tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-353038312024-02-08T18:49:16.011+00:00Chris' Soapbox!!Chris Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18027911559123675890noreply@blogger.comBlogger61125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-35977825565580101662010-11-26T07:39:00.004+00:002010-11-26T14:02:54.203+00:00Anti-Virus SoftwareFor a number of years, I have been a strong advocate of Kaspersky Anti-Virus software. A few years back it was the ultimate choice of many large corporations, and did well in the reviews.<div><br /></div><div><b>Unfortunately a few major revisions later they have not managed to maintain the quality of their offering.</b> With each update, the software has become much more resource hungry. </div><div><br /></div><div> I work with a lot of customers who wish to preserve the life of their old PCs. These machines are running old versions of Windows (usually XP) with a moderate processor and limited amount of memory.<b> Many were complaining that their machines were running too slow. </b>The solution in most cases was to pause Kaspersky. The machine was significantly faster, but they were left extremely vulnerable to any viruses or malware.</div><div><br /></div><div>So it is time to have a good look round at the alternatives. A news article caught my eye recently saying that a thorough and independent lab test had rated the free Microsoft offering above many of the traditional packages that were sold on a subscription basis.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Trying to search Google for advice about anti-virus software is a nightmare</b>. All the top articles are either sponsored by an anti-virus company and hence are very biased, or you will come across illegitimate anti-virus software that actually infects your computer.</div><div><br /></div><div>So who is this independent lab whose review I am basing my new recommendation on? NSS Labs. Their Consumer Anti-Malware Products: Group Test Report Q3 2010 is available free at this <a href="http://nsslabs.com/research/endpoint-security/anti-malware/consumer-anti-malware-products:-group-test-report-q3-2010.html">link</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 238); -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: underline; "><img src="http://nsslabs.com/assets/images/Report%20Images/2010Q3_av_guidance_graph.png" border="0" alt="" style="display: block; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: auto; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: auto; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 420px; height: 220px; " /></span><br /></div><div>They tested 11 leading products, two of which are free. AVG has been available for a number of years, but the Microsoft addition is relatively new. <b>And I really like the look of the Microsoft product. It has above average scores for Malware blocking and Exploit blocking, and has the joint-best rating for performance</b>. Add to this its free, and the convenience that it is updated through the normal windows update system and this has to be my new favourite.</div><div><br /></div><div>I note that the report also compares this year's findings with the previous year. In 2009 Kaspersky was second in the rankings detecting 87.8% of malware against an average of 80.2% for the group. This year Kaspersky detected 71.3% against an average of 74.1%. For performance Microsoft is rated 8 times better.</div><div><br /></div><div>The guidance in this year's report is that AVG and ESET are poor. F-Secure, McAfee and Trend Micro were recommended and the remaining 6 (including Microsoft) were rated neutral.</div><div><br /></div><div>The main problem for my customers is the performance impact of the anti-virus software. Cost is also a large factor for them. The product I will recommend was not the top rated for malware detected, but it still does a respectable job in both categories.</div><div><br /></div><div>To summarise the next time I need to renew or install anti-virus protection, I will be selecting Microsoft. Click <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/">here</a> to visit the Microsoft Security Essentials website.</div><div><br /></div><div>Chris</div>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-61637984695439496142010-05-03T13:57:00.026+00:002010-05-05T11:54:33.471+00:00UK Financial Recovery and ElectionWell the general election is this week, and its decision time about who to vote for....<br /><br />As I have the right to vote I really strongly believe in using it. But I even more strongly cannot back any of the parties.<br /><br />Rightly the economy is the biggest factor for the electorate at present. So where is that up to? My facebook friends will have seen my various tweets about this, that I ought to expand upon here.<br /><br />I have my eyes and ears on one man for my economic advice. His name is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Blanchflower">David Blanchflower CBE</a> who is a Professor of Economics. When I mention David below I mean Mr Blanchflower, not the tory leader. The reason I listen to him is he is the one voice that knew this recession was coming. He has a <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/writers/david_blanchflower">regular weekly column in New Statesman</a> which I await each week with bated breath. He is also an economic adviser to the government, and sat on the Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee for a brief period, who he recently wrote have 'lost the plot'.<div><u><br /></u></div><div><u>The recession and the UK economic recovery</u><div><br /></div><div>So the UK is now out of the worst recession in decades by the skin of its teeth. A recession is commonly defined as a period of negative GDP growth for two consecutive quarters. GDP is the economic output of the country. Growth for the quarter just gone was provisionally 0.2%, and 0.4% the previous quarter. <b>All the signs, such as consumer confidence, private business spending, money supply, the housing market and unemployment are all still unfavourable.</b> For instance unemployment statistics show that the period each claimant is unemployed for is increasingly larger. Money supply to businesses and property buyers is still next to non-existent. The cheap 95% LTV (Ie 5% deposit) mortgage is consigned to the history books. A standard Buy-to-Let mortgage now requires a 40% deposit.</div><div><br /></div><div>We are recovering from the recession, but <b>this recovery is still at a clearly fragile stage</b>. Any mistakes in economic policy today could end that recovery, and cause a double-dip recession. <b> Avoiding a return to a recession should be of utmost priority. The only priority.</b></div><div><br /></div><div><u>UK Government borrowing</u></div><div><u><br /></u></div><div><u>Secondary to the above</u>, but also important is the country's borrowing. UK borrowing is now approximately £167bn. This is a lot of money. An eye-watering amount. This will have to be brought under control and repaid. The Bank of England governor was recently quoted as saying in private that whoever has to make the cuts to repay it risk being out of power for a generation. Really tough cuts are coming and are unavoidable regardless who wins. Expect more stikes and large public unrest. The cuts needed have been summarised as <i>equivalent to</i> a 6p rise in income tax.</div><div><br /></div><div>Any government has a tough balancing act between spending to prop up the economic growth and money supply, or making cuts to address the borrowing. As has been seen in Greece lately, unaffordable borrowing can be disastrous. <b>If experts and investors feel a government cannot afford its level of borrowing, a country's official credit rating can be reduced</b>. Greece was downgraded to junk status a couple of weeks ago.</div><div><br /></div><div>So <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-03-23/blanchflower-says-u-k-losing-aaa-might-not-be-so-monumental-.html">what if UK's rating is downgraded</a>? We are currently enjoying the best possible credit rating. A downgrade would not be good. To consider the effects of a downgrade, my expert quotes yields on government bonds. UK bonds are currently trading about the same price as Italy. He notes that Italy's official credit rating is four 'notches' below ours. This he says is evidence that the <b>bond markets have already priced a downgrading into their prices</b>. So if a downgrade were to actually happen it would have a moderate effect on us. In summary, a return to recession should be a much larger concern than having our credit rating reduced by a notch or two.</div><div><br /></div><div>The other effect of a country's finances being out of control is the sterling exchange rate. At the start of the storm about Greece a few months back, Sterling was still loosing ground against the Euro, which I saw as a very bad sign for Sterling. This again suggests that the level of our borrowing has already been priced into the markets, and a downgrade to our rating would not have a major effect. A weak sterling could even help stimulate demand for UK exports which become cheaper in real terms.</div><div><br /></div><div>It is for these reasons David argues that securing growth is more important than repaying our debt at the present point in time.</div><div><br /></div><div><u>Inflation and Deflation</u></div><div><u><br /></u></div><div>The next issue is inflation. UK inflation has officially been 3% in February and 3.4% in March, well above the official target of 2%. However David believes these are a temporary blip due to energy prices, and the end to the 15% VAT holiday, and that inflation will drop back down to around zero very soon. The worst thing that could occur is know as deflation - negative inflation. This is bad because everyone will stop spending as officially goods will be cheaper in real terms if one delays spending. <b>To try to avoid deflation UK interest rates are at a record low of 0.5%, and predictions say they will stay low for a while to come</b>. Low interest rates help stimulate inflation, and vice-versa. Also a medium-term rise in inflation would not be a totally bad thing as it would make repaying the government borrowing easier, as the real cost of the debt would drop. As such, when inflation returns the government could allow it and increase their official target. I need to add that steady, and relatively low inflation is the ideal, and it was a real problem years back when it was 15%.</div><div><br /></div><div>Again, securing growth will help raise inflation over the long term, and hopefully completely avoid deflation. Cuts too early will stifle demand, and consequently lower inflation.</div><div><br /></div><div>So to summarise the above, the government borrowing is not an issue. Yes it will have to be paid for and reduced over the next five years. Yes we should have been saving money during the good times. But escaping the recession, getting the economy working properly again and protecting jobs should be the priority.</div><div><br /></div><div>To summarise my summary, I support Labour's policy on handling the economic recovery. The tories plan of making cuts immediately with an emergency budget are very dangerous. Looking back through history, one will note that the great depression of the 1930's was caused by inappropriate government austerity measures during a fragile recovery. They caused a far worse recession. </div><div><br /></div><div><u>Rise in National Insurance for businesses and employees, or rise in VAT</u></div><div><u><br /></u></div><div>Labour are planning to raise £6bn by an increase in National Insurance. Tories have promised to scrap the increase. This money has to come from somewhere. Labour is already trying to raise billions by 'efficiency savings' and trying to find another £6bn is not realistic. This money will have to come from a rise in VAT instead. Or to put it another way if the money is not raised from businesses it will all be raised from you and I. <a href="http://www.politics.co.uk/news/general-election-2010/more-economists-back-labour-$1375250.htm">On this subject I note many prominent economists (over 100) support the labour view</a>, and many non-FTSE100 businesses (Ie no economic experts at all) support the tory policy.</div><div><br /></div>Also at a time when government finances are this tight, I cannot see justification for such a huge increase in the inheritance tax threshold which Mr Cameron is proposing. Currently the limit is £325k and the tories want to triple this to £1,000k.</div><div><br /></div><div>There can be absolutely no justification for such expensive tax cuts at the present time. Especially when arguing in the same breath for immediate and very serious spending cuts elsewhere based on the argument that it is a priority to pay back the borrowing today.<br /><div><br /><div><u>Other issues</u></div><div><u><br /></u></div><div>Another issue for me is air travel. I'm not refering to the recent volcano in Iceland. Although this will possibly have an impact on our economy, I am refering to availability of flight slots. I am referring specifically to the extra runway at Heathrow, which Cameron opposes. <b>We need more flights from more airports.</b> International companies rely on them when choosing where to base their international offices, and when choosing where to host business meetings and conferences. </div><div><br /></div><div>At present London is a very attractive proposal internationally, and we need to keep it that way! Please don't let all the environmentalists destroy this, on the basis of an unproven theory about climate change. No-one knows if it will happen, or what the effects of it would be with any certainty. </div><div><br /></div><div>So three main reasons I can't vote tory:</div><div><ol><li>Handling of the present economic recovery.</li><li>Scraping raise in National Insurance, and most likely having to raise VAT.</li><li>Anti air travel policy.</li></ol><div>However, there are a few strong reasons I could not vote Labour. I did say I agreed with their handling of the present economic recovery, and I also have to agree Gordon Brown did keep inflation under control as chancellor. But as any reader of some of my previous posts will know, I strongly dislike Gordon Brown. He has the worst record for raising back-door taxation. He can also be blamed for poorly preparing our finances for the recession. All world leaders seem to hate him, damaging the standing of our country with other world powers.</div></div><div><br /></div><div>So for all that I strongly believe as I have the right to vote that I should use it, I even more strongly believe that I cannot vote for anybody.</div><div><br /></div><div>Chris</div></div></div>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-17671169228350607012010-02-08T14:25:00.005+00:002010-02-11T15:59:35.267+00:00Apple iPadWell after months of hype and half rumours, Apple have now announced their entrance to the tablet computing and net book sector. The missing device from the world of computing is to be called the iPad. UK betting operator Paddy Power had iSlate as the most likely name so I got odds of 7/4 on the iPad name and turned a £2 flutter into £5.50!!<div></div><br /><div>I do like the iPad. Unlike the original iPhone, the very first version appears to be reasonably priced and a comprehensive and complete piece of hardware. There were a number of anticipated features like a multi-tasking operating system that were not shown, but these can all be added via a basic software upgrade. In contrast the first iPhone did not support 3G mobile networks meaning no amount of software upgrades would allow fast mobile internet or photo messaging.<div><br /></div><div>The question everyone will be asking is "Do I actually need a touchscreen device to hold in my hand and use to browse the internet?" Personally, I have no issue with sitting at my fixed desktop computer when I want to go online.</div><div><br /></div><div>However when one looks into trends for computer sales, I think it is true that consumer outlets like Dixons or Comet sell a very high percentage of PCs in laptop form factor rather than desktop models. People clearly like being able to put the computer in a cupboard and reuse the space of their computer desk. They like to be able to use the laptop anywhere in the house that is convenient, for example in the garden, or while watching television. Far more business staff require mobile working from customer sites or from home for which a laptop is ideal.</div><div><br /></div><div>Very gradually, battery life of laptops has ebbed away. When laptops entered the mainstream they would last all day on a single charge. As screens have grown in size, and processors have increased in speed and number of cores battery life has slowly dropped. Last time I went laptop window shopping on the web I would be doing well if the latest laptops would last more than 5 hours on a single charge. <b>So benefit number one of the iPad is it sports an incredible battery life of 10 hours of continuous use!</b></div><div><b><br /></b></div><div>Next I will discuss what is best called the 'iPhone OS ecosystem'. Recall a recent TV campaign from Apple with the punchline of 'There is an app for everything'. There is no doubt that software drives the sales of hardware. For example I am sure some customers have browsed through the App Store in iTunes and bought an iPod Touch or iPhone because they have seen applications that they wanted to use, or games they wanted to play. This is not the main reason I bought my iPhone, but I did have an urge to use some of the apps before I had my iPhone. </div><div><br /></div><div>I have also talked to customers in business who have become frustrated because the software they needed for their business was not available on the computers they already owned. They chose the software first, then bought hardware on which to run it.</div><div><br /></div><div>So my point is that people who see apps in the iTunes app store they want now have an additional choice of hardware device that will execute the app - an iPad. One custom app for example a point of sale application for use in a bricks-and-mortar store like the Apple Store to enable staff to complete sales with customers will be a big driver of sales - the iPad may be the better platform in the ecosystem for this purpose.</div><div><br /></div><div>This leads me to my next major advantage of the iPad.... it's screen resolution. I have written applications for the iPhone. The first point that hits you as a developer is how small the screen is. When PCs graphics adapters first launched they ran at VGA or 640x480 pixels resolution. The iPhone is half this size, 480x320, or 460x320 after the status bar showing battery charge and signal strength etc. I was investigating writing a TV Guide app, but quickly realised there was no way to show information from many channels on screen at once. A Sky subscriber would want at least 200 channels available. At five per screen this would mean an unfeasible amount of scrolling.</div><div><br /></div><div>Have you noticed that apps on the iPhone have a very small set of options? Microsoft Word has hundreds of features available from its menus. No iPhone app comes close. I believe the reason for the lack of features and customisation is due to the lack of screen space to show the options. Apps have to be well designed, and features trimmed due to restriction with the user interface.</div><div><br /></div><div>By comparison the iPad has a resolution of 1024x768 (also known as XGA). This is two steps of development ahead of VGA, the first step was 800x600 or SVGA. With this large increase in screen real-estate and the faster custom-designed Apple processor, the possibilities for developers are now much much greater. It is my opinion that apps (not forgetting games) for the iPad will be an order of magnitute better than all the existing iPhone apps. To conclude, <b>benefit number two is the much larger screen that will bring with it far more potential for application developers.</b></div><div><b><br /></b></div><div>A second benefit of the physically larger screen is multimedia viewing - lets face it the iPhone is too small to use as a serious device for watching TV or movies. Maybe Apple should revamp their Apple TV to enable recording, syncing those recordings to iPad and even remote control and viewing of your TV? The larger screen will allow more of a web page to readable without the need to zoom. As Apple have advertised, the larger screen is now usable as an electronic book reader.</div><div><br /></div><div>To conclude I think the iPad will be successful. When consumers replace their present PC or laptop they will be able to consider the iPad instead. Apps on the device will be an order of magnitude better than any existing iPhone apps. Specific apps for specific business needs will drive sales of the unit to businesses. People who require an ebook reader or web and video on-the-go have no better option than iPad at the moment. Also at $499 or I guess £399 in UK this will not break the bank for most people as a fun lifestyle gadget or games device. </div><div><br /></div><div>There are so many possibilities for this new device....</div><div><br /></div><div>The hype and rumour mills have already moved on to the next version of the iPhone!</div><div><br /></div><div>Chris</div></div>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-71986056802637152232009-08-04T20:16:00.008+00:002009-08-24T23:18:40.103+00:00OS Wars.... Microsoft have just shot themselves in the foot.If I was the IT Director of a large company with a large user base running Microsoft Windows, I would be very concerned at the moment.<div><br /></div><div>I would have looked at the cost of upgrading to Vista a couple of years back, considered what benefits it would bring and made a decision about whether to invest in upgrading all my users to Vista. Most large companies decided that Vista is far more resource hungry than XP meaning a large proportion of their existing computers would struggle to run Vista. The specialist applications a company uses would be thoroughly tried and tested, and the users are happy with them. These applications in all probability would need upgrading or replacing to run on Vista. And the benefits to upgrading are ...... transparent windows!</div><div><br /></div><div>So to make my first sentence more specific, I would have a large user base running Microsoft Windows XP. I had no compelling reason to rollout Vista.</div><div><br /></div><div>Don't get me wrong here - I know Vista and have been running Vista on my home PC for about 18 months. My advice to my next door neighbour would be if they had enough power and memory to run it, and if all the programs and hardware you use work I would recommend switching to Vista. But I would not buy a new PC just so I could have Vista.</div><div><br /></div><div>So most large corporations with thousands of PCs decided that Vista would be a waste of money that they did not need. So they didn't. This is no secret and Microsoft are well aware of this. I have lost count of the number of times XP's support life has been extended.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>For some reason, Microsoft has now actually switched off support for XP. It officially went end-of-life on April 14th 2009.</b> What this means is Microsoft are no longer helping people with problems, or writing patches to resolve issues that are still to be discovered.</div><div><br /></div><div>This is not a situation a large corporation should find itself in. The IT director and board made the correct decision not to upgrade. What does Microsoft expect all these companies to do now? Upgrade to Vista for a few months until Windows 7 is launched? Run unsupported until Windows 7 is released *and* has had chance to be tested?</div><div><br /></div><div>If it were me, I would be saying that we are seriously exposed, and must take steps to avoid being in this situation again. How? Well now we have to upgrade everything in the next 12 months, I would be evaluating the other options beside Windows. <b>In fact I would be very seriously looking for an option other than windows so Microsoft cannot do this to us again.</b></div><div><br /></div><div>Linux is now much easier to use - it is much more plug-and-play. Mac OS is growing in the size of its installed user base, and all Macs now have Intel processors, which makes it much easier to run Mac OS on a standard PC (I have it running in VMWare and it runs a treat! VMWare Fusion on the Mac lets users run Mac OS as a virtual machine. And the PC can run with a couple of little tweaks!) Google are working on a new operating system. I think in the next 12 months we will see cheaper alternatives to windows that are actually viable! I forgot to mention the unreliability of Windows. People just think it is normal to wait when a PC freezes, normal to restart apps, or to reboot to fix odd problems. </div><div><br /></div><div>If I were Microsoft I would not have switched off XP support until Windows 7 was starting to be taken up on a large scale. Because they have I would have a very good argument to try and move away from Microsoft desktops!</div><div><br /></div><div>Chris</div><div><br /></div><div>Update: <a href="http://www.macworld.co.uk/business/news/index.cfm?RSS&NewsID=26807">Today Microsoft are officially concerned about competition to the desktop OS.</a></div>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-75249540453604555712009-06-16T04:07:00.011+00:002009-06-16T05:49:37.100+00:00I wasn't racist, but I am now....I consider myself to be a fair person, and am against discrimination of all sorts. My dictionary defines this as 'to single out for special favour or disfavour; to distinguish between'.<br /><br />Our government has made great strides into promoting equal opportunities for all.<br /><br />The problem is that some people or groups will take advantage of what they can gain from a situation. It is next to impossible to make a case that this is happening, and to change policy to stop it.<br /><br />For example, if I receive poor service from a black employee of a company I feel reluctant to complain or make a fuss about this person for fear it will construed racist. I am not. I just expect to be able to contact a company providing services in the UK, be able to talk them in my normal language, and be understood and provided with a good standard of service. When a customer service employee is trying to sell me something I don't need, and is unable to speak good enough english to explain the difference to me of two products I, like most people, may get annoyed.<br /><br />Consider the very public case in the London Metropolitan Police Service where a senior commander Mr Ghaffur made allegations against Sir Ian Blair that he was passed over for promotion because of his ethnicity. It was obvious why he was not promoted from the way he conducted himself in public. Another example, I went into my local Spar and asked the muslim cashier if they had bacon because I could not find it. He took offence!<br /><br />This sets a precedent. Foreign people with poor english, or that are not suitable for a job are promoted for two reasons. One so the interviewer is not accused of racism, and two so a company can brag about being an equal opportunity employer.<br /><br /><strong>Why am I not able to ask a company to speak to an english representative?</strong> Our public services go to great expense translating all their information packs to every language. Why are foreigners allowed to request that they are seen by helpers of a similar religion or origin, but I am racist for asking to speak to someone who properly speaks the language of my home country at home?<br /><br />You try doing this - and you will be the one on the end of the discrimination! <strong>This is so ridiculous and is enough to turn anyone racist</strong> and make you feel like discriminating against foreigners in the future! It is intolerable to be forced to accept substandard service in my own country in the name of racial equality!<br /><br />These people have chosen to live in our country, there should be an implicit expectation on them to work to fit in, and to make an extra effort to get on with the 'locals'. To be honest I believe most do. <strong>The ones that make no effort and expect us to accommodate them DO need someone to complain about them. Not for their skin colour but for being unable to do their job.</strong><br /><br />BTW: I have some good friends from various ethnic backgrounds, and am more than happy to accept services from anyone that can do their job to the standard I expect.<br /><br />ChrisChrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-33883259606929136312009-03-02T12:50:00.007+00:002009-03-15T19:28:33.041+00:00There is a reason pubs serve alcohol...<p>I have been considering a post about this subject for some time, and have been prompted to write it today as Scotland have now announced plans to introduce a minimum price for alcohol to outlaw 2-4-1 drinks promotions.<br /><br />Over the last year or so I have seen politicians, scientists and doctors voicing various opinions about the extent of alcohol related crime and health problems. The majority of comments have singled out supermarkets and pubs that sell alcohol on promotion. Recently<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7695791.stm"> a club in Newport</a> was criticised for selling unlimited drinks to customers - even though the event was run responsibly and there was no trouble on the night.<br /><br />I have attended events similar to this in Manchester before. The detail is that you are given a wristband and a ticket when you go in. Swap the ticket for your first drink. Once empty return to the bar to swap it for a full one. Each time your wristband is ticked. The barmen know how much you have drunk from your band, and are able to refuse to replace your empty once you are too drunk or if you are consuming too many.<br /><br /><strong>To start, it is my opinion that pricing of drink has no bearing on the amount of consumption</strong>. To refer to the principle of elasticity of demand, people will always want nights out with friends socialising and drinking. They will do this regardless the cost. <em>Most</em> people who drink would just pay the extra if the price went up. Note the treasury presently levy a high tax on alcohol - whenever they raise this tax, customers continue to buy the same quantity of alcohol and just stump up the extra few pounds. <strong>Historically raising the price of alcohol via taxation to reduce drinking has had minimal effect.</strong><br /><br />If on the other hand, someone is struggling financially, they may look to cut the amount <em>they spend</em> on alcohol. I deliberately worded that sentence to say that they do not cut the amount of alcohol they consume! When times are stressful an evening drunk becomes more important to someone. <strong>Occasionally being drunk has many positive benefits - such as helping you escape your worries, relax, socialise and enjoy yourself!</strong><br /><br />Remember the old christmas booze cruise to France? This is no longer necessary because supermarkets have cut their prices. Were laws brought in to raise the price it would only inconvenience people as they would just buy it from somewhere cheaper. I have had some reports that beer should be priced around £10 a pint. This would definitely effect demand!<br /><br /><strong>So, similar to my last post, lets look at the bigger picture. The real question is do we want: </strong></p><ol><li><strong>everyone to have fun a few times a month out with friends in the pub? or </strong></li><li><strong>people to be stressed financially from going out once a</strong> <strong>month, and importing</strong> <strong>large amounts of alcohol and staying at home drinking? or</strong></li><li><strong>Let's even assume the politicians are successful and no-one ever drinks anymore?</strong> </li></ol><p>Could you imagine how much fun a pub would be if everyone was sober? We have all been the sober one in a group of friends who are drinking! <strong>People would spend less time in face to face contact with friends and communicate using other means such as the internet or telephone.</strong><br /><br />Taking this question one step further .... do we want a nation of hermits with no social skills? I refer you to recent statements that lack of face to face social contact with other humans is bad for someone's health, and impedes proper development. See <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7898510.stm">Online networking 'harms health'</a> and <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7487723.stm">'Mental risk' of Facebook teens</a> .</p><p>My argument is that there is a very good reason why pubs serve alcohol! Pubs were invented as a place people could go to socialise. The benefit of alcohol is that it is a social lubricant. Once people are drunk they have reduced inhibitions and are less worried about approaching new people, or saying something that may make them look stupid. <strong>Without alcohol in everyone's life people would most likely have less casual friends, and share less experiences with other humans.</strong> I argue that a world without alcohol would be a worse place to be!</p><p>On the subject of anti social behaviour there are always going to be some idiots who cause issues (when they are drunk or sober) - lets deal with this minority and not let them spoil things for the properly behaved majority. People do need to be allowed to take responsibility for their alcohol consumption and behaviour, such as was allowed when later bar licensing was introduced.</p><p>Finally I think Tony Blair has done a lot to prepare pubs for the future. Introducing flexible later licensing and making pubs a smoke free environment were bold policies and I personally enjoy the benefits of both. Things are changing rapidly in the industry anyway. Due to the global recession, like everyone these businesses are facing a hard time. For the consumer price competition is good. Don't go stopping this at such a difficult time.</p><p>I will be off out for a drink because these proposals are not for England where I live !!</p><p>Chris</p><p>Update: Will be quicker getting that celebratory drink next time. Not had it yet and now another headline <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7944334.stm">Governments top medical advisor has drawn up some daft plans</a> -Cries-</p>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-47054981651306155892009-01-29T04:54:00.007+00:002009-01-30T14:30:13.878+00:00More 'World is flat' moments.Anyone who has read any of my previous posts will be aware that I do not believe in all the hype about human emissions causing global warning, or that there is anything we can do to prevent a 'climate' from changing, as it will by definition.<div><br /></div><div>I have also had a rant in the past about bio fuels - the government's hot potato for a couple of months. What no-one considered was that forests would be destroyed in order to farm crop for bio fuel as they earned the land owner more money. People are starving becuase the price of food has soared - farmers are selling grain for fuel and making more money than selling it to feed people. The net result is that bio fuel farming is causing more damage to the environment when the bigger picture is considered. </div><div><br /></div><div>This is the purpose of this post - people are making conclusions within their own scientific fields, politicians are believing them and throwing money at the causes these scientists have created - the net result being these scientists are kept in work.</div><div><br /></div><div>Some 'experts' have decided they can predict the world's weather in a timescale of 100-500 years. Should we believe them when they cannot predict the weather over the next 24 hours with any reliability? I don't.</div><div><br /></div><div>Where I am heading with this is that current knowledge cannot predict or understand today's weather patterns. This is why extra hypothesis are being tabled blaming things like carbon dioxide (hypothesis = unproved). When making the bio-fuel argument, no-one thought of the bigger picture about the possible consequences.</div><div><br /></div><div>So how would I explain our inability to understand the earth's weather systems?</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Please think back 100 years. There was no electricity. There was no television. No telephones. No microwave cookers. Our world is an order of magnitude different because of scientific inventions and discoveries that they did not have.</span></div><div><br /></div><div>So why does no scientist, politician or journalist ever think that in another 100 years man will be looking back on today in disbelief about what the world was like without all the then current technology? Hence the title of my post - I will guarantee we are gonna have more 'World is flat' moments. Things we look back on and laugh about once we have more understanding.</div><div><br /></div><div>My final point is about attempts to understand the working of an animal's brain. Nothing we know about chemistry or electronics can explain or come close to emulating the processing and storage power of our brains. Things we remember are stored somehow in our brains. It must therefore be possible to remove the brain from a dead person and read some of this information. But if someone asked you to do it where would you start?</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">As I have shown about predicting weather, and our knowledge of the workings of an animals brain there are plenty more forces at play in our universe that we have yet to discover.</span> Maybe someone should suggest these as an explaination to some of the political hot potatos!!</div><div><br /></div><div>Chris</div>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-59275371233055620362008-12-12T12:51:00.002+00:002008-12-12T18:03:53.042+00:00Manchester says no to the con charge.<div>Enter Davina McCall:</div><div><br /></div>The votes have been counted, verified and indepedently checked and I can reveal the next person to leave is.....<div><br /></div><div>(Stupidly long pause)</div><div><br /></div><div>The congestion charge!</div><div><br /></div><div>To explain the formal process... the way the voting worked is that Manchester was split into 10 districts. The result for each district was announced. For the TIF proposal to carry, 7 of the 10 districts had to return a yes vote. A yes vote would mean the proposal would be sent to the government for their consideration. As was made clear at the Labour conference, even if it was submitted there was no guarantee it would actually happen.</div><div><br /></div><div>EVERY SINGLE district returned a No. And not just any no, but by a massive majority of approximately 20% for and 80% against in every district.</div><div><br /></div><div>This referendum was being watched the world over as it is the first time this kind of proposal had been put to a public vote in the world. A few reporters even dared declare the concept of congestion charging dead in the water.</div><div><br /></div><div>So what are the implications?</div><div><br /></div><div>1) Businesses can continue to locate themselves in central manchester and be able to attract the best talent. With the charge these people would have moved offices, or got jobs away from the city centre. I think it makes the city centre far more attractive.</div><div><br /></div><div>2) Our leaders will have to look somewhere else to pay for the maintenance of our transport system, a large amount of which is essential and must be completed. How they can charge such high fares for our trains and trams and not be self financing is beyond me?</div><div><br /></div><div>3) My favourite politician - Gordon Brown - now has a bloody nose. Westminster now know that they cannot blackmail local authorities into congestion charging in return for essential public transport funding.</div><div><br /></div><div>4) As for congestion, the charge was only designed to change the time people travelled, not to reduce traffic in the city centre - as such pollution would not have changed if the charge was introduced, and will not change now it has been axed.</div><div><br /></div><div>I will be raising a glass to our councillors for giving us the chance to have our say! And Gordon no trying anything devious to sneak this in through a back door like you usually do - just give us the cash for our transport!</div><div><br /></div><div>Chris</div>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-84690003040207863652008-09-02T19:54:00.017+00:002008-12-12T18:14:04.841+00:00Google Chrome - web 2.0 starts today....Back in April 2007 I wrote a blog post about all the hype around web 2.0. My opinion was "You can't call something Web version 2 without changing some infrastructure (Ie hardware), protocols (Ie http) and/or browsers." <div><br /></div><div>Well today Google have launched a new browser, named Google Chrome!</div><a href="http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/garman.chris/LearningGoogleChromeInPictures#"><img src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/garman.chris/SL3jIoo8Q9I/AAAAAAAAAsM/P1DR-C4S2cY/s288/Chrome%203.jpg" /></a><div><br /></div><div>If anyone knows anything about the Internet, where it is going and how to make it better this company does.</div><div><br /></div><div>The browser is simple, well designed and has a new architechture to protect our computers from the nasties on the net. And I believe it (unlike when Microsoft make the same claim with every new release of their software). Each web site and plugin is in a process of its own, which is a kind of virtual box. Whatever happens inside that box only affects the box.</div><div><br /></div><div>This is my shortest post ever because the software has been released within the hour. <a href="http://tools.google.com/chrome/intl/en-GB/features.html">Get this browser now</a>. Today the internet has changed. I need to add this browser is still in testing and is classed as Beta, but Google always do this. I'll bet a Google beta works better than any Microsoft final release!</div><div><br /></div><div>I have never been so excited about the future for computing. What with the Apple iPhone which will be expanded into a laptop form building on the success of the touch interface, and now Google evolving the web browser which could morph into a replacement for Microsoft Windows.</div><div><br /></div><div>Chris</div><div><br /></div><div>Update: I use this for normal surfing, but there are more than a few sites that are not properly compatible with this browser. If you like a browser to store your logins for all the websites, Chrome is poor in this area. Unfortunately one still needs to use Internet Explorer for some tasks.</div>Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-12203610410301201232008-07-25T23:43:00.009+00:002008-07-27T03:48:03.813+00:00BATTLE OF THE YEAR: Can HTC beat the iPhone??I am referring to the HTC Touch range of new mobile phones. The Diamond is the consumer model which has a joystick, 4 buttons and a touch screen (no keypad). The Pro which will be out in the next couple of months has a sideways sliding full qwerty keyboard.<br /><br />I have tried the HTC Touch Diamond as on paper it beats the iPhone, plus it runs Windows Mobile operating system which I have used before and really liked. The main benefit is full synchronisation with Outlook contacts and calendars.<br /><br />The adverts all show off the screen with a selection of album covers to choose from to play your music, and some very nicely animated weather program.<br /><br /><strong>I will cut to the point - it does not work.</strong> Trying to use this handset to make calls and text is next to impossible. Windows Mobile v6.1 cannot cope with a touch screen. There is one simple flaw that they have not addressed. If I am on the contact screen and flick the screen from the bottom to the top to scroll the list the phone will on about 30% occasions dial the contact on whom your finger first touches.<br /><br />As for texts there is a nice HTC front end to the text inbox. However to view old texts or to compose a new text you have to revert to the standard Windows Mobile interface.<br /><br />The album covers that are in the ad are only available <em>within the playlist</em>. This device has 4Gb internal storage so can hold a decent amount of music. This is impossible to flick through and select from the text list (and there is no other way). Lastly you have to buy a third party adapter if you wish to use anything other than the bundled hands-free kit to listen through.<br /><br />When I said the HTC beat the iPhone the main point was the screen resolution. iPhone boasts 480x320 over 3.5". The HTC has a physically smaller 2.8" screen (allowing the handset to be much smaller than iPhone) but has twice as many pixels (640x480). The "minor" problem is that the processor in the phone can't process a movie anywhere near that resolution. I uploaded a 480 line mp4 and was lucky to see 1 frame per second. And it downsized that to view in portrait - couldn't get it to use landscape...<br /><br />Which brings me on to my next issue. Not only is use of the accelerometer restricted to the flashy but useless album viewer and opera mobile, but most apps do not have a setting to tell them to put the screen in landscape. For example Windows Remote desktop took over my PC but with a screen res of 480 pixels across and 640 down!!<br /><br />Lastly the internet experience - there are two browsers loaded. Opera was the easiest to use, but couldn't use the bookmarks sync-ed from your PC. IE could see the bookmarks but had problems rendering a lot of websites and had poor support for the touchscreen.<br /><br />To sum up this phone has a lot of features and a large amount of apps are available to customise the phone with it being Windows based. I chose this phone thinking it was a cross between a phone and a laptop - against the iPhone which is a cross between a media player and a phone. But it simply doesn't work. There is no point having a phone if you feel like throwing it everytime you try to ring someone.<br /><br /><strong>The last problem for HTC is simply that iPhone is "the iPhone".</strong> Doesn't matter what anyone else launches it will not BE an iPhone. The iPhone is from Apple. It has the press coverage. Everyone has heard of it just because it is!<br /><br />Chris heads to the Apple store........<br /><br />PS. When you go to the store to buy the iPhone the O2 website will not work in Mac OS. They boot their lovely Mac into Windows XP before they can process the order lol.Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-89003646776364463412008-06-22T05:05:00.006+00:002008-08-03T18:12:44.299+00:00iPhone 2.0 on the way...I have posted a review of the first iPhone when it was released last year. This review comprised a very long list of things the iPhone 1.0 could not do. I dismissed it as an extremely expensive device (including the 24 month contract) that was very lacking in some modern functionality most others phones already had.<br /><br />A couple of months after the launch O2 revised their tariffs - giving more minutes for your money, and allowing an 18 month rather than 24 month agreement.<br /><br />Back to the new model that launches July 11th, there is a new £30 a month tariff on the way for light users, and a pay-as-you-go option has also been promised at some point.<br /><br />The best news is the price of the handset has been significantly reduced. The 8Gb version starts at £99 and the 16Gb version starts at £159. On the more expensive tariffs the iPhone will be available free of charge.<br /><br />The iPhone itself has had a limited amount of hardware changes. Most important it is now compatible with the faster 3G networks. It now includes a GPS radio receiver for accurately pinpointing your location. The camera and headphone socket are now flush which means at last you can use any set of headphones you choose.<br /><br />There are numerous software changes, which can also be installed on the old iPhone if you havn't illegally unlocked it. There is support for third party applications, a new application store, better Microsoft exchange integration and 'hopefully' the addition of picture messages and video capture.<br /><br />I will be very tempted to get one when they are launched. I would recommend buying on the £45 a month contract to get a discount of £100 on the device. After 9 months you can call O2 and ask to downgrade to a cheaper tariff! My only remaining mini-gripe is that 16Gb is a bit small for music - and no where near enough to carry round a selection of videos as well. Hopefully a 32Gb version will be along soon.<br /><br />Chris<br /><br />Update: Still no picture messaging or video, unless you can find an email gateway.Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-74256398633312917272008-06-13T19:16:00.014+00:002008-06-15T12:45:48.763+00:00Europe - the Irish have saved the day!Today the results of a referendum on the EU 'treaty' in Ireland have been announced. The 'treaty' must be ratified by all 27 member states to succeed. In 2005 the French and Dutch voted the 'constitution' down. It has since been reformated and called a treaty. Every review body (including the government's own) who has studied the treaty has concluded it is the same as the constitution, but renamed and reformated to be un-intelligible. The 'constitution' would have thrown away the existing European constitution and replaced it with a brand new constitution. The 'treaty' achieves the same end by taking the existing constitution and amending any lines that are different between the old and new constitution. All governments have tried to force it through without a vote, except for the Irish.<br /><br />There was a very high turnout and the result was a very strong 'No'. <strong>Respect to the Irish!!</strong><br /><br /><strong>One: to the government for fulfulling their promise to hold a referendum before handing over control of the country to Brussels.</strong><br /><strong></strong><br /><strong>And two: for the electrorate "not following the wishes of their leaders" as the Financial Times put it. </strong><br /><br />Maybe I misunderstand the world, but I always thought in a democracy the leaders ask the electorate and follow their collective instruction. If the leaders issue orders and force the population to follow them regardless of their opinion I would call it a dictatorship.<br /><br />Can someone please explain this to Gordon Brown, or his successor who takes over in a couple of months!<br /><br />Labour were elected on the basis of a referendum. Apparently 80% of the population wants a referendum, but <strong>we are not given one because the government expects it is unlikely to win. That is a very seriously worrying reason for refusing a vote in a democratic country.</strong><br /><br />To make my position clear on Europe I do not believe a one-size-fits-all European government would benefit our country. We are one of the most technologically advanced nations in Europe which requires a very different way of government to a developing country like most of the rest of Europe. Financially we are already getting a bad deal from Europe. (See <a href="http://blog.cgc-uk.com/2007/11/reforming-europe.html">my blog post from November 2007</a> for more)<br /><br />At past summits the demands of our country have been badly received by a lot of our peers. Our demands have appeared as a nuisance and not been given proper consideration.<br /><br />I was reading the sport supplement of the Times a couple of weeks ago. There was an article about Britain's bid to host the 2018 football world cup. <a href="http://www.tiscali.co.uk/news/newswire.php/news/reuters/2007/08/10/sport/warner-says-england-2018-world-cup-bid-doomed.html">A senior international figure Jack Warner is quoted as saying "Nobody in Europe likes England.", "For Europe, England is an irritant"</a><br /><br />Then take a look at the results from the 2008 Eurovision song contest where voting was clearly political and nothing to do with the actual songs and we received zero votes.<br /><br />These may be about football and the Eurovision, but I think it would be foolish to dismiss the comments completely.<br /><br />I am seriously concerned that without a veto we will get a seriously bad deal by joining Europe. We will also loose our seat on the UN Security Council. If we cannot get a majority vote in the proposed new Europe we will have absolutely no say in domestic or international matters any more. The red lines we apparently had put in to safeguard our national interests can legally be overruled at a later date on the whim of Brussels due to a 'ratchet clause'. Additionally our government who we elected will be stripped of all powers to govern our country. Instead we will be at the mercy of European MPs over whom we have no electoral power.<br /><br />I will be raising a glass in thanks to the Irish for halting the devious and underhand attempts of European leaders to force the abandoned constitution through the back door! That's shut too now guys!<br /><br />ChrisChrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-83504370367782537742008-05-08T16:04:00.005+00:002008-05-20T03:15:15.240+00:00New Satellite TV launches in UK - FreesatIn my last post I mentioned that a new TV service in the UK would be launching soon. This launched on Tuesday. This service is available to most households in the UK via a satellite dish.<br /><br />The name of the new service is <a href="http://www.freesat.co.uk/">Freesat</a>. This is extremely confusing because there was already a free satellite TV service available from Sky with the same name. The Sky offering is normally now referred to as 'Freesat from Sky'. The new Freesat service is owned by the BBC and ITV. I am amused the word Sky is completely absent from the Freesat website and literature!!<br /><br />If you have a Sky dish you can buy a Freesat set-top box (STB) at most large electrical retailers and just plug it in. Both systems use the same satellite signal for receiving channels. Freesat do have their own TV guide and interactive services that are completely separate from Sky.<br /><br />In my last post I concluded the new service was a branding exercise and that it was pretty pointless. There have since been a couple of developments.<br /><br />1. <strong>ITV HD will not be available on the Sky HD service.</strong> It will be exclusive to Freesat.<br />2. There will soon be televisions on the market that can receive Freesat without a separate STB.<br /><br />Sky have been complaining about Freesat saying they already offered such a service and the new one is a waste of money. Given that Sky holds 17.9% shares in ITV it is very interesting that ITV HD will not be on Sky. The chairman of ITV was quoted as saying 'they would not give the channel to Sky for nothing'.<br /><br />A number of broadcasters have been complaining about Sky's monopoly and business practices. Recently Sky withdrew their Sky One channel from the Virgin cable network because Virgin would not pay a massive price increase for the channel. Some small channels have been challenging the cost levied by Sky for carrying their channel.<br /><br />There is more to this than meets the eye!<br /><br />I would love to know how much is payed and in which direction for the channels on the Sky service. My hunch is Sky is used to charging content produces to transmit their channel on the Sky network. And ITV HD have told them to get stuffed! Sky is now playing catchup because their status as the only network with all available HD services is at risk. They are getting a taste of their own medicine! As a Sky HD customer I hope this is resolved and ITV HD will be on Sky soon.<br /><br /><strong>The game I think ITV are playing is to get access to channels that have an exclusive contract with Sky - namely Channel 4 HD and Five (Both of these are absent from Freesat)</strong>. Sky are going to be in trouble when they come to re-negotitate most of their contracts with content providers now they have competition! They are already at the limit of what most customers will pay to view a subscription TV service.<br /><br />Where I really believe the new Freesat is justified is that anyone can make receiving equipment for the new service. The Sky receivers were only available from Sky. It was not possible to integrate these with televisions and recorders. This was a real headache if you did not subscribe to Sky+ - recording a weeks programmes meant setting your Sky receiver and your video device for each programme. The Sky programme guide is locked and can only be decoded by Sky - whereas the new Freesat system will be open to all.<br /><br />Today the free service from Sky is better than the free service from Freesat. If both STBs cost the same I would choose a Sky one because I then have the option of paying for TV channels if my needs change.<br /><br />If any more channels go Freesat exclusive Sky will have problems. <strong>I hope we don't get to a situation where consumers will need a STB for the Sky service and an STB for the Freesat service in order to get all the channels they want - not a desirable situation.</strong><br /><br />Chris<br /><br />UPDATE: My imagination has been running on high since I wrote this article. Think of all the possibilities now there is an innovative new TV service. While the Sky service works - there have been no innovations from them for years. While the HD receiver has a network port and numerous USB ports - like the interactive card slot featured on all systems since launch they don't do anything.<br /><br />Imagine if the new Freesat service allowed you to access your recorded shows as you wished? Maybe the box could have a built-in DVD burner? You could copy programmes onto an iPod or a PSP to watch on the move. You could watch live TV on your PC by connecting a web browser to your satellite receiver. You could manage all your recordings from anywhere on the internet! I hate having to turn my TV on just to set a show to record.<br /><br />At present on Sky all the time-delayed and Hi Def versions of normal channels exist as separate channels. Imagine if the box could merge them into one. You press a button to switch between the current or the 1 hour delayed version. If there is a recording clash the system could automatically pick up one of your programmes from the time delay channel if possible. How user friendly would that be?<br /><br />Also your satellite receiver could stream video files from your PC, and could connect to all the new TV over IP services such as the iPlayer or BT Vision.<br /><br />Lastly what if more channels that are currently subscription only on Sky changed their business model as numerous newspapers have? If they gave them free they would have more viewers and could charge more for advertising. More and more choice of free TV channels would be wonderful!Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-92061276134906352122008-04-25T00:26:00.006+00:002008-06-13T12:54:14.143+00:00HD TV keeps getting better!If you havn't made the jump to Hi-definition television yet things are certainly improving!<br /><br />At the moment the only option is from Sky. A handful of new channels have recently launched, with another 2 expected within weeks.<br /><br />My favourite channel is BBC HD. It only broadcasts each evening but the picture quality is always exellent. They are running shows like Torchwood, Last of the summer wine, The green green grass plus various nature programs like Tiger Spy in the jungle, Planet Earth and The power of the planet.<br /><br />Discovery HD and National Geographic HD are also favourites of mine. History HD also carries interesting stuff about space and the universe. Sky Arts is also available in HD.<br /><br />There are now 3 HD sports channels if you subscribe to Sky Sports. A third movie channel has just launched in HD. Previously there were 2 channels showing movies in HD. There was often a wait of a month or two before new movies on Sky Premiere were available on the HD channels. We now have the Premiere channel broadcasting simulcast in HD. There are also 2 box office movie channels in HD.<br /><br />Sky one HD and Channel 4 HD are a waste of time. They are simulcast of the SD channels, and 90% of programmes on the HD versions are not broadcast in Hi-def.<br /><br />Lux HD launched a couple of months back but seems to be permanent repeats and I have not worked out its intended subject.<br /><br />Some of the best programmes I have seen on National Geographic have been about outdoor pursuits - kayaking, surfing, base jumping etc. There is now a new HD channel called Rush HD that is devoted to programmes like this. I have seen nothing in the press about this amazing new channel - which has prompted this posting on my blog.<br /><br />The 2 I mentioned that are due any day are FX HD (I don't ever remember watching the normal FX channel, but it has things like family guy) and ITV HD. Hopefully the ITV channel will be a different schedule to the normal ITV but with plenty of programmes actually in HD.<br /><br />If you are not prepared to pay Sky the extra £10 for the HD content I have some good news. Within the next couple of months a new satellite TV service will be launching called Freesat. This will carry BBC HD, ITV HD and eventually Channel4 HD that can be received completely free. Freesat receivers are fully compatible with an existing Sky dish.<br /><br />Getting accurate technical information about the new Freesat is difficult because Sky also have a free service they market as Freesat. At present it is my understanding that the new Freesat service uses exactly the same satellite signal as Sky. By this I understand that if the Sky transmitters that beam TV to the satellite were to go offline, all satellite TV services would break. Basically Freesat is a brand. They will sell you a different set-top box that will have a Freesat logo on the screen instead of a Sky one! Pretty pointless!<br /><br />The choice is to get a Freesat box that cannot decode the Sky services, or get a Sky box without a subscription. At least with the latter option you can add a Sky subscription if you so wish in the future without buying a new box.<br /><br />Having said that the more HD programmes I can receive the better - so I shouldn't complain!!!<br /><br />Will update this if I get any more info:<br />1. <a href="http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitaltv/a94961/freesat-confirms-launch-date-as-may-6.html">Freesat will launch on 6th May.</a> As I thought they are only broadcasting their own 'metadata' which is the tv schedule and teletext type services in english. Unconfirmed prices are £50 for SD or £120 for HD set top box, plus installation if required.<br /><br />Last thing - there are a few pictures on the net of a new version of the Sky TV guide that will be pushed to the HD boxes in the next couple of months. Will keep my ear to the ground if I find any more details of the changes! (Here it is -<a href="http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitaltv/a97056/sky-unveils-new-high-definition-epg.html"> link</a>)<br /><br />ChrisChrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-31424251853312772732008-04-06T15:48:00.006+00:002008-05-25T13:53:59.642+00:00Global warming???? Yes please!It is the first week in April and the UK is experiencing sub-zero temperatures and snow. Over the last 12 months we have had more serious floods than I can remember in the last 30 years.<br /><br />I have worked out why. Because everyone is driving round in puny 'green' modern cars that have low carbon emissions. Everyone has got to do their bit to prevent global warming! Jeremy <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">Clarkson</span> sums the problem up well in his latest video 'Super car showdown' where he races the environmentally friendly G-whiz against a table. And the table wins :)!! He concludes the reason the weather in the UK is so bad is because people are buying these unsafe and slow vehicles.<br /><br />I don't buy this latest political crap about preventing carbon emissions for 3 reasons:<br /><br />1. Every living creature on the planet turns Oxygen into Carbon Dioxide. I am waiting for a rationing system where we are all told which day(s) of the week we are permitted to breathe! Soon it will be politically incorrect to have children because they breathe and the whole human race will die anyway!<br /><br />2. All the hippies are wanting us to stop using oil and switch to <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">biofuels</span>. <a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1725975,00.html">I have just read an interesting article in Time about how much DAMAGE <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">biofuel</span> farming causes to the climate.</a><br />Have you noticed how food prices have risen lately? This is because farmers can make more money selling crop for <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">biofuel</span> production than food. This in turns means more people will die of hunger. "The grain it takes to fill an SUV tank with ethanol could feed a person for a year". The Amazon is being cleared to make way for growing grain for <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">biofuels</span>. These forests would have removed carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. There was a flaw in the science reports about how green <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">biofuels</span> were - "It was as if the science world assumed <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">biofuels</span> would be grown in parking lots". It is actually now believed it is greener to leave the forests and burn oil rather than <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">biofuel</span>.<br /><br />3. Looking back through history at recent climate change reveals that the temperature rose prior to 1940 but unexpectedly dropped in the post-war economic boom, when carbon dioxide emissions rose dramatically.<br /><br />I think all these climate change advocates should learn about the 'Muller' principle! So much pleasure where is the pain? All the inventions in the last few years that will save the world turn out to cause more problems when you look into their complete <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">lifecycle</span>. For example how much energy is needed to make these low energy bulbs that contain a <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">significant</span> amount of poisonous mercury?<br /><br />The climate will change anyway and there is nothing we can do to control nature. Leave me alone to light my flat and drive my car! I had a good drive this weekend so if the weather warms up and we have lots of sun - please blame me.<br /><br />Chris<br /><br />Update: One more point - the UK is a very small country. Our contribution to world carbon levels is negligible at present. Even if our country emitted no carbon at all this would have no effect on the global carbon levels.Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-36727406223962085362008-04-01T20:36:00.003+00:002008-04-01T20:57:30.212+00:00Police send RAF Tornado a speeding ticket.Just had this through one of my email lists....<br /><br />=======<br />Two British traffic patrol officers from North Berwick, east of Edinburgh, were involved in an unusual incident while checking for speeding motorists on the A1 Great North Road.<br /><br />One of the officers used a hand-held radar device to check the speed of a vehicle approaching over the crest of a hill, and was surprised when the speed was recorded at over 300mph. The machine then stopped working and the officers were not able to reset it.<br /><br />The radar had in fact locked on to a NATO Tornado fighter jet over the North Sea, which was engaged in a low-flying exercise over the Borders district.<br /><br />Back at police headquarters the chief constable fired off a stiff complaint to the RAF Liaison office.<br /><br />Back came the reply:<br />" Thank you for your message, which allows us to complete the file on this incident. You may be interested to know that the tactical computer in the Tornado had automatically locked on to your 'hostile radar equipment' and sent a jamming signal back to it. Furthermore, the Sidewinder air-to-ground missiles aboard the fully-armed aircraft had also locked on to the target. Fortunately the Dutch pilot flying the Tornado responded to the missile status alert intelligently and was able to override the automatic protection system before the missile was launched."<br />=====<br /><br />Happy 90th birthday to the RAF and and 100th birthday to the TA! hehe<br /><br />ChrisChrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-24214542932361838722008-03-15T13:36:00.008+00:002008-04-06T16:26:37.923+00:00MP pay and expensesThis post has been inspired by the latest newspaper reports that MPs are demanding their salary increase from £61k to £100k instead of generous expense allowances which are currently in the spotlight. Part of this increase is justified by them because they will loose £15k of that increase in tax.<br /><br />I'm not saying the job of an MP is an easy one - regular travel between their constituency and parliament is a long journey for some MPs. However when you look at the qualifications, experience and knowledge required to be an MP I feel they are presently overpaid. <strong>The sole skillset of the job is being able to speak in parliament to represent the views of their constituents in parliament.</strong> This is supposedly how a democracy works. If I have an opinion I tell my MP. If a large number of people have the same opinion that is the opinion my MP must speak for in London.<br /><br />In practice this does not actually happen. I am strongly against our country being governed by Brussels. Most of the population have spoken to demand the referendum on the European treaty. Our government and MPs have failed to respect the wishes of the population. The votes in parliament on this issue were a farce - with the lib dems asking for a different referendum and then ensuring that the vote for a referendum was lost. I feel let down by the whole system.<br /><br />There are so many really daft laws passed by parliament. I use the law about using a mobile phone while driving as an example.<br /><br /><strong>Using a hand-held mobile phone while driving is now illegal. If I am driving 100% safely what is the problem?</strong> Let's break this down. It is OK to talk to passengers. So the concentrating on a conversation not driving argument is false. It is OK to smoke. So the one hand on the wheel argument is false. I know what I would rather drop in an emergency out of a cigarette or a phone! It is OK to take your eyes off the road to dial and text if the phone is in a holder, so the dialing or typing on keypad argument is false. What really takes the mick is that if you are stationary at lights or in a traffic jam it is illegal to hold your phone, maybe to check for a missed call or send a quick text. If a vehicle is stationary that is the most safe state it could possible be in.<br /><br /><strong>Were all our highly paid and extremely important MPs asleep the day this law was scrutinised?</strong><br /><br />Anyway now Brussels has control of our statute books, we can lay off our 646 MPs as soon they will be left without any power over our country. And then the money can go to more deserving causes like medical staff and police pay.<br /><br />Chris<br /><br />Update: The other thing I meant to say about the daft mobile phone law is the unintended consequences. 1: If I need to use my phone when driving I will now hold it on my lap and have to take my eyes off the road. As things were I always held the phone up high so it was easier to look at the phone and watch the road. 2: If I am driving and witness an accident or a crime there is no way I will go to the trouble of reporting it. The reason is because I could predict if I did I would be prosecuted for using the phone regardless that making that call could save someone's life or catch a criminal.Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-41889401384949561932008-03-14T14:06:00.006+00:002008-03-25T16:14:28.879+00:00Death of Chief Constable Michael ToddI am saddened to read of the tragic apparent suicide of Manchester Police's Chief Constable. Reports of his coroner conclude he walked up Snowdon on a very cold day and deliberately let himself freeze to death.<br /><br />Before this incident I would not have been able to name our Chief Constable - which is a great testament to his work.<br /><br />The chief constables you can name such as <a href="http://www.abd.org.uk/brunstrom.htm">Richard Brunstrom</a> are the ones that are in the press for doing a bad job, or outraging the public. This guy lives on a different planet and has become a one man force against minor speeding offences and has been very outspoken about legalising drugs.<br /><br />I have unfortunately had to contact the police a few times since moving to Manchester City Centre. On every occasion I have been impressed with their sensitivity and professionalism. Much work has been done by Mr Todd to improve links between the police force and the communities of Greater Manchester.<br /><br />There are many 'liaison' officers assigned as the face of the police force to meet with the community at a local level and ensure the police are delivering a satisfactory service.<br /><br />It is for this that I will remember and miss Michael Todd. May his team continue focusing on this aspect of policing in his honour.<br /><br />I also wish to take this opportunity to say how terrible the mental health services are in Greater Manchester. As I mentioned in my previous post I have needed treatment for depression myself. When I lived with my parents I had treatment from the North Wales Health Authority. They were fantastic. I was offered regular help from senior doctors.<br /><br />I have tried to access services in Greater Manchester. My GP agreed I was in need of similar help within Manchester and tried to make a referal but I was ignored and left with no help or support at all. Were such services available to people in need, more lives may be saved and deaths due to depression and suicide such as Michael Todd's may be prevented.<br /><br />ChrisChrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-14035235880602466032008-03-06T17:13:00.002+00:002008-03-06T17:25:16.726+00:00Developing medication such as SeroxatHave read today that our stupid government who have now signed our whole country over to Europe are thinking of making it even more difficult for large drug companies to produce new treatments.<br /><br />The current system of regulation is extremely thorough. The costs involved in taking a drug to market are phenomenal and the process takes years.<br /><br />I have taken Seroxat. It is an anti-depressant. Claims an anti-depressant can cause suicide are utterly stupid. A number of people that take anti-depressants do so because they are seriously depressed and are on the brink of suicide. Without such medication a large proportion would probably attempt suicide. Saying that with the medication a few still do does not point the finger of blame to the medication. Think of the large number that make a proper recovery. Any GP will tell you they have seen drugs like Seroxat successfully treat plenty of patients.<br /><br />The proper question to ask is should these large companies be discouraged from their work? Definately not! Advances in modern medicine are amazing. People need to ask where would we be if no-one took the risk of making new treatments. They should be assisted not hindered in their noble work.<br /><br />ChrisChrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-59272106027304779242008-02-17T21:53:00.002+00:002008-02-17T22:03:38.965+00:00HD Format War OverWe have a winner in the format war to be the next DVD! It will be official next week.<br /><br /><strong>HD-DVD, the format designed and promoted by Toshiba is dead and buried</strong>. Rumours surfaced last week that Toshiba will be launching a range of Blu-ray players shortly.<br /><br /><strong>Blu-ray designed and promoted by Sony is the winner</strong>. And mostly because of the Playstation 3. There are about 10 million of the beasts in people's living rooms, compared to about 100,000 other Hi-def players.<br /><br />In terms of sales the HD-DVD separate players have sold better, solely because they are cheaper than Blu-ray separate players.<br /><br />Numerous studios and more importantly large retailers have thrown their support behind Blu-ray since the new year. Their selection has been driven solely by consumer demand. Blu-ray movies are significantly outselling HD-DVD movies.<br /><br />According to What Hi-Fi the Playstation 3 is the best Blu-ray player on the market. It won all their reviews on the basis of picture quality. It also supports the latest version of Blu-ray. Lastly it is the cheapest Blu-ray player. You basically get the games and media console for free!<br /><br />If you are buying a Blu-ray player make sure it can be upgraded to the latest version of Blu-ray compatibility. As the versions evolve better interactive features are becoming possible. If you are after a damn good player for normal quality DVDs there are some absolute bargain HD-DVD players out their that will do a brilliant job!<br /><br />ChrisChrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-14110311300859307042008-02-17T13:13:00.005+00:002008-02-19T00:06:57.316+00:00Embracing VistaI am running Vista on my main PC. I have been for over a month.<br /><br />Why?<br /><br />Firstly because SP1 is all but officially finished. On the 11th January Microsoft released an almost final version of service pack 1 for use by anyone who is interested. Ie Me!. Most major corporations refused to evaluate Vista until it had time to 'bed in'. Plenty of people were classing the launch version of Vista as a beta, and were waiting for the first service pack. Well here it is!<br /><br />Secondly I am fed up with having to format my computer and re-install XP from scratch every couple of months. XP seemed to develop quirks and problems that would eventually become such an issue a re-install was the only option. I had done this so many times I had the rebuild down to 3-4 hours and knew exactly what to backup and where to find it.<br /><br />Lastly because Microsoft's claim that Vista is more secure seems to have stood the test of time. I have not seen any stories of viruses breaking into the protected kernel or any other other such major problem being found in Vista's security. It has had its share of critical security patches, but not as many as XP or other software.<br /><br />I have previously criticised and joked about Vista. My gripes can be summarised as:<br /><br />First - the new UAC or User Account Control. Whenever you install anything or change any global user settings you are bombarded with security prompts asking you to confirm the changes. Now more programs are vista compatible there are less prompts during installation. There is also a very neat solution to this problem. I have mentioned it before on here but I have now found a much easier way to enable it.<br /><br />On the start menu, right-click Computer and select Manage. Confirm the action at the security prompt.<br /><br /><a href="http://bp3.blogger.com/_wV0drVJWe2I/R7hpqeRsPUI/AAAAAAAAABU/1nSEDDU5xeE/s1600-h/Users.bmp"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5167996750810332482" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="http://bp3.blogger.com/_wV0drVJWe2I/R7hpqeRsPUI/AAAAAAAAABU/1nSEDDU5xeE/s400/Users.bmp" border="0" /></a>Expand Local Users and Group in the left tree and select Users. Double-click Administrator and uncheck the account is disabled box. Click OK. Now right-click Administrator and click Set Password. Enter a strong password when prompted. <strong>When you login as Administrator you bypass UAC but it is still active for all your other users.</strong><br /><br />Second the lack of new features. When Vista was announced many moons ago we were promised some really ground-breaking and much needed improvements. Not many of these promises were actually delivered. When you compare XP and Vista on a major functionality basis there are not many changes.<br /><br />Thirdly the many different versions and the unjustifiably high price tag. Vista Ultimate which is the best version available retails at £323 on DVD from Ebuyer. However <strong>I recommend buying the </strong><a href="http://www.ebuyer.com/product/123060"><strong>OEM version</strong></a> - it is exactly the same software but without the shiney box and it retails for <strong>£106</strong>. This version is only meant to be sold to PC manufacturers to pre-install. It has slightly different terms and conditions but all that matters is you are not meant to be able to move your license to a different computer after it has been activated. In practice I don't know how strongly this will be enforced, or how many times you are allowed to reassign the expensive version.<br /><br />Also bear in mind some hardware that works perfectly in XP will be obsolete and need replacing when upgrading to Vista, which will add to the cost of upgrading.<br /><br /><br /><strong>After installing Vista I found it to be extremely sluggish.</strong> <strong>When my computer was idle I found my CPU usage was about 20%!!</strong><br /><br />SP1 does improve this - but - the cause of this sluggishness can be explained by Vista's improved search system. After an install the system will comb your hard disks and generate an index for the search subsystem. This is why it runs slow.<br /><br />Turn off the power save features and <strong>leave your computer switched on for a day or two.</strong> <strong>In this time it will complete building the index and setting up other tuning systems. I found once this has completed the system will run about as fast as XP!</strong><br /><br />So after installing, turn on the Administrator account and use it to setup your computer without UAC annoying you. Leave your computer on for a couple of days to build its indexes etc. Then you can think about Vista's benefits!<br /><br /><br />Chris<br /><br />Ps. My PC is only a fairly old Pentium 4, 3.0GHz with HT (Single Core with HyperThreading) and 1.5Gb RAM.Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-50775948090770849722008-02-04T20:16:00.000+00:002008-02-04T21:20:07.092+00:00Search engine wars.This week Microsoft has made a generous offer to buy Yahoo. This has been described as a shotgun wedding with Google holding the gun!<br /><br />I remember back in 2004 <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/jun04/06-30improvedsearch2004pr.mspx">Microsoft launched a massive campaign</a> to promote its own search engine MSN Search. Aside from lots of prime time TV adverts they claimed to index millions more pages than Google (8 million vs Google's 2 million). Within a week the number of pages Google claimed to index rose to 10 million!<br /><br />Ask Jeeves has also been working to boost its service. They have some great features on their page. When they launched they cornered a niche in the market - that you could ask them a question and they would find the answer. This contrasted Google's approach where you had to ask the answer to get confirmation you were right. Now they want Google's business they have rebranded and tried to compete as an alternative to Google.<br /><br />Google differentiated from Yahoo when it launched because every result at Yahoo was part of a category. After a search you had to zoom into the right category to find related results.<br /><br />I'll give Microsoft some free advice. <strong>All that matters for a search engine is that I find what I am looking for. First time and every time!</strong><br /><br />When I saw the ad campaign in 2004 I did go to MSN search. I ran a search and could not find what I wanted in the top results. I went to Google and found what I wanted in the top 3 results. Needless to say I havn't been back since.<br /><br />MSN is absolutly awful at finding what you want. What takes the mick is last time I needed software for my Microsoft Mouse I couldn't even find the correct page on the Microsoft search site.<br /><br />One let down like that and they lost a customer for a long time. The beauty of the web for a customer is there is never any tie-in to a certain site or system. If one day you find better answers on a different site you just make a new favourite and never go back.<br /><br />Finally coming back to the larger picture could you imagine the world if Microsoft was running the most successful and popular search engine? They already have the most successful desktop operating system with an extremely large momentum preventing any competition. Do you reckon they would abuse their power if they could control everyone's search results and internet usage?<br /><br />My last thought is could this determination to make a bigger impact on the Internet be a sign they are worried about the future of their operating system monopoly? I am currently running Vista SP1 and will report how I find it soon!<br /><br />ChrisChrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-49364470172377640852008-01-17T10:07:00.000+00:002008-01-17T11:11:03.082+00:00Privacy vs Safety on the InternetI am sick of reading about all the different organisations complaining about our lack of privacy in the 21st century. Apparently our human right to a private life is being eroded.<br /><br />And why? Because the authorities want organisations to keep a log of what each computer does on their Internet sites or services.<br /><br />I wish to draw an analogy to the real world. Every day you walk along the streets. You pass other people, some on foot, some in cars and some in offices or shops. They have eyes and a memory. They can easily see what you look like. They might remember what you look like, where you were and at what time. Is this an assault to your privacy? Is this infringing your human rights? No.<br /><br />In Britain's cities there are more and more video cameras being installed. I love this. If I were robbed or assaulted there would be indisputable video evidence that could be used to bring the offender to justice. I cannot understand why anyone has a problem with video cameras unless they are up to no good?<br /><br />If I were to walk down the street wearing a padded jacket and a balaclava so my face and body shape were disguised what would the reaction be? I would have 5 police officers pointing a gun at my head. Do you think the argument you were entitled to privacy would cut any mustard?<br /><br />Assuming I was dressed normally, and I snatch an old lady's handbag she would shout and people would look round. They would witness the event and the police would have descriptions from numerous people as to who attacked the old lady and how.<br /><br />Returning to the subject of the Internet there are no witnesses, and no faces to recognise. When I visit a website I have no idea who else is on the site at the same time. The owner of the website has no information about people who visit the site. In terms of privacy this is far more private than even the scenrio with the balaclava. This is a criminal's dream come true.<br /><br />Say this old lady who had her handbag stolen went to report the crime and the police refused to record details of the offender because it infringed his right to a private life. Can you imagine the public outcry?<br /><br />Now that I have won that argument, let us ramp up security on the Internet. When I send and receive information on the Internet, the only way I can be identified is by the unique number my computer uses to enable replies to be received from other computers. This is my IP address. Technically with my IP address, date and time this can be traced to my internet line - usually a telephone number and address. In practice this is nearly impossible. Even if this is accomplished there is no way to prove who was using the computer. There is no physical description of the person. By the time the address is located the computer could be removed or destroyed.<br /><br />My point is I want more logging of activities on the Internet. I want more technology to link Internet activities to a real person. Without it cyber-crime will continue to soar. I don't see how having all my activities on the Internet logged is an issue - so long as I am not doing anything illegal.<br /><br />The worst aspect of all this logging is that the logs are sometimes used to directly target marketing to certain demographics. If the logs record you accessing BBC News online this could be of interest to a Financial Times salesman. The salesman would be happy to pay good money for this information.<br /><br />To the people who have a concern about this:<br />1. We are permanently bombarded with advertising every day of our lives. It doesn't stop us watching television for example. We are all capable of simply ignoring it.<br />2. We get so many valuable services on the Internet for free. If users of the service do not pay at point of use the providers need to obtain an income to support the service somewhere. As the consumer has come to expect so much for nothing on the Internet this is a situation of our own making - and to be honest - I would rather read an advert than part with hard-earned cash!<br /><br />To conclude - we need to markedly increase security on the Internet for the protection of the community. I don't believe it is any less private than walking down the street. If I am abiding by the law I don't see what the problem is with my activities being recorded.<br /><br />ChrisChrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-43114440505735443562007-12-12T00:27:00.000+00:002008-01-11T12:08:32.556+00:00Commercial Interests vs New TechnologyI often wonder what the world of computers and technology would be like were it not for commercial companies making sure their user's choices are restricted to their own products, and were it not for all the law suits due to infringing patents that defy common sense.<br /><br />Competing techinical products are great - if only the winner was the one that proved to be technically superior as opposed to the one whose inventor had the biggest pockets.<br /><br />It is an ongoing joke in the web programmer circles as to how Amazon managed to get a patent for a One-Click shopping service. Most shopping websites allow customers to create a profile holding their address and payment details to make repeat shopping easier. So I am browsing a shopping site, I have logged into the site so they know my identity. If such a site allows me to click a 'Buy' button and my order is created this infringes an Amazon patent.<br /><br />Another example is the iPod. On it I store music - each track having properties such as Genre, Artist, Album and Track name. The obvious way for me to choose what to play is to select the property I wish to use, then to look through a list of all music sorted by said property. This is patented by Creative Labs. How else am I meant to choose my music? Any 10 year old asked this question will come up with the same answer. How can a commercial company patent something that is not a serious invention?<br /><br />These patents causes competing products that cannot afford to pay for a patent license to deliberately design some inferior interface. How is this good for the user?<br /><br />Quite often a company has a successful product that people like. It gets an established user base. As the product and technology evolves this company makes some bad decisions that lead to a worse product. Users are then stuck with a dilema and have to choose to put up with the new inferior product, or deal with the upheaval and problems of switching to an alternate and incompatible product.<br /><br />I get so annoyed when features are removed as products evolve and users are forced to buy a second add-on product or upgrade to get the features back.<br /><br />A final issue is when companies set rules and restrictions that govern how other companies can create products to integrate with their products. So often these are designed to prevent integration and cause users inconvenience to limit the user base that embrace the competitors product.<br /><br />Havn't I done well not mentioning Microsft and Apple in the above article?? <br /><br />Maybe this is one area where I should be grateful to the regulation fanatics that run the EU? They have taken on Microsoft for uncompetitive practicses. The problem with fining a company for bad practices is that they simple pass the cost of the fine on to the end user. When you buy your next Windows think how nice it is that some of that price paid the record breaking EU fine they incurred! I await to see if the EU ruling actually improves the user experience.<br /><br />ChrisChrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35303831.post-24271755078345963852007-11-15T20:48:00.000+00:002007-11-15T23:11:48.839+00:00Review of iPhone UKToday I have had my first experience with an iPhone. It is definitely in the Bleading Edge Technology category because it has plenty of serious shortcomings.<br /><br />To summarise the only reason I would buy one is pose value - everyone who sees it will notice you have got the latest and greatest gadget to hit the phone market for ages. In my opinion it is a very nice gadget that will really raise the bar in terms of mobile handset design. Let it do its job and see what the competition release in response.<br /><br />There is no such thing as a perfect mobile phone. <strong>I am of the opinion designers deliberatly leave features out so they can add them to the next version and you will part with more cash to upgrade.</strong> If the iPhone really did everything you would only buy one. The range will evolve and features will be enhanced.<br /><br /><strong>The first problem with it is that it is not a 3G handset.</strong> If all you want to do is make voice calls this phone will do that perfectly on the 2G networks. In such an allegedly advanced phone this is unforgivable!<br /><br /><strong>3G networks enable 3 very important enhancements.</strong><br />1. Video Calling. 3G phones normally have a camera on the front of the phone so when you are in a call you can see your other party and they can see you.<br />2. Mobile TV. This is basically up to 15 special only-for-mobile channels from Sky including News Sport Music and Soaps. The channels are broadcast on demand to your handset - which would look great on the iPhone with its massive screen and with it being built for video.<br />3. Broadband speed Internet. The maximum speed internet connection possible over 2G is called GPRS. This is the same speed as an old fashioned dial-up modem: 56k. 3G enables 10x faster Internet access.<br /><br />The touchscreen interface system is not as revolutionary as the hype makes out. It was actually annoying. I could speculate as to why, but I won't. About 1 in 4 times I touched a link or an icon the phone ignored my request and I had to try again - touching for longer or pressing more gently and more specifically on the link or icon. On a couple of occasions I would touch one place and the phone would sense my touch about an inch away from where I pressed.<br /><br />I sampled all the ring tones in the shop and found myself having to move the phone nearer to my ear so I could hear them. If the phone was in my pocket there is no way the ring is loud enough for normal use - even on maximum volume. Fortunately there is a vibrate mode.<br /><br />You must have heard all the hype about 'Cover Flow'. When browsing your music you tilt the phone 90 degrees and it shows all the cover artwork for your music. You can flick left and right through these to pick the album you want. When you find a track there was no way to do a 'add to playlist' feature, like holding the button on the normal iPod would. If you go through to the special screen for editing playlists the cover flow feature does not work. Common sense would also say if you were browsing your contacts and turned the phone round you could look through all the photos of your friends to find the picture of who you wanted to call. This does not happen. Cover flow cannot be used to pick between the photos and videos on your device. I am positive this will be added soon. It is such a serious short-sight. You cannot use good quality headphones with the iPhone - you have to use the supplied Apple in-ear headphones.<br /><br />And there is more....... The camera is like a cheap point and shoot - reviews say the 2MP photos are poor quality. The ones I saw in the shop looked OK on the iPhone screen. There are no options at all. Most now have options like white balance, shoot mode, night settings etc. It also cannot shoot video. <strong>The iPhone does not support multi-media messaging.</strong> It cannot send MMS multi-media text messages with photos and videos etc. It only receives MMS as links which you have to open in the internet browser.<br /><br />The devices come with 8Gb internal memory - which is very poor for a video device. I have outgrown my 15Gb iPod with just music! The memory cannot be replaced or upgraded for example with a memory stick as seen on most other phones and digital cameras. The battery cannot be removed - if you are on the move and it goes flat, you are goosed. You can't even get your SIM card out to put in another phone without the special tool.<br /><br />Next - most gadget lovers that have high monthly phone bills travel around and need internet access anywhere. When you buy your iPhone the 18 month contract you have to sign to activate your phone includes internet data. Say I am on a customer site or in a hotel with my work laptop. It is not possible for your laptop to connect to the internet through your iPhone and the O2 network.<br /><br />That's all my gripes after 2 hours with the unit in the shop - thanks to the guys at O2 in the Arndale Manchester for not throwing me out!<br /><br />Last I have to mention the cost. £269 for the handset. Cheapest contract is 18 month @ £35 with 200 inclusive minutes. <strong>Total Cost of Ownership over 18 months £899 plus insurance.</strong><br /><br />My advice: Buy a PSP for games and videos @ £130. Buy an 80Gb (iPhone is 8Gb) Ipod Classic for music (can do videos but screen is a bit small) @ £150. For calls, email, internet, laptop connectivity and photography buy a Sony Ericsson W880i free on Vodafone 18 month contract @ £25 with 225 inclusive minutes. Oh and you don't really need the ipod anymore too - this is an amazing MP3 player. <strong>Total Cost over 18 months £730.</strong><br /><br />But I still came away from the store thinking I like the iPhone and it has potential - I will wait for a couple of evolutions like the addition of 3G and hope for one on a cheaper contract.<br /><br />ChrisChrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05225704370560900461noreply@blogger.com0