Archive for the 'Cool Stuff' category

A Better Previous Versions: Time Traveler

 | July 30, 2009 2:16 pm

Mirrored PoundThe most recent versions of Microsoft Windows, Vista and Windows 7, include a wonderfully useful tool called Volume Shadow Copies.  You can think of Volume Shadow Copies as insurance against momentary stupidity or negligence.

Consider that in any given day, the typical computer user (namely me) works with a lot of files.  These include data, images, and text.  As part of the workflow, I may be editing and combining changes to a document from many people.  Over time, this can result in a great deal of cruft.  Thus, while I’m working, I try and maintain some semblance of organization by applying edits to the most recent version and keeping a semi-automated log of the changes that have been made.  Older versions of the document will typically be backed up in the subversion repository on my server, or in a dedicated archive.

However, in the process of shuffling and moving the digital detritus, occasionally I have accidentally deleted the wrong file.  Which, invariably, happens while away from the backup server.  Losing work is obnoxious, frustrating and embarrassing; thus, my healthy appreciation for Volume Shadow Copies.

On a regular schedule, Windows takes a picture of how your drive looks at that moment and saves it away.  So, should you ever need to restore a lost file, you can use the Volume Shadow copies to do so.  It’s even a relatively straightforward process.  Simply right click on the folder you need to access and select “Properties.”  Then, click on the “Previous Versions” tab  and you will find a list of every snapshot that the computer has taken.image

But while all versions of Windows have Volume Shadow Copies, Microsoft decided that only those who purchase the most expensive versions (Business, Enterprise and Ultimate) get the ability to use them.  Home users are out of luck.  The Shadow Copy service is still there, but you need a third party program to get at the stored information.

The open source Shadow Explorer is one such option.  It’s free and gets the job done.  But I recently stumbled upon a second alternative that is worth mentioning, Time Traveler, developed by Bears on the Loose Software.

While reading about Time Traveler, I learned something very interesting.  Microsoft considers Volume Shadow Copies to be essential to the operation of Windows.  More than a few of the internal services like System Restore and File Backup make extensive use of it.  Support is even built-in to  Windows Explorer (the file managing utility, not the internet browser).  If you know the proper url, you can navigate to where the previous versions are stored on the hard drive and work with them like any other file.

But, bizarrely, Microsoft didn’t connect any of these technologies.  They didn’t make it easy for the end-user to take advantage of their hard work.  Sure, right clicking is easy enough … but … that’s the problem.  It’s like saying that something is “good enough,” or “useful enough.”  The “enough” is a qualifier, it implies that the solution is merely passable rather than excellent.

The problem with Microsoft’s implementation of Previous Versions is that you have to add the qualifier.  Of course a good tool should be invisible, at least until you need it.  But Microsoft’s Previous Versions is too invisible.  It forgets that you should also be able to find said tool quickly and efficiently.  To use Microsoft’s Previous Versions (assuming you even have the right version of Windows), you first have to load a context menu, then you have to go to the all-encompassing “Properties” option and find the right tab.  Only after three unnecessary clicks  can you actually review your shadow copies.  And what happens if you don’t know where your lost file once lived?  There’s no way to actually search through the archive.

You see, it’s “good enough.” And because there’s a gaping hole in the integration, others can make some money by patching it; enter Time Traveler.  Bears on the Loose took the final step that Microsoft should have taken: they integrated Shadow Copies into the rest of the Windows.

Time Traveler is a software add-on from

The program does one thing, it points Windows explorer to the url where the relevant volume shadow copy lives.  Simple, huh?   Remember, Windows Explorer already has support for browsing the shadow copies built-Time Traveler installs itself as an add-on to Explorer.  You can enable it by clicking on View->Explorer Bar->Time Traveler.  Alternatively, you can also it Ctrl+T.in.  It just needs a little help getting there. And this works on every version of Windows: Basic, Home, Home Premium, Business, Enterprise and Ultimate.

Time Traveler represents “Previous Versions” as it should be.  Invisible until needed, then easy to access and use.  It’s loaded  by clicking on View –> Explorer Bar -> Time Traveler.  Alternatively, you can hit Control + T to toggle the slider on and off.

When loaded, it subtly clues you into what previous versions are available via a convenient timeline.  You can open that point in time by moving the slider bar.  Hence the name, you “travel back in time.”  Windows Explorer does the rest of the work.

But even if Time Traveler makes the navigation of shadow copies easier, that one simple action doesn’t justify the $20 that Bears on the Loose charges for it.  I would say that it’s the program’s “other” feature that makes it valuable. Namely, it makes it really easy to configure and manage the Volume Shadow Copy Service.

While I am aware that managing the Volume Shadow Copy Service is possible with the Control Panel, I’m not exactly sure how it’s done.  Frankly, I’m not even sure where to begin.  I once found a few options when I was looking for something else, but I can’t remember where I saw them.  Time Traveller, however, takes all of those available settings and puts them on the same configuration page.  Want to change how often the computer takes snaphosts?  You can do that.  Want do change how much hard drive space is used to store them?  You can do that too.  Want to manually delete or protect old snapshots?  The settings for that are also available.

image

Sure, Time Traveler isn’t what anyone would call groundbreaking software.  But that doesn’t mean that it isn’t valuable.  It transforms Volume Shadow Copies from a system tool into a user tool, primarily by linking Microsoft’s own technologies together in a more cohesive manner.  I hope that someone at Microsoft takes a good look at how Time Traveler works.  It represents “Previous Versions” done right.

Back In Time (Part 2): Over the Network and Across the World

 | July 20, 2009 9:15 pm

Staircase at the Vatican Museum Despite all of its strengths, Back In Time has one major weakness: it doesn’t support backup over a network.  But luckily, it runs on Linux,the single most customizable operating system in the world!  As a result even though Back In Time might not officially support a backup to a remote computer, you can still make it work through a little bit of spit and grit.

The magical sauce is the Fuse SSH file system.  This kernel module allows for Linux to mount a remote share as a local drive.  And by doing so, Back In Time thinks that it is working with a local folder even though the data might be sent across the network or internet.  To make it work, though, you’ll have to work at the command line and do a bit of programming.  But, don’t panic because it isn’t that hard.  It amounts to a few shell commands and about six lines of code.  Below, I’ll show you how in seven simple steps.

Show me more... »

Back In Time (Part 1): Linux Backup Made Easy

 | 9:12 pm

Advancing ArchesLinux is a bit of a funny creature.  In many ways, it’s the most integrated and full featured operating system in existence.  Take software development, for example.  You couldn’t ask for a more integrated, well thought out solution.  The tools are absolutely first rate, the system is stable, and because the platform is open source, most of the rough edges get worn off rather quickly.

But there’s also a downside to open source.  You see, everyone tends to scratch their own itch first.  Thus, while there are a bevy of tools that perfectly meet the needs of a few (most notably their authors), they often miss the needs of the many.  That is a problem, because the masses don’t necessarily have the skill set required to adapt an already existing program so that it fits them.  If anything, this is why Microsoft is valuable.  They create software that more or less handles the needs of the masses.

And as might be expected, this is also the state of backup on Linux.  It is no understatement to say that you can get your hands on the very best backup tools available, for free.  All it requires is that you use some derivative of the following:

sudo apt-get install toolname

Unfortunately, while you can find the very best tools, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you will be able to use them.  Rather that be written with the end-user in mind, they were created for programmers and system administrators.  You know, the type of people who wonder why anyone would bother with a user interface.  After all, it’s so much faster to do everything from the command line.

The result is that while the Linux backup tools may be powerful, they also have a learning curve steep enough to bang your head against.  And that is an absolute shame.  In general, I (and a great deal of humanity in general) am against activities that require me to learn new things or otherwise grow in what might end up being a painful direction.  Even if it is for a good cause.   (And I can think of few more important than making sure thatmy personal information is safe and secure.)  Ideally, I want backup to be easy.  I  want to “Set it and forget it.”  Time Machine for Mac OS X allows me to do this, as does the Windows Vista File Backup.  But at first pass, such a solution for Linux is woefully absent.

That’s not to say that there aren’t contenders.  In fact, a quick search on Google will reveal several: sbackup, Flyback, and TimeVault all look promising.  But if you look at their project pages, you will notice something disconcerting: in each case, the programs are old and there isn’t much recent activity.  This is typically a bad sign for an open source project.  No activity usually means that the program is dead and unlikely to advance further.  And that is really too bad, because sbackup, Flyback and TimeVault are good programs with potential.  But, like many other open source options, they have a number of very rough edges.

Maybe that’s why I got so excited when I saw a new contender, called “Back In Time,” when it was recently featured on Lifehacker.  At the time, I thought, “Have I finally found a backup program I can really use?”  Now, after four months of using it full time, I can answer that question: Yes!  Without a doubt!

Show me more... »

Backup, Sync and Share – Part 4: Apple Time Machine and Samba

 | June 9, 2009 9:58 pm

Mac OS X - Leopard - Disc At it’s World Wide Developer’s conference in June of 2006, Apple released a product that changed the way that a great many people think about backup: Time Machine.  While I cringe at the thought, I need to descend into the fawning adoration public relations speak that masquerades as critical coverage of Apple Products.  (Actually, forget that, here’s how Apple describes their backup system.)

Time machine is a breakthrough automatic backup that’s built right into Mac OS X.  It keeps an up-to-date copy of everything on your Mac – digital photos, music, movies, TV shows, and documents.  Now, if you ever have the need, you can easily go back in time to recover anything … Time Machine takes care of it … Automatically, in the the background.  You’ll never have to worry about backing up again.

General sarcasm and bitterness aside, Time Machine really is a spectacular piece of kit.  Sure, you can very successfully imitate a Time Machine experience using the tools within Windows Vista or Linux (or via third party tools such as Norton Ghost).  Even so, Time Machine is just just about the perfect combination of simple, powerful, and integrated.  And like most Apple products, when used within the Apple eco-system is  a lovely experience.

However, if you migrate too far out of the walled garden, Time Machine isn’t quite so nice to work with.  Actually, it can be a bit demanding and temperamental.  For example, it requires its own formatted hard drive or the ready availability of a specialized Apple router (called a TimeCapsule).  Alternatively, it can be a bit flaky; when I was backing up to a local hard drive, it would often quit with an indecipherable error.   Luckily, however, these limitations are pretty easy to overcome.  In this article, I will look briefly at how to setup Time Machine so that it works with a simple home server running Samba and Subversion.

Show me more... »

I Killed Twitter

 | May 14, 2009 3:59 pm

I just killed Twitter.  The whole website is down, it can’t even be pinged.  So ... just in case I get asked about it, here’s my story.  I was trying to post an update about the brand new, easy to install binaries of LyX-Outline and then … the little twitter widget (twidget, what a sickeningly sweet name) went black and crashed.  Now, I can’t contact the website, even when I try to access it from another computer on the neighbor’s wireless.  Who’s to say that little people don’t have any power?

Update: Okay, in the face of both reality and facts ... it may be possible that I did not kill Twitter, per se.  But my interaction most certainly had a negative consequence.  That, at least, you have to give me.

Introducing LyX-Outline 0.1

 | May 13, 2009 6:16 pm

Writing anything - whether it be a book, or a short story or an angry letter to your boss - is substantially more than starting from the first idea moment of inspiration and continuing to the final draft. Rather, writing involves a fair number of idea fragments, fleeting moments of inspiration, and a tremendous number of dead ends.

It is incredibly unfortunate that most writing software, however, is geared to organizing and structuring the document after most of the hard work has already happened.  It simply assumed that most of the planning and layout has already happened and the author is ready to string words together.  Unfortunately, this assumption overlooks one important truth: ideas are best defined as they are expressed.  Thus, it's usually about the time that the a writer sits down to compose the draft, that the document's true structure becomes apparent.  In my own case, this often leads to a flurry of reorganization.  And it’s during the restructuring that the real battle begins.

When in full creative passion,  I am typically working with three or four different programs all at the same time: OneNote is open so that I can access my ideas, Word is there to start collecting the somewhat finished text, and I'll also probably be using a MindMapper so that I can see a visual representation of the document structure.  The tools are separate and don't communicate with one another.  Thus, a change made in one place needs to be made everywhere.  And all too often, that I end up fighting the word-processor and the notetaker, and the mind mapper.  It is tremendously frustrating to battle the tools of your adopted trade.  Luckily, I am not alone in my frustration.

In the past everal years, a number of programs have become available that leave the linear model of writing behind.  On the Mac platform, one such tool looms above the others: Scrivener.  Central to Scrivener's function are two important metaphors: that of the outline and that of the corkboard.  And it works really, really well.  There are just a few minor problems.  First: Scrivener is only available for Mac and Scrivener's lead developer has made it clear that there won't be versions for other platforms.  Second: Scrivener was really designed with creative writing in mind.  Thus, while it can be used for long and complicated documents, this is a slightly less than straightforward process.  Last, to create said fancy documents, Scrivener requires the raw use of a markup language (and all of the associated headaches that come with it).

The document processor, LyX, however, excels in many areas where Scrivener falls short.  It is built upon the mature and robust underpinnings of LaTeX, the typesetting language of choice in the science and engineering.  And more importantly, it is easy to use (where LaTeX most decidedly is not).  But it fails in the same way as Microsoft Word and other word processors, it is a linear writing tool and doesn’t offer a great deal of work-flow flexibility.  That is where LyX-Outline comes in.

LyX-Outline is a marriage between Scrivener's organizational tools and LyX's typesetting tools.

 LyX-Outline Main Window (Mac OS X)

Show me more... »

Barn Architecture

 | May 9, 2009 4:21 pm

balancing-barn-by-living-architecture-and-mvrdv-squ-mvrdv-balancing-barn-su.jpgThere is a reason why the tuxedo hasn’t changed in more than a century.  Put simply, there is no need for it to.  Unlike other things, it doesn’t need to evolve or mold itself to the fashions of the current age.  It’s just fine the way it is.  It’s traditional.

And barn architecture should be traditional.  They are practical buildings, and as a result should be made of relatively impractical things.  That means natural materials.  Most of the structure should be made of wood (preferably oak) or stone with big timbered logs being an even better choice. Steel and concrete can be acceptable, but edge out on the tacky side.

Thus, there is only one word to describe the structure being proposed by MVRDV and Mole Architects near Suffolk in the United Kingdom: travesty.  (Though monstrosity comes remarkably close as well.)  First, they are proposing an “open” architecture with beautiful bay windows and gobs of free-space.  While barns can certainly be open, they should not include bay windows.  Have you ever seen the type of slime a dedicated horse can produce?  Second, it’s made out of modern materials: specially treated steel and composites …  and it’s cantilevered.  Words do not even begin to describe how wrong it is to cantilever a barn.  (Even if it is really a vacation home that some hack decided to call a barn.  I would never house animals, much less people in such a disgusting and clearly unsafe building.)

Traditional barns are so much better.  Traditional barns have character.

John Moulton Barn - Mormon Row - Grand Teton National Park Hi Ute Ranch - Park City, Utah

Winter Barn in Utah - Park City

Wagon Wheel and Barn - Morgan, Utah

Utah Farm near Capitol Reef National Park

Save Your Favorite Show By Watching Online

 | May 5, 2009 2:13 pm

nbc_kings_header1Whenever I hear the statistics on television watching, I get more than a bit nauseous.  “According to the AC Nielson Co, the average American watches more than 4 hours of TV each day (~28 hours/week or 2 months non-stop TV watching per year).”  I’m not nauseous for the significant amount of wasted time, but for the fact that there is almost nothing worth watching.  How can the average American spend four hours a day watching hideous reality TV and Law and Order reruns?  Eck.

Sure, are a few awesome shows (Battlestar Galactica for one), but the majority of television is utter rot.  And sure, reality TV may be responsible for the cultural illiteracy of entire generation of American youth, but the real problem lies among timid television executives.  Despite noble sentiments to the contrary, television (in addition to music and literature) is a business.  (A horrifically expensive business.)  TV executives want to make money, which is done by running programs that are popular and profitable.  This usually means that instead of trying something different, they opt for renewing Law and Order: White Collar Crime over something, for lack of a better word, good.

Show me more... »

Living with Google Voice

 | March 13, 2009 2:25 pm

I don’t really like telephones all that much.  I understand that they are a necessity of modern existence and can be greatly convenient, but that doesn’t make them pleasant.  They ring incessantly and result in virtual slavery to an overly complicated lifestyle.  Keeping track of callers on a home phone, a cell phone and a work phone is a nasty piece of business.  It usually means running two (or three) separate voicemail inboxes.  And there is nothing worse than battling voice mail after a long weekend.  Nothing.

Luckily, Google agrees with me.  In 2006, Google acquired a California based start-up called GrandCentral.  GrandCentral had a pretty simple vision of phones: they should work for people.  That means one number that never changes, for life.  Here’s the vision: landlines change, cell phones change and work numbers change.  It is far more convenient to provide people with a single number that can ring to work, home and cell.  One number instead of three.

GrandCentral did all sort of other nifty things too, like send e-mails when a new voice mail arrived, let you transfer calls between phones, screen callers before choosing to answer, and automatically direct individuals based on who they are or what day it is (useful for sending the boss to voice mail after 5:30 pm).  Even David Pogue of the New York Times had nice things to say.

But for everything it did well, GrandCentral also had some rough edges.  For one, it didn’t support text  messages. Thus, when I experimented with GrandCentral a year ago, I also had to give out my cell-phone number.  And while I would tell people to call me on the GrandCentral line, said people preferred to call me on the cell phone.  After all, they wanted to make sure that I would answer; never mind that GrandCentral would ring to my cell office and home all at the same time.Google Voice

At some point. Google decided that they would overhaul the service and GrandCentral shuttered its doors to the public.  And while the service remained active for people who were already subscribers, I found that GrandCentral became a fancy business number due to its limitations.  Today, after nearly 21 months of development, Google announced GrandCentral 2.0: Google Voice.  I think it’s fair to say that Google’s developers took off the rough edges.

Show me more... »

Backup and Archive

 | March 1, 2009 9:42 pm

I love old photographs.  They are windows into the past and reminders that history is made of a long string of daily moments.  Consider the photo below, which was taken in Montana just after the turn of the century.  There is only one thing written on the back: Old Time Band.

As a (mostly aspiring) writer, this is just the sort of thing that gets me fired up.  Who are the people in this photo?  What did they do?  What brought them together to play their instruments?  Were they any good?  While it is fun to speculate on the answers to these questions, it is impossible to give any answers without more information.  The history of this photo is lost, and all that is left is speculation; and while speculation is a wonderful thing, it is thin fare when compared with the truth.

Old Time Band

History is central to our identities.  If we don’t know where we came from, we don’t know who we are.  And until quite recently, history was tactile: letters, pictures, artifacts, art.  But the digital era has fundamentally changed how we store the physical artifacts of memory.  Email replaced the letter, digital photography replaced film, scholarship moved online, and much of the most amazing art now exists only on the internet.  While digital certainly has the potential to exist forever, the reality is that it usually has a much shorter shelf-life.  In this way digital is infinitely inferior to physical.  And worse, when it a digital memory is destroyed, all evidence is gone forever.  A letter or grainy photograph can at least linger forgotten in the attic, ripe for rediscovery.  So here’s the bottom line: digital data needs to be treated with care.  It’s not just zeros and ones on a hard drive, but the full text of life and experience. There should be a plan to keep it safe and take care of it.

Show me more... »