Archive for September 2004

I was trying to get a free iPod to use with my cochlear implant and learn to listen with it since circumstances don’t allow me to invest in gadgets these days (NO pity, please!). Besides, it is not like the company is giving them away. You earn it by getting people to sign up for offers. Five people signed up and took advantage of an offer as required.

Two of those accounts were not acceptable by the people behind the Web site. One was entirely my fault and an oversight. It was Paul’s account. He and I have the same address. When he signed up, he had NO plans to request an iPod. We realized our error later and got someone else to sign up in his stead.

The other “unaccepted” account was my mom. We don’t even live in the same city. Hers was probably taken away because it was around the time the eBay offer disappeared though it was there when she signed up. She was never a user of eBay prior to this.

I signed up (it pains me to say this) for the AOL offer, so you KNOW I don’t use AOL. It was very difficult to get my account closed on AOL, but it was done.

But, no. The damage was already done and my account placed on hold. This is what the terms and conditions say about the “hold” status quoted from the site itself:
(more…)

I had been curious about the registry editor, or rather the two of them that came with Windows. Did a little research and learned a few interesting things. Read A Tale of Two Regeds.

I like getting my hands dirty especially with search engines. Read the meryl.net articles Web Search Garage review.

Tech support tells me to type ‘regedt32′ as opposed to ‘regedit’ to access the registry from the command line (Start > Run). I question the use of ‘regedt32,’ but he says to do it anyway. Whenever I use the registry editor, I recall this incident and never look up the tale of the two regs… until now.

Regedt32.exe is an alternative registry editor available with Windows NT/2000 with features of its own. Regedt32.exe does not support importing and exporting registration entries (.reg) files. Regedit has limitations of its own as quoted here:

You cannot set the security for registry keys.

You cannot view, edit, or search the value data types REG_EXPAND_SZ and REG_MULTI_SZ. If you try to view a REG_EXPAND_SZ value, Regedit.exe displays it as a binary data type. If you try to edit either of these data types, Regedit.exe saves it as REG_SZ, and the data type no longer performs its intended function.

You cannot save or restore keys as hive files.

Research indicates regedit has:

* a better search tool

* bookmarking of subkeys

* opens to last edited subtree, export and import capabilities

* all keys are visible from a window similar to Windows Explorer

Regedt32 (pre-WinXP) can:

* run in read-only mode

* allows you to edit values longer than 256 characters (who wants to do that???)

* displays subtrees in their own windows

* modify access permissions to subtrees, keys, and subkeys

In WinXP and Server 2003, the two have been replaced by a new version of regedit that has features from both. Try typing ‘regedit’ and ‘regedt32′ to see what happens. They’re the same. To prove it, while in ‘regedit,’ select ‘edit’ and you’ll see ‘permissions.’ This is a feature that was only available in the old ‘regedt32′ and not ‘regedit.’

Technically, regedt32 is a small program that runs regedit. So when typing ‘regedt32,’ it takes you to ‘regedit.’ The destination is the same either way. So type whichever is easier for you to remember. Regedit is easier for me – I had to play with the spelling of the other version until I got it right.

Now I remember that tech support was checking to see if the permissions were properly set and that was why we used ‘regedt32.’ However, someone forgot to update the script or tell him that it didn’t matter anymore when a user had WinXP. Tech support always asks what operating system at the beginning of the call, so he knew.

More registry editor resources: Microsoft has a knowledgebase article on the differences between the two. Windows IT Library has a feature comparison chart dated 2000, so it’s way old, but it will satisfy curiosity. Here’s a list of registry editor alternatives for those who wish to try something different. For tweaks, tricks, and hacks, check out WinGuides’ Registry Guide for Windows.

Spread Firefox has reached its goal with five days to spare. Any guesses as to the number of downloads at the end of day 10?

I almost always root for the underdog. Go foxie! Dog? Fox? No pun intended.

In seven days, the Spread Firefox campaign has gotten over 700,000 people to download it. Its goal is to get one million in ten days. A million people is a drop in the bucket when you think of how many people use a browser, but it is hard to comprehend 100,000 people downloading and installing a new browser in one day. Maybe not. BusinessWeek provides the browser numbers.

For Web designers, FirefoxIE has been updated to work with Firefox 1.0PR. See the release.

I previously mentioned a discussion at Ezine-tips about HTML email and XP SP2. Ezine-tips followed up with another article with feedback from readers followed by editor Chris Knight’s thoughts. I think the feedback is valuable especially to newsletter publishers.

Those familiar with Calishain’s ResearchBuzz know of her expertise with search engines, Google especially. Her previous book is Google Hacks. This is a book of a different nature and doesn’t focus solely on Google.

Anyone who uses the Internet to do searching and research will find this book valuable. I’ve been using operators and special syntaxes in searching for a long time, yet I’ve learned a few new tricks from the book such as more syntaxes and ways to improve searching that I hadn’t considered.

I’ve had to learn most of the tips in the book on my own over several years. If I had this book sooner, it would’ve saved me time and have shortened some of my searches.

Calishain shares principles for conducting various types of searches as one search method doesn’t fit all. Though a Google fan, I don’t use it every time simply because some other search engines better meet the needs of a search. This is the advantage this book has over Google Hacks. You learn about the big picture of using search tools rather than focusing on one.

This book stands out because it describes the process of doing it. It “shows” you. She uses an example and tweaks the search syntax while letting you in on her thought process. Once you understand the principles, the rest is easy and the book becomes a great reference for remembering syntax, Web sites, and when to use a specific search engine.

Web sites that are excellent places to go for reference are listed in the book. I watch out for such information because we know Web sites come and go. However, these sites have been around for a long time and are reliable references.

With so many pages and subjects out there, it’s impossible to cover them all. Calishain manages to cover a good variety of topics enough to interest each reader. Example topics include people searching, news searching, jobs, finding local information, and genealogy. The table of contents should give you a good idea of what’s addressed and tell you exactly what the book covers. If you like the table of contents, you should be happy with the book.

Title: Web Search Garage
Author: Tara Calishain
Publisher: Prentice Hall PTR
ISBN: 0131471481
Date: August 2004
Format: Paperback
Pages: 264
Cover Price (of course, it’s marked down): USD$19.99
CDN: 28.99
UK: 15.99

Previously, I provided an overview of Windows Error Reporting. Someone wrote and said he never received resolutions to his problems when submitting an error report. I don’t know if this happened to him or not, but it may not be obvious that Microsoft is providing a possible solution.

I got an error after writing this report and submitted it to Microsoft. After it finished, the following window appeared. Click on “more information” to get details about the problem and a possible solution. When I clicked on it, it takes me to the Microsoft Online Analysis Web page and provides the following information.

Clicking on “Word Quits…” takes me to a knowledgebase article for details. Some problems probably have multiple possible solutions and there would be a bulleted list of other knowledgebase articles.

Maybe instead of “more information,” it would be better for the link to say, “More information and possible resolution.” “More information” might lead people to believe it’s tech speak about the problem and people don’t have time or interest to read that, so they close the box instead of clicking on it to see what is really behind the link. I’ve been guilty of that before.

May I ask a favor? I’ve been needing to establish a character for meryl.net, the business. Here are three examples. I’d love to hear your thoughts – just comment below. Example 1. Examples 2 and 3. Oh, and, if you think something could use tweaking or a little something — say the word.

Update: Thank you, folks! I appreciate all the input. It looks like #1 is the clear winner with a few tweaks:

1. Replace :: with middle dot (like the current logo way up on the top of this page).

2. Soften / lighten blue circle to blend in with inside background. A
little strong.

3. Narrow the space between Meryl and .net / .n and et. Dot should be
more centered between meryl and net.

What about a slight font change? Maybe a little too flowery?