like it gave me some bad disease. Not that I dislike Firefox. I would just keep it as the mistress from that point.

Guess this kinda turned into a rant about how Google Chrome is taking too long to come of age. Hmm. Gotta try to keep from doing that.

Have Fun

-Mike

Being a computer repair wizard in my spare time, I figured it would be good for me to garner some experience on the Vista platform even though I don’t particularly care for it. I enjoy playing around with Linux and Ubuntu flavors just make that transition even easier. I still need XP for compatibility issues on contract work, though. I figure,”Hey! I’ve been multi-booting for several years now. This should be cake to set up.” Well I was wrong. Microsoft has taken something that should be an easy task and tried to make it impossible. Of course I should have expected that. Why wouldn’t I? Because I figure people would actually think before they do things. I’m an optimist. It kills me.

If you’ve ever wanted to set up a multi-boot system: AVOID MICROSOFT AT ALL COSTS!

Note that I hate all caps, but this is the only way for me to show how much I mean that last little part.

Microsoft has no intention of letting anyone boot multiple operating systems, even if it is multiple of their own. I was able to easily re-size the Vista partition and add in Linux. It uses it’s own boot-strap and GRUB boot menu that doesn’t interfere with ntldr. Vista and XP, however, have two DIFFERENT ntldr files that cannot coexist on the same partition though. “Why does this matter?”, you may ask. Well, as I found out over two days of partitioning and installing, even though you create two separate primary installations for your operating systems to inhabit in their hermatic bliss, whatever Windows operating system is not on the first primary partition does not install its version of ntldr on its own partition. Like a fool, it assumes that it is going to be the ONLY possible OS installed and writes it’s ntldr file to the first partition (erasing one that already happens to be there). Oh, but this is an easy fix, right? Yeah, but it is not something that is obvious or really discussed anywhere easy to find out in the cold recesses of cyberspace. The Vista disk has a nice feature that will automatically replace the “corrupt” ntldr file, you just need to remember to open the command line utility from the same disk and copy the XP ntldr over to its own partition first. Then there is still the issue of the boot menu once you get the boot loader file issue sorted out. This is what all the forums already discuss. Never mind the fact that you need a boot loader before the menu can boot to a partition. If you are actually using this post as a guide, I recommend EasyBCD from NeoSmart Technologies. It is free and it worked exactly as I needed.You could try to let the Vista boot disk automatically, but I don’t see you getting anywhere with THAT. Do you?

Of course if you are going to install ANY flavor of Linux, just let GRUB do that dirty work. Worst case scenario there is that you have to use a GRUB editor that is easily found with your package manager to modify your GRUB settings. Just make sure you install your Microsoft stuff FIRST. The Vista disk seemed incompetent at removing third party boot loaders, but the XP disk will easily screw with your GRUB files. If you are not an advanced computer user, I do not recommend getting frustrated on attempting this at all. Just call in some help and ask for lots of pointers along the way!

When you view the above link, be sure to realize the full genius of this. What I REALLY want to know (and comment on) is this: Why must one be fourteen years of age in order to receive or purchase Nothing?! Are there small parts involved that a 12 year old might find dangerous?

If this catches on, it could very well go the way of the pet rock. Wish I had gotten to this one first.

I am afraid that he is trying to break into the site and take things over.

Coming out here was actually kind of liberating. I’ve only flown a few times in my life, and up until now I’ve never flown alone. I was concerned about getting through security and all that but all that went really well. The media really has sensationalized the difficulty of getting to your flight. I’m sure it’s much harder in some other airports, but here it’s been pretty easy. All of the workers are quite helpful and are more than willing to point you in the right direction.

Anyway, enough gabbing. I’ve learned a lot while being here. I came out here for business. As I posted before, I was trying quite hard to nail a position as an ASP developer for the ISP I work for. As some of you know, I got the job. As a result, they flew me to Vegas to meet the other half of the team I’m joining. While I’ve been here, I’ve learned a lot about the larger and more technical aspects of the development process. It’s been lots of fun and lots of work.

I have to get to my flight so I’ll cut this one short.

Good day.

- john

leaving on a jet plane

I stumbled on this very interesting article on password stealing. Why would I link to something that seems to promote illegal activities? I wouldn’t. But I would link to something that gives you the tools to practice safer browsing. This article describes a very nasty way of stealing passwords that actually uses the REAL LOGIN PAGE! If you know any javascript, you might be able to recognized links that might be infected, but if not, this article can give you a couple of ways to side-step this danger. Enjoy!