Amazon are Fanstasitc, Highly Recommend them

I was thinking about my last post and that I spend a good amount of time "complaining" on this blog. I realised that I don't enough praise whats good.

Amazon are GREAT the provide an excellent service, they are safe, efficient and really seem to listen to customer feedback. They don't overly spam me with advertisements and they have always delivered on the goods (and on the rare occasion I have had problems I've always been left satisifed with the resolution).

I highly recommend if you have shopping to do, check out Amazon's website.

I'm sure though for most people this is really apparent, but I just wanted to take the chance to praise something good.

Browser Features Override from Web Scripting

I want to make everyone aware of this dangerous ability provided within Microsoft Internet Explorer (and possibly other browsers) with a correctly coded browser script it is possible to "hijack" default browser shortcut keys (such as CTRL-N (New Window). CTRL-F (Find) and replace the standard behaviour with a scripted behaviour).

THIS IS A HUGE SECURITY LOOP HOLE.

Imagine, you search on Google and alight upon a likely looking search result. You goto that page and then decide you want to move to a new browser window, you hit CTRL-N and, unknown to you, the script on the page intercepts your request and opens up a new window in its own script injecting its scripted functionality into the new window (perfectly possible). Now, unless your very familiar with the working of your browser your not aware your still in a page controlled by scripts from your previous page. It would be potentially dangerous to proceed to login to your email.

It admittedly would be hard to make an "exploit" which would not be noticable by someone familiar with browser technology but easy to trick the non-technical user.

This kind of irresponsibility I find really annoying. Having these kinds of features. An external source should not be allowed to override innate features of your browser (for example, although pages should have the ability to know when they are closed. They should not have final executive control of wether the close can be allowed, the page should mearly be notified of proceedings and proceed to obey the user.

However, theres money in taking control away from the end user and theres loss in fixing it.

Sick to death of Browser Whores (Wars)

Summary:

"I'm Sick & Tired of companies using my internet connection like they own my computer and all its softwares and like I am just an inconvinience getting in the way of them continuing as they wish!"


Let me detail a typical day of bad "free" or "supplied" software.

I launch Internet Explorer, which on the whole isn't a bad little browser but a bit target for viruses and malware. It works well for me and is pretty steady. Though, every now and then, I wonder if I want something better (especially when I try to zoom a JavaScript and get junk).

So, I fire up Opera and the whole whoring begins. First of all, without any permission from me or even notifying me it starts downloading something. Its probably an update, but F**K OFF ITS MY SYSTEM ASK >.<. So basicly, Opera could be the best damn browser ever but I would never use the f**king thing. Except blocked to hell and sandboxed in an emergency situation. This is just a single example, other examples are that it connects to unrelated web addresses when I goto a website on the intranet (in a "triggered" behaviour). I don't know or care what its doing. It might even be in my interest, all I care is theres another internet connection I have not asked for or agreed to (agreeing to allow the product to do what it likes in the licence agreement is NOT gaining permission, its avoiding litigation).

This is the problem these days, browser / internet companies feel its "acceptable" even "profitable" to bypass the customers consent portion of the proceedings and go ahead and do whatever THEY want (I can imagine them saying "oh right.. yes.. erm.. now you mention it erm.. yes.. we did it FOR you.. yes.. we know best. Just be a good consumer and continue to download our crap and support our advertising revenues theres a good customer.").

What they want is money and they don't really seem to care all that much how they get it within the bounds of "not spooking the cow" (eg. cash cow) which is the customer.

I'm sick and tired of this crap. Online bussiness built on "what can we get away with" instead of "what can we provide, and how should we charge for it". 

I do admit though its the actions of consumers that have them: 1) getting away with such alot and 2) needing to "get away with it" in the first place as some people treat the web like a gianormous free meal, 3) Undermine decent business by leaving a perfectly good cost effective solution because someone in a web back ally goes "pssst, I can get you that free mate".

I am not anti-free software. I do like my rights and things being my choice.

Mind you, some companies that have got it right on the above can be irritating in other ways. I really like Comodo, I used their Internet Security Solution free version whilst I was between positions and when I was back in work I wanted to buy their full product and support their activities. They couldn't process my debit card and ended up pretty much rejecting my order (not tried to work it out. Just rejected my order. This was on a card I used a day later to buy something 3 times the price with no problems at all from Amazon).

Oh yes! Whilst I'm here Amazon are fantastic. Amazon have continually impressed and proved to be very considerate. Pity they don't provide a browser.

Microsoft Closing up the operating system API

In the "growth" days of Microsoft, before it was the corporate giant it is today, Microsoft where very keen to get anyone and everyone using their software. One way in which they did this was by providing robust and well supported API's opening up the operating systems to developers and allowing easy extension of existing controls.

Over the last 5 years, Microsoft have been peice by peice clawing back the control of their operating system by slowly and subversively closing off UI accessiblity. This is not an idle claim, review the following examples:

• Desktop Window Manager (Closed / Private API for all but TRIVIAL operations)
• Windows Presentation Foundation (Closed / Private API unless you use / buy their .NET development products. See DirectUIHWND control which is replacing many controls in Windows 7).
• Digital Rights Management (See IP6, Windows Media Player etc)

Now, of course, Microsoft want to still keep customers but at the same time ensure that the customer requires a continuing spend with their organisation. What has changed is they no longer want to keep customers by "giving them a bargin / open development platform". Not happy with the simple continuing spend of O/S upgrades and new technology they want to lock third parties out of certain areas of the operating system (leading to a monopoly control within their own solution with minority access given to the wider development community).

What they are seeking to do, is to tie customers to their product and force customers to use them, and them alone (though this is possibly the goal of most all big business sadly).

Abode I'm sure are partly to blame for this change in behavior. Adobe proved with Flash how a third party could "tie up" a market sector and "force" businesses to pay for their particular solution. The have done this repeatedly, PDF format being another "lock in" technology. Microsoft have tried to "reclaim" this sector with their "Silverlight" like for like solution but its just changing which company your locked into.

Whilst I appriciate all business needs to earn revenue to survive, business which feels it must "shackle" their customers to their solution is at best anti-competitive. Microsoft used to operate based on "incentive", that is, buy in to our solution we offer the best most flexible / simple (best?) solution. They used to do this well.

However, their direction right now is all about tying up the customer. A customer forced to stick to a provider due to artificialy concocted "reasons" (with an engineered technical reason) is not getting the best for their investment (since they no longer have the "power" of choice being locked to a single solution for reasons other than, superior service or reduced costs).

SHAME ON YOU MICROSOFT.

If you really do care about your customers, you will do the following:

1. Provide FULL documented low level API access to WPF and DWM.
2. Find OTHER alternative ways to protect your revenue streams. Ones which are based on serving the customer.

Finally don't just do this for the functions you have earmarked as "low profit" or "last generation". Expose and document the whole API (even if its only a one liner on a blog). Sure, you might mark some functions as not being supported yet or as volatile as sensible.

I susspect noone is listening.

I bought into Microsoft as was, I dislike the direction. Google sometimes seem to be inching in similar directions but so far they seem to have tempered this practice and kept it to an acceptable minimum.

A damn good website!

Still in love with my best friend, still "like a brother" to her. I got absolutely "fed up" today because she told me how I was "acting strange" and "scaring her away" which seemed to be based on me being "clingy". I live a good distance from her and she is sharing a flat with her ex-boyfriend (and not as "ex" as I would wish) so of course I am going to get "clingy" *sigh*. So, I searched for some random "fed up" search terms and came to here:

Straight Talking advice on Romance

I have to say that right now I very much love this straight talking site. Its just tempered nicely between advice and "wake up fool".

I am not actually sure I have any ideas to change my situation but I do feel I might understand it alot better.

I just hope the "content replicators" don't "ruin" it by whoring it about with advertisements.

Too many McGyver's not enough Engineers

I like McGyver's they get things done, they do whatever needs to be done in whatever way it can be done given the resources available and sometimes the solutions are just damn genius! Sometimes.

Mostly though, they are short sighted work arounds leaving increasingly bigger messes for Mc Gyver's boss's to sort out.. unfortunately, they are also trying to be McGyver.

We do need McGyver's in this world. The problem is, most all people are being McGyver's.

We need more people to be patient and consiencious observers of life who test their ideas and come up with theories. People who look forward to whats comming next and design for the future and to be built upon, not just always working in the space of Now.

Now is important (for sure), Now is when things get done, now is when things happen! It seems people today equate "progress" with "happening now". That is to say: people don't want to plan things out today and build tommorow, they want to start work right away. This is possibly an admirable trate, but without planning and understanding whats being built and its need we soon end up in the "then" needing a lot more "now".

Society does not support people to work for a better future, but it does support those in the now.

We need a mix, we need to encourage the genius McGyver's into places where they can help the world but managed so they don't just put off a bigger disaster in the future. We need to somehow train the other MyGyver's (the ones building a poor solution in the now for an even worse problem in the future) to be something "other" but which fits with their ability.

Now, my observation. The reason there are so many McGyver's is that business and government rewards that type of behavior and rewards genius and fool hardy with some level of equality (as much as anything is equal in societies built from a history of slavery and opression).

Whats needed is a clear reward, placed in the future, for following a Engineering path. One that a person can see building day by day and one which they can observe the conciquences of returning to be a McGyver.

I'd like to see more "scolarships", more "government funding" in such a way that it makes sense to do things right (not just to do things "profitable" which is certainly not equating to right). Actually when it comes down to it, this is the core of the problem... "profit" in terms of money does not equal "profit" in terms of society and people. It infact means the opposite.

Lets make "profit" in money to "profit" society.

Do No Reply type emails should be banned.

With the ever rising tide of "phishing" scams why is it that major players are still using "do not reply" email addresses. It seems to me this is basicly saying f**k off to the consumer, your not important enough for us to listen to you but we still want you f**king money now hand it over (even though its worded in the nicest tones possible).

I am making a policy. I am going to generally not deal with any company which emails me anything in the form of a "do not reply to this address" email (that is, anyone I'm not already dealing with *sigh*. I guess you can't change some things).

Say NO to do not reply!