Friday, August 22, 2008
Outlook 2007 diagnostics
Honestly, Outlook 2007 is a piece of crap. As soon as I come across a copy of 2003 I'll be downgrading - because 2007 is just too badly broken to be fixed. I keep hoping for a Service Pack but so far, almost 2 years since it was released, that is still to materialize.
It's not just crap, it's obtuse as well. I had major problems this morning so did all the usual things to try and help Outlook 2007 to actually stagger to life: as well as 110-150MB of memory it needs just to run, I tried the Microsoft Office Diagnostics.
What a joke.
Diagnostics ran and reported one problem was identified and fixed. I click the "more info" and find that "Office fixed all the problems that it could find". Details? You Must Be Joking Mate. It fixes this one problem EVERY TIME. Actually, I don't even believe that the tool does anything any more than report a "placebo" problem.
If only - if only there was an alternative that works with Exchange. And don't even WHISPER Lotus Notes, as everyone I know who has to use Notes complains just as much as "we" complain about Exchange.
It's not just crap, it's obtuse as well. I had major problems this morning so did all the usual things to try and help Outlook 2007 to actually stagger to life: as well as 110-150MB of memory it needs just to run, I tried the Microsoft Office Diagnostics.
What a joke.
Diagnostics ran and reported one problem was identified and fixed. I click the "more info" and find that "Office fixed all the problems that it could find". Details? You Must Be Joking Mate. It fixes this one problem EVERY TIME. Actually, I don't even believe that the tool does anything any more than report a "placebo" problem.
If only - if only there was an alternative that works with Exchange. And don't even WHISPER Lotus Notes, as everyone I know who has to use Notes complains just as much as "we" complain about Exchange.
Labels: Office 2007, rant
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Real-time info - but whose version of real time is real?
Checking real-time flight arrival times at Heathrow today - and noticed a disparity between the info offered by BAA, the airport operator, and BA, the carrier. For a flight landing planned for 2pm, BA was showing a 2.15pm expected arrival time and BAA a 2.11pm arrival until at least 2.25pm, when BA reported that the flight had arrived at 2.16pm.
It's only a matter of minutes but with real-time flight monitoring, I want to know whose real time this is.
It's only a matter of minutes but with real-time flight monitoring, I want to know whose real time this is.
Labels: web 2.0
Monday, August 11, 2008
Spotify: A musical shooting star
It is a dark and stormy night - which means I'm going to miss the annual Perseid meteor shower - which I blogged about last year. Frustrating as I was even planning to get up around 2am for some bleary-eyed stargazing.
Instead of watching celestial bodies burn up due to the friction as they enter the Earth's atmosphere, I've enjoyed the privilege for few months now of a login to the beta of Spotify's rather fabulous streaming online music service.
To say that Spotify is good would be like saying The Beatles were "quite successful". Spotify is awesome. Fabulous. Comprehensive and delightful. Detailed, content-rich and immensely satisfying. I just can't believe it took me so long to really discover it.
Here's the elevator pitch: think unlimited access to the entire iTunes library - streaming direct to your PC. Where do you start?
At first, I thought Spotify was just a web radio station. Oh no. That's the front end. I can't share any screenshots thanks to the license agreement - and NO WAY am I going to risk losing access. I can just say that it offers a series of musical genres and dates - you just choose as many, or as few as you want, and press play.
After indulging - actually, over-indulging my desire to hear wall-to-wall 70s funk, I've started exploring further: driven by a need to find out whether Plastic Bertrand's 1978 opus, Ca Plane Pour Moi, would be there? Check. A great start. I challenged Spotify to find The Dead Kennedys' "Too Drunk ..." - check. Colonel Abrams and Trapped? Which version? And how about the whole album while you're at it? Carl Orff's Carmina Burana? Check.
I dug around and finally managed to find a song that Spotify's doesn' have (yet): It's Gonna Happen by the Undertones - of course this IS on YouTube, and so you might argue that this is no better than YouTube's collection of music videos, but I disagree on two counts. First, audio quality. Second, streaming - I've never had even a millisecond's interruption with Spotify, even on a public wi-fi network. And third, I'm listening to It's Gonna Happen right now - but not watching. I noticed that Feargal looked frighteningly young and returned to this post.
The tipping point for Spotify was reading Rolling Stone's story on Kid Rock's worldwide success with the monster hit of the summer, All Summer Long. Despite the irony that Kid Rock is not releasing his tunes to iTunes (All Summer Long is also absent from Spotify), I immediately fired up Spotify on learning that the Kid had mashed TWO previous hits. I thought he'd just augmented Lynryd Skynryd's Sweet Home Alabama - having never consciously heard anything from Warren Zevon. Thanks to Rolling Stone, I learned that Kid Rock mixed it up with Warren's Werewolves Of London - and where to check this out? Yes, Spotify.
Instead of watching celestial bodies burn up due to the friction as they enter the Earth's atmosphere, I've enjoyed the privilege for few months now of a login to the beta of Spotify's rather fabulous streaming online music service.
To say that Spotify is good would be like saying The Beatles were "quite successful". Spotify is awesome. Fabulous. Comprehensive and delightful. Detailed, content-rich and immensely satisfying. I just can't believe it took me so long to really discover it.
Here's the elevator pitch: think unlimited access to the entire iTunes library - streaming direct to your PC. Where do you start?
At first, I thought Spotify was just a web radio station. Oh no. That's the front end. I can't share any screenshots thanks to the license agreement - and NO WAY am I going to risk losing access. I can just say that it offers a series of musical genres and dates - you just choose as many, or as few as you want, and press play.
After indulging - actually, over-indulging my desire to hear wall-to-wall 70s funk, I've started exploring further: driven by a need to find out whether Plastic Bertrand's 1978 opus, Ca Plane Pour Moi, would be there? Check. A great start. I challenged Spotify to find The Dead Kennedys' "Too Drunk ..." - check. Colonel Abrams and Trapped? Which version? And how about the whole album while you're at it? Carl Orff's Carmina Burana? Check.
I dug around and finally managed to find a song that Spotify's doesn' have (yet): It's Gonna Happen by the Undertones - of course this IS on YouTube, and so you might argue that this is no better than YouTube's collection of music videos, but I disagree on two counts. First, audio quality. Second, streaming - I've never had even a millisecond's interruption with Spotify, even on a public wi-fi network. And third, I'm listening to It's Gonna Happen right now - but not watching. I noticed that Feargal looked frighteningly young and returned to this post.
The tipping point for Spotify was reading Rolling Stone's story on Kid Rock's worldwide success with the monster hit of the summer, All Summer Long. Despite the irony that Kid Rock is not releasing his tunes to iTunes (All Summer Long is also absent from Spotify), I immediately fired up Spotify on learning that the Kid had mashed TWO previous hits. I thought he'd just augmented Lynryd Skynryd's Sweet Home Alabama - having never consciously heard anything from Warren Zevon. Thanks to Rolling Stone, I learned that Kid Rock mixed it up with Warren's Werewolves Of London - and where to check this out? Yes, Spotify.
Labels: music
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]