Today I did a cray-cray thing: I installed Linux Mint on my Windows PC, giving it 500 GB of space on my primary drive, with Windows getting the rest.
So far it has gone pretty smoothly. I haven’t had to use the terminal once!
I’m not sure why I installed it, I think I just wanted to try something different. It did drive home how much of what you do on a computer is done through a web browser, and it doesn’t really matter much what the OS is behind it.
Supposedly Linux is faster than Windows, or uses less resources or something. I’ll keep trying it for a bit, and if I love it, I will marry it! Well, no. But I’ll keep it. If in the end I feel it offers little over what I’m getting with Windows 11, I’ll probably reclaim the space back to Windows.
For now, though, I’m a triple OS guy on the desktop. Such a nerd. Or idiot. We’ll find out soon enough
EDIT: Here’s a link to the Linux Mint page. It’s like I completely forgot my internet manners!
Tonight, I downloaded all 862 photos I took on Saturday from onedrive.com to my Mac. When I tried to unzip the resultant file, I got an Error 79 message. I know, you’re thinking, “Oh, Error 79! Right. What is that?” It basically means you have a corrupt archive, but go ahead and try a dozen typical troubleshooting steps, anyway, because surely one of these steps will fix it.
NONE OF THEM WILL WORK.
Undaunted, I then set up networking between my Mac and PC (the latter of which hosts the photos locally) and used that to access the files on the Mac as if they had been there all along.
I love technology1I mean, I do. In the olden days with a film camera I wouldn’t have had this issue because I would have taken 36 photos in total, and they would have been picked up in an envelope at a local drugstore a week after dropping the roll of film off. And if the photos all sucked? Too bad. Book another trip and try again! So this is still better, even if it had to fail utterly first..
From the December 1997 issue of The Computer Paper, a free publication that was all over the place in Metro Vancouver way back when:
To me, a rotary phone is ancient tech, but I remember using them. And now we’ll have people who will remember ancient tech as having to buy software to get on the internet.
Actually, I guess that still includes me, because I actually did this myself (I went with iStar).
(BTW, netcom.ca is a broken link now, and www.netcom.ca has an expired certificate that has nothing to do with what the site was back in the days of parachute pants.)
While marvelling over having to install a browser just to get on the internet and then doing so at a maximum speed of 56 Kbps (I only ever have a 33.3 Kbps modem before going to broadband), I am mostly struck by the list of retailers at the bottom of the ad where this software (remember when software came in boxes?) was sold and how most are long-vanished, proof that even tech is not immune to getting steamrolled through evolving times:
Future Shop: Bought out by Best Buy, shuttered for good in 2015
RadioShack: Effectively killed in 2005 when it became The Source and turned into a kind of Best Buy Mini (it’s now owned by Bell, boo hiss)
London Drugs: Still going, but computers were only ever part of their business. Fun Fact: I worked in the computer department of LD from 1999 to 2001. I was there for the launch of Windows Me. We got free copies. I ran it on my home PC for two weeks before going back to Windows 2000.
Staples: Still going, will probably scrape by as long as the paperless office remains a fantasy
Doppler Computer Superstores: I had to check to see if they actually had more than one store (the one I know was in Vancouver, across from a Wendy’s that’s still there) and I think this was the only one. The building is long gone now, but you can see it in this reddit post. I bought my first two CD-ROM games there: Myst (of course) and a disc of shovelware games. I remember the spinning racks of shovelware. You might find a low budget gem if you looked long enough, but it was mostly junk. Still, CD-ROMs seemed very futuristic in the early 90s.
Computer City Canada: There were seven Computer city stores in Canada and more than 60 in the U.S. before the entire chain went kaput in 1998. Fun Fact: I worked at the brand-new Coquitlam store during the launch of Windows 95, which was a very big deal at the time. We had two Compaq PCs set up running Win95, one with 4 MB of ram and the other with 8 MB, to show how much better Windows 95 was with more memory (some things never change).
And while I’m waxing nostalgic, here are some of the other stores I used to haunt regularly when shopping for computers or software that are all gone now, and mostly forgotten:
CompuCentre: These were in malls, and they quietly vanished without me even noticing. I’d buy the odd game here.
ATIC Computers: Still around, actually! I bought multiple PCs from them in the 90s. They were cheap, which was the main appeal, as I was poor.
Wizard Computers: I mainly went here to get software for my Atari ST. I remember buying Dungeon Master at this store, which was on Fraser Street.
MicroConcept Systems: Like ATIC, but not as cheap. Ran huge, multipage ads, had a business division, then shuttered.
NCIX: Ho ho, the store that spawned Linus Tech Tips and is probably most famous (or infamous) for going bankrupt, then auctioning off a bunch of equipment that still contained user data. Oops. I bought stuff here for years and remember the early days of Linus making videos for them.
Egghead Software: I bought OS/2 at the Broadway store. I barely remember running OS/2. I was a Windows guy, ultimately.
Software Superstore: True to its name, this massive store in Richmond sold software for every major platform (this was when there were more than two). My biggest single-day haul was picking up both Populous and SimCity for my Amiga 500. At the time, this would have cost $100 and would be apparently about $180 today. Considering some games are now costing $90, it seems both weird that prices have pretty much stayed the same and also that $90 feels like way too much to pay for a single computer game (thank you, Steam sales and indie devs!)
On one hand, I miss picking up software from these stores, because there is something about getting something tangible, something physical, that can’t be replicated with downloads. But there’s no denying the way software works now is way better. Still, it would be fun to zap back in time for a day and be able to check all these places out circa 1992.
Maybe pen and paper would be better–no crashes, no bugs! Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com
Question: Do I find to-do apps helpful? Answer: Yes!
Question: Do I need to use two to-do apps? Answer: No!
Question: Why am I using two to-do apps? Answer: Because I am dumb?
I’ve been using TickTick since late 2021 and started using Microsoft To Do last year. To Do has the advantage of being completely free. TickTick does have a free version (I’ve been using it since fall 2023 after previously paying for a year).
Ideally, I just pick the one that works better for me and chuck the other. Easy-peasy!
My task list needs are not complex, so both work well to cover what I require. In the end, I think, as weird and superficial as it may seem, the best way to pick is aesthetics and UI.
Which app looks better?
To Do offers a variety of backgrounds per list, helping to make each list visually distinctive.
TickTick offers better-looking text, square checkboxes instead of circles, uses colour effectively, and lets you apply labels to tasks. The free version doesn’t let you use the calendar view (which I never ended up using), and seems to offer some limits on the mobile version, which I also don’t use.
So TickTick it is. I’ll try using just it for the next few weeks and see how it goes. If I switch again, I promise to feel both bad and dumb.
On Friday, March 31, 2023 the move streak on my Apple Watch ended at 586 days.
I ended it deliberately.
I not only had a 586-day move streak, I’d also completed my stand and exercise goals for that same 586 days. I admit I flinched a little at ending the streak–I even strapped the watch on my left wrist when I got up on Saturday morning. But after about an hour I took it off, put on my Garmin Forerunner 255 and two days later, I’m still wearing the Garmin.
Why?
Ostensibly, it was to allow the Garmin to monitor my vitals all day, so I could get more accurate results and better health-related recommendations. But as that first Apple Watch-free day went by, and I realized the streak was really over (Apple doesn’t support anything like a missed-day feature to get you back on track if you miss one) I came to the realization that, in a way, the Apple Watch was controlling me.
I was letting it do this, of course. I constantly glanced at it to check the outside temperature. Why? I don’t know. I apparently have a weird need to always know the temperature (it’s really only important when I’m about to go out on a run and want to know how to dress). I was also in the thrall of those fitness rings (I had the ring complication on my watch face), repeatedly checking it, making sure I stood every hour, making sure I got all 30 exercise minutes, even if it meant hopping on the treadmill in the middle of the evening after a lazy day, or going for a walk to burn enough calories to get my move goal.
And you may be thinking this is good. I’m being gently pushed to do healthy things!
But it started to become obsessive. And after I deliberately called the whole thing off, it struck me how rigid the Apple Watch is when it comes to physical health. You MUST exercise every day. You MUST burn x number of calories (move), or you lose your streak. Again, you might think this is fine (doginburninghouse.jpg), but compare this to the Garmin watch, which has a morning report feature. It analyzes your current condition, looks at your previous workouts, and sometimes it recommends…a rest day! It’s a much more nuanced approach. It’s a better approach. Apple’s gamification left me feeling put off. The Garmin watch gives me all the stats, but leaves me free to judge (or not) myself.
I miss the bright AMOLED display of the Apple Watch. It’s a terrific piece of tech and a great convenience for saving you from pulling out your phone just to check a notification. But for general fitness, I feel better having moved away from it. For now, at least.
Plus, the Garmin watch still lets me check the outdoor temperature.
I’m about to do something I’ve never done before: Defend Bing Maps. And Apple Maps.
Background
In 2017 the Royal Columbian Hospital, which I live next door to, began Phase 1 of a huge redevelopment project. This first phase was to replace an outdoor parking lot with a new Mental Health and Substance Use Wellness Centre. Or what they used to call insane asylums/funny farms, and drug addiction rehab.
Anyway, the building was completed in late 2019 and opened in early 2020.
In 2021, the next phase began, the construction of a new acute care tower that is monstrously huge compared to the existing tower. This is due to be complete in 2025, with the building exterior slated to be done by the end of 2023.
The maps compared
This is the Google Maps satellite view of the area.
As you can see, Google Maps:
Still shows the parking lot that hasn’t existed since 2017 (lower right corner)
Still shows the Sherbrooke Centre (upper left), electrical building and shipping/receiving area of RCH (centre top), which are now gone, the former being demolished more than a year ago.
And the Bing Maps view below.
Bing Maps:
Correctly show the new Mental Health building (lower right)
Correctly shows the Phase 2 acute tower construction underway (centre top)
Correctly shows the temporary shipping/receiving building in the northwest corner (top left)
The only issue here is it’s a bit out of date, as the electrical and shipping/receiving buildings are still present and have since been demolished–though to be fair, the last of the old shipping/receiving building only came down in the last month.
Bonus round: Apple Maps
If you happen to have an Apple device, you can also use Apple Maps. The screenshot above is from the Mac version. It:
Correctly show the new Mental Health building (lower right)
Correctly shows the Phase 2 acute tower construction underway (centre top)
Correctly shows the temporary shipping/receiving building in the northwest corner (top left)
Bonus: Shows further progress in the construction, including only the corner remaining of the old shipping/receiving building, which was only demolished a month ago (March 2023)
Gallery showing all three maps views:
Google MapsBing MapsApple Maps
Conclusion:
For reasons unknown, Google considers New Westminster to be too piddly to warrant anything resembling an accurate satellite view, while Microsoft doesn’t. Now, Google does have a street view of the same area, and it is as recent as May 2022, so just under a year old. Microsoft only has the equivalent for parts of Vancouver, and nothing for New Westminster. Apples does have a street view equivalent of Google, but it appears to be older than Google’s.
Winners:
Apple for most current satellite view
Google for most current street view
Runner-up:
Microsoft for having a reasonably current satellite view
Losers:
Google for having a hideously old satellite view
Microsoft for not having any street view
Overall, I’d have to give Apple the edge, as satellite view is the most important (IMO) and their street view a) exists and b) is reasonably up-to-date. If you don’t need a street view, Microsoft is a solid second place choice. Google needs to divert some of its ad billions to updating its imagery more than once per decade.
From the Galaxy Brain newsletter, on companies like Meta (Facebook) and Twitter charging for verification:
I don’t know if Charlie Warzel knew where the preview of his newsletter would end and where the pitch would begin, but it couldn’t have been placed more perfectly for maximum ironic effect.
This is apparently a parallel dimension. OK! Photo by Mo Eid on Pexels.com
Years ago, I wrote an (unfinished) novel for National Novel Writing Month that involved a parallel dimension. I never had a good title for it, and used the clunky working title “Start of the World”, which sounds a bit like a bad translation. Then I thought, why use my brain to come up with a title when I can ask an AI chat program to do the mental lifting for me?
It turns out the answer is because it comes up with incredibly banal titles. Or maybe my prompts suck. In any case, I asked ChatGPT for 10 titles and #10 would likely to result in a call from Disney’s legal department1Actually, tittles can’t be trademarked, but try telling that to Disney less than a year after the second Dr. Strange movie..
Give me 10 titles for horror novels that involve alternate dimensions
“The Shadow Realm”
“Parallel Terrors”
“Through the Void”
“Twisted Realities”
“The Other Side”
“Gateway to Horror”
“The Fourth Dimension of Fear”
“Infinite Nightmares”
“Beyond the Veil”
“The Multiverse of Madness”
These are all so bland, I wouldn’t use any of them. Yes, even the one Disney actually used. Undaunted, I asked ChatGPT to give me 10 more:
“Dimensional Descent”
“The Darker Side”
“Alternate Realms of Horror”
“The Otherworldly Terror”
“Twilight Dimensions”
“The Doppelgänger Effect”
“The Abyssal Gate”
“The Haunted Multiverse”
“The Sinister Parallel”
“Terror from Beyond”
A few of these are not horrible, but they’re all still incredibly generic. I especially like the on-the-nose “Alternate Realms of Horror.” That’s a novel name that is very much “what it says on the tin.” Maybe the prompt itself was too generic. I tweaked it a little. Probably too little.
Give me 10 titles for a modern horror novel featuring parallel dimensions
“Interdimensional Nightmare”
“The Multiverse Horror”
“Parallel Panic”
“Beyond Our World”
“The Alternate Abyss”
“Dread Dimensions”
“The Parallel Paradox”
“The Multidimensional Menace”
“The Terrifying Twinverse”
“Portals of Horror”
These are also pretty uninspired, but I like the alliteration it leaned into, especially for “Parallel Panic” and “Dread Dimensions”. “The Terrifying Twinverse” made me laugh, so there’s that.
I’ll try this again at some point when I can think of a prompt that will at least produce bizarre results, if nothing else.
The article and comments are both worth reading, but I adore the delighted stock photo man having the Android mascot peering over his shoulder at what he’s doing on his phone. It perfectly fits what the story is about and endlessly amuses me. Well done, Ars Technica creative director Aurich Lawson.
Or I could go back to pen and paper! Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com
I read an article on Medium about Todoist in which the author lamented certain issues with the app. Todoist is one of the to-do apps I tested and ultimately dropped, though reliability was never an issue for me.
However, the comments on the article happened to mention another to-do app as an alternative, a new one I’d never heard of before called Twos. It’s developed by a guy named Parker and instead of a subscription for premium features, you just buy the ones you want for a flat fee (currently $2 US each).
Now, I’d settled on Microsoft To Do, but recently started using TickTick again. I do not need to test drive another to-do app. And yet here I am, doing just that!
I’ve given myself a week to evaluate it and see how it stacks up against the others. My initial impressions are favourable, though To Do still holds the crown as prettiest to-do app.
Literally the only image that comes up when I search “spam” on Pexels. Photo by Moose Photos on Pexels.com
After getting nothing but spam accounts endlessly registering on this site (but unable to post because the first post any account makes must be manually approved by me before it can post freely afterwards), I shut off registrations altogether. My blog–this site–officially became me shouting into the void, with people unable to directly comment or cajole.
Today, I ran an experiment: I once again allowed user registrations.
Within moments, a new user had registered: clintonvanderpoo
Yeah.
I mean, I kind of like how the name is sort of a portmanteau as imagined by a spambot, but still, having a poo name show up within seconds of opening registrations, while unsurprising, was a tiny bit depressing. I’m not exactly lamenting the old days of Internet Explorer 6 circa 2001, but the web has certainly changed since then. In most ways, for the better.
