Bad experience at Larry’s Pistol and Pawn in Huntsville

I’m not really a complainer by nature (thank goodness), and I don’t tend to have problems with customer service at most of the businesses I deal with– in part because I am picky about who gets my money. Having said that, I had a bad experience with Larry’s Pistol and Pawn in Huntsville that I wanted to document.

Larry’s has been in business for a long time; when I moved to Huntsville in 1991, they had the only indoor pistol range in town. As long as I’ve lived in the area, I’ve shopped there, and I’ve never had a bad experience. Yesterday, though, I had a salesman who was both discourteous and uninformed about the law. He refused to sell me a rifle because I am a dual resident of California and Alabama– “I won’t sell you this because it’s not legal in California,” he said. 

I explained that I’d just gone through the same process at another local store, which had called the local Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) office to confirm that it was legal. According to 27 CFR 478 § 11, it is in fact legal for a US citizen who resides in more than one state to purchase a long gun in any state of residence. I meet the legal residency definitions for both Alabama and California, and if you read Example 2 in the definition for “State of Residence” it’s clearly applicable.

Rude Guy wasn’t in the mood to listen; he told me that the other store where I’d made a previous purchase had broken the law. That didn’t seem likely; gun stores tend to be terrifically careful to follow the law and ATF regulations because failure to do so can get them shut down and their employees jailed. I politely thanked him and left. Then I called the local ATF field office myself and spoke to a very helpful ATF employee. I explained my situation, she cited 478§11 to me, told me I was good to go, and gave me her phone number to have Larry’s call her if they had any questions.

Armed with this information (ed.: see what I did there?) I went back to Larry’s, stood in line for the same guy, and explained my phone call. He was even ruder than before: “I don’t care what she said,” he said angrily; “I still won’t sell to you.” Clearly there was no point in arguing, so I left.

I’ve sent Larry Burnett, the owner, a detailed letter explaining what happened, so we’ll see what action, if any, he takes. Until I hear back, though, Larry’s is off my shopping list. If you’re in the market for firearms, ammunition, or supplies, I suggest you go elsewhere.

129 Comments

Filed under FAIL, General Stuff, Smackdown!

CrashPlan “Cannot connect to backup engine” errors on Mac OS X

I recently updated to Java 1.7 for work, and after doing so I noticed that CrashPlan was no longer performing backups. (I’m a bit ashamed to admit how long it took for me to notice though!) The company’s support forum suggests uninstalling and reinstalling the client, which didn’t fix the problem. A bit more searching identified the problem: CrashPlan expects Java 1.6, the official Apple version, and it gets unhappy if you replace that with 1.7. The instructions here outline a workaround: you have to stop the CrashPlan background service, modify its configuration file to point to the official-Apple version of Java, and then restart the service. Happy backups!

Leave a comment

Filed under General Tech Stuff

Microsoft wins UK case vs Motorola Mobility/Google

Earlier this year I had the unique (to me) opportunity to serve as a technical expert witness in a court case in the UK. Tony’s already written about the case but I wanted to add my perspective.

I was contacted by Bird and Bird to see if I might be willing and able to act as a technical expert in a court case; that’s all they said at first. The nature of the questions they were asking soon clued me in that the case involved Exchange ActiveSync and multiple-point-of-presence (MPOP) support for presence publishing– two completely separate technologies which Motorola/Google had lumped together in this case.  .

My role was to perform a wire-level analysis of the protocols in question: EAS, SIP/SIMPLE as implemented in Lync, and the Windows Live Messenger protocol. For each of these protocols, my job was to produce an accurate, annotated packet capture showing exactly what happened when multiple devices synchronized with the same account, and when the status on one device changed.

This isn’t what most people think of when they think of expert testimony; in courtroom dramas and books, it always seems like the expert is being asked to provide an opinion, or being cross-examined on the validity of their opinion. No one wanted my opinion in this case (which is perfectly normal), just for me to to accurately and impartially report what was happening on the wire.

This proved to be incredibly interesting from a technical standpoint. Like most administrators, it had never really occurred to me to look into the depths of the EAS protocol itself to see exactly what bits were being passed on the wire. After a great deal of study of the ActiveSync protocol documentation and many a late night slaving away over Wireshark and Network Monitor captures, I’d produced a report that showed the actual network traffic that passed between client(s) and server for a variety of test scenarios, along with an explanation of the contents of the packets and how they related to user action on the device.

Along the way, I gained a new appreciation for the economy of design of these protocols– it’s surprising how efficient they are when you look at them at such a low level. (And a shout out to Eric Lawrence for his incredibly useful Fiddler tool, which made it much easier for me to get the required data into a usable format.) I found a few bugs in Wireshark, learned more than I wanted to about SSL provisioning on Windows Phone 7.5 devices, and generally had a grand time. I particularly enjoyed working with the attorneys at Bird and Bird, who were quite sharp and had lovely accents to boot. (I’m not sure they enjoyed my accent quite as much, but oh well.)

When I finished my report, I submitted it to Bird and Bird and that was the last I heard of the case until today, when Mr. Justice Arnold issued his ruling. It was submitted as part of Microsoft’s justification explaining why their implementations did not infringe on Motorola’s patent; the purpose of having an annotated set of packet captures was to clearly illustrate the differences between the claimed innovations in the patent and Microsoft’s implementation to show why Microsoft wasn’t infringing.

Florian Mueller has a good summary of the case that highlights something I didn’t know: the patent at issue is the only one on which an Android manufacturer is currently enforcing an injunction against Apple. I am no patent attorney, but it would seem that Apple might have grounds to have this injunction lifted. It will be interesting to see what happens in the related German court cases that Muller cites, but it’s hard for this layman to see any other likely result besides a Microsoft win… but we will see.

Leave a comment

Filed under General Tech Stuff, UC&C

More on the Lenovo A720

It turns out that I was perhaps a little hasty in dismissing the Lenovo A720. If you use the link that Google and Bing offer when searching for “Lenovo A720,” the Best Buy page you get says that the product couldn’t be found; searching for the SKU embedded in the link returns no results. However, searching Best Buy’s site itself for “Lenovo A720” does bring up a grand total of 1 A720 configuration: 6GB of RAM, 2.5GHz Core i5, 1TB hard drive, and a 1920×1080 27″ multitouch display with a BluRay player.

Best Buy shows that they have the A720 in stock, but only for shipping; it’s not in stores. I didn’t try to order one, so it’s possible that they are exaggerating their stock on hand.

The least expensive 27″ iMac is $1799, which buys you more RAM (8GB), a faster CPU (2.9GHz Core i5), and a 2560×1440 screen. The iMac lacks the A720’s touchscreen, but it can be configured with a larger hard drive (including Apple’s Fusion hybrid SSD/conventional disk) and more RAM (max of 32GB vice the A720’s 8GB.)

Is this a price premium? For your $300, you get a higher-resolution (and, probably, higher-quality; Apple’s iMac displays are very, very good) display, more RAM, and a faster CPU, but you lose the touchscreen. I am not convinced of the value of touchscreens for desktops for the kind of work that I do, so that might not be a bad tradeoff.

However, the iMac isn’t itself available from Apple’s website until January, so the comparison is a bit of a moot point as this juncture. I’ll write another post once the highest-end models from both vendors are actually, y’know, shipping; comparing vaporware or you-can’t-have-it-ware is pretty pointless.

2 Comments

Filed under General Tech Stuff

Where is the Lenovo A720?

About a year ago, I wrote an article examining whether there really was a price premium for Apple laptops. My conclusion: yes, in some cases. A short while ago, Apple introduced a new line of iMac all-in-one computers, and, that same day, Dan Holme and I got to debating their merits on Twitter. Dan is a big fan of Lenovo’s all-in-one desktops, about which I knew little, so I decided to do some digging.

I wanted to see if Apple was able to get a price premium for their all-in-one computers compared to comparable Windows 8 machines. Dan said he’s a fan of the Lenovo A720, which looks like a pretty spiffy machine. I went to Lenovo’s site on 23 October and found that there are 4 A720 models ranging in price from $1949 down to $1469. (These were sale prices; the Lenovo site had a prominent banner pointing out that their sale prices would be in effect for a week or so.) The highest-end machine shown on their site was an A720 – 25647CU. Your $1949 buys a quad-core 2.3GHz Core i7 CPU, 8GB of RAM, a 1TB disk with a 64GB SSD, and a 27″ 1920 x 1080 27″ multi-touch screen. This particular machine also includes a TV tuner and a Blu-ray optical drive. You can’t get a bigger drive, more RAM, or a better graphics card through the usual configure-to-order process.

At that time Apple hadn’t announced availability dates for the new iMacs, so I put this post aside as a draft. I went back to Lenovo’s site on 3 December and found that the A720 models are all listed as “out of stock.” I checked again 19 December and found they were still out of stock. This is odd, given that we are the height of the holiday buying season; rather than a page that says “out of stock- try back later” you’d think Lenovo would be trying to capture my money somehow.

Interestingly, if you use Google or Bing to search for “Lenovo A720,” the first two sponsored results are for Best Buy and Amazon. The Best Buy link 404s, and the Amazon link leads to a single used A720.

So where did the A720s all go?

Searches for phrases like “A720 delay” don’t bring up any results. Perhaps Lenovo is selling A720s as fast as they can make them, or perhaps there’s some issue with their production or distribution. Regardless, if you cannot actually buy one, the question of whether they are less expensive than Apple’s nearest equivalent isn’t very interesting. I look forward to revisiting the question once the A720, or its successor, resurfaces.

3 Comments

Filed under General Tech Stuff

“Go or No-Go: Heading North”

Air Facts Journal is one of my favorite web publications. I’ve been reading Richard Collins since I was a wee lad (thank you, FLYING Magazine) and the other authors and editors there are every bit as good– I learn something from just about every article. One of my favorite features is their “Go or No Go,” in which you’re presented with a realistic scenario involving a flight: you’re in city X, you want to get to city Y, here’s the weather, here are any other pertinent facts… do you go or not? The discussions around these articles have been really helpful in pointing out to me what my personal minimums and comfort levels are at this stage of my aviation career (which I intend to be long-lived, thus my interest in learning from the experiences of others).

This week’s “Go or No-Go” involves the world’s most famous freight pilot:

Talk about “get-home-itis.” Your trip today is the final leg of a marathon freight dog run, with over 1 billion legs in the logbook so far. The flight has gone flawlessly, but you’re dead tired and would really like to get home to the Mrs. (Claus, that is). But just because you’re the big red man doesn’t mean you can skip the weather briefing, so you take one last glance at your iPad before takeoff.

It shows a good deal of white stuff out there and some serious fog, so it looks like your last flight won’t be easy. The good news is you are very current (23 hours in the last day) and your Mark IV sleigh is in excellent condition. You also don’t have to worry about running out of fuel tonight–you started using renewable energy sources long before it was fashionable–so you can deviate if you need to.

Read the report below and then tell us if you’re going or canceling.

Even if you aren’t a pilot, it’s worth looking at the scenario to get a sense of some of the factors that can influence, positively or negatively, a decision to complete a planned flight. The other scenarios they’ve published make for interesting reading too.

Leave a comment

Filed under aviation

Thursday trivia #82

No time for trivia this week, sorry. Instead, let me leave you with a mashup for your listening pleasure:

Or if your tastes run more towards Christmas music I strongly encourage you to give this a listen:

Leave a comment

Filed under General Stuff

Santa’s checkride

The FAA requires that pilots have what’s known as a biennal flight review, or BFR. Every two years, you have to fly with an instructor, who’s supposed to point out anything you need to work on. Of course, pilots who fly charter, passenger, or cargo flights may have additional “line checks” or other check flights.

To prepare for his checkride, Santa had the elves wash the sled and bathe all the reindeer. Santa got his logbook out and made sure all his paperwork was in order. He knew the examiner would examine all his equipment and truly put his flying skills to the test…

The morning of the checkride arrived. The examiner arrived promptly, introduced himself, and started the inquisition with a barrage of questions. Moving to the hangar, the examiner walked slowly around the sled. He checked the reindeer harnesses, the landing gear, and Rudolph’s nose. He painstakingly reviewed Santa’s weight and balance calculations for the sled’s enormous payload.

Finally, they were ready for the checkride. Santa got in and fastened his seatbelt and shoulder harness and checked the compass. Then the examiner hopped in carrying, to Santa’s surprise, a shotgun.

“What’s that for?!?” asked Santa incredulously.

The examiner winked and said, “I’m not supposed to tell you this ahead of time,” as he leaned over to whisper in Santa’s ear, “but you’re gonna lose an engine on takeoff.”

(hat tip to John at Golf Hotel Whiskey).

Leave a comment

Filed under aviation

Thursday trivia #81

2 Comments

Filed under General Stuff

Weekend wrapup

Paul robichaux net 20121209 002Tom is putting our Elvis ornament on the tree. Yes, that Elvis. I’m flying back from a short but eventful weekend with the boys. During this whirlwind visit, we bought a small Christmas tree and decorated it with our favorite ornaments. These ornaments all have some kind of sentimental or event connection; for example, there’s a Rushmore ornament from our long road trip with my dad; there’s the Marine Corps logo ornament, and so on. We also sponsored two Salvation Army “angels”: a 12-year-old boy and a veteran living in a local nursing home. We had a terrific time picking out clothes, toys, and other items from their wish lists. This is something Arlene and I used to do before we even had kids; over the last couple of years it had fallen off my radar but I was really glad to renew the tradition with the boys. Plus: Oreos.

 

On this trip, I also got my first taste of wireless charging, courtesy of the “free” Nokia DT-900 charging plate that AT&T was giving away when I bought the 920. It’s magic: you put the phone on top of the little charging puck and it charges, as advertised. The rate of charge seems to be slower than a regular USB connection, but the convenience can’t be beat. Sadly Windows Phone doesn’t (yet?) support wireless sync, but the ability to plop the phone down to let it have a snack, then pick it up and go without fussing over cords is delightful.

And speaking of delightful: I mentioned a few posts ago that I would post an example of what the Lumia 920’s camera can do. Here’s one of my cousin Adam.

Paul robichaux net 20121124 004

And, as a bonus, here’s one I took indoors, with no flash. The color reproduction and sharpness is excellent. I’m very well pleased with the 920 as a camera, as well as as a phone.

Paul robichaux net 20121124 005

In other power-related news, I finally broke down and bought Apple’s airline power adapter. Many American Airlines planes (and some on Delta) still have 12V sockets at their seats, and after running out of battery on my last flight I thought I’d give it a try. The in-seat outlets can’t provide enough current to both charge a MacBook Pro and operate it; all they do is slow the rate of discharge. I got on the plane with 76% battery; after nearly two hours of moderate activity, plus having a phone plugged in, I’m down to 58% with the adapter in place. This is better than nothing, although inferior to the 115V outlets on newer 737-900s and other planes of similar vintage.

Finally, today at the Chinese buffet, here’s what my fortune said. I am choosing to take this as a good omen for my check ride next week!

NewImage

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Friends & Family, Travel

Endeavour fly-by

[ this is pretty old– the flyby was 21 September 2012, and I just found this post lingering in my drafts folder. I wrote it with the intention of finding an aviation outlet for it. It would have been much more interesting had I posted it sooner– sorry about that. It turns out that no one wanted a “real” article on the flyby, so I’m publishing this– better late than never.]

“Once in a lifetime” is a perhaps overused phrase. However, with the demise of the Space Shuttle program, almost everything associated with the program has entered its last phase. Endeavour was the last of the shuttles to be built; it was a replacement for Columbia. It is thus fitting that it was the last Shuttle to be retired, and when I found out that its farewell flight would take it through the Bay Area I made plans to see it. NASA announced the route of flight and a tentative schedule a couple of weeks in advance, but I didn’t start planning seriously until a couple of days ago. My first stop: an email to the press coordinator at NASA Ames, asking for press credentials on behalf of Windows IT Pro. Astute readers will know that they don’t usually publish aviation stories (and I am working on a real article for a real aviation publication) but I figured it was worth a shot. Sure enough, they put me on the press access list. 

A few coworkers and I got to talking about how to best take advantage of this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, and the game was afoot.

The first decision: where would the best viewing be? The route of flight was supposed to take the Shuttle from south to north. At first it looked like the Palo Alto airport might be the simplest place to go: limited crowds, no problem with parking. However, we weren’t sure exactly what path it would take, and I was worried that we wouldn’t get a good angle from the accessible areas. Eric suggested a spot in the wildlife refuge but we ruled that out as well. With press credentials, we reasoned, we shouldn’t have any problem getting on base or getting a good spot.

Eric picked me up at a nearby Taco Bell about 8am and we made our way to the Ellis gate, where we were quickly admitted and directed to the press area. The helpful NASA PAO staff gave us credentials, and we bumped into fellow Acuitan Tim, whom we deputized as a backup photographer. We tried to buy breakfast, but the food trucks were largely out of food since they had opened at 0600, thus illustrating something about early birds and Belgian waffles. As we walked through the line of booths that NASA Ames had set up to showcase their work, I was surprised and pleased at how many young kids were there. The crowd vibe was surprisingly upbeat given the fact that, when you think about it, this was a sad occasion: the final flight of the last of the United States’ fleet of man-rated spacecraft.

The flight operations building was where we’d planned to watch the flyby. Our press credentials got us in and we made our way through the building to the back apron. Here’s a sample of what it looked like from ground level. 

DSC 0506

We heard estimates of the crowd size ranging from 13,000 to 20,000; I didn’t get a final count from the Ames PAO but it was a large and cheerful crowd.

I made a few exploratory forays to the parking apron to see if anyone yelled at me for being out there. No one did, so our first plan was to set up our tripods out there when the Shuttle got closer, on the theory that setting up too soon might get us ordered back to the seating area. In the meantime, though, we went inside the building to have a look around. Seeing a stairwell, Eric suggested we go see what was on the second floor; Tim volunteered to watch the camera gear and Eric and I went upstairs. The second floor is dedicated to offices for the control tower– Moffett Field, of course, has its own Class C airspace with a control tower, and that tower happens to be located on top of the building we were in. At the end of the hall, we came to another stairwell; a quick exchange of glances was all it took to convince us to go up and see what happened. There we were greeted with an imposing site: a big, black metal gate with a sign warning us not to enter. The gate, however, was open, and we could hear voices coming from above– so after a bit of consultation, during which I believe the word “bail” may have been used once or twice, up we went.

Soon enough we found ourselves on the outside of the control tower. There were some other folks on the east side of the tower, in full sun; we had a shady corner on the west side to ourselves. Amazed at our good fortune, Eric went to go get Tim and the camera gear. He then got to meet the tower chief, who was a little aggrieved that the media was invading the outside of his tower. Eric and Tim were able to convince him to let them rejoin me up top, as you can see below.

Eric and Tim

Here are Eric and Tim  enjoying a moment of peace and quiet before they started slinging camera equipment around.

(I should note that this picture was taken with a Nokia Lumia 800, the camera software for which is about a million times better than the iPhone’s built-in app.) The elbow you see in the extreme right of this picture belonged to Pat, one of the tower managers; he was very friendly and was kind enough to keep us informed about where the Shuttle was during its flight. We had been expecting the Shuttle to fly down the length of the runway from the south; turns out it was going to approach from the north, meaning that it should have  come from right next to Tim’s head in the picture above. We set up our cameras: Eric and Tim had theirs on tripods; I had a camcorder on a monopod and my D5100 around my neck.

We waited; the PA announcer would occasionally give the crowd updates, and at last the call came telling us the aircraft were only a couple of minutes out. We readied our cameras. Surprise! Rather than flying along the runway centerline, as the PAO (and announcer) had repeatedly told us would happen, the Shuttle stack flew along 101– to the west of Moffett– on our side of the control tower! Our seeming bad luck at getting a spot away from the runway turned out to be perfect luck indeed. The Shuttle’s chase aircraft flew down the runway centerline, but I doubt anyone was paying much attention to it.

The actual flyby… wow. I was too busy taking pictures with my camera to notice which way the camcorder was pointed, so I didn’t get any video, and some of my pictures are poorly composed because I was eagerly watching the flyby with my Mark 1, Mod 0 eyeballs instead of looking at the camera. Here are the two best of the resulting pictures:

DSC 0522

DSC 0525

After the flyby, the crowd slowly dissipated; it took us about half an hour to exit Moffett and get back onto 101. 

Leave a comment

Filed under aviation, California

Checkride: the last days

Part of the reason I’ve been so quiet lately is that I’ve been preparing for the check ride for my private pilot’s license. I’ve written before about the requirements for the check ride; just as with your driver’s license, to get a pilot’s licenses you must  demonstrate competency by passing a practical test. Before you are allowed to take the practical test, you must pass a written exam and meet some minimum requirements for the amount and kind of training you need. I have met all the minimums– including flying at night and flying without outside visual reference, using flight instruments alone– and have a check ride scheduled for next week. Since early September, I’ve been practicing various maneuvers and studying the body of knowledge that the examiner will expect me to demonstrate competence in. About a month ago, I got the nod from my instructor: “It’s time. Call the examiner and schedule your check ride.” 

Of course, I did so immediately and was crushed to find out that she couldn’t schedule me until mid-December. Undaunted, I took the first available date and kept on studying and learning. One big focus area for me was landings. The practical test standards require that the applicant demonstrate four kinds of landings:

  • the “regular” kind
  • power-off landings: at a point on the downwind leg of the traffic pattern, you pull the throttle to idle and glide to a landing on the selected runway
  • short-field landings, in which you must pick a point on the runway and land within a specified distance after (but not before) it. This simulates approach and landing to a short runway, or over an obstacle such as a tree, crane, or tower in the approach path. The key to making great short-field landings is airspeed control: if you are going too fast when you cross the runway threshold, your airplane will float on seemingly forever, causing you to miss your touchdown point.
  • soft-field landings, which you might use to land on grass, sand, a plowed field, or other non-paved surfaces. The key here is to land the airplane as softly as possible, which requires quite a bit of finesse (not to mention excellent airspeed control) and to use aerodynamic braking instead of the wheel brakes to slow down.

For extra fun, you can combine these– imagine, for example, that you need to land in a plowed field after an engine failure and you have a power-off soft-field landing. And, of course, there are short- and soft-field takeoffs, too. Being able to do these consistently is critical, because each type of takeoff and landing has characteristic speeds and distances that the examiner will evaluate. I can honestly say that my landings have improved beyond the point I thought possible– if you’d told me a year ago that I could land my airplane safely in 500′ of runway I wouldn’t have believed it.

FAA check rides are supposed to be based on realistic scenarios. Here’s the extent of the guidance I got from the examiner:

I’m planning on meeting you at 9am (traffic permitting).  You can plan xctry to KPRB, calculate takeoff and landing distances over a 50ft obstacle and I’m 120lbs with no bags for weight and balance.  Go ahead and preflight and assure fuel is as desired.

I have a destination and I know how much payload I need to haul (in this case, right about 300 lbs). Other than that, the route, fuel on board, altitude, intermediate stops if any, and every other aspect of the flight are up to me as the pilot-in-command (PIC). This nicely reflects the common uses for light aircraft: go to a specified destination with a passenger, with all the other factors being subject to the PIC’s judgement. To meet the requirements for this scenario, I need to be able to show the examiner a solid flight plan, taking into account weather, terrain, airport availability, and any other considerations that might impact my ability to get us safely there and back. (The only slightly unusual aspect of this plan is that my flight plan needs to include obstacle clearance; there currently aren’t any obstacles at Palo Alto or Paso Robles, but the FAA requires that applicants show that they know how to plan for obstacle clearance, so thus it shall be.) I need to show that I can file a flight plan and deal with air traffic control (ATC) as we fly, including canceling the flight plan when we divert and dealing with any instructions that ATC may give us en route. 

Before we get to that point I have to prove that the airplane is airworthy, which I’ll do by showing that its maintenance records are up to date and that any required inspection or maintenance has been performed. This is really part of the oral exam, which is more or less continuous: the examiner will be evaluating my knowledge from the minute I shake her hand and say “hello” until she signs my temporary license. The examiner can ask anything she likes about any aspect of what private pilots are supposed to know, and I’d better be able to answer correctly. She is also expected to create what the FAA calls a “realistic distraction” to see how I handle it; this means she can try to distract me by talking, dropping an object and asking me to pick it up, or anything else that a passenger might reasonably do in flight. 

Will we actually fly to Paso Robles? Nope. At some point along the route, the examiner will divert me to an alternate destination, simulating a change in weather at the destination or perhaps a passenger who has to go to the bathroom RIGHT NOW I MEAN IT. The examiner will also simulate an in-flight emergency that requires a simulated emergency landing. She can also fail, or simulate failure of, anything else in the airplane, including navigation and communications systems. I’ll also have to demonstrate the maneuvers called for in the PTS, which will be done somewhere along our route of flight. 

There’s a surprising amount of paperwork that has to happen first. The FAA uses a system called IACRA to process applicant paperwork. I had to fill out an application in IACRA, then my flight instructor had to log in to IACRA and approve it; along with an endorsement in my logbook, this signals the examiner that I’ve met the skill and knowledge requirements to attempt the practical test. Updating my logbook and completing the IACRA paperwork took me a couple of hours, but I finished it this morning. All the paperwork is done, so all I need now is a good night’s sleep on Monday and good weather on Tuesday! 

3 Comments

Filed under aviation

First two weeks with the Lumia 920

A few quick notes jotted down from my two-week exploration with the Lumia 920 as my primary phone:

  • LTE is awesome, and the WP8 tethering app works flawlessly, with none of the flakiness of the corresponding iOS app.
  • There’s no TaxiMagic app for WP8, so I grabbed my iPhone 4 this morning to book a taxi. It felt tiny compared to the 920.. but it also felt terribly slow. Granted, the iPhone 4 is two hardware generations (at least) behind the 920, but I’d always previously been satisfied with its speed.
  • The Bluetooth crackling I complained about seems to be a bug in the Nokia Music app; it doesn’t happen when using Xbox Music or the built-in music app.
  • The Mac sync tool is buggy. Really, really buggy. This is my biggest current frustration with the phone, although since it automatically uploads pictures to SkyDrive at least I can grab photos without too much hassle. It occurred to me that I might want to use the Windows sync tool in BootCamp instead of relying on the Mac client, but then I’d have to give up iPhoto and iTunes integration.
  • Only today did I discover the very cool Groups feature, which allows you to see all status updates for a subset of your contacts from a single tile.
  • The WP Evernote app seems to have a bug where, when you edit a note, you get a blank white screen with no note contents. I’m not sure what causes this or whether it’s known, as I haven’t really had time to dig into it yet.
  • Nokia’s Panorama app is superb: it is super easy to take panoramic pictures with great alignment, through the expedient of showing a hollow circle that you align with a solid concentric circle. This works really well– here’s an example of a panorama I shot at the I-20 rest area in Vicksburg.

Although I briefly considered swapping the 920 for an HTC 8X, I decided not to for three primary reasons. First, the 920’s screen looks better to me– blacks and colors both look better on the 920. Second, Nokia’s bundled (and supported) apps are better– Panorama, SmartShot, Nokia Music, and Nokia Drive are great examples of how they’re adding value for their users. Third, the 920’s wireless charging feature would greatly simplify my phone usage– or at least it has that potential, once Nokia ships the plates.

Oh, and as long as I’m fantasizing about future developments: it would be great to get a full-fledged Starbucks app one day… sigh.

3 Comments

Filed under Reviews

Lumia 920 day 11: brick city

Happy Thanksgiving! Today I am thankful for AT&T’s return service (and irked at myself for leaving my MacBook Pro charger in Huntsville– thus the brevity of this entry. Low battery concentrates the mind…)

On Windows Phone devices, Windows Live IDs (WLID), now better known as Microsoft accounts. are the master accounts used to control access to Microsoft services. You have to link a WLID to the phone to buy or update apps. Once you put a WLID on the phone, the only way to change the associated WLID is to wipe the phone to factory settings and start over. Because (long boring historical discussion elided), I had to change the e-mail address on my WLID. The Xbox, Skype, and Windows Phone Marketplace aspects of this change went smoothly (although the change itself was damn near impossible to effect; I ended up having to get a friend who works at MS to open an internal support case.) Tim did the same thing recently and found that even his Surface took the change without issue.

My phone, however, did not, so I had to reset it and put in the new WLID. I did this last night… only to find that the 920 apparently has a bug that bricks it when you do a hard reset. Ooooops.

I understand the existence of software bugs; Lord knows I’ve suffered through my share of them on iOS. I put the phone aside, took it to the AT&T store in Alexandria, Louisiana, and was immediately given a replacement with no fuss– the staff were super helpful and friendly.

Now, a brief digression: at the AT&T store I saw the HTC 8X for the first time. Wow! What a great-looking phone: it’s the same width and height as the 920 but much thinner and lighter. I may give the 920 the boot and get an 8X instead, despite its inferior camera and smaller onboard storage.

Anyway: I took the replacement phone home and started trying to restore its settings. All of my old text messages and photos seem to have synced back from the cloud, but app settings, and the apps themselves, have not. This Paul Thurrott article says that the “App List + Settings” backup “includes Internet Explorer Favorites, the list of installed apps, and ‘most’ device settings.” I haven’t seen any evidence of it restoring those things but maybe I’m just being impatient; I’ll wait a bit longer. SMS messages synced automatically and immediately, but maybe apps take longer? One thing that doesn’t seem to be included in sync at all is the arrangement of tiles on the home screen; that’s an unfortunate omission given that I had finally gotten everything put the way I wanted it!

Last night, before the WLID change, I’d tried to use the Windows Phone connector for Mac OS to back up the phone, but it crashed each time I plugged the phone in. This morning, when I plugged the new phone in, sync worked flawlessly. I lived through the flakiness of iTunes sync for many years, and I’m not happy about having to relive it, especially because the WP connector is only supported through Microsoft’s forums.

The 920 camera is superb; I’ll post some photos I’ve taken with it once things settle down here a bit. 

4 Comments

Filed under Reviews, UC&C

Announcing Exchange 2013 Inside Out

Big news, at least to me!

Tony Redmond and I are delighted to announce a new joint project: Exchange 2013 Inside Out, a two-volume set that we will write for Microsoft Press, with an anticipated publication date in fall 2013. Tony is writing part 1, which covers the mailbox server role, the store, DAG, compliance, modern public folders and site mailboxes. I’m writing part 2, which covers client access, connectivity, transport, unified messaging, and Office 365 integration. This division looks as if I got more work to do, but Tony assures everyone that he can easily fill a book on just one topic.

Why two books where Exchange 2010 Inside Out merited just one? Well, just look at that book and reflect that it contains some 400,000 words in a 2-pound tome. Apart from the weight, it takes a long time to write such a book and there are tons of changes and new material in Exchange 2013 that we want to cover. The option of writing a single 500,000 word volume was just not attractive. Thankfully Microsoft Press agreed with us.

We’ve deliberately decided to take our time writing. There’s no point in rushing out a book based on a product immediately after it is released because no real-world experience exists. Microsoft runs an excellent Technology Adoption Program (TAP) that helps the development group understand how new versions of Exchange behave in production environments through early deployments, but we prefer to see how the software evolves and behaves as it is deployed more widely. This can’t really happen until after Microsoft releases Exchange 2010 SP3 and whatever update is necessary for Exchange 2007 SP3 to allow coexistence with Exchange 2013. Writing based on a firm foundation of real-world deployment experience has always seemed to make a lot of sense to us and we see no reason to change now.

Although the two volumes of Exchange 2013 Inside Out will stand alone, we will absolutely make sure that each volume complements the other. We will be technical editors for each other’s volumes, giving us equal opportunity to insert bad jokes and Exchange war stories across the breadth of both volumes.

Mostly because we have no firm dates in mind, we’re not releasing any details of our schedule, we hope that we will be able to offer an early-access program to readers through the Microsoft Press prePress program, so stay tuned!

Leave a comment

Filed under UC&C