Tuesday, March 13, 2012 by Terry Branaman.

Microsoft has released the first consumer version of Windows 8, and I have been testing it. Based on what I have seen so far, and assuming that Microsoft doesn’t make some significant changes, I recommend that most people with older computers start planning on buying a new PC with Windows 7 before Microsoft cuts off access and requires new PCs to have Windows 8. Most reviews that I have read in the trade publications are also pointing out the problems with Windows 8 as it stands now (March 2012).

There are some improvements in the new version. For instance, the time from turning on the PC to being able to log in is much shorter than with previous versions. This is somewhat misleading, however; Windows is still loading programs in the background, so you may not actually be able to start working much sooner than in earlier versions of Windows. And, as usual, the new Windows is reported to be more secure than  previous versions.

However, Microsoft has decided that the user interface (called “Metro”) should be the same on desktop/laptop computers as on phones/tablets. While I have not seen an actual Windows phone with the latest version, I have seen pictures that make me believe that the result of Microsoft’s decision is a system that doesn’t really work well on either type of device. In the pictures I have seen it appears that you only get about a half dozen app icons on the screen at a time. On the desktop, you get the same type of large icons (called “tiles”), resulting in only a few icons being visible at a time.

While the tiles can be moved around, and some of them can be either small or large (twice as wide as a small one), I still find the arrangement of tiles to be cumbersome. They are arranged in columns that are two small or one large icon wide. When you add more tiles than will fit in one column (five rows in my experience), the excess tiles are moved to the next column. When you install a regular Windows program, instead of getting a group on the Start button menu, ALL of the icons for that program are added to the end of the tiles on the Metro desktop - including any links to web pages and uninstall links. You can then move the tiles to where you want them if you so choose, or remove the ones you don’t want - one at a time.

You can get to a desktop like you are used to from previous versions of Windows. However, you will immediately notice that something is missing: the Start button. It’s not hidden, it simply is not available. There is no way to get the same functionality. For those of us with more than a few programs, the inability to create a concise menu will be a problem.

If you have a large screen, the Metro interface eliminates its advantages. Programs designed for Metro always run in full screen mode. Forget about putting two or more application windows side by side. Not only that, but the ones I have seen so far seem to use very large fonts, so even on a large screen you can’t see very much at a time. I only have one monitor, so I don’t know how Windows 8 will work with multiple monitors.

I wonder if Microsoft isn’t going to shoot itself in the foot with this. They don’t seem to be making inroads with phones or tablets, and the Metro interface and lack of the Start button in Windows 8 might very well push users to alternate platforms like Linux or Mac computers.

If you want to try Windows 8, I suggest that you install virtual machine software like VMWare or VirtualBox to run Windows 8 without  risking your computer. This version is a beta (still in testing) version, so problems are likely to occur. You don’t want to risk your system with a test version of the operating system.

I would like to hear your feelings on this, whether you agree or disagree. Please post your comments on this entry, or post your own entry.

Posted in Windows | No Comments »

Thursday, January 26, 2012 by Terry Branaman.

Somehow, my previous blog got lost, so I have to start over. I hadn’t done much with the blog, though, so there wasn’t much to loose.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Thursday, January 26, 2012 by Terry Branaman.

Media and software companies have been trying to get laws passed that would cripple the Internet and infringe even more on our freedom of speech. A concerted effort by concerned citizens has gotten one of the bills postponed for now, but the threat is still out there. If passed, any web site could be blocked (censored) in the U.S. because a company claims that it promotes online piracy (or engages in any other copyright violation), or even if it links to a site that they claim promotes piracy. Think of the effect on you if your web site was taken down because a company claimed you somehow violated their copyright, without even having to go to court or provide any evidence! Don’t think it could happen? Many sites, such as YouTube, have already been required to take down content solely on the word of a media company - no day in court or any other controls - even when it has later been determined that there was no infringement.

To bolster their claims of why they “need” these bills, industry spokespeople have been making claims of great losses, but these claims have not been backed up by ANY credible research or information. Here is an article on InfoWorld that describes some of these inflated claims: Scam: SOPA advocates’ claims about piracy costs.

These same companies are trying to eliminate “fair use”, which has always existed in copyright law. Fair use is the principal that allows you to copy music that you have purchased onto your own devices for your own use (but not to distribute it to other people). It allows you to quote part of an article or book for something that you write. It allows you to write a parody of another work. But under laws already passed, as well as laws that media companies are trying to get passed, those rights that we still have would go away. For instance, under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) it is alreadyillegal for you to circumvent copy protection measures, even for uses that would already be legal. In effect, this allows the publishers to write their own laws - if they want something to be illegal, they just distribute it in digital form with copy protection. They can make something illegal that Congress has refused to make illegal.

They are also constantly trying to get the scope of copyright extended. Copyright now prevents actions that used to be legal, and the media companies are not satisfied yet. For instance, Associated Press recently claimed that anybody who copies more than five words from one of their articles has to purchase a license from them, which not only costs the person quoting the article, but their license terms define what you cannot say in what you write. Think about it - many headlines are more than five words. They are trying to define what is fair use, rather than allowing the courts to decide. If they get their way, nobody would be able to write anything without permission from numerous sources, because everything would already be copyrighted. Try to find a phrase that isn’t in some work already published; I bet you can’t come up with one. I hope the politicians think of this the next time a vote comes up for a law extending copyright, or they will have to get permission from these companies in order to make any speeches!

Posted in Copyright | No Comments »