LG Blu-Ray Disc Rewriter Model WH16NS40 Review

This is an internal drive which can write and read virtually all forms of CD, DVD, and Blu-Ray (BD) discs, including four-layer 128GB BDs.  It works perfectly so far.

Test System: 

LG Blu-Ray Write/Read Drive
Model WH16NS40

Seven-year-old mini-tower computer, home-built from an Intel DP35DP motherboard hosting an E6750 CPU with dual 2.66 GHz processors, 8 GB memory at 800 MHz, system bus 1066 MHz, running Windows Vista Ultimate. Hard disks are SATA 2TB Seagate hybrid disks.

The system is used as a computer, not as a video player. This review is about data backup. It should apply to copying video files as well, but you might want a newer, faster CPU to actually play or manipulate the video files.  The owners' manual lists the E6750 CPU at 2.66 GHz as the minimum system.

The originally-installed Samsung SH-203B DVD Drive is still in place and functioning well after seven years.  It can read and write DVD+R DL (dual layer) discs, though I only use it with standard and archival single-layer DVD's.  Each month, sometimes more often, I create a backup copy of our own important files (not system files or application executables) on a MAM-A DVD-R gold archival disc for long-term storage, then copy that disc to regular DVD's for shorter-term offsite storage.  Those important files have grown beyond the DVD's 4.7GB capacity, however, so the new LG Blu-Ray Disc (BD) Drive will bump that limit up to about 25GB.  A firmware update from version 1.00 to 1.01-A0 is available for the drive but not yet installed.  (First rule of life:  If it works, you can't fix it.)

Test Method:

The new BD drive was installed in the mini-tower just below the DVD drive.  The generic
Windows Vista software was used to write each disc initially.  ISO Recorder 3.1 was used to restore each disc back to an ISO file, or to write that out to another disc. The following tests were performed to demonstrate single-drive data integrity as well as cross-drive data integrity:

• CD read:  On the BD drive, restore two of our oldest archival CD's, going back to 1997.  No read errors.  Open a few files to verify data integrity.

• CD write/read, using Verbatim CD-R discs:  Write a disc on each drive, restore each disc back to a desktop ISO file using each drive (four ISO files).  No errors reported.  With the Windows utility called comp, compare the two ISO's which were created from a disc written on one drive and restored from the other.  This is a byte-for-byte comparison, and no differences were reported.

• DVD write/read, using TDK DVD-R discs:  Same procedure as for CD's.  No errors, no differences.

• DVD+R DL write/read, using Verbatim DVD+R DL discs:  Same procedure as for CD's.  The discs were filled to about 5.25GB, so that both disc layers would be used.  No errors, no differences.

• BD-R write/read, using Verbatim 25GB 6x BD-R discs:  Write a disc containing 21 GB of data including thousands of files (photos).  Restore that back to an ISO.  Write the ISO to another BD-R disc, restore that back to a second ISO, compare.  No errors, no differences.

• BD-R 50GB, 100GB, and 128GB: Not tested - I don't need this functionality now, but I have no reason to doubt that it will work when it is needed, and perhaps disc prices will be better.

Data integrity test results:

The LG Blu-Ray Disc Rewriter Model WH16NS40 performed perfectly.  I am impressed, and I now have renewed confidence in the old Samsung DVD drive as well.

Vista Speed-display Issue:

On this "old" Vista system the writing speed, estimated time left, and progress bar were all displayed incorrectly for the BD discs.  Specifically, the Windows software reported that it intended to write at 39x, and the ISO Recorder program thought it would write at 351x.  I seriously doubt that either was correct.

For both drives and all discs, I always allowed the write to take place at the maximum displayed speed (i.e. 39x or 351x), not attempting to reduce it.  I have no idea what the actual write speed was for the BD discs, and I did not time any of the operations, but the data files were obviously recorded without error.

First actual Blu-Ray backup:

• Write encrypted and unencrypted files to a Delkin 6x 25GB Archival Gold BD-R.
• Restore that disc back to the desktop as an ISO file.
• Write that ISO to each of three Verbatim 6x 25GB BD-R discs for offsite storage.
• Open and verify some encrypted files on the last of those discs as a final check.

This procedure worked flawlessly, backing up about 12GB, except that one of the Verbatim BD-R discs failed immediately when ISO Recorder 3.1 tried to write to it.  That one disc was discarded with no attempt at diagnosis.  I attribute the failure to the disc, not the drive, and comments on other blogs confirm that such failures can occur.

I believe that this process creates archival Blu-Ray discs which will last at least as long as there are drives capable of reading them.  The Delkin Archival Gold BD-R discs cost me about $10 each in a pack of of 5, and the Verbatim BD-R discs about $1 each in a spindle of 25.  Both are cheaper in larger quantities, and other brands are available.  The LG Owner's Manual recommends Sony and Panasonic discs for BD-R 25GB, but does not say whether Delkin or Verbatim discs were ever tested.

Blu-Ray versus Flash for Archival Storage:

Removable-media technology seems to be moving away from optical discs and toward USB flash drives these days, and video is increasingly downloadable, so Blu-Ray discs may never enjoy the popularity of DVD's.  Flash for archival storage is controversial, however, and it is still at least as expensive as Blu-Ray for similar capacity, so Blu-Ray is a better choice for now.

Automatically Delete Local Shared Objects

Also called "flash cookies," Local Shared Objects" (LSO's) can be used by any web site to store information about your web browsing.  Web developers explain that this capability is used "to enhance your web-browsing experience," but skeptics (like me) know that it can also be used to track a user's browsing in detail and even to share that information with unsavory sites.  LSO's may or may not be cleared when you attempt to clear your browser's cookies.

LSO's may be important to some applications.  Games, for example, may save the current state of the game in LSO's, so that the game can be stopped and then resumed.  However, in my computer usage I do not know of any such beneficial application of LSO's and I prefer to delete them.

Third parties have created extensions for some of the browsers which will delete LSO's automatically.  However, this script will also do it, without installing an extension:

    TITLE "Delete Local Shared Objects"
    SETLOCAL

:: Delete Local Shared Objects in a very heavy-handed way:

    SET SYSPATH="%APPDATA%\Macromedia\Flash Player\macromedia.com\support\flashplayer\sys"
    SET IE2LSO="%APPDATA%\Macromedia\Flash Player\#SharedObjects"
    SET GOOPATH="%LOCALAPPDATA%\Google\Chrome\User Data\Default\Pepper Data\Shockwave Flash\WritableRoot\macromedia.com\support\flashplayer\sys"
    SET GOOGLSO="%LOCALAPPDATA%\Google\Chrome\User Data\Default\Pepper Data\Shockwave Flash\WritableRoot\#SharedObjects"
    
:: Delete LSO's for IE and FireFox, preserving the flash settings:

    XCOPY /y /q /h /r %SYSPATH%\settings.sol %TEMP%\*
    RMDIR /s /q %SYSPATH%
    RMDIR /s /q %IE2LSO%
    XCOPY /y /q /h /r %TEMP%\settings.sol %SYSPATH%\*
    DEL /f /q %TEMP%\settings.sol

:: Delete LSO's for Chrome, nevermind the flash settings (use defaults):

    RMDIR /s /q %GOOPATH%
    RMDIR /s /q %GOOGLSO%

:: Optionally start one of the browsers.  Also possible to specify a "home" URL here:

    START "" "C:\Program Files (x86)\Google\Chrome\Application\chrome.exe"
::  START "" "C:\Program Files (x86)\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe"
::  START "" "C:\Program Files (x86)\Mozilla Firefox\firefox.exe"

::  PAUSE
    ENDLOCAL
    EXIT

Put this code in a script file with a .CMD extension, e.g. DELETELSO.CMD.  Then create a shortcut to that script and set Properties/Shortcut/Run to Minimized.  Put the shortcut on your desktop, or Quick Launch bar, or wherever you want it.  Use it any time you want to clear the LSO's.  It can also be used to start the browser of your choice after it clears the LSO's, see the code.  That's how I use it.  If you have trouble copying the code from this screen, try this instead, making your screen wide.

Note:  This is a VERY HEAVY-HANDED way to approach the problem and could produce unanticipated and hard-to-diagnose results.  Please check for problems with your favorite web-based applications before you forget that you did this and start looking for problems in the wrong places.  This script comes with no warranty, and you can only sue me for the amount that you paid for it.

The above script has been tested and is in use on Vista and Windows 7.  It has not been tested on Windows 8, and it will not work without modification on Windows XP.

I've had this in place for several months now, using it to start Chrome any time I want a browser, and have not identified any problems in my use of the Chrome browser.

Comments, complaints?

Iomega Professional 2 TB External Drive Review

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.

PC Phone Home (Do It Yourself)

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?

NVIDIA Driver Update Error 800705B3

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?

Mozilla Sunbird Calendar Works Great!

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

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

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.

PCPhoneHome Not Recommended

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:

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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!
4. 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

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

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

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.

The Computer Is Built!

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.

Windows Vista Ultimate

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.