<?xml version='1.0' encoding='iso-8859-1'?>
<rss version='2.0'>
<channel>
	<title>DigitallyCreated Blog</title>
	<link>http://www.digitallycreated.net/News/</link>
	<description>Blog from DigitallyCreated</description>
	
<!-- Item Template
	<item>
		<title>****TITLE HERE****</title>
		<author>daniel@digitallycreated.net (Daniel Chambers)</author>
		<category>General</category>
		<link>http://www.digitallycreated.net/Blog/</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Nov 2007 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[
			
		]]></description>
	</item>
-->
	<item>
		<title>RSS Feeds Have Changed and LemonWire</title>
		<author>daniel@digitallycreated.net (Daniel Chambers)</author>
		<category>General</category>
		<link>http://www.digitallycreated.net/Blog/</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[
			<p>I have converted the RSS feeds on this site into FeedBurner feeds. Please unsubscribe from your current feeds and resubscribe to get the new URLs. This change should allow me to track the feeds' usage, which could be fun. I've gone a little statistics crazy since the bandwidth stealing episode, so now everything is all statted up. Sweet.<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			This will be a short blog this time, since I've got a ridiculous amount of Uni work to do. Swinburne has taken away the swat vac week that everyone uses for study before exams. So I get a grand two days to study for one of my subjects. Thanks Swinburne! [sarcasm].<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			One of our assignments is to write a P2P filesharing system (yes, you read that correctly) by the end of the semester. My team has spent the last 2 or so weeks planning; we haven't even written a line of code yet. We've written two documents describing the two protocols we're going to use and 23 whiteboards of object design. A lot of other groups have already begun coding but I think that's a bad idea. If there is one thing that the PSD course has taught me  it is that starting a project  by hacking some code is a good way to screw it up, especially in object oriented programs. Plan first, cut code later.<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			This seems to me to be especially important when you are working in a group. There are four people working in my group (including me). Without an OO design, everyone is going to do their own little thing and its just going to become a complete mess. Now that our design is done we can split the work between us and write the code knowing exactly what services someone else's part of the program will provide to my part. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			The assignment's subject gives no guidance on how to code effectively in a group, which is crap since its a difficult thing to do effectively. Luckily, a few of us have some experience with source control before from a previous subject and I use source control at work. I've set up a Subversion repository for us all to work from on my home server. Hopefully, we won't make a mess when we use it.<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			We've named the program &quot;LemonWire&quot;. This name has two tricks behind it. The first is obvious: a play on the common LimeWire P2P filesharing system. The second is less obvious: it works with the program's catchphrase: &quot;its a lemon&quot;. Sounds random? Its not. Normally, when you say something's a lemon you mean that its not very good. The catchphrase basically reflects our cynisism with the assignment, since all of us reckon its way to big to be given to us to do in half a semester especially when we're missing swat vac. That and the fact that its a P2P filesharing system operated from a console! Also, a whole bunch of its archictectural decisions are bad ones because we were forced to comply with the assignment spec. A good example is the fact that the network has a central server whose primary function is to bootstrap clients into the network. That ought to be done by another client, not a server. It would make sense if the server also indexed shared files and performed searches, but it doesn't. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			I may have sounded a little too cynical about our ability to complete the assignment in the last paragraph. Its true that it is much too big for an assignment, but I think if we all work hard on it, we have a good chance of completing it in time, thanks to our time spent planning. Wish us luck! <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			The next   few blogs are going to be blogs that I have to write for my Software Development Practices subject. One of the requirements is that I put the blogs online, so I'm putting them here. They may be a little dry, but hey, maybe you'll learn something! <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			So much for a short blog. </p>
		]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Leave the gun. Take the Audioscrobbler.</title>
		<author>daniel@digitallycreated.net (Daniel Chambers)</author>
		<category>General</category>
		<link>http://www.digitallycreated.net/Blog/</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Apr 2007 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[
			<p>Over the last week or so I have started scrobbling my music. What the hell is scrobbling? Audioscrobbling is where you submit the music you listen to, as you listen to it, to a central database where is it tracked. Doesn't sound so cool now, does it? That's probably why they called it audioscrobbling, not as-you-listen-music-tracking. :) <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			So what's the point of scrobbling your music? As you submit the tracks you listen to to the audioscrobbler main database, it watches and recommends other artists that you may like and lets you see statistics on your listening habits. You can listen to free online radio in the genre that you like best (determined by the system by looking at your listening habits).<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			So how do you go about audioscrobbling? They've made it pretty simple. <a href="http://www.last.fm">Last.fm</a> is the place where it is all centred. You download a client for your computer which installs plugins into your favourite music player. I use Winamp (it really whips the llama's arse!) to play and manage my music, so it installed a plugin for that. When you start your media player, it starts the Last.fm client software as well, which hides away in your system notification area. As you play your music, the plugin in Winamp will send what you are playing to the client software which will submit that to the main <a href="http://www.audioscrobbler.net">audioscrobbler database</a>. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			As you listen to your music you can tag the tracks with tags (short informative labels) which helps classify them. So for example, if you tag a track as &quot;vocal trance&quot; your tag gets added to the database of all the tags that everyone else has tagged that track with. The song could then (if Last.fm has it) be found on the &quot;vocal trance&quot; tag radio. You can also mark tracks as Loved or  Banned and recommend them to to other Last.fm users. You do this through the client software or through the website if you're using that to listen to music. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			Most of the functionality of the software can only be accessed via the website. The client is very weak, in my opinion. It lets you do standard operations such as play radio (by artist, or by tags), set tags, Love, Ban, and Recommend, but not much else. Its got a weak display that talks about the artist of the track being played and lists the track's play count, but compared to the website, it does nothing.<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			<a href="http://www.last.fm">The website</a>. That's where the functionality of audioscrobbling all comes together. Its a bit of a web 2.0 application, a community based app where users create the content. However, it is presented in a slish usable fashion and is actually useful, so don't blacklist it along with MySpace as an annoying, rubbishy &quot;Web 2.0&quot; application. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			The website lets you view your statistics such as top artists listened to, play count, etc. But its best feature is its recommendations. By looking at your listening habits, the system will recommend you music to listen to. You can listen to specific tracks on the website (normally 30 second clips, but if the artist is feeling generous, the whole track) using a Flash object, or you can listen to a radio stream via a Flash object or via the client software.<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			You can do other Web 2.0 things like add friends, write journals, talk in forums, post in peoples' (and artists') shoutboxes. You can join groups of other users who have a similar taste in music and tune into that group's radio or talk with its members. I don't find I use those features much, other than the friends feature. Its pretty cool to be able to see what your mates are listening to right now and be able to recommend them tracks. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			I find the most useful feature of the website is music discovery. It lets me find new artists to listen to and when I get bored of my current music collection I'll jump into a radio station and listen to that. I can view the artist I've found on the website and preview their music and see what artists are similar to them. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			Audioscrobbling is an open protocol. You can write your own applications that use the data generated by their database, or you can write your own plugin or application to submit tracks listened to. <a href="http://www.audioscrobbler.net">Audioscrobbler.net</a> has the protocol specifications and data feeds.<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			I use an iPod to listen to music on the train to University, so naturally I wanted to scrobble the music I listened to on my iPod  as well. I don't use iTunes (rubbish software) and instead use <a href="http://www.winamp.com">Winamp</a> + <a href="http://mlipod.sourceforge.net/">ml_ipod</a>, which made my life a little difficult trying to scrobble my iPod music. The plugin that ml_ipod has that does scrobbling isn't compatible with the Last.fm client software (the client software must be relatively new) so I couldn't use that. I have ended up using <a href="http://homepage.sunrise.ch/mysunrise/ph_waeber/audiopod+/">Audiopod+</a>, a simple Java application that has a distinct &quot;hacked together overnight&quot; feel about it. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			Its a bit of a pain to use: first you need to set it up. Launch it and set the preferences. Tick the two checkboxes to delete the playcounts after scrobbling and set it to only scrobble when you tell it to. Then you have to connect your iPod (make sure Winamp is closed), start Audiopod+ and set the path to your iPod database in the preferences. It probably won't find any music to scrobble. Close the app. Listen to some music, then connect the iPod again (making sure Winamp is closed). Start Audiopod+. It should detect the music you have played. You can then scrobble the tracks you want. Its messy and hacky, but it works. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			Words of warning: note that because iPods only record the last date a track was played, if you listen to a track twice without scrobbling it you will only be able to scrobble it once. Also note that you should NOT scrobble any other music from any other source until you have scrobbled your iPod. The audioscrobbler database will not accept music submissions from a time previous to the time that the last track was scrobbled. So if you come home after listening to your iPod on the train, listen to a little music in Winamp (which gets scrobbled), then decide to scrobble your iPod music, you will not be able to. This is apparently a spam prevention mechanism.<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			My Last.fm account is <a href="http://www.last.fm/user/ratfink88/">ratfink88</a>  so if you want to give me a shout in my shoutbox go ahead. Add me as a friend and if you are a trance fan (especially vocal trance) recommend me some tracks.<br>
			&quot;The Future's Bright. The Future's Audioscrobbler.&quot;<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			<em>Tip: Check out the bottom of Last.fm for a random selection of Audioscrobbler quotes like the ones I used for the title of this blog and the last sentence. Some of them are gold. </em></p>
		]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Hotlinking and Bandwidth Stealing</title>
		<author>daniel@digitallycreated.net (Daniel Chambers)</author>
		<category>General</category>
		<link>http://www.digitallycreated.net/Blog/</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Apr 2007 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[
			<p>You might have noticed this website went down for four days this week. That was because of a sudden jump in the bandwidth usage. Normally, I use around 100MB of bandwidth per month. Its not much, because this website's not that popular (yet). But, from the 5th of April, the website started eating 100MB of bandwith <em>per day</em>. That meant within 5 days, I'd used 100% of my 500MB per month bandwidth quota. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			Sure, I wouldn't mind at all if this website became popular and everyone started reading my blog, but unfortunately, developing 25 times more readers overnight was really too good to be true.<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			I investigated, using the statistics  program that comes with cPanel as part of my hosting. Apparently, a lot of people were accessing the wallpapers section. It didn't seem to be any sort of malicious activity, since no single IP was repeatedly attacking any particular file. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			I didn't have much time, what with uni work, so the site lay fallow with a &quot;Bandwith Exceeded&quot; error message for four days. When I got some time, I took down the wallpapers page and gave myself some more bandwidth. (I own the hosting that DC.net is on, so I can do things like that.) <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			I went back to the statistics the next day, to see whether my situation had improved now that the wallpapers section had been taken down. According to the stats, the Yuna wallpaper had received 214 hits hitting a 404 File Not Found error in a single day. The stats also revealed <a href="http://www.kindertent.nl/final_fantasy_princes_x">the culprit</a>. (Note the empty space on the page where my wallpaper, hotlinked directly from my site, had lain).<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			I had never really understood why some websites got really pissed off when people hotlinked their images, until now. For example, there was one time I tried to post on The Forums (a private forum that my old high school friends and I use to keep in contact) a funny image. I couldn't be bothered downloading it and uploading it to a free image provider like ImageShack, so I hotlinked it directly. It looked okay in my browser because my browser had the actual image cached. But everyone else saw something... <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goatse.cx">very different</a> (the link is to the Wikipedia article, not the actual image, I'm not cruel). Naturally, my friends were... upset. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			It is simply amazing the amount of bandwidth a few hundred people downloading a 1MB wallpaper can use. It really illustrates the power, and the cost, of the web. It makes me wonder how hosting sites like ImageShack can exist. Advertising must really be lucrative.<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			My plan of action is to set up a hotlink blocker that redirects any website that hotlinks my wallpapers to a temporary image that politely asks them to sod off. You'll see the wallpaper section come back when that happens. Don't hold your breath, though. </p>
		]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>PSD 2006 Semester 2</title>
		<author>daniel@digitallycreated.net (Daniel Chambers)</author>
		<category>General</category>
		<link>http://www.digitallycreated.net/Blog/</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Apr 2007 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[
			<p>Time flies when you're having fun; its already almost half-way through 2007 and I haven't reviewed Year 1 Semester 2 of my university course, Professional Software Development. I will use the <a href="http://www.atomicmpc.com.au">Atomic</a> method of rating: a real 0-10 score where 0 is absolutely shocking, 5 is average, and 10 is brilliant. This rating is opposed to the typical ratings you see on the internet, ranging from 5 at the lowest to mostly 7s and 8s and maximums of 10.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					<strong>Computer Systems</strong><br/>
					Computer Systems was supposed to be a lead on from Computer and Logic Essentials and it started out that way, but then deviated. This subject was a bit of a mess this semester, starting out with some theory about operating systems (quite interesting stuff), moving quickly into a little Linux and a lot of Bash scripting, sliding into a tiny bit of boolean algebra and logic gates, then diving into writing assembler (not x86 assembler).<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					Although, I came out of this subject unscathed and with good marks, a lot of people had a lot of trouble with this subject. The first assignment was writing four or five scripts in Bash. This doesn't sound too bad until you realise that the subject doesn't actually teach any Bash. We were referenced the quite terrible Advanced Bash Guide and given a lab or two and that's it. With Bash and Linux being quite different to Windows and Pascal (the language we learnt last semester), and almost no help from the subject itself, it was no surprise that many people had a lot of trouble with this assignment.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					The other main assignment was a rather complex program written entirely in assembler. Again, a lot of people had a lot of trouble with this assignment. Assembler is particular complex (even for the simple chip that we were writing it for) and very different from normal programming (no branching, loops have to be written manually, etc). It also didn't help that the subject moved too quickly through the assembler and left everyone behind once they got lost at the beginning. A review meeting was held with the staff and the PSDs present and it was agreed that the assignment was to be made easier and the subject slowed a little. Once we had gone back over the basics and got them grounded better, most people started getting a grip on assembler. However, it was too little too late. I had a good grip on assembler from right at the beginning (I was able to follow the lectures better than most), but even I had to do the cut down assignment because there simply wasn't enough time to do the original assignment (this meant I lost marks automatically, which was nasty).<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					The subject was mostly taught by Rob Allen, with Raj Vasa jumping in at the beginning for some operating systems and Linux stuff. Although Rob is a really nice guy, his explanations were often hard to understand, and he moved too quickly through the subject without making sure people actually understood what he was talking about. Once he realised that people were failing the subject, he went back to the basics and taught them more slowly and most people responded well to that.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					All-in-all, I quite enjoyed most of Computer Systems, although I'd probably be the only one in the course who'd say that. I found all the topics facinating, except for boolean algebra and Bash scripting which almost weren't taught at all, and subsequently were a pain in the arse.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					<em>Rating:</em> 6/10<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					<strong>Internet Technologies</strong><br/>
					Internet Technologies was like a crash course in all things internet. It basically ran through lots of topics very quickly, ranging from TCP/IP to HTML/CSS, to Javascript, to accessibility, and to PHP. If there is one thing that this subject bashed into your head repeatedly with a large hammer, it would be to validate your HTML against the W3C standards.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					The lectures were taken by Clinton Woodward and were mostly good. If anything, I sometimes found them boring because I already knew the stuff he was talking about, but whenever some new stuff came up, like some advanced Javascript or a good explanation for the CSS box model, I regained interest. So my boredom wasn't the subject's fault.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					I found the labs entirely pointless because they were so ridiculously easy. I basically never needed to ask the tutor anything because I already knew it all. All the labs really did was further bash in the "validate, validate, validate" message deep into my skull.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					The assignments were better. In the first assignment I had to group up with some friends and create a standard set of XHTML that each of us individually would style with CSS. We then had to present our work to the lab group in a presentation. Again, I found this easy, so I spent some time creating a dynamic stylesheet switcher in Javascript as an extra feature.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					Although I knew most of this subject already, there was one main valuable thing it taught me: good standards. I taught myself HTML and CSS by hacking and Internet technologies showed me the way it <em>should</em> be done: standards compliant, don't use IDs more than once, etc. I look at DigitallyCreated's HTML now and cringe. I should update it someday, because its really shocking.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					<em>Rating:</em> 8/10<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					<strong>Object-Oriented Programming</strong><br/>
					Object-Oriented Programming continued from where Algorithmic Problem Solving left off. It handled the transition from procedural programming to object-oriented programming. The subject was taught in C#, which was a new language for the PSDs to learn.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					The subject was taken by Andrew Cain, and was presented in his typical Beyond Bulletpoints style that we found very effective when used in Algorithmic Problem Solving last semester. The lectures taught broad concepts which were honed and developed in the labs and assignments. Apart from one lecture, C# was taught only in the labs, which was very effective since the best way to learn a language is to practice it, not to hear about it in a lecture.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					A lot of the OO design theory wasn't taught in the lectures in detail, and was left for reading tasks. This was rather boring, but Andrew had created reading questions to answer after reading the text book. They were a pain in the arse, but did their job well: forcing you to remember what you read. A much better approach than just straight reading.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					Although, some OO design was taught in lectures, I found I learnt the most doing the assignments. The second assignment was the one that taught me OO. The assignment was to create a Zork style text-based adventure game. The actual design was already done by Andrew and we had to read his notes and implement it in C#. This was a really good way for us to look at how OO is done, without going in too deep initially by having to create our own design. Creating your own design was handled by assignments three and four.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					Object-Oriented Programming was structured differently to other subjects. The third and fourth assignments were optional but required if you wanted to get a distinction or high-distinction respectively. There was one test and no exam (unless you failed the test). This was a good structure and meant that people who wanted high marks had to work for them, which is fair enough. Having a test instead of an exam meant that we could use computers during the test and write code on a computer (fancy that!). This was a good way of doing it, since it tested actual real skills, instead of the useless skill of programming on paper.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					OOP was the best subject of the lot. It was challenging and interesting and taught me many valuable programming skills. I loved C# so much that I now count it as my main programming language.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					<em>Rating:</em> 10/10<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					<strong>Usability</strong><br/>
					The content of Usability promised to be good: how to create applications that are easily usable by the end-user, however, the subject's implementation left a fair bit to be desired. My first disappointment with this subject was that Usability taught the theory behind creating usable applications, not actually how to create usable applications. Sure, it showed how to follow a process to research how to create a usable program, but there were no guidelines like "all popup dialogs must have an OK button".<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					The main problem with Usability wasn't what it was trying to teach, since what it was teaching was sensible and useful. The problem was how the information was presented. As you can image, theory on creating usable programs is dry, dull, obvious stuff that feels like its being overcomplicated and theorised for theory's sake. So how this content is presented is very important. Unfortunately, Usability's lectures had boring bullet-point slides with little information, no notes, and a textbook with too much information.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					On the plus-side for Usability was its approach to assignments. There was one big assignment which was due in pieces throughout the semester. Although this was a good approach, I felt that sometimes each piece was due too soon, because the assignment was a team project, and team projects are difficult to get organised within short times such as a single week.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					The assignment itself was mostly good. It took a practical approach to the theory and asked us to work through the process of designing a kiosk software interface. We started by collecting information like existing solution problems and users' needs. Then we designed prototypes and eventually performed a 'scientific' test on real human subjects by using a lab. This test involved having users sit down and use the system while we watched them through one-way glass and recorded their every movement and comment using cameras and microphones. That was fun.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					All in all, Usability wasn't a bad subject, it was just a boring one. With a bit of work, this subject could be made a lot more interesting. You can tell the subject convenors tried to make it interesting by the way they made the assignment (thumbs up), but their approach to the lectures needs a rethink.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					<em>Rating:</em> 5/10<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					<strong>Summer Scholarship 2006</strong><br/>
					The Summer Scholarship (SS) was a program that was offered to all PSD students through a voluntary application process. Only six PSDs were selected to participate, and I was lucky enough to be one of them. The SS was a four week program that was run a week after the exams finished. It ran 9 to 5 for three days a week and paid us a $1200 stipend at the end. The purpose of the program was for us to do some programming projects and learn things as we did it.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					The six of us were split into three groups. Three of us worked together using PHP to create a web application based on the Werewolf game. Two of us worked on a C# minesweeper clone (to learn Windows Forms), and then rewrote it in Java using Swing (to see the difference). I worked on my own, creating a side-scrolling game called Escape from Swinburne.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					I won't detail much more about the SS since I've talked about it before here and you can read the SS blog <a href="http://psdss06.blogspot.com/">here</a>. Basically, the Summer Scholarship was brilliantly fun.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					<em>Rating:</em> 10/10<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					The second semester of PSD, while not as refined as the first semester, was still enjoyable. If the rough edges are smoothed, this semester could have been awesome.<br/>
					&nbsp;<br/>
					<em>Trivia: I actually started writing this blog in January, got three-quarters through, then got distracted by commitments to my web development business and University. Apologies for the drought. </em></p>
		]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Working Hard</title>
		<author>daniel@digitallycreated.net (Daniel Chambers)</author>
		<category>General</category>
		<link>http://www.digitallycreated.net/Blog/</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[
			<p>Even though its the holidays, I have been working harder than ever. Currently, I'm working two days a week at my part-time job and the other three days at the <a href="http://mercury.it.swin.edu.au/swinbrain/index.php/PSD_Summer_Scholarship_2006">Summer Scholarship</a> at my university. Unfortunately, my preferred living style (going to bed really late and waking up as late as possible) doesn't work well with 5 days a week of full time work, so I've been tired as hell.<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			Luckily the work is mostly good: in my part-time job I have starting to be elevated from a mere software tester to a software developer. I wrote my first bit of code (in ColdFusion) for them on Monday! The Summer Scholarship is also great. I've been assigned a task where I have to create a simple API for creating games in the Pascal programming language, and to demonstrate that API with a side-scrolling game. The API will be used by next year's <acronym title="Profession Software Development (my uni course)">PSDs</acronym> in their Algorithmic Problem Solving subject.<br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			Writing the API in Pascal sucks, because I love real IDEs with code suggesting (Intellisense), and I'm using Crimson Editor (simple as hell text editor) to write my Pascal. Also, Pascal isn't exactly a language that is widespread, so learning it hardcore is (almost) wasted. I can't even use the object oriented features of the language since the <acronym title="Algorithmic Problem Solving">APS</acronym> students won't know OOP yet! The other guys get to write in C#, Java and PHP! But knowing that next year's APS students will use what I write makes it worthwhile and mollifies me. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			Most of my blogging over the next three weeks will probably be on the <a href="http://psdss06.blogspot.com/">Summer Scholarship's PictBlog</a> at Blogspot, so keep an eye on that. As a side note, Blogspot's blog editor sucks. I had to edit my post there at least six times before it was correct. The worst problem was, for some reason, my text didn't word wrap and it poked out over the right-side navigation menu (overlapping it) and stretched the page. Hopeless. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			Outside of work, I have  also been busy writing the PHP for Aurora, the <acronym title="Content Management System">CMS</acronym> that will power web solutions created by Pulse Development (my cousin and I's web design business). Aurora is written in PHP and I was happy to find that PHP 5 has almost all the OOP features that C# has: interfaces, inheritance, polymorphism, etc. <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			Aurora will power this website once its done (in fact I'll use DigitallyCreated as a kind of test bed for Aurora), so you'll get a nicer blog and news interface, and it'll be a hell of a lot easier for me to update it (hopefully increasing my blog count). Also, you've probably noticed this page getting stupidly long; Aurora will split it automatically over multiple pages. It will also do automatic generation of the RSS feeds for this blog (thank god, I do it manually at the moment!). <br/>
			&nbsp;<br/>
			Finishing up, I'll leave you with a warning: I read an article over at the INQ about one of their reporters who got <acronym title="Repetitve Strain Injury">RSI</acronym> (yes, that thing you ignore the warnings about). The afflicted hack wrote an article about his experiences with RSI and it sounds entirely <em>nasty</em>. He ended up with arms that didn't work. Normally, I don't really read this sort of stuff, let alone get worried about it, but this hits close to home since I do a lot of typing and I really don't want to break my livelihood (you can't code C# with speech recognition when your arms are stuffed). I would suggest you read it, so as to avoid it yourself. Find the article <a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36179">here</a>.</p>
		]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Just a Little Wibble</title>
		<author>daniel@digitallycreated.net (Daniel Chambers)</author>
		<category>General</category>
		<link>http://www.digitallycreated.net/Blog/</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 2006 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[
			<p>Bah, I seem to be attracting hardware failures of late. The new stick of RAM I bought for my laptop in June decided to up and die, corrupting my Windows installation along with it. Luckily it has lifetime warranty, so I didn't lose anything, except my patience with the sluggish remaining 512MB of &quot;not enough&quot; RAM and having to reinstall everything which sucks when you're a developer (it takes <em>ages</em>). <br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			But let's move onto the more interesting things. What I've begun doing is having a folder in my bookmarks in <a href="http://www.opera.com" title="&quot;Simply the Best Internet Experience&quot;. Kicks the pants off Firefox 2.0">Opera</a>, and when I get a particularly interesting article I stick it in there to write about later. This should mean I will blog more frequently*.<br>
				* Terms and Conditions Apply. :)
<br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			So. The first item: <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/technologies/management/powershell/default.mspx">Windows PowerShell</a> has gone 1.0! As we all know, the standard command prompt and scripting offered in Windows blows when compared to Bash in Linux. PowerShell is here to rectify that. However, don't go jumping into it thinking that you can just run all of Windows from the shell. Windows is still a strongly GUI-centred operating system and you can't just run the OS from the command-line like you can in Linux. Certainly it has been touted to make Windows Server administrators' lives easier, but unlike Linux, most apps for Windows aren't written with command-line functionality or COM interfaces. <br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			The PowerShell syntax is a weird amalgam of C# syntax with a little Bash and some weirdness thrown in there for good measure. I almost wish it was more C#ish; just some things like the equality operator being -eq, as opposed to the more C-style ==, seem strange when you are doing C# style foreach loops. <br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			Where Bash is often centered around plain text hacking, PowerShell does it differently. When you &quot;pipe&quot; things around you are piping objects. Yes, PowerShell is weirdly object oriented. Kind of. PowerShell is built on top of the .NET Framework, and it shows through. Passing objects around instead of plain strings is better since different cmdlets (pronounced &quot;command-lets&quot;, these are the commands in PowerShell) can act on the objects differently without the need of string hacking ala Bash. For example, instead of (in Bash) getting a list of files, using awk to rip out the filenames then throwing them into file, PowerShell does it by getting objects that represent the files and passing those objects to some other command which will extract the filename object property and write them to a file. Its a crappy example, I know, but I haven't spent a lot of time in PowerShell yet. :) <br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			If you're interested, you can <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/technologies/management/powershell/download.mspx">download PowerShell here</a>, and read a rather good <a href="http://arstechnica.com/guides/other/msh.ars/1">starter tutorial here</a>.  In my summer holidays I'm looking forward to fiddling around more in PowerShell.<br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			The next item on today's agenda: threading in the Source Engine!  If you don't know what the Source Engine is you either live under the &quot;I don't play computer games&quot; rock or <a href="http://www.proxiteam.com/dwainbunker/">you play way too much Starcraft</a>. For you people, the Source Engine is the game engine that powers the bestselling Half-Life 2 game and has been licenced for other good games like <a href="http://www.darkmessiahgame.com">Dark Messiah - Might and Magic</a>, and <a href="http://www.sinepisodes.com/">Sin Episodes</a>. <br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			Most game engines these days don't properly take use of dual/quad core CPUs because they are not &quot;multithreaded&quot;. A program that is multithreaded has multiple lines of execution all running concurrently. This means, on a multi-core computer, more than one thing is happening at once. If your game isn't threaded it pretty much means a whole half (or three-quarters or whatever) of your CPU is going to waste. So its an important thing for games to become multithreaded.<br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			Valve (the makers of the Source Engine, oh uneducated ones :P) have started work on making the Source Engine multithreaded. This is difficult since threading can be a real pain in the butt and will require a large amount of the engine to be rewritten. There are three main ways that multithreading can be done in a game engine: in a coarse fashion, in a fine fashion, and in a hybrid fashion that uses elements from both coarse and fine.<br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			The coarse fashion is where different game subsystems are put on different threads. Valve found this to be ineffective in utilising the entire CPU fulltime. The fine fashion is where low level tasks are split across cores. This method was also unsatisfactory since not all tasks are well suited to being split in this fashion. Valve settled on the hybrid method which pretty much means it uses the coarse fashion where it suits the problem and the fine fashion where it suits the problem. This way is the most complex but it scales well and maxes out the CPU. <br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			What Valve has done is to create N-1 threads (for N cores on the CPU) with the other thread being the master controller thread. Valve uses <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lock-free_and_wait-free_algorithms">lock-free algorithms</a> to help remove the problem of threads sitting around blocking (doing nothing) while they wait for access to data (two threads cannot write to the same piece of data at the same time, that would be bad). <br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			Multithreading in Source can only bring benefits to Source-based games. I know that currently half of my CPU (1 core of 2) sits around doing nothing when I play games, and last time I checked I didn't fork out good cash for it to be slacking! There is a <a href="http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2006/11/02/Multi_core_in_the_Source_Engin/1.html">full on article</a> about multithreaded Source which goes into more detail and has a good focus on the technical side of the threading, which a lot of the other articles about this didn't.<br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			A nice thing to hear is that Valve uses iterative development on the Source Engine (building and improving it piece by piece over time, rather than writing it and then rewriting it from scratch for upgrades) because my course at University likes to rave about iterative development. Wonder whether they do unit tests :).<br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			And finally on today's show is <a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35620">a little something to back up my rant</a> on Apple a few blogs ago. I will now degrade into IM-speak: LOFL, ROFLMAO, LOL. </p>
		]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Rebutting Rednecks</title>
		<author>daniel@digitallycreated.net (Daniel Chambers)</author>
		<category>General</category>
		<link>http://www.digitallycreated.net/Blog/</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Oct 2006 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[
			<p>Its been a while since the last blog as I am ridiculously busy with university work. Anyway, just to keep the raving masses at bay, I'll chuck in something that I found very funny and very, well, <em>right.</em><br />
			&nbsp;<br />
			Here's the story: <a href="http://www.theinquirer.net">The Inquirer</a> published a story that <a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35213">took a jab</a> at Dubya  and the Americans. They got this reply from an angry redneck reader:</p>
			<blockquote>
				<p>The folks in Europe should be damn happy that the U.S. is willing to protect your asses from the many rogue nations who can reach your country with missiles. When the time comes to prove our mettle - and it will, the U.S. will stand and fight to protect the world as we have done for centuries, unlike the rest of the western nations who pander to political agendas.</p>
			</blockquote>
			<p>A European reader (I assume he's British) replies:</p>
			<blockquote>
				<p>I wonder idly, just which are those &quot;rogue nations&quot; that &quot;can reach your country with missiles&quot;? Most of the &quot;rogue nations&quot; denounced by the US administration are conspicuous by their lack of missiles. The &quot;Axis of Evil&quot; - from memory, Iran, Libya, and North Korea - don't have a single ICBM between them. Nor, AFAIK, a single functioning nuclear &quot;device&quot;. On the other hand Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, and France have nuclear weapons and missiles. Which of them is a &quot;rogue nation&quot; in the eyes of Americans? Oh, and which is the only nation that has ever used nuclear weapons on another country's civilians? <br />
				&nbsp;<br />
				I wonder, if push came to shove and someone decided to turn these isles of ours into smoking ruins, if the Americans would really lift a finger to stop them? Especially if that involved risking any of their own tender pink skin. <br />
				&nbsp;<br />
				They certainly didn't lift a finger to help us fight Hitler and Mussolini, until those blokes declared war on them... two years, three months, and a few days after the real war got under way. They looked on calmly (and safely) through Dunkirk, the Battle of Britain, the Blitz, the evacuation of Greece and Crete, and the invasion of the USSR. <br />
				&nbsp;<br />
				I wonder how many Americans nowadays know that: <br />
				&nbsp;<br />
				1. The USA remained neutral for the first 27 months of the great war against Fascism. <br />
				&nbsp;<br />
				2. The USA did not enter the war until the Japanese sank its fleet at Pearl Harbor, and Hitler personally declared war on it. After those events, they were at war whether they liked it or not. <br />
				&nbsp;<br />
				3. Britain paid in full for everything the USA sent to support the war effort - even the retired WW1 destroyers that the US Navy didn't think were good enough to send its own sailors to sea in. Actually, we finished paying either last year or this year, depending on which government department you believe. <br />
				&nbsp;<br />
				It was interesting to hear Randy tell us how the USA has protected the world &quot;for centuries&quot;. Hmmm, that would be all two and a quarter centuries, since it came into existence. In the 20th century, the USA protected about 25 nations - for instance by killing 3 million people in South-East Asia, and bombing more countries than the Luftwaffe did in 1939-45. It also protected the Philippines, where its forces killed only about a quarter of a million people while liberating them from the Spanish (who had actually left some time before). <br />
				&nbsp;<br />
				How about the 19th century? There was the protection of the Native Americans, which reduced their numbers by over 99 percent and caused them generously to hand over all their land to the USA. There was the protection of Texas, California, and what are now several other states of the USA, which were forcibly stolen from Mexico against the wishes of their Mexican inhabitants. Then there was the invasion of Mexico itself, which led General Grant to say: &quot;The Southern rebellion was largely the outgrowth of the Mexican war. Nations, like individuals, are punished for their transgressions. We got our punishment in the most sanguinary and expensive war of modern times&quot;. <br />
				&nbsp;<br />
				All this was admirably summed up by H. L. Mencken (himself an American): <br />
				&nbsp;<br />
				&quot;All [of the Americans&rsquo;] foreign wars have been fought with foes either too weak to resist them or too heavily engaged elsewhere to make more than a half-hearted attempt. The combats with Mexico and Spain were not wars; they were simply lynchings&quot;.</p>
			</blockquote>
			<p><em>Source: <a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35261">http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35261</a></em></p>
		]]></description>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Bad Apple</title>
		<author>daniel@digitallycreated.net (Daniel Chambers)</author>
		<category>General</category>
		<link>http://www.digitallycreated.net/Blog/</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[
				<p>Apple really gets my goat sometimes. I'm not going to turn this into an Apple bashing session, because I honestly like what they make. They make a good operating system that is, in many ways, superior to Windows. Their computers are really nice looking with some nice features, especially now that they are x86 based. Their software, for example iMovie, is very nice.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>But it really gets my goat when Apple acts like a spoilt brat. I only follow Apple based activities with a cursory eye, and get major overloading updates from my Mac man friend even now and again. But when I see Apple making ads like their &quot;Mac Guy, PC Guy&quot; ones, that really pisses me off. For an example, go watch <a href="http://www.apple.com/quicktime/wwdc2006/video/small.html">this</a>.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>I'm going to drop an expletive here, so if you don't like that then skip a couple of words. Fuck you, Apple. Fuck you. Okay, I've got that out now. I find those ads rather offensive. Kind of like if Apple came and spat in my face. They are incredibly derogatory and worse, condescending. They completely disrespect any person who uses a PC over a Mac. In fact, it reminds me of a child who screams at their parents trying to get their attention. I'm sorry, Apple, but face the facts. You own, what?, two percent of the market? Consumers vote with their wallets and you lost 98 to 2.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>Their TV ads are nothing less than straight propaganda. For example, their <a href="http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac_ads1/viruses_480x376.mov">viruses</a> ad. They quite correctly state that PC's have lots of viruses and Macs don't. Okay, known fact. What they fail to tell the average consumer who knows nothing of this type of thing is that the only reason Mac OS X doesn't have viruses is because no one uses it. If anyone used it, say 98% of people (*cough* like Windows *cough*), then it would have viruses.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>Plus the whole PC guy, Mac guy stereotype thing. Apparently, all PC guys wear boring business suits, wear glasses, are overweight, and have bad hair. Mac users are the &quot;cool, hip&quot; guys. Again, I find this offensive. I'm sure there are PC users out there that look like that PC guy, but I can guarantee you that there are Mac users like that guy too. I can also guarantee you that I know lots of &quot;cool&quot; people who use PCs. That would be, ahh, most of the population. And really, judging people by their looks is incredibly childish. Remember the saying &quot;Don't judge a book by its cover&quot;? 
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>Another thing that annoys me about the Apple ads it that they openly piss on Microsoft. Okay, Microsoft has screwed up a bit. But standing back, pointing and laughing really is a particularly childish thing to do. And that fact that Microsoft just takes it, not a word said in return. That, that simple act of not getting involved, and of not lowering themselves to Apple's namecalling level instills great respect for Microsoft in me. It draws parallels with the things you were told as a child: &quot;If someone is being nasty, simply ignore them. Don't lower yourself to their level.&quot;
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>All this crap was brought to my attention by Paul Thurrott  who wrote a brilliant article article about Apple's new upcoming OS X version versus Vista. I heartily recommend you read it, it really <a href="http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/macosx_leopard_preview.asp">sums up my feelings</a> about Apple. Paul doesn't support Microsoft, per se, but he sure shows that he does not approve of the propaganda that Apple generates daily and their pathetic childish attention seeking. 
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>And the worst part is, people lap it up. People lap it up. Especially Mac fans. Have you noticed that for an Apple fan, Apple can do no wrong? A slight exaggeration would be if Steve Jobs told a Mac fan to run off a cliff, the guy would do it. Anything Apple makes is instantly legendary in the eyes of their fans. An example: <br>
						Jobs: &quot;Hey Mac users! We want to completely change the operating system from Mac OS (OS 9) to Unix (OS X). This means none of your applications will work anymore (unless you emulate, which will be discontinued shortly)! We also are not letting you install OS X on older hardware. That's right, you have to buy our expensive upgrades! How do you like that?&quot;<br>
						Mac fans: &quot;Yay Steve, I'll buy a new computer just for you. You are so right in doing this!&quot;<br>
						They are almost religious in their fanaticism. 
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>Also notice the constant upgrades in Mac OS X. Steveo sees this as a good thing. No Steve, its not. Not when new apps are locked from running on the old OS X versions (eg iLife), forcing you to upgrade Mac OS X for a fee. If that happened in Windows, Microsoft would be shot. Notice Windows' massive backwards compatability? Christ, if Jobs started sending empty cases to users instead of computers, the fans would just go &quot;What an innovation! Look how light it is! And it doesn't need cooling! Suck on that PC users!&quot;
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>What also annoys me is the claims that Microsoft has been sitting on its butt twidling its thumbs since XP. Okay, so it screwed up Vista big time, but what about all the other stuff. For example, .NET Framework 1, 1.1, 2.0. Visual Studio 2002/3/5. C#. Just because Microsoft stuffed up making its operating system for a couple of years doesn't mean its completely useless and makes nothing good. On the contrary. .NET Framework and C# brings a whole new dimension to easy development of stable systems.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>People don't realise how good they've got it with Windows. And how hard it is to make an OS like Windows in comparison to Mac OS X. Windows has massive hardware support. Mac OS X has Mac hardware only. Windows is massively backwards compatible, Mac OS X is not.  Windows can run everyone's software and makes software development a breeze. Mac OS X has little software in comparison. <br>
						Windows' backwards compatability is the thing that really limits Windows' development compared to Mac OS. Microsoft doesn't have the luxury of a rabid fan base that won't mind upgrading completely to run applications. Jeez, enough people are bitching that Halo 2 is only for Vista, and that Vista won't run well on crappy hardware. If Microsoft could throw away their current code base and redesign like Apple did with Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X, I think Windows would be freaking awesome. 
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>Some of Apple's claims of &quot;stolen features&quot; also annoy me. Paul Thurrott in his article expressed that especially well. For example, Spotlight, Mac OS X's instant searching utility that they stole off Microsoft. Ok, so they got it to market first, but it was Microsoft's idea originally.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>Damn, I guess this did turn into an Apple bashing session. My main point is not that Apple makes bad products, on the contrary, their stuff is excellent. But the fact that they behave like goddamn schoolchildren with their (white)lying and namecalling. I could put up with their selective information advertisements/propaganda where they don't tell the whole story. But the derogatory PC guy vs. Mac guy ads really piss me off. It just shows how insecure they are if they feel the need to drag others down around them. Their vying for attention like a short kid jumping up and down in a crowd of tall kids is nothing short of pathetic. 
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br><em>If you haven't yet read Paul Thurrott's article, go <a href="http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/macosx_leopard_preview.asp">read it now</a>. Its a must-read eye-opener. </em></p>
		]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Review of PSD 2006 Semester 1</title>
		<author>daniel@digitallycreated.net (Daniel Chambers)</author>
		<category>General</category>
		<link>http://www.digitallycreated.net/Blog/</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Aug 2006 00:00:01 EST</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[
			<p>Ah yes, I have been putting this off since I am lazy, but  now with Semester 2 in  full swing, I thought I&rsquo;d better get to it before I forget it.<br>
							I do the Professional Software Development (PSD) course  at Swinburne and this is my first year. I had four subjects in Semester 1, so I  will review each of them, one at a time.</p>
						<p>&nbsp;
						<br><strong>Algorithmic Problem Solving</strong><br>
						This subject involved learning the very basics of  programming: how to write code, and how to solve problems using standard coding  structures eg if, while, for etc. The subject used Pascal as a syntax simply  because Pascal is a good teaching language. One of the advantages of this  subject is that it doesn't throw the student straight into object oriented  programming from the get go and gets them used to procedures and functions etc  first.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>It was very easy for me since I have done lots of  programming before, but that didn't stop it from being the best subject of the  semester. It was taught by Andrew Cain, a very good lecturer who brings his  enthusiasm for programming to every class. He also does away with bullet-points  in lecture slides, and uses more graphics and animations to convey his  concepts, which helps alleviate the boredom that most lectures entail.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>The exam for the subject was very easy but it did,  however, cover all the work that we had done that semester so I think it was justified  in being easy. The fact was, if you could do what was on the exam, then you had  done the work during the semester and that&rsquo;s what counts.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br><em>Rating: 10/10</em>
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br><strong>Database Analysis and Design</strong><br>
						This subject was a simple introduction to databases. It  taught the student how to properly design a good database in third normal form,  and also how to program databases using SQL. The lecture slides were incredibly  detailed, which made this subject very easy to learn since you could just look  at the slides if you needed answers.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>The tutorials, however, were not so flash. The guy who  took our tutorial obviously spoke English as a second language so it was clear  that he often had trouble answering questions not because he wasn&rsquo;t good at  databases, but because when questions were shot at him in English he got easily  confused. The result normally ended up with a &ldquo;chasing your own tail&rdquo; situation  where your question didn&rsquo;t get answers. That said, the guy was extremely  helpful when I needed my assignments to be remarked.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>Which brings me to my pet bitch about this particular  subject. I had to have two out of three assignments remarked because they had  been marked incorrectly. This really annoyed me because is showed lack of care  on the part of the markers and/or incompetence. I really should not have to  teach the subject to them. 
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>The labs for this subject were particularly useless,  again not because of the work material, but because of the lab tutor. She was  pretty useless. All she did was sit there until someone asked a question and  when they did (at least whenever I did) she invariably either didn&rsquo;t understand  the question, or got the answer wrong.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>However, the subject on the whole was good and I learnt  some very useful database design techniques which I will be putting into use  soon.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br><em>Rating: 8/10</em>
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br><strong>Computer Logic and Essentials</strong><br>
						This subject strove to give a shallow understanding of  the mathematics behind computers. So it taught things like binary, hexadecimal  and normal base 10 number conversions, encoding schemes, predicate logic, set theory,  relations and functions and graph theory. The way the subject skimmed over  these topics was ultimately the thing that made it hard for me. In mathematics  you need a full understanding of how things work to be able to get things  right. Because we only skimmed the surface of topics in this subject, we often  didn&rsquo;t know whether something was right or wrong. This was especially evident  in the predicate logic section where we were taught a loose notation that  resulted in a lot of different correct answers. This made learning a little  difficult. That said, we did need to skim over the subject materials because  otherwise there would not have been enough time to learn it all. So this really  was more of an awareness subject.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>CLE was taught by Raj Vasa, another good lecturer who has  a great style where he can talk about a subject in a very casual and informal  way, dropping in funny comments and opinions all the time. This meant, even  though the subject material could be a little dry, the lectures were never  boring.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>What annoyed me most about this subject was that it didn&rsquo;t  give us many exercises to practise on. You should take that statement with a  grain of salt, since I am not your average student and in maths subjects I like  to have lots of exercises to learn from. The exercises that we were given did  not come with answers, which is my pet bitch about this subject. This made it  very hard to verify your work because you had to manually go and see Raj to get  answers instead of just checking an answer sheet.<br>
							Raj said this was because he didn&rsquo;t want people just looking  at the answers rather than doing the questions. However, I feel that since this  is university and supposed to be a self-learning environment, anyone who  scuppers themselves doing that can deal with it themselves. Their stupidity  should not limit others.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br><em>Rating: 8/10</em>
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br><strong>Introduction to Business Information Systems</strong><br>
						There always has to be one crappy subject, it seems, and  this is it. Introduction to Business Information Systems (IBIS) attempted to  teach you how IT integrates and is used in business. Sounds good, but it wasn&rsquo;t.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>To start with, the lecture content was a mish-mash of  topics, which would switch around in a lecture making it very hard to figure  out what was going on. The lecture slides were bad, barely explaining the  content of the lecture and full of diagrams that meant absolutely nothing. One of  my friends only turned up to four or so lectures and still got a good mark for  IBIS. That&rsquo;s how useless the lectures were.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>The tutorials were also bad. I didn&rsquo;t get a single thing  out of the tutorials. There were no exercises to be answered, nothing. Just discussions  on seemingly irrelevant topics. The labs were also useless, teaching us how to  use Excel and Access. Things like: to open Excel go Start menu -&gt; Microsoft  Excel. I&rsquo;m sorry but this sort of thing is taught in school, we don&rsquo;t need it  again. I finished all the lab work for the semester within scant weeks and didn&rsquo;t  turn up to any subsequent labs.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>The textbook was bad. It was boring, full of diagrams  that made absolutely no sense, and seemingly expected us to know what the world  had been like before computers so that we could see the impact. I&rsquo;m sorry, but  I wasn&rsquo;t alive when that time passed into obscurity, so how am I supposed to  relate to that. It made a big deal about things like portals and transaction  processing systems etc things that people my age take for granted. Trying to  look at those from the eyes of someone who never had that stuff is impossible  for me, because I don&rsquo;t know what it was like to not have it.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>Luckily, for those PSDs taking the course next year, our  bitching about how bad this subject is has caused this subject to be removed  from the course, which is brilliant.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br><em>Rating: 3/10</em>
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>So all in all, Semester 1 was pretty good, with  the exception of IBIS.</p>
		]]></description>
	</item>
	
	
	<item>
		<title>Guilty Confessions</title>
		<author>daniel@digitallycreated.net (Daniel Chambers)</author>
		<category>General</category>
		<link>http://www.digitallycreated.net/Blog/</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Aug 2006 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[
			<p>I know, I haven&rsquo;t blogged much lately, and I&rsquo;m sorry. Ironically,  I have less time to blog in the holidays than during the semester. &ldquo;What?!&rdquo; you  say. In the holidays I am doing things that I like, for example writing my Command  Console C++ program, and thus I am less likely to spend time on things I like  less than coding eg blogging. But during the semester, procrastinating from  working means that I &ldquo;make&rdquo; time to blog (so that I don&rsquo;t work).
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>Anyway, the last blog I wrote (Smackdown for Conroe) you  can pretty much forget, since apparently, <a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32885">reverse hyperthreading is not real</a>.  So the Conroes are kicking the crap out of the AMD AM2 CPUs. Ah well, such is  life in IT. You buy some tech and it gets outdated straight away.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>I also have another guilty confession. I have started to  use Windows Live Messenger (WLM). I normally use Skype, but unfortunately I  need WLM to talk to people at university, so I&rsquo;ve had to install it.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>It really is an inferior piece of software compared to  Skype. The instant messaging experience is crap. For example, Skype manages somehow to remember when a conversation gets broken across a 6 hour gap and  brings up the previous messages sent, so I can remember what we were talking  about. WLM just erases it and starts afresh.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>Skype also doesn&rsquo;t have advertising crap shoved in your  face, like WLM does. However, I have ripped that crap out of the  software with a patch called <a href="http://apatch.tk/">A-Patch</a>. It also lets you remove other annoying  things like &ldquo;Buy a Webcam&rdquo; links and other useless teeny-bopper buttons and  rubbish.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>Skype also, in instant messaging, shows the difference  between who&rsquo;s message is who&rsquo;s by putting a colour background behind the &ldquo;Daniel  says:&rdquo; part and different colour background behind the &ldquo;Daniel&rsquo;s friend says:&rdquo;  part. In comparison, WLM relies on you to change your text colour. Too bad if  yours is the same as someone else&rsquo;s.
						<br>&nbsp;
						<br>However, I will give some kudos to the WLM development  team. It has come a long way since I used to use it years ago. The fact that  voice chat works now, the shared folders feature, etc are all good new things  that WLM has.</p>		
		]]></description>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>