Half-Elf on Tech

Thoughts From a Professional Lesbian

Category: How It Is

Making philosophy about the why behind technical things.

  • Surfin’ Safari

    Safari 3 beta came out for Mac and Windows. Naturally I download Safari 3 for Mac last night and test it out, planning to pick it up on Windows when at work.

    On a Macintosh, things are like a pleasing mix of Firefox and Safari. There are a couple bugs I dislike (like Firefox’s ‘Allow Popups from…’), but I adore that it now alerts me ‘Dude! You’re closing multiple tabs!’ if I quit, and ‘Hey, you’re entering text in this window, you sure you want to close it?’ if I close this tab. So on that note, yay.

    On Windows it sucks balls. Oh, it’s fine on my XP home edition, but as soon as you add in Windows wackiness of Roaming Profiles, and proxies, and it dies.

    Mac makes two critical errors:

    1) Not letting you manually adjust proxies. Picking it up from IE seems sensible, but having used IE and multiple other browsers, I can tell you it’s a bad idea. IE settings work for IE. Firefox has to be different, slightly, and so does Safari. So instead, they should default to IE, but allow you edit access.

    2) Preferences don’t grok roaming profiles. There’s no way around how huge this is. If you want Safari to be used in corporate America, you must allow for roaming profiles. This means either you let relative pathing do it’s job, or you allow the users to manually set profile locations. The latter plan isn’t really going to work, since Mac lives by the ‘Do everything simply and have the user do nothing.’

    My solutions are simple sounding, and they won’t fix everything, but it’ll get them started.

    Hey, Mac, I used to build MSIs!

  • Why not homogenize?

    For another site I maintain, I use a total of six different coded products. Not one of the lot is actually integrated with the other, and no, I don’t use the same password between them. I’ve been having thoughts about merging the various tools into one vended support option, but as I look into the options, not one meets all the goals I have.

    Most of the time, when people look at a One Ring solution to keep all their products in line, they think of two aspects: usability and style.

    Usability means that, on the back end, you only have to learn one style of tools. We all know that no two product vendors produce the same style of code. Microsoft’s suite of word processing tools are, by far, the best out there, but Photoshop’s the place people go for photo editing. The interfaces between the two software tools is nothing alike. They’re so far un-alike it’s laughable. Hell, even Word on Windows is dissimilar to Word on a Mac.

    So for usability, people like things to look the same, or at least similar, so they don’t have to think hard when wanting to make a change. That makes sense.

    Style is more complicated. They want things to look the same. This makes more sense when you’re talking about a webpage, were you might have multiple background tools, but you want the whole site to look the same. This is called seemless integration. I call it style, since it’s a look and feel situation for the end use. Style points are useful. Style points keep people coming back to your site.

    In web software, which is as far as we’re going today, seamless integration is the thing. is content, a point most sites I’ve seen tend to miss. You have to have something worth reading, or people won’t read. Second? They have to enjoy the visit.

    A pox on all the sites with dark backgrounds and light fonts! That is not enjoyable! Most of us grow up with black text on white/light paper! We’re used to it, we like it, and our eyes have adjusted. Pander to us!

    There, was that too hard?

    Once you get a design, folding your multitude of tools into a seamless integrated design is fucking hell. Period. The majority of my sites are hand-coded, which means any integration was done manually. Over the years I got wise and used PHP includes, and then a PHP/SQL pastiche. But I attacked each part of the website problem as a separate entity.

    I needed polls, so I found good software. I needed an RSS feed, so I found one I liked. I needed a better gallery, so I picked on and so on and so forth. Doing things that way made extra work for me, this is true, but it also allowed me to tackle each new component as an individual. Would it have taken less time if I’d found an all in one solution? Yes, but it falls back on the problem that what I need doesn’t fall under usability and style.

    When I look for a new addition, I look for it as it’s own thing. A gallery needs to stand alone, without the rest of the site, and meet my organizational goals, my pretty URL goals, and my bandwidth goals. I’m confident enough in my l33t skilz to hack a system and make it look like how I want.

    So for me, a hacked up mishmosh system suite is what I need. Each tool is tailored specifically to my goals, and while it makes more work for me, the end user never has to deal with most of it.

    And if they’re happy, I’m happy.

  • Caveman Tech Support

    The tech support problem dates back to long before the industrial revolution, when primitive tribesmen beat out a rhythm on drums to communicate: (more…)

  • Stop repeating yourself!

    Almost a year ago, I blogged (and sent to a mailing list) a little ditty on how people know who you are on the net.

    One of the readers replied:

    : Admittedly, there a many legitimate reasons to have two IDs on one bulletin board.

    This might make an interesting follow-up article.

    Does it? Let’s find out!

    Some background information for the neophyte: Bulletin boards/forums have an ‘Admin’ who is the lord of all they survey. They run the code, generally the design, and have access to all things. Below the Admin are the Moderators, who have a varying degree of power. Some can only close nasty topics and some can do everything but blow the board’s code up. In other words, there are a lot of possibilities when we get into how much ‘power’ a moderator can have, so your millage will vary from board to board. Take this post with a grain of salt.

    Reason One: You’re The Admin

    In this instance, what you see logged on as the admin is not what you see as a user. For those of you at my office (and hi, I know you’ve found this page, I won’t tell anyone you read it from work, but I can see your IP address!), this is the same reason we have some people as admins and some as users. I’ll step it back.

    A user can log in, read posts, post a message, maybe send someone a private message. Just the simple stuff. That’s all they need to do, after all. Read and communicate. That’s all a user needs to do.

    An admin, however, can see the code, gets different error messages, and has control over not just the code, but the database with all the personal information.

    Now, as an admin, you also get a very different layout for the board, and when you’re designing things, it can be a problem. You know that what you see as an admin doesn’t match Joe User, so you make a second ID that’s just a user, and use that to test things from a user’s perspective.

    Reason Two: You’re The Admin

    No, I’m not repeating myself.

    If you’re the admin, sometimes you want to just be you. Having a second ID with which you can catfight with the best of them sometimes takes a load off people’s minds. It makes you normal and people have normal conversations.

    Reason Three: It’s a gaming board and you have multiple characters

    Some bulletin boards have roleplaying adventures and you can interact as different characters. Hence, different IDs.

    …

    Crap. I ran out of reasons.

    Okay, so there aren’t a whole lot, but there are some.

  • Are we getting smarter?

    A recent study said that 81% of computer users had changed their web surfing habits in order to avoid spyware and malware. My buddy, Beebear replied ‘And the other 19% are AOL users.’

    Taken at face value, that number seems to be a little too high. I agree, that just about everyone I know has changed their browsing habits to avoid spyware. All the Mac users I know told me ‘I haven’t touched IE since OS 10.2.’ I suspect Ipstenit was a bit of hold out, but when I upgraded her to OS 10.3, I took IE off her computer. She was a Netscape Fan, and never liked IE in the first place.

    The browser wars, though, really are a peculiar place. Here’s IE, the most prolific browser known to man (that works better if you say it in a booming ‘g-d’ voice), and it sucks donkey balls. The GUI is acceptable. It loads pages, it makes HTML look decent. What more could a person want? Well, let’s look at Safari, which is my Macintosh browser of choice.

    1. Spell Check.

    I have an already included spell check tool, so when I post my blog, I can right-click and correct typos. Also, the tool is tied into my system wide dictionary, so everything that uses it knows ‘Ipstenu’ and ‘blog’ are real words, thanks. There’s a tool called IE Spell that can do this for IE, but it’s not exactly the same. The Mac one can be set to remain on and it’ll underline in red squiggly lines the unknown/misspelled words. Just like Word. Hmm. And IE is missing this?

    2. Easy Searching

    I have a search field on my menu bar. I can type in ‘The life cycle of documentation,’ hit enter, and away I go. Google has a toolbar you can add in to IE and get this done, but again. It’s built in on the Mac.

    3. Tabbed browsing

    One window, six websites. Thank you and good night. Supposedly IE 7 will include this, but reading the IE blog off MSDN leads me to think it’ll be pretty basic. They suggest a couple third party apps that can put in tabbed browsing on IE 6, but one is $15 and the other is free but appears to be it’s own application (that is, a new browser).

    4. Popup Blocker

    I hate popups. I despise them with the fiery passion of a thousand burning nuns. Okay? Popups, popunders, and similar IN YOUR FACE advert scams piss me off. They need to die. Safari? Menu bar, Safari, Popup Blocker. Click, done. IE? Download something like Google’s toolbar and then you can have it.

    Of course, Microsoft sees all this and says ‘Look at how expandable our browser is!’ To a point they’re right. I like IE because you can add on to it. The problem is the items I want to add on should already be there. Microsoft’s fatal flaw right now is complicity. They assume that people who are using IE aren’t going to be buggered to change their habits and get a new browser.

    Microsoft needs to look at that 81%.

    And before you say Apples/Oranges about the Safari thing, with the exception of the spell check, Firefox does all that too. Firefox also has an easy to implement spell check, and yes, I use Firefox on my Windows PC, and IE only when I have to.

    Is Microsoft going to ‘lose’? Eventually, maybe, possibly. It’s hard to say. Do I care? Not as much as you might think. I love Macintosh because it works for me. It lets me work without muss or fuss and it lets me geek when I want to. That’s really all I want with a computer. I do like certain things about Windows. I like the squareness of it, sometimes. It’s obvious that my Windows Machine is to get the job done. But it’s John Wayne. My Macintosh is ‘How can I help you?’ Polite, well groomed, funny. It’s the Fab 5 from Queer Eye.

    Neither one is better than the other, any more than one cell phone is better than another. They all have different functions, and their form is best suited to the user. I think custom PCs should be the way to go, for the users. Make a PC the way someone wants to use it, and they know where to come for fish! I mean, they’ll be likely to come back.

    As for Apple? Well. I love them, I use them, and my Mac is me beloved. I prefer the way it’s handles pop-up alerts. I like being able to hide the geeky UNIX underpants and I like being able to access said panties. I don’t think it’s perfect. Apple’s making a push against Office, with Pages, but frankly after using Pages for a month, I’ve switched back to Word.

    The perfect world for me is an OS that can run anything I need (preferably made by Mac) and my resultant documents/output is compatible with everyone I need to work with.

    Hey, wait … I have that with my Macintosh.

  • CMS: What is it and why do I care?

    CMS. Content Content Management System.

    A website where the admin, as a user or as a group of users, are able to control the content.

    If you’re anything like me, you read that and said ‘Yeah, and your point is?’ I’ve been poking around CMS style websites for the better part of a year, and it wasn’t until last week that I dipped more than my toe into them. Part of that had to do with the age old square peg/round hole syndrome. The rest was fear. But I’m here to tell you that CMS isn’t anything to fear! In fact, I’ve decided that for one specific instance, it’s perfect.

    The final decision, I blame on my web-host and my office. They sent me an email about a new tool for my website. Fantastico!, a tool that can install ‘programs’ to your website. By program, they mean blogs, portals/CMS, support tools (for your users), forums, eCommerce tools, image galleries, and ‘other scripts.’ I laughed a little, because I’d already managed to install a blog (MT, which isn’t offered by Fantastic), forums and a gallery. I had already mocked up a static style website but as I was about to click away, I saw the list for these portals/CMS thingies.

    My head spun and started to hurt a little but right away I recognized PHP-Nuke and Post-Nuke. Now, you should know that to look at those web pages is painful. They’re NOT formatted for people like me. They’re a cluster-fuck of information, scattered in an organizational mishmash that makes your desk look neat and tidy. Yes, they’re that bad.

    Why in the name of G-d would I want to use it? That’s best answered by showing you two examples of websites.

    Example One: The Traditional, Static, Informational Website

    There’s only one main admin to this site, me. I take the burden of collecting articles, images, summaries and any related information posted anywhere on the net and compiling it into something that makes sense. The site’s been up since 1997, and there are around 400 individual static SHTML pages to the site. I use a blog to keep track of updates, but for the most part, when I add a new page, I do it manually. Sometimes other people email me things I’ve missed, and I update that as well. It’s a once-a-week updated site, with a mass email that goes out every Thursday.

    Example Two: The Collaborative Website

    There’s still only one admin to this site, but the information comes from up to ten people, all of whom keep ‘journals’ of their personal activities and post public ‘news’ about the site. While I still retain the right of final inclusion on the site (should it stay or should it go is all my call!), most of the time I’m just going to tweak a format change. This means, with 10 people, I could get up to 50 request for new information a day. One option was to run a blog, where there are static links on the site for the ‘general’ information, and then a blog for each person and one for the group as a whole. The other was to have a 100%, updated by me and me alone, static page where they email in their new data and I upload it.

    Yeah, Example Two is starting to may your head hurt, isn’t it.

    I tried Drupal, which installed fast and had the best documentation, didn’t give me enough flexibility. Geeklog didn’t install well and the documentation was very geeky. PHP-Nuke has no documentation, and Fantastico! goobered the install a little. phpWebSite, for some reason, didn’t work at all, though it looked very nice. Post-Nuke was similar to PHP-Nuke. Siteframe had one idiot error I couldn’t solve. Xoops … well, there was no reason for me to try it, because I went back to PHP-Nuke.

    Why PHP-Nuke if it had no documentation of value and the install was goobered? Because when I ran a Google search on my error, I found the solution on the second hit. Really, that was it. Once I had the meat of the site up, I figured I’d better try it out.

    My head hurts today, thinking about the hoops and ladders I jumped around getting it to look right. Step one, I decided, was figuring out what I wanted from the site.

    1. To be able to have my users log in and post information.
    2. To be able to organize that information by Subject.
    3. To have an archive that worked by Subject.
    4. To have individual journals so each user could share their own information

    Doesn’t sound too hard, and all that was included in the basic PHP-Nuke Package. On to Step two. Make it pretty. PHP-Nuke uses a concept called ‘Themes.’ Each theme controls the basic layout of the page, the colors and the images. After staring at one for a while and making tiny changes, I figured it out and was done. Not too shabby. The problems I had with the layout was not the theme, in the end, but the ‘Modules’ and ‘Blocks.’ Unlike Themes, the concept of Modules and Blocks was less idiot-friendly. Blocks are like Building Blocks; you place a block in one of three positions ‘Left,’ ‘Right,’ and ‘Main.’ Okay, not too bad. You place ‘Modules’ inside blocks, and you can place multiple if you want. I wanted everything that was a menu block to be on the left side. Done. Now ‘Modules’ themselves were painful.

    Modules are all the special frippy website tools. The FAQ is a module. The Categories are a module. The News is a module. The Topics are a module. Once I understood that, I had to ask what the difference was between a Category and a Topic. In the end, I wasn’t really sure. Ipstenit (my test subject) bitched that in her head, they’re synonyms. I happen to agree, but as I argued ‘It’s not my motherfucking terminology, help me rename them!’ She wondered why the fuck I’d want to use a craptastic system like that.

    The benefits. Once I could get it up, I was sure it’d be pretty and useful! I think it is. At least, Ipstenit was able to use it without too much hand holding, and most of the problems we solved by copious documentation.

    Anyway, my Topic/Category solution was such: Topics are ‘Subtopics’ and Categories are ‘Main Topics’. Our current topics are ‘Actors,’ ‘Characters,’ and ‘Episodes.’ The Categories are ‘Cast (Season One)’ and ‘Episodes (Season One).’ If you click on a link for ‘Cast (Season One)’ you get a list of all cast (characters and actors) for the season. If you click on the link for ‘Actors,’ all you see are the last 10 Actor posts. It’s not perfect, but it works. What we really need is Subcategories, but those don’t exist code-wise yet.

    So in the end, what’s my advice?

    DO NOT install any Portal/CMS software unless you’re a coder or at least very comfortable with SQL and PHP. And if you are a coder, have the least code-friendly person you know test it and try not to get irritated when they ask you questions. It’s freakishly complicated stuff, mostly poorly documented, and if you’re really new at all this, you’re going to tear your hair out.

    90% of my problems came in making it something my non-techie users could understand. Once I broke that barrier, the 10% left were cosmetic. In that 90% was a lot more coding than I should have had to do, in my opinion. The archival options were for month only (January 2004, February 2004 etc) and I found I wanted more than it offered. On the flip side, setting up a theme was as easy as designing a web-page and uploading the required files. Also, adding in new modules was a snap! It’s a lot of give and take.

    IF you need a lot of people to be able to add information to your website, it can be very useful. By no means is it a catch all solution, and even now I’m wondering if I could have found a better one. It’s been a good learning experience, and there’s a lot more about coding that I now understand. It’s not for the timid or the code-shy, that’s for fucking sure.