Monthly Archives: May 2012

Rasberry Pi vs old Dell, P4

Posted by on May 27, 2012 14 comments

A random smattering of Raspberry Pi vs an Old Dell P4 machine.

Unfortunately I labeled the Rasberry Pi, Debian (it is running the debian image, at least).  You can view the full results at OpenBenchmarking.org.  Most people are not buying a Raspberry Pi for the performance :) , but it is nice to know just how much slower the Pi is.

The dell can pull between 70 – 120+ Watts, while the raspberry pi can pull 5.   Unfortunately, in performance per watt, I think the P4 still comes in first most of the time.  (The total test time on the P4 was less than an hour, the Pi I left overnight).  I didn’t do much graphics testing, but the Raspberry Pi chip is physically better (not sure if it’s being properly leveraged though).

Ahh! New comment spam!

Posted by on May 23, 2012 No comments

Watch out for comment spam linking to facebook profiles.  I don’t know exactly what spammers get out of it but it seems to be becoming more common.  They add misspellings so that it’s not seen as a direct copy as easily.

For some reason, it fooled Akismet..

Notice the difference:

Unfortunately, Gnome-shell is not very good from a usabiladity peradspecadtive in its curadrent state. The deigsn (at least the big picadture) has not exactly changed that much since it was introadduced, and while A LOT of those who have tested it have given negadaadtive feedadback, Gnome has choadsen to stick with its deigsn. Just check out the comadments on every blog entry, every youtube video, every news item on the interadnet about the shell. Although I see posadiadtive feedadback as well, they are far between. That Gnome-shell have not taken this feedadback into conadsidaderadaadtion is just arroadgant and a big “fuck you” to the loyal Gnome usera0base.Its sad that Ubuntu felt they had to make their own shell, howadever, its even more sad that Gnome-shell have not lisadtened to the criadtique of the curadrent state of affairs.If I peradsonadally have to choose between Gnome-shell (as it is now) and Unity, I will go with Unity. I am sorry, but the curadrent way of switchading between tasks are just not acceptadable in Gnome-shell.

-Comment on my blog linking to facebook

Unfortunately, Gnome-shell is not very good from a usabil­ity per­spec­tive in its cur­rent state. The design (at least the big pic­ture) has not exactly changed that much since it was intro­duced, and while A LOT of those who have tested it have given neg­a­tive feed­back, Gnome has cho­sen to stick with its design. Just check out the com­ments on every blog entry, every youtube video, every news item on the inter­net about the shell. Although I see pos­i­tive feed­back as well, they are far between. That Gnome-shell have not taken this feed­back into con­sid­er­a­tion is just arro­gant and a big “fuck you” to the loyal Gnome user base.

Its sad that Ubuntu felt they had to make their own shell, how­ever, its even more sad that Gnome-shell have not lis­tened to the cri­tique of the cur­rent state of affairs.

If I per­son­ally have to choose between Gnome-shell (as it is now) and Unity, I will go with Unity. I am sorry, but the cur­rent way of switch­ing between tasks are just not accept­able in Gnome-shell.

Original real comment by Anonymous on http://ignore.tv/2010/10/27/the-right-question/

 

 

Browsers and how I think they should show Trust and Encyption

Posted by on May 1, 2012 8 comments

A follow up from my previous post;

Firefox 12 Currently

…has something like this to show trust and encryption (the colors are off but hopefully you get the idea, the actual blue and green are much nicer on the eyes):
[V] The Vanguard Group Inc, (US)   https://personal.vanguard.com/us/CorporatePortal

[d]duckduckgo.com   https://duckduckgo.com/?q=cheese

[g]google.com   https://encrypted.google.com

[/.] slashdot.org

My proposal:

[V] The Vanguard Group Inc. (US)    personal.vanguard.com   /us/CorporatePortal

[d] duckduckgo.com   /?q=cheese

[g] encrypted.google.com

[/.] slashdot.org

I’m curious if you can figure out what everything means in my proposal without explanation.

Explanation

  • Green is for trust and only for trust.  Notice how the favicon is only colored at all when using Extended Validation.  AFAIK it should never be a domain name.
  • Blue is for encrypted and only for encrypted, and only used for the sub+domain name.  I’m hoping this will provide a non-color cue for those who are colorblind, to differentiate between the two.
  • I got rid of the greying out of text and moved to a bolding of the domain name, this helped due to my bad green/blue colors but might not be necessary in the real version
  • Spacing between the domain name and the rest of the url to help keep them even more separate in a quick glance
  • Oh, and the complete lack of https/http, I would want to see Opera’s awesome feature implemented where they hide them unless you click on the URL bar.

My overall goal was to try to communicate both a level of trust and a level of encryption, while making it easy at a glance.  In addition, giving us the option in the future to really separate these two concepts.

Looking for suggestions, comments, and feedback before I try to propose it to Mozilla.  Check out my previous blog post for what they are actually planning to do for Firefox 14.