CHill Tools blog

I've decided to start letting people know about the technology tools I use and love... so check out CHill Tools at http://chilltools.blogspot.com/ to see what technology makes my life a little bit happier.

Goodbye Shrink Wrap

Prior to the opening of the Mac App store - the Macintosh equivalent of the iTunes App store for the iPad and iPhone - I hadn't spent much money on software in a few years. I upgraded iLife, but that was about it. The App store opened and I checked it out out of curiosity on the day of its launch. My first surprise was Apple had discounted Aperture, the pro version of iPhoto, from $199 for the shrink wrap edition to $80 or so. I have long considered buying Aperture, but $199 was too high. The discount was too good to pass up and the I quickly made my first Mac App store purchase.

Aperture worked out so well for me that I found myself poking around the App store to see what was there. I wasn't really interested in purchasing games as I have far too many iPhone and iPad games to play... but nonetheless was intrigued by and purchased Braid. It's a bit of an unusual game and I'm a sucker for creativity.

The floodgates have opened! Since January 6th I have purchased Comic Life 2, Civilization IV: Colonization, Desktop Curtain, Cinch, Art Text 2, PinPoint, Boinx TV Home, Postbox, FGDesktopLoupe, and Camtasia. In just over a month my software purchases went through the roof.

Many of these apps I had never heard of before. Some (like Cinch, FGDesktopLoupe, Desktop Curtain and PinPoint) were great little utilities that I could probably have found but I didn't know existed or that I would even need. Even if I had wanted these, going to each site to pay the $0.99 - $4.99 at all these sites was too difficult for the little bit of utility they provide that I would probably have just figured I could do without them. But now with the iTunes store buying, downloading and installing is a single-click process.

I've also been thrilled that no longer do I have to monitor these apps for updates. Instead, the App store helpfully lets me know whenever an update is available for any of my purchased apps and makes it a simple process to update them all in a single action.

Yes, Apple charges the developers a 30% premium to have their wares in the store, but the developer gets simple purchasing, doesn't have to implement anti-piracy or auto-update notifications or code, and marketing. And I haven't provided much money to the Apple development community at large in the last few years. In one month I've exceeded $300 in spending. Sounds like a good deal to them.

I think Apple may have a hit on their hands...

Sharing Internet while Traveling

I travel a lot for work and one of the issues I have is trying to get an Internet connection to all my devices. Rather than pay for a separate connection for my laptop, phone and iPad, I have managed to share my Internet connection in order to minimize my expenses. Here is how I make one paid connection carry over to three (or more!) devices.

1. A 3G plan on my iPhone
My iPhone has a 3G plan which ensures that under most circumstances I can get Internet on my phone. For an extra $20 I added tethering. Tethering isn't as great as a hotspot, as it requires me to either connect my phone to a laptop via USB or Bluetooth and can only share Internet with that single device. And my Wifi only iPad doesn't have tethering support, so it cannot directly use my iPhone's mobile connection.
Still, the 3G plan serves to get my laptop on the Internet any time my phone can connect.

2. Wifi sharing on my laptop
My Macintosh laptop has the built-in ability to create an ad-hoc Wifi network and share its Internet connection with any connected Wifi devices. When my laptop is connected via Bluetooth or cable to my phone I share that connection. If I happen to have an Ethernet connection to my laptop (as is the case when onsite with a client or at a hotel), sharing over Wifi ensures my iPad (and even iPhone - and friends' computing devices) can access the connection. Wifi sharing seems very reliable once you get it set up.

These two techniques mean that not having a 3G iPad isn't really proving to be a liability.

Rumor has it that AT&T will offer iPhone hotspotting. This means that your iPhone can share its connection over Wifi to up to 5 devices. If that occurs, then my iPad will be able to access the Internet through my phone (no laptop middleman required!). I suspect this will be the case as Verizon has already announced hotspot support on the iPhone, and most competing phones offer the same capability.

So no need to spend money on a 3G iPad and its monthly plan...

Apple's Aperture

I've been using my Macintosh for over three years now, and one of my favorite features is iPhoto and its integration throughout the operating system. iPhoto slowly won me over as both it and I evolved until it has become one of my most-used and favorite applications. I've always known that there were high-end, "professional" solutions like Adobe Lightroom and Apple's Aperture, but the high cost of these applications and my relative lack of knowledge of what they add to my photo management and editing workflow left me uninterested.

Less than a week ago I updated my Mac to the latest release of OS/X and found that Apple had released the Mac App Store. I tried out the new marketplace and was impressed at how easy it was to find applications in a wide range of categories. But what jumped out was that Apple's Aperture, for sale traditionally for $199, was available for $80! For reasons I cannot fully explain I immediately made an $80 application my first App store purchase.

I've been using Aperture for several days and now I don't know how I lived without it! My iPhoto library was a mishmashy mess of events, half organized, and difficult to navigate. After a few hours with Aperture, I was able to import my photo library, organize all the projects (events from iPhoto) into a folder structure, and managed to finally have some semblance of order. But even more interesting is that Aperture includes just the right amount of photo retouch capability that I previously relied on Photoshop Elements for. I was actually evaluating Photoshop Elements 9 (an upgrade to 8 which I currently own), but found that after my latest Puerto Vallarta trip I did all my photo edits in Aperture, never needing any tools from an external application.

There is a learning curve to using Aperture. I spent some time with the tutorial videos and the manual to get where I am now. I'm by no means a power user, but have been able to get more than enough value to justify the purchase. In fact, now I would not hesitate to spring for the $199 license if I had to.

Aperture is also well-integrated into OS/X, just as iPhoto is, so I can access all my new, better photos just as easily as before.

At $80 Mac users who do a lot with photos should seriously consider Aperture. It is worth the cost and effort!

Invasion of the Body Scanners

A Security Surprise

I am a frequent traveler for work and am pretty up on the security routine. Last month, however, I was on my way to New York from Seattle. The flight left quite early, so after rousing myself at 3:30am wasn't exactly my most alert self going through airport screening. I have a system for making my passage through screening as efficient as possible and usually have little need to interact with the security screeners. This time, however, as I prepared to head through the metal detector a female agent quite adamantly refused my passage since I had my driver's license in my hand. I told her it was non-metallic but she demanded I go back and put it in the scanner. This was odd as I usually keep my license with me throughout the screening process. It wasn't until after I sent my license through the X-ray machine that I noticed that I was actually being sent through two blue walls and was asked to stand on a pair of footprints with my hands over my head. I was in a full-body scanner! Rather than make a scene at this point I did as I was told (stand still for 10 seconds while who knows what was happening) then exited the contraption and was asked to stand face-to-face with a TSA agent while he waited for word on whether or not I should be allowed to pass. We waited what seemed like an uncomfortable length of time then he said, "Where is the anomaly?" into the headset. We waited. He repeated. Finally I heard him say something like, "No, this is not a woman" then he said I was free to go. I wasn't sure how to take that comment, but it did make me wonder what the answer to the anomaly question might have been.

After that experience, I sat at my gate a little annoyed at the whole proceeding. I also started wondering about exactly what the machine I just allowed myself to be scanned by does. So I got out my iPad and started doing research. The results of my research made me vow that I would "opt out" of full body scanning from that point on. Since then, I have followed the media developments and would recommend we ALL opt out of the scanners.

The Scanner

The body scanner I went through uses X-Ray technology and is manufactured by Rapiscan Systems. This corporation has close ties to Michael Chertoff, the former Department of Homeland Security Secretary under George W. Bush. Chertoff is a strong advocate for whole-body scanning, and is a lobbyist for Rapiscan. The sales of these systems are making Chertoff an awful lot of money. There are other full-body scanning technologies based on radio waves that do not use X-rays.

Safety Concerns

Unfortunately, X-rays are known to have the potential to damage human DNA and can be a potential cause of cancer. The TSA claims for the amount of radiation an individual is subjected to is, from what I can determine, low. Actual dosages, most third-party experts surmise, are probably 20 times higher than advertised. Nonetheless, the dosages are very low, perhaps 1/100th of a chest X-ray. That said, since radiation exposure accumulates over time, if I were to go through security for every flight last year I'd have the equivalent of an extra chest x-ray or two in the year. Safe? Probably. But no one really knows for sure. Last weeks' episode of Science Friday on NPR had a radiation expert discuss the issue in depth. I would suggest everyone listen to this program to get a better idea of the technology and risks before being herded into one of these machines. The short answer: the government says it isn't dangerous even for frequent fliers or airline personnel. They say they have tested the equipment and that we can "trust them." Yes, trust the government. I would rather trust but verify knowing some of the ill-fated actions of our own government in the past. Unfortunately it appears that no third-party has access to test these machines. Since there is no "radiation meter" how do we know what a silent machine might be doing?

Another concern is the fact that the TSA employees work in close proximity to radiation-generating equipment but are not provided with any means to measure their exposure. Radiation dosimetry badges are routinely worn by medical personnel and researches who work in radiation departments. The badges are cheap and ensure that over time no individual is overdosed with radiation. But the TSA will not provide these to their employees.

Privacy Concerns

Many are concerned about the fact that these images reveal too much and might leak out or otherwise embarrass the scan-ee. I don't really worry too much about that, but although the government says it is "impossible" for these images to be retained, I think we know better. Mobile cameras are everywhere, so it seems plausible a TSA employee might use one to take snapshots of their screen. Beyond that, however, public documents make it clear that these machines do have the ability to store and send images as that was one of the features the government required. "Trust us, we're the government." The government claims that they can only send and store images in "test mode" and that "test mode" is impossible for airport personnel to activate. But the government declines to have anyone verify that this is indeed the case, nor even expand on the mechanism in-place to ensure privacy.

Bad Security

Worst of all, all this effort, time, and money is probably one of the less effective ways to deal with airport security. In response to the "underwear bomber", these scanners supposedly plug that security hole. But it appears that may not even be the case. Many of the items easily seen on the scan were already detectable by metal detectors. Instead of developing a system of prevention, these scanners continue our security theater by fighting the last war rather than thinking ahead to the future.

Israeli security experts in Tel Aviv have never deployed such machines, and it appears the reason why is that they just don't work. Rafi Sela, the former chief security officer of the Israel Airport Authority with 30-years experience in airport security claimed he can smuggle enough explosives through these machines to bring down a 747 when addressing Canada's parliament. Israel appears to rely on intelligent interrogation by numerous people you encounter as you make your way through the airport. Key here is "intelligent." Israel places highly-trained personnel at their airports who know where to focus their resources and determine where the true threats to aviation lie. Rather than invest in paying for training and investing in the TSA personnel to make them expert interrogators likely to uncover known and unknown risks to aviation, we instead have cast our lot with training them to to herd people through mindless machines that claim to be able to cope with all threats. Michael Chertoff and other businessmen like this because they can make a ton of money selling machines that will no doubt become obsolete very quickly as terrorists adjust their behavior, requiring new improved versions of the machines to deal with the next threat that comes through. They simply can't make a ton of money training people in proven interrogation techniques, so they lobby strongly for the automation. And we all are herded like cattle into these machines, most of us having no more questions than the cow who's about to get a bolt into their skull. Radiation in the skull may not have the same drama, but who knows about the long-term effects.

Just Say No

The second time I was asked to enter a machine in Montreal I was prepared and immediately opted out. The agent wasn't too happy and attempted to persuade me by saying "these are totally safe machines that don't use the same technology you are probably worried about." I told her I couldn't really tell anything about how safe or not this machine is by just looking at it and opted out. I received a highly invasive pat-down, but at least I was confident that the procedure was safe and I knew who it was who had rubbed my chest, groin, thighs, and butt. I would rather look the screener in the eye and be a human to them rather than have my naked image sent to a private room where some faceless agent looked on. But most importantly, I did not have to try to determine if the agent was telling me the full story when she said the machine was totally safe. I didn't have to wonder if the vast amounts of money involved might lead some people to downplay real risks in these machines. I did not need to consult a doctor, physicist, engineer, and who knows whoever else to decide if the procedure I had just been exposed to was a health risk. No, instead I just got felt up by a stranger.

We cannot blindly allow our government to take a path that may have hidden health risks, may not improve security in any appreciable way, and wastes a ton of taxpayers money when clear alternatives exist. Instead of pursuing a policy of making airport security something any idiot with a cattle prod could conduct, I want to feel that the people I encounter at the airport are diligent, truly looking for threats. Machines and procedures always develop blind spots, and terrorists are continually trying to capitalize on those blind sports. Well-trained people are not so easy to design around. But building a staff of well-trained people for our airports is a challenge that does not mean lots of cash for a small group of Washington lobbyists.

Tomorrow has been declared national "opt-out" day. For me, that will now be every day.

iOS 4.2 + AppleTV = LOVE

I updated my iPad and iPhone 4 to iOS 4.2 today and must say my favorite new feature is being able to stream video directly to my Apple TV. For $99 I am now able to immediately start streaming video content to my living room HDTV. What's more... multitasking is supported so I am able to exit the video player and continue to use my iPad while the video continues playing over the Apple TV.

After some terrible attempts to do the same using a Samsung Blu-Ray disc player and a Windows media server, I am impressed with the quality as there seems to be no buffering or synchronization issues within my home network.

If you consume video on you iPhone or iPad and have a HDMI slot available on the living room TV I highly recommend the Apple TV for this functionality alone. Beats my audio-only sharing via an Airport Express for the same price!

Bringing Apps to your TV

For more than ten years I have been using computer technology in some form or another as a television. I am still using a Windows XP machine in my office to record video using BeyondTV from Snapstream. Even though it appears Snapstream has completely redirected all resources to commercial offerings, the consumer-targeted BeyondTV is still a compelling experience for television. I enjoy being able to record video to unprotected, standard formats that I can easily move to my iPod, iPad, iPhone, or another computer when needed.

Unfortunately, outside of television functionality the computers I've attached to my TV screen have provided a substandard, difficult experience - especially when navigating between various content types (i.e. television, movies, DVDs, music). Windows 7 and OS/X both include media center functionality, but you have to pretty much commit to staying within their software universe for content.

My Samsung Blu-Ray disc player includes an Internet connection which allows you to install apps for streaming content or even playing games, but the games are utterly lame. Streaming from Netflix or Amazon seems to work ok, but if I try streaming from my media center PC the voices are out of sync with the video. Seems like this problem should have disappeared ten years ago or more, yet it still persists.

Apple TV worked well, although it was very limited in the types of content you could bring in and largely not extensible to the average consumer. It played well with anything in iTunes but, again, if you wanted to venture out of that ecosystem you had very limited options.

Google and Apple appear poised to bring their solutions to getting content on the living room screen by the end of this year. Google announced the Google TV project this year to embed their software into new televisions. I don't really relish replacing the flatscreens that recently replaced the tube sets, but apparently Logitech will be offering Google TV in an add-on box.

Apple is rumored to be announcing an update to Apple TV next week that sounds like it will bring iOS (the operating system powering the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad) to your television. This sounds very exciting for a number of reasons:

• Huge, available app ecosystem
• Easily extended via apps
• Already in-place e-commerce through iTunes
• Familiar interface

If Apple can bring the iPad/iPhone experience to the television they may have a hit on their hands. You will still be in the Apple ecosystem, but the iOS ecosystem allows for content providers to create new experiences outside of iTunes if they want.

It's strange that my TV has been limited so long when my phone has become a killer content consumption device. I'm hopeful that by the end of this year that situation will change and my TV can really enter the 21st century.