johncoxon: ([LICD] iRon Man)
So recently I've been having issues with Firefox (by 'recently' I mean 'between yesterday and since installing NoScript'). Essentially, whenever I clicked a .dmg file in my browser it took me to a white page and refused to do anything. This would have been annoying but something I was prepared to put up with, if it weren't for the fact that it wasn't happening on my MacBook, running the same versions of Firefox and NoScipt on the same operating system. Disabling NoScript meant that whenever I clicked one, it would automatically be passed to Speed Download (via FlashGot). I reasoned that, if I could stop it being passed to Speed Download, I might be able to re-enable NoScript and stop this annoying behaviour.

First thing I tried in order to verify this was to disable FlashGot and see what happened. As a result, every time I clicked on a .dmg Firefox just wouldn't do anything. The little blue circle would go round and round, but beyond that, nothing. I tried editing the options in Speed Download to explicitly stop it from automatically downloading any file types, but this had no effect. I tried editing the list of file associations within Firefox, which did nothing, so I then tried following the instructions here on resetting that aspect of Firefox. This, similarly, did nothing to solve the problem.

Eventually I decided to search to see if anyone had had any luck with getting Speed Download to stop intercepting files on their Mac. I uncovered a rather odd forum thread regarding Speed Download integration with Growl. As it turns out, Speed Download's faulty Growl implementation was creating a "Recovered Files" folder in your Trash every time you log in - I had noticed this but assumed it was a Mac thing rather than a bug in an app I was running. According to the thread, this stopped happening with Mac OS X 10.6.7 - given that I haven't noticed it in quite a while, this would make sense - and neither the developers of Growl nor Speed Download were able to work out why it was going wrong. At least it's stopped happening now.

Anyway. That same thread also mentioned having trouble getting Speed Download to stop intercepting Firefox downloads, but because everybody had focused on Growl, there was no solution to be had. The person in that thread had even attempted to completely remove Speed Download but that hadn't solved his problem. However, I then found this article, in which someone gave Speed Download a go and decided to uninstall it afterwards. The author, who is my favourite person of the day, noted that to completely remove the app, it was necessary to go to "/Library/Internet Plug-Ins" (note that that's /Library, not ~/Library) and remove the Speed Download plugin from that folder.

Since I did that, Firefox's method of dealing with .dmg files has been restored to normal and I'm not having any more problems. Even putting the plugin back in the appropriate folder after a couple of browser restarts didn't bring the issue back. No idea why this didn't happen on my MacBook, but at least I've managed to fix it!

The reason I'm boring you all with this is because nobody else had actually written anything that answered my question online, so I want to codify it and make sure that there's some chance anyone else in my situation will be able to follow this instead of having to work it out themselves. So, in conclusion, if you're running Firefox with NoScript and Speed Download, and you're seeing white pages when trying to get .dmg files, try moving the Speed Download plugin, restarting the browser, moving it back in and restarting again.

(If I ever get around to making my website any good, guides to fixing problems that I've had will probably occupy a large portion of it - I've learned to do so many things on my Mac by simply Googling until my eyes bleed...)
johncoxon: ([LICD] iRon Man)
So recently I've been having issues with Firefox (by 'recently' I mean 'between yesterday and since installing NoScript'). Essentially, whenever I clicked a .dmg file in my browser it took me to a white page and refused to do anything. This would have been annoying but something I was prepared to put up with, if it weren't for the fact that it wasn't happening on my MacBook, running the same versions of Firefox and NoScipt on the same operating system. Disabling NoScript meant that whenever I clicked one, it would automatically be passed to Speed Download (via FlashGot). I reasoned that, if I could stop it being passed to Speed Download, I might be able to re-enable NoScript and stop this annoying behaviour.

First thing I tried in order to verify this was to disable FlashGot and see what happened. As a result, every time I clicked on a .dmg Firefox just wouldn't do anything. The little blue circle would go round and round, but beyond that, nothing. I tried editing the options in Speed Download to explicitly stop it from automatically downloading any file types, but this had no effect. I tried editing the list of file associations within Firefox, which did nothing, so I then tried following the instructions here on resetting that aspect of Firefox. This, similarly, did nothing to solve the problem.

Eventually I decided to search to see if anyone had had any luck with getting Speed Download to stop intercepting files on their Mac. I uncovered a rather odd forum thread regarding Speed Download integration with Growl. As it turns out, Speed Download's faulty Growl implementation was creating a "Recovered Files" folder in your Trash every time you log in - I had noticed this but assumed it was a Mac thing rather than a bug in an app I was running. According to the thread, this stopped happening with Mac OS X 10.6.7 - given that I haven't noticed it in quite a while, this would make sense - and neither the developers of Growl nor Speed Download were able to work out why it was going wrong. At least it's stopped happening now.

Anyway. That same thread also mentioned having trouble getting Speed Download to stop intercepting Firefox downloads, but because everybody had focused on Growl, there was no solution to be had. The person in that thread had even attempted to completely remove Speed Download but that hadn't solved his problem. However, I then found this article, in which someone gave Speed Download a go and decided to uninstall it afterwards. The author, who is my favourite person of the day, noted that to completely remove the app, it was necessary to go to "/Library/Internet Plug-Ins" (note that that's /Library, not ~/Library) and remove the Speed Download plugin from that folder.

Since I did that, Firefox's method of dealing with .dmg files has been restored to normal and I'm not having any more problems. Even putting the plugin back in the appropriate folder after a couple of browser restarts didn't bring the issue back. No idea why this didn't happen on my MacBook, but at least I've managed to fix it!

The reason I'm boring you all with this is because nobody else had actually written anything that answered my question online, so I want to codify it and make sure that there's some chance anyone else in my situation will be able to follow this instead of having to work it out themselves. So, in conclusion, if you're running Firefox with NoScript and Speed Download, and you're seeing white pages when trying to get .dmg files, try moving the Speed Download plugin, restarting the browser, moving it back in and restarting again.

(If I ever get around to making my website any good, guides to fixing problems that I've had will probably occupy a large portion of it - I've learned to do so many things on my Mac by simply Googling until my eyes bleed...)
johncoxon: ([LICD] iRon Man)
So recently I've been having issues with Firefox (by 'recently' I mean 'between yesterday and since installing NoScript'). Essentially, whenever I clicked a .dmg file in my browser it took me to a white page and refused to do anything. This would have been annoying but something I was prepared to put up with, if it weren't for the fact that it wasn't happening on my MacBook, running the same versions of Firefox and NoScipt on the same operating system. Disabling NoScript meant that whenever I clicked one, it would automatically be passed to Speed Download (via FlashGot). I reasoned that, if I could stop it being passed to Speed Download, I might be able to re-enable NoScript and stop this annoying behaviour.

First thing I tried in order to verify this was to disable FlashGot and see what happened. As a result, every time I clicked on a .dmg Firefox just wouldn't do anything. The little blue circle would go round and round, but beyond that, nothing. I tried editing the options in Speed Download to explicitly stop it from automatically downloading any file types, but this had no effect. I tried editing the list of file associations within Firefox, which did nothing, so I then tried following the instructions here on resetting that aspect of Firefox. This, similarly, did nothing to solve the problem.

Eventually I decided to search to see if anyone had had any luck with getting Speed Download to stop intercepting files on their Mac. I uncovered a rather odd forum thread regarding Speed Download integration with Growl. As it turns out, Speed Download's faulty Growl implementation was creating a "Recovered Files" folder in your Trash every time you log in - I had noticed this but assumed it was a Mac thing rather than a bug in an app I was running. According to the thread, this stopped happening with Mac OS X 10.6.7 - given that I haven't noticed it in quite a while, this would make sense - and neither the developers of Growl nor Speed Download were able to work out why it was going wrong. At least it's stopped happening now.

Anyway. That same thread also mentioned having trouble getting Speed Download to stop intercepting Firefox downloads, but because everybody had focused on Growl, there was no solution to be had. The person in that thread had even attempted to completely remove Speed Download but that hadn't solved his problem. However, I then found this article, in which someone gave Speed Download a go and decided to uninstall it afterwards. The author, who is my favourite person of the day, noted that to completely remove the app, it was necessary to go to "/Library/Internet Plug-Ins" (note that that's /Library, not ~/Library) and remove the Speed Download plugin from that folder.

Since I did that, Firefox's method of dealing with .dmg files has been restored to normal and I'm not having any more problems. Even putting the plugin back in the appropriate folder after a couple of browser restarts didn't bring the issue back. No idea why this didn't happen on my MacBook, but at least I've managed to fix it!

The reason I'm boring you all with this is because nobody else had actually written anything that answered my question online, so I want to codify it and make sure that there's some chance anyone else in my situation will be able to follow this instead of having to work it out themselves. So, in conclusion, if you're running Firefox with NoScript and Speed Download, and you're seeing white pages when trying to get .dmg files, try moving the Speed Download plugin, restarting the browser, moving it back in and restarting again.

(If I ever get around to making my website any good, guides to fixing problems that I've had will probably occupy a large portion of it - I've learned to do so many things on my Mac by simply Googling until my eyes bleed...)

GIP

Sep. 26th, 2010 05:24 pm
johncoxon: ([LICD] iRon Man)
I think this is the proudest I've ever been of an LJ icon. At last, I have an Apple userpic!

GIP

Sep. 26th, 2010 05:24 pm
johncoxon: ([LICD] iRon Man)
I think this is the proudest I've ever been of an LJ icon. At last, I have an Apple userpic!

GIP

Sep. 26th, 2010 05:24 pm
johncoxon: ([LICD] iRon Man)
I think this is the proudest I've ever been of an LJ icon. At last, I have an Apple userpic!
johncoxon: (Default)


I found this video very interesting for a few reasons. It really shows how hard the Firefox team is working to create an intuitive UI for their product, which something that I find very important in the software I choose to use. I'm rather hoping that this attention to detail comes into play with the Mac UI of the new version of Firefox – I have heard that the Mac version of Firefox 4 is not very Mac-like, so I haven't yet tried it out, but I'm hoping to do so soon.

Secondly, it has converted me. I hated the look of Firefox 4's new default tab placement and I had resolved to change it back as soon as I had the chance to do so – however, the video presents a logical and quantifiable reason not to do that, and I cannot really disagree that it makes far more sense in terms of the usability of the software to have the tab bar at the top. For this reason, I'm willing to give Firefox 4 a chance to convince me that tabs-on-top is the right way forward.

Regarding a different part of the UI, I think the new approach with things like login windows and the like is definitely, definitely the right step forward. Having the dialogue box appear and losing it or being unable to do something else in the browser until you've dealt with it is very irritating, and having the ability to switch tab before dealing with it, or even the ability to close it and then reopen it, would be very, very pleasing.

Throughout the video the team talk about this new approach being useful for operating systems that don't have window managers, and being the slow-on-the-uptake sort of chap I am, I was pondering what they meant until they came right out and said they were talking about tablets, presumably such as the iPad (although Firefox on iPad will happen when I grow wings) and the forthcoming selection of Android tablets. I didn't know that they had actually confirmed that that would be happening – is that my fault for skimming over Engadget or is that a sneaky leak?

Lastly, app tabs are a great idea and Gmail will definitely be one of my choices when I get that feature.

In other news, I recently downloaded the Firefox Sync add-on for both my Mac and Windows XP partitions, and it really works rather well. I suspect it will come in even more useful if I manage ever to get an iMac. since it'll sync history and other such things between my desktop and my notebook. It's also going to come in very handy with my iPhone, since the release of Firefox Home. I'm going to go and play with that now – ciao!
johncoxon: (Default)


I found this video very interesting for a few reasons. It really shows how hard the Firefox team is working to create an intuitive UI for their product, which something that I find very important in the software I choose to use. I'm rather hoping that this attention to detail comes into play with the Mac UI of the new version of Firefox – I have heard that the Mac version of Firefox 4 is not very Mac-like, so I haven't yet tried it out, but I'm hoping to do so soon.

Secondly, it has converted me. I hated the look of Firefox 4's new default tab placement and I had resolved to change it back as soon as I had the chance to do so – however, the video presents a logical and quantifiable reason not to do that, and I cannot really disagree that it makes far more sense in terms of the usability of the software to have the tab bar at the top. For this reason, I'm willing to give Firefox 4 a chance to convince me that tabs-on-top is the right way forward.

Regarding a different part of the UI, I think the new approach with things like login windows and the like is definitely, definitely the right step forward. Having the dialogue box appear and losing it or being unable to do something else in the browser until you've dealt with it is very irritating, and having the ability to switch tab before dealing with it, or even the ability to close it and then reopen it, would be very, very pleasing.

Throughout the video the team talk about this new approach being useful for operating systems that don't have window managers, and being the slow-on-the-uptake sort of chap I am, I was pondering what they meant until they came right out and said they were talking about tablets, presumably such as the iPad (although Firefox on iPad will happen when I grow wings) and the forthcoming selection of Android tablets. I didn't know that they had actually confirmed that that would be happening – is that my fault for skimming over Engadget or is that a sneaky leak?

Lastly, app tabs are a great idea and Gmail will definitely be one of my choices when I get that feature.

In other news, I recently downloaded the Firefox Sync add-on for both my Mac and Windows XP partitions, and it really works rather well. I suspect it will come in even more useful if I manage ever to get an iMac. since it'll sync history and other such things between my desktop and my notebook. It's also going to come in very handy with my iPhone, since the release of Firefox Home. I'm going to go and play with that now – ciao!
johncoxon: (Default)


I found this video very interesting for a few reasons. It really shows how hard the Firefox team is working to create an intuitive UI for their product, which something that I find very important in the software I choose to use. I'm rather hoping that this attention to detail comes into play with the Mac UI of the new version of Firefox – I have heard that the Mac version of Firefox 4 is not very Mac-like, so I haven't yet tried it out, but I'm hoping to do so soon.

Secondly, it has converted me. I hated the look of Firefox 4's new default tab placement and I had resolved to change it back as soon as I had the chance to do so – however, the video presents a logical and quantifiable reason not to do that, and I cannot really disagree that it makes far more sense in terms of the usability of the software to have the tab bar at the top. For this reason, I'm willing to give Firefox 4 a chance to convince me that tabs-on-top is the right way forward.

Regarding a different part of the UI, I think the new approach with things like login windows and the like is definitely, definitely the right step forward. Having the dialogue box appear and losing it or being unable to do something else in the browser until you've dealt with it is very irritating, and having the ability to switch tab before dealing with it, or even the ability to close it and then reopen it, would be very, very pleasing.

Throughout the video the team talk about this new approach being useful for operating systems that don't have window managers, and being the slow-on-the-uptake sort of chap I am, I was pondering what they meant until they came right out and said they were talking about tablets, presumably such as the iPad (although Firefox on iPad will happen when I grow wings) and the forthcoming selection of Android tablets. I didn't know that they had actually confirmed that that would be happening – is that my fault for skimming over Engadget or is that a sneaky leak?

Lastly, app tabs are a great idea and Gmail will definitely be one of my choices when I get that feature.

In other news, I recently downloaded the Firefox Sync add-on for both my Mac and Windows XP partitions, and it really works rather well. I suspect it will come in even more useful if I manage ever to get an iMac. since it'll sync history and other such things between my desktop and my notebook. It's also going to come in very handy with my iPhone, since the release of Firefox Home. I'm going to go and play with that now – ciao!

On Apple

Jun. 10th, 2010 01:33 pm
johncoxon: (Default)
So, some thoughts about Apple's recent activities and news, with a dollop of uninformed opinion.

Apple recently updated their policy on advertisements, and the following is, apparently, a quotation from their new policy: "[The ability to show ads on iOS 4] is provided to an independent advertising service provider whose primary business is serving mobile ads (for example, an advertising service provider owned by or affiliated with a developer or distributor of mobile devices, mobile operating systems or development environments other than Apple would not qualify as independent)."

Although this is bit of a dick move, and there's no denying that, it's also no surprise to anyone at all (or at least, it shouldn't be). Google opened the war against the iPhone with Android and have continued along that path with gusto. That's completely fine, and I have absolutely no problem with Google doing what Google need to do to survive and make a profit as a corporate entity. Having said that, Apple are also a corporate entity and as such, they're going to do their best to outmanoevure their big opponents. They think they can make more money with this new policy so they'll carry on (and will undoubtedly attract attention from regulators!).

The main thing that worries me is that developers will stop using ads and start charging more for their apps as opposed to switching to other ad providers, which would suck for the users who own and use iOS. Having said that, Apple is letting app developers use third-party ads. The gist appears to be that if you're a company that just does advertising, and you're not owned by a competitor to Apple (for instance, Google) you're just fine. For instance, Greystripe, an advertising company that is in partnership with Adobe, is saying that they think they'll be allowed to advertise.

All in all, Apple's decision is not going to be the end of non-iAd advertising on iOS, and so I don't think it will have a massive effect on the average iPhone user. Having said that, if it does, I hope that His Holy Steve will go back on this and allow AdMob back onto the platform. In other news, I would also like him to stop censoring iPhone apps and iron all the T-shirts currently in my washing machine (and that last request is the most likely to happen, at a wild guess).

Moving on. What is all this I'm hearing about video calling not being awesome and shiny?! Yes, I get it, video calls have been possible for the last however many years. But do I know a single person my age who has actually used that functionality? No. Hell, do I know a single person who's used the functionality who doesn't run their own server and code in three different computer languages? I'm struggling to think of any. Will Apple's decision to make this one of the big new features in iPhone 4 make it a lot more popular? Well, if anything is going to provide that momentum, it's going to be this, I think. If Apple makes this work, then Google may well include 3G video calling in Android 2.3 to one-up Apple, and that would be the final approval the tech needs, I think.

Of course, Apple are exaggerating massively when they claim that it's a revolutionary feature. As far as I can tell Apple haven't announced anything revolutionary for about three years now (the initial iPhone launch, and the launch of Mac OS X Leopard at a push). Everything has been an evolution of something else (Snow Leopard an evolution of Leopard, the iPad an evolution of the iPhone and iOS 4 an evolution of iPhone OS 3).

And lastly, I have no idea what's going on with Pulse, the iPad RSS reader that was removed from the App Store after a complaint from the New York Times that it was using their content by pulling their RSS feed in the default settings. It was removed, and then it was gone, and now it's back again. I can't work out whether it was removed and then reinstated by Apple, or whether the app's creators were notified and submitted a version of the app that didn't pull that feed automatically (I've read different accounts on different blogs!). I can see where Apple were coming from with their initial reaction but it still highlights definite problems with the current way Apple are doing things. I hope that Steve gets his act together before it's too late.

On Apple

Jun. 10th, 2010 01:33 pm
johncoxon: (Default)
So, some thoughts about Apple's recent activities and news, with a dollop of uninformed opinion.

Apple recently updated their policy on advertisements, and the following is, apparently, a quotation from their new policy: "[The ability to show ads on iOS 4] is provided to an independent advertising service provider whose primary business is serving mobile ads (for example, an advertising service provider owned by or affiliated with a developer or distributor of mobile devices, mobile operating systems or development environments other than Apple would not qualify as independent)."

Although this is bit of a dick move, and there's no denying that, it's also no surprise to anyone at all (or at least, it shouldn't be). Google opened the war against the iPhone with Android and have continued along that path with gusto. That's completely fine, and I have absolutely no problem with Google doing what Google need to do to survive and make a profit as a corporate entity. Having said that, Apple are also a corporate entity and as such, they're going to do their best to outmanoevure their big opponents. They think they can make more money with this new policy so they'll carry on (and will undoubtedly attract attention from regulators!).

The main thing that worries me is that developers will stop using ads and start charging more for their apps as opposed to switching to other ad providers, which would suck for the users who own and use iOS. Having said that, Apple is letting app developers use third-party ads. The gist appears to be that if you're a company that just does advertising, and you're not owned by a competitor to Apple (for instance, Google) you're just fine. For instance, Greystripe, an advertising company that is in partnership with Adobe, is saying that they think they'll be allowed to advertise.

All in all, Apple's decision is not going to be the end of non-iAd advertising on iOS, and so I don't think it will have a massive effect on the average iPhone user. Having said that, if it does, I hope that His Holy Steve will go back on this and allow AdMob back onto the platform. In other news, I would also like him to stop censoring iPhone apps and iron all the T-shirts currently in my washing machine (and that last request is the most likely to happen, at a wild guess).

Moving on. What is all this I'm hearing about video calling not being awesome and shiny?! Yes, I get it, video calls have been possible for the last however many years. But do I know a single person my age who has actually used that functionality? No. Hell, do I know a single person who's used the functionality who doesn't run their own server and code in three different computer languages? I'm struggling to think of any. Will Apple's decision to make this one of the big new features in iPhone 4 make it a lot more popular? Well, if anything is going to provide that momentum, it's going to be this, I think. If Apple makes this work, then Google may well include 3G video calling in Android 2.3 to one-up Apple, and that would be the final approval the tech needs, I think.

Of course, Apple are exaggerating massively when they claim that it's a revolutionary feature. As far as I can tell Apple haven't announced anything revolutionary for about three years now (the initial iPhone launch, and the launch of Mac OS X Leopard at a push). Everything has been an evolution of something else (Snow Leopard an evolution of Leopard, the iPad an evolution of the iPhone and iOS 4 an evolution of iPhone OS 3).

And lastly, I have no idea what's going on with Pulse, the iPad RSS reader that was removed from the App Store after a complaint from the New York Times that it was using their content by pulling their RSS feed in the default settings. It was removed, and then it was gone, and now it's back again. I can't work out whether it was removed and then reinstated by Apple, or whether the app's creators were notified and submitted a version of the app that didn't pull that feed automatically (I've read different accounts on different blogs!). I can see where Apple were coming from with their initial reaction but it still highlights definite problems with the current way Apple are doing things. I hope that Steve gets his act together before it's too late.

On Apple

Jun. 10th, 2010 01:33 pm
johncoxon: (Default)
So, some thoughts about Apple's recent activities and news, with a dollop of uninformed opinion.

Apple recently updated their policy on advertisements, and the following is, apparently, a quotation from their new policy: "[The ability to show ads on iOS 4] is provided to an independent advertising service provider whose primary business is serving mobile ads (for example, an advertising service provider owned by or affiliated with a developer or distributor of mobile devices, mobile operating systems or development environments other than Apple would not qualify as independent)."

Although this is bit of a dick move, and there's no denying that, it's also no surprise to anyone at all (or at least, it shouldn't be). Google opened the war against the iPhone with Android and have continued along that path with gusto. That's completely fine, and I have absolutely no problem with Google doing what Google need to do to survive and make a profit as a corporate entity. Having said that, Apple are also a corporate entity and as such, they're going to do their best to outmanoevure their big opponents. They think they can make more money with this new policy so they'll carry on (and will undoubtedly attract attention from regulators!).

The main thing that worries me is that developers will stop using ads and start charging more for their apps as opposed to switching to other ad providers, which would suck for the users who own and use iOS. Having said that, Apple is letting app developers use third-party ads. The gist appears to be that if you're a company that just does advertising, and you're not owned by a competitor to Apple (for instance, Google) you're just fine. For instance, Greystripe, an advertising company that is in partnership with Adobe, is saying that they think they'll be allowed to advertise.

All in all, Apple's decision is not going to be the end of non-iAd advertising on iOS, and so I don't think it will have a massive effect on the average iPhone user. Having said that, if it does, I hope that His Holy Steve will go back on this and allow AdMob back onto the platform. In other news, I would also like him to stop censoring iPhone apps and iron all the T-shirts currently in my washing machine (and that last request is the most likely to happen, at a wild guess).

Moving on. What is all this I'm hearing about video calling not being awesome and shiny?! Yes, I get it, video calls have been possible for the last however many years. But do I know a single person my age who has actually used that functionality? No. Hell, do I know a single person who's used the functionality who doesn't run their own server and code in three different computer languages? I'm struggling to think of any. Will Apple's decision to make this one of the big new features in iPhone 4 make it a lot more popular? Well, if anything is going to provide that momentum, it's going to be this, I think. If Apple makes this work, then Google may well include 3G video calling in Android 2.3 to one-up Apple, and that would be the final approval the tech needs, I think.

Of course, Apple are exaggerating massively when they claim that it's a revolutionary feature. As far as I can tell Apple haven't announced anything revolutionary for about three years now (the initial iPhone launch, and the launch of Mac OS X Leopard at a push). Everything has been an evolution of something else (Snow Leopard an evolution of Leopard, the iPad an evolution of the iPhone and iOS 4 an evolution of iPhone OS 3).

And lastly, I have no idea what's going on with Pulse, the iPad RSS reader that was removed from the App Store after a complaint from the New York Times that it was using their content by pulling their RSS feed in the default settings. It was removed, and then it was gone, and now it's back again. I can't work out whether it was removed and then reinstated by Apple, or whether the app's creators were notified and submitted a version of the app that didn't pull that feed automatically (I've read different accounts on different blogs!). I can see where Apple were coming from with their initial reaction but it still highlights definite problems with the current way Apple are doing things. I hope that Steve gets his act together before it's too late.
johncoxon: (Default)
I have been having trouble with Terminal.app taking ages to load (that is, to get from login to bash) on my Mac running OS X Snow Leopard (OS 10.6) and I finally found the solution I was looking for. I am reproducing it here because I believe the result should be higher on Google so that people in my situation can find the answer more easily!

YouTube

Jan. 8th, 2010 01:13 am
johncoxon: (Apollo Lift-Off)
An e-mail I received from YouTube today: "Your video Unboxing Apple's iPod Classic has become popular on YouTube and you're eligible to apply for the YouTube Partnership Programme, which allows you to make money from playbacks of your video."

A video of me opening an iPod Classic and commenting on how shiny the box is qualifies for their popular club. Huh.

I still can't believe I don't have an Apple icon, I'll rectify that sometime!

johncoxon: (Default)

TheAppvent Calendar is giving a different game away free every day throughout December. Some have been really good, so I recommend giving it a try!

Posted via LiveJournal.app.

Milkshake!

Oct. 31st, 2009 07:39 pm
johncoxon: (Cricket (Vaughan Batting))

This weekend my family and I are visiting my Great Auntie Margaret in Southampton, and so last night I spent the night in Peterborough and this afternoon has been spent wandering around Southampton city centre.

Some of the people reading this will live in cities that have a proper milkshake shop, like Shakeaway -- indeed, some of you may even have a branch of that particular business! My parents and I were introduced to milkshake shops by Shakeaway in Bournemouth, and my mother is rather partial to the chocolate & cherry flavour. In fact, she's made it her mission to visit all of their branches (not entirely seriously...).

When we got to Southampton, our first port of call was the bigger of the two Shakeaway outlets (one is a shop, the other is more a counter in a shopping centre), in which I had the milkshake photographed below:

It was lovely, but they did it with Milkybar instead of Milky Way, which made it a bit sweet for my taste. Afterwards we explored more of the city, discovering that the new Magic Mouse is alright but not as good as I hoped; that Hotel Chocolat do chocolate nibbles for dinner parties; and that Italian hog roast apparently means "no stuffing or crackling". I also didn't buy a Beach Boys album.

Then, Dad suggested getting another milkshake, and since I have no self-control, I plumped for a chocolate and peanut butter one this time around:

(The thumbs in the background are my Aubtie Jennifer's, and the milkshakes are chocolate with cherry, peanut butter and ginger respectively.)

Then we went to actually visit Auntie Margaret, and now we're preparing to go our. All in all, a good day!

Posted via LiveJournal.app.

johncoxon: (Default)
As most of you will know, I use Twitter (you can find me here if you're not following me already). I am completely in love with the service and spend a lot of time with it, and I've been using TweetDeck since I was introduced to it at Eastercon this year (whilst I was on the panel on Twitter, coincidentally).

However, I am planning on getting an iPhone 3GS this week, and although a free version of TweetDeck is available, I've also heard really good things about Tweetie, so I thought I'd download the Mac version of Tweetie and see how I got on... )

Feel free to suggest Twitter clients I haven't mentioned in the comments, I always like new shiny apps, and please clue me in on anything you feel I've missed that either client does better than the other. After a couple of days I'll probably put a "what Twitter client do you use?" poll together based on the comments.
johncoxon: (Default)
I used a MacBook yesterday (one of the new ones) and would like to say that I'm in love with Apple again. But I do have a gripe and a question. Firstly, the lack of a Firewire 400 port is irritating. I use Firewire for my Time Machine backups and I'd rather not have to connect the external drive to a USB hub in order to have it plugged in! Three USB ports would have been nice...

Also, why does the MacBook Pro need two graphics cards you have to log out to switch between? Why not just include the better one? Am I missing something?
johncoxon: (Default)
I used a MacBook yesterday (one of the new ones) and would like to say that I'm in love with Apple again. That is all.
johncoxon: (Default)
Dear Apple,

I am a bloke who disables the 'tap to click' feature on every trackpad he comes across. This means that I am extremely angry that the new MacBook and MacBook Pro have no button on their trackpad - I don't care about the '39% more room for your fingers to move', I want the button back.

Signed,
The person who just started wondering about his next laptop being a ThinkPad.

Most Popular Tags

Syndicate

RSS Atom

July 2014

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
2021 2223242526
2728293031  

Style Credit

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios