home links tools blog about
home

« April 2006 | Main | June 2006 »

May 29, 2006

Mikeey's Vista Review

Stuff that doesn't suck:
Parental Controls. They're exactly what you'd like them to be. Not only can you specify times when a user is allowed on the machine, but you can specify generic web-type settings, or get medieval and completely specify allowed/disallowed sites as you'd like.

Parental_small

More importantly, you can specify which native WINDOWS components the user can interact with (like the control panel, etc.), and you can grant/revoke access to certain programs. Honestly, it's perfect.

Performance Diagnostics. Finally, I've got an easy, logical way to see disk activity. This alone makes me very tempted to switch to Vista TODAY.

Performance_small

And, more importantly than just showing me nice graphs - I can now easily see what's got hooks/etc into various files. Kind of like building in extra goodness of the type that's typically associated with SysInternal's utilities. It's also nice that perfmon and all of its goodness is right there as well.

Reliability Diagnostics. There's also a spiffy new interface that reports on any failures - nice.

Reliability_small

'In Place Navigation.' I'm sure MS has their own term for this, but whatever the name, I like. At any point in your current path (as displayed in explorer) you can 'branch' in to a completely new location. VERY sweet.

Inplacenav_small

(For example, in the screen cap above, I can immediately 'branch' or navigate to any root directories off of my J drive. Not the best invention EVAR, but very helpful, and something I'll likely use. (It takes a bit of time to get used to, but can be pretty useful.)

Startups: More goodness in the spirit of SysInternal's utilities (i.e. Autoruns) that will help you keep tabs on evil installers. (No not ad/spyware - but crud like iTunes and other crap that feels it needs to start up 5-12 MB of 'services' each time your box starts.)

Startups_small

Very Cool.

Add Remove Windows Components: By now you've hopefully heard that MS will let you upgrade your Vista 'version' by paying an upgrade fee online - and then just turning on what features you need/come bundled with your 'purchased' version.

Addremove_small

What I like about it, however, is that it makes it easy to see what's installed or not - no more clicking that bleepin' details > details > details button - it's all exposed in a simple-to-use treeview control now.

Not Sucky, Not So Hot Either:
Aero Glass: Yawn. Check out all of the screen caps up until this point. Yeah, Aero-Glass is cool - it's pretty spiffy, and YES it's much more than merely making the borders of your windows transparent. Only, it's really just nothing more than making the borders of your windows transparent - with some very impressive hardware rendering. Which is my big beef - the hardware requirements. There just isn't enough 'candy' there to justify the absurd hardware requirements. Hopefully we'll see some other coolness come out the UI, or I'm going to consider it a MAJOR disappointment (as much as I like what's there).

Flip 3D: Mega Yawn. I'd seen images of windows in 3D from various reviews of Vista - and somehow figured that we could 'stash' or 'minimize' them off to the side in a semi-3D mode - kind of like what you CAN do with WPF (Avalon). But no. After seriously hunting around and pecking at various ways to even get Flip 3D to work, I seriously underwhelmed when I got it to work. What's it do? Simple: Instead of hitting ALT+TAB to cycle through your windows, Flip 3D lets you WIN+TAB through your windows, but shows them as thumbnails 'stacked' in a so-called 3D manner.
Flip3d

Big YAWN. I mean, cool, I guess. But I hope this isn't one of the things that's been holding Vista up. (And from the TINY bit I've seen, I'm thinking I could get VERY similar 'candy' from a *gasp* Mac - but much LESS hardware. Seriously... I don't GET the 256 MB graphics card requirement - for what, some killer shading? hrrmmmmpppph.)

The Ugly / Sucky:
User Access Control. This stuff just plain sucks. It really feels like a great big hack, and I'm surprised more people in the security community aren't crying foul. (Maybe the fact that they're not means I don't know what I'm talking about - but I can guarantee you that you'll hate this 'functionality' too).

Uac1_small

So, you're playing around with Vista - checking out new functionality - all of a sudden the entire screen dims, and a pop up demands your attention. Something currently in operation has crossed a trust boundary - would you like it to continue?

Not only do I think this is dumb (most people using the machine won't know what's going on - they're trying to 'get' to a part of their computer, see something, or install software that they would like to have work - so they're GOING to just click YES. Security problem with spyware/malware and luring NOT solved.

And this thing is SERIOUSLY annoying. While looking at the Task Manager's processes tab, I clicked the 'show processes from all users' option - the screen dimmed, everything stopped. Did I want to proceed? Um Sure.

My favorite part was when Vista booted up - something was trying to run, did I want to let it continue?

Uacfirewall_small

Um, yeah. I think I'll let that one fly. (But hey, thanks for the alert on something attempting to run what might POSSIBLY be a malicious program.) Overall, as to the UAC thing, it's analogous to the fact that I'm a terror risk. See, whenever I fly anywhere since 9/11, it turns out that in 1972 there was a male with the last name of Campbell born, who apparently MIGHT have ties to terrorism. Because _I_ am male, was born in 1972, and have the last name of Campbell - I can no longer check in online - I have to do it at the counter, in order to keep everyone on the flight SAFE. (In other words, it's a pathetic use of smoke and mirrors that doesn't do a damned thing.)

Other Factors:
Despite my major contention with the effectiveness, AND the annoyance of the User Access controls, and my lack of fanfare over aero-glass, I was pretty impressed by the overall beta. Installation was NICE - and almost all of my hardware was automatically detected. Performance was excellent - fast enough that I found myself thinking I could switch to using this BETA as a primary platform. And, yeah, the Aero Glass stuff is cool - just nothing huge. In other words, I've heard analysts and (I believe) MS spokespeople talk about how Vista will be the next big revolution in computing - the biggest revolution since Windows 95. Well, from everything I saw, I've got to say that I must be missing something. What I saw was a very NICE upgrade, maybe even a nice bit of evolution - but nothing revolutionary.

All that said, I'm totally willing to give it a chance - and I'm currently thinking really hard of making the switch to Vista as my primary platform - it's snappy, better to look at than XP, and has some cool new gizmos - and I've only scratched the surface. And it's definitely NOT a failure (other than that UAC crap), just not something that I would have had to expect to wait 3+ years for - that's all.

Posted on May 29, 2006 | | Comments (1) | TrackBack (1)

May 25, 2006

Missing ASP.NET Tab in Windows Server R2 and x64

Fellow ASPInsider Phil Winstanley recently blogged about an issue he had been monitoring in an email thread. Specifically, the email thread was strongly leaning towards implying that the ASP.NET tab wasn't supported in R2 and x64 editions of Windows 2003 Server (which would have been a BIG deal).

Well, the email thread he was monitoring was one that I started. (And was on a private forum where Insiders can post feedback to Microsoft and get help/feedback from other Insiders and MS folks).

BackStory:
Normally when the ASP.NET tab isn't in place, that just means the Server hasn't been instructed to map any of its sites to ASP.NET 2.0 in IIS. Mapping is easy - just jump to C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727 (assuming that the 2.0 Framework is installed) in a command prompt, and run aspnet_regiis with the -i and -enable switches (or with the -sn <path> and -enable switches if you just want to upgrade a single site).

Only, I had done that, and a couple of other combinations - including uninstalling, re-installing, and even installing/mapping to lower versions (i.e. aspnet_regiis is installs whatever version of the framework the .exe is located in... so v1.1.4322 will do ASP.NET 1.1) and I still wasn't getting the ASP.NET tab to show up. (i.e. I had tried a number of 'vulcan death grip' switch options - but nothing).

Paranoia sets in:
I started to worry that maybe the ASP.NET tab wasn't supported in R2, and therefore launched an email thread - hoping that I had just missed something stupid. Another Insider with much better search skills than me (since I _did_ google first), pasted a link from the MS Office site  that surely seemed to indicate that there was a basis for my paranoia. Amazingly, it stated:

The ASP.NET tab does not appear on x64-based editions of Windows Server 2003 and Windows Server 2003 R2. This tab also does not appear if only one version of ASP.NET is allowed in the web service extensions.
[ exasperations added (original) ]

Worse, it repeated that notification over and over again throughout the page. Huh? What??!!

The Truth about the ASP.NET tab in R2 / x64 Installations:
Luckily Scott Guthrie noticed that my panties were starting to get in a wad (they do that some times), and put me in touch with some folks at MS to help look in to the situation. We weren't able to figure out what was up with my ASP.NET tab, but I did get some confirmation from MS:

The documentation on that Office page is false. In other words:

The ASP.NET tab is fully supported in all version of Windows Server 2003 R2, and is EVEN supported in x64/ia64 versions of Windows Server 2003 and Windows Server 2003 R2. The ONLY place that you won't see the ASP.NET tab is when you are running an x64/ia64 System and have IIS set to run in 32bit compatibility mode.

At this point I'm still NOT sure what caused my ASP.NET tab to disappear in my installation - likely just my incredibly good luck. That said, one of the caveats about getting the ASP.NET tab to show up is that IF you install IIS _AFTER_ you install the 2.0 framework, you have to run aspnet_regiis. (This wasn't my issue, I installed in the 'correct' order - and either way, running aspnet_regiis should make your ASP.NET tab display.)  So if anyone reading this is looking for their own ASP.NET tab - just run aspnet_regiis.

Conclusion:
Just for the heck of it though, I tried getting the ASP.NET tab in an R2 image, so I pulled up a Virtual Machine I was using for an upcoming demo and reverted it back to the 'base' image snapshot, then used the Add Remove Programs | Windows Components dialog to 1) add IIS, 2) Install the .NET Framework (it's an optional component on R2 versions of Windows Server 2003).

Aspnet_r2

And, Wohoo! Everything worked -with the exact same IIS/ASP.NET options that I had chosen before. Still no idea what happened -  but some day I'll just repave (after I head to Costco and get a three-pack of chickens to sacrifice along the way, just to make sure).


Posted on May 25, 2006 | | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0)

FCC's Do Not Call List: Make sure to Complain

UPDATE: If you've linked here from Plip's blog looking for info on the ASP.NET tab, click here. (Plip accidentally linked to the wrong post.)

So, we just got a phone call from the "Cancer Fund of America". They _sell_ items to anyone who may be suffering from Cancer.

That's NOT a charity in my book. (No they didn't say that proceeds went to help cancer victims, they were trying to make a sale to anyone in my house with cancer. First of all, not a permitted call, second - talk about vultures.)

Make sure you get off your butt when telemarketers try to be sneaky. I think we can all attest to how much better our lives have gotten since the FCC's do not call list was put in place. Let's not let inactivity hose us when telemarketers try really lame things to get around restrictions.

Here's a link to instructions on how to complain. (Scroll down a ways - you can 'complain' via email, the phone, or mail.)  See, complaining is easy *grin*.

Posted on May 25, 2006 | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

May 24, 2006

Really Simple Syndication

So, forget what you already know about RSS - that it's for blogs, etc. (Because while it's true that blogging and RSS are almost synonymous these days, RSS doesn't have the word "blog" or "podcast" or any other word typically associated with blogging in it.)

But, as you know, RSS stands for Really Simple Syndication.

In computing you've effectively got two major mindsets for communication (lately): the request-response model (which is really what the web is based on), where users request information when they need (think of a trip to google); and the newer trend towards publication and subscription (or pub-sub). PubSub attempts to give clients/users the ability to 'sign up' to resources they express an interest in, and be updated when new content is delivered.

RSS just happens to be a great way to describe 'published' or syndicated material. But it isn't limited strictly to rants about the government, reminiscences of vacations, recipes, technical blather, or anything else typically associated with blogging.

Enter RSSBus.

I'm still not quite sure what to make of it, but it looks like an RSS-instead-of-UDDI approach to systems integration. I still have a bit of a hard time shaking my pre-conceived notions about RSS (and its relation to blogging/etc.), otherwise, I think there might be some merit in some enterprises. (Though I tend to wonder if it would go over as a HUGE success with pointy-haired bosses ("huh? what? Web services using blogging technology? Wow... yeah, that sounds cutting edge - does it provide support for lego-mind-storms via XML?"), and be sneered at by developers out of a pure sense of NIH (Not Invented Here)?)

Posted on May 24, 2006 | | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Um ... No. Unacceptable

This kind of crap is completely unacceptable on a server:

Bull_crap

Granted, I guess you COULD argue that all patching should be required to go through rigourous testing within an organization blah blah blah before being applied (and should then be done manually) instead of being left to the auto-mangling update functionality - but spare me.

Posted on May 24, 2006 | | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

May 23, 2006

Abstraction: Learning to love the "My Documents" Folder

For a long time, I really really hated the whole "My Documents" thing about windows.

Mostly just because of how obscenely restrictive it was (and how much it SUCKED in Pocket PC).
But, I've actually really grown to love it over the last few months - because of the incredible abstraction it provides.

Case in point. I'm getting ready to throw Vista Beta 2 on my box. I've got a 60GB HD on my laptop (and a few external USB drives) which up until an hour ago I had configured with 4 partitions roughly like so:

C: 20 GB
D: 6 GB (All of my real 'data' - stored off of the system partition to make re-installs tons easier)
E: 24 GB (data/music/MSDN ISOs, etc)
F: 8 GB (second system partition)

Well, control freak that I am, I wanted to put both of my 'system' partitions back to back (i.e. C & D, not C & F). So... I:
1) Copied all data out of D, E, and F on to a USB Backup.
2) Changed the location of My Documents (which WAS at D:\My Documents) temporarily to C:\Documents and Settings\Mike\My Documents. (Just right click on your My Documents folder in Windows Explorer, select Properties, and you can specify where the 'guts' of this folder will live - you can even have it copy 'your documents' to the new location if desired.)
3) Repointed my Desktop to C:\Documents and Settings\Mike\Desktop from D:\Desktop using the Special Folders management do-hickie in Tweak UI.

Once all of that was taken care of, I:
4) Destroyed the Partitions by right-clicking My Computer | Manage | Disk Management, and then just right clicking D, E, and F to Delete them (gulp).
Delete_partition
5) Used the Disk Management interface to create three new partions, leaving me roughly with the following:
C: 20 GB
D: 8 GB (second system partiton - close to the primary system partion... ahhhh order)
E: 16 GB (data - accessible to BOTH system partitions, but not sandwitched between them)
F: 12 GB (more data)

6) Copied all of my files back to their NEW homes.
7) Repointed "My Documents" to E:\My Documents\ and repointed my Desktop to E:\Desktop.

The benefit? Once I did all of that everything works PEACHY. I had to update a number of my Slick Run magic words - but that was a sinch. Otherwise, NOTHING. I didn't miss a beat.

I initially started cramming ALL of my stuff in to my "My Documents" folder about 9 months ago - just because it made backups a lot easier (and keeping them OFF of the System Drive (C:\) make reformatting/fdisk-ing absurdly simple). But tonight I was impressed by just how well using that 'abstraction' of "My Documents" pays off. (i.e. iTunes still knows what music I own, Visual Studio still knows where to find all of my projects, etc, etc, etc.)



Posted on May 23, 2006 | | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

CodePlex: Grasshopper sees the wisdom

CodePlex.

My immediate thought was that if this thing is supposed to be a replacement, effectively, for gotdotnet.com, then it was going to be a dissapointement - because not everyone is going to be able to poney up the $10k for a shiny VSTS Level/Caliber MSDN Subscription.

But it looks like there are ways... 'around' that. Only, I don't think the intention is to get you around that obstacle. I think the intention is to get you to ENJOY that obstacle - so much so that you become tempted by it (and think about setting up a tent, or maybe a lemonade stand, complete with check-in constraints, and all the other goodies).

Frankly, not bad.

I think the site could use some definite filtering/navigational help - but it's insanely young. Otherwise, I'm going to keep my eye on it. I may even end up dropping ReverseDOS on it once I make a few more major mods.

Posted on May 23, 2006 | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

May 19, 2006

Dell Customer Service 'bots

A few days ago I got the following email (out of the blue) entitled: Dell customer issue-Mike:

Dear Mike,
Dell routinely visits online communities to reach out to our customers.  In doing so, we have identified you as a customer with an outstanding issue.  We would like to help resolve any remaining customer care or technical support concerns you may have.  If you still require assistance with this issue, please provide us with your full name and phone number so that we may contact you directly.

Margo
Blah blah blah (contact info type stuff)

Spiffy eh? I'm pretty sure it was in relation to this post (where I talked about outsourcing, etc.).

Well, today, 'somebody' (or something) posted a comment to that post. The comment says it was from Debbie - but TypePad actually says the name of the person that created the post was none other than James Shaw (even though the email/contact info listed is for a 'debbie').

So, options:

1) James Shaw isn't staying busy enough with Telligent, Dozing Dogs, and blogging, and now he's resorted to posing as a dell customer service rep.
2) Debbie just wanted me to take NOTICE of what she was saying, and posted as James (then got cold feet and signed her own name).
3) TypePad (my blogging engine/service) lost its mind.
4) Dell has begun phase one of its intelligent robot initiative and the bot that made/spammed this comment needs a few kinks worked out (phase two of the intelligent robot initiative is to start using bots to answer customer phone calls). (And hey, Debbie's not a bad name for a bunch of intelligent robots... )

Ideas? Thoughts? Concerns (other than for my sanity)?

Posted on May 19, 2006 | | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

May 17, 2006

Solace

Seriously, one of the best things I ever did (and something I installed today 'reset' it... grrrr):

Start > Control Panel > Sounds and Audio Devices > Sounds (tab) > Program Events.Windows Explorer.Start Navigation > Sounds: = none.

Solace

No more of that infernal 'click clicking' sound everytime I navigate into a new folder or browse to a new site.

click. click. click...

Posted on May 17, 2006 | | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

May 13, 2006

Now there's a killer idea...

I love VMware's Workstation - all the goodness and virtualization benefits of Microsoft's VPC (which most people reading this will be familiar with), but so much faster and more robust that it's almost spooky.

Only there's one thing VMware stinks at: 'pausing' your VM. VPC makes the whole 'save state' operation pretty easy, quick, and painless. (There's a bit of CPU chugging and some decent HD activity - but it only takes about 20 seconds - tops.)  VMware, on the other hand, makes 'pausing' painful. The pause process just, usually, takes about 20 seconds, but then you're sitting, and waiting for the machine to completely recover state sometimes for MINUTES when you go to restart it.

It was taking so long I decided I'd try shutting down and rebooting instead of pause/unpause. It was actually faster. Considerably.

Then I thought: hmmmm... Hibernating in Windows would probably scream. It does. I can hibernate and 'thaw' in seconds - it rules in terms of speed, provides a spiffy way to free up resources, and doesn't cause you to 'lose your place'. (The only issue, of course, is that network connectivity takes a slight jolt - but that's the same issue if you pause/unpause as well.)

Posted on May 13, 2006 | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Next »