Archive for March, 2009

(Falling Off) The Twitter Bandwagon

I’m sorry, I officially fail at Twitter.

I’ve had my Twitter account since March of last year.  How many updates–or tweets, or whatever the hell they call it–have I posted?  Six.  Half of which are about “trying this Twitter thing again”.  Everybody seems crazy about it, but I just can’t get into it.

I can sort of understand the appeal.  The reason I gave up on the old version of my blog (which was personal, not tech/rant-related) was because it was too cumbersome…  I felt like I had to write a novel to justify posting anything.  So I looked at microblogs.  Tried Tumblr, and I liked the concept, although it was still enough like a blog that I rejected it for being a hosted solution.  (The original drive behind Escher was to develop an open-source microblog similar to Tumblr.)  I started using my long-dormant Facebook account and found a satisfying outlet via status updates.  Then Richie started talking up Twitter, so I tried it.

And I’ve tried it five more times since then, and I still can’t bring myself to like it.

Yes, I prefer Facebook.  I like having built-in mechanisms to find my friends.  I like Facebook IM…  Though I’ve only used it a handful of times, it’s smoother than playing tag through email or tweets or other offline messages, but less hassle than having to boot up one of a half-dozen existing IM clients.  And as for those privacy concerns, they’re not my concerns…  My dirty little secrets are few and far between, I have nothing to hide, and I’d like to think I have more sense than to upload the sort of information that could result in identity theft.

But this rant really isn’t about the things I like in Facebook.  It’s really about the things I hate in Twitter:

  • It’s ugly.  You would think it would be too simple to be ugly–especially since it uses a down-to-earth font like Arial–but they have found a way to cram every ounce of ugly possible in 140 characters.  I hate “twitter litter”…  The stupid @ symbols prefixing half of all twitterfeeds, the tiny urls, even the stupid o_O googly-eyed default icon…  It’s an icon, it’s a PNG, capable of a millions of beautiful colors, or at least gradients galore!  Why make it look like more text?  Twitterfeeds, IMO, are uglier than MySpace profiles, and that’s saying a lot.  But at least with MySpace, there’s a chance to use your l33t stylesheet skills (or copy-paste ability) to make your profile look not-so-hideous.  I guess the difference is that Twitter is trendy or kinda “scene” despite its rough-hewn appearance–or perhaps because if it–like shopping  at vintage stores or something.
  • It’s full of shit.  Literally.  I just asked Trish what she thinks about Twitter, and this was what she told me: “I’m taking a shit now.”  Let me clarify:  I didn’t walk in on her in the bathroom or anything.  That’s how Twitter reads to her.  People seem excited to post details both intimate and mundane…  Every “sneeze, fart, and hiccup.”  Her words, not mine!  But it’s true.  At least make it intimate–and juicy! I cringe at my old LiveJournal entries because they seem so self-absorbed, but at least there’s substance to them.
  • It’s too short.  I suppose 140 characters sounds like a lot, but unless you’re rocking Dick & Jane levels of literary prowess, it’s about enough for two sentences, and very little flavor.  (In fact, Trish pointed out, that last sentence alone was too long–170 characters.)  If you’re reading this (or if you’ve given up by now, which I wouldn’t blame you for) you know that I like to rant.  So, if there’s something going on worth writing about, I’m probably going to need more than 140 characters to fill it.  I could be wrong, but it doesn’t seem like Facebook or MySpace have such a conservative limit.  And anyway, how hard would it be to truncate a status message with ellipses?  Plus, this 140-character business is the reason behind the recent popularity of tinyurls, which I loathe.
  • It’s spammy.  I follow a whopping three people: two friends, and Leo Laporte.  I listen to Leo’s podcast, This Week in Tech, and like what he has to say.  But his tweets drown out my friends’ posts.  Granted, this can be an issue on Facebook too…  But on Facebook, I can “turn down the volume” on certain types of posts or on particularly spammy friends.
  • It doesn’t seem terribly secure.  Again, I’m curious why people tolerate Twitter where they didn’t tolerate MySpace.  Sure, MySpace had plenty of exploits and phishing expeditions, but I never remember reading about an administrative account getting compromised–but Twitter admin accounts have been hacked.  I’m sure a lot of  the other “celebrity hacks” and etc. have been a matter of social engineering, not of technology, but I still blame Twitter.  Twitter more or less relies upon their API allowing third-party clients to provide updates, which gets people too used to typing their passwords into all different apps.  Twitter ought to develop some of their own clients and require third-party clients to go through a user-approval process, on a case-by-case basis, similar to how Facebook apps function.

This week, Facebook is rolling changes to their home page and fan pages, changes that seem targeted at making Facebook a “Twitter killer”.  Bring it on, I say…  Not because I want Facebook to become more like Twitter.  (I needn’t worry about that, Facebook is far too elegant to become like Twitter.)  No, I’d like to see everyone jump ship on Twitter so I can stop hearing about it.

And now, I think I’ll stop talking about it!

3 Comments


Parallels

I tried out Parallels desktop when it first came to Mac, back when it was just Windows in a box on my screen.  It was neat, but as I wasn’t freelancing at the time, there was no need for Windows on my computer.  Later on, when my side work did start up again, I got turned on to a free product called VirtualBox–which in all respects is a great product for its price tag.  I had seen the early iterations of Parallels Coherence feature by then–that is, the feature that allows individual Windows apps to appear alongside Mac apps, and VirtualBox’s “seamless” mode was much farther along at the time.  (VirtualBox definitely wins the vocab award: “Seamless” is a much better name for the feature than Coherence or VMWare’s buzzword, “Unity”.)

So Parallels fell off my radar, until a few days ago, when I was trying to find a way to run GuildWars on my Mac.  Turns out, Parallels runs DirectX 9 and VirtualBox doesn’t.  So, I downloaded the trial of Parallels, and it’s pretty cool.  Unfortunately, no, it didn’t meet my needs for a gaming machine, although it’s possible it would do the job on a newer model Mac.  (Aside from some weird texture issues, the only concern was framerate.)  But I have switched my web testing over to Parallels, and I don’t think I’ll be looking back.

Clockwise from Top Left: Firefox (Host), Chrome (Guest 1), IE6 (Guest 2), IE7 (Guest 1)

Clockwise from Top Left: Firefox (Host), Chrome (Guest 1), IE6 (Guest 2), IE7 (Guest 1)

Parallels has gone far beyond window integration (which is itself much-improved) to nearly true application integration.  I can set favorite Windows apps such as Internet Explorer (using the term “favorite” quite loosely) and they get saved to my dock.  Later on, I can click on an icon to launch and/or focus the app, just as I can do with a native Mac app.  I know I’m late to the game on this feature, but it’s such a relief for it to be automatic in Parallels…  I spent hours trying to write an AppleScript to do the same thing in VirtualBox–the closest I got was to restore the virtual machine to a particular state and launch it.

My current setup is a bit laggy–I have installed IE6 into its own virtual machine, and running both VMs side by side is lag city.  I am considering testing the old “Multiple IEs” hack to see if it will run in XP Service Pack 3 and, if so, I will just keep all of my Windows browsers in one basket.  (Otherwise…  IE6 on Windows 98?)

But under normal circumstances, it’s a cool experience.  Ther XP windows–what with their drop shadows, their playing nice with Exposé, the lack of a taskbar–look so comfortable on my Mac desktop it’s a bit eerie…  In fact, I tried the “silver” XP theme and, it was so incognito that I had to turn it back to the default blue in order to maintain sanity.

So, Parallels is how I get my Windows now.

3 Comments


Broken Record: Firefox Bugfixes

Every time an update to Firefox is released, I hear the same conversation:

“Oh no, does this mean Firefox isn’t secure?”
“I think so…  There were six critical vulnerabilities in this release!”
“Did you know that more vulnerabilities were reported for Firefox last year than for any other browser?  Firefox had four times more vulnerabilities than Internet Explorer?”
“ROFL that’s why I just use IE.”

I really do hear this conversation every time, and unfortunately it’s an apples-to-oranges scenario.

Myth:

Because Firefox has so many vulnerabilities and bugfixes, it must not be as secure as people think.

Fact:

Firefox has so many publicly disclosed vulnerabilities because it is the most popular open-source browser.  This means thousands of people can look at the program code and see where there are vulnerabilities.  Compare this to IE, where only Microsoft programmers have access to the raw code.  If they discover a vulnerability, they don’t have to report it or even patch it until it becomes an active threat.  I’m guessing, in most cases, they don’t patch any but the most serious vulnerabilities, because it’s a waste of man-hours to attempt to perfect an old version of the browser.  (Most of their resources are probably focused on Internet Explorer 8 at this point.)

So of course Internet Explorer will have fewer disclosed vulnerabilities…  However, I’m willing to bet that a very high percentage of these vulnerabilities are actually exploited by hackers.  As for Firefox, the public bug tracker might be loaded with reported vulnerabilities, but I can count on a single hand the number of times these have translated to an actual, real-world exploit on the loose.

And more bugfixes is a good thing–it means Firefox is being patched and made secure more quickly than IE and other browsers.

If you still need convincing, try this:

  • Ask 10 Firefox users and 10 Internet Explorer users how frequently they have been infected by a virus or spyware in the past year.
  • Ask 10 Firefox advocates, who have forced their families and friends to switch to Firefox, if their family’s computer woes have increased or decreased since the change.

I have switched my entire family over, and the only one who’s had problems is my Aunt, whose kids were smart enough to create an administrator account for themselves and undo the security I put in place, but not, apparently, smart enough to forego Internet Explorer.  I’ve run Firefox for the past five years at work, and the only time I’ve gotten a virus is the five minutes I loaned my laptop to someone else, after which they handed it back with…  sigh…  Internet Explorer up and running.  Do the math.

No Comments