The best phone in the world, until it broke

I didn’t review it on the site, but for about the past 9 months I have been using the Palm Pre phone from Bell.  I loved that phone quite a bit.  It had the form factor I wanted, being a phone with a touch screen and a sliding keyboard, a portrait slider. It also had an innovative operating system, WebOS, that I really enjoy using.  I loved using that phone a lot. But, the Palm Pre had one fatal flaw that has proven too be too much.  The hardware had absolutely terrible quality. In a little over 9 months of use, I had 3 of them break.  On the first unit, the screen actually cracked from bottom to top, and not from being dropped. the headphone jack also stopped working.  Thankfully I purchased warranty on my plan, so I was able to take it into bell and get a different Pre.  The second one lasted another 3 months, and what happened to that was that the touch screen stopped working entirely, making the phone impossible to use.  The third problem, and this happened to me on Monday of this week, was that in the middle of the night the phone rebooted, and never turned back on.

I loved that phone so much, it did absolutely everything I wanted it to do, in the form factor that I wanted.  I’m a huge proponent of Palm’s WebOS operating system. I think it’s significantly better than the iPhone OS, or iOS as apple likes to call it, and I believe it has some great potential.  When I bought that phone I intended on it being a phone I would use for at least 2 years, maybe even 3. Palm was reliable on keeping the software updated, and adding new features, and while small, there were more and more apps being developed every day.

The Pre was plagued with hardware problems at launch. I had heard about this, but didn’t think it would be nearly as bad as it would be.  From what I understand, if you got a good unit, it was solid and never broke. Unfortunately there were far too few of those units that had no problems.  My hope with the first two broken units was that I would replace them with hardware that would not break, and unfortunately that did not happen.  I wanted to make it work, I wanted to keep using the Palm Pre

But the simple fact is that I cannot keep using a phone that dies on average every 3 months.  Especially when it breaks completely and I can’t get a replacement phone immediately. For me my phone is my central communication device. Phone calls, voicemail, email, twitter, Facebook, and pretty much any way possible to communicate with me get funneled through my phone.  I’ve become far too dependant on it to have something that breaks all the time. Whether that’s actually a good thing or not is an entire other issue for another time.

Monday afternoon I went to a bell store and purchased a Samsung Galaxy S Vibrant. This phone just came out on Bell, and is a 4” touch screen Android phone.  After 4 days of use I can say that I really love this phone. Is it as good as the Pre, I’m not sure yet.  There are a few things I miss about the Pre, and some things I really love that the Pre didn’t have.  I’m going to be doing a full review of the phone in the coming days.  The real test will be about 3 months from now. If it doesn’t break by then, it’ll be a success.

New Camera!

Up until a few months ago I used, and was very happy with, a Canon Powershot SD870IS camera.  I carried it with me pretty much everywhere, and used it quite a bit.  Then one day, I pulled it out of my pocket, turned it on, and my LCD was cracked.  I was presented with a small circular “hole” in the screen, right in the top center.  The camera still works fine, however the crack in the screen is growing, and with no viewfinder having part of the LCD being broken really means that the camera becomes harder to use, eventually becoming impossible.  I knew I’d need a replacement eventually.
As I slowly started to stop using the 870 I have been using my Palm Pre more and more for taking pictures.  the 3 Megapixel camera in the Pre takes good pictures for the most part, and I have found that I didn’t really miss carrying my 870 with me all the time anymore.  I knew I would eventually need a new camera, especially for when I am on holidays this year, but I waited until I absolutely needed it before buying, so I would know what kind of camera I would want, and waiting for new models to come out.
As much as I would love an SLR camera, they are very expensive, and quite frankly, I probably wouldn’t use it as much as I should because of the size.  There would be no point to me owning an SLR camera if I’d never take it with me anywhere.  So an SLR was out.  I had a few features I really wanted in a smaller camera.  They were

  • longer zoom, at least 8x
  • 720p video mode
  • good low light images (for the type of camera)
  • some kind of manual controls
  • Good image stabilization

There were several cameras that met at least those requirements, the last two that I was looking at were the Sony Cybershot DSC-HX5V and the Canon Powershot SX210IS.  I won’t break down all the features, but there are a few differences between them.  The Canon camera has a longer zoom (14 over 10), more megapixels (again, 14 instead of 10), overall better camera controls, and a slightly better flash than the Sony camera.  Where Sony’s camera excels is in it’s manual options, slightly better low light pictures, better video options (capable fo 1080i video, and more options for taking videos) as well as featuring a Compass and GPS for geotagging photos.  The rest of the features were similar.
After trying out the cameras, and reading several reviews, I picked the Sony Cybershot over the Canon camera.  There were a few reasons why, some of them more important than others.  The Sony camera has been regarded as generally having better image quality, especially in lower light conditions.  Sony pulls this off because their lens is a little shorter thanks to the smaller zoom and the sensor has a backlight that illuminates when the camera is in a low light situation to improve on the amount of light it can collect.  Having fewer megapixels also helps a great deal, as fewer megapixles on the same size sensor means that each pixel will be larger.  Because of that, each pixel can collect more detail.  I’m very happy that Sony decided that the mexapixel arms race is not as important to them anymore, and kept it to a reasonable 10.2 megapixels in an effort to increase image quality, and it worked.
The better video modes on the Sony camera also really tipped the scales.  the Sony Camera is capable of shooting 1080i AVCHD video, with full control of the zoom lens and the ability to focus while a video is shooting.  I will likely be shooting in the camera’s 720p H.264 mode, because the file sizes are considerably smaller (60 seconds of recorded 1080i AVCHD video from the camera came out to a whopping 167MB), and H.264 is a format that is easier to manipulate and compatible with more software.  Having a point and shoot with HD video, with full zoom and focus control, means that I can put my Flip Mino HD away, and can carry one camera to take images and video.
Having a GPS and compass was a nice little add on that I believe I will really appreciate over time.  With that feature I can tag exactly where in the world I was when I took a picture, as well as what direction I was pointing when I took it.  That info is built right into the EXIF data in the picture, so it will always be there.  I’m looking forward to going into software like iPhoto in a few months and looking at all the different locations I’ve taken pictures, especially when I’m on holidays or on the road for work.  My Palm Pre has geotagging on pictures thanks to it’s GPS, and while it doesn’t work 100% of the time thanks to a weak GPS in the phone, I really like looking at the map of the pictures I have taken, even around the city.
The last thing to say about this camera is that I didn’t buy it to take with me everywhere.  It is very solid and sturdy and could stand up to that no problem, and when I’m going somewhere and carrying a bag of some sort with me, I’ll probably toss it into the bag.  But when I’m just heading out, my Palm Pre does the job just fine.  My hope is that the DSC HX5V will be the last “pocket camera” I ever buy, and that by the time I’m looking for a new phone again, the quality of the cameras in them will be almost as good, or nearly as good, as the point and shoots we get now.  The iPhone 4 comes very close to this, and I look forward to others catching up.  Maybe when that happens I can look at getting an SLR, but until then the Sony Cybershot DSC-HX5V will be my camera of choice, and it does the job well.
I will be taking a ton of pictures with the HX5V on an upcoming trip. Some of them will end up on Flickr while I’m on the trip (though I will mostly be uploading pictures taken with my Pre direct).  After I’m back there will be a proper set on Flickr with the pictures taken with the camera.

The Edmonton Twitter Community - what makes it good, and why we have been noticed.

I'm not going to lie, this post is 100% inspired by this blog post by Adriel Hampton (@adreilhampton). Mr. Hampton is a "journalist, Gov 2.0 and new media strategist, public servant, and licensed private investigator" in San Francisco. His blog post highlighted the Edmonton Twitter community, known by our hashtag of #yeg, as a wonderful example of how a good Twitter can be built.

I'm not going to lie, this post is 100% inspired by this blog post by Adriel Hampton (@adreilhampton). Mr. Hampton is a "journalist, Gov 2.0 and new media strategist, public servant, and licensed private investigator" in San Francisco. His blog post highlighted the Edmonton Twitter community, known by our hashtag of #yeg, as a wonderful example of how a good Twitter can be built.

I've never much thought about it before, likely because I'm so engrained in the community myself, but Twcommunityitter really has brought Edmonton closer together than ever. Not only do ordinary people use twitter, but several local TV and radio personalities use twitter as well, to directly interact with the community. This has allowed for a more direct approach to them, and personally makes me feel much more connected to those organizations, because often times I can say something to them, or ask a question, and get a real, personal response.

So often what makes Twitter great is the people you interact with. What has really solidified it for me is the people I have met, face to face. I think that's part of what make our community unique, and has really added a more personal touch. The fact that I've actually met, and spent time with, the people I'm having a conversation with on Twitter adds an extra depth of meaning to what we are talking about. Sure it's easy to talk to someone through Twitter, but taking the time to actually get to know personally has transformed my perception of the service. I know one of my goals for 2010 is to go out to more of our Twitter meetups than I have been this year. The friendships and connections that are being built there are too valuable to ignore. Part of that goal is to try to get even more people to come out to those meetups. There are hundreds of people on Twitter in the Edmonton area, but for most of our large meetups we are getting 30-40 participants. There are new faces every time, which is good, but the more personal the experience becomes, the more powerful Twitter becomes. Twitter may be one of the more powerful communication tools of the decade, and leveraging it's power is something that can be very useful.

Edmonton owes a lot to Mack Male (@mastermaq) for really kickstarting the community. Without him, it would not be where it is today, and he is still one of the leaders. If you are in Edmonton, and not following him, you should be. If something is happening in Edmonton, chances are he's tweeted about it.

2009 was the breakout year for Twitter, and here in Edmonton, we embraced it and took it to an entirely new level. I absolutely cannot wait to see what 2010 brings.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I must go get ready for our #yeg holiday meetup tonight. Hope to see you there. Info can be found here.

[ Read ] - Blog Post from Adriel Hampton

EDIT: fixed some font size and colour weirdness.

Why Windows Vista Failed, and why you have no one to blame but yourself - Part 3

This is the conclusion of the three part series about Windows Vista, for parts 1 and 2, click here and here.

In 2001, Windows XP was released to the world. At the time, it was Microsoft's best operating system release. Windows Vista improved on it in nearly every way. Let me say that again. Windows Vista improved on it in nearly every way. The biggest problem with Vista was the high barrier to entry, however, it was no more higher than the barrier to entry Windows XP faced in 2001. As I wrote previously, we were spoiled by lower hardware costs, and the fact that running Windows XP on cheap hardware from 2006 was akin to running Windows 95 on hardware from 2001. It could be run very well on very cheap hardware. In 2009, pretty much every computer except for the netbook class computer can run Windows Vista very well, and this is where Vista truly shines.

Many of the technologies that make Windows Vista so good are beyond the scope of this article, so I will concentrate on the features that the end user will see.

The first, and most useful, is start menu search. Windows XP had the add-on Wnidows Desktop Search software for years, however it was slow, not integrated into the OS, and in my opinion, just plain not useful. In my experience, it actually slows down a Windows XP PC quite a bit. Windows Desktop Search 4.0 for Windows XP did address some of those issues, but the simple fact is that Windows XP was never meant to have a built in quick desktop search application, and using an application like Windows Desktop Search or Google Desktop really highlights that deficiency. Windows Vista was designed with the instant search built in. This instant search, appearing in the start menu, allows you to quickly find applications, documents, even specific email if you use outlook. simply hit the start menu, or press the windows key on your keyboard, and start typing. Usually the first few characters of the application is enough for what you are looking for to appear. Type "word" and Microsoft Word will be the first result. You can even search for a particular document, and open it directly. Start menu search has many more functions, but at it's core it is used as a fast way to launch a document. Ever since my first experience with the beta of Windows Vista way back in early 2005, it has been my preferred way of launching applications. I truthfully rarely even go into "All Programs" in Windows anymore, as start menu search is a much faster and more efficient way of getting to where I need to go.

Speaking of the start menu, it received an overhaul for Windows Vista as well. Gone is the word "Start" present in every version of windows since late 1994. Also gone is the multi-column all programs menu. Instead going into all programs places the menu in a scrolling list in the left side of the start menu. As someone who regularly dealt with 2, 3, sometimes 4 columns of applications in Windows XP, this change is welcome for the few times I need to go into all programs. Other changes are more minor, but appreciated, including more streamlined access to the networking section of Windows, and more.

The second feature, which is arguably the single most important feature of Windows Vista, and remains integral in Windows 7, is User Account Control(UAC). Windows Vista represented a fundamental shift in how Windows handles user accounts and security. In every Windows version up to, and including, Windows XP, a normal user ran as a system administrator, meaning that the user has unrestricted access to the computer, and can make any change without prompt. The "limited account" option that existed in XP was an attempt to stop this, but in reality the limited account was so restricted a user could not really do many day-to-day applications with Windows. This method of user accounts remains the single biggest security vulnerability in Windows XP, even after 3 service packs and hundreds of security updates. Many types of malware take easy advantage of the fact that that they can make changes to Windows, install applications and services, and generally have their run of the operating system. Windows Vista changed all that. Instead of operating with unlimited permissions, all accounts, even computer administrators, operate under the principle of least privilege. This means that a user runs as a limited user, and when a change is made that requires administrator access, UAC will display a prompt. A computer administrator may simply click continue, and a standard user must enter an administrator password to continue. This ensures that no operating system changes are made without the user's knowledge, and any changes that are made are done so as a direct result of user interaction. This is the security model that UNIX and linux based operating systems have been based off for decades, and what Apple as adopted for OS X, which is UNIX based, back in 2001. UAC in Vista is not perfect, and many people feel that it prompts too many times. This is partially true, however, many people turned UAC off because of this, and they really shouldn't. UAC is the biggest piece of the security puzzle in Vista, and while turning off may add some convenience to using Windows Vista, it is much more open to attacks. After Windows Vista is set up, and most of the users applications are installed, UAC is much less obtrusive, because 99% of the day to day operations of Windows do not require elevated permissions. UAC is also much improved in Windows 7, with the same security as in Vista, but with far fewer prompts.

Windows Vista also introduced Aero. The Aero desktop is the visible component of the Windows Presentation Foundation, which was a complete re-write of the Windows User Interface. the new UI design allows for Windows to use more advanced graphics effects, such as transparent windows, the "glass" look of the windows, live window previews, and new transition effects between Windows. Many skeptics of Aero in Windows Vista say it was nothing more than an attempt to make Windows Vista look "pretty" and did not offer any real benefits. On the surface, this is actually true. However, like many things in Windows Vista, the underlying system was completely re-written, and Windows Vista represented the growing pain, and Microsoft implementing a brand new system for it's user interface. The truly advanced elements possible in Aero are evident in Windows 7. Going from Windows XP, to Windows Vista, and up to Windows 7, it is very easy to see how Windows Vista is the stepping stone, and many of the advancements in Windows Vista are taken and improved upon in Windows 7.

These are just a few of the changes in Windows Vista. As I have stated, Windows Vista represents a change that was as big, if not bigger, than the leap from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95. Many of the changes are good changes, and many of the changes represent brand new ideas for Microsoft. For that, Windows Vista will fall in place as a transitional operating system. Is it perfect? No. There are many things in Vista that drive me crazy. But I do not let those things detract from what is otherwise a very solid operating system from Microsoft.

If I had written this 6 months ago, Windows Vista would have gotten a 100% recommendation from me. In fact, 6 months ago, I was urging people who were considering buying a new computer, but afraid because of the stigma of Vista, to upgrade. Very few people that I know that have purchased a new PC with Windows Vista on it have told me they dislike it. Give Vista a chance, a real chance, and you will generally be surprised with how good it is. However, with the release of Windows 7 just 2 months away, there truly is no point. Buying a new PC today will come with Windows Vista, but many will come with a free upgrade to Windows 7 anyway. I have no qualms telling people to run Vista, but cannot recommend people buy a new computer right now. Wait until Windows 7, and buy a new computer with the new operating system. In many ways, it is a shame, because many people will never really know just how good Windows Vista is, and how it provided the critical stepping stone to Windows 7, which is being regarded as the best release of Windows ever. So, as you move on to Windows 7, know that at it's core, you are using the technology of Windows Vista, and working day to day with everything Vista had to offer.

Windows Vista failed, and you have no one to blame but yourself – Part 2

This is part 2 of my article about Windows Vista, and why it failed, and why it shouldn’t have.  For part one, click Here.

Author’s note:  Part 2 had originally been intended to be an article about what makes Windows Vista a good operating system. That will now be featured in part 3.

there were nearly 4.5 years between the release of Windows XP and Windows Vista.  That is an eternity in the world of technology, and because of that, many things had changed.  Windows Vista is very much a reflection of that change.

Many of the changes going from Windows XP to Windows Vista are very technical, things I will not get into in this article.  But suffice it to say, that except for the name, and the mostly familiar feel, they are very different operating systems.  Windows XP was created in the age before most people had high speed internet, before twitter, before Facebook, before Myspace.  Windows XP comes from a time before Social networking.  When XP came out, Google was not the biggest search engine in the world.  It sat at least behind AOL search.  Windows XP launched within a month of the very first iPod. In 2001, fewer than 50% of the people in North America owned a cell phone.  The 5 most popular pop music artists/groups in 2001 were, in order:  Destiny’s Child, Jennifer Lopez, Janet Jackson, ‘N Sync, and the Backstreet Boys.  America went to war in Afghanistan and Iraq between releases.  As you can see, XP seems to come from an era of our past.

In the time between Windows XP and windows Vista, many things changed.  Computers became infinitely more powerful, and less expensive.  The internet became almost as common of a utility as having a phone line.  People used their computers in an entirely different way in 2006 than they did in 2001.

With those differences, came the challenges.  With the proliferation of the internet, so too came the proliferation of security vulnerabilities.  Windows XP was actually designed in the late 1990’s.  XP was built off of Windows 2000, which actually came out in late 1999.  Windows 2000 and XP, by design, let the user do whatever they may want without their computer without any difficulty.  The reason for this is that the largest concept of security in the late 90’s revolved around someone gaining physical access to a computer to compromise it, so less attention was paid to security.  As the internet grew, more and more computers were connected.  XP’s mentality of giving a user full access to everything on the system was it’s largest downfall.  This meant that it was very, very easy for a program downloaded from the internet to compromise a computer, because it could run even without the user knowing.  There were little to no safeguards.  Windows XP, the most stable Microsoft operating system at the time, was severely vulnerable to attacks from the internet.  And despite all of Microsoft’s best efforts, to this day, that is still true.  It is simply the way the operating system was designed.

In the internet age, it became clear that Windows had to change.  Many of the technologies at the core of Windows XP were actually first designed in the early 1990’s.  That simply would not cut it anymore.  A newer, safer, and more secure Windows was needed.  Windows Vista was the result of that.  Microsoft nearly re-wrote the entire operating system.  Many, many elements were changed.  Many of the things that were done in Windows Vista were brand new to Windows, represented a radical change for Microsoft in not only how Windows worked, but how the company made windows.

In many ways, Windows Vista is the operating system that was a proof of concept for many new things, and because of that suffered many growing pains.  In many years when we look back at Windows, we will see Windows Vista as the beginning of a new type of operating system for Microsoft, and the release that began the transition of Windows from an operating system built for a personal computer, and an operating system built for the internet connected person.

In part 3, I will discuss what Vista actually brings to the table that is better than XP, and how it is the foundation for the upcoming Windows 7.