What's Firefox? says website

I cannot stand websites that are so out of date that they still don't know what a browser is.  I have another blog on a well known sports site. Or rather on a subsite devoted to personal blogs. It allows you to post your blog on Facebook. Well, actually only if you use Internet Explorer. I found this out today.

I wrote a post about Michael Vick, posted it to the site, & clicked the link that would post it to my Facebook page. Wouldn't do it. Something about the fonts & other stuff. Don't quite remember. This is not the first time I have tried. So I tried copy & paste. No can do. So finally it occurred to me to switch to IE. Yup. Posted with no problem.

I have a problem with this. IE has been losing market share for at least 2 years. It has gone from 90% to under 50%. That is a big drop. At the same time Firefox has gone from 15% to 24-25%. The rest have gone to Chrome, which has gone from not existing to around 12%. Not to mention that Apple's share of the computer market has gone up, meaning Safari's share has gone up.

So why do web developers not understand this? Because businesses mostly use IE, & sadly use IE6. So they don't understand that the regular person, plus the geeks, & those like me, who want a better experience, won't use the bug riddled, security hole that is Internet Explorer. I have also found video sites that do the same thing. We lose in the long run because the business community is stuck in 1995, & is afraid to move forward.

A lot of people simply think the blue E is the internet. I often wonder what they do when forced to use a non-Microsoft machine. Do they think a mac doesn't have internet access? We are falling behind the rest of the world. There are many countries where Firefox is the #1 browser. Do companies not realize this?


I

Illegal movie sites

So I was online looking for a movie to watch. I only have 2 hrs of online on my Netflix subscription, & Hulu & YouTube have horrible selections. So I started searching. Boy! Was I amazed to come across so many sites that had downloads & streaming of movies that just came out & just got in theaters.

I couldn't believe how many of these sites had True Grit, Little Fockers & who knows what else. Are these foreign sites or what? Not to mention how do they get the downloads on there, since these aren't on DVD yet.

Now this is the piracy the MPAA is talking about, & I understand where their coming from. If everyone watches this way, the studio makes no money. The RIAA issue is different since most CD's are on iTunes & Amazon, & a few CD's can be bought at Target & Walmart. Plus it's harder to find a particular song or Cd on pirate sites, but every movie site had brand new movies on the top of the page.

Now if the studios want to stop this, they have to stop this nonsense of not allowing recent films to be streamed on Netflix. I've had the service for over 2 years & have probably only watched 4 or 5 films online. Because they're all old films. Silly. Yeah, you can rent from iTunes, but it costs more than a Netflix subscription, plus the amount of time it would take to download. I'll stick with DVD's thank you.

Facebook may cause break-ins say UK police

According to the BBC, a woman claims her house was broken into twice because of Facebook status updates that said they would be out of town. I have a problem with this. Are you dumb enough to put your home address on a social site? Then it's your fault.

I have no info on my page, other than my hometown (how else are people going to know who I am?). Not my address, not my phone number, not the name of the company I work for. That's my business. But then again, the people I'm "friends" with already know all this.

Facebook, of course, says that the risk is the same as sharing info in person or in an e-mail. Well, that's not quite true. In person you're sharing with one person. Sure, he can tell others, but I assume you only tell someone you know, not random strangers. But again, why have all this info online? I'm sure people go on Facebook & discuss an upcoming trip. But if your home address is not on the site, how is someone going to rob you? Think people.

Heck, some co-workers know what complex I live in, but not my specific unit. Some people just don't understand security.

Uploading photos

On Christmas my cousin decided that my Facebook photo was a bad one. Well, yeah, it's a photo I took of myself with my cheap prepaid cell phone. I held it a foot from my face & clicked. It's the same photo on here. Not great, but it's not like a really care that much.

But my cousin does. So he took out his much better digital camera & took a bunch of pictures, against a white wall, & in front of the Christmas Tree. Then I watched while he & his computer friend ( I think, by the way they talk, that he does IT work for a hospital) went about getting the photos on my page.

I sort of knew what you did, but I watched & learned. Namely, put the photos on my cousin's harddrive, then have me log on to Facebook, go on my page to change the picture. For other photos, so I could change to a non-Christmas photo, e-mail the photos to me. Those photos are still on my e-mail, but I can, of course, send them to "documents" or "pictures" anytime as long as I don't delete the e-mail.

Of course what I really need to do is get a digital camera. My cousin's friend also gave us a vacation slideshow last night by hooking up his laptop to the TV so we could look at his pictures from his family's trip to Egypt. It took them a while to figure out how to set up the slideshow, but once they did it worked fine. Of course another way to do this would be a CD or DVD, but since they traveled here from Southern California I'm pretty sure you wouldn't want to carry photo CD's AND a laptop.

Eventually I will get the camera, but cost is a consideration. Isaw one in the paper for around $40 today, but it was a Vivitar, not a Sony or Canon, so I'm guessing it's a lower quality camera. We will see.

Reading e-books online

Yes, Google launched it's e-bookstore some time ago. Yesterday I found out about Project Gutenberg. What is that? It is a site devoted to public domain books. These can be downloaded to your computer or put on an e-reader like a Kindle.

But what kind of books? How about classic fiction like Dickens, Shakespeare, Tolstoy & DeFoe. Not exactly what a current reader wants to put on a digital device. Yes it's free, but so what? This is always going to be the problem with something like this. Do  I really want to waste space on my computer for Robinson Crusoe or Huckleberry Finn? Or would I like the chance to get newer material?

And, not being a geek, I want to know, can I even use a Kindle? See, my computer is a desktop, not a laptop. Therefore I don't have wireless in my house. A Kindle, or an iPad use WiFi on the cheaper models, & WiFi & 3G on the more expensive versions. But this is never explained in all the stories I see on these devices.

If this is the case, if I had one of these, I could only use them at the public library or the local mall, which has complete WiFi access. In other words it's totally useless to me or someone else who doesn't have a laptop at home. Yes, I can read an e-book online, but then you have the issue of LCD lighting. This is not the way to read a book. It's too tiring on the eyes.

I wish these companies would come clean on this. Borders is 5 minutes from my house, Barnes & Noble 10 minutes. Both are selling various e-readers, none of which are cheap. $150-$300 mostly, & probably not usable by me, unless I don't understand the technology, which I readily admit. But hey, I'm not the main target audience anyway. I'm too old.

Sports website rips off fans

I am a winter sports fan. I love the Winter Olympics, especially skiing. When the Olympics are not on, I still will watch World Cup races. Or at least, I used to. Last year & the year before I was able to follow the season on a certain website that carried all the events. You clicked on & watched an event from beginning to end.

Here's the problem. This is the website for a channel that isn't carried on cable or satellite. Only as a digital subchannel. Why? I have no idea. This is the channel's owners decision, which IMHO is a really stupid one. It means that only people watching TV over the air have access to the channel, meaning a much smaller viewership base. Why would you do that? BTW- it's owned by the network that has rights to the Olympics. Figure it out.

Now to the website. You can no longer watch the video streams or the replays unless you pay . That's $4 for a single event (like today), $9 for the World Championships in February, or $30 for all 71 events. Who is going to watch all 71 events? I consider this to be pure unmitigated greed. It was free the last two years, what changed?

For the record, I can watch any college football game, any college basketball game & various soccer, rugby, & other events in their entirety on ESPN 3 without charge. I can watch every program CBS shows, primetime, daytime, late night, without charge. Just in the last two days I have watched on CBS' website a full episode of Letterman, a full episode of Craig Ferguson, & the most recent episode of Hawaii 5-0. I watched Manchester United vs Arsenal (1st place vs 3rd) on ESPN 3. What is this scummy, greedy networks problem?

This is what destroys the web. You want to have commercials, go right ahead. CBS shows commercials on the web. ESPN 3 doesn't interestingly enough. You just get the logo saying the broadcast will be back soon. Hmmm. I mean if this network wants to make money, here's an idea. Have your channel on cable & satellite. Duh!

Online store fails Christmas

I had three ways to shop for presents from one of my favorite retailers today.

1. Drive 20 miles to their closest store
2. Call on the phone to their very busy 800#
3. Go on their website & order that way

Well I tried the latter. Bad idea. Here's what happened. The company's catalog (I have different ones) says that I had until December 18 to order for Christmas. This is December 15. Therefore no problem, right? Not so fast. No matter what I tried to order this is what came on my screen:"not available for this date". This wasted an hour.

So finally I gave up & called on the phone. Person answering had no idea why it was doing that, but took my order. In fact it would be done today. Why was this a problem? Isn't online shopping supposed to be convenient? I wasted almost 90 minutes because of this nonsense. This was the first time I used this company's website & it will be the last. I've been buying stuff from this outfit for 25 years, but I am ready to take my business elsewhere. Seriously folks, if you want to do business in the internet age you need to get someone to write a website that works properly, & doesn't tell customers :"I don't want your business".

Free games on Windows

Once in a while I try to play a game on my computer. I will install free games only to find that they don't play very well. Why is this? I have installed racing games., Awful. Using your mouse doesn't work because you can't steer properly. Golf games? Stupid. I just installed one, only to find that they make impossible shots that you can't make, no matter how many strokes you take. One idiot course had you shooting up a ramp to get to the other side of a hill where the hole was. problem was the ball had to twist around once it got over the ramp. Is it a magic ball? So stay away from these nonsense games.

Gawker sites hacked

Over the weekend a hacker group called Gnosis compromised Gawker & all it's sites. It collected all the usernames of the registered commenters on all the sites Gawker owns. This would include Lifehacker, Gizmodo, Deadspin & others. Now I read the first two, but have never registered or left a comment, so I'm OK.

The problem is, of course, the hackers got hold of e-mail addresses & passwords. Now if it's only comments that's one thing. But if you use the same password at shopping sites, now it's a big problem. Check your credit card bills if that's the case.

Seriously, if you use the same password everywhere, well that's just dumb. Of course, the only site I have ever bought anything at is Apple. And I have a different password there than anywhere else. I blog here (obviously), but also on a sports site. Different username, different password. My cell phone providers website? Different username, different password. Three different e-mail accounts, different providers, different usernames, different passwords. That's what you're supposed to do. But heck, ther head of Gawker was using the same password everywhere. Duh!

Be very careful. The term "identity theft" didn't exist before the creation of the internet. There's a reason for that.

Metrodome's inflatable roof deflates-again

Minneapolis because of it's rough cold winters wisely decided to build a domed stadium in the late 1970's. Because of the success of the Pontiac Silverdome outside Detroit, it was decided to make it an inflatable cloth dome, instead of a solid concrete dome like the Superdome in New Orleans. Most of the time that's OK, sometimes not so much.

This morning at around 5AM, it collapsed. There had been 17 inches of snow the previous day. There were 3 tears in the roof. The NFL game between the Vikings & the NY Giants had already been postponed because the airport had been closed, meaning the Giants couldn't get into town. The game has now been moved to Detroit.

This is not the first time this has happened. In fact there have been four other deflations. November 19, 1981 (also because of over a foot of snow in Minneapolis), December 30, 1982 because of a tear caused by heavy snow (what a surprise), on April 14, 1983 (heavy snow again-don't you just want to live there?), & on April 26, 1986 a tear was caused by high winds. The last two happened when the Minnesota Twins were to play the California Angels. Hmmm. (Source: Wikipedia)

Even though this roof may be impressive, it clearly isn't the best idea for this part of the country. According to Wikipedia, it's the largest application of Teflon on Earth. But the midwest is home to some of the worst weather around, & it's just luck that none of the collapses happened during a football game. can you imagine the injuries had all that snow & the collapsing roof happened while there were 50,000 people in the building?

Google opens e bookstore

Yesterday it was announced that Google would be opening an e bookstore to compete with Amazon & Apple & all other e book sellers. Google let's you download to Android, the iPhone or iPod Touch or to a Sony or Nook. Notice I didn't mention the Kindle. Not sure why it's not supported. You can also download to your computer to read online. This is what I did.

I'm not ready to spend $150 on any e reader, & I'm not even sure e books are that good an idea. One thing I did notice is that the free selection is limited to old books, not all of which I would call "classics". I downloaded "The Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli  originally published in 1532. The free selection is full of stuff like this, also Shakespeare, Dickens, the Wizard of Oz books, & all the Sherlock Holmes stories. Maybe if I had one of the supported e readers I would look at the books to buy.

I'm not sure about this. Barnes & Noble & Borders both have books downloadable to your computer, but you have to install a e reader program on your computer. Google's seems to be built in to it's website, since all I did was click on the book title & it immediately opened. That's an improvement, but I still wonder who is going to use it. Again especially since the biggest selling reader is not supported.

Making computer screens eye friendly

I use my computer a lot when I'm home. And a lot of people use computers as part of their work. Some are on them all day. So why is so hard to come up with a screen that doesn't hurt the eyes? I've been on my computer less than an hour & I feel like getting off.

This was the argument against the iPad. That an LED screen hurts the eyes, but an e-ink screen doesn't, which is why e readers are so popular. The problem there is of course those tend to be black & white, not full color, like computer monitors, laptops & iPads. Still the iPad is a massive success, so someone doesn't have a problem. And I'm sure different people may have eyes not as sensitive as mine.

So is there a need to improve the way visuals are done? Of course there is. Everything can be improved upon. I can't see watching video on a smartphone (too small), but lots of young people do it. Of course their eyes are stronger. Although my eyes have always been somewhat weak. I've worn glasses since junior high. Some kids need them before they're 10.

But I can read a book for long stretches. I've read as many as 100 pages in a day. Try doing that online. Your eyes can't handle it. Again it's the lighting. I don't know about Kindle's or Nooks because I don't own one, & I'm not planning on getting one. I just think with all the technology out there, there must be a way to make computer monitors more eye friendly.

PGE fails with smart meter website

One of the things PGE supposedly delivers when you get a smart meter installed is that you can follow your energy usage online. Well, this was the case until this weekend. Suddenly, there are no results going back two days. Nice. Does this mean that the usage will mysteriously increase dramatically? If so, I will let them know that it is not acceptable.

These utilities are known for dishonesty. PGE is already in trouble for sponsoring a ballot initiative in June that would have made it hard for an outside company to come in. The voters saw through the stunt & voted it down, so i have no misconceptions about this company. Especially since a lot of people have been complaining about the smart meters for months.

So my message is "show the results & don't screw with them. I am watching".

Google Chrome jumps over 9%

The hot new browser from Google continues to grow, while the one most people think is the internet continues to fall. I guess this is good news, although I still don't understand why anyone would prefer Chrome over Firefox. Supposedly it's faster, but that has never been my experience.

It's clear to me that casual users will continue to use Internet Explorer, & if they want another browser, well...everyone's heard of Google. It also appears that Firefox will remain stuck at around 22-23% as it has for the last year at least. FF 4 comes out in a few months with increased performance, but is it too late? Interestingly, IE8 has over 3X the usage of IE7 while the much hated IE6 has almost the market share of Chrome & Safari combined. This because businesses still use it despite Microsoft themselves saying get rid of it. Heck my high tech company uses IE6.

It seems that IE users are switching to Chrome rather than Firefox, which would have been the case in the past. I don't like the idea of every tab being a different process because that uses more RAM. Plus I just don't care for the bare bones nature of the UI. But unfortunately, FF 4 will look somewhat like Chrome. Plus it isn't as bare bones as it would appear. On my old XP machine Firefox 3.6 was around 30mb, but Chrome was 75mb. Huh?

I think it's the new kid in town, & that's why it's gaining. Let's see if that continues.