Questions about the advertisers? See the end of this note. Please also see legal notices at the end of this note. Want an easier-to read formatted HTML version? See http://www.langa.com/whats_new.htm (The HTML version of each issue normally is available by 9AM EST [GMT-5] of the issue date.) Please recommend the LangaList to a friend! (And maybe win a Palm III !) The LangaListA Free Email Newsletter from
Fred Langa About BrowserTune, In This Issue: How Fast Is “Fast Enough?”Everyone knows what a "yuk" computer experience is: when a system is frustratingly slow and seems unable to get out of low gear. But have you ever had a real, rock-you-back-on-your-heels, “Wow” moment with a PC? You know, when you saw something so unexpected or fast or dazzling that you were literally astonished? In this jaded age, those moments seem to come further and further apart. But I certainly remember one of my first: It was the day, years ago, when I traded in my original 4.77MHz IBM PC-XT for a 10MHz “Turbo” PC from a company called PC’s Limited---the company that later became Dell Computer. With just a press of that wondrous Turbo switch, I had at my fingertips what previously only was possible via overclocking or other hacker-esque exploits: I could double the speed of my machine. It was awesome. I also remember, some years later, when I first saw an “accelerated graphics” card. Same effect: Wow! Today, I’m typing this column on a 550MHz Pentium III. With four foreground apps and nine background apps running, the System Monitor app tells me I’m using all of 13% of the CPU’s cycles. Yes, I easily can spike the CPU use to 100%, and when I’m doing something really computationally intense, the system is noticeably faster than the P2/400 it replaced. But for all that, using the system is not a “Wow” experience. This system also has an AGP 3D graphics card with 32MB of video RAM and a graphics coprocessor so beefy that it needs its own cooling fan. But for all that graphics power, I can only see a visible difference over my previous card in a few limited (and most non-business) apps. And at that, it’s more of a “That’s nice” than a “Wow.” How important is that
"wow?" Some people always go for the "wow" when they're
buying and that's fine. But many others (especially in business) can't always
afford the latest, greatest hardware. Instead, they need to look for the sweet
spot in the performance curve: That happy middle ground is where your system is
fast enough to do what you need done, period. These systems don't come with
excess power and features that you don't really need, but neither do they saddle
you with frustrating, driving-with-the-brakes-on performance. Not too big, not
too small: just right. My InformationWeek column this week tries to define the middle ground between "yuk" and "wow." <grin> I'll tell you what kinds of machines I think provide acceptable minimum standards; which exceed the minimums in a rational, economically defensible manner; and which fall off the curve. But what’s your take? If you’re replacing a PC, what’s the minimum “step up” it takes to feel that you're getting something better? How do you determine the tradeoff between purely technical needs and the slippery realm of user satisfaction? Does the “Wow” effect matter? At what point do you declare old machines obsolete? What standards do you use for specing new hardware? Join in the discussion at http://www.informationweek.com/langaletter !
--------------( the
above is a paid advertisement )-------------- DOS Really *Is* DeadI won't beat a dead horse---or operating system---but the reader email on the last few columns involving Temp file cleanup has been very, very eye-opening. (See http://www.langa.com/newsletters/sept-27-99.htm#temp , http://www.langa.com/newsletters/sept-30-99.htm and http://www.langa.com/newsletters/oct-4-99.htm#wow )A significant number of readers, for example, had never before booted their system directly to DOS or run their PCs without the graphical interface. I'm probably showing my age (ahem) but it simply hadn't occurred to me that DOS would be so alien to so many people. It's mostly a good thing: a sign that Windows has matured. But all operating systems benefit from some knowledge of what's going on under the hood. And some systems (Linux, for example) *demand* reasonably extensive "command line" skills to use them much at all. So it surprised me that so many people had never even seen command-line DOS operate. For example, many readers were confused by one of the responses DOS may give when you run the little cleanup batch file I showed you: You may see "File Not Found" on your screen, which many readers took to mean that something was wrong with the Cleanup.Bat file itself. But that's not the case. Here's what was going on: The batch file issues a command to DOS to delete any files that end in "ZIP" and "EXE" inside one of the Temporary folders. But if you don't have any ZIP or EXE files, DOS can't find anything to delete, and thus reports "File not found." Once you know what it means, it's obvious what's going on. But if you don't know DOS, it can be confusing. Of course, cryptic commands/responses are one of the reasons the world moved to graphical interfaces in the first place. But sometimes, the graphical shells get in the way of what you need to do if you really want full control over your system, and that's where a passing knowledge of DOS can help a lot. For another example, see the next item. Those Email Format BluesIf you're reading this newsletter in email, you're seeing it in a fairly plain and almost format-less manner: I send the newsletter that way to ensure maximum compatibility with the wide range of mail readers out there. (Don't get me started about AOL's proprietary format, or Juno's inability to handle attachments, or HotMail's security problems or--- well, see? I got started anyway! 8-) ) Because the newsletter format is deliberately generic, the final formatting of the email version of the newsletter is actually controlled by your email reader, not by me.Sometimes that causes problems, especially when there's a long line of text--- a URL or command---I'm trying to show you. I send those lines "unwrapped" so that they are delivered to you as the one long line they should be. But some email readers wrap the text (that is, start a new line) at about the 60th, 70th or 80th character, so what I send as one long line may appear in your email reader as two lines. That happened to some readers in the last issue. One of the Cleanup.Bat lines was too long for some email readers, which wrapped the text. Alas, DOS command can't be wrapped---if you send DOS a one-line command wrapped into two lines, DOS treats each line separately and gets confused. For example, the first line of the Cleanup batch file was c:\windows\command\deltree /y c:\windows\temp The above should appear as one line from the initial "C:" to the final "\temp." If it appears something like this c:\windows\command\deltree
/y in your email reader, then your email reader has turned the one line into two. Because it is a one-line command, sending it to DOS as two lines won't work. DOS will say something like "Parameter missing" when it tries to run the first line, and something like "Bad command or file name" when it tries to run the second. Long-time DOS mavens could figure out what was wrong with the wrapped command. But, naturally, people who weren't DOS-familiar got the error and didn't know why. This is a problem with two parts. One is the email formatting itself: HTML formatting avoids all these problems and I hope one day reasonably soon to offer a by-mail HTML version of the newsletter. HTML allows the sender to control the formatting, so you'll see exactly what I send. I don't send out HTML now because many mail programs can't display it properly: I'll actually have to start a second mailing list and maintain two lists---one for people who want text, and another for the HTML version. For now, the only way to see a fully-formatted HTML version of this newsletter is to click on over to http://www.langa.com and click on the "what's new" link for the current newsletter, or the "archives" link for past issues. It's not as convenient as getting it right in your mailbox, but at least you'll see the newsletter in a correct format. And I especially recommend that you visit the site to see the HTML version if you run into trouble with long URLs or commands presented here: you'll see the URLs in fully-clickable format, and long lines in exactly the way they're supposed to appear. The other part of the problem is that many of us could use a little more knowledge about DOS. Don't get me wrong: I'm glad DOS is essentially dead. But some command-line knowledge is a good thing. So watch for a column and discussion on this next week. DOS experts can share their knowledge, and DOS newbies can learn. Done right, we'll all get something out of it. Stay tuned!
--------------( the above is an advertisement )-------------- What
Has The Best, Most Interesting, Most Useful,
The HotSpots page---that's what.
Every day, the HotSpots page spotlights one site that has at least one
outstanding attribute. It might be an especially information-rich site, or one
that employs awesome web-design elements. Sometimes it a site that's
laugh-out-loud funny---either intentionally or not! And sometimes the sites are
simply very, very strange. But they're always interesting and at least worth a
look.
|