The graveyard of minimized windows ...

When you use VR goggles with 30 foot wide virtual displays, you'll see where minimized Windows go ...

The Land of Wind, Ghosts and Minimised Windows

... So what modern Windows versions actually do when you minimise a window is move the window.

WinNT and its descendants - possibly even Vista, though I'm not sure - move minimised windows to the undisplayable location -32000, -32000. Way up there, eight to ten metres above and to the left of your monitor(s), all of your 'minimised' windows are hanging in the air.

Windows 95 and its descendants, though, couldn't go that far. They should have been able to, but too many programs - serious expensive commercial programs from companies that should have known better - went crazy when presented with large and/or negative window locations. Windows 95 had to work with as much existing software as possible, so (read all about it on Raymond's blog here) it ended up moving 'minimised' windows to only 3000, 3000.

The 3000, 3000 position stayed the same for the rest of the 95-derived Windows variants - Windows 95, 98, 98SE and ME. And it gives rise to an amusing artefact.

If you install one of those versions of Windows on a computer with two really humungous monitors (or three normal screens), and then tell Windows that the screens are positioned diagonally with the primary at the top left, you can see the Land of the Minimised Windows...

BTW, this is one of the things Apple's developers messed up when they semi-ported Safari to Windows.

The $20 noise reducing "headphone" solution that beats the $350 Bose QC 2 ...

Or so Pogue's readers claim: 

Blocking Out Background Noise - Pogue’s Posts - Technology - New York Times Blog

...As another reader put it: “I have a Bose QuietComfort 2 headset which transforms my daily commute into almost a recreational activity. But I’ve found a better solution: Get a pair of lightweight, industrial hearing protection ear muffs for no more than $20 by Bilsom. (I love these: http://tinyurl.com/2r4a6y).”

He then suggests that, for music, you can slip a pair of regular old iPod-style earbuds *inside* the earphones. “The sound reduction is superior, there are no batteries required, it is a much cheaper solution, and the sound can be stunning, depending on what brand of earphones you buy.”

(This reader offers a video that demonstrates a similar hack: http://www.marvgolden.com/hearing/index.htm.)

This is an over-the-ear effect similar to the in-ear high end occlusive earphones. It probably won't be as good at reducing continuous noise, but it will blunt outside conversation, music, etc. Depending on what you want, this could be an advantage or not.

Aperture's bizarre lift and stamp UI

I'm still using Aperture in trial mode. I refuse to buy until Apple adds the ability to edit image date information (like every other image management software ever produced). In the meantime I'm slowly slogging through one of the most cryptic and sluggish pieces of software I've every seen. The Aperture Quick Reference is worth printing btw.

The worst part of a generally disappointing product is Aperture's bizarre "lift and stamp" UI. My guess is that some Apple engineer tried to hack an awful interface and made it both worse and out of sync with the documentation. I suspect there are some bugs in there as well.

In Aperture 1.5.3 both 'o' and 'shift-o' seem to do exactly the same thing. Some web sites claim the option key will change the lift/stamp button, but that doesn't work for me. Regardless of what I do, it always says 'stamp'.

After much labor I finally found a sequence of actions that allowed by to take image settings from one image and apply them to multiple images. Nothing else I tried worked for "stamping" multiple images. Here's what I posted to Apple's Discussion group.

Apple - Support - Discussions - Re: Lift and Stamp - one image only ...

1. Adjust settings on the reference image.
2. Select image.
3. Type 'o' to bring up the L&S HUD (or use either the lift or stamp toolbar buttons, they seem to do the same thing). If you leave the lower left select box set to 'add' a "stamp" operation will add to existing edit metadata, if you choose 'replace' it replaces existing edit metadata
4. Look at the settings, confirm that the HUD is showing the right settings to apply. Unselect any you don't want to apply.
5. HOLD the command key to change the cursor to a select cursor. Select all images desired. Click stamp.

Aperture is disappointing. iPhoto hasn't been updated for eons and is falling behind the (free) Picasa app -- and it can't handle multiple image Libraries. (Doesn't anyone travel any more? Get married? Divorced? Anything?). OS X 10.5 is late (I don't believe it will be ready for the fall).

There are no OS X blogging applications even remotely comparable to Microsoft's free Vista/XP Writer.

Apple is not doing very well right now. I'm ready for the iPhone to be a pretty impressive flop.

Update: Primary Only. If you type the letter S when using Aperture, Aperture will, without warning, change its operating mode to "primary only". There's no warning, Aperture just changes mode. In this mode it doesn't matter what you do when you select, the operations will apply only to the image with the thick white "select border" (the "primary"). Lift and Stamp away, Aperture won't give you a warning, but only one image will be stamped. I was in Primary mode and didn't know it.

I realized something was truly bizarre when I couldn't apply ratings to multiple selected images simultaneously. I poked around the menus until I saw the "Primary" option. Selected.

Who the heck wants this? Why does it have a quick key? Why doesn't Aperture display "Primary mode" in the chrome to warn users what mode they're in?

Anyway, when you're in standard mode, Lift & Stamp works this way:

1. Select images you want to Stamp.
2. Type o to bring up the Lift & Stamp HUD.
3. Click on an image you like (this does the lift). Note settings
4. Clicks stamp, this applies changes to the images you selected in step 1.

That's so weird.

Aperture Lift and stamp tool - winner of the unusability award?

I've been trying to use the "lift and stamp" tool in Aperture 1.5.3. It will only "stamp" one image, no matter how many I select before application. When I search on this tool, I mostly find comments on how hard it is to use it.

Aperture is such a frustrating product ....

Encyclopaedia Britannica - Google integration

We subscribe to the encyclopedia britannica - mostly for sentimental reasons. It's not terribly useful; Wikipedia has better coverage for the topics I need to know about. Still, it's handy when the kids have questions, though even then it can be flaky. Tonight most of the links were dysfunctional when I used Camino, a switch to Safari fixed that problem. (I suspect I was hitting a bad server and switching browsers randomly assigned me to a working server.)

Really the EB seems to have been on its last legs for ages. The web site has been remarkably uninventive; for example, they've never really tried to build a community of users. I figure they've been waiting for Google to bail them out.

Maybe that's starting. Just by chance I came across this Google co-op integration feature:
Co-op Encyclopaedia Britannica integration. I've used Google co-op to create my own custom searches, but I'd not heard of this option.

I clicked the button, and now, as long as I'm logged in to my Gmail account, my Google searches include results from EB at the top. I'll give it a try for a while. Maybe I'll even use my EB account more than once every six months - if they can get their site working! (Wikipedia, by contrast, never fails me.)

The Co-op site, btw, provides other search integration options, but I didn't see any others I wanted.

The mystery of Safari, and how to file a bug report

The "surprise" of Steve Jobs unremarkable Apple developer keynote address was a Windows version of Safari. It's not been an auspicious launch. Even by the unexacting standards of Apple's product releases it's probably a month away from being ready, but Jobs dumped it out anyway.

There's a new version for Windows out already, but I'm more interested in how we're supposed to file bug reports (not that I'm going to bother with it!):

Surfin’ Safari - Blog Archive » Safari Beta 3.0.1 for Windows

• For security issues: email product-security@apple.com.
• For engine-level issues, like site compatibility or crashes on specific pages: file a bug report in WebKit bugzilla.
• For any bugs, including the above categories, you can file a Radar bug.

In other words, don't bother with the little bug icon on the toolbar. That offical Apple stuff goes nowhere.

In related news, Cringely tries to figure out why the heck Apple bothered. He figures the premature timing was driven by a lack of anything to announce at the WWDC, but the primary motivation is to provide a platform for AT&T web services. Seems unlikely, but, like all things Cringely, it's interesting.

The explanation I like best (so far) for "why Safari/Windows" came from Daring Fireball. DF thinks it's all about referral revenue from using the Google search box in Safari/Windows. Apple wants a Windows platform for iPhone web development, and this way they get that and a few million in cash flow.

Ultimately though, I'm still puzzled.

By the way, I wrote a while back that the push of OS X from April to September, and the reasons given for that delay, suggested that OS X may not be ready until 2008. The lack of WWDC news has reinforced my suspicions.

It's rare for a project as big as 10.5 now appears to be to slip by only a few months. If they do ship in September, I'll bet it will be about as cooked as Safari/Windows.

Why doesn't Apple do basic security testing?

 Glenn Fleishman, writing for Tidbits, asks a simple question ...

TidBITS: Apple Updates Windows Safari Beta with Security Fixes

... It's disturbing that Apple isn't stress testing its public beta software with the same kind of readily available tools for fuzzing that both researchers and the nefarious have. Many of the Month of Apple Bugs flaws (see "MoAB Is My Washpot," 2007-02-19), as well as many recent AirPort and AirPort Extreme problems, were discovered through fuzzing.

We all know Apple treats early adopters as alpha testers, but Fleishman is making a more important point. Apple is releasing products that evidently haven't passed even basic attacks using off-the-shelf hacking tools -- including OS X 10.4.

In a reasonable world, that would be product negligence, and there would be rabid lawyers ringing Cupertino. It's the 21st century Apple. You need to do much, much better.