Category Archives: Geek Stuff

So Obvious It’s Brilliant (Plus the Secret Origin of Atomic Avenue)

I love this story–not just because it points toward a possible way of fighting a devastating disease, but because of the sheer simplicity of the approach.

Now, I have no idea whether this sort of approach is the Next Big Thing in oncology, but I’m attracted to the story because it seems to be a great example of someone looking around, seeing how something (in this case, advances in cloning technology) has changed the game, and revisiting an old problem with a fresh set of eyes. Suddenly, an amazing insight like, “Hey, if this guy’s immune defenses are being overwhelmed by cancer cells, why don’t we just send in an army of cloned reinforcements from his own cells?” becomes almost blindingly obvious.

Of course, once the first person thinks of something like this (and it works), everyone in the audience can just sort of shake their head and look sadly at the other researchers who’ve spent decades trying to perfect other approaches and wonder why they were wasting their time on something that now looks like a hopelessly pointless and old-fashioned way to address the problem.

To wit: Obviously the way to stop dealing with scratches and crackles on record albums is to encode and play back record albums digitally! Obviously it makes no sense to haul around a huge, battery-sucking boom box on your shoulder to listen to music when a tiny set of headphones attached to a Walkman (or later CD or MP3 player) lets you listen to your tunes wherever you want without annoying everyone else around you.

Sure, we say “obviously” now, but until someone thought to use the decades-old technology of Analog-Digital converters and lasers to record and play back music digitally, all the “smart” audiophiles were spending countless hours trying to de-static and dust their record albums, and researchers were focused on devising avant-garde tone arms and improved, diamond-tipped record styluses. Similarly, before Sony introduced the Walkman, music lovers were more concerned with how big (and heavy!) the boom box needed to be in order to hear good bass, and whether Duracell or Energizer made the best batteries. Had the Walkman not disrupted everything, the next great area of research would no doubt have concentrated on making and perfecting rechargeable D-cells.

In the crazy world of computer software, the technology shifts come even faster. There are any number of fashions and fad involving feature sets, languages, and technology platforms. Often, the wise path is to hold your fire until the picture clarifies a little, or you really sense that a trend is catching on (otherwise, we’d have likely done a ComicBase for the Apple Newton or Pippin—anyone remember those?). At the same time, ComicBase has been among the first programs anywhere to embrace internet-driven software patches, CD-ROM data distribution, DVD (and dual-layer DVD). ComicBase is even down in tech history as the first software program ever distributed on Blu-ray Disc. Not too shabby for a program whose whole purpose in life is to keep track of comic collections!*

Still, all those technologies were years in development, and the uses were pretty much built into the technology itself. What’s really exciting is when someone takes an older technology (like Analog/Digital converters and lasers) and applies them in a game-changing new way (storing and playing back digitally recorded music on a CD). These are the shifts that take the world by storm and make being in technology so interesting. (Right now, my #1 hope is that there’s something in the works—somewhere—which is going to let me get where I’m going without paying $4.49 or more per gallon.)

One of the big new changes in our life here is the much faster internet pipe that was part of our new office location. Computer folks like ourselves are always after more speed, but what started as an imperative to keep up with the growth of Atomic Avenue has already turned as well into a way for us bring in on-demand cover picture downloading (part of the Archive Edition of Atlas), new online services like renewals and product downloads, and more.

But as cool as all this is, what I really wonder is: What’s the next “blindingly obvious in retrospect” innovation whose components are already here…and we just don’t know it yet?

*Probably the biggest “Blindingly Obvious In Retrospect” moment for us was Atomic Avenue itself. After a decade or so of doing ComicBase, we were bemoaning the largely theoretical nature of guide values for comics, along with the paradox of a comic market that seemed almost entirely dysfunctional in that most store inventory would never actually sell, while comic fans would drive themselves crazy looking for rather ordinary comics they needed but which nobody was bothering to bring to conventions or post at auctions.

Suddenly, we thought to ourselves, “You know, there are tens of millions of comics that have been entered into ComicBase—all with prices. What if we just gave everyone a big button marked “Sell” which would let them post their comics to a central site. Then, anyone looking for a regular comic like Hellblazer #85 could not only find it, but probably find a dozen copies in various conditions. And whoever sells their comics on the system would be able to put their books before the entire world and just wait for orders to roll off their printer!”

We Love Robots…But Not on Our Forums (Sorry!)

Even though I was in the middle of More Important Things (which, by definition is sort of…well, everything), it was that fourth forum spam message in six hours which sent me over the edge. Suddenly, the idea of retro-fitting our third-party (and incredibly hard to decipher) forum software with a CAPTCHA to help deter spam robots went from the “sometime where I get a few hours after Atlas’s release” timeframe to Right Bloody Now.

“CAPTCHA’s (“Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart”) are those squiggly, hard-to-read sets of letters which are popping up more and more frequently in order to make it difficult to overwhelm forums and other systems with automated attacks. The theory goes that by requiring a human being to actually pause and decipher such letter codes, the spammers out there will find their productivity cut from being able to attack millions of systems per day to at best hundreds. More commonly, the automated scripts they employ will simply fail in their efforts and move on to the next system on their list.

I’m not in love with filling out CAPTCHAs myself, but I was really getting tired of deleting spam. On the bright side, it seems to have (temporarily) stopped cold the flood of new, patently bogus accounts which we’d see piling up in the forums as “pending approval”. (We’d always required new account owners to activate their accounts by clicking an email link–a simple measure which by itself would stop hundreds of bogus spam accounts per month). Adding a simple CAPTCHA at registration seems to have at least temporarily helped stop even more.

So, although anyone who knows us at all knows that we love robots here at Human Computing and Atomic Avenue, Spambots (and their dirtbag owners) are not at all welcome. There’s no stopping determined spammers who want to spend a lot of time posting messages, but when being a professional spam-creep depends on posting millions of bogus messages per day, it doesn’t make any sense to do it where it’ll take you longer to post the message than it will for the board owners to delete both the spam and your account.

The HD-DVD/Blu-ray Format War: All Over but the Crying

From Engadget:

http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/16/toshiba-pulling-the-plug-on-hd-dvd-already/

If the Reuters/NHK report is accurate, now is probably a good time to put your HD-DVD player up on Craigslist (and hope they convert Heroes to Blu-ray soon!).

Good news: the format war is over. Bad news: it took about five years too long. Thanks, guys!

Update 12/19: It’s official: HD-DVD is dead. Toshiba just announced they were pulling out of the HD-DVD business.

TV Torment

For the past couple of years, my TV setup at home has been a Dell projector shining across the living room at a screen I put together with a couple of yards of blackout fabric, lumber from Home Depot, and some black velvet trim for the border. When the projector isn’t on, it looks like we’ve decorated our living room using a large, minimalist abstract painting commenting on the emptiness of life; at night, which is when I almost always do my TV watching, it magically turns into a 77″ movie screen.

Some months ago, I started tip-toeing into the oh-so-pretty world of HD, which involved changing around lots of cables, my satellite provider (Dish Network’s HD offerings came much more expensively than DirectTV’s), and a Playstation 3, which introduced the world of Blu-ray movies to the Bickford household.

Finally, I could watch Heroes in HD—and notice how amazingly huge everyone’s pores looked. It all looked pretty darn good, but I couldn’t escape the feeling that something wasn’t quite right.

Anyway, about a week ago, I decided to take a break from the office, grab a coffee, and try to puzzle out how to work a certain new feature into ComicBase and Atomic Avenue. As I paced around the local strip mall with my grande Caffé Mocha (nonfat, no whip cream) in hand, I happened to drop in at the local computer store. There, someone had finally figured out how to sell Playstation 3’s by hooking them up to a big monitor and, you know, actually turning the monitor on (For some reason, the previous strategy of hooking up Playstation 3s to switched-off monitors, employed universally from coast to coast, had not proved the sales dynamo that stores had hoped. Go figure). Anyway, the screens and menus on the Playstation 3 looked fantastic—with a much higher resolution than I was used to seeing at home.

It turns out that the Dell projector we’d scavenged for our home theater lash-up can accept signals of up to 1920×1200, but the actual LCD matrix inside is only 1024×768. That’s a good sight better than the 640×480 signal associated with standard definition TV, but it’s not even quite up to the standard of 720p–the sort of mid-definition HDTV that’s usually broadcast. And it’s miles away from the 1080p, a.k.a. “full HD” which is output by devices like Blu-ray movies and Playstation 3s. In fact, it’s got something like 1/3 of the resolution of full HD.

Looking around at the screens in the electronics store, I was also struck by how very far they’d come in price since they first came on my radar back when Neil was kindergarten. They were actually—dare I say it—within reach of someone whose previous television-budget was such that saving a couple of hundred bucks by constructing his screen out of fabric and wood seemed a very sensible use of time and resources.

At that point, the mighty forces of rationalization and justification started kicking in. And somewhere in the “Ooh! Pretty pictures!” part of my mind, the item, “buy big freaking TV” got added to my mental list of things which ought to be done sooner rather than later. Like, say, tomorrow.

After the requisite approvals from family members had been obtained, I located a 65″ DLP TV from Fry’s electronics which was suitably close in dimension to what we’d grown used to watching, but with the added benefits of far better blacks, the ability to be watched during the daytime, and much higher resolution—all for just $1399. Unfortunately, when I found out that my car was about 1/2″ too narrow to fit the TV box in, I had to decide whether to (A) let the Fry’s delivery goons manhandle my new purchase for $59.99, or (B) try to locate someone with a larger car to haul the set home in.

Naturally, I went with plan B. But when I returned the next day with Joe from our office (whom I’d promised to bribe with lunch if he helped me lug the set home in his car), the Fry’s sales staff announced that the set had just gone up in price—by $600.

“But it wasn’t even listed as being on sale!” I protested. “Just give me yesterday’s price and we’ll have a deal.” But it was all to no avail. With the bitterness that you can only feel when you’ve decided to go all out and spend foolishly on something you really want, only to be thwarted, I walked out of Fry’s and bought Joe his lunch. I was eating a chicken sandwich, but what I was tasting was defeat.

(OK, that last bit might be a bit much. But I was still really, really bitter.)

I checked Circuit City. I checked Best Buy. I even checked other Fry’s stores as well as my nemesis CostCo. But nobody had the television set—or if they did, it was hundreds of dollars more expensive. The worst part was that I just knew I was going to wait out the geniuses at the Fry’s pricing department until the same bloody TV came “on sale” days or months later. But there was no way in creation I was going to hand Fry’s one cent more than $1399 (plus 8.25% sales tax!) for that television.

In the end, our good friend the internet saved me from months of mid-def purgatory. I couldn’t find the exact model I’d settled on for a competitive price, but amazon.com had the model one step up (with an extra HDMI port on the front as its major improvement) for $1468 — but with the all-important free shipping. When the lack of sales tax was figured in, I was actually a little ahead of the game. More importantly, I escaped the humiliation of crawling back months later to the same folks who had jerked the rug of reckless consumer spending glee out from under my feet.

By next Friday, hopefully I’ll be spending all sorts of pointless hours staring agape at the pretty high-res images on my new TV. The only dark cloud on the horizon? Reviews online say that some sets have had a horrible high-pitched whining coming from the color wheel. It seems to be a problem on a minority of sets, and the rest of the reviewers were gushing about how great the picture was. Hopefully the happy reviewers were not also the deaf ones, and the problem’s been fixed on this model. Otherwise, my TV torment will continue…

Scaling up by Downgrading?

Is low-end SQL Express 2005 the way to go for a heavily trafficked site? OK, I know. The question sounds daft, but hear me out.

Right now, Atomic Avenue (and ComicBase.com for that matter) use SQL Server 2000 as their back-end database. Like most databases, the bread and butter of the whole thing is garden variety SQL: SELECTs, UPDATEs, etc. using the requisite JOINs, stored procedures and whatnot, along with the occasional subquery, and—I think once or twice in the entire database—something really avant garde like a temporary table. The point is, we make use of basically none of the high-end features that Microsoft has been stuffing into SQL Server in the past few versions to try to sell to the “enterprise” market.

What we do make use of is connections—lots of them. And that’s where we’re starting to get into trouble. See, you don’t just pay Microsoft a couple of grand to use SQL Server, you pay a couple of grand to use SQL Server on one machine, with up to five simultaneous connections going. If you want more connections (and believe me, you do), you have to spring for something called a “CAL” — Client Access License, which permits your server to keep more than that number of connections open at once. These CALs come in “packs” of five, ten, twenty five, etc. and cost about $162 per connection license. Need 25 more simultaneous client connections on your “SQL Standard Edition” server? That’s a cool $4,050 on top of the initial purchase price of $1,899. And remember: that’s for one server.

Being the kind folks they are, Microsoft also offers the option of skipping all this CAL business and just licensing SQL Server for a fixed amount based on the number of processors on your server machine. An SQL Standard Edition license by processor runs $5,999—so that’s basically $12,000 if your machine has two processors. But heck, at least that’s better than the Enterprise Edition of SQL Server 2005: that baby runs $24,999 per processor. Imagine: $50,000 to run a single piece of software on one machine. I’ve just depressed myself utterly by realizing that a copy of ComicBase sells for something like 1/10th of 1 percent of that. We’re definitely in the wrong end of the software biz!

The only good news in this scenario is that connections go surprisingly far if your site is programmed halfway properly. Typically, you can open, service, and close connections in well under a second, allowing a relative handful of connection licenses to handle the connections generated by thousands of typical users without too much waiting around for a free connection to open up. Still, as Atomic Avenue’s traffic continues to grow, I’m getting concerned about lack of available client connections becoming a problem.

The obvious way to handle the problem is to just throw money at it and pay Microsoft for ever-more licenses. When I think of all the giant Alien statues and toy robots we could buy for the office with that same money, however, I’ll admit I have to think twice before reaching for my wallet.

One intriguing alternative is that we might be able to solve the problem by actually downgrading our production servers to the new “Express” version of SQL Server 2005. This version was introduced to compete with free databases like MySQL, and brings virtually all the features of the full versions of SQL Server to the table, but with no cost for the application, and unlimited client connections. The catch? Microsoft hobbled the server by limiting it to handling databases of 4 GB or less; the server can only make use of one processor (but as many cores as it wants); and it can only use 1 GB of RAM for the buffer memory.

Of these limitations, frankly, the memory one gives me the most pause, but it definitely seems worth checking out. I think there’s at least the chance that we may be better off going down to the free version, than by throwing untold thousands at the folks in Redmond. (And if this doesn’t work, we also have the option of rewriting the back-end database in something like MySQL anyway, although that would be a major project to say the least).

I just got our new quad-core database server racked up and ready to go using SQL 2005 Express. I’m not really getting my hopes up, but I’ll let you know what I find out… (And if any of you have experience in this area, by all means write and let me know what you discovered!)

[digg=http://digg.com/microsoft/Is_the_free_version_of_SQL_Server_better_than_the_paid_one]

Confused About Processors

For the first time in as long as I can remember, I’m utterly at a loss as to which processor is faster—or whether buying a server with a new processor (or even multiple processors) will make the slightest bit of difference in terms of overall performance of our web site.

Back in the day, it was easier to say whether a new processor would be faster than an old one: just look at the clock speed. 1.6 GHz smoked a 800 MHz processor; 2.4 GHz was better still, and 3.6 GHz was the best you could buy. But then heat factors put an end to simple clock speed races and Intel and AMD turned to multiple processors, multiple cores, different piplelining schemes, and so on.

I’ve heard the advice that multiple cores and processors are essentially worthless unless you’re running a machine specifically geared toward using the multiple cores. But how then, is a 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo noticeably outperforming my 3.4 GHz Pentium at most regular desktop work—none of which (that I can see) has been optimized to work with two processors?

Then there’s the question of our web servers: when running Windows Server 2003 and IIS 6, is there any advantage at all to upgrading our 3.0 GHz Xeon processor-based servers to whatever the top-of-the-line offerings from Dell or Supermicro are? So far as I can tell, the major bottlenecks for web servers are bandwidth (not immediately upgradeable), disk (we’re already running fast SATA drives in RAID configurations), and only then the processor speed. That said, kicking off compiles in ASP.Net does feel kind of slow to me, and I’d be willing to throw some cash at solving the problem…but I’d have to have some assurance first that throwing cash at it would actually make a noticeable difference in some metric I care about (# of web requests serviced, compile speeds, etc.)

Ideally, what I’d like to have a sense for is, “If I spend $X to buy Y, my <something I care about> will run Z% faster than it does now.” Several nights spent googling around on this score really haven’t yielded anything enlightening. I’ll admit it: right now, I’m at a loss.

Can anyone with real-world experience on our brave new world of processors kick in some words of wisdom on this subject?

Acronym Watch: SSD

It stands for Solid State Drive, and it’s my guess that this will be the year that it becomes a commonly used term in tech—if not yet a commonly used technology in our computers.

Basically, it means replacing the hard drive in (usually, a notebook) computer with a device which uses flash memory attached to an SATA or IDE interface, and fits in the same form factor as a notebook drive. The main advantages are speed, silence, and minimal power draw. Plus, the drives are nigh-indestructible, providing you don’t dip them in the pool.

Right now, it’s pretty much a boutique technology, but that’s changing awfully fast. A low-end SSD can be cobbled together using a $21.95 Addonics 2.5″ adapter and a couple of CF cards. At the higher end, Toshiba announced an SSD with a whopping 128 GB of capacity, albeit at a yet-to-be-disclosed price, topped by BiTMICRO’s CES announcement of drives of up to 832 GB capacity in the fall. Apple’s also offering a 64 GB SSD drive as a (pricy!) option in its new MacBook Air.

Hooray for Amazon.com!

In one of those decisions that makes onlookers roll their eyes, the French courts have ruled that Amazon.com violated their law by offering books at too high of a discount when you factor in Amazon’s free shipping offer. Amazon.com was ordered to pay 1,000 euros/day fine unless they comply…and Amazon decided to just pay the fine and keep the free shipping.

Realistically, the French courts will likely just raise the fine to a level at which no company can keep paying it, but for now, I say, “Hooray for Amazon.com!”

Apple’s Macworld Announcements

I’m a nine-year Apple veteran myself, but having said that: Is it just me, or was anyone else incredibly underwhelmed by Apple’s product announcements today?

Like so many other tech guys, I freely admit I look forward to each Macworld with a fair amount of anticipation. I love taking a spin in the fabled Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field™, checking out bold new design ideas, and seeing what at least one strongly opinionated company thinks will be the Next Big Thing for technology…

…but today, we got expensive online video rentals and a skinny, incredibly expensive laptop.

Sigh.

High-def Format Wars, Animated Cats, and the PS3

At this moment in time, it looks like Blu-ray has a leg up in the high-definition video format wars, particularly with news that Time-Warner had decided to switch to the format, and rumors afoot at CES that Universal and Paramount may soon follow. That said, I suspect all of us would rather declare somebody the winner so we could all enjoy better-looking movies at home without worrying we bought into the wrong format.

In addition to the “big war” of HD-Video vs. Blu-ray, however, it turns out that the manufacturers, in their wisdom, have also added a bunch of new interactivity features to each format—and now there’s concern that disks designed to use the features specified by the later “Profile 1.1” or “Profile 2.0” version of the Blu-ray format won’t work properly on players built around the earlier version of that spec.

Two things struck me about that article. First off, it’s apparently a good idea to buy a player which can be upgraded by flashing the firmware to add new capabilities. (I’d claim to be prescient in this regard, but to be honest, I really bought my PS3 to play Guitar Hero III and Rock Band—Blu-ray movie support was just a nice extra for me when making the purchase decision).

The second was how fantastically unexcited I am about the Java-based “interactivity” features which both the Blu-ray and HD-Video camps are willing to risk so much market confusion over. In my life, I have a pretty much perfect record of regretting the minutes I’ve spent with any client-side Java application, whether it involves animated cats jumping around in my browser, or some “interactive” feature launched by pressing the wrong button on my TV’s remote control. It’s always possible that someone will come up with an application which makes us all into believers on this score, but I haven’t seen it yet. I hate to say it, but when I’m watching a movie, I pretty much want to…well, just watch the movie. Sound and picture matter a lot to me when I do that. Interactive jumping cats…not so much.

But hey, since I’m currently doing my high-def movie-watching on a PS3, I guess I’ll likely be able to get my bouncing cats too. Yay.