Build My Own Computer

Use BLAT With STUNNEL To Send Email Via SSL On Windows

2011-03-18T16:41:00.001-05:00

An earlier post described a Windows command-line script which sends a detailed email at bootup, like PC Phone Home (tm). It worked on our computers for a year and a half, and then stopped. We discovered that our internet service provider, trying to reduce the amount of spam sent through their servers, had blocked port 25, the standard unencrypted email port. They encouraged their customers to switch to SSL, encrypted transmission, using a different port.

The BootMail script uses a free utility called blat to actually send its email. Unfortunately, blat does not support SSL connections. However another free utility, stunnel (secure tunnel?), can convert data from an SSL-ignorant program like blat and send it to an SSL-aware computer or connection. Stunnel can do lots of other things too, and in fact I found the documentation to be thoroughly daunting, but installation turned out to be quite simple, basically the same on Windows 7, Vista, and XP:

Download stunnel-4.35-installer.exe from stunnel.org.
Run it and accept the defaults. This installs the software on the disk, in c:\Program Files\stunnel on a 32-bit system or c:\Program Files (x86)\stunnel on a 64-bit system.
In Start/Programs go to the new stunnel folder and right-click on "Edit Stunnel.conf." Click Run as Administrator (Vista or W7), or click Open (XP). This brings the configuration file into Notepad with rights to modify it. You may be prompted for permission in this and following steps.
Delete everything in the file, and copy in the four lines example below, modifying them for your use. "Accept" is the port on which blat sends the email (this can be changed), and "connect" is the server name and port that your ISP wants you to use. Save and quit.
In Start/Programs, right-click "Service Install" and click Run as Adminstrator.
In Start/Programs, right-click "Service Start" and click Run as Administrator.

Example stunnel.conf file which could be used to send email through gmail:

client = yes
[ssmtp]
accept  = 25
connect = smtp.gmail.com:465

In the script which runs blat, or in the registry, you will want to specity the server as follows: "-server localhost:25".

(tm) PC PhoneHome is a trademark of Brigadoon Software.

Virus Attack!

2010-12-18T13:54:00.003-06:00

One of our computers, a 32-bit Vista laptop, recently became infested with a virus. Using either Google or Yahoo, and then clicking on a result, the browser would first go briefly to several other sites before going to the selected URL. It appeared that the virus may have been a money-earner, clicking on ads that brought someone a profit. I also got repeated popup messages that the computer was running out of disk, or out of memory, or out of "resources." None of that was true, but the computer did seem slow.

The antivirus software, Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE), looked green (OK) in the system tray, but it would not update itself, reporting an error. After reboots to "safe" mode, MSE looked red or didn’t appear at all, and the browser still misbehaved. Also, various system services would shut down, and the more I investigated, the more the virus seemed to react and shut things down.

I was able to download Malwarebytes anti-malware, update it, and perform a scan, which came up with three results:

rogue.installer registry key
spyware.passwords.xgen in the recycle bin, and
rogue.hddscan in a temp directory

Malwarebytes attempted to clean them and said that it had done so. But the bug was still there after a reboot to “safe” mode. Another downloaded spyware scanner ran much more slowly but came up empty.

I reverted the drive to a previous time, before the symptoms had appeared, but that didn’t help. I eventually reverted the drive to the earliest available restore point, weeks earlier, and that didn’t help either. So:

Either the bug had installed itself in the Master Boot Record, or
It had attached itself to a program that always gets started at boot, and had done so without the change being noticed by the system restore software.

I suspect that it had attached to Java Updater (jusched.exe), which is started at every reboot. I can’t prove it - just a suspicion, based on a couple of observed symptoms.

Fortunately, I had made a complete disk image of that laptop on an Iomega 2 TB external drive just six weeks earlier, using Macrium Reflect (free). Macrium restored the drive in about an hour, including the Master Boot Record, and the problem was gone. Files in the lost six weeks were then restored from more-recent partial backups. Apparently nothing of value was lost, except a lot of my time.

The virus may also have posed other risks, of which we are not aware:

It might have been a keylogger, sending keystrokes back to someone;
It may also have tried to find personal data and send that;
It could have tried to send virus-laden emails to our mailing list; and
it may have tried to infect other computers on the network.

I did have the computer disconnected from the network except when downloading the virus scanners, and so far, no other computer has shown symptoms of the infection. There is no indication that emails were sent - no backscatter from virus checkers or bad email addresses. This particular computer does not contain much personal data, and we have taken steps to deal with the keylogger possibility, including changes in passwords and a new IP address.

How did the virus get in? Windows and Internet Explorer (IE) were entirely up to date. I checked recent emails, and that doesn’t seem to be the path. It may have come through Java, which was not quite up to date - I know for certain that the same computer was infected through Java a couple of years ago. Perhaps it did come in through Internet Explorer itself, or one of the many browser extensions - this computer was still running IE7 rather than the newer IE8. I’ll never know for sure, but Java is now up to date and Internet Explorer is now IE8. Was it a virus, or a worm, or a trojan? Who cares, it was destructive.

What a pain. Wouldn’t you just love to get hold of the cowardly creeps who write viruses like that and cause other people so much grief? What kind of "man" (woman?) is that intelligent, and yet so incompetent that they have to make a living by deliberately hurting other people?

Iomega Professional 2 TB External Drive Review

2010-11-04T17:33:00.004-05:00

It works! With eSATA and USB 2.0 ports, this drive connected easily to six different computers ranging from 7 years old to less than a month, and running operating systems from Windows XP up to Windows 7, some 32 bit and some 64 bit. Every computer saw it as an external hard drive and was able to use it.

I have other ways of doing day-to-day backup, but was about to send a computer in to HP for repair and bought this drive (from TigerDirect, $130) to make an image backup first. That went so well that I started on the other computers, backing them up with Microsoft's image writer, Windows Complete PC Backup (WCPCB) where it was available (Win 7 and Vista Ultimate only). I also used Macrium Reflect Free Edition on all six computers, with success on all but one, and tried Paragon Backup & Recovery Free 2010 on that one, with uncertain success.

Hardware & Performance:

Iomega Professional Hard Drive 2 terabytes (2,000 GB), P/N 31853000, Model LDHD-UPS, eSATA and USB 2.0.
Capacity as displayed on a Windows Vista system: 1.81 TB, or 2,000,396,288,000 bytes.
Maximum transfer rates (advertised): eSATA 3,000 megabits/second (Mb/s), USB 2.0 480 Mb/s. Those are peak rates, not achievable in large transfers.
Actual average data transfer rates for complete image backup: As high as 475 megabits/second (Mb/s) writing through the eSATA port from a new computer, and as low as 93 Mb/s writing through USB 2.0 from a 4-year-old Toshiba laptop running Windows XP (a 7-year-old Gateway laptop with XP did better than that lame Toshiba!).
In its search for image backup devices, WCPCB did not "find" the drive on a Vista Ultimate system when the drive was connected by USB 2.0, though it was mounted as a "local disk" and files were visible. Therefore, the drive was not usable for WCPCB backup via USB. It did find the drive when connected by eSATA.
On Windows 7 computers, WCPCB did find the drive when connected either by USB or by eSATA.
Macrium always found the drive and was able to write to it. Unfortunately, though, I was unable to boot their linux rescue CD on one of the Windows 7 systems. They claim to have a fix if you buy the "full" edition, $40 per computer. I may blog about Macrium Reflect later - I do like their software best, except for this problem.
The Iomega Professional Hard Drive box indicates compatibility with Windows XP, Vista, and Windows 7 (32-bit). Does anyone even make a 32-bit Windows 7 system? I suppose, but anyway the drive seems to work just fine on two different 64-bit Windows 7 HP laptops, using either the eSATA or the USB connection and the drivers already in Windows 7.
The drive is very quiet, and I'm fussy about noise. It's quiet.
In Device Manager: The drive is listed as a "Samsung HD204UI USB Device", or just a "Samsung HD204UI" when connected by eSATA.
According to the box label, the drive was assembled in Korea, Sept 20, 2010. I wonder if the entire system is made for Iomega in Korea by Samsung. That's OK.

Software:

I would expect any external drive to come with software for backing up the computer, both for drive-image backups and for incremental backups. Indeed, the box containing this drive touts their "Iomega NeverDown Software," which, unfortunately, was not in the box and is not to be found anywhere on the Iomega web site. Apparently, it has been discontinued. The box does contain a brief manual, in seven different languages, telling how to get started with NeverDown, but alas, no software (oops). They do offer the downloadable "Iomega Protection Suite," including:

Iomega's v.Clone, which allows you to run YOUR OWN computer on anyone else's hardware. It's a "virtual image" - is that an image backup? Their own user manual advises that v.Clone is not backup software.
Roxio Retrospect Express, which appears to protect exactly one computer on one external drive, no more. I'm not interested - my 2TB Iomega drive now has ten compressed system images on it from six fully-competent computers, and is barely half full.
Hence, Iomega apparently does not offer an image backup solution. Ouch.

Happily, though, many other companies do offer image backup software, some for free, such as Macrium and Paragon.

A caution: I have not yet attempted to restore an image to any computer's hard drive. That's a risk I won't take unless I have to, and the repaired computer came back from HP with the internal drive intact. Where possible I do make at least two different images, one by WCPCB and one by Macrium or Paragon or both, in the hope that one will work if the other fails.

For your consideration: Universal Serial Bus. USB 2.0 followed USB 1.0, and has been around for at least seven years now. USB 3.0 is a recently-approved standard, and manufacturers are working hard to implement it in new computers and drives. It is about 10 times as fast as USB 2.0, a little faster even than eSATA, so computers with USB 3.0 may no longer need an an eSATA port. Therefore, future computers might have to talk to this particular drive using only USB 2.0.

That's not too bad, though - Macrium backed up a complete Windows 7 computer in 32 minutes via eSATA and 59 minutes via USB 2.0. In both cases, 105 GB "used" space on the computer's drive was compressed to one 78 GB file on the Iomega drive. Actual average data transfer rates, therefore, were 349 Mb/s and 189 Mb/s respectively, so the eSATA image backup was not even twice as fast as the USB 2.0 backup even though burst speed is six times higher.

Copyright (c) 2010

Please add your comments or questions.

Snippage User Manual

2010-10-08T10:42:00.013-05:00

Windows 7 Active Desktop

Snippage is written and offered at no cost by Gabo Mendoza. It's a cool little program that can display a web page, or (better yet) a portion of a web page on the desktop. That web page can be active, such as a web cam which refreshes, and you can select just the camera image. You can watch weather radar, the stock market, twitter, anything you'd like to keep an eye on. Other applications will run right on top of it, when you need the desktop space, but the Snippage window will keep up to date in the background.

It's a replacement for the Active Desktop of Windows XP, and it runs on XP, Vista, and Windows 7. I was unable to find a help file or a manual, and I did learn a few lessons the hard way, so here is my little "manual" with apologies to Gabo Mendoza.

First: Install Adobe AIR from get.adobe.air. The current version (Oct 8, 2010) is 2.04. Snippage was written for AIR 1.0, though, and it still works with AIR 2.04, so the version may not matter much.
Second: Visit snippage.gabocorp.com to download the file snippage.air. As of Oct 8, 2010, the current version is 1.0 R 12.
Third: Run snippage.air. Click past the dire warnings. Snippage is used by lots of people so I doubt it's a spy. Allow the installer to put a shortcut icon on the desktop for now because you may need to restart Snippage a few times. You can delete that later.

Snippage will open with a little window showing a pointer "click me," see below. Move the mouse pointer up past that and click "Expand to browser view."

Enter the URL of the web page that you want to snip (or cut and paste from another browser) and click the red "go."

You can re-size the browser view of your page, if necessary, by dragging the bottom right corner. Then move the snip window over the part of the web page that you want to snip with the upper left corner, re-size it with the lower right.

Snip it by clicking the upper right corner. Now all you have left is the part of the page that you want, called the snip. Drag on the top and put it wherever you want on the desktop.

Once you have let go of the snip, your ability to control it may disappear. It does for me. To regain control:

Right-click on the AIR icon in the system notification area (tray), click "Exit." Then,
Restart Snippage by clicking on the desktop icon, then quickly move the mouse to the top of the Snippage window.

Do what you need to do:

To move the snip, drag the top as before.
To delete the snip, click "Expand to browser view" and then click the "X" in the upper right corner of that larger window.
There are other options too.

To make Snippage start every time the computer boots up, place a shortcut to the executable (copy the one on the desktop) in your startup folder.

Here's nice page that I have used in Snippage tests: lsmma.com/webcam/webcam_lg.html. It is the Duluth, Minnesota ship canal camera at the Lake Superior Marine Museum. The image updates every 30 seconds and will occasionally display an iron-ore carrier or a "salty" ocean-going vessel. For boat watchers, the web site even has a schedule of expected arrivals and departures.

I've tried Snippage on Windows XP SP3, Vista, and Windows 7 - they all work about the same. On competent dual-CPU Vista and Win 7 machines, Snippage needs less than 1% of the CPU time. On an old single-CPU XP system it may be over 1% but not 2%. I suspect this would depend on the number of snips displayed and the rates of update.

I'm grateful to Gabo Mendoza for giving us this cute tool. One of my users is upgrading from XP to Win 7 and wants to keep the active desktop.

Saturday, Oct 9, 2010:

Oops - I just noticed an issue. When I have two snips running, and delete one, it doesn't really go away. The next time I run Snippage it comes back. You can work around that problem by editing a text file, not pretty but it it works:

Stop Snippage.
Locate the "snipset" file.
- On my Vista and Win 7 systems it is C:\Users\Don\AppData\Roaming\Snippage.B28F...B29B.1\Local Store\current.snipset.
- On an XP system it's C:\Documents and Settings\Don\Application Data\Snippage.B28F...B29B.1\Local Store\current.snipset.
You may wish to make a backup copy of that file somewhere just in case.
Open the file with a plain text editor such as Notepad.
Snips are defined between <snip...> and </snip> tags. Within each snip you will find the URL of the web page that the snip displays, along with positioning and "snipping" information.
Find the snip that contains the web page you want to delete, and remove it completely, including the <snip...> at the front and the </snip> at the end. Save the changes.
Run Snippage. If it doesn't work correctly, try again - something is wrong in the edit.

Send Blog Posts to Twitter

2010-04-20T15:43:00.008-05:00

I recently started using Twitter, to follow the Boston Marathon. It's great for events like that. But then I also found out how to make my new blog posts appear on Twitter as if I had "tweeted" them, in the Twitter "timeline" as if they were part of the conversation. It's not hard - here's how:

Go to Feedburner and create an account. If you are already on Blogger, you can use that account - you will notice that Feedburner.com actually resolves to a Google address.
Under "Burn a feed right this instant," enter your blog address. Next >>
Then select a feed source. The default is Atom - I have used that.
On the WELCOME! page, click NEXT >>
On the CONGRATS! page, click "Skip directly to ..."
On the Publicize tab, select Socialize.
On the Socialize page:
- Add your Twitter account. Then,
- Change Post content to "Title and Body." This just means that the "tweeted" content will be the title and the first line or two of the body, instead of just the title. Or don't change it.
- Be sure to ACTIVATE at the bottom of the page.

I do notice a time lapse between the blog post and the tweet appearing on Twitter. Maybe 20 - 30 minutes? I haven't timed it. Perhaps that's an intentional delay in Blogger, to allow time for the inevitable blog-post corrections before the RSS feed is generated. Just a guess.

Incompetent HP Laptop Support

2009-11-20T16:30:00.000-06:00

Not the people, the whole system. I think they would prefer to have a dissatisfied customer return a laptop rather than giving access to people who can actually solve the problem.

The built-in TV tuner in my brand-new HP dv7t-2200 laptop is not working, and I have now spent over 12 hours of my time (and HP's time) on the phone with HP's response center agents. As far as I know, we are no closer to a solution.

The Good: (1) I have had no trouble reaching an agent on the telephone (now seven different agents); and (2) Every one of the HP agents, except the last one, has been polite and has tried hard to fix the problem.

The Bad: Except for one, every agent has been clueless. I'm very certain that none have ever seen a TV tuner like mine - one guy asked if I had plugged in the tuner card. It's built in, and they should know it!

The Ugly: HP's system simply does not allow for any continuity. You cannot call anyone back - you always start all over. They do have a record of what has been done before, but they only half believe it, so they want to repeat everything. I had a good thing going once with Jason in the USA, who was on a good track and promised a callback and an email. No email, ever. There was a call, which I unfortunately missed, and they said they would call again, but they never did. Most of the agents who say they will call back do not do so. It's impossible to get anywhere, gain any traction. As far as I know, there is no way to escalate a problem. HP just doesn't care about one laptop - they deal in hundreds and thousands of them.

I managed to reach "Second Level" support today, but was informed by Adrian (in India) that I was only on warranty support and had not paid enough money to talk to him! This despite the fact that I have purchased a 2-year support contract.

The system is totally incompetent.

I have about 12 days yet to send the damn thing back to HP for a full refund. I don't want to do it, but it's looming larger every day.

Windows 7 Does Not Save Window Size or Position Settings

2009-11-19T10:39:00.001-06:00

This is as good a reason as any to AVOID buying a computer with Windows 7. Buy a Mac instead.

In Windows XP and earlier we could set the size, position, and other details of an explorer window, then close the window, and from then on a window with that path would have that same size, position, and details. Windows Vista retained that function, but occasionally "forgot" everything, so we had to reset every window again.

Windows 7 remembers NOTHING! Actually, it seems to know only the size and position of the last-used explorer window, even if it isn't closed yet, so all new windows will have that size and will fall of top of that window. As a result, almost every newly-opened explorer window must be resized and repositioned, resulting in many more mouse-clicks and moves than ever before.

According to remarks on two different forums, by people who may know, this is a deliberate change by Microsoft, not an accident. It's a feature, not a bug. If so, then Microsoft solves their little problems by simply eliminating the feature that has the problem!

But it sure doesn't work for me. I often work with multiple windows open, copying files from here to there or whatever. I HATE HAVING TO FIX WINDOWS ALL THE TIME.

I've never used a Mac, but people keep saying that it's better in some way. Maybe I'm starting to catch on.

FOR GOD'S SAKE BUY A MAC!

I haven't returned my brand-new HP laptop to HP yet, but I'm sure leaning that way.

Still No TV Tuner

2009-11-19T10:19:00.001-06:00

I missed a phone call yesterday, so I don't know the current status of the TV Tuner problem on my brand-new HP dv7t-2200 laptop. My fault for missing it.

Of course I tried to call back, twice actually, but was both times connected to an agent in India, neither of them able to bring up any record of my service ticket. Both wanted to start all over. After wasting 9 hours on Tuesday, I declined.

The voice message from the missed call said they would try again today. We'll see. They said that they would send an email and would call. No email, but they did call.

HP dv7t Still Doesn't Work

2009-11-17T18:25:00.002-06:00

To be slightly more fair, brand-new laptop, the TV tuner doesn't work. At all. Over nine hours on the phone with HP, no resolution. The last HP agent, Jason, said that apparently this is a problem on most or all of the newest HP dv7t laptops.

So don't buy one now, or don't get the TV tuner with it!

The only good news is that I have been able to get through to HP agents fairly quickly. The bad news is that they were pretty much clueless until I reached Jason. And of course it ISN'T FIXED!

HP has a money-back guarantee. Perhaps I'll wind up sending this back and buying a Dell or a Toshiba.

I'm supposed to get an email tonight or tomorrow with a resolution, and a phone call as well. We'll see.

Frustrating HP Support

2009-11-17T15:08:00.003-06:00

I don't think I can build a laptop, so I bought one.

At this moment I have been on the phone with HP for over seven hours, trying to resolve a problem with the built-in TV tuner in a brand new HP dv7t laptop computer. Imagine, seven hours, and there is no end in sight. I've had my sweeties bring up both breakfast and lunch, looks like dinner might be next.

I started at 7:41 am with the general support number and got a woman who quickly gave me a service ticket number and turned me over to Vivek, in India. He's a nice guy, but we spent over four hours together, way more than either of us wanted. At 12 noon, 00:30 am his time, he gave up and asked me to wait five minutes for him to document the problem and then call a "Level 2" support number.

I did, but then got transferred (intentionally I think) to another department, where the nice lady transferred me back. Or so I thought, but after spending a couple more hours with Lloyd, also in India, I discovered that he was also Level 1 and was communicating with HIS support person by text message.

I am almost ready to give up on the tuner and just say that HP couldn't fix it. It has never worked, it's dead as a doornail, and HP just won't put me in touch with people who can figure it out. Right now I'm off the phone, but the laptop is doing a scan for channels, which will come up with zero channels as it always has. Then I have a number to call again. I'll let you know how that comes out.

I can't say anything positive about the HP dv7t laptop until this is resolved. I'm pissed.

PC Phone Home (Do It Yourself)

2009-08-14T18:48:00.005-05:00

Some time ago I downloaded an evaluation copy of the for-sale PC Phone Home, and reviewed it here and here. I did not recommend PCPhoneHome in that review, and some of the comments left by readers are quite interesting too. Bottom line - at that time it seemed to be mostly a scam, because even if it did work there was no way to get a response from the company if your computer was stolen. Your results may vary.

I had never done anything with Windows scripts, but I studied up a little, and it turns out that you can fairly easily create a pc-phone-home batch file to be executed by the Task Scheduler at system startup. This batch file can automatically send you an email describing the computer, time of day, IP address, and whatever else you wish to add. No changes to the registry (except those made by the Task Scheduler), no secret code, no risk of a trojan in the system, everything is done with standard Windows command-line commands plus one well-proven, free, open-source SMTP mail sending program called BLAT. The same batch file runs on Windows Vista Ultimate, Vista Home Premium, XP Professional, and XP Home Edition, probably all Vista and XP systems, and even Windows 7, though testing is not complete on Win 7. It will not work on earlier Windows systems, and has only been tested on XP and Vista systems that are fully up to date, SP3 and SP2 respectively.

On my computer, the batch file is called BootMail.cmd. Its weakness is that it may be easier for a thief to find and uninstall BootMail than PCPhoneHome. But that would require a knowledgable computer thief, which may be an oxymoron. And there are things that you can do, like hiding the BootMail.cmd file somewhere in the operating system and renaming it something innocuous like GoogleHelper.cmd. In addition, if there is no network found at bootup, it will not lurk in the background waiting for one to show up. I may add that someday.

Previous experience with Windows scripts and with the Task Scheduler might be helpful to a person installing this software, but they are probably not required. I got by somehow, and you may be able to make some simple modofications and otherwise use the example code exactly as is.

BootMail is designed to phone home at system start, but it could easily be modified to run on different triggers, such as the network coming back up, or a disk error, or any other event that is logged by Windows. There are lots of those, especially in Vista and Windows 7. Of course a user knowledgable in windows commands can also modify the information that it displays. Click here for an example of the email message that it sends.

To make it work:

Copy the code from this page into a file with a .cmd type extension, e.g. bootmail.cmd. Modify it for appropriate email addresses and user names. See code comments.
Download the small BLAT program from www.blat.net and put the executables where Windows will find them. See code comments.
Use the Task Scheduler to set up bootmail.cmd to run at system startup. See code comments.
Set debug=TRUE at first, until you get it working.

The code looks big, but it's mostly documentation (every line beginning with ::). If you prefer not to do the screen copy, you can download both the code and the example email text in a zipped file here. The files are very small.

What I DON'T know is what to do if a computer is stolen and I do get an email. There is enough information in the email to pinpoint the exact IP address from which it was mailed, but how does a person proceed with that? I guess I'd call my local police, or perhaps better yet the cops at the address where the IP address is owned, as determined by WHOIS. Will the police even care about one stolen computer? Anyone have a better idea?

Windows Live Mail versus Mozilla Thunderbird

2009-05-27T19:08:00.008-05:00

I like Windows Mail, the free mail client on Windows Vista. It grew out of Outlook Express, and finally does almost everything I would want. So, naturally, Microsoft has decided to discontinue it on their next operating system, Windows 7. In fact they will not be providing any email client at all, counting on the user to download something, or on the internet service provider to do that for the user.

Microsoft has developed a new mail client, apparenty based on Windows Mail, called Windows Live Mail. Sorry for the confusion in names, but I didn't cause that, Microsoft did! Users will be able to download Windows Live Mail (WLM) at no cost. But it isn't the same. So I installed Windows Live Mail Version 2009 (Build 14.0.8064.0206) alongside Mozilla Thunderbird 3 (Beta 2). Thunderbird is a free, open-source, collaborative email client developed by people who say they want to provide the "most useful and enjoyable communications tool possible." It's a mature product, certainly as mature as WLM. Thunderbird Release 3 Beta 2 is stable on my machine. The comparison between Thunderbird and Windows Live Mail is interesting.

Windows Live Mail:

THEY DUMBED IT DOWN! Windows Live Mail is Windows Mail with fewer controls. They added a calendar and included it with a large set of other applications called Windows Live Essentials. Here are some comparisons between Windows Mail and WLM:

WLM supports multiple POP accounts, but each is treated quite separately, with no way (that I have found) to direct mail from all or several POP accounts into a common inbox. This is most inconvenient. I have lots of POP accounts and do not use web-based accounts.
Further, when a new, unread email does come in, WLM says there is a new one but doesn't say which inbox it is in! Inconvenient and annoying. There is a "Quick View" that can help, but it takes space in the list of accounts, see next.
The list of accounts cannot be deleted or moved and has way too much space between accounts, so that scrolling to search for an email is always necessary if there are several accounts.
WLM has no "Send All" command. When you finish an email, it's gone. No "Outbox" unless the send actually fails. This can be good or bad, but I don't like it because I'm accustomed to clicking on Send All to really send it.
WLM apparently uses yet another type of address book. For sure it does not use the "Contacts" directory used by Windows Mail, though it will import that directory into its book. I'm not sure where the WLM address book is, actually, though I probably could find it if I cared. It will export its address book in only two formats: VCF and CSV.
The "New Mail" sound file cannot easily be changed. I like a louder one in case I'm not at my computer.
When I installed WLM it tried to copy all of the mail in Windows Mail into its own file system, but failed. Email POP accounts also did not transfer over. I don't know why.
Help, like all Microsoft help these days, is entirely web-based. Don't plan on any help without an internet connection.
The good news is that WLM works and seems quite appropriate for a user with one POP account, or with only web-based accounts, because the list of accounts will be trivial, and there are fewer things to screw up. Too bad Microsoft couldn't include an "expert" button of some kind to make it more configurable for the rest of us.

Mozilla Thunderbird:

I tried both Release 2.0, the current "stable" version, and Release 3b2, ending up with 3b2. Comparing Windows Mail and WLM with Thunderbird:

WLM and Windows Mail have a "drag and drop" capability, allowing the user to drag an email out of the Inbox, for example, into a normal Windows Folder as a .EML file. I love that feature and use it all the time. Thunderbird does not have that feature. Why would anyone want that? I like to keep all files for a project together, whatever their file types. For example, if I'm planning to run a marathon in Paducah, there will be a folder named Paducah containing an internet shortcut to the race web site (.url), maybe one to the hotel web site (.url), a copy of the course map (.jpg or .gif), printouts of car, air, or hotel reservations (.pdf), and copies of communications (.eml). No need to look in different places for different file types. Thunderbird will correctly display an email in .EML format, and will export them too, but not as easily as Windows Mail and WLM will do.
Like WLM, Thunderbird has no Send All command. In fact I haven't found anything quite like WLM's Sync command. I admit I haven't missed it though.
Thunderbird would not import my email messages from Windows Mail. There is a separately-installable extension called ImportExportTools, but it only imported the file structure and not the files themselves. Perhaps it would work better with a simpler file structure than I have.
Thunderbird would not import POP accounts. But neither did WLM.
It will export contacts only in LDIF, CSV, or tab-delimited formats.
HOWEVER, Thunderbird does have a global-folder structure called Local Folders. Any email from any account can be directed into the global Inbox on Local Folders, or the global Spam box that I created, for that matter. This allows me to pull email from any of several POP accounts into one place.
All three clients have filters that can be configured to redirect or simply delete known spam, or to direct email from specific addresses into specific folders. Thunderbird allows these folders to be global, hence accessible to any POP account.
Further, Thunderbird has a "Junk Mail Learning" feature that seems to work pretty well, far better than the simple junk filter levels in WLM.
Thunderbird has WAY more controls than WLM, and more than Windows Mail as well. So it's possible for a user to get things pretty screwed up. The good news is that the most dangerous options have a "restore defaults" button. I haven't needed that yet, but ...
Thunderbird can include "add-ons," contributed extensions which may add class and functionality for the discerning Thunderbird user.
Thunderbird won't go away. I hate that about Microsoft - they just want to sell new copies of operating systems, so we (obviously) can't depend on them for continuity.

For my money (they're both free), I far prefer Thunderbird over Windows Live Mail, even without drag & drop. I have already switched to Thunderbird on my Vista x64 system, even though I do have the venerable Windows Mail on it too. But there are other users on my network, people with only one POP account. It may be a while before they have computers with Windows 7 (or beyond), but perhaps I will install Windows Live Mail for them when they do. We shall see.

NVIDIA Driver Update Error 800705B3

2008-10-27T07:07:00.012-05:00

This morning Windows Update wanted to install several updates, including one for my GeForce 8600 GT graphics card. I let the updates proceed. All updates installed correctly except this NVIDIA driver. According to Windows Update, the installation failed with error code 800705B3. Microsoft's Windows Update description of the failure is shown at the bottom of this post.

Microsoft has no information about this error, nor does NVIDIA.com. A quick internet search with Google didn't help much either.

My computer runs Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I suppose it's a 64-bit problem - neither Microsoft nor the 3rd party vendors have fully committed to 64 bits yet - it's always the last thing they do when developing software or issuing an update. But I don't know how to fix the update error, 64-bit problem or not.

AHA! End run. I went back to NVIDIA.com and downloaded driver version 178.24, the latest drivers for the NVIDIA 8-series running 64 bits. That download was 99 MB, much larger than the Windows Update download for some reason. It installed without error. When Windows Update next runs, we will see whether it wants to try to update the NVIDIA driver again. I expect that it won't.

The NVIDIA.com web site is very easy to navigate, and there is even a tool (beta release) which can figure out which hardware and software you have, hence which driver update you need. I'm impressed so far.

Comments?

HP Laserjet P1005 Review

2008-08-04T22:23:00.006-05:00

A few weeks ago my ancient HP Laserjet II (20+ years old) expired, so I looked around for a low-cost replacement. The HP P1005 fit the bill - at that time HP was selling them with an on-line rebate which reduced the price to $49.99 with free shipping, less than the cost of one of its print cartridges. At this writing HP's price has gone back up, but Newegg has them for $49.99 plus shipping. Perhaps others do too. At that price, how could it really go wrong?

So far so good. It installed fine on Vista x64 and the LAN-connected Vista and XP computers, despite some confusion on my part caused by the serious lack of documentation, see below.

I've used it for a couple of weeks now. Unlike the old Laserjet II, the P1005 is absolutely silent until called upon to print something. Then if it hasn't printed recently it warms itself up for a few seconds (HP says 8.5) and prints at a rate of up to 15 pages per minute, four seconds per page, and in a quick test it did print a 3-page document in 12 seconds. Some reviewers have complained about the 62 dB noise, but in my low-duty application right next to my desk it hasn't bothered. It won't interrupt conversation. If others were using it frequently, I would place it farther from my desk or at a different computer.

Features:

Paper: Letter, legal, postcards, transparencies and "tough" (plastic) paper, #10 envelopes, smaller sizes.
Up to 15 pages per minute, four seconds per page.
Good black-and-white print quality.
About 1500 pages per print cartridge, which cost about $50-$60, or 3 to 4 cents per page.
Input tray 150 sheets, output 100.
USB 2.0.
Win 2000, XP, Server 2003 32/64 bit, Vista 32/64, Mac OS X several revs.
Small and light, 10.3 lb, hence modestly portable.

It does NOT have:

COLOR. The biggie.
Its own networking of any kind, except through an attached computer of course. The only connection available is USB 2.0.
Automatic double-sided printing. It does have manual double-sided printing, sort of, see below.
Selectable input trays.
High duty cycle - 1500 pages per month is the recommended max, 5000 absolute max.
Any printed documentation whatsoever.

Things that are lame:

Printed Documentation: none. HP has apparently given up on solving the multiple-language problem and just doesn't include any printed material except how to unpack it and how to find your local HP office anywhere in the world. There is a CD-ROM with no instructions on it which, if you play it, gives information on installation. It's a bit obtuse but we got there.
Manual Double-Side Print: It prints the first side of all pages, then instructs you to re-insert the stack and push the GO button. But on the P1005 there is no GO button or any software button to click - maybe you need a P1006 or P1500 to get that. The workaround is to briefly lift the lid to the printer cartridge and set it back down, after which the backs of the pages will print. But HP doesn't offer that solution - you have to get there by trial and error. They may offer a downloadable fix for the software, but I've checked and not found it.

Despite those minor issues it's a mighty good printer for the price of $50. Probably for the regular price too. It's very suitable for home use or for a small office, but for color you'd need an inkjet as well.

Made in Vietnam.

8 GB RAM

2008-07-19T15:49:00.004-05:00

The "new" computer has 4 GB of RAM, which is a lot, but I have disk paging turned off, and Windows Vista has warned me more than once that I was down to 15% of memory remaining. In each instance Googe Earth was running, but I like Google Earth and I'm sure that other applications will come along which can also benefit from gobs of memory. That's the future of computing.

Furthermore, the exact memory that I used for the first 4 GB (G.Skill 4 GB dual channel 800 MHz) now appears to be out of production by G.Skill (technology moves along) and is on sale at NewEgg. It works perfectly and has a Windows Experience Index Subscore of 5.9, the highest possible. So I ordered 4 GB more, which is all that my Intel DP35DP motherboard is rated to handle. Full up.

But I got an unpleasant surprise at boot time. While my nice new home-built computer had routinely booted in about 60 seconds with 4 GB, from power-on to display of the desktop, it now took over three minutes, sometimes almost four. Yikes! Why would that be? Memory test: no problems. Swap new memory with old: same problem with 8GB, no problem with 4 GB. Huh.

Google provided the answer. The Intel DP35DP BIOS had two software bugs, one affecting only boards with 8GB and running in 64-bit mode, and the other affecting boards with 8 GB and no disk in the DVD drive. Either way I had a problem, but either way the fix required only a simple download and "express" installation of updated BIOS. Now it boots up in 60 seconds with 8 GB, as it darn well should, and the Windows Experience Index Subscore for memory is still 5.9.

Before	After

Mozilla Sunbird Calendar Works Great!

2008-07-05T16:06:00.027-05:00

Better than Microsoft's Windows Calendar.

Here are my specifications for a good calendar system:

A nice application window with several views, including day, week, and month;
Compatible with on-line calendars such as Google Calendar;
But it must continue to work when there is no internet connection;
Calendars sharable within my own network;
Reliable pop-up reminders of calendar events; and
The same application should work on all of the computers on my network.

After I discovered Windows Calendar on my new Vista 64-bit machine, I set it up with several different calendars, moving all of that information off of an older machine which I then shut down. It sort of worked, and I found it useful, but with these issues:

It only worked on my Vista machine, not on XP machines, so I couldn't use it to maintain a central calendar accessible from all machines.
It was unreliable, in two different ways:
- Reminders did not work unless Windows Calendar was running, regardless of the setting of the option called "Reminders should show when Windows Calendar is not running."
- Windows Calendar didn't always start when Windows started. That meant that I couldn't depend on reminders, period, because I can't depend on myself to notice whether it's running every time the computer restarts.
Setting an appointment (event) for later in the current day was quite awkward: As soon as I clicked on New Appointment, I would get an immediate "reminder" because the default time for the reminder was prior to the current time. The reminder had to be dismissed before any other information could be entered into the new appointment. Yuck - don't they ever try their own software?
After a new event was set up, there was no way to know whether it had been published. No final "save" command or "appointment saved" acknowledgment.
HELP on Vista Calendar is worthless. Clicking on Help gives one page of instructions for doing those things that are patently obvious anyway. There is no overview, no explanation of the difference between an "appointment" and a "task," no instructions for keeping the calendars in a folder of MY choice (one that will be backed up frequently).

Windows Calendar isn't a bad application, but it isn't good either. It's Microsoft.

A quick Google search produced Mozilla Sunbird, an open-source cross-platform multi-language calendar which runs on Linux, Windows, Mac, and a few other systems. It resolves most of the problems mentioned above:

It works on both Windows Vista and XP;
It has been quite reliable so far although, as with Windows Calendar, Sunbird must be running for reminders to work;
It's much easier to set up a new event, especially on the current day;
There is no question when the new event has been published.

It does NOT have a help file, however, except an on-line help which works with Mozilla browsers (Firefox) but not with Internet Explorer. The people who do Mozilla must really hate IE! Maybe I'll install Firefox and take a look at that help file someday. And who knows, maybe I'll like Firefox.

Getting Started with Sunbird:

Here is the web page for downloading Mozilla Sunbird. Installation on Windows was uneventful on my systems.

Sunbird supports two kinds of calendar files: (1) Its own internal data base, not accessible from other computers; and (2) iCalendar (.ics) files, a standardized format in which each file is a separate calendar, accessible from other computers if located in a shared folder. Sunbird will create the first kind of calendars, but it will not conveniently create the second kind, unless I've missed something.

I have a main computer (the one I built) and a laptop, and others in my family also have computers, so I needed sharable iCalendar files. Here is how I created all of my calendar files:

Some of my calendars already existed in Windows Calendar, so I simply "published" those to .ics files in the folder of my choice.
For the rest, I created an empty file with the extension .ics in a folder of my choice as follows:
- Right-clicked in that chosen folder, clicked New, then Text Document.
- Renamed that file "calendarname.ics," where "calendarname" is the name I wished to give that particular calendar. When Windows asked if I really wanted to change the name extension, I answered Yes.
In Sunbird, I clicked File, then Open Calendar File, then
Navigated to the file I created, clicked on it, and clicked Open.
That calendar then appeared in my calendar list, so I added events, and also edited the calendar's properties.
I actually deleted the default calendar called "Home" because there was no need for it.

Why would anyone want more than one calendar?

Because (1) It may be convenient to organize calendars by topic or activity, e.g. one for taking medicine (daily reminders), a different one for business appointments, and yet another for repeating things that don't change, like birthdays; (2) With several calendars all displayed at once the calendar window may get quite busy, so it may be helpful to be able to temporarily suppress the information from one or more calendars to better view the other calendars; and (3) Some of the calendars that show in my window may belong to someone else, from another computer on the network or from the internet, such as a calendar of US holidays.

Examples of calendars that appear on my Sunbird window:

Medicine reminders;
Business and other appointments - anything that may come up;
Repeating events such as birthdays, backup reminders, tax payments; and
US Holidays.

To make Sunbird ALWAYS start up minimized at bootup on XP and Vista:

Windows XP:

Put a shortcut to Sunbird on the desktop so that it will be handy. If there is not a shortcut there already, click the Start button, then go to Programs, then Mozilla Sunbird, RIGHT-click Mozilla Sunbird, drag it to the desktop, and click "copy here."
In Windows Explorer, navigate to c:\Documents and Settings, then User (whichever user wants startup at boot), then Start Menu, then Programs, then Startup.
Move the Sunbird shortcut from the desktop into Startup.
Right-click the Mozilla Sunbird shortcut, click Properties.
Change "Run:" from "Normal Window" to "Minimized." Click Apply. Click OK.

Windows Vista:

Put a shortcut to Sunbird on the desktop so that it will be handy. If there is not a shortcut there already, click the Start button, then go to Programs, then Mozilla Sunbird, RIGHT-click Mozilla Sunbird, drag it to the desktop, and click "copy here."
In Windows Explorer, navigate to c:\Users, then User (whichever user wants startup at boot), then AppData, then Microsoft, then Windows, then Start Menu, then Programs, then Startup.
Move the Sunbird shortcut from the desktop into Startup.
Right-click the Mozilla Sunbird shortcut, click properties.
Change "Run:" from "Normal Window" to "Minimized." Click Apply. Click OK.

That will do it - anything in that Startup folder will be started at bootup, and you have told Windows to start it minimized. Reboot and try it out.

Remaining Problems:

Help File: Neither Windows Calendar nor Sunbird has a useful help file built in. If you use the Firefox browser, then you may have a help file for Sunbird - I haven't tried it.

With both calendars, reminders will not work if you close the application. If you use reminders, then DO NOT EVER click on the X in the upper right corner of the window. Minimize the window instead. I hope to find a fix for this issue in Sunbird. I'd also like to move it from the main taskbar to the notification area (system tray), though I think this is a bit beyond my expertise at the moment.

Comments are invited.

Vista Still Sucks

2008-05-22T11:34:00.003-05:00

This post is a brief rant about Microsoft and their latest attempt to provide an "operating system" for regular PC users. It's the opinion of one semi-technical user - read it at your own risk.

Vista has been out for over a year and a half now. One major update later (Service pack 1), nothing has changed on my system. Nothing. Every original complaint is still there. I have found workarounds for some, but not all. I don't have the performance problems that so many others complain about for some reason - but then again I have never made the exact comparison by loading XP or Ubuntu on this speedy new home-built hardware. It boots up in seconds. I chose Vista Ultimate 64 because it supports 64-bit addressing, allowing more RAM memory, which (as always) is the future of computing. But that's the best I can say for Vista.

Microsoft has always been a paragon of mediocrity in the technical arena. I have not been exposed to anything that they have done with excellence, ever, except marketing. They have, of course, applied their marketing muscle with skill, arrogance, and disdain to force their inferior products into markets where excellent products already existed, to the detriment of the customer and certainly to the companies offering the superior products. Vista may yet be another Microsoft marketing success but, so far, it's a technical flop.

A few of my specific complaints:

Vista forgets folder settings. This is a well-documented bug which doesn't seem to appear on all systems, but I sure have it. Just now, for example, I opened my Contacts folder to find that it had been reset to a folder type of "all items," (the default) rather than a folder type of "contacts." Because of this, the contacts were not sorted in any useful way. This happens to all folders, even the recycle bin. I set things back as they should be, but I know that they won't be that way after the next reboot. Here is a web site that offers a fix, but in my experience the fix lasts for only a few days to a few weeks.
Vista is unstable. Several times now Vista has failed catastrophically, something that never happened on Windows XP. Most recently I had almost finished a fairly complex email, and suddenly the create-mail window froze. I could still perform a few windows functions, but every application which was dependent on explorer.exe was stuck. That's a lot of applications, and apparently the "create mail" function in Windows Mail is one of them. Reason enough to use a different mail client, I guess. I lost my work.
HELP is AWFUL!!! What on earth are they thinking? If you ask for help from within an application, you will get an unordered list of things that might help. But if you try to change or narrow the search you will get Google-like results from the entire universe of Microsoft products, most having little or nothing to do with the application you are using. It's useless. Actually, Google on the web is much better! What happened to an application-specific help facilitiy with a table of contents, index, and word search? The new help must save cost for Microsoft, but it's very little help and another example of technical mediocrity, in this case very deliberate.

There is so much more, but this will do for now. What's the point of complaining - I don't get any warm feelings that Microsoft ever listens.

I wish I had the courage (and time) to just switch to Linux.

Windows Vista Service Pack 1

2008-02-21T19:23:00.007-06:00

No problems.

Unlike the service packs for Windows XP, Vista Service Pack 1 (SP1) is an AUTOMATIC install. That means if you have Windows Update set to perform updates automatically, SP1 will be installed whether you choose it or not. That almost happened to me today, but I was able to delay it until I could do a disk-image backup. See a previous post "RAID Backup" about that process.

Then I allowed the update to proceed. This computer is a medium-high-end system with dual 2.7 GHz processors, RAID 1 SATA disks, 4 Gb of memory, and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. The update took 27 minutes, from start until I was logged on again. It rebooted once during the install.

I have so far discovered no problems at all. I've tried lots of applications, including IE, Word, WordPerfect, Windows Media Center, anti-virus, graphics editors, and many more. SP1 has been running for only a few hours, but so far so good.

Here are some possible improvements:

Microsoft says it's a little faster, and it does seem a little more lively, though this computer was pretty quick before, and
Before the update, memory usage tended to build up throughout the day until it reached 55 or 60%. Now it seems to sit at about 35%, going up or down slightly as applications are opened and closed.

That's all I have noticed, and those are just perceptions, not measurements. Here are some annoying Vista "features" that have NOT improved:

The select zone that extends all the way across the main window of Windows Explorer instead of being limited to the file name,
Windows Calendar reminders still don't work if Windows Calendar is closed, even though I have selected the option that should make reminders work,
Windows Task Manager still asks for permission to continue, when I ask it to display all running processes, even though I'm logged on as Administrator, and
All of the other Vista annoyances.

After the update was completed, a popup asked whether or not I would like to contribute to the "Windows Customer Experience." This was a click YES or NO, with a "read more" link. I clicked on "read more" and was taken to a very obtuse page about personal information and Microsoft's use thereof; that page had nothing to say about Windows Customer Experience. I opted out, of course. Why contribute when they won't even tell us what it's about?

Nevertheless, bottom line, SP1 works fine here, or at least as well as Vista worked before. I'll install it on another computer without a qualm. On the other hand, if I were managing an enterprise network I'd do a lot more investigation before installing.

Desktop iCalendar Lite

2008-02-09T20:08:00.000-06:00

Cute but buggy. Almost a product.

I love the look of this cute little calendar. Windows Vista now comes with an almost-competent calendar called, not surprisingly, Windows Calendar. It has its own set of bugs, but it almost works well enough. In particular, it can subscribe to calendars in ICAL (.ics) format which are on the web or on the local network, and it can also publish a calendar in that format locally or on the web.

Since I have two computers, it's convenient to maintain the calendar on the Vista desktop and have the XP laptop "subscribe" to that calendar. Unfortunately, though, Windows Calendar does not run on the laptop, and the Microsoft calendar that IS on the laptop is not compatible with the ICAL format. So a search ensued for a compatible calendar that will run on XP, preferably a free one.

Desktop iCalendar Lite was released less than two weeks ago, and seems to have all of the features that I want. Best of all, it's free. I've installed it on both computers, and it seems to work exactly the same on Vista x64 as it does on XP x32.

What I like the MOST is the cool appearance. The screenshot shows the desktop of the XP laptop computer, with the calendar in the upper right-hand corner on top of a busy desktop theme (breakfast!). It shows even more clearly against the black background that I normally use. This is a transparent "skin" (appearance), which I especially like, but the calendar also has opaque skins of various motifs and colors. The text size, placement, and colors are almost completely adjustable. Days with scheduled appointments or tasks are in color, while days without are white. Hover the mouse over any day, and up pops a little window showing the events of that day. On both of my computers I have told iCalendar Lite to subscribe to the calendars published by Windows Calendar on the Vista desktop computer, and that part seems to work.

Here is a list of installation issues:

On initial startup, an error appeared with a US Holidays problem. This was solved by adding a new US Holidays calendar from Google Public Calendars, then deleting one of the US Calendar entries.
HELP did not work, either from the program (right-click and Help) or from the HELP shortcut in Start Menu. This was solved by renaming the file Desktop iCal Lite.chm to Help.chm. Now it works from both locations.
The calendar kept prompting me for a Google username and password, even though I do not use Google Calendar. I set up a dummy Google Calendar and eventually the problem went away, though I think a reboot was part of the solution.
Initially when I clicked on the "setting" function, the program reported an illegal integer value. That problem eventually went away.
The hourly time announcement is optional. If you select it, the default sound file is in the folder c:\WINNT\Media, which folder does not exist on either XP or Vista. I changed the default to point to a file in c:\Windows\Media and then it worked.
It has a setting called "Run the program at start up." If this is NOT checked, iCalendar nevertheless runs at startup anyway. I deleted the offending registry entry, which was disclosed in MSCONFIG, and that issue went away.

Ongoing issues:

The HELP file discusses a "weather" function, which does not seem to exist in this "lite" version of the program. In addition, the HELP file is very, very skimpy.
IMPORTANT: The REMINDER function does not seem to work properly. For example, if the reminder is for 5:00 pm iCalendar may or may not chime at that time. Further, it may show a popup at the correct time, or perhaps later, and the popup seems to disappear almost instantly. I can live with the other bugs, but this one is serious. If you set a reminder, you need to be confident that you will GET the reminder at the set time, not one minute sooner or later.

Windows Calendar has this same failing, by the way. It has a setting in Options labeled "Reminder should show when Windows Calendar is not running." But the reminder doesn't always appear, even with that setting checked. I think it always works if Windows Calendar is minimized, but of course that unnecessarily consumes taskbar space.

Rant: I've had a calendar with reminders working on a real-time computer (HP 1000) for over 20 years. I wrote it myself; it's NOT difficult! Is this a problem with Windows, or did two different calendar authors both screw up? Either way, Microsoft certainly screwed up. Why is Microsoft always such a paragon of mediocrity? Heaven knows they have enough money to do the job right the first time if they care to.

The non-Microsoft author might be excused, but not Microsoft for Heaven's sake. If they're going to act like the big boys they should do the job right, but somehow I doubt they ever will. End of rant.

Perhaps the solution to the buggy iCalendar is to try the "full" version; it's only $20 if it works, otherwise nothing. I like the look so much, I'll probably do that. I hope it has a simple digital clock too; I'd like to move that off the taskbar.

Still no response of any kind from Brigadoon Software, by the way. See previous post.

PCPhoneHome Does Not Call Back

2008-02-02T08:18:00.001-06:00

Update 2009 Sep 28: Do It Yourself PC Phone Home

Update: I left three separate tech service requests with Brigadoon Software, the makers of PCPhoneHome, two by email and one by telephone. The most-recent of those, the phone call, was five days ago and the oldest was more than a week ago. I have received no response yet.

It's my current opinion that PCPhoneHome is an orphan - nobody home at Brigadoon Software. So what if my PC was stolen and it did phone home? I seriously doubt I would get any help tracing it. Apparently it's still possible to order the product, but I won't!

Now the problem is that it's still phoning home, from my home, every day at least twice. Brigadoon's documentation implies that it is nearly impossible to uninstall it without their help, and they don't call back. Since PCPhoneHome puts other "hooks" into the operating system, I think I will try to uninstall it anyway before the trial period expires.

PCPhoneHome Not Recommended

2008-01-28T17:22:00.002-06:00

Update 2009 Sep 28: Do It Yourself PC Phone Home

What if I left my laptop in the car for a moment, and someone ripped it off? or, perish the thought, someone broke in and took my nice new computer? It happens all the time, especially in the corporate and public sectors, but certainly it happens to private individuals too. One in 14 laptops is stolen, say some experts.

But what if that stolen laptop or computer was powered up by the thief, then connected to the internet, and it sent an email back to the original owner describing where it was? And what if "someone" could then tell the police the name and address of the thief?

That's what PCPhoneHome is supposed to do. It costs $30, a modest one-time charge. There is a Windows version and a Mac version. You install it on the hard drive of the computer, and whenever the computer gets a new internet connection it sends an email to any email address that you specify. This happens regularly, day after day, and unless the computer is stolen it's of little use except to let you know that it is still working. But if the computer is stolen, that email contains vital information including the IP address of the computer on its local network, if any, and especially the IP address of the mail server from which the email is actually sent. That IP address can be traced back to the user who was connected to the mail server at that time.

Brigadoon software, the makers of PCPhoneHome, promise to help with the task of tracing the computer and contacting the police with that information. So, for the price of $30, you are buying an insurance policy that may get your computer back, assuming that Brigadoon will actually answer their telephone and trace the PC, and that the police will take the time to retrieve the PC.

I downloaded three trial copies:

Laptop running Windows XP:

Version 3.0 is the "standard" version set up for a 30-day trial. It doesn't say that it works on Vista, but it does on XP. It installed with no problems, I filled out the form with details of my laptop computer (make, model, serial#, more...) and it immediately sent its first email to the address that I specified in the form. The laptop was connected by WiFi, and when I connected it directly to the LAN it sent another email. In fact, it sends TWO emails every time, with a slightly different FROM address, for some reason. No problem. So far, after three days, it works just fine.

New home-built desktop running Vista Ultimate 64-Bit:

I knew that Version 3.0 was not recommended for Vista, even though that was the standard trial download from Brigadoon Software. So I downloaded a 3.2 "upgrade" version and tried installing that, with a subsequent comedy of errors:

First, the installation program failed to run because, according to Windows, I did not have sufficient privileges to run it even though I was logged on as administrator;
So I clicked on the installation program's Properties, then Compatibility, and selected "Run as Administrator;"
Then the installation program went a lot farther, but eventually reported a different error;
It continued past that error and put up the "registration" screen which takes data to be included in the email that PCPhoneHome sends, but because of the reported error I didn't bother to fill out the screen;
Nevertheless, the installer said the installation was successful, though I knew better;
I uninstalled it (still possible until reboot), and tried again;
Same results, so I rebooted;
PCPhoneHome disappeared from the list in Programs and Features - it could no longer be uninstalled. This is a security feature built into PCPhoneHome;
So I "reverted" the drive to the most recent restore point, deleted one leftover executable, and started over;
This time, surprisingly, the installation went well. I filled out the "registration" screen and allowed it to reboot the computer.
After logon, Windows alerted me that an "unknown" program XYZ (I won't disclose the name here) wanted to run and asked me if that was OK;
I said yes. Pretty soon I received the two emails. Yay!;
Sadly, though, upon each succesive reboot, Windows continues to ask whether program XYZ can run;
I have modified "User Account Control" (UAC) in Windows Vista so that this no longer occurs, but of course this modification is unacceptable for the long term. UAC is a pain in the ass, but it has a purpose and should be turned ON for day-to-day activities.
I requested a technical service response by email on January 25, but so far have not received any.

Friend's laptop running Vista Home Edition 32-Bit:

Wow I'm SO SORRY that I tried PCPhoneHome on this computer. I tried downloading the official trial version and installing that first, as most users would do. Of course it didn't work, because that version is not for Vista, so then I downloaded the upgrade and tried to install that on top of the first install. The resulting comedy of errors totally eclipsed anything that I had encountered with the desktop installation, and it still doesn't work. I have installed a lot of software on many different machines, but this takes the cake. I have requested a technical service response by telephone and by email, but so far have not received any.

Bottom line: I DO NOT RECOMMEND PCPhoneHome FOR VISTA.

In my opinion, it works fine on XP but is not ready for Vista yet. It phones home on only one of my two Vista installations. There is a workaround for the XYZ "unknown program" prompt at bootup, but that workaround simply trades one security risk for another. Brigadoon Software must fix that problem somehow, perhaps by getting valid "digital signatures" for their software.

Perhaps this is all my fault for installing it on both Vista systems incorrectly. But I don't think so; I suspect anyone running Vista with UAC turned on will experience similar problems. If true, that's an astounding failure, since:

The most-easily-stolen computers are laptops;
Almost all laptops sold in the last YEAR run Vista;
UAC is turned on by default in all new Vista systems;
Brigadoon Software had months BEFORE THAT to prepare for Vista; so
They are about two years behind the curve and falling further behind daily.

It's as if Brigadoon is a one- or two-person shop, too busy to take the time and do the testing necessary to make their product really install and run correctly. What happens then, I know from experience, is that you spend so much time dealing with tech service questions that you have no time to fix the product. Meanwhile you are selling more of the junky product and compounding your problems. I'm only speculating here though ...

Other Issues:

If your computer is stolen and does phone home, will Brigadoon Software actually answer their telephone and trace an email for you? When I called their telephone number this afternoon during regular business hours, I got an answering machine and no callback today. This is not what you want, because the computer may soon evaporate into the black market and never call home again. I see other remarks on the internet which indicate that this is a real question. I will update this post and add a new post when/if I hear from them regarding my pre-sales technical service problems.
One very good thing: My computers are set up to require a password for my own logon, to prevent access to my account through the network, and also through the keyboard if the computer were to be stolen. On both the XP and the Vista desktop system, if I booted up and did NOT log on, the computer sent the email anyway. Thus if a thief were sitting at the keyboard trying various passwords, and made the mistake of connecting the computer to the internet first, the email would be on its way.
But what if the thief didn't connect to the internet before logging on? In another part of the FAQ document, Brigadoon goes into great detail to show how to set up a computer so that it will boot up with one account which does NOT have a password. They don't spell out WHY we should do that, because it obviously reduces the system's security. But I suppose if I were the thief, I might try each of the usernames on the logon screen, looking for one with no password. If found, I might start with that account, and might even use that account to connect to the internet. Obviously, that account should not have administrator privileges!
Brigadoon makes another good point in their FAQ document: It's important to set up a password to the BIOS of a computer, and then set the BIOS to boot first from hard disk, not floppy or CD/DVD or memory stick. This prevents a thief from using an alternate boot to simply reformat the disk and install a new operating system, thereby obliterating the PCPhoneHome program. In case YOU have a problem with the hard disk, you simply enter the password and change the BIOS back to allow boot from alternate devices. Of course the thief can still remove the hard drive and reformat it some other way, but that's more work and by then the computer may already have phoned home.

Google Desktop vs. Copernic

2008-01-08T17:20:00.001-06:00

The basic idea: What if I could search my own computer as easily as I can search the web? Then I could find an email or a Word document, even a PDF document, or a previously-viewed web page, or all of those on my own computer in an instant, just by entering a few words of text that I think might be in the document or in its name.

Enter Google Desktop (GD). I discovered this a year or two ago, when I was running Windows XP, and thought it was slicker than sliced bread. Well, almost, and certainly better than anything that Microsoft offered. It didn't work exactly right - sometimes I would click on a result and nothing would come up - but at least it did seem to find everything.

Except WordPerfect documents. I use WordPerfect and certainly prefer it to Microsoft Word, but the documents apparently have a unique format and are not correctly indexed by GD or by Microsoft's Vista indexing software. No surprise that Microsoft would deliberately omit WordPerfect, because they have been trying to bury it with Word for years (with obvious success), but we expect better from Google. There is a contributed Google Desktop plugin called Larry's WordPerfect Indexer, and it seemed to work when installed, but Google Desktop kept uninstalling it for some reason; I never solved that problem.

Enter Windows Vista; I have the 64-bit version. It supposedly has its own indexing, but I find that awkward and obtuse; I still haven't entirely figured what IS and what IS NOT indexed. Google Desktop was better.

However, if you Google "google desktop" and "vista" you will find complaints about Google Desktop slowing down Vista, and you will find that Google and Microsoft are having a legal hassle. Nevertheless a few days ago I downloaded GD and installed it. To my surprise, GD did not offer ANY indexing commands. I could not make it re-index, and there was no pause-indexing command. When I did a GD search it DID come up with results though, without ever doing an indexing search. From this I assume that it uses Vista's built-in index, and no longer builds its own index. I "installed" Larry's WordPerfect Indexer, but of course a search still did not bring up any WordPerfect documents. Conclusion: At least for now, Google Desktop is broken - no better than Vista's search, which itself is very clumsy and which will apparently never be able to search WordPerfect documents.

Enter Copernic. I downloaded this desktop searcher and couldn't be more pleased. It runs exactly the same on both XP (my laptop) and Vista 64 (my new desktop computer). In both cases it built its index in almost no time at all. Here are some of the features:

It automatically indexes WordPerfect documents - important to me if not to you;
You can select the types of files it will index, including PDF documents and ZIP folders, by type extension;
You choose whether the indexing function pauses while you use the computer, and if so, for how long;
You choose which folders you index and which you do not. For example, I have files that are encrypted and certainly don't want them in the index!;
Regardless how the index is built, you can limit a search to any particular file type, to avoid getting too many results;
For any specific class of files you can limit the search by date, partial file name, folder, and other attributes;
There is a quick and easy way to check for updates to Copernic;
I haven't even discovered all of the features yet.

Copernic does NOT seem to offer complex (advanced) searches. It seems to require that ALL of the words in the search box must appear in the document, with no "ANY" option or "DOES NOT HAVE" option. But I can live with that. Many of the features in the list above are also available in Google Desktop and Vista Search, but not all of them are.

I've only had Copernic for a couple of days now, but it sure seems far more robust than the competition, and yet easier to use. Unlike those, it's a completed, working product. If I continue to like it, I may just turn off Vista indexing altogether.

Please let me know if you agree, or disagree, or want more information.

AverMedia AVerTV Combo PCI-E Media Center Upgrade Kit

2007-12-14T21:25:00.000-06:00

Recording TV Programs:

Our ancient VCR (tape recorder) in the TV room is starting to act up and we are looking around for a replacement. Of course VCR is the technology of the previous century - we should probably get a DVD recorder or, better yet by far, a DVR (digital video recorder).

Enter the brand new computer. It turns out that a computer with a TV tuner card can make a dandy DVR, and this new one with lots of power, high-quality graphics, and Windows Vista Ultimate with Media Center is a perfect candidate.

TV Tuner Card:

I have Windows Vista 64 with Media Center, so I ordered the AverMedia Media Center Upgrade Kit from NewEgg.com, a PCI-E tuner card. I chose that product for its features but even more because of the good recommendations from purchasers on NewEgg.com. The card includes two tuners, one for analog channels (broadcast or cable) and the other for digital (broadcast or cable).

Installation:

I installed it in a PCI-E slot, rebooted, and Windows automatically installed the drivers. There was no need to use the drivers on the included CD-ROM; I'm confident that Windows used appropriate drivers. With the kit also came a remote control and remote receiver, for which Windows also found and installed a driver.

I connected the cable TV signal to the analog tuner, and the included "test" antenna to the digital tuner, and immediately tuned in all of the analog cable channels and eight digital broadcast channels.

I'm not an HDTV enthusiast, at least not yet. I know almost nothing about home-theater PC (HTPC). But this was trivially simple. What we have here is a card that is designed to work specifically with Windows Media Center (MC), a Microsoft software package found on some XP and Vista machines. The card came with no other software except drivers - it would be useless without MC, and MC cannot play or record TV signals without a TV tuner card. They go together hand in glove, and they worked together right out of the box with no coaxing at all.

Performance:

The quality of the analog cable programs is better than my desktop TV, and they have equal signals off the same splitter.
The quality of the digital programs is stunning.
MC and the tuner immediately detected and cataloged every useful analog cable channel.
Using a tiny "test" antenna supplied with the kit, the system detected all of the major local broadcast stations. That test antenna is all I need.
MC can play one program from one tuner while recording another program from the other tuner.
With MC not running, the computer's CPU usage is 1% to 2%. With MC playing a program it is about 20%, and with MC both playing and recording it is about 25%.
The card's tuner chips felt warm to the touch, but not hot.
I ran a CPU exercise program called HeavyLoad while MC was playing and recording, and the program played without a hitch with CPU usage bumping up between 90% and 100%. Nothing overheated.

Features I'd like to have:

The documentation was nonexistent. I have no idea how some of the included parts are even supposed to be used.
It has no FM tuner, which would be very nice with MC.
Though there are two tuners on the card, MC will not show picture-in-picture.
The tuner is capable of playing QAM (unencrypted digital cable signals) but MC will not take advantage that capability.

Bottom Line:

It works exactly as advertised and I'm glad to have it. I wonder if we should just build another, cheaper computer and dedicate it to DVR as a replacement for the VCR. Still expensive I guess.

An alternative is to rent the DVR from our cable provider Comcast, which would require us to upgrade the cable from Standard to Digital, and the rental plus the upgrade would cost us $16.00/month or about $200.00/year. At that rate we coud pay for an $800 computer in four years ... hmmm.

TrueCrypt Is Cool

2007-12-11T16:48:00.000-06:00

My business requires me to safeguard the security of certain files. For years I have used Encrypted Magic Folders (EMF) from PC-Magic to encrypt those files, and to hide them from the view of an interloper. I loved it, because files were always encrypted on disk and yet were fully accessible to applications. However, when I upgraded to Vista 64, the new EMF crashed my system so completely that it was unbootable even in safe mode. I tried it twice, recovered twice with some difficulty, and gave up on EMF.

In the meantime I had heard about TrueCrypt, an open-source disk encryption package for Windows and Linux. It's free! I must admit that after I downloaded it, I needed some time to get my mind around it.

Here are the basics:

Using the TrueCrypt application you create a large "container" file on your system, larger than you will need to hold your encrypted files. It can be on any read/write disk, even a memory stick, and is initially filled with random data.
The container file can be copied, moved, deleted, or renamed just like any other file. It's not fragile. It can have any name and any file extension. You can have more than one.
With the TrueCrypt application, you mount that container file as a disk volume with its own drive letter. You choose the letter.
The TrueCrypt application runs in the background and manages TrueCrypt volumes.
Within the TrueCrypt volume you create folders, or copy them in, and create or copy in any files that ought to be encrypted. A TrueCrypt volume behaves exactly like any other disk, even though it's really just a file on your hard drive or mem stick. Every file within it is totally encrypted, including file names and even its file system.
Unused space in the TrueCrypt container file is filled with random data which cannot be distinguished from actual encrypted files.
When you open an encrypted file in an application, such as a wordprocessor or graphic editor, the file is decrypted on the fly so that the application sees it decrypted.
The file is never decrypted on disk, however, unless the application keeps temporary backup copies, and of course you should tell your applications to keep those in an encrypted volume too.
Backup of encrypted data is easy: Just dismount the encrypted volume and copy its container file, still encrypted, to the backup medium.
If the backup medium is another disk, mem stick, DVD, or CD-ROM, you can actually mount that backup container file whenever you want without ever copying it back to the original hard disk.

That's the simple view of TrueCrypt. There is lots more. For example:

Anyone examining your system or your disk can tell that you use TrueCrypt, and can probably even identify the container files.
However, you can host a TrueCrypt volume within another truecrypt volume in a manner that makes the internal volume both hidden and undectable even if the outer volume is mounted and visible. Really cool. The TrueCrypt people call this "plausible deniability," and consider it quite important.
Example: An adversary points a gun at you and demands to see your encrypted files. You can give them the password to the outer encrypted volume without ever revealing that an inner, hidden volume even exists. It's invisible. I don't actually see the need for a hidden volume in my business, but evidently some folks do.
You can host a truecrypt volume on a public computer, or another person's computer, without installing any software on that computer, so your encrypted files are portable.
You can tell TrueCrypt to mount certain TrueCrypt volumes automatically at bootup, though you will be required to enter a password to complete the mounting process.
TrueCrypt allows you to use any of eight different encryption algorithms and three different hash algorithms, making decryption by an adversary even more difficult.

I love it, and in fact am using it for my encrypted files on my new computer. It works very well indeed, even on Vista 64. It is certainly no more trouble than EMF was, and backup is much simpler. It is far better than Windows Encrypted File System (EFS) because: (1) EFS files are always available when you log on, whereas TrueCrypt files require you to enter another password; and (2) EFS files cannot easily be backed up in their encrypted form. TrueCrypt is also much simpler than Windows BitLocker encryption, which requires you to partition your drive and poses some risk of losing the entire drive if something goes wrong.

RAID Backup

2007-12-02T17:21:00.001-06:00

Working perfectly!

Usually, a person needs a backup when their disk drive fails. All disk drives fail sometime - there is no escape from that truth. But there are other reasons for keeping good backups:

Total disaster, such as a fire or flood that destroys the whole computer and all nearby backups.
Deliberate mischief, such as a virus that deletes important files.
Accidental deletion or modification of one or more files.

I'm sure there are more reasons, but if we cover these we'll probably have the rest covered.

Drive Failure:

Disk drive failure can mostly be avoided by using two mirrored drives in a configuration known as RAID 1. RAID means Redundant Array of Independent Drives, and has several well-defined levels. RAID 1 is a simple comfiguration with two drives which always contain exactly the same information, hence the term "mirrored." If either drive fails, the other simply becomes the system's sole drive and takes over without a hitch. Since the probability of two drives failing at once is very small, RAID 1 pretty well covers that problem. The new computer here employs RAID 1.

Total Disaster:

If the building burns down or floods, the only solution is to have a separate backup stored offsite. This can be on the internet, another building some distance away, or perhaps in a fire- and water-proof safe. At this office a flood is highly unlikely, so we store encrypted DVD backups of most user files in a fire-resistant safe in the basement, and we occasionally put a DVD in a safe deposit box at the bank. I have just set up an upload account and I may stop putting DVDs in the safe deposit box. We'll see.

Deliberate Mischief, or Accidental Deletion or Modification:

RAID disks don't help here, because the RAID disk controller keeps the two mirrored disks identical even when the files themselves are deleted or corrupted. This is where Windows System Restore can be very handy indeed. I have several times seen a serious problem solved by restoring a system to a previous date and time. System Restore works, though it has the disadvantage that the whole drive reverts to a selected time in the past, even if you only need to recover one file.

But if System Restore isn't the solution, then backups are the answer. DVD and internet backups can be used to restore user data, but what about all of the rest of the system? I started a full backup once, but quit when the backup wizard pointed out that I would need 19 DVDs. Enter "RAID Backup" with a third identical disk drive. At some reasonable interval (every day, every week, every month) I can disconnect the power to one of the two mirrored disks and connect the third disk. The disconnected disk is instantly a complete backup of everything, and the newly-connected disk will soon be overwritten and re-mirrored to the remaining good disk in the RAID 1 pair. Voila - complete backup in about five minutes for a one-time cost of about $80. It does actually take about 2 hours and 15 minutes to re-mirror, but the system is usable, if slower, while that takes place. And the third disk, with no power, is safe from any mischief.

It Works!:

I wasn't entirely sure that the Intel software would be totally cool with what I wanted to do, but I tried it last night and today. The system has three identical 320 Mb Western Digital hard disk. Steps in the experiment:

Disk Drives A and B were mirrored, drive C was powered up as a spare but had never been used.
I shut down the computer, disconnected power on B, rebooted the computer. The Bios complained that the RAID 1 pair was "degraded" and gave me a chance to deal with it in the Bios, but I declined and let the bootup proceed.
The computer booted normally, and the Intel monitor software presented a pop-up balloon that said the RAID 1 disk was degraded but could be repaired.
I clicked on the balloon and followed the instructions to restore disk C to mirror the good disk in the RAID pair, disk A. Two and a quarter hours later, A & C were a mirrored RAID pair and B was a complete backup. Job done.
As an experiment, however, I shut down again and disconnected all EXCEPT disk B, then rebooted. Again the Bios complained and the on-line software did too, but the system functioned normally on just the "backup" disk. As far as I could tell, all files were accessible. The RAID software, apparently confused, also created a second RAID array at this point, consisting of Disk B and a "missing" disk. Duh.
I rebooted with only A & C connected, and everything worked once again, no complaints.
Then I connected B as well, rebooted, and got some complaints about a degraded pair in the second RAID array (disk B), but the system ran normally and all files on all disks seemed to be accessible, including the files on disk B.
Finally, I disconnected disk C, leaving A & B connected, and rebooted once again. The Bios and the Intel application software both complained about degraded RAID arrays. But it allowed me to delete the second RAID array, consisting of only disk B. That done, it allowed me to re-mirror B to the good disk in the original RAID pair, disk A, even though disk B contained lots of valid data. I was concerned that it might not let me destroy data, and I think there were at least four warnings that data would be destroyed on disk B if I proceeded, but it finally let me do it. Now disk C is again the full backup and the system is back to a RAID array of disks A & B.

From now on the procedure will be much simpler: Shut down, disconnect B or C (whichever was connected), reconnect the disk that was disconnected, reboot, and tell the Intel application to restore the RAID array. The biggest hassle is moving the computer to a position where I can open the side panel and disconnect / reconnect drives. I can handle it.

Windows Experience Index:

Before these little experiments, the system's Windows Experience Index was 5.4, limited by the disk subscore of 5.4. I ran the tests several times. Since the experiments, the Windows Experience Index is 5.5, limited by both the processor and gaming graphics, with the disk subscore improving to 5.7. Why did the disk subscore go up from 5.4 to 5.7, using exactly the same disks? Only Microsoft knows.

Heat, Speed, & Sound

2007-11-11T20:41:00.001-06:00

Speed:

Mr. Tobias Schonherr pointed out an error in my assembly of this new computer. Thank you Mr. Schonherr! I had misinterpreted the Intel manual on the DP35DP motherboard, and unwittingly installed the two memory modules in single-channel mode rather than dual-channel mode.

As I understand it, dual-channel mode enables the CPUs to make two requests on memory at one time, increasing overall memory throughput. See below. First the memory modules before and after, then the resulting Windows Experience Index before and after. The computer recognized 4 Gb of memory in each case, but you will notice that the memory sub-index jumped from 5.6 to 5.9, now as high as any other element of the system and higher than the dual-processor CPU.

Before	After

Heat:

Modern computers contain a host of self-monitoring devices, temperature monitors in particular. I installed the Intel Desktop Utilities, which takes advantage of those devices to provide readouts and to raise an alarm if some device goes outside its limit.

A few days back I returned to my computer to find an alarm on the screen. The CPU had exceeded its temperature limit of 68 degrees C for several minutes, going as high as 69 C (156 F). I downloaded a system-exerciser program called HeavyLoad and ran the CPU test, which is a repetitive graphics application, and the CPU temperature jumped right up to 70 C, CPU fan becoming very audible. Oops - problem.

I wondered if the thermal transfer between the CPU and its heatsink was OK. I had removed the heatsink once to re-check that the CPU was correctly loaded in its socket, thus disturbing the termal transfer compound. Also I had never felt good about the seating of the clips that hold the heatsink to the motherboard.

So I removed the heatsink once again, removed the old thermal transfer compound, and applied Arctic Silver compound in its place, evening it out with a credit card. Replacing the heatsink atop the CPU cover, I tried very carefully this time to apply equal pressure on all of the mounting clips, hearing a satisfying little click at each corner, an assurance that the heatsink is held down squarely. I also disconnected the internal case fan from motherboard control and connected it to full voltage so that it will always run full speed. It's noiseless anyway.

Good results! The following measurements were made with HeavyLoad executing its graphic application (about 60% CPU utilization), and the hole pattern in the back of the case blocked, thus forcing air to come all the way through from the front). In each case, temperatures were allowed to settle for at least a quarter of an hour. The CPU fan is automatically controlled from the motherboard:

Conditions	CPU	MOB	ICH	MCH	GPU	CPU
	C	C	C	C	C	Fan
Max allowed	68	85	119	109		RPM
Exhaust fan LOW (silent)	60	48	62	66	53	1467
Exhaust fan MED (audible)	60	49	62	66	50	1345
Exhaust fan HI (whoosh)	59	47	62	66	50	1348
Fan LOW, no HeavyLoad	40	41	63	66	53	927

I wish it were cooler still, but the CPU is now well within specifications. Further, the speed of the rear exhaust fan doesn't seem to make much difference in the temperatures, though it makes a lot of difference in noise. So I'm leaving the fan on low until there is a problem.

Noise:

I admit that my hearing isn't what it once was, but this system is so quiet that I can't always be sure I'm hearing it. A very low rumble from the disk drives is about all there is, and only when they are busy. But when the forced-air-furnace comes on I just can't hear it at all. I LOVE that! Now about that furnace ...

The Computer Is Built!

2007-11-04T16:55:00.000-06:00

And I'm pleased with it.

Performance:

The overall Windows Experience Index is 5.4, which I believe is pretty good. The limiting subscore (5.4) is the disks, actually, and they are very high-speed SATA II 7200-RPM drives, though you can get 10,000 RPM drives which should be faster yet. The highest subscore is the Windows Aero graphics, 5.9. Everything else falls between, so the system is reasonably well balanced.

Quietness:

When there is nothing else going on in the room, TV and the old computer turned off, sitting at my desk, I can hear a faint, low-pitched roar similar to the sound you hear by holding a large seashell up to your ear, but certainly not that loud. It has a resonance to it, despite my efforts to dampen sounds inside the box. I think that the rear fan is the origin of most of the noise. It's not objectionable, because it's faint, but I will probably try to do more to limit the sound, such as:

Add more sound-deadening material inside the box; there is room on the side cover for more;
Play with fan speeds. The computer reports its own temperatures at several places including the CPU, graphics card, and motherboard, and those are quite comfortably within spec right now, so I could choose a lower speed for the rear fan;
Cover the strange hole pattern on the back of the case, for which there seems no purpose; and
Replace or rewire the rear fan. The motherboard came with a fan-control connection for that fan, but oddly, that fan did not come with a connector for the fan control. It may be easier for me to order a fan with the right connector rather than a conversion cable.

Bottom Line:

It's a good computer. Luckily there were no DOA (dead-on-arrival) parts, and it came right up and ran. The only problems were software ones, after Vista was installed and not to be discussed here (though I may yet post a rant about Vista. It is SO awkward and obtuse). I think that once a person has the proper parts on hand, one could put a computer like this together in an hour or two, including the initial Vista installation.

Below is a pictorial of the build process, in reverse order. Click on the Materials List on the side panel to see what went into the computer.

After powering up the disks, this screen in the BIOS allowed the association of drives A and B as a single fault-tolerant 320 Gb RAID disk before anything was ever written to the disks.

When first powering up the system, I had disconnected all of the disk drives and some other stuff to see if the CPU and motherboard would POST (power-on self test). THEY DID! This screen proves that a lot of stuff was working:

Power supply;
Motherboard;
CPU;
Graphics card, at least sufficient to display to the generic screen; and
USB ports and keyboard-handling firmware on the motherboard;
Fans (I could see them turn).

The box is fully wired and ready to test.

The motherboard is installed and screwed in place.

The three 320 Gb hard drives are in place and wired up. Two drives are for the fault-tolerant RAID disk, and a third will be used as a backup.

It's still hard for me to reconcile this palm-sized, silent, extremely fast 320 Gb drive with the washing-machine-sized sub-Gb drives I cut my computer teeth on years ago. And in just a few years, even these will be replaced with much faster flash drives having no moving parts at all.

Sound-deadening material stuck to the back side of the hard-drive cage. A similar piece is attached to the side door covering the drives on this side, and on the bottom and top of the cage. I attached this material on all interior surfaces wherever it could be attached without getting in the way or interfering with the passage of cooling air.

Sound-deadeing felt. Found in the local Menards hardware store, not for the purpose of deadening sound, but I think it should work. I liked the black better, but the store didn't have much so I bought some of both.

Front fan installed inside of the hard drive cage, to pull air across the drives and blow it toward the graphics card and CPU. See earlier posts for other views of the entire case.

Everything is Here

2007-10-23T19:04:00.000-05:00

The Intel E6750 Boxed CPU and three Western Digital 320-Gb SATA hard drives arrived today, and now all of the parts are here. I set everything except the case out on the picnic table for a photo. Out of several photos, my sweetie liked this one with fall color in the background :-)

Then I downloaded an Intel video that demonstrates how to install the processor and "thermal solution" (fan + heat sink) on the Intel DP35DP motherboard. After playing the video once, I played it again and did the installation while watching the video. What makes it tricky is that dozens upon dozens of tiny pins on the motherboard socket must match up with a similar number of contact lands on the CPU wafer, without bending any of the pins.

And the CPU is just a wafer at this point, not fragile exactly but the motherboard pins are. You are supposed to set the square wafer straight down on the pins without sliding it at all, but I must admit that when I set it down it wasn't perfectly aligned and it did slide slightly. I hope those pins handled it - I didn't look.

After inserting the wafer you close a little door and then a little spring handle to press the door and wafer down tightly against the socket pins. Then you put the heatsink on top of it all and fasten it down with its own little plastic clips, plug the heatsink fan into the appropriate connector, tie off any spare wire, and job done. I hope. I'll feel a little better when I power it up and get a BIOS screen.

By comparison, the 4 Gb of G.Skill RAM seemed quite easy to install. Just push it carefully into the socket.

On another note: My first experience with computers was in 1962, 45 years ago, when disk drives were barely on the horizon. We used a magnetic tape operating system, and wrote programs on punched cards or paper tape. Later, about 28 years ago, I bought my first computer while working at 3M, with 64 Kb of RAM (yes RAM, not core), and a 5-Mb disk drive which was too heavy for one person to manage alone. These palm-sized disks each have 64,000 (sixty-four thousand) times as much disk capacity, and the CPU will enjoy 62,500 times as much RAM. Oh, and the RAM is about 800 times faster, while the CPU is easly 2500 times faster and there are two in the chip. Isn't technology stunning?

Antec Sonata III 500 Review

2007-10-18T07:42:00.000-05:00

Noise Reduction:

The Sonata III 500 is supposed to be one of the quietest computer cases on the planet, advertised by Sonata as "whisper quiet when it comes to system noise." This is why I bought it, but frankly, I don't see what all the fuss is about. Here is what the Sonata III 500 does have for noise reduction:

An efficient 500-watt power supply with its own "low noise" cooling fan. I haven't powered it up yet, so I can't yet testify to the lack of noise but I expect it to be quiet,
A normal-looking three-speed 120 mm rear exhaust fan. I was unable to find noise ratings published by Antec, but I expect it to be quiet at the lower speeds and noisy at the top speed,
Silicone grommets for mounting the hard drives, to absorb noise and vibrations, and
Rubber feet.

On the flip side, though, here is what the Sonata does not have:

Sound-deadening panels or foam of any kind to absorb sound or prevent conduction through the hard steel panels,
Baffling to prevent sound generated inside from coming out either the front or back air ports,
Gaskets or sealant to prevent sound from coming through the various cracks, such as around the side and front doors,
Joint treatment to prevent the doors from rattling.

I have a lot of experience in older computers, the kind that were once called minicomputers, but I am certainly not an expert in modern PC's - this is my first build. So maybe none of those things are important or should be expected, although Sonata does indeed provide sound-deadening panels on some of their other cases so I guess that one matters. I may add my own panels where there is space to do so, especially around the hard disks.

Air Cooling:

The air filter is built-in, removable, and washable, but dubiously effective at filtering air and obviously no good at baffling noise. It is simply a very thin plastic piece with lots of little holes in it, as shown in the photo, in fact so flimsy that I broke one of the latch handles the first time I tried to remove the filter. It should be provided with some kind of filter medium, and the accompanying manual appears to show such a piece, but none came with the case. Perhaps I'll add one myself and punch out the lattice of holes, which will just plug up anyway and cause the fan to speed up and make more noise.

Furthermore, there is a big pattern of holes in the back cover which appears to be positioned to provide air to the PCI devices, but which has no filter at all and which looks like it would admit air which would circulate directly up to the rear exhaust fan without doing much good. There are brackets inside which could be used to hold a filter, or even an air-blocking cover, but no documentation about such an accessory was provided. Maybe this is standard, and I ought to know about it, but I don't, and I don't find it on my older PCs. I may try to block it myself, or cover it with a filter medium, after I see exactly how all of the components fit inside the case.

The rear exhaust fan is a three-speed, automatically controlled by the motherboard, which I believe is normal these days. There are screw holes for another fan inside the case between the hard disks and the motherboard, but no fan is provided because, according to Antec, this will add noise. I have ordered a very-low-noise fan for this location, to help cool the disk drives as well as the graphics card attached to the motherboard. It looks as though it will fit with very little room to spare.

Feet:

Other reviewers of this case have complained that the rubber feet are attached only with adhesive and tend to come off. I judged that my box would have that problem too, and fixed it right away by screwing the same feet securely to the case through 1/8-inch by 3/4-inch fender washers. See the photos. I can't imagine why Antec doesn't do this themselves, especially when all objective reviewers mention it.

Power Connections:

I am impressed by the sheer number of power connectors available out of this supply. With no experience in such things, sixteen connections seems like a lot to me, a good thing. It has four SATA connections, which might seem like a lot, but I may still need to add one additional SATA power output if I install three hard disks and two DVD drives. Nevermind, there are inexpensive "Y" cables for this very purpose.

Case Size:

I thought that this was a "full-size" ATX case, or I would have ordered a different one. It is not, but this is MY FAULT because Antec's literature clearly describes it as a "super mini tower." Regardless, the case is large enough to accommodate a "full" ATX motherboard, and I think it will hold the other stuff I've ordered with some space for expansion. Therefore, even though I am currently somewhat underwhelmed by the quality of the Sonata III 500, I do like the specifications on the power supply, I find the box attractive, and I will build my new computer in it.

I ordered all of the other components for the computer yesterday, mostly from NewEgg.com, but the motherboard from ZipZoomFly.com because NewEgg didn't have it at the time. They do now, for less money. Tsk. I bought SATA data cables and one power "Y" cable from SataCables.com. Here is the materials list. I may post about the Sonata case again after I have it filled and powered up, when we'll know how quiet it is.

Your comments, objections, and suggestions are invited.

Choice of Motherboard

2007-10-13T19:55:00.001-05:00

This computer (which I call Stirling) will require a motherboard, like any other computer, which will be host to the CPU, memory, graphics, audio, disk controller, and much more. There are many motherboards, by several manufacturers, which support the E6750 CPU that I have selected, and which will fit perfectly in the full-size ATX cabinet that I have ordered. For better or for worse, however, I have not made a search for the "perfect" motherboard and have decided to just order one by Intel, for these reasons:

I like Intel,
They are an Amercan company (at least headquartered here), and
They make the CPU as well, so I expect to get support, if needed, without finger pointing.

Do let me know if I am dreaming.

From what I have read about the Intel motherboards, they are reliable, utilitarian, and straightforward. They are not for gamers and other overclockers, because they do not allow most of the voltage and clock adjustments that those folks seek. The Intel boards are not simple, however. They all include such features as:

Slots for 8 Gb of 800 MHz main memory,
Lots of serial ATA (SATA) disk interfaces,
One back-compatible Parallel IDE interface,
Audio system,
LAN 10/100/1000,
Legacy I/O including a serial port, consumer infrared, PS/2 mouse & keyboard,

Some include a diskette controller, and some contain an internal graphics controller. All support Windows Vista, 1333 Mz FSB, 12 USB ports, and more. Here is a table comparing the four Intel motherboards that support the E6750 and similar CPUs.

I've chosen the Intel DP35DP motherboard, distinguished from the others by the following set of features:

Full ATX form factor, for maximum on-board real estate,
Six SATA interfaces, as much as any board
Three standard PCI slots,
Three PCI 1 slots,
RAID support, but
No graphics accelerator, and
No legacy diskette I/O.

Those last two are a trade-off so that the card can have the maximum number of SATA interfaces and PCI slots, as well as the maximum real estate for cooling and component fit. Graphics will be provided by a separate graphics accelerator card, and diskette support will be provided through an internal USB connection.

If it sounds like I know what I'm doing here, don't be fooled. These are the musings of a complete novice, and any comments will be appreciated and valued.

CPU Cooling

2007-10-13T15:57:00.000-05:00

The Intel Core 2 Duo 6750 processor comes in a retail box from NewEgg and others, complete with a processor cooling solution consisting of a small fan and cooling fins. Concerned about noise, I searched for a passive design, without a fan, to replace the Intel cooler, and came across the web site FrostyTech.com, where CPU heatsinks of many types are compared. One of the evaluated heatsinks is the "stock" fan/fin cooler provided by Intel with the boxed processor.

According to FrostyTech, the Intel cooler is very quiet, one of the quietest coolers evaluated. The article includes a large table of coolers, with the stock Intel 35 db quieter than the noisiest cooler and about 20 db quieter than the median. The description was also very favorable, it "operates very quietly at its default speed."

However the fan was not tested in the mode in which it will actually be used. FrostyTech used a 3-pin connector, which causes the fan to adjust its speed according to ambient air temperature. In the Intel boxed solution a 4-pin connector is used, permitting the fan speed to be programmed according to the actual CPU temperature, in which case it might run faster and make more noise. Nevertheless, it's my guess that the Intel fan will be quiet enough, probably much quieter than the two mirrored 320 Gb disk drives that will be running in the same cabinet, and probably also quieter than the cabinet fan.

FrostyTech also evaluated the cooler's actual cooling ability, applying an 85-watt heat load, which is slightly higher than the 65 watts dissipated by the E6750 at maximum current. Here the Intel cooler did not fare as well, ending up near the top of the list with the highest CPU temperature (least cooling), some 20 degrees C higher than the best cooler. Again, though, the fan was not operated in the mode in which it will be used in my computer. I suspect that Intel knows what it is doing, and the cooling will be adequate for my relatively tame application.

I did find two heatsinks by Spire, both of which include a noisy fan, but which (according to Spire) can be used without the fan if the heat load is not excessive. One of these was also evaluated by FrostyTech, who downrated it for its bulkiness and thought it was difficult to install and remove. They did not test it without the fan, but considering the tests they did perform I doubt that it would perform very well without the fan unless there was a gale wind flowing through the cabinet. In my modest search I did not find any other passive CPU heatsinks. These are available on some graphic accelerator cards (which are CPUs in their own right) but apparently not for CPUs. If you know different, please let me know.

Bottom line: I'm going with the stock Intel cooler unless the noise is a big surprise. If so, then I'll look at other coolers.

Windows Vista Ultimate

2007-10-11T22:00:00.001-05:00

I'm not yet a big fan of Windows Vista, but unless I go to some form of Unix it is in my future whether I like it or not. The machine I am building will support the fanciest operating system that Microsoft makes, which is 64-bit Windows Vista Ultimate.

It would certainly also support Windows Vista Business, which is about $50 cheaper than Ultimate, but Ultimate has two things I might want that are not in Business:

Media Center stuff - I could become interested in this, and
Windows BitLocker, drive encryption.

So I ordered Windows Vista Ultimate, full, not upgrade or OEM, from VioSoftware for $253.22. Note: VioSoftware has two prices for this software package, one if you go to PriceGrabber first and a higher one if you go directly to VioSoftware. There is a $27 difference.

Here We Go ...

2007-10-09T16:56:00.000-05:00

Since I don't really know how to build a computer, the first item to order would seem to be the case. Then I can visualize how everything will fit. I've chosen the full-size Sonata III 500 case, billed as the quietest case in captivity. We'll see.

It's glossy black, because (I think) most of the people who build their own PC's are "gamers" who want the fastest computer on the block, or at least the fastest that they can afford, for running their graphics-intensive computer games. For some reason, gamers seem to like black, shiny things, or very colorful things: computers, web sites, graphics cards, on and on. It's OK with me - black is a fine color for computers, and most accessories like DVD drives can be ordered in black.

The complaint from people who have ordered the Sonata III 500 is that the glossy black finish is easily marked. If that happens it'll be too bad, but I don't really care that much. If it's not quiet, I'll care a lot more.

It is now on order for $117.00 from ZipZoomFly.com, shipping included, the lowest-cost source I could find at the moment I ordered it. Not bad, really, since it includes the power supply. Another company, TigerDirect, had it for less, but as I shopped around the price there suddenly jumped up. That might have been a coincidence, but I suspect that their computer thought I was getting serious and bumped up the price. They lost the sale.

More Specifications:

Full-size ATX for lots of space, whether I need it or not. It sits beside the desk anyway, so there is plenty of room for it.
Included 500-watt super-quiet high-efficiency power supply.
CPU-controllable cooling fan speed.
Nine drive bays of various sizes, mounted on sound-absorbing silicone grommets.
Front ports for USB, audio, and more.

When I receive it, I'll see whether it comes with anything else, such as power supply cables, screws, and other necessary parts. Then the next step is to order the motherboard, CPU, memory, graphics card, Vista, DVD drive, and at least one hard drive. When those arrive I'll try to start it up and install Vista. Some of these parts have a limited return period, so I will wait until I need them and order them all at once. Learning experiences will follow!

At this moment my intention is to install the 64-bit version of Vista, 4 Gb memory, and Raid 1 disks (2 disks, mirrored). The materials list looks like this. If you have any suggestions I'm all ears (eyes).

Choosing a Hard Disk

2007-08-29T22:34:00.000-05:00

How does one choose the hard disk drive (HDD) from all of the available vendors and capacities? First, it's important to recognize that it's not a highly critical decision; I'm not likely to choose a vendor or capacity that is unsuitable, and drives are not a huge expense any more, so I can add or replace drives later (or sooner) if necessary.

My existing system has 23 Gb available out of 100 Gb total capacity, so I'm using about 77 Gb. Disk usage has grown from about 15 Gb in 1999 to 77 this year, which means that it grew by a factor of five in the intervening eight years. That suggests I should buy five times the amount of disk that I am now using, or about 400 Gb, to last the next eight years. Maybe so.

But maybe not. New technology is on the horizon. It is already possible to buy a 64 Gb flash drive with no moving parts for about $900. How soon will the price/performance curve of flash or some even-better technology approach that of moving-head disk drives? Probably sooner than later.

For now I'm going with 320 Gb drives, a relatively mature technology, available from several manufacturers, with modest power and heat dissipation needs. That's a safe choice.

So whose drives? To simplify things I've narrowed the field to three manufacturers: (1) Samsung, (2) Seagate, and (3) Western Digital, in alphabetical order. Hitachi and Maxtor make appropriate drives too, as do other manufacturers, but I've seen nothing to indicate that any of those would be a better choice than the best of the first three. If you have other information, please comment. The drives will all have:

320 Gb capacity.
SATA 3.0 Gb/s interface.
7200 RPM and attending latency.
Average seek time less than 10 ms.
16 Mb cache.

The following table shows some additional information about each drive. Prices are all from NewEgg, as is the user comment information. Other data comes from the manufacturers' specification sheets:

Brand	Model#	Price	Warranty	Five*	Comments
Samsung	HD321KJ	$74.99	1 yr	80%	20
Seagate	ST3320620AS	$79.99	5 yr	76%	1887
Western Digital	WD3200AAKS	$74.99	3 yr	80%	144

The Five* column is the percentage of reviewers who gave the drive five stars out of five, i.e. the best possible rating. I realize that some people rarely give the highest rating to anything, so the system may be biased, but I also saw a comment from a reviewer who gave four stars for a drive which was dandy until it failed after one day's use. So it balances out.

In any case the reviewers' ratings don't give much guidance, all between 76% and 80%. The Seagate drive is by far the most popular, but comments indicate that it has been received dead on arrival in many recent cases. One commenter said that it is made in China. Further, and significantly, many reviewers comment that the Seagate drive is noisy. I don't like that, and I'm leaning a bit toward WD. I wonder where theirs are made?

Suppliers like NewEgg have a 30-day return policy on drives (probably on everything), so I suppose I won't be buying any drives until the rest of the system is nearly assembled and ready to test. By then things may have changed. Perhaps Seagate will correct their quality problem, or prices will change enough to make one drive more attractive on that basis.

Gateway Performance 600

2007-08-28T14:49:00.000-05:00

I'm struggling with the original precept of this blog: building a new computer, because my Gateway Performance 600 is working so well now. It's almost eight years old, but it runs a Pentium III processor at 600 MHz and has been upgraded significantly:

Added another hard disk to increase total disk capacity from 20 Gb to about 100 Gb.
Replaced the original CD RW drive (failed) with a new and better Sony drive.
Upgraded from Windows 98 to Windows XP Professional, now SP2 and fully current.
Maxed out the memory to 768 Mbytes, comparable to brand-new low-end computers.

It's not a bad computer, and I'm wavering on the decision to replace it. Money ($1000+) and time are the reasons NOT to replace it. Here are some reasons why I might:

Quieter. The Performance 600, though not loud, is the loudest thing in the room.
Faster. I wonder how much. The processors will be ten or twenty times as fast and the disk(s) at least twice as fast. I'm sure the difference will be noticeable!
Upgradable. In theory at least, the memory will be upgradable to 8 Gb.
Bigger disk. At least three times as much, upgradable to much more.
Windows Vista or Vista compatible. The Gateway 600 is not even slightly compatible with Vista, needing more speed, disk, a DVD drive, and more.
More reliable? Only the CD RW drive in the 600 has ever failed, but I've been lucky because hard disks certainly do fail too. I'm thinking about paired disks in the new computer for improved data security, and a better backup system than the zipped CD ROMs I use now.
Experience. Mine. I will enjoy the experience and learn a LOT! I've been involved in computers almost all of my adult life (45+ years) and it's time to add some current technology to that knowledge.

I'm almost convinced, but then again the 600 is really working pretty well. I have plenty of time to think about it.

RAID

2007-08-24T20:32:00.000-05:00

RAID is a computer acronym meaning "Redundant Array of Independent Disks." Wikipedia. In this case we're talking about "mirrored" disks, one of the simplest RAID configurations, where two identical disks contain identical data so that one can continue operating if the other fails. Since they contain the same data the second disk doesn't add any disk capacity, but it does add reliability. Pros:

The hard disk is MUCH less apt to crash. Only people who have experienced a crash can fully appreciate this.
Perhaps I can get away with less backup, e.g. only back up the most sensitive data.
Or, I can buy a THIRD drive and hot-swap it, so the swapped-out drive is the backup.
I'd enjoy the experience of setting it up and using it.

Cons:

It's more expensive: I need two drives, not one, and the motherboard (which manages the drives) costs a little more.
The drives will make twice as much noise. Hmmm.
It doesn't solve ALL backup problems: If I accidentally permanently delete a file, it will be gone on BOTH drives; if lightning hits the computer it could easily take out both drives.

I'm leaning toward RAID, as you may have guessed. But haven't decided yet for sure. Seems like overkill for a simple office computer. But then again there's the experience of it ...

Here are some other features of the computer that's starting to come together:

Sonata III 500 case, with 500 W power supply. This is the outer box for the whole thing, and this box is quiet with plenty of power available.
Intel E6750 dual-core processor, 2.66 GHz, 1333 front-side bus, with Intel motherboard to match. This is two very fast processors in one. By the time I get going on this, the E6850 may come down in price, even faster.
2 Gb of 2-channel DDR2 memory, 800 MHz. Expandable to 8 Gb they say, but the chips for that don't exist yet; 4 Gb is the max.
Seagate 320 Gb SATA-300 drive(s). Big enough for me.
Sony AWG170S-B2 18x DVD read/write.

But everything is still in pencil. Absolutely everything. Meantime, though, I did a little pricing of the materials lists for WITH RAID and withOUT RAID. Here are very preliminary materials lists:

With RAID.
Without RAID.

I'm totally new at this, a complete novice. If there is anyone out there reading this blog with an idea or a word of caution, I'd love to hear from you.

I think I'll Build My Own Computer

2007-08-23T12:29:00.000-05:00

I do need a new computer in the office; mine is a slow eight-year-old Gateway 600 MHz, with upgraded memory, disk, and operating system. It's time for a new one that can grow with the times. Here are some specifications:

Quieter than my old Gateway tower, which itself really isn't too bad but is the noisiest thing in the room when the TV is off.
Speedy (modern) but not "extreme". The idea is to have a computer that will last a while and be upgradable for a while. We're talking dual processor for sure, but maybe not quad.
It doesn't have to be small - it sits on the floor next to the desk.
At least 2 Gb RAM, 800 MHz or more.
At least 250 Gb hard disk, 3 Gb/sec.
Windows XP Professional (preferred), Windows Vista Business otherwise.
Vista Business compatible for sure. I don't even know what that means yet.
CD/DVD read and write dual layer.
Floppy (yes, I really do want a floppy, even if I never use it).
PS/2 mouse and keyboard ports (I like my existing keyboard & mouse).
Vanilla audio and graphics. This machine means business, not games or entertainment.
Modem. Occasionally we need dialup when DSL fails.
Serial port.
Lifetime warranty. By me.

There are plenty of companies offering to build computers to specification, so why would a person build a more-or-less-ordinary computer himself?

Price: Probably not a good reason. I've done some internet pricing of parts already, and I doubt there will be much of a cost saving.
Quality: Might be a reason. For example, I'm thinking of the Antec Sonata III case, because it is supposed to be very quiet. It's a little expensive, but certainly worth the difference if it really is quieter.
Experience: I've been putting together computers for over 30 years now, but not modern ones. The experience will be invaluable.
Serviceability: If I build it, I can fix it!
Entertainment: It's fun to learn and do.
Bragging rights.

More later. I hope.