<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><rss xmlns:atom='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom' xmlns:openSearch='http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearchrss/1.0/' xmlns:georss='http://www.georss.org/georss' version='2.0'><channel><atom:id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388</atom:id><lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:52:29 +0000</lastBuildDate><title>Cratchit.org News &amp; Commentary</title><description>Cratchit.org maintains the VIC CRM and TimeTool open source projects.</description><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/</link><managingEditor>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</managingEditor><generator>Blogger</generator><openSearch:totalResults>136</openSearch:totalResults><openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex><openSearch:itemsPerPage>25</openSearch:itemsPerPage><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-6862818456783623849</guid><pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 00:26:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2010-01-29T17:02:15.950-08:00</atom:updated><title>The Android Tablet</title><atom:summary type='text'>While Apple has introduced the iPad tablet computer, MSI has quietly been developing an alternate based on the Android platform. Here's a taste:Here are some comparisons:The MSI has a camera; the iPad does not.The MSI supports Flash; the iPad does notThe screens are nearly identical in sizeThe MSI is based on NVidia's Tegra chip; the iPad on the A4. The processors are comparable in horsepowerThe </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2010/01/android-tablet.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-9132697978375029209</guid><pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:24:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2010-01-28T22:37:53.928-08:00</atom:updated><title>iFail</title><atom:summary type='text'>According to the criteria Steve Jobs set out in his announcement of the iPad, the device has no reason for being.Transcript:In order to really create a new category of devices, those devices are going to have to be far better at doing some key tasks. They're going to have to be far better at doing some really important things. Better than the laptop, better than the smartphone.What kind of tasks?</atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2010/01/ifail.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-5083742642254574385</guid><pubDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2009 21:42:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-12-05T18:34:49.083-08:00</atom:updated><title>Windows 7 is a cluttered mess</title><atom:summary type='text'>I spent some extended "quality time" with Windows 7 lately. A customer needed to upgrade his server, and in so doing, get the networking to work with a mixture of Windows XP and Vista clients, all of whom would be running various apps on the server including one legacy app that was written for MS-DOS.Before some commenter puts his foot in his mouth by suggesting an upgrade of the legacy app, I'll</atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/12/windows-7-is-cluttered-mess.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-6659173969841848633</guid><pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:34:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-12-04T12:38:58.084-08:00</atom:updated><title>VIC CRM and Lotus Notes 8.5</title><atom:summary type='text'>I've not upgraded to Lotus Notes 8.5 yet, as $BIGCLIENT, who constitutes most of my revenue, hasn't. But other people have, and I've gotten my first report on VIC CRM on 8.5.The bottom line is, as it stands right now, VIC CRM is NOT compatible with R8.5. The core problem is that the From field doesn't appear to contain the expected data. Until I examine and fix the problem, I don't recommend </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/12/vic-crm-and-lotus-notes-85.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>2</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-2026454820619035892</guid><pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 18:31:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-10-18T13:21:28.391-07:00</atom:updated><title>I told you so. I told you so.</title><atom:summary type='text'>Loathe as I am to do it, today's post is a solid "I told you so". Not once, but twice.First... in my last post ("You're a pirate, and you don't wash your hands") I suggested that you should turn off automatic updates, and examine security patches before applying them. Friday, ZDNet posted a story exemplifying what will happen to you if you don't heed this advice ("Microsoft exposes Firefox users </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/10/i-told-you-so-i-told-you-so.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>1</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-6859273757122663464</guid><pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:22:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-10-12T08:06:14.845-07:00</atom:updated><title>You're a pirate. And you don't wash your hands.</title><atom:summary type='text'>OK, maybe you're not, and you do.  But according to the Business Software Alliance, 41% of all software on personal computers is pirated (link).  In the U.S. that figure is around 20%, and higher in the rest of the world.The funny thing is that this doesn't have to be the case at all.  With OpenOffice.org, Firefox, Thunderbird, the GIMP, and other great Open Source packages around, there's no </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/10/youre-pirate-and-you-dont-wash-your.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-733480899841562463</guid><pubDate>Sun, 11 Oct 2009 16:23:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-10-11T09:52:38.506-07:00</atom:updated><title>Rupert Muroch puts his foot in it AGAIN.</title><atom:summary type='text'>We've got our second story in a row on Rupert Murdoch, Soooper-Genius.Over at Newsweek, Weston Kosova reports that Murdoch thinks Google is "stealing" his content, and wants them to pay him. According to Murdoch, linking == stealing. Definitely read Kosova's commentary, as he has it 100% correct.Google doesn't steal anything from Murdoch. If you do a news search in Google, you get a list of links</atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/10/rupert-muroch-puts-his-foot-in-it-again.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-7406238479040924219</guid><pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 18:23:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-09-29T11:29:25.494-07:00</atom:updated><title>Mammals Shouldn't Take Advice from Dinosaurs</title><atom:summary type='text'>On ZDNet, Larry Dignan asks, Is Barry Diller Delusional?  Barry Diller is the exec formerly behind Fox Broadcasting and USA Broadcasting, and is currently in charge of the lukewarm IAC/InterActiveCorp. Larry's post contains video of Barry (once again) declaring that people should pay for Internet content.There are gobs of media moguls out there who feel that they should be paid for access to </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/09/mammals-shouldnt-take-advice-from.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-1436989319668659852</guid><pubDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 17:42:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-09-07T11:52:07.306-07:00</atom:updated><title>Cloud Computing: Still Bad.</title><atom:summary type='text'>In response to my previous post, Cloud Computing is Baaaad, Mmmkayyy?, I was happy to receive a most thoughtful comment from Greg Charland. Greg writes in part:Really, though, it comes down to the math.I'm not even going to go in the direction of google as I'm not convinced that their email solution is business-worthy.But I can offer hosted Exchange &amp; SharePoint through a well-known provider for </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/09/cloud-computing-still-bad.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>3</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-4845530854638132611</guid><pubDate>Sat, 05 Sep 2009 00:59:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-09-04T19:36:23.770-07:00</atom:updated><title>Cloud Computing is Baaaad, mmmKayyy?</title><atom:summary type='text'>Cory Doctorow has a story in the Guardian (link) describing the "real" purpose of cloud computing.The tech press is full of people who want to tell you how completely awesome  life is going to be when everything moves to "the cloud" – that is, when all  your important storage, processing and other needs are handled by vast,  professionally managed data-centres. Here's something you won't see </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/09/cloud-computing-is-baaaad-mmmkayyy.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>4</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-7359675519043077937</guid><pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2009 00:12:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-09-01T19:09:41.959-07:00</atom:updated><title>Software Patents, Word, and OpenOffice.org</title><atom:summary type='text'>If you've read this space at all over time, you'll know it's no secret that I'm a serious fan of OpenOffice.org, the free alternative to expensive desktop software like Microsoft Office. Recently we've been provided with additional reasons for making the change.Reason one: A District Court has issued an injunction banning Microsoft from selling Word in consequence of losing a patent-infringement </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/09/software-patents-word-and-openofficeorg.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-9200284664941438253</guid><pubDate>Sun, 16 Aug 2009 13:42:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-08-16T07:25:10.368-07:00</atom:updated><title>Please, Marc, why RockMelt?</title><atom:summary type='text'>Marc Andreessen is backing a new web browser, to be called "RockMelt". What no one can figure out is, why?  The RockMelt website is no help (link), and neither, apparently, is Andreesen himself, who is quoted as saying, "There are all kinds of things that you would do differently if you are building a browser from scratch," in an interview with the New York Times. Perhaps so, but we're in the </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/08/please-marc-why-rockmelt.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-3262925475441635941</guid><pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:21:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-08-14T12:51:19.022-07:00</atom:updated><title>Now THAT'S how you do textbooks!</title><atom:summary type='text'>I can kvetch forever about California's budget crisis and the fiscal irresponsibility that led to it, but in the midst of that bad news is this wonderful example of how the Creative Commons works to the betterment of society.Some time back Gov. Schwartzenegger launched and initiative to "Open Source" digital textbooks for students (press release). Technically, these aren't  "Open Source"... </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/08/now-thats-how-you-do-textbooks.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>1</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-4457698722741942003</guid><pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:19:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-06-17T06:56:33.291-07:00</atom:updated><title>Cligs Cracked; TinyURL is A-OK</title><atom:summary type='text'>I hate it when "clever" headline writers mislead their readers. Take this one, for instance, from ComputerWorld:Hacker cracks TinyURL rival, redirects millions of Twitter users This borders on the irresponsible. There you have TinyURL, prominent and mostly in caps, with that tiny little "rival" next to it.  This story has nothing to do with TinyURL, but they're the one associated with the hack by</atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/06/cligs-cracked-tinyurl-is-ok.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>1</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-6919955249299785364</guid><pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:52:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-06-16T23:55:32.008-07:00</atom:updated><title>Project Xanadu</title><atom:summary type='text'>This is one of those posts where I really don't want to be mean, but I have to be.Often the computer systems that we create today don't hold a candle to the things that were envisioned for computers at the very outset.  For instance, I'm still in awe of what Douglas Englebart was able to accomplish back in the 1960s. (I've written at length about that in "Why you need VIC CRM".)  On the other </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/06/project-xanadu.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-3303084301682397029</guid><pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 17:33:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-05-28T12:44:24.423-07:00</atom:updated><title>They're reinventing the wheel (again)</title><atom:summary type='text'>There have been a few new product announcements that have really amazed me lately due to their obvious "me-too"-ness where the press have somehow been hoodwinked into believing that there's something innovative going on. All I can conclude is that the computing media are made up of sheltered children who never saw a computer before they graduated and got their current jobs.Specifically I'm </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/05/theyre-reinventing-wheel-again.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-1562225915584595220</guid><pubDate>Sun, 03 May 2009 13:51:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-05-03T07:46:31.258-07:00</atom:updated><title>Randy Pausch on Time Management</title><atom:summary type='text'>I don't know how I missed this talk by Randy Pausch on Time Management, but it's excellent. Please, please, please make the time to watch it: you'll be glad you did.Not only does he pass on general principles in an entertaining way; he provides advice on specific techniques and tools to make you more productive.Now here are my totally self-serving observations: Randy mentions that [as of the time</atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/05/randy-pausch-on-time-management.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-6151988106251902387</guid><pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 02:23:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-04-20T19:25:17.779-07:00</atom:updated><title>Microsoft to open source: Please don't compete on price!</title><atom:summary type='text'>This article by Matt Asay says quite enough.</atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/04/microsoft-to-open-source-please-dont.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-4695634927622028624</guid><pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2009 02:47:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-04-10T21:11:07.378-07:00</atom:updated><title>An Egg for Easter</title><atom:summary type='text'>Here's a neat little Easter egg I just learned about for Microsoft Word (if by this time you don't know that an "Easter egg" is a hidden feature, then get educated here).In Word, type in "=lorem(p,s)" minus the quotes where p is the number of paragraphs and s is the number of sentences per paragraph. Entering "=lorem(200,4)" will give you about 10 pages of output that looks something like this:</atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/04/egg-for-easter.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-6031533806374509607</guid><pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:06:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-04-07T14:52:24.240-07:00</atom:updated><title>Cool websites you should visit.</title><atom:summary type='text'>Today I thought I'd pass on a few interesting and useful websites I've run across.Some are reference, some are tools... the only real rule I've got here is that I'm not posting links to any Google websites... I've got a separate list for that. I'm also steering clear of the obviously popular sites, such as Wikipedia and IMDB. I'm also limiting myself to a baker's dozen this time 'round.So, with </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/04/cool-websites-you-should-visit.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-4220820579738407184</guid><pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 15:26:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-02-17T12:31:17.284-08:00</atom:updated><title>Handicapped features in Linux</title><atom:summary type='text'>In the course of a discussion on Paul Murphy's ZDNet talkbacks, Roger Ramjet noted an issue with accessibility features for Linux.First, background. Able people often don't consider the difficulties encountered by the handicapped in using a modern computer. With text-based (DOS) computers it was pretty easy... a screen reader for the blind and you're pretty much done. But with GUIs it's really, </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/02/handicapped-features-in-linux.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-4724606190983412745</guid><pubDate>Sun, 01 Feb 2009 20:47:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-02-01T21:24:14.499-08:00</atom:updated><title>While you weren't looking, Linux got great.</title><atom:summary type='text'>I had an older Windows box that needed to be re-installed. (It's an HP Optiplex). Now, this isn't a crap machine. It's a 2.2GHz processor with a very decent video card.  But it didn't come to me with a restore disk, so I called Dell to get one. Sadly, they couldn't hep me out because it originally shipped with Windows 2000. The restore disks are no longer being manufactured. They couldn't send a </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/02/while-you-werent-looking-linux-got.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-1544826659091346944</guid><pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 18:13:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-01-24T10:34:15.310-08:00</atom:updated><title>Conficker ("Downadup") is nasty</title><atom:summary type='text'>My eldest son's computer contracted a nasty bit of malware a couple of weeks ago, which I had to remove manually (NONE of the antivirus software caught it). And believe me, tracking it down and removing it manually without knowing what it was was no easy thing. He's lucky I'm his dad, otherwise the repair could have been hugely expensive.It was the "Conficker" worm, aka "Downadup".Fortunately for</atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/01/conficker-downadup-is-nasty.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-527808507244718491</guid><pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:04:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2009-01-07T10:04:11.886-08:00</atom:updated><title>Why BitTorrent is Slow</title><atom:summary type='text'>Every BitTorrent vendor promises you that BitTorrent provides blazingly fast downloads. This is a lie.  Weeeell, it's not technically a lie, and it's not an intentional lie, but in practice it's a lie nonetheless.Here's the theory. BitTorrent works by having many users share pieces of the file among themselves. Seeds have complete copies of the file, and peers don't. By sending different pieces </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2009/01/why-bittorrent-is-slow.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>2</thr:total></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6966388.post-8252011145242365540</guid><pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 11:19:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2008-10-14T06:41:15.036-07:00</atom:updated><title>Is Cloud Computing worth it?</title><atom:summary type='text'>In my last post I related that in eWeek magazine (Oct 13, 2008), Jason Brooks asks "Does OpenOffice.org Still Matter?" He's wondering if, given on-line suites, if OpenOffice.org will matter in the future. Yesterday I addressed the quality of the software, but today I'd like to look at the on-line software concept and whether Software-as-a-service (SaaS or "cloud computing") advantages outweigh </atom:summary><link>http://www.cratchit.org/blog/2008/10/is-cloud-computing-worth-it.html</link><author>noreply@blogger.com (Dave Leigh)</author><thr:total xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'>0</thr:total></item></channel></rss>