Cloud Services Graveyard

I'm compiling a list of the cloud services that I have used, which have disappeared on me, leaving me hanging in various states of out-in-the-cold.

• Yoggie - the most painful.  Its demise left me with two paperweight firewall devices that ceased to work properly.  
• me.com - rolled into iCloud
• Google Reader - quite sad to see this one go.  It was a great news aggregator and very simple.  Haven't found anything yet that takes care of the same task with as much ease.
• Live Mesh - this got rolled into Microsoft's Live/SkyDrive mess, but never had the same level of functionality or cross-platform support as before.  I was a heavy user and I miss this one.
• Google Buzz - fortunately, only tried this one a couple times, and then hardly noticed when it went away.  Maybe I was part of the problem?
• MSN Messenger - rolled into Skype as far as I can tell.  More amalgamation of Microsoft's various listless and directionless pet projects.
• Latitude - this one was nice and simple and easy - a really elegant and well done google app.  Kept our family in touch nicely.  It has more or less vanished into the big vague Google+ soup and I'm not sure if I can manage to get that mess to give me what I want from this any more.    Google+ changes, grows, shrinks, and morphs so much I never know from one visit to the next what options I'll have, or even where they've been moved to.

Response to Blackberry's Recent Open Letter

Dear Blackberry,

I recently received your "Open Letter to Customers".  It saddened me.

I don’t know what you are trying to achieve with emails like this.  I never get stuff like this from Apple or Google or Microsoft – I wonder why?  Even by actually sending the email, without any regard to the content, you are already sending a negative “DAMAGE CONTROL” message.  Personally I believe it just makes the situation worse. 

As to the actual content:  I’ll be honest – I’m not going to read the whole letter.  I don’t have the time, and frankly I’m not that interested.  I have skimmed your section headings and the general impression I get is “uh huh.  More of the same.”  You could sign this email John Chen, Thorsten Heins, or Balsilie/Lazaridis and pretty much accurately represent the same tired old message of decline that they sent out before you. 

If Blackberry is still in as serious denial about the situation as this email seems to indicate, then I’m more than happy to continue outfitting my users with iPhones and Androids, and unless your BES MDM solution is actually free, I’m not interested in it either, thankyou very much.  I already have MDM built in with my Meraki Cloud WLAN solution. 

As a proud and happy Canadian, I am highly predisposed to root for Blackberry, a once-mighty Canadian Tech giant.  But sadly this email indicates to me that we really are seeing another Denial-Demise-of-Nortel repeated in grim detail.

And it makes me sad.

So long, Blackberry.  At this point emails don’t mean anything.  Produce an actual successful product and then we can talk – and that doesn’t mean turning to patent-trolling either.   For goodness' sake, don't do THAT.

I even lined up for your much vaunted BBM-on-iOS app, and have installed it and tried it.  Sadly, it is not very compelling - quite a mess actually.  The much simpler and more visually appealing interfaces of WhatsApp and iMessage keep me coming back, and leaving BBM to whither, unused, on my device.

Vista Backup and Imaging Confusion

If one word comes to mind to describe Microsoft after looking into their backup solutions, that word must be "Bumbling". We've all heard comments about big unweildly organizations like "the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing". Unfortunately, in this context, that comment is quite limiting. You see, it only assumes two hands - right and left. What if there are four hands?

What am I getting at? I'll explain.

I've always been an enthusiastic devourer of new IT technology. Sometimes it is rewarding (started using Linux in 1993 and haven't looked back) and sometimes it can be very disappointing(Zetera SAN). Like many others, I eagerly awaited the launch of Windows Vista. Now, I'm no Microsoft zealot, but I use Windows quite a lot, and am always interested in something new out of Redmond. So, like many others, I was interested in what was coming up next with Vista. Because I run a few test machines, I'm very interested in system imaging software. Years of painful trial-and-error led me to choose Ghost as my imager of choice. I was quite happy and comfortable in the knowledge that I could use Ghost to image my test systems, and switch between images for further testing, whether the operating system happened to be DOS, Win95, Win98, WinNT, Win2000, WinXP, Linux(ext3), OS/2, or BeOS. Even multi-boot environments with multiple Operating systems and a boot manager could be imaged and re-deployed later on the same hardware, with one simple command.

All that changed with Vista. First, Microsoft upgraded NTFS in a way that Ghost could not understand it. Additionally, Microsoft claimed to have come out with this vastly improved backup and imaging solution that can be used to easily restore your computer. But the more I looked into it, the more confused and varied it became. So far what I've found is 4 different backup and imaging solutions, with 3 different backup file formats, none of which are compatible with each other. The waste and duplication, not to mention the inconvenience of multiple formats that can or can't be used depending on the situation, boggles the mind.

Before going any further, here is a summary of the four backup and imaging solutions:

1. Windows Backup - This is new in Vista. It backs up a lot of your files and settings but does NOT image your entire computer. To do a restore in the case of a catastrophe, you would have to redeploy Vista from scratch first, install your favourite software, and then restore from the backup. It produces a directory of many small .zip files for each backup, as well as a bunch of other small files which are probably metadata about the contents of the .zips. It is available in all versions of Vista.
   
2. Windows Complete PC Backup - This one is available in Vista "business and up" which means it is not available in the Home versions. It does a complete backup of your PC, creating an image that you can use to completely redeploy your system in the even of a catastrophic drive failuer - WITH LIMITS. It is VERY annoyingly hobbled in that it will only back up to externally attached devices (such as USB, eSATA, or Firewire drives), or to blank CDs or DVDs. It will NOT back up to a NAS. Further, many people have reported inabilities to restore to different drives from these backups - especially to smaller drives. Personally I have tried about 5 restores from This type of backup, and only 1 has worked. This type of backup produces a directory with a large .vhd file (and a bunch of smaller supporting files which presumably contain metadata) containing an image of your disk.
3. WBADMIN Backup - This one is available on any version of Vista. However, it is CLI-only and requires some diligent application of your propeller-beanie. On the surface, it seems to be very similar to option 2 above. It produces a similar looking .vhd file and supporting files, but there are very distinct differences in the behaviour of this option. First, it allows you to restore to any size of drive, larger or smaller, without restriction. Second, it allows you to store the backup on a NAS. This type of backup has been my most successful method of backing up Vista and getting it back after a drive change. There is one big caveat however: despite being superficially similar, backups created by WBAdmin are not readable by Complete PC Restore, and backups created with Complete PC Backup are not readable by wbadmin.
4. ImageX Backup - This is Microsoft's "enterprise" backup strategy. It is available as a free download (part of WAIK) and can be used to image any version of Vista. It is CLI-only, although the same method is used by the WDS GUI if you have a network infrastructure and the proper licensing to run it. It stores your backup in one single .wim file. This file can be used to store multiple revisions of backups from multiple computers, and it will use a "Single Instance Storage" procedure to minimize the waste of space. I have successfully redeployed Vista from ImageX backups after changing a boot hard drive, but I have tended to use option 3 above because after backing up several PCs to a single .wim file with ImageX, the backups become quite slow as they search the wim file for duplicate blocks for Single Instance space saving, and my .wim file became colossally huge, giving me an "oh crap I have all my eggs in one basket" feeling. Of note, this is also the format used to package all versions of Vista on the installation DVDs.
   

Much more could be said about the above backup strategies, but to my mind the bigger and more important consideration is to look at the entire situation and ask "WHY?"

Why does Microsoft have three different backup file formats? Why do they have four different and incompatible backup strategies? Do they actually have 3 or 4 different backup teams all working in different parts of the Redmond campus, who never cooperate with each other and are all competing to make their little backup strategy the winner? What possible reason could there be to justify this kind of needless duplication? Especially, what kind of justification is there for putting all 4 into the shipping product? Might it be just possible that they could work together and make ONE backup and imaging strategy that works even better? Maybe actually put a basic GUI to it? As it is, ImageX looks and acts like Ghost did, over 10 years ago. This is one example of waste in Vista that I've found so far - I wonder what other kind of needless waste is hidden under the hood in parts of Vista that I cannot see?

And, if I might rant for a bit, because this needs to be said: Microsoft has some very interesting documentation of their ImageX imaging strategy, where they lay claim to "file based imaging" as a big new idea that they have come up with, and which is a bold new invention, taking system imaging a quantum leap ahead of the more limited "raw disk-based imaging" that all the other disk imaging vendors use. I have to ask this - what kind of drugs are they on? Have they actually ever tried to use Ghost before saying things like this? Ghost has done file-based imaging for over a decade before they "invented" it for ImageX. If you take a ghost image of a 100Gig disk with 23Gigs of files on it. Your Ghost image is 23Gigs, not 100Gigs. Also, you can use Ghost Explorer to browse the contents of the image and extract whatever files you need. Furthermore, when you restore the image, Ghost is very clear about the fact that it is restoring files, and your system actually runs faster after this restore, because you've had a gratuitous defrag at the same time as Ghost restored FILES one by one. Hello, Microsoft? We're not complete idiots out here. We can tell when you're blowing smoke.

This whole backup muddle is something I look forward to being simplified in Windows 7.

Coax Home Networking - Part 1

As one of many people who live in a rental townhouse, with no ethernet wiring but lots of coax going to almost every room, and not having real freedom to cut too many holes in the walls, I'm motivated to seek out the best possible way to extend my network throughout my home using alternate means.

I have wireless N capability, but I find it just not quite reliable or fast enough for things like system backups and copying large files like videos. Both of my Wireless-N equipped laptops regularly lose connection to the N network and need to be rebooted to get it back. Powerline networking has proved reasonably reliable, as long as you don't run laundry (or a vacuum cleaner, or a microwave, or a hair dryer... but I digress), but just as slow as wireless - sometimes even slower. This leaves those plentiful coaxial cables as the most promising alternative, so my research into ways to harness these beasties has begun.

To give some background, there are (big surprise!) two competing standards for coaxial cable networking that deliver workable speeds and warrant evaluation. These are HomePNA and MoCA. A simple google search for either of these will bring up the HomePNA Alliance or Moca Alliance home pages. After wading through the marketing fluff, it is simple to find links to actual products that are either shipping or almost there.

Interestingly, several companies, such as 2wire, Actiontec, and Motorola, seem to be present in both camps, and shipping compliant products on both sides.

To give this stuff a real world try, I was able to get my hands on a set of four Ready-Links CEB-402 ethernet-to-coax bridges, and also a set of four Motorola NIM100 ethernet-to-coax bridges. The Ready-Links supports HomePNA while the Motorola supports MoCA.

The Ready-Links I was able to purchase right online from the manufacturer, and have found their support people to be eager and helpful via email. The Motorola NIM100, on the other hand, is another matter entirely. If you search Motorola's web site, it is as if the NIM100 doesn't even exist. It seems Motorola only sells these devices directly to cable operators. I was able to get mine from a liquidator on eBay. They came in a nice box with all necessary cabling and no manuals whatsoever. Thanks to the very good DIY blog entry at http://lemmingreviews.blogspot.com/search/label/NIM100 about the NIM100 I was able to at least gain access to the machines enough to configure them. Shame on Motorola for being so cagey about this device. One can't help but notice it runs Linux and Busybox, and one does wonder what is the status of Motorola's GPL compliance on this device, and whether that is the reason for the secrecy. In contrast, Ready-Links provides a configuration utility for the CEB-402 which gives a nice view of the network status and provides a facility for firmware upgrades and network topology reporting.

For my setup, I hooked one coax bridge to my gigabit ethernet switch in the basement, connected it to a cheapo four-way coax splitter, and hooked the other three connections on the splitter to coax cables that go to the three bedrooms on the upper floor. In each bedroom, I put another bridge and a computer. This coax setup is not connected in any way to the cable TV feed into my house - although this will work, I wanted to just keep it separate for testing.

Testing involves both daily usage, and also performance measurement using iperf. I have been running the Ready-Links bridges for almost a year in this configuration, and am just beginning to test the NIM100's now. In the next post or two I will give details of my experience with these devices.

Vaporware - BluOnyx and D.A.V.E.

I was really hoping for at least one of these products to actually launch this year, but sadly, neither seems to have materialized yet. The BluOnyx web-site now gives a SQL error, and the Seagate D.A.V.E. site still shows the marketing trash that hasn't changed in over a year. What a disappointment.

Word Compatibility Falls Down

It's not like we didn't know this was coming, but to finally bump up against it really sends the message home. Today I got my first Word document file attachment that I could not open with Word. I use Word 2003 and the file I received was in Word 2007 format.

It hit home that it has been a full decade - a very long time in IT terms - that the Word .doc file format has been a constant standard. You could always rely on it. No matter what, you could open anyone's file that they shared with you. That all changed, for me, today.

Up until now, I have not even considered alternatives to Office because it was just so convenient. It was lazy of me, yes, but Microsoft just had me too tantalized with the total ease of always being able to open anything. Now my main reason for being loyal to office is gone. I have tried 2007 but it doesn't turn me on - just a bunch of interface changes I didn't ask for and don't wish to learn. Interestingly, Open Office Writer, because it still has the classic menu interface, is now more consistent with the Word I'm used to than even the new Word.

Thanks Microsoft. By changing the office UI so much and altering the file format, you have unhooked me from my Office habit, and I'm free. Free to seriously beging using free software. I bet that's not what you intended, but it's what you've done.

Things that would get My Vote - Part 1

In Ontario, we're expecting to be at the polls at least twice in the next few months. Once for our Provincial election, coming up very soon, and again for a soon-to-arrive federal election. The worst thing is that we don't really have anything coming from the main parties that we can sink our teeth into, whilst all around us we have aggravating thing that frustrate us to no end. If a political party would latch onto one of these issues, they would probably get my vote, and they might actually get more of us out to the polls. So, without further ado, here's my gripe list. Fix these, and I'll vote for you:

1. Highway Gridlock. You know what I mean. It's worse and worse all the time, and nothing is being done. This is highlighted by the fact that at least twice since its launch the privately owned Highway 407 as been widened, effectively reducing gridlock and improving the commute for those who use it. Meanwhile there is simply no action on the 401 and the 400, not to mention the QEW. Even worse, there doesn't even seem to be a plan. Wake up! Do something!

2. Killer Trucks. Most of us who drive on the 400-series highways see it almost daily. Angry truck drivers driving their big rigs like they are Civics. Tailgating, cutting lanes, and otherwise intimidating people. And then sure enough, you hear it yet again. Big accident. Car run over by truck, 3 people dead. If it isn't that it is parts falling off unsafe rigs killing people. Why does this continue? I propose that we ban all trucks over 3 tonnes from the 400 series highways. Permanently. Without compromise. In the short term, there will be pain, yes. But we will adjust. Then someone will build a nice private highway for the trucks, like the 407. It probably won't fix everything, but at least it will buy us some time.

3. Our Canadian Banks. Does anyone remember the good old days when you lent your money to the bank at one interest rate, and then the bank in turn lent your money out to others at a different, higher, interest rate, and made it's profit on the difference? Wouldn't it be nice to go back to that? The situation we have now is astounding. Our banks are huge, powerful monsters. And I mean monsters. Nearly every year they pull in record profits. They are so big they are actually buying out American banks. And how are they doing this? By raping and pillaging us. Since when did we roll over and just take it? Why do we allow them to nickel and dime us to death with service charges, account minimums, miscellaneous fees, and zero-interest accounts? You've all heard the stories. Mom takes little Johnnie to the bank to introduce him to the concept of banking. They open an account and deposit his money. Several months later, due to charges, low balance flags, and inactivity fees, his money is all gone. Nice. Why do we allow this system? These banks are more than just big private companies. They are chartered by our government. Just try to start another bank in Canada and see how hard it is. I propose we ban all service charges and fees. Our banks must go back to making their money solely from the differential between the interest rates on the money we loan them and the money they loan us.

Anyone proposing a brave initiate like one of these would definitely get my vote.

That's enough for now. Next time - Mandatory Auto Insurance and Identity Theft.