Not to mention the OEM copy of XP MCE sitting in a draw that I’d lost track of (I think the system is now using a regular XP Pro license) or the miscellaneous systems that have affixed OEM licenses but for which there is no (misplaced) physical media.

Accordingly, if I want to obey the OEM sticker directive, I’ve got to download a CD ISO from a torrent site (because I don’t fork out for MSDN). But MSDN is increasingly attractive; it effectively offers the desired outcome. Unlicensed, unactivated systems that work perfectly well on a subscription basis… sure, subs suck, but whenever they stop their XP activation servers we’re all going to be screwed, anyway, so it hardly matters.

Meanwhile, I’m sitting here making a list (on paper, which I’ll store with the physical media) of all the licenses in use, and roughly where. Thanks to the unauthorised rebuilding of systems that I own and have built from scratch so often (resourcefulness in anyone else’s book, evil work of a pirate to the draconian OEM overlords) whatever descriptions are attached to aforementioned systems is likely to be rendered completely untrue in eighteen months time when I once again get around to the wholesale slaughter rebuilding of them all. Intermittent reinstalls will probably happen, too, unless I’m driven so insane by the inability to discern one license from another I end up, as I do now, simply taking out the lot and shooting them all a new install.

To Microsoft: whatthehelldoyouwantmetodo? I am so not forking out the at-least-$2000 you would have me pay for retail Vista licenses for this lot–it’s that much because Vista Business retail licenses come in at a delicious $500 each. Say it with me: hell no. I’ve heard from a reliable system builder source that you’ve been telling them that the new OEM rules work in their favour as it’ll bring them more business. Sure, but it’s pretty crappy business if I don’t say so myself. I have absolutely no interest in becoming a Microsoft certified system anything, simply because it’d mean dealing with your crap in a professional capacity, and I deal with it quite enough in a professional capacity trying to do other sorts of development as my job, thankyouverymuch. I’m not going to pay a Microsoft tax twice (first for certification, second for individual licenses) just because you claim that your crappy system builders do it better than DIY-ers.

Whenever the time comes around to upgrade to Vista, if I ever deem it worthwhile on the other home desktops here not for any commercial pursuits (still running Business in response to the crippling networking capabilities of all Home line products), I’ll be making a trip to my local store, who, for what it’s worth, don’t even offer retail Vista Business for sale on their website, but mention the OEM edition an awful lot, with the token “(only sold w/ new system or to a system builder)” tacked on to placate anyone from officialdom who comes looking. I haven’t had the pleasure of breaking OEM conditions-of-sale (that’s all they are… are such things even legally enforcable in this country?!) just yet, but have no doubts there will be ample places that want to take my money when and/or if I do.

I’m actually in the position of having one spare XP license (two if you count XP MCE) at this point, but am sorely tempted to install Linux on at least one of the three systems I’m taking care of tonight just to avoid having to deal with these mediocre attempts at extortion in the future. It’s not morally defensible to refuse to acknowledge system builders as “original equipment manufacturers” when they are, in fact, conducting exactly the same tasks as their so-called ‘certified’ builders. Clearly, it’s not being pursued for retail sale: the only retail products that belong in an operating system product mix are upgrades for people who enjoy having computers that don’t work (i.e. most of the population, anyway).

It’s an indictment upon the difficulty of upgrading/reinstalling Windows that so few people take this route: quite frankly, the products don’t work. Everyone who is unqualified (in the literal, capable-of sense, not some arbitrary didacourse, paidMSsomemoney sense) to build a computer, in my experience, is unqualified to successfully install Windows independently. Even if they succeed at booting from a CD, negotiating the installer prompts (admittedly better than they used to be), manually answering questions about daylight savings and other such things that should long since have been dealt with automagically (c’mon, we’ve had GeoIP products for what, ten years now? Longer?), or at least correct from the outset (two HP machines last week were insistent the default timezone should be Singapore. They shipped in Australia. Is it so bloody hard to pick a populous east-coast state zone as the default?), chances of users correctly installing things such as drivers in post-install stages are slim to none. Nearly all phone a tech-saavy friend (I know no-one who’s ever called the Microsoft support line for OS installs… more should, but few do).

The point stands: retail licenses are for newbies, OEM licenses should be accessible to everyone who doesn’t give a crap about shiny packaging, manuals, and shooting their wallet to bits.

Here endeth the rant.

Of course, if they’d got it right from the start, I’d be running Vista already… as it stands, I’m not too likely to drop $200 on something that runs slower than XP, supports less hardware, has arguably-worse power management, and makes the occasionally excruciating UI mistake (most notable is the automatic replacement of the “sleep” button with “install updates and shutdown” where updates are available). Really, the main reason I’d switch is to have consistent UI between Office 2007 and the rest of the system (instead of the presently absurd Vista-ish (but not actually Vista) UI available on XP), newer hardware (insofar as XP isn’t available), and a paid-for upgrade path… I’d rather fork out my money now and trust that another 3 service packs are coming, rather than pay full price for an OS and then pay full price again, and again. I acknowledge this is partially a psychological thing stemming from my opposition for paying for point-releases, but even so… many of the alleged ‘upgrades’ in OS X are thoroughly trivial.

There are other hardware projects I’ve got cooking, yes, but none so immediately useful or easily implemented. The great thing about this is the hard work (read:software) is essentially done already. At worst I’d need to hack some kind of interface driver, but, really, it’s pretty much functional as is. And, because it’s already been ported to Linux and BSD, it’s really trivial to build a barebones system upon which to base it all. Preserving keyboard + mouse input is a totally necessary design parameter anyway (for reasons of network stream integration, titling(!!), etc.) so hardware can be periodically switched on as it becomes available. I’m tempted to pull apart my languishing Athlon XP, but it feels too powerful for the task (not even kidding… this thing is lightning fast) and I wouldn’t know what to do with the rest of the RAM in it. My biggest concern is tracking down capture hardware that’s Linux or BSD friendly. Ideally there’ll be a security capture card that does PAL at full frame rate and has 4 inputs, because essentially that means it’d be trivial to add a few extra cards and, all of a sudden, it’s quite foreseeable to have a 12 input vision mixer that will key and title away til the cows come home.

One concern I have is that the mixer component only takes two sources… which is much the same as on any hardware mixers I’ve used (two buses: select source on A + B bus, mix buses), but it feels really inflexible. I’d chain them together but think that might necessitate extra genlocking time and increase overall latency. I can’t actually think of a usage scenario for this one, though, so it’s not a big deal. Because keying exists independently of mixing it’s not a concern of 2 sources + keyed source, and that’d be the main situation in which such a thing would be at all necessary.

The other cool thing about this is you can mix digital and analogue sources with impunity. Need SDI? Sure, get an SDI capture card and add an input source. Firewire? Done deal. Same goes for output: because you can output via FFMPEG, your “vision mixer” potentially also encodes an IP-distributable stream simultaneously with realtime output to a monitor.

This is an inestimably cool piece of software, but the most brilliant thing is it isn’t really anything new. I discovered it because I was looking for EffecTV which I’d last used in a production context over 12 months ago… Gephex uses existing open-source filters and processing solutions and just provides an excellent means of chaining them together. You can create some excellent motion artwork with it, but the most exciting thing for me is that it enables use of cheap and disposable x86 hardware in place of hideously expensive and proprietary (read: more expensive, but also inextensible and not particularly flexible) solutions that the ‘pros’ use.

Increasingly I’m disinterested in ‘professionalism’ about this sort of thing, because that’s way out of my price league and, to be honest, the most common place I wish this technology were applied is in church and Christian event contexts, where (even if there is money) no-one is interested in effective communication through applied technology. So we continue to try and push forward with no money and a bunch of innovative and irreverent (to the pros) solutions.

Ultimately, it’s about achieving excellence in the quality and nature of the work done to share the gospel and build up the body of those who follow Jesus — but excellence can be attained without even a smattering of ‘professionalism’.

That said, I’d still love to own an MX-70.

When they announced it a whole bunch of people were getting a little grumpy about how it didn’t work with Windows update — a few of the same were getting grumpy about how Microsoft didn’t release a version for Linux, but no further comment required on them… you’re all of an intelligent enough bunch to realise aforementioned people fall into the category of … well, you know.

Obviously, it’s no big deal — the whole point of that image it is that it hasn’t (and won’t) update, allowing you to keep testing on older platforms.

But then, this afternoon, I go and shut down the image (I know, suspending is faster, but I was trying something different) and all of a sudden it goes and says it’s installing 7 updates before it shuts down. In usual XP fashion.

So what gives?

I found myself yelling at it “you’re not even a real operating system! Don’t you get it? You’re going to be used and trashed in a couple of months anyway! Why do you care if you’re virus and spyware ridden by the end of it?” Possibly a strange response, but there we go.

Got me thinking about (human) clones, actually. Much musing to be had there. Maybe I’m just strange…

So I’ll say it now: Loading JavaScript on a prominent page that builds a link to a non-existent resource is a BadThing. Think ridiculous numbers of 404 errors and partially-defeated statistics tracking! Having said that, I managed to manual work out JS/no-JS support to be even lower than it is on this site — it’s 1.5% non-JS here — which is impressively (pleasingly) low!

AWstats is fun to run on many-gigabyte logfiles… just not multiple times once you’ve realised “Oh, I screwed up and no amount of grepping can save me now!” (First time I’ve absolutely required my dual-boot Ubuntu/XP install at work… because it’s lots easier to watch load on a computer you’re physically on rather than by SSH, and because multiple-GB-logfiles aren’t fun to transfer across networks!)

Reasons for not wanting to run as Administrator vary (for me, it’s mostly a background in Unix that has educated me thus), but no longer, thanks to a helpful reader, do we have to suffer under the regime of HP’s drivers and automated installation that renders printing as any user but administrator impossible. (Previously elucidated here).

Well, someone had to solve the problem eventually (and, knowing the way things go around here, it wasn’t going to be HP’s notoriously pathetic driver/software team), and that someone was Danlio in the comments of my review! Wooo!

A slightly edited version follows:

Just open the printer settings. (Right click on “HP Photosmart 2610 series, then click “Properties”).
Click on the “Ports” tab.
“Add port”
Select “HP Standard TCP/IP port”.
Click “Next”.
Enter the correct IP address of your HP 2610 printer. The other field will automatically fill — this does not need to be changed. Click “Next”.

There you go!

Now you can print logged in with any user account (not only administrators).

Woo! I don’t think a Windows test page has ever looked so beautiful ;-)

I’m pretty sure they were rebadging Sony monitors even when this thing was made, so it’s probable there’s another model number that goes with it, but perhaps not. Basically, I used it because it went with the computer and, at that time, we didn’t have any other spare monitors of any decent quality.

This screen is okay in terms of resolutions/refresh rate support (it does 1024x768 at 85Hz, which is very good for a cheap vendor from the late 90s — and yes, it was cheap — this is a Celeron 400MHz system, though we’ve pumped up the RAM from probably 64MB or (optimistically) 128MB to 256MB to make it usable with XP. It is, however, rather blurry.

Or, was. We acquired it just as we moved into this house, so I didn’t really have a lot of time to spend just setting it up properly… I was trying to get, you know, four other computers and the network setup, whilst working out how to configure the phone system… oh, yeah, and I had to move into my bedroom at some point, too (in actual fact I still haven’t unpacked all the boxes… there is one or two remaining but I know what’s in them and they’re being stored in the bottom of a wardrobe, so that’s okay!)… basically I threw it on the desk and plugged it in, formatted and installed XP, made some trivial administrative software changes (probably via RDC because hot desking is, like, so much easier than turning around and using another KVM setup!), and promptly forgot about it.

So today I actually had to use it for a bit and its blurriness irritated me enough to bother doing something about it. It’s got one of those doors that covers controls and pops open to reveal a rotary switch that doubles as a button, so I did that seeing if there was anything I could do to fix it in there. Alas, no software focus utilities to be found (must poke a screwdriver in the back of it sometime), though, importantly, there are both Vertical and Horizontal Moire adjustments available under the More option from the core menu. This monitor had a fairly significant moire problem (I’m not sure if I’m using that term correctly, though I know the problem was with that), so playing with these settings for a bit made its lots more pleasant to use.

Admittedly, its focus towards the edges drops off fairly significantly, but that could be an unavoidable limitation of the device (that is, it’s a curved CRT display… so the focal length physically does change fairly significantly).

You can see the printer in that photo — it’s a fair bit smaller than the G85 was (before you go searching — because I know you actually care that much — I’ve only ever fleetingly mentioned that printer on here before. A quick search just turns up a whinge about drivers, from last July.), probably between two thirds and a half its size (in terms of bulk — it has an equivalent footprint, or maybe a bit shallower).

So what’s this thing do? Printing, scanning, faxing. Duh. It also has PictBridge stuff (which I doubt I’ll ever use), memory card slots, an LCD display, and network support.

I’m still uncertain which of the last two is cooler, but I’m leaning towards the network support.

The main control panel is very well planned out, and highly usable.

The LCD screen tilts backwards and forwards (into a recessed area within the printer), and is backlit.

Its viewing angle is pretty mediocre, but it’s good when you’ve got your head in the right place/adjusted the screen properly.

Now that I’ve got the trivial stuff out of the way with lots of pictures, time for some more exciting and slightly-less trivial stuff with even more pictures! The network feature!

Yeah, okay. We’ve all seen a plugged in network cable before. Probably even seen a network cable plugged into a printer before. So why’s this special? To quote Elizabeth Barrett Browning, “Let me count the ways” — okay, so I’m not quite in love with it. (Thank goodness).

For one, this is a dirt cheap consumer printer. Well, probably a little more than dirt cheap. But squarely in the home/SOHO market, so the network support (it does USB, too) is out of the ordinary.

Not only is the presence of a port out of the ordinary, the software side of things is also surprising. HP, of course, have their own “JetDirect” network printer protocol. Which isn’t IPP, and isn’t some crappy Windows share. It’s supported on Unix systems thanks to HP’s co-operation with the open-source community, and on Windows/Mac systems, HP bundle software to deliver this functionality.

Still nothing special? Okay. How about this.

You can not only use this network printer to print, but also to file share and network scan.

Yeah. Cool, huh? Whenever you plug a card into the memory slots, it will appear as a network drive on Windows systems with the HP software installed (with one caveat, but I’ll get to that soon). I’m not sure what happens with Mac computers, but I imagine it’d be similar — we haven’t got any of those here for me to test with, a situation I’m planning to remedy in the near future.

Whilst on the topic of those memory slots, it’s also possible to scan on the device direct to the card, so you don’t even need a computer with drivers for scanning. Also, much in the same way as many consumer scanners have a button you can press to activate scanning on your computer, this device similarly allows you to do that — only you’re given a choice of which network-connected computer to send the scan to!

Scanning needn’t be so complicated, however. The first thing I did after installing cartridges was to setup the network inteface manually to ensure the device had a static IP and couldn’t get lost on the network. In my usual compulsive geek-investigator state, I scanned the ports of that IP (I picked 192.168.0.4, the lowest static IP still available on my network — we also use 192.168.0.101 to 200 for DHCP, but that’s a story for some other time) and discovered that in addition to the JetDirect and Windows file sharing ports, there was also port 80 open.

Score! I thought, as I hadn’t expected anything so civilised as a web interface on this thing.

I loaded up the page, and was greeted with this:

It gives miscellaneous information about the status of the printer, along with links to various other functions. The most important of which is “Scan”.

Clicking through to “Scan”, I’m greeted with a simple enough screen that offers a choice of image type, and document size. One thing that does suck here is that A4 isn’t an option for the document size, so it’s impossible to scan the full size of the plate with the web interface. Standard desktop scanning software has no problems, this is just a usability flaw in the web interface.

You can preview your scan in this page, as shown in this screenshot…

…before progressing to the actual scan.

This next bit had me confused. At first, I thought it just didn’t like Firefox — so I walked over to a Windows computer and gave Internet Explorer a go. Same problem. It said the scan had completed successfully, but I couldn’t see anything. Internet Explorer, however, offered a more intrusive explanation of what had happened, proudly proclaiming that it had blocked a popup window.

So, back to Firefox, I added 192.168.0.4 to the list of allowed popup sites, and all was merry.

The experience has been a mostly positive one, with one exception. Their Windows XP software sucks. That needs some qualification — it only sucks if you’re using it in an environment that has been administered correctly. If you’re Joe-my-computer-is-full-of-spyware-from-running-as-administrator-Smith, then you’re in luck (for once): it’ll work fine. But, if you’ve setup user accounts (as could be expected, even in a small network environment) that aren’t running as Administrator (even the Power User group doesn’t work), then you can’t print or scan or read the contents of flash disks in the printer.

As I write, there is no known solution to the problem, and what I’ve read would suggest that HP are denying such a problem exists. Well, it does, and it isn’t solely because of inept administration.

In all, a good device marred by a few software flaws. If you’re looking for a network printer for a non-XP environment, be that earlier versions of Windows or Mac OS X or a *nix environment, I’d say it’s a great buy. Bonuses are the ability to use the flash card reader on all connected computers, network scanning, and an LCD preview display.

In terms of print quality, the colours are okay, though key (black) isn’t wonderful. I’ve only tested on 60GSM paper, though, so that’s obviously a contributing factor in my judgement. I doubt the quality would be of concern to most users, at any rate. It’s more than adequate for most desktop tasks.

I just filled out my 2005 tax return on Linux, before getting to the final step and discovering it wouldn’t print nor submit electronically (because, apparently, they can’t code and are dependent on Internet Explorer as a connectivity layer — and yet they test for security before allowing you to download the program! Hah!)… but it would save just fine, so I copied my tax file across the network to a Windows computer (resenting all the while having to leave my chair, because I really shouldn’t have had to even leave my browser — In this instance Firefox — if they’d done this properly) and imported, printed, and submitted it electronically without any significant problems.

Note that you can’t import a file from anywhere — you need to actually copy the file into the e-tax folder itself (probably C:\etax2005) before e-tax will let you startup without creating a new file. You’ve also got to enter your TFN again (presumably as a meagre form of security) to get it to open the file.

It annoys me that they don’t even support Mac users natively, instead saying that it will function, if “suitable Windows Emulator software” is installed. That’s so presumptuous I was tempted to fill in the section asking for costs incurred in filing the tax invoice, listing three licences for Windows XP purchased earlier this year (not really, but it’d be a nice revenge :)).

Okay, rant over.