jjncj.com

My fellow good blogger Rohan Jayasekera comments on why Macs are more popular now. He's spot on: in industries that have no particular tie to a platform (mainly web and other tech), one is free to use the best platform available. That is why you'll find most tech-oriented people using either a Macintosh or Linux machine to do their day-to-day work. As a system administrator and programmer, I've exclusively used a Linux box at work since 2000, and at home since some time in 2003 (I think).

There are other reasons for the surge in popularity, though. For one, it's just a really good platform. The stability, usability, and security are top notch. I remember using OS 8 and OS 9 systems a long time ago, and while fun, they never really impressed me enough to even think about switching to the Mac. If I had not already been on Linux when OS X started getting good traction, I probably would have gone that direction.

Mac's just work. Their support in the third-party component world has historically been good, but now it's fantastic. You can buy pretty much any piece of hardware and expect it to work on the Mac. And work well, with minimal muss and fuss. Support on the software side is quite good as well.

And for those occasions when you really need Windows Parallels Virtual Machine provides a virtual environment in which Windows runs at nearly native speed.

All this adds up to traction. When the only feasible alternative out there is Windows CloudedVista*, Mac is set to reap some real rewards. It's a system that is fun to use, and easy to learn.

No wonder they are growing in market share.

*Linux is nice, and works well. But it's not always the best choice for a home user.

Tonight, I bring you an advertisement. Not a paid advertisement, or even an advertisement for something that I'd use. It's an advertisement for a birth control product. Now, before you get all bent out of shape, I didn't say I was promoting it, I just said that I was bringing you an advertisement. If you click on the picture to the right, you'll see all the names have been fuzzed out. If you've seen the ad, you probably recognize it.

So, why I am even posting about this? Humor, really. Down in the lower-left-hand corner of the add, there is a small disclaimer (in addition to the small print about one inch high across the entire bottom of the ad, which I cropped out). The disclaimer says this: "Model used for illustration purposes only." You can see it more clearly by clicking on the graphic to the left.

Now, English is a funny language. It can be, and often is, probably more than most other languages, ambiguous. According to Webster's, there are 14 different meanings for the word "model." In this case, these two are applicable: 1) "one who is employed to display clothes or other merchandise" and 2) "a usually miniature representation of something; also a pattern of something to be made" or "a type or design of product."

So, to which are they referring? If it is definition two, as seems likely, then they are saying, "That little t-shaped piece of plastic kind of looks like what we sell, but might not exactly." If, however, they are referring to definition one, which it would appear, as the disclaimer is printed directly on her likeness, it becomes rather humorous. Imagine this (expanded) disclaimer

The model you see here may not actually use the product we are advertising. In fact, she might not even like it. Her picture probably came from a stock photo agency, so she probably had no idea she was going to be promoting a birth control device until she picked up a magazine with this ad in it. You do not have to have red hair, brown eyes, or freckles to use this product, nor do you even need to be attractive. We just needed a pretty face to put on the page so you would stop and read this ad. Why? Because this ad is really targeted at men who do not want their woman to get pregnant, and do not want to go to the trouble of using a condom or (horrors!) patience to prevent pregnancy. If this ad was really targeted at women, we'd be using cute little cartoon characters that look like their dresses are made of flowers, and have petals for a headdress. Or babies....babies catch a woman's attention. But, as it was, we just wanted the cute red-head in the low-cut tank top to grab the men.

Personally, I lean toward that disclaimer. But your opinion may vary.

Izzy has a post venting his frustrations with companies that don't know how to ship to Alaska. I can relate. Since moving to Alaska in 1999, I've had my share of frustrations with companies that a) have to have it explained to them that sending USPS to Alaska doesn't cost any more (because they try to charge you more for USPS shipments to Alaska); 2) say they ship to the "continental" United States, but they exclude Alaska, that "Yes, Alaska is on the Continent," or 3) charge simply exorbitant rates for shipping a small item (oh, say a computer part) up here.

Example: Amazon
Amazon sells packs of Seventh Generation diapers* for two to three dollars less than our local Fred Meyer. Problem? Amazon classifies diapers as "grocery items," so they do not ship them to Alaska. When I inquired about this, they said that due to some items being larger, the shipping cost is too high. Hmm...really? How about putting it in a USPS box, and slapping a label on it? I don't care if it has to come fourth class, I believe (but could be wrong) there are classes of postal mail that are the same cost whether you ship them across town or across the nation.

*Yes, we usually use cloth diapers (see Blueberry Baby. But Elizabeth wears disposables to bed so she doesn't soak through when she sleeps all the way through the night, and Jonathan still wears them because cloth diapers would be extremely messy at this stage (he's exclusively breast fed, so there is, shall we say, nothing solid coming out).

Example: 1800diapers.com
Similar story: shipping to Alaska costs too much. Well, maybe, but I bet that even with shipping we could match the price we'd get up here. Which would be fine when Fred Meyer is out of what we need (which they have a scary propensity to be).

Example: Most online computer parts stores
Pick just about any online tech store (some notable exceptions, see below) and you'll pay as much or more in shipping than the item cost (for small items, of course). When you want to buy a $30 mouse, and shipping is $40, it kind defeats the point.

Example: Companies that don't know about ground service
Often, when greeted with high shipping prices, I suggest to the store's feedback center that they look into shipping via UPS Ground or FedEx Ground. I get a range of response. "We can't do that." Huh? "Our system isn't set up to handle that." Hmm...need a better system. "FedEx doesn't offer ground service." Wow, either they really don't know what they're talking about, or their FedEx account representative needs to be, shall we say, reeducated. And as much as I hate to use them, there always is the option of the United States Postal Service. They're usually pretty cheap (often with service to match), and they usually get the job done.

Example: Most small companies
It seems that smaller companies are the ones that are the worst offenders, and I suppose it's not really their fault. Either their low shipping volume, or their lack of account with a shipper (shipping items one at a time) causes them to charge the "market rate" for shipping, instead of the rate offerred to customers that have an account, or those who ship more. So, either they need to get an account, which would lower their rates at least a little bit, or they should investigate the USPS as a last resort. The note about Ground service also applies here.

Exception: Newegg.com
Newegg.com has very reasonable shipping. On most small orders, you can get FedEx two day service to Alaska for $25 to $30. Nice when you're ordering a $60 hard drive and you have to have it soon. And when you are ordering lots of small items, it starts at about $25, and doesn't go up too much with each small item. Larger items (computer cases, etc) cause shipping to climb a little faster. There are also a couple other companies out there that offer free or low cost shipping to Alaska, but I don't recall their names right now. I'll find them and put them in another post.

Exception: Christian Book Distributors
They use USPS almost exclusively, and their shipping rates are often so low that, even with shipping, they're cheaper than buying locally.

So, yeah, shipping to Alaska is a pain. Royal, big, Alaska size pain at time. I look forward to seeing how Izzy's story turns out.

Nah, you know you're really getting used to the cold when it's -25° (or colder) and you run outside in your T-shirt to plug in (or start) the car.

After reading this story my wife responded, "Rats belong in scientific studies, not fast food joints."

Well put.

I came across an interesting phishing attempt the other day. I got an e-mail that wanted me to sign in to E-Bay for a "dispute resolution." The odd thing was, all the links actually went to E-Bay's sign in page. Well, that is odd for two reasons: 1) links in E-Bay e-mails don't usually link straight to the sign-in page (you are redirected there if you need to be signed in), and 2) if you are being "phished," the phishers don't link to the legitimate site. So, I investigated further and discovered that after you signed in on the legitimate sign-in page, it redirected you to the URL that the phisher had provided, which was a page that looked like the e-bay sign in page. It appears it was designed to convince you that you had mistyped your password and were being prompted again. This was especially scary for two reasons: 1) if you had checked the URL and the security certificate before you signed in, you might not check the second time and enter your information again, and 2) it was using E-Bay's own sign-in procedure to redirect you to a phishing page. I contacted E-Bay about this and suggested they lock down their redirector. They e-mailed me back the standard boiler-plate reply and said:

Thank you for writing to eBay regarding the email you received.

Emails such as this, commonly referred to as "spoof" or "phished"
messages, are sent in an attempt to collect sensitive personal or
financial information from the recipients.

The email you reported was not sent by eBay. We have reported this email
to the appropriate authorities.

In the future, be very cautious of any email that asks you to submit
information such as your credit card numbers or passwords. If you are
ever concerned about an email you receive from eBay, simply follow these
steps:

1. Open a new Web browser and type www.ebay.com into your browser
address field to go directly to the eBay site.

2. On eBay, sign into your account and click the "My eBay" button at the
top of the page.

3. Check the My Messages section located at the top of the My eBay page.
If an email affects your eBay account, it's now in My Messages. Any
email sent to your registered eBay email address from eBay or from
another eBay member via eBay's member-to-member communication system
will now appear in My Messages.

All very good advice, but it does not fix the problem that E-Bay's sign-in procedure can be used to catch people off guard and possible obtain their login credentials.

You can see an example of what happens by going to this link. After you sign in, you will be redirected back to this post.

I hope E-Bay fixes this soon.

Congratulations go out to Jon and Caitlin Bourne on the addition of their latest. Speedy recovery to Caitlin and continued health to the new one!

Well, we're still all hanging in suspense. Is she here yet? How big? How's Caitlin?

Werner Vogel, is the CTO of Amazon.com. As such, he is probably fanatically concerned about uptime, large systems, and reliability. He's so concerned about it, he has a entire blog about it. So, when he starts talking about failure rates for hard ware, specifically the reliability of harddrives, you sit up and take notice.

He highlights two studies (Study 1, Study 2), one of them from Google, on the failure rates of harddrives, and what makes hard drives likely to fail. The interesting conclusions? It has nothing to do with use, environment, or age. Although older drives seemed to last longer than new drives. Why? Well, the newer disks were less expensive. As is often the case, you get what you pay for. There was also a "strong correlation between manufacturer/model and failure rates."

As an IT person, and specifically a system admin, harddrive failure is one of those things that is pretty high on my list of things "I really don't want to happen...ever." Those reports will make some interesting food for though next time we go buy harddrives. I think I'll be leaning toward the "enterprise class" harddrives.

Jon Bourne got to see one of his suggestions for Firefox implemented. It's always fun to see one's input used, especially in large projects like Firefox. May this be the first of many!

If you weren't convinced the first time around, yet another reason why old people shouldn't drive.. Well, at least occasional testing would be good.

I didn't know you could train rabbits.

Two days ago (2/13, Tuesday) Carl's Jr. opened here in Fairbanks, with yesterday being their first really busy day. Today on my way to work (half way across town from Carl's Jr.) I saw a bag from there along side the road. Sigh. I'm glad we have a state-wide cleanup day every spring.