The blog

Call Them Irresponsible…

eWeek Magazine has a chilling report in its current issue: University of Calgary to Offer Virus-Writing Class. The report sent me to the university’s news center, where I found this press release about its class in “Computer Viruses and Malware,” boasting that it will “focus on developing malicious software such as computer viruses, worms and Trojan horses.” According to the professor who’s teaching the course, “By looking through the eyes of the people who develop these viruses, our students will learn what their targets actually are and what needs to be protected…. This attitude is similar to what medical researchers do to combat the latest biological viruses such as SARS. Before you can develop a cure, you have to understand what the virus is and how it spreads – why should combating computer viruses be any different?”

Can we all agree that this is insanely irresponsible? Public health researchers learning to fight SARS or Ebola don’t start by going into the lab and creating their own designer disease first. They work in carefully controlled environments with existing viruses, learning from the inside out. Responsible computer security researchers have plenty of existing viruses to deconstruct if they want to learn how malware works. We don’t need to teach people how to write hostile code.

Given that the age group most often associated with virus-writing is the same as the undergraduate university population, this just seems stupid.

Broadband Economics 101

I’m switching from DSL to cable next week. My local cable company (Cox) says I can pay them $15 a month to rent the modem, or buy one from them for $90. Or I can head over to Amazon.com and get the
Linksys BEFCMU10 EtherFast Cable Modem
for $77 with free shipping. (A buck less than Newegg.com, even!) Or a
Motorola Surfboard SB5100
for $65. Or a
D-Link DCM-200
for $66 with a $20 rebate.

So my question is: Why would anyone pay $15 a month to RENT one of these things, when the payback period is between three and six months and it takes about 5 seconds to connect one? I just don’t get it.

MSN Targets the Loo

If it were April 1, I’d be inclined to dismiss this as a practical joke. But it’s not, so I won’t…

“The iLoo being developed by the MSN division of Microsoft Corp. in Britain is a standard portable toilet — a loo to the English — with a wireless keyboard and extending, height-adjustable plasma screen in front of the seat. … The device is expected to be in use at festivals this summer in Britain, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer reported Tuesday. There’s no word on if, or when, the iLoo will make its way across the pond.”

From Yahoo! News – Microsoft Plans Toilets With Web Access

Would you want to touch that keyboard? And how long do you think those pricey plasma screens are going to last given the typical, shall we say, youthful exuberance of the average attendee at a summer music festival?

Google Meets Microsoft

OK, how cool is this? Add the Google Microsoft Search page to your Favorites, and you can search for any term, restricting the results to those found on Microsoft sites. Handy when you’re trying to find official answers or developer-specific information.

As always, the Google folks have even come up with a clever logo for this page. Check out the Windows XP-style background!

Another One Bites the Dust…

I was unpleasantly surprised today to discover that Matrix NetSystems abruptly suspended its Internet Weather Report recently. By the looks of some mirror pages, it appears this happened around April 17-18.

For those of you who never saw it, the IWR was a service that regularly sampled routers around the world and then graphically displayed the results in a very cool Java map. Looking at the map (especially scanning the reports from the previous day or so) was often a way to tell whether connection problems were the result of congestion on a portion of the Internet’s backbone somewhere, or whether there was something wrong with your computer.

After a bit of poking around, I turned up a few alternatives:

  • The Tera-Byte Internet Weather Report gives a snapshot of status and latency statistics between a Tera-Byte server and a bunch of routers on the Internet. Useful if you host with these guys. Also requires that you know which routers your connections are likely to use.
  • Internet Health Report – Does hourly checks of connections between major segments of the Internet backbone by provider (UUNet, Cable & Wireless, Qwest, etc.). Drill down in the connection to see geographic reports. For instance, my Qwest connection gets handed off to AT&T regularly, so I can click on the Qwest-to-AT&T link and see how well traffic is moving from Chicago to Phoenix. Numbers represent latency times where, confusingly, smaller is better.
  • AT&T Data and IP Services publishes Backbone Delay and Backbone Loss statistics. You can use the city pairs to get an idea of how traffic is flowing in the US. Not very useful for the rest of the world, and also less than helpful if your traffic is racing around on someone else’s network.
  • You can get another perspective from MCI’s Latency Statistics page. Funny, I used to remember it being at Worldcom. Guess they don’t want to use that name anymore.
  • For a more global perspective, look at the Real-Time Performance Statistics from Cable & Wireless, which give a very broad picture of how traffic is flowing between four very large parts of the world. Not very granular, but interesting.

And that appears to be it. I can’t find anything that offers the same at-a-glance snapshot of Internet performance that the IWR did. RIP.

When an Update Needs an Update…

At regular intervals, Microsoft issues Critical Updates for Windows. Everyone who knows me knows that I recommend configuring your system so that these updates get downloaded automatically. (But don’t choose the option to install them automatically; in that configuration, Windows will automatically restart itself in the middle of the night, even if you have unsaved files open!)

Every so often, one of these Critical Updates turns out to cause additional headaches. That’s the case with Critical Update 811493, which fixes a nasty security bug that could allow someone to take over a computer running Windows XP. Unfortunately, this fix doesn’t play well with some antivirus programs on computers that also have Windows XP Service Pack 1 installed, as Microsoft acknowledged in a brand-new Knowledge Base article: 819634 – You May Experience Performance Issues After You Install the 811493 (MS03-013) Package on Your Windows XP SP1-Based Computer.

After this issue surfaced last week, Microsoft took the patch off the Critical Updates list and added it to the Recommended Updates list. So you’ll only find it if you choose the option to visit Windows Update and scan your system. Most people will probably be just fine. I’ve got this fix installed on several computers here, all using Norton AntiVirus 2003. Everything’s running normally, with no performance problems at all. But you might not be so lucky, especially if you’re using a different AV program.

If you’ve noticed that your system has slowed down since the last time you updated it, this update could be the cause. To fix the problem, you can remove the update (from Control Panel, choose Add or Remove Programs and then select the “Windows XP Hotfix (SP2) Q811493” entry. You can then wait for the updated patch from Microsoft, which should be ready in a few days.

If your system isn’t displaying these symptoms, however, leave the patch installed!

Gadget Lust, part 2

The Siemens phone is back-ordered, AT&T informs me. So I’ll have to make do with the good ol’ Nokia for a while longer.

The Toshiba arrived yesterday, however, and so far I’m impressed. It’s light, sleek, and engineered like a tank. I was skeptical about the pivoting screen, which converts from the Tablet PC slate format (portrait orientation, with the pen for input) to a traditional notebook-with-keyboard format. But it works, and it seems more solid than the plastic hinges on the old HP.

I haven’t had a chance to do much more than fiddle with the pen as an input device. It did a surprisingly good job with my crappy handwriting, though, converting it to text with more accuracy than I would have expected.

Beware of Bogus XP Advice

This question appeared on a bulletin board recently:

Someone suggested deleting the contents of the Prefetch directory in Windows XP on a weekly basis, to speed up the boot process. Is that good advice?

The Internet has a way of taking questionable facts and giving them a life of their own. Even bad advice about Windows has a way of spreading, just like urban legends. This is one of those “tips” that doesn’t survive even a cursory analysis.

The Prefetch directory serves a valuable purpose by analyzing files that you use at startup and when you run programs. Contrary to what some well-meaning but technically inaccurate articles suggest, this does not copy the files themselves. It creates an index to the location of those files on the hard disk, including the order in which they’re loaded. This allows Windows and Windows programs to start very quickly after the first time you use them.

The Prefetch directory has one additional salutary function when used in conjunction with the built-in defragmenting tool. Every three days, during idle times, this utility rearranges program code, moving it to the outside of the disk to make it more efficient when loading (to force Windows to perform this optimization without having to do a full defragmentation, use the Defrag.exe command with the -b switch. For instance: defrag c: -b).

Carl Siechert, Craig Stinson, and I actually devoted several pages of Windows XP Inside Out to this topic. That was almost two years ago, though, and I’m willing to keep an open mind that we might have missed a great tip. So, just for grins, I got out my stopwatch and clocked my system boot time. Then I cleared out the Prefetch directory and did it again. My system has been running nonstop for 7 months and I have never touched the Prefetch directory. If this “tweak” were going to do any good, surely it would have maximum effect on my computer, right? The results were illuminating.

I timed from power up, starting with the first beep (POST code) to the point where the hourglass cursor disappeared.

With a full Prefetch directory:
… 0:50 to login screen
… 1:08 to desktop

After emptying Prefetch directory:
… 0:58 to login screen
… 1:57 to desktop

In other words, it took me nearly a minute longer to boot after using this “speedup” tip!

When I Googled for this topic, I found tons of examples of people who had simply copied this advice to their list of “tips” without any explanation of why it would be valuable or whether it actually affects performance. Mark Russinovitch and David Solomon, for instance, wrote an excellent article called Windows XP Kernel Improvements Create a More Robust, Powerful, and Scalable OS in the December 2001 issue of MSDN Magazine. Their technical credentials are impeccable, and they speak very highly of this feature.

The few people who did discuss it in those terms were unanimous in recommending that you leave Prefetching on.

Furthermore, why worry about boot times anyway? I recommend that most people avoid restarting their computer except when it’s absolutely required. Windows XP is so stable you can leave it running for weeks at a time and only restart on those rare occasions when you have to do so. If you need to shut down the computer, use the Hibernate option instead, which allows you to resume in seconds, with all your programs loaded just the way they were when you shut down.

If you really want to improve performance, forget bogus tweaks like this one and do the following: increase the amount of RAM in your computer (at least 256MB), get a good defragmenter (Diskeeper is the best), and remove programs you don’t use (or at least configure them so they don’t start automatically).

Update, March 2005: This “tip” just won’t die. It still appears all over the Internet, including at some places that should know better. We revisited the topic for the second edition of Windows XP Inside Out and found that cleaning out the Prefetch folder still does nothing positive for performance. If you think otherwise, get a stopwatch and run your own tests.

Update, May 2005: Microsoft’s Ryan Myers has an excellent blog post on the subject, entitled “Misinformation and the Prefetch Flag.” Here’s the money quote: “[I]t is a bad idea to periodically clean out that folder as some tech sites suggest. For one thing, XP will just re-create that data anyways; secondly, it trims the files anyways if there’s ever more than 128 of them so that it doesn’t needlessly consume space. So not only is deleting the directory totally unnecessary, but you’re also putting a temporary dent in your PC’s performance.”

Be sure to read these follow-up articles as well: Don’t clean out the Prefetch folder, Debunking yet another bogus Windows tip, and One more time: do not clean out your Prefetch folder!