California, you get what you pay for

Today, many newspapers are disclosing more details of the new California state budget. Doubtless, many, like myself, are wondering what this will mean in terms of reduced services, such as fire, police and library services. Will these cuts further delay or cancel maintenance or improvements? Our Willow Glen neighborhood street hasn't been maintained in nearly 50 years. Also, how much worse will our state economy suffer with 14% payroll cuts, furloughs and forthcoming layoffs? Ofcourse, the state legislature is trying to put this carnage in its best light. Conservatives tout that taxes are untouched to promote commerce and spending while liberals promise a payback of education cuts as soon as practical. But the fact is the Californian economy and its citizens will either have to suffer a lower standard of living in the coming years or finally acknowledge that we're getting what we paid for.


Despite the spin, we know the 14% pay cut to state employees, the $8.8B cut to education and the $4.4B raid of county and city coffers will raise unemployment, cut spending and reduce future tax revenue. How? State local and educational employees will get paid less, therefore pay less taxes, they’ll spend less, therefore pay less sales taxes, and the ripple effect of belt tightening will affect businesses down the line, which aside from paying less taxes, will also have to cut payroll costs. That equals job loss. Adding to the jobless numbers are the young people who can’t go to college because of increased tuition and reduced class size, not to mention those teachers who are squeezed out of jobs due to cost cutting. This shouldn't surprise anybody. The economic effects of cost cutting are well understood in “trickle down” economics.

The benefits of a conservative tax cap are a canard as well. While its anybody’s guess how they'll spend their savings, its reasonable to assume that the top 10% of Californians who hold nearly 2/3 of the state’s GDP cannot consume or operate their businesses to help pull the other 90% of Californians out of recession. Additionally, the raiding of county and local government funds to the tune of $4.4 billion amounts to around $120 "borrowed" per Californian resident. If the state takes the funds proportionate to population, San Jose could stand to lose $120M in revenues (given 100M residents). Assuming county and local governments aren’t successful defending their funds, they may have no choice but recoup their loss by increasing city and county taxes. The alternative is to cut more crucial programs beyond those already excised from their budgets. Some areas like the Silicon Valley, at 11.8% unemployment, can probably handle it, while others like most mid valley counties, are on the brink of economic collapse. Again, California, you get what you pay for.


Lastly, the cut in state government expenditures and resulting loss in future tax revenues will forestall its ability to repay the funds it raided and restore programs that it cut. This will prolong the economic downturn. This is largely a result of California’s dependence on cyclical sources of revenues, from income and sales taxes, which is at odds with its linearly growing expense obligations, such as infrastructure and education. If you consider that 1/3 of the expenditures in the $80B state budget is fixed by initiative constitutional amendments, and there’s no complementary fixed source of revenues, its easy to see how the state has gotten into this mess. It’s sad to note that through the initiative process, Californian’s continue to authorize spending for more programs but conversely legislate more cuts in state revenue. Clearly, the initiative process has given too much power to the electorate. So after the dust has settled on the greatest budget crisis in California history, nobody should be surprised or disappointed with the outcome: we're getting what we paid for.

Netbooks, sadly, are repeating history

I believe our livelihoods are bettered when we can get information and entertainment wherever we are and whenever we want it. So I’m always interested in the technology that can potentially fulfill this need. That’s probably why I’m tracking the growing popularity in netbooks, especially since I owned and tinkered with some of their precursors, including the Z50, back in the ‘90s. But it was a recent press article that raised my concern about the viability of today’s netbooks. In the article, a vendor was quoted saying their netbooks would always perform less than their standard notebooks.

At first blush, this seemed obvious since netbooks are, by definition, priced lower that notebook/laptop platforms. But the lines are blurring. I just saw in the Friday Fry's pullout a Gateway notebook on sale for $400. That’s in line with the pricing of many netbooks offered by Acer, Asus and Dell. Granted, it’s a sale item, but there’s lots of pricing crossover between (intel)Atom powered netbooks and Pentium/Athlon powered notebooks. Since the Atom is inherently slower than Pentiums or Athlons, wouldn’t it seem prudent to go with the higher performing platform?

Vendors however are downplaying netbook’s processing power. They tout smaller size, and longer battery life. In that case, an Atom CPUs are better than Athlons or Pentiums since the former have a thermal design power in the 2-8 Watts range while the latter have TDPs of ~30W. This means Atom configured notebooks could last at least five times longer than conventional notebooks. Of course in real life there are other factors that affect battery life: internal peripherals, screen size and use load. For example a netbook with a flash hard drive will use less power than another with a conventional hard drive and CD-ROM. Yet annoyingly, one doesn’t really know how long netbooks last since the MobileMark battery life tests tend to over state battery longevity. Furthermore, the structure of its tests (specifically DVD and gaming tests) doesn’t seem to reflect the typical usage profile of a netbook user.

To further complicate matters, there seems to be differing opinions of what a typical user does with a netbook. Given its small screen size, lack of a gaming graphics card (why?) and CD/ DVD drive, one might assume that netbooks are used for web browsing, email and typical “office” applications. But what entertainment options exist for the mobile warrior? Hulu, Netflix, Amazon and YouTube let you download and view content; so shouldn’t watching downloaded media be an important consideration when buying a netbook? If so, netbooks need software or hardware CODECs to show video effectively, but that requires both processing and battery power. Likewise, Google’s vision of web enabled apps with its Chrome and Android operating systems (and to a lesser extent Microsoft’s with its Office Live) will also push processing requirements so that users may be disappointed with down powered netbooks. Vendors should recall the broken promises of windows CE devices that offered good battery life but limited performance and functionality.

I fear that bargain hunting PC shoppers (which in this down economy includes everybody) will be sorely disappointed when they discover they gave up much more than just the size of their screen and keyboard in their new netbook. When a netbook running iTunes and a web browser is maxed out, or turns your downloaded “Heros,” video into the equivalent of a slideshow, you know its the kiss of death for that platform regardless how well it handles e-mail. For that reason, shoppers should look beyond size and battery life. They should fully understand how well their netbook will not only work for them on the road but entertain them as well.

Is Windows 7 worth it?

Being the PC and software junkie that I am, I’m always trying new operating systems (read different linux distros) to see how public domain software has progressed, But Windows 7 is completely different. Earlier this year,for the first time, Microsoft offered a beta version of its OS for trial. Free. Online. I had to try it! After three months of ups and downs, I backed down to Vista, convinced the OS wouldn’t ship until 2010. When the Release Candidate (RC) became available only a few months later, I was both impressed and skeptical. How could they have fixed all the bugs that I saw, let alone all the others reported by other beta testers? So after a month of hand wringing, I decided to take the plunge and take the Windows 7 RC out for a spin. Here’s a synopsis of my discoveries in preparation, installation and the actual running of this soon to be released OS.

Test Bed Configuration:

I have a Core 2 Duo Toshiba Satellite running Vista 32bit with Office 2007, Firefox Visual Studio 2009 and other development platforms. The drive has two major partitions, with Windows using about 130GB. The other partition is Linux. I also installed RC on two other systems: an older 2GHz Shuttle Athlon 64 dual processor system (3800+) and a newer 2.33GHz Shuttle Intel Core 2 (8200)quad system. Apps include Office 2007, Visual Studio 2008, Quicken 2008 Kaspersky and McAfee Antivirus.

Preparation:

It can’t be said enough, so I’ll say it again, whenever you prepare to install or upgrade an operating system, backup, backup, backup!!! I actually did backup my system three different ways: 1) I imaged my system drive, 2) I used Microsoft’s Windows Easy Transfer Tool and 3) I backed up all my user data. The first option simply gives you a escape path back to a known safe configuration, the second is required to migrate your files and settings to the new OS since you need to perform a Clean Install for the RC and the third is healthy paranoia. An external USB or FireWire drive is indispensable. XP users should pay particular note to the fact that they must use the Vista Easy Transfer Tool, not the Files and Settings Tool (FAST)that comes with XP. You can download the tool from Microsoft’s site or get the tool from a Vista or Windows 7 machine. Last but not least, make sure you have you application disks/images handy since you’ll have to reinstall them. Also, use MSoft’s compatibility tool to make sure your hardware and apps (especially antivirus) are compatible.

Installation:

Unlike the beta that allowed an in place upgrade, Microsoft requires a clean install of Windows 7 RC, so I chose the 64bit version of the OS (build 7100) to try out on my systems. You’ll need a DVD to burn an install disk. Once you’ve pulled the trigger, you’ll immediately notice differences in the way this OS installs compared to previous MSoft platforms. In addition to the main partition, you’re required to set up a small partition (presumably for boot loader and checksum information) then hit carriage return and, boom…nothing?? Really it seems like that. For the longest while, the screen shows three pulsing dots … and little or no hard disk activity. I was so surprised with this behavior on my new quad core system that I aborted the install twice, but after waiting patiently, you will be rewarded by the thrashing of the hard drive as the OS is finally installed on it. Its as if the OS image is being expanded in memory then written to the hard drive in one huge disk write. Note that I had a dual boot configuration on my Notebook so I had to reset the windows/Longhorn boot loader to point to the newly configured small windows partition in order for it work work under GRUB.

Setup:

When the system reboots into the new OS, you begin to appreciate (fear??) the graphics design effort that Microsoft has put into its images and icons. The pulsing sunrise (cylon eyes) graphic raises your anticipation as the system prepares itself. My network setup is fairly simple so there were few configuration questions before the system was ready for use. What was really interesting was how the system continued installing drivers after I logged in. It recognized the Nvidia card on my notebook and automatically downloaded and installed newer drivers for the card. Neither Vista nor XP behave this way! What was especially interesting was how the OS behaved when it didn’t have a driver for my flash media memory stick/SD card reader. The OS shows a window with an installation error and asks if you want to put off the device installation or look for a solution on the network. Sure enough, selecting the latter allowed me to download a driver from the Toshiba website that installed successfully! Its particularly noteworthy that Microsoft has re-engineered the update system, combining driver and system updates and integrating it more closely into the OS. Unfortunately, here you begin to see some of the rough edges still present in this new OS. In my case, I was offered a newer driver for my Conexant sound card that oddly has a 2008 date stamp on it. Upon installation, my notebook was rendered mute and I had to roll back the driver.

Ups and Downs:

By now most people know of the Aero Peek interface which is reason enough itself to upgrade to this OS. My system has a good quality graphics card so Aero shows nicely on my notebook. Aero Peek so simplifies navigating through the applications and other windows on your screen that even using the Vista ultimate interface seems stodgy. Likewise, the Start Menu has been redesigned so recently used applications have drop down menus of the most recently accessed files used by that app. This serves as a convenient shortcut to the word documents, excel spreadsheets or PowerPoint presentations that you’ve recently been working on. Additional eye candy like translucent windows and effects further enhance the visual experience.

Microsoft offers its Homegroup networking services for small networks that need to share information more easily and without the hassle of permissions. Setting it up is pretty straightforward: just enable the homegroup services and then enter a common password among the computers in the group. Of course, this service isn’t as useful in heterogeneous environments where you still have to set up shares and permissions for non Windows 7 computers (just about everybody), but it’s still nice to see Microsoft offer an ease of use feature that rivals what Apple debuted in 1984.

Sadly, you run into more troubles with the RC as you try to do simple tasks like install a network attached printer. If homegroup is running on the PC with the printer it magically appears in your Windows 7 devices window. However, if you’re not using Homegroups or are a Vista or XP user, the standard procedure of installing a network attached printer will not work! Neither will the technique of dragging a networked printer into your devices window. You consistently get error messages and no combination of share permissions, passwords or other incantations resolves the problem. If this issue also exists in domain managed networks, then this OS is DOA for small and large businesses. Incidentally, what is it with Microsoft and printer troubles?? I still remember the story surrounding the Windows 98 launch where during a rehearsal the day before the announcement, Chairman Bill couldn’t get the demo PC to install a locally attached printer. They say the fireworks were spectacular! The current workaround is to install the drivers on the client PC then define a new port using the SMB share format (\\computerName\shareName) and then it will work.

Other teething problems include drivers and applications that don’t work with the new OS. As previously mentioned, some apps, like industry leading virus checkers, don’t work on the RC. Additionally, drivers are either unavailable or still buggy. As an example, my sound card driver stops working after my notebook comes out of sleep mode and the alternate driver simply doesn’t work. Presumably, users who buy new computers with Windows 7 installed won’t have this problem, but what about support for legacy peripherals not to mention the road block this will pose for the upgrade market. What’s particularly annoying is the absence of a portal to log these problems. Microsoft claims they discover bugs through user telemetry relayed back to them. Really? I wonder what bug was registered when I downgraded from 7 Beta back to Vista?? While MSoft advocates their user forum to discuss these kinds of issues, it seems like they’re missing an opportunity to demonstrate to early adopters their interest in shipping a higher quality product than Vista.

Is it worth it?

One can't but wonder the risk Microsoft is taking by letting customers try out their upcoming operating system for free. Sure, the price is right, but aren’t you getting what you pay for, or worse? While Windows 7 offers exciting new features, they’re presumably also trying to assure customers this is a Vista fixer, or are they? While this is the successor to most everybody’s production operating system, I can’t help but believe that MSoft plans to release (what most users would consider) a more stable OS as a service pack 90 days after Windows 7’s initial launch (that joke never gets old). That’s about how long it took them to address the bundle of bugs they had in their beta release of the OS. In the meantime, upgrade users have a difficult choice to make: be an early adopter and buy the upgrade for as low as $49, or bide their time, forsaking the price break and added features for a more stable OS in the future. I suspect most customers will be conservative and postpone the upgrade, putting added pressure on MSoft, hardware and software vendors to support three operating systems.

Ahhh, isn’t job security a wonderful thing?