On Monday, Slashdot carried a story about two key developers leaving the Thunderbird project. Is this a sign of troubled times ahead? Mozilla is attempting to spin off the product into its own company, which seems rife with failure to me. As a user of Thunderbird, I certainly hope that this isn't the end of such a great product.

The third service pack for the Windows XP operating system has now officially entered the beta testing phase. According to an article at neosmart.net (link points to a network mirror, since the site is down), there are 1,073 patches in this service pack, a testament to how long it's been since SP2 was released. What I find most interesting, however, is that Microsoft is back-porting features from Vista into this service pack. A few specific features have been mentioned:

• New Windows Product Activation model
• Network Access Protection modules and policies
• New Microsoft Kernel Mode Cryptographic Module
• New "Black Hole Router" detection

Could these back-ported features be a sign that Microsoft is getting ready to drop Vista? Take up on the new operating system has reportedly been very slow, with the large vendors (HP, Dell, etc.) requesting XP preloads instead of Vista, due to customer demand. Microsoft has always been its own biggest competitor, and this could be a sign of a power struggle within the corporation (XP teams vs. Vista teams). If they do indeed pull the plug, I predict a collective sigh of relief from around the globe. Only time will tell what happens.

As I mentioned briefly yesterday, I recently bought my first iPod (the 80 GB, generation 6 model). I haven't gotten much time to play with it due to constant interruptions at work (which really sucks), so I'll be coming back to it later this week. For now, I'd like to share some thoughts on iTunes 7.

I've been using iTunes on my laptop for a while now, for the sole purpose of subscribing to podcasts that I enjoy (Diggnation, The Totally Rad Show, They Might Be Giants, etc.). In that regard, it does a great job. But until now, I hadn't used any of the the music library features.

Ripping music from a CD is very easy. You simply put in the CD and iTunes prompts you to import it (after loading CDDB information about the CD). I like the fact that I can cancel the prompt, unselect the tracks that I don't want to import (or fix incorrect track names), and continue. I'm a accuracy freak, so the CDDB information is always important to me. Thankfully, the iTunes database is way more accurate than the database used by Windows Media Player. To my best recollection, I haven't needed to make any corrections so far; simple tweaks to remove stuff like "[Live]" or "(alternate take)" are all that I've done. Editing track information is incredibly easy, and you can batch edit multiple tracks at once (very handy).

In order to get album art, you must have an Apple store account. And in order to get an account, you have to provide a credit card number (which sucks). Thankfully, there's a way around this. Simply buy a prepaid iTunes card (I bought one for $15), and use that to create the account. Easy and a little more secure! Downloading the album art is quick and painless, but iTunes sometimes gets it wrong. Thankfully, it's easy to use your own album art image files. But where does one get these images? Surprisingly, I've found that Amazon.com is the best place to get the images. Most albums have user-submitted images, which can be used easily. I've filled all the holes in my collection using this technique, so I highly recommend it.

I've noted that iTunes is clearly a multi-threaded application. When I'm ripping a CD, both of my processors are using about 80% of their available cycles. Ripping seems to take a little longer than in Windows Media Player, though I haven't done a side by side comparison, so it could simply be my poor time estimation. I chose to use MP3 files (instead of AAC) at 160 kbps, higher than the 128 kbps I used to rip at with WMP. I'm about 2/3 of the way through ripping my music library, and it's taking forever. But think of the music I'll be able to listen to!

Syncing music from my computer to my iPod is incredibly easy. I initially thought that I would manually manage the music on my iPod, but the automatic syncing is so easy I'm not sure that I want that hassle. Other miscellaneous thoughts: the "cover flow" view in iTunes is a nice gimmick, but seems a little impractical for frequent use. I prefer to use the searching, sorting, and browsing options (which are all quite responsive).

Overall I'm quite pleased. Like any application, iTunes has its quirks, but overall it seems like a very solid program. I think I prefer it to Windows Media Player 11, which now feels like even more of an iTunes wannabe than it did before I switched.

I was touching up some of my photographs recently when I noticed that one shot in particular had substantial vignetting. Wishing to use this photograph as a desktop wallpaper, I set out to try and remove this effect from the photograph. All of the standard Photoshop tools failed to do the trick. Both the clone tool and healing tool produced poor results. Disappointed, I searched the web for help. Thankfully, I found the answer I was looking for: a new filter introduced in Photoshop CS2.

For the sake of discussion purposes, here is the original, unedited image (scaled down of course):

The vignetting in this image is most apparent in the upper left and right corners. In order to fix this unwanted effect, I fired up the new Lens Correction filter made available in Photoshop CS2 (it's under the Filter » Distortion menu).

This particular filter allows you to alter a number of things: chromatic aberration, vignetting, and perspective problems. Two sliders for tweaking vignetting are available along the right hand side of the filter; one handles the amount of correction desired (either lighter or darker), while the other handles the midpoint (which I still don't fully understand; a trip through the documentation is in order). I lightened the corners by a value of +18, which gave me the following result:

As you can see, the results are stunning. Not only was the vignetting removed from the upper corners (where it is most apparent), the lower corners were also updated, as were the edges of the photo. After tweaking the levels of this photo, the final result is definitely desktop wallpaper worthy:

This new filter is fairly well hidden, like many of Photoshop's features, but I'm glad that I stumbled upon it. I was definitely impressed with the results, and I have yet one more trick in my bag for future photo editing.

I recently installed Apple iTunes for the first time (the QuickTime install on my laptop was having lots of problems). One of the first things I tried out was subscribing to a video podcast (specifically The Totally Rad Show), which was fairly easy to do. As soon as I started to play the latest episode, I noted that playback performance was horrible. I never had this kind of performance problem with QuickTime, so I was a little surprised that iTunes would be so different.

A quick Google search turned up a support article from Apple on iTunes performance in Windows XP and 2000. All of the standard suggestions are there (make sure you're computer is fast enough, download the latest version, etc.), but one suggestion caught my eye: "Disable Direct3D video acceleration in QuickTime."

I ventured to the Windows Control Panel, opened the QuickTime item, and turned off the Direct3D video acceleration. To my surprise, performance was restored! Who knew that a simple toggle could solve such an annoying problem?

In loosely related news, I'm getting closer to actually buying an iPod (something I thought I'd never do). More on this later.

You don't know the power of the Dark Side; I must obey my master. — Darth Vader

Can anyone recommend to me a secure (i.e., spam-resistant) contact form? I use the NMS FormMail script over at Born Geek, but spam is starting to pour through it. A replacement would be great, so any recommendations would be appreciated.

Several weeks ago, I finally got around to installing Windows Media Player 11. Having put it through its paces, I'd like to share my thoughts on this release.

The most apparent change in WMP 11 is the new look and feel, courtesy of Windows Vista. In fact, the player features the Vista-esque minimize, maximize, and close buttons in the upper right hand corner. Strangely enough, a 1-pixel "dead zone" exists above each of these buttons when the application is maximized. I tend to run most applications maximized, and when I want to either minimize or close a window, I throw my mouse all the way up to the upper right of the screen. With Media Player 11, I can't do that. Instead, I have to move the mouse down at least 1 pixel from the top to activate any of the buttons. What an unnecessary aggravation, not to mention a break in the Windows XP standard!

The entire interface, as with most things Microsoft tries to make modern, looks like it has been coated in plastic. Everything is black, with the exception of the buttons, which sport an electric blue, back-lit effect. Overall, the interface feels uninspired, but it's one I can live with. It took me a while to figure out that you have to right click the top of the player to access the standard application menus. Why exactly is Microsoft getting rid of the menus in all of its new applications? Internet Explorer 7 does the same thing.

The new media library interface is a prime example of Media Player's stance as an iTunes wannabe. Gone is the oh-so-useful tree control for browsing through your stored albums. Instead, the user is presented with a visual collection of music "stacks," as Microsoft calls them. The more albums in your library for a particular artist, the bigger that artist's stack will be. This new interface is fairly confusing to me. I have a much harder time finding the artist I want to listen to now, mostly because I can't quickly scan for the artist's name (looking down an alphabetized tree control was much easier). One other problem is that the media library is very slow, especially on initial startup. It takes Media Player a while to load all of the album art it needs to display, and this initial slowdown is quite noticeable.

Speaking of album art, Media Player occasionally can't find the appropriate album cover image. One 2-disc collection of mine (John Denver's Rocky Mountain Collection) has the correct album image for disc 1, but only has a blank placeholder for disc 2. I note that some of the meta-data for disc 2 also differs, so it's no doubt a problem with the music database service that Microsoft uses. It's still a noteworthy annoyance.

I can find at least one positive note about the new media library interface. Playing music from the artist level, rather than the album level, allows me to listen to all of a particular artist's albums without having to click through them. Media Player automatically moves to the next album in the list when the current album has finished playing, a most welcome feature.

Playing videos through WMP 11 is fine, though I have experienced some occasional stuttering on locally saved files. I recently attempted to watch an episode of Diggnation that I had downloaded, and I found that I could not jump around in the video without experiencing incredible delays of 5 to 10 seconds or more. This wasn't a problem in version 10.

Ripping music has changed slightly (progress bars now advance in 10% increments), but still seems fast. I have not yet performed a sync operation with my Creative Zen Micro, so I can't comment on that part of the application. I'm avoiding the "built-in" Napster and URGE music stores, since I still prefer to obtain music on CD.

I'm not sure how to sum up Media Player 11. While it has a few nice features, I think Microsoft has generally taken a step in the wrong direction with this. Have you used WMP 11? If so, what do you think?

It looks like the next generation of the Thunderbird e-mail client has been released. Although I have not yet updated my client at home, I will certainly be doing so tonight. Thunderbird is a fantastic client, and I am really looking forward to all the new features (not to mention the boat loads of bug fixes).

It looks as if Windows XP will be phased out by the end of the year, despite a continued strong demand for the operating system. Though Microsoft claims that sales of Vista are high, this rush to stop shipping Windows XP seems to say the exact opposite. In a recent Harris poll on over 2200 US adults, only 12% showed any interest in actually upgrading to Vista. This is bad news for Microsoft, and might be one reason why they are rushing XP out the door. My attitude is, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. As such, I intend to stick with XP for several more years. There are far too many problems in the current release of Vista than I'd like to deal with (not to mention all of the overhead for those fancy transparent windows).

One "feature" of Windows XP is the built-in support of what Microsoft likes to call "compressed folders." But nothing new was introduced here; the zip file format is all that's being used. When I first learned of this feature, I was fairly excited to see that Microsoft was actually trying to make life easier. No longer would I need a zip tool like WinZip to do my extractions. Instead, I would just use the features in Windows Explorer to do my compressing and uncompressing as needed.

That was an idealistic view if there ever was one, and I'm not too surprised to say that it was grossly mistaken. The zip support offered in Windows XP is utterly horrible. My work place is fairly strict about not having shareware applications installed on our personal workstations, so WinZip isn't an option for me. As a result, I'm relegated to using the native support offered by Windows. What I'd like to know is this: what the heck are they doing when unzipping a file? We package stuff up in zip files all the time around here (since we often have tons of source code files to deal with), and unextracting them through Windows literally takes 5 to 7 minutes. Literally! WinZip could chew through these files in less than 30 seconds (I know, because I've tried it at home). Is the Windows stuff just horribly inefficient? Are they doing more complex file system stuff than WinZip? Whatever it is, it makes file extraction very slow.

I use the Cygwin package all the time at work, and so I occasionally use their command line zip utility. It's way faster than what Windows provides, but it has the occasional problems with file ownership, which is why I use it sparingly. For instance, I've encountered the case where I extracted a zip file using the Cygwin tools, then tried to open a subsequent file for viewing. Windows then tells me that "I don't have the authority to open that file." I'm the freaking administrator of the machine! I should be able to do whatever I want, right?

If anyone has tips on how to improve things in the "compressed folder" world, I'd be glad to hear them.

I've recently had the fortune of playing with Windows Vista release candidates at work. Though I haven't spent much time with them, I can tell you one thing for certain: it doesn't feel any different to me than XP. Sure the windows are translucent and shiny, but shouldn't there be more to this? Come on Microsoft; what have you been doing for the past decade (or however long it's taken you to get this thing out)? The new start menu is horrible. Something that basic should have been left alone at the very least; not made worse.

Anyways, now that Vista has a release date, I'd like to make some predictions for the OS. Due to the headaches that will be coming down the pipeline based on all the new security stuff, I'm betting that few people will adopt the new operating system at first. Those that do adopt will essentially be "beta testers" for Microsoft, helping to work out all the last minute bugs. Things will go rough for several months, MS will reduce the price a time or two to help boost sluggish sales, and people will slowly turn on to it. I'm guessing that it will be another year (or maybe two) before the ball really starts rolling and substantial numbers of people start converting. Corporations will easily take that long before they begin rolling it out. So much has changed in this release that I doubt any large company will be willing to risk converting immediately.

Microsoft isn't helping things by offering seven different versions of the OS. Which version am I supposed to choose? And why should I go with that choice over the other six? Two versions seems complicated enough in XP (the Home and Pro editions). Why must we make things harder here?

To me, it all comes back to the way it feels. If I don't feel substantial change, why should I switch? What I've seen so far doesn't impress me, and I don't plan on switching for several years.

There are a few categories of software applications that suck across the board. Instant messaging clients are one primary example (though Google Talk is changing that). Another seems to be CD-RW burning software. I've tried a number of applications, all of which seemed to either not work or not have the features I desired. Does anyone have any recommendations for decent burning software? The free packages I tried (Deepburner and CD Burner XP Pro) didn't impress me, and the Nero Express version I got with my CD writer is really old (5.something). I hear Nero 7 is horrible, but that 6.6 is pretty good. What do you use and prefer?

I recently mentioned the stuttering problems I was seeing in some games (Half-Life 2 to be precise), and my attempts to fix it with nForce 4 drivers and a fix from AMD. One of these changes, strangely enough, has made my computer run hotter (the graphics card now reaches up to 50 degrees under load, which is still somewhat cooler than my previous card, but warm nonetheless).

Before installing the nForce 4 drivers, I created a restore point using Microsoft's System Restore. And, after I noticed the heat problems, I tried to go back to the state the machine was in before I did the driver install. But restoring to my saved point doesn't work! After a reboot, Windows reports that it was "unable to restore to the previous point" and that nothing has been changed. I'm not exactly sure why I tried System Restore, because it has never worked for me before. Has anyone else ever gotten this thing to work? As far as I can tell, it's completely useless.

I continue to use Favorites Plus to manage my favorites page, which I make daily use of both at work and home. And the more I use it, the more I question whether or not I should continue to do so. Having dumped Internet Explorer long ago (so long ago, in fact, that I can't remember when), keeping my IE favorites up to date has become rather redundant. My main goal is to keep my favorites page up to date; something that might be better suited for a PHP / MySQL application. In fact, I began working on such an application many months ago. I don't recall why I stopped development; if I pick it up again, perhaps I'll remember.

So the question is, should I drop support for Favorites Plus? I mean, Firefox is clearly the better browser, and its bookmarks system is top-notch (though the "export to page" functionality doesn't have all the features I want). I really like having a dedicated web page in which to store my favorites, but generating said page is the problem. And even though Favorites Plus does a decent job in this arena, it's not as portable as I'd like. All of these issues combined make continuing support seem not worth the trouble.

Firefox 1.5.0.2 is now available to download. Several stability and security fixes have been included, so make sure you upgrade.

Googlebar Lite 4.0 will be released this weekend (most likely on Saturday). Lots of great new features are coming, so stay tuned.

Thanks to a mention from Penny Arcade, I downloaded the BTMod for Oblivion, and wow what a difference it makes! The mod makes the inventory and map screens larger, so that you can see more at once. If you have the PC version of Oblivion, and you haven't grabbed this mod, you absolutely need to.

Because the next release of Googlebar Lite will be fairly substantial, I've been working on refreshing its icons. The button sheet I use is a 24-bit PNG image, making heavy use of transparency. And unfortunately, my copy of Adobe Photoshop 5.5 has weak support of the PNG format (i.e. transparency doesn't work at all).

I gave the Windows version of GimpShop a try over the weekend, and I hated every minute of it. Can you believe that you actually have to run a batch file to enable the Photoshop keyboard shortcuts? Shouldn't that be the default? I mean, the entire goal is to mimic Photoshop in every way possible! The sucky GTK interface doesn't help either. Needless to say, I quickly ditched this wretch of a program.

I then found out that Adobe has a 30-day trial of Photoshop CS2, their latest installment in the Photoshop line. So I naturally gave it a shot. I couldn't be happier.

The retail price of $650 is clearly ridiculous. But I am virtually sold on the product. I still have a substantial amount of time in the trial period to play around with it, and I intend to do so; several things warrant my exploration. For example, the text tool is way different than in 5.5, and I still don't quite understand how to use it. There are also a number of fun tools that weren't even in 5.5: stuff like the healing tool, ability to control multiple layers at once, and more. It's all quite exciting, and I look forward to some experimentation.

PNG support in CS2 is phenomenal. As a result, the upcoming Googlebar Lite icons should be fairly pleasant (there is way less aliasing this time around - oh, and most of the icons will be brand new). I also really like the updated user interface. It's much easier on the eyes, and things seem to be a little easier to locate.

All in all, I think this is a program destined for my hard drive. I'm simply too impressed with the demos I see on the Adobe website, and the trial speaks for itself. If you hear a scream in the next 28 days or so, that will be my wallet crying for mercy. You should ignore it; I know I will.

Due to increasing activity at work, I have only just now updated Thunderbird to the latest release, version 1.5. There's a laundry list of new items in this release, so be sure to update your copy if you happen to use Thunderbird as your mail client. And if you don't use it, what are you waiting for?

In other software update news, I understand that version 2.0.1 of WordPress is coming along, as I predicted it might. I've put off upgrading this blog to version 2.0 for the simple reason that major version changes usually have a number of uncaught bugs. And that's something I'd rather not deal with at the moment. I do hope to upgrade before too much longer. The changes offered are quite enticing.

My CoLT extension for Firefox just got accepted over at addons.mozzila.org, so perhaps it will get a little more exposure as a result. I'd like to add a few more features to the tool; perhaps I can do that in the near future.

There are a couple of exciting new software releases that I am anticipating:

• Thunderbird 1.5: Firefox's little brother is finally getting some major updates, some of which have been sorely needed from the beginning. The brand new software updating system introduced with Firefox 1.5 is coming to Thunderbird, which should be a great way to stay on top of critical security updates. Inline spell checking is also coming to town. Other great features include: auto-complete ordering based on address usage, built-in phishing detector, deleting attachments from messages, auto-save email drafts, and more! I'm really looking forward to this release. Thunderbird is an awesome client, and these updates should make it even better.
• WordPress 2.0: A major update to an excellent blog publishing system is coming soon, and it's going to make some great changes to the way things are handled. This feature list highlights the best parts of this upcoming release. Of interest to me: the improved post-preview, the theme previewer, and a built-in plugin for backing up your database. I'm going to give this a few weeks for any major bugs to shake out, but I'll eventually update this site to 2.0. It should be well worth it!

I feel like there was something else on the horizon that looked great, but at the moment I can't remember what it was. Anyways, with an exciting lineup like this already forming, 2006 should be a great year!

In looking at my site statistics this morning, I noticed that my previous post on Google and OpenOffice actually made it to NewsForge. That was surprising to me (albeit a pleasant one), but I certainly didn't expect such a wide audience for my thoughts on the matter. Had I expected such a turnout, I would have put a little more thought into the post before actually publishing it. As such, I'd like to clarify a few of the points I made.

My ultimate point was that, in my opinion, the office application battleground is likely to see more cut-throat action in the short term than operating systems are. I certainly cannot support this claim with fact. But operating systems seem to me to be a much more difficult problem to solve, simply because they are bigger, more complex beasts. As a result, it seems like it would simply take longer to create an excellent OS than it would an excellent application.

I also believed I oversimplified my stance on the Linux community. The points made by Greg Raiz in his recent article on Linux are exactly how I feel. Linux is certainly poised to encroach on Microsoft's territory. But desktop users need to have a reason to want to switch. As Mr. Raiz pointed out, a unified environment, where there's One Way to do things, would appeal to many people (particularly "newbies"). Apple was heading down that very road before they made the switch to a UNIX base.

A unified environment, where the user interface paradigm is the exact same for every application would be awfully appealing. I would certainly consider switching to such a solution. I want Linux to succeed. The more developers can weaken Microsoft's iron grip on the market, the better the universe will be for everyone. But there's a long road to ride down before we reach that point. Let's get to work!

So apparently, Google is hiring programmers to work on OpenOffice. Microsoft has to feel threatened at the online search giant's latest move in the office document arena. Google is the one company that Microsoft simply cannot figure out. And I couldn't be any happier to see the folks up in Redmond sweat just a little. For too long they've been the bully on the playground. But a new kid has come to town, and he's beginning to look a little bigger than ever.

I don't have any facts on the matter, but Office has to be one of Microsoft's largest revenue generators. To have someone announce that they will offer a competitive solution, for free, is quite an obstacle. And it's Google's way in to several markets which Microsoft has owned since what feels like the dawn of time. This will certainly be the first arena where Microsoft will face true pressure. Lots of people claim that Linux is a threat to Windows, but that's just not true (at least not yet). The Linux world is too fragmented. There are too many flavors, everyone has his favorite, and no one wants to try another one. Until the Linux community can get that particular act together (not to mention the ease of use factor), the office application arena will be the main battlefield. And I'm glad to see another player has finally joined the game.

The whole thing should be interesting to watch. I question whether Sun's involvement will doom the project (seeing as Sun has doomed virtually everything else they ever touched), but perhaps Google's brains can prevent such a catastrophe. I, for one, salute our (hopefully soon to be) office application overlords.