Jamie's Random Musings

As I expect Vista SP1 to be available soon, and XP SP3 not long after that, I suppose I will be playing "disc jokey" with my laptop again before long. I've been meaning to mention a couple of odd things I have come across on my Lifebook S6510, so I'd best get it out of the way now. These problems are occurring now, with the laptop running XP Professional.

On a typical day, I use three different means of accessing the Internet from my laptop. At home I use Wireless-N, with a Linksys WRT350N router and the laptop built-in Intel 4965AGN adapter. At the office I use 100 Mb wired via the office DSL line, and I am required to use a fixed IP address on that connection. In the train and/or bus between the two, I use HSPA/UMTS/EDGE/GPRS via a Sierra Wireless AirCard. The problem with this comes up because of the fixed address (and therefore fixed default gateway and fixed name server) on the wired ethernet interface. If I make a fresh boot at home, everything works just fine. But if I then suspend/resume Windows, it somehow decides that the wired ethernet needs to be considered, and it adds that default gateway to the routing table, which then causes me not to be able to access the internet even though the wireless interface is working just fine. The only way around this is to change the wired interface to automatic addressing (DHCP), which then cleans out the routing table. Not a big deal, but irritating, since I keep having to change it back and forth between DHCP and fixed at home and at the office, and that was something I thought I would be able to avoid when I got wireless working.

I have port replicators on my desk both at home and at the office, and I have a PS/2 keyboard on each of them. Again, if I make a fresh boot in either location, everything works just fine. But if I use the laptop without the port replicator (on the train/bus), and suspend it, then put it on the port replicator and resume, it will frequently, but not always, not see the keyboard on the first try. If I suspend and resume again with it in the port replicator, it will usually, but not always, see the keyboard on the second try. Again, not a big deal, but irritating.

jw 14/3/2008

I recently purchased a Philips SPC1300NC webcam, and I don't think that I could be any more pleased with it. It is the current top of the line in Philips webcams, and has some impressive specifications: a 1.3 MPixel sensor (1280x1024), wide angle glass lens, two microphones, and a USB 2 connection to the computer. It has an ingenious base, which can be used as a stand on a desktop, shelf or monitor, or a clamp on a laptop or LCD display. Unlike the "clip" style that is found on the Logitech notebook webcam series, this clamp works easily, and is very stable, even with very thick displays.

The video quality is excellent, with "native" resolution up to 1280x1024 and "software interpolated" resolution up to 3840x3072 for pictures, and 1600x1200 for videos. Of course, I use my cameras primarily with Video chat programs, and in that case the frame rate and light range of the camera are much more important than very high resolutions. The SPC1300 can provide a frame rate up to 90 FPS; I can only say that it runs at 30 FPS in various Video chat programs with no problem. But where it really excels is in low-light and variable-light situations. I have tested it in my office with very, very low light, and it is fascinating to watch the driver adjust the picture until it comes up with a very acceptable quality under what I would consider impossible conditions.

The SPC1300 uses two microphones, and some very impressive noise reduction, to produce sound quality that is consistently the best I have ever heard from a camera built-in microphone. This is one of the few camera/microphone units that I think would be suitable for use with a video/audio chat program.

The USB 2 link to the computer is important for this kind of high-resolution camera. Even with impressive data compression in the camera, there is still a LOT of data to be moved between the camera and the computer, especially at the higher resolutions and frame rates that this camera is capable of.

Drivers are available for both Windows XP and Vista, and the Vista drivers are also available through Windows Update, so if you are running Vista you can just plug in the camera, and it will download and install the latest driver automatically. Note, however, that this will ONLY install the driver, and if you want the VLounge software, you will still have to install it from the CD.

The VLounge application software that comes with the camera is also quite nice. It has the usual picture and video capture capability, and access to all of the special functions and capabilities of the camera. It also has a nice "motion detector" feature, which could be used to set up a room surveillance system. It also has "Coummunicate" and "Broadcast" tabs, which just seem to contain links to other programs or web services to perform those functions.

One of my few complaints about the SPC1300NC camera, and Philips video cameras in general is that they seem to have a special version of VLounge for each camera, and the various versions and cameras only have limited cross-compatibility. I suppose this is not a big deal, as there probably aren't a lot of strange people like me who own and use numerous webcams.

The SPC1300NC is priced approximately the same as the high-end Logitech cameras (Pro 9000 / Pro for Notebooks). The trick is just finding them, because they aren't as widely available as some of the others. It has taken me quite a while to get one of them, but I can honestly say now that I finally have it, I'm glad that I stayed after it.

The strangest thing has happened. I have known since the Vista disk in my Lifebook S6510 got corrupted and wouldn't boot that I would have to reload it before SP1 comes out. Last night I decided that I probably had enough time to do that, so I swapped the XP drive out and the Vista drive in, and booted up the Fujitsu Vista Recovery DVD. That all went very smoothly, and within an hour or so I was up and running with Vista in exactly the state it had been when the Lifebook was delivered. That's pretty impressive.

Then I started loading all of my basic software - Firefox, Thunderbird, ooVoo, SightSpeed, Gizmo and so on. The more I worked with it, just getting that stuff loaded, the more I realized that I really LIKE the way this thing runs with Vista. I can't put my finger on it; it's not only the "Aero" user interface, and it's certainly not any faster than it runs with XP Pro. It's almost like an addiction... I want it, but I can't tell you why. I think this is a large part of the reason why I have kept saying over and over again, I really WANT Vista to work, to be better than XP, or at least as good, at least as fast and reliable.

Maybe Microsoft has slipped some of that subliminal mind-control software into the Aero interface... it's taking control of me... I have to have it...

No! This disk is coming out again this evening, as soon as I do a bit of testing with the Wireless-N connection, because I've updated the firmware in the router since I last had Vista running. But then it's coming out, and I'm going back to XP until SP1 is available. I swear!

jw 7/4/2008

The Skype Cheerleading Squad (also known as the Skype Journal) has a lead article today on the "Evil Genius" behind the "Sexy SPIM for Skype" (SPIM = Spam over Instant Messaging), replete with numerous pictures of exactly the type that you wouldn't want popping up on the screen in front of your children, your boss, you colleagues at a business presentation - in fact, I find them personally offensive, and don't even want them popping up in front of me alone! The article gives a fairly complete step-by-step guide on how to create such a spamming system, and seems to want to convey the impression that doing so requires some kind of "genius", I can only assume in hopes of covering up for Skype's refusal to do anything about it. As a programmer with 30+ years experience, and having watched spam grow in all forms on the arpanet, usenet and internet, I can tell you it doesn't take much "genius" at all, all it takes is a decent knowledge of scripting, a lot of determination, and a great deal of attention to detail.

However, more interesting in the article is the statement from Skype's "Chief Security Officer" as to what Skype users can do to protect themselves against it. He is totally misleading when he says:

"In addition, each Skype user has a range of privacy settings at their disposal that can prevent the receipt of any kind of unsolicited contact, whether by video, voice or chat."

What he conveniently fails to mention is that there is NO WAY for a Skype user to prevent the pop-up connection request messages from appearing, complete with whatever offensive picture the spammer chooses to include. Until Skype does something about this, you, your family, and your next business presentation are all wide open to any and all pop-up messages.

The hope for the future doesn't look good, either. Besides not mentioning the contact request problem, the Skype "Chief Security Officer" goes on to describe what Skype is trying to do about spamming, and describes efforts to identify offensive activities of individual accounts, when it is clear from the nature of the problem, the symptoms that Skype users have seen, and the description given by the Skype Cheerleading Squad that one fundamental requirement of the spam process is continuously generating new accounts to send from. Oh good, let's put a lot of effort into closing the barn door after the cows have already gotten out!

jw 5/4/2008

P.S. It is particularly ironic that the only complete Skype window they show in the article with pornographic content is a contact request window - exactly the case I have been writing about, and which neither the Skype Cheerleaders nor the Skype "Chief Security Officer" mention.

jw

Skype users are becoming increasingly irritated with the steadily rising flood of pop-up pornographic messages and pictures. As usual with user support requests, complaints and suggestions, Skype is totally ignoring their users. Here is the situation:

When someone wants to add you to their Skype contact list, they send you a contact request. This request contains their name, picture, and whatever text they write to ask you to add them. All of this pops up in the middle of your screen, and you can then either accept or deny the request. Unfortunately, spammers and pornographers have discovered this "feature", so now what you get unexpectedly appearing on your screen is often a lewd or outright pornographic picture, with some correspondingly suggestive text. If you are in the middle of a business meeting this can be embarrassing. But if it is on your home computer, where you have loaded Skype so your kids can talk to their grandparents or whatever, it suddenly becomes a much larger and much more personal problem!

There is nothing you can do to stop this pornography from popping up on your screen. Think about that, and read it again. IF YOU USE SKYPE, THERE IS NOTHING YOU CAN DO TO STOP THIS PORNOGRAPHY FROM POPPING UP ON YOUR SCREEN AT ANY TIME. Skype has made it perfectly clear that they are not interested in stopping this, or in making it possible for Skype users to block it.

The only suggestions from Skype "support" (for the very few who have gotten any response at all), and from the "experts" in the Skype User Forum, is to change your security settings to accept calls and chat requests only from people in your contact list. This has no effect whatsoever on contact requests, however. Then they say that you can block future contact requests from the same person - but of course, if that person is continually creating new Skype accounts, they can send the same garbage to you over and over again. (That makes me wonder how many of Skype's vaunted "250 million users" are actually multiple accounts set up and abandoned by spammers)

There are simple solutions to this problem. Just not showing the picture in a connection request would be a huge step forward. Treating the request as just another "event", which is flagged in the main Skype window, rather than suddenly, unexpectedly opening a window, would virtually eliminate the problem.

Unfortunately, as I said at the beginning, Skype has shown no interest in doing anything about this problem. In the long run, though, they are going to have to something. It would be nice, especially for our children, if it were sooner rather than later.