Archive for the 'Reviews' Category

Switching to a Mac

The absolutely never breaking permanent link to this post.
Published
by
bcg
on 23 December 2008
in Reviews and Sci & Tech
. 0 Comments

Well it's been about five months or so since my shiny new MacBook Pro arrived, and I thought I'd share some of my thoughts, as an experienced Windows user of many years switching to OS X.

My first thoughts were that it looks, quite simply, amazing.  The graphics are smooth, the way it displays fonts is miles better than Windows.  Spotlight works better than Windows Search, it's faster and more accurate.  The various features like stacks, Time Machine, Spaces, Exposé make it great to use.  I have to say I prefer navigating files and folders in Windows Explorer than in Finder, but I'm getting used to it.  And anyway, I'm mostly using Spotlight to find things anyway.

As with any new thing, there are certain annoyances, things that OS X does in a strange way, that I find difficult.  There are also things that I find helpful to deal with the different Mac behaviour.

Home/End Keys

In Windows, the Home key jumps to the beginning of the line, and Ctrl-Home to the beginning of the document.  Likewise the End key with the end of a line/document.

On a Mac things are different.  To get the same behaviour you have to press the Apple Key+left arrow/right arrow.  Even on a keyboard with Home/End keys.  So I downloaded Double Command, which has an option to use PC style Home/End keys.  Much more sensible.

Forward/Back

Now, this is really stupid.  To navigate forward or back a word, you press Alt (which is also called the 'Option' key) and left/right arrow.  To select text at the same time use Alt+Shift+arrow.

To delete a word backwards, use Alt+Backspace.  But to delete a word forwards, you have to use Apple Key+Delete.  Now, can someone enlighten me as to the reason for that?  On a PC, pressing Ctrl with an arrow or delete button affects the whole word.  Simple.

The Mac behaviour isn't difficult to get used to, it just annoys me.

App Cleaner

One of the best things about OS X is that there is no registry like Windows.  When you install an application, usually you just have a single file (which is actually a folder, though you can't see its contents) for your application, and maybe a preferences file or folder in your Library directory.

This makes for a much cleaner operating system - but it means that there is no 'Uninstall' app in OS X.  To get rid of an application you just delete it from your Applications folder.  But that leaves any preference files/folders in you Library directory.  Hence the very useful AppCleaner, which searches for those and deletes them too.

Mac Office 2008

It might seem strange to get a Mac and install Microsoft software on it, but I actually like Office, it gets the job done and it's cheaper on a Mac anyway.

Word 2008 is ok (except for a really annoying Word Count bug where the 'live' word count is WRONG), it's like an updated version of Word 2003 for PC.  This is because OS X forces the use of a toolbar (the grey thing at the top of the screen), so the new Office 2007 'ribbon' wouldn't work on a Mac.

Excel is terrible.  I used to use Excel a lot for work, so I know it backwards.  And Excel 2008 for Mac is just awful.  It doesn't have Visual Basic support for a start, so none of macros works.  The default layout is awful, and I just hate using it.  So I use Excel 2007 on a Windows Vista Virtual Machine instead.

Don't even think about using Entourage - Mac Mail, iCal and Address Book are so much better.  And PowerPoint is fine, but not as good as KeyNote.

So, overall, do I wish I had bought iWork?  Probably, yes, but when one of the 'great new features' of Pages '08 is that it 'automatically formats lists as you type' I was a bit suspicious.  It also seems heavily based on templates - I prefer to have my own layouts.

I may get iWork to see what it's like - I'm a technophile after all - but at the moment I'm sticking with Word.

Stability

One of the much-vaunted benefits of having a Mac is the inherent stability of OS X.  I would agree, in general - however I have noticed complaints among seasoned Mac users that OS X 10.5 (Leopard) is the least stable Mac OS.  I can confirm I have had a few crashes - one last night in fact as I tried to turn my laptop off.

However, I have had far fewer problems than I have had with Windows.  For example, updating a driver last week caused my PC to die spectacularly (it was a graphics driver), and I had to do a full repair (reinstallation over the top) of Windows - and that was even XP, which is far more stable than Vista!  Overall, I have had far fewer problems than Windows, but I am looking forward to OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard), for which Apple are concentrating primarily on performance and stability.

Printing

By far the biggest problem I have had with the Mac is printing.  I am using a Canon MP 610, which is one of Apple's recommended printers for Mac.  However, the Canon driver is simply not good enough, especially when trying to print double-sided.

Actually this raises a bigger point: the reason Apples are so much more stable than PCs is that Apple has total control over BOTH the hardware AND the drivers.  Windows, on the other hand, is expected to work with pretty much anything.  So, I have noticed that third-party drivers (e.g. for the Canon MP 610) are significantly more stable on Windows than Mac OS.

For 'more stable', read 'they actually work all the time.'  I use booklet printing for my sermons, and I have had such trouble printing them out - sometimes identical settings work, sometimes they don't work.  Grrr!  Hear the frustration!

Conclusion

Overall, however, I love my Mac.  The user experience is (almost always) a joy.  Occasionally I miss Windows (especially Office 2007) - running it on a Virtual Machine (VMWare Fusion) is ok, but nothing like running it natively.  However, I can cope with it given the rest of the experience.

Netgear DG834G and Wireless Repeating

The absolutely never breaking permanent link to this post.
Published
by
bcg
on 31 August 2008
in Reviews and Sci & Tech
. 2 Comments

I have a problem with my MacBook Pro - its metal case weakens the signal of my wireless network, meaning that I can't access the internet in my lounge.  That is rather annoying, because that's where the comfy sofa is!

A recent firmware update meant that my trusty DG834G v3 had Wireless Distribution System added as a feature - both bridging and repeating.  So I decided to buy a second DG834G (this time v4), to repeat the network downstairs and to be a backup wireless router in case my old one dies.

Sound easy?  Anything but.  There are absolutely no instructions on the Netgear site about repeating with two DG834Gs.  I found instructions on repeating with other hardware, but the options were not quite the same, and it just would not work.  I tried repeating, bridging, all kinds of variations, WEP, WPA, and nothing was working.

I was beginning to wonder if the repeating 'feature' was added to make the DG834G look better than it really is.

And so after several hours of frustration I emailed Netgear support, and they sorted me out.  If you are having this problem, follow the instructions below to the letter and you will get wireless repeating working.  The key part is the security encryption.

  1. Make sure both routers have the latest firmware.  The best way to do this is by plugging your computer into the ethernet port, rather than doing it over the wireless, in case there are any problems.  Make sure you download the correct firmware for your router version (I think WDS only works on v3 upwards).
  2. On the 'internet' DG834G, go to the 'Advanced Wireless Settings' page and ensure 'Enable Wireless Bridging and Repeating' is checked.
  3. Select 'Repeater with Wireless Client Association' and enter the MAC address of the 'repeating' DG834G in the boxes for 'Remote MAC Address 1′.
  4. Click 'Apply'.
  5. Now go to the 'Wireless Settings' page and enable WEP security.  Do NOT enable WPA, or it won't work.
  6. Choose '64-bit'.  Again, if you choose 128-bit, it won't work.
  7. Enter a phrase, and the DG834G will generate your hexadecimal passphrase automatically for you.
  8. Click 'Apply'.
  9. Now click on 'Setup Access List' in the middle of the page.
  10. Ensure 'Turn Access Control on' is enabled.
  11. Add the MAC addresses of all the devices you want to be able to access your wireless network.
  12. Click 'Apply'.
  13. Now go to the 'LAN IP Setup' page, and change 'Ending IP Address' to 192.168.0.99.
  14. Click 'Apply'.
  15. Now unplug your computer from the 'internet' DG834G, and plug it into the 'repeating' DG834G.
  16. Repeat steps 2-12, making sure you duplicate all MAC addresses you entered into the 'internet' DG834G.
  17. Once you have performed step 12, go to 'LAN IP Setup', and change 'IP Address' to 192.168.0.100.
  18. Now make sure that 'Use Router As DHCP Server' is unchecked. [Edit: if you leave this checked, usually the 'internet' router assigns the IP address to your computer, but sometimes the 'repeating' router does - and then you can't access the internet.  Better to leave it unchecked.]
  19. Click 'Apply'.
  20. Now unplug both DG834Gs.  Put each in their proper locations.
  21. Plug the 'internet' DG834G back in.  Wait until all the status lights (especially the wireless light) are green.
  22. Now plug in the 'repeating' DG834G.  The status lights will come on, including the wireless one.
  23. If you now plug your computer into the 'repeating' DG834G you should have an IP address where the final number is less than 100, and you should be able to access the internet (as long as the 'internet' DG834G is accessing the internet!).
  24. Congratulations, your wireless network is now be extended!

The reason why you enable 'Access Control' is that WEP 64-bit security is barely worth having.  It is better than nothing, but is easily cracked by a determined hacker.  So by limiting the devices that can connect to the computer, you hugely reduce the risk of someone hijacking your network.

The Jesus Storybook Bible

The absolutely never breaking permanent link to this post.
Published
by
bcg
on 21 March 2008
in Bible, Church and Reviews
. 1 Comment

This week I have been on a mission in Bath (I am currently on my day off!).  One of my primary roles has been to go into the Junior School for assemblies and class visits.

For the assemblies we made up some dramas, and read out some stories from the Jesus Storybook Bible, by Sally Lloyd-Jones and illustrated by Jago.  The Amazon page has a couple of critical reviews, but we found the stories really very good, and the illustrations too.

One of the main criticisms of the book on the Amazon page is that it downplays sin and judgement.  I disagree.  The section on the crucifixion (called 'The sun stops shining') tells the real story:

Even though it was midday, a dreadful darkness covered the face of the world.  The sun could not shine.  The earth trembled and quaked.  The great mountains shook.  Rocks split in two.  Until it seemed that the whole world would break.  That creation itself would tear apart.

The full force of the storm of God's fierce anger at sin was coming down.  On his own Son.  Instead of his people.  It was the only way God could destroy sin, and not destroy his children whose hearts were filled with sin.

Now, of course it isn't perfect.  No translation is perfect, and this isn't a translation, or even a paraphrase.  It's a way of telling some of the main stories in the Bible.  It will only 'do much harm' (again, from the Amazon reviewer) if it is used as the only way of telling Bible stories to children.

We used it in our assemblies as the frame for telling the stories.  Some of the phrases are brilliant, like this one:

And Peter told them the wonderful Story of God's Love - God's Never Stopping, Never Giving Up, Unbreaking, Always and Forever Love.

What the book does best of all is show how Jesus is at the centre of the whole Bible, how 'every story whispers its name' (the tagline from the book cover).

I would recommend this book, especially if you do children's work and can use it in assemblies.

Films vs. Games

The absolutely never breaking permanent link to this post.
Published
by
bcg
on 15 March 2008
in Culture and Reviews
. 0 Comments

I was disappointed to see today that the ban on Manhunt 2 has been overturned:

Ban on 'sadistic' video game overturned

The game publisher's argument is that the violence is no worse than, say, a Quentin Tarantino film, or some of what goes on in the TV series 24.  Therefore, they say, an '18′ rating is sufficient.

However I question this.  First of all, I find the violence in Tarantino's films completely over the top.  I have never managed to see one of his films all the way through, because of the violence.

Second, there is an important difference between watching violence, and performing it yourself, as you do in a video game.  I enjoy playing video games, but I find that they affect me far more than violent films, because you are, literally, more involved in what's going on.

Third, a violent film might last two hours (during which time, even in Tarantino, there is respite), but video games are far longer, and it seems Manhunt 2 has little respite:

In its original decision, the BBFC said that Manhunt 2 was distinguished by
its "unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone" and that the
game "constantly encouraged visceral killing with exceptionally little
alleviation or distancing". "There is sustained and cumulative
casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed," the
BBFC said.

I would argue in support of BBFC, that violence in video games is different to films, and that the length of time involved, and the lack of respite makes it far worse.

Nero 8

The absolutely never breaking permanent link to this post.
Published
by
bcg
on 1 November 2007
in Reviews
. 0 Comments

I recently purchased Nero 8, having used the trial version for a while and feeling it was time to get the full version!

The suite is pretty comprehensive. It includes a media centre (for TV viewing and recording, etc), CD/DVD authoring tools, photo, sound and video editing, file and drive backup, disc copying, music streaming etc.

I have Vista Ultimate, so I'm not using any of the media centre applications, but I'm very impressed with the rest of it. The interface is a little clunky, and the reliance on wizards can be annoying, but I've found the applications work reliably and quickly, with good results. It does pretty much everything I can think of.

Using Nero Vision to create DVDs is easy if you want to use a standard template, but can be frustrating to create your own custom layout and menus. However, the finished article is excellent, and it is possible to save a custom template, so you only have to make it once! I don't use Nero Vision to create the video content itself - I find Cyberlink PowerDirector much, much better for that, but this is one of the few areas I think Nero fails.

One of the gems in the suite is BackItUp 3. I got fed up with the Vista Backup & Restore Centre, because it won't backup every file-type (one of the ones it misses is .php files, so it's no good for backing up my website). Nero's backup solution is brilliant. You have the standard Nero wizards, but otherwise it works well, quickly, quietly, and with minimal fuss. You can set up schedules, and it even has a calendar to show future jobs etc!

All in all, I'm extremely happy with it - and so far I haven't had any trouble with it in terms of Vista compatibility. Fingers crossed..

‘The Cross and the Cariacatures’

The absolutely never breaking permanent link to this post.
Published
by
bcg
on 7 May 2007
in Bible, Reviews and Theology
. 0 Comments

I have just finished reading Tom Wright's lengthy article on Penal Substitution, during a long safety exchange in the snooker world championship final (!). Penal substitution is something of a hot topic at the moment. I have read much about it in the church press, and had many discussions about it and the current arguments with fellow students at college.

I have to confess, I haven't read the book Pierced for our Transgressions, the discussion of which takes up the larger part of Tom Wright's article. I also have to confess, I am a big fan of Tom Wright's, ever since his Hulsean Lectures in Cambridge University, in 2004.

To start with, Wright makes some excellent comments on Jeffrey John's recent talk, and on Robert Jenson (another of my favourite theologians). Substitutionary atonement definitely has a place in orthodox Christian theology, including the penal variety. The tricky bit comes when we try to give content to that (penal) substitutionary atonement.

Wright's major problem with Pierced for our Transgressions is that the book is, in his words, 'deeply, profoundly, and disturbingly unbiblical.' He argues that it fails to do justice to the whole biblical story, ignoring the calling and purpose of Abraham and the people of Israel, and paying scant regard to the gospels.

As one of my college colleagues wrote, Wright's main issue is a methodological one, which leads to an unbalanced (and, in his view, unbiblical) theology. How do we do 'biblical' theology? Doing a word-search using a concordance is perhaps one way, trying to understand all the different verses that mention a particular thing.

However, there is more to the Bible than words - there is a story. Wright argues that to understand something 'biblically', we have to understand it in the context - and as part - of the whole biblical story. If this is done, we avoid the dissatisfaction of what seems to be little more than theological proof-texting.

This 'narrative' theology is not 'systematic' theology according to the writers of Pierced for our Transgressions:

... there is a difference between the kind of narrative theology project in which Wright has been engaged for so many years, and the approach of classical systematic theology, which looks to provide an integrated picture of the Bible’s teaching on particular themes. (here)

The writers of Pierced for our Transgressions are claiming they are doing 'systematic' theology. However, I am not really convinced you can do real 'systematic' theology without a full appreciation of 'narrative' theology - the Bible is, after all, a narrative, not a set of theological propositions.

To cut a long story short, the his narrative method allows Wright to define penal substitution in the following way:

The gospels, as whole narratives, are deliberately telling the story of Jesus and his kingdom-inauguration in such a way as to say, on the one hand, that this is how the long story of Israel (which is, remember, the story of how the creator God is redeeming the whole world) is reaching its God-ordained climax, and in such a way as to say, on the other hand, that it is this story to which the crucifixion of Jesus is itself the climax. The understanding of the cross offered by the four canonical gospels, in other words, is not to be reduced to a handful of prooftexts taken here and there. These are merely the tips of the iceberg. The evangelists' understanding of the cross is that it means what it means as the climax of this story - the story of Israel compressed into the story of its representative, the Messiah, whose task was precisely to draw the threads of that narrative together. Read in this way, the multiple strands of idolatry, sin, evil, wickedness, oppression, violence, judgment and all the rest throughout the Old Testament come rushing together and do their worst to Jesus. He takes their full force, and does so because that was God's purpose all along. That is why, though I have argued here and in many other places for something that can be called 'penal substitution', I regard the 'Christus Victor' theme as the overarching one within which substitution makes its proper point, though that would take a lot longer to demonstrate. And it ought to be quite clear, if we read the gospels in this way, that what many have seen (and dismissed!) as the mere 'political' or 'historical' reasons for Jesus' death - Pilate's duplicitous vacillation, the Chief Priest's cynical scheming, and so on - are themselves part of the 'theological' interpretation of the cross offered by the evangelists.

As you can probably tell, I whole-heartedly agree with Wright's theology. However, the tone of his essay has upset many people. Tom Wright is a combative guy - that is one of his best qualities! - and often reads quite harshly. While he has good points to make about theology, perhaps the force with which he describes the book as 'unbliblical' could have been avoided. Sometimes I get the feeling he should write things, and then sleep on them for a couple of days, before publishing them!

Whatever, I hope the excellent points Wright makes about theology are read in the constructive manner they are intended. I intend to do more work on narrative theology for my dissertation next year - it is a fascinating subject!