Microsoft says “I’m a PC” and well... thanks Microsoft :-)

When Microsoft released ads answering the “I’m a PC, I’m a Mac” ads from Apple, the blogosphere is bound to write about it.

Chandoo has also done that. And while reading his post, I wrote the following myself.

Stuff I appreciate about the ads: it fights the idea of stereotyping users, though that is not the intent of the Mac ads. It’s a good strategy - take the strength of the competitor’s communication and turn it around as their weakness. It celebrates diversity - that the hardware I use does not define me. And ofcourse PC (the x86 PC architecture to be precise), being the open systems format, is the perfect “mascot” for that diversity.

And that’s where it does not fit in with M$. It does not work. Why? Mac-vs-PC works because Apple OWNS Mac - the software as well as the hardware. PC is not OWNED by anyone. IBM invented it, and it’s been since taken over by the open market. Even Intel can’t claim to own the PC market. There are many more players who define PC - there’s HP, Dell, AMD.

And Microsoft does not run on just PCs anymore. After Intel entering Macs, Windows also is aiming for people owning Macs.

So why is Microsoft spending so much money on promoting a franchise which it does not own nor which comprises its entire target market?

Note that none of the people say “I’m Windows” or “I’m a Windows user”, nor would it fit if they did.

I guess if they are serious, specialized PC users, they’d NOT be using Windows, let alone Vista How many of these “PeeCees” were Linux users, how many were BSD users? How many use XP (remember the ad ends with a Vista graphic)?

Next, since the ad celebrates diversity so much, does Microsoft support the idea? Is its software or UI that customizable? The idea that the computer you use should not define who you are or what you look like - shouldn’t it be carried forward in the goods delivered? Why does M$ software (Vista) hog so much of resources that it does not let the real software which DOES define what us PC users are work properly?

Just making smart ads isn’t going to get M$ back in the good books of computer users. Making software that works properly would.

In the end, if you’d remove the last screen mentioning Microsoft, the ads make a stronger case for the x86+OSS systems (read Linux/BSD on PC) rather than Windows/Vista.

Being a devout x86+OSS (rather x64+OSS) user myself, all I have to say is “Thanks Microsoft ;)”.

Plagiarism?

Thanks to Prasad who pointed me to the following graphic which appears in Digit magazine's August '08 issue DVD


Now I'd request you to see the following animation:


Do you notice something?

This animation was made in 2005, by three of us: Jhasketan Sethi, Sanchit Shinghal and me, Amit Sharma, for our institute's management fest. I'm sure neither of us, nor the current managing team of the festival have been contacted by anyone related to the magazine for this.

Do you think it's legally and ethically acceptable for such a reputed publication to copy creative content?

Related links - http://www.kidakaka.com/2008/09/plagiarism.html

http://jainuine.blogspot.com/2008/09/plagiarism-by-digit.html

Chrome Crashed!

Two days after waxing eloquent over Chrome's small memory footprint and stability, I faced my first ever Chrome crash today.

6 days since it was released and I started using it. It's the only Chrome crash so far... let's hope it's the last :)

Chrome: is it... worth it?

So Chrome is out. Wonderful. Is it good? Or is it like the others in the market?

To find out I tried a very simple (some might say simplistic) test to see if I'd like to shift to Chrome.

I am most concerned with memory usage and stability in all my applications, and since the browser is the one software I use the most, well, I'd like to test this new kid on those two counts.

And if you remember that I was dissatisfied with Firefox 3, I have been on the lookout.

So here we go.
Methodology:
check memory usage
a. of each of the following browsers: Microsoft's IE7, Mozilla's Firefox2 (I had FF2 only, remember FF3 crashes so often on my machine, Mozilla would sue me for this post :D), Apple's Safari, Opera and Google's Chrome.
b. with 1, 2, 3 and 4 tabs open
c. comments about observation and usage etc.


So here are the stats:

One window: facebook.com (my profile page)
IE7 - 206kB
Firefox2 - 92kB
Safari - 107kB
Opera - 53kB
Chrome - 38kB

Two windows: facebook.com (my profile page), flickr.com
IE7 - crashed!
Firefox2 - 81kB!
Safari - 116kB
Opera - 67kB
Chrome - 38kB + 21kB

Three windows: facebook.com (my profile page), flickr.com, gmail.com
Firefox2 - 101kB
Safari - 148kB
Opera - 68kB
Chrome - 38kB+21kB+16kB

Four windows: facebook.com (my profile page), flickr.com, gmail.com, xkcd.com
Firefox2 - 105kB
Safari - 153kB
Opera - 93kB
Chrome - 38kB+21kB+16kB+36kB


So? Do you want charts for me to tell you which is better? Well, if you don't consider Chrome right away, Opera was the lightest browser around, but I don't know why, to me it always seemed to be heavy.

Now what's unique about Chrome is that every tab comes up as a separate process, though on the taskbar it's only one icon. What it means is that if one of your tabs is not responding, then only that tab needs to be shut down, not the whole browser. So even though with a high number of tabs (over 3 on average) Chrome has higher memory usage than other browsers, what would you do with slightly lower usage for statistical purposes if for one malicious tab your entire "slightly lower memory usage" browser goes down? Atleast Chrome is better on that count. And if you want to just check your mail and facebook updates, you won't have to block some 100 kilos of memory.

Touch and feel:
I agree to the Google Chrome comic when it says that the browser needs to get out of the way (and in my opinion, so should the Operating System) when the user is working. Chrome works well on those counts.
More screen space - good.
No status bar - but its functionality is there - with temporary status boxes which appear on a need basis.
No menu bar - but there are two buttons which club all the functionality of the menus. Smart thinking - it's a browser, not an illustration package where you need detailed menus to list out everything.
The favourite/bookmark bar is also not there - bookmarks appear when you open a new tab, which also shows an Opera like, but dynamic dial-space listing out the most visited/last visited pages. Ofcourse if you want an always-visible bookmark bar, press Ctrl+B.

The browser feels nimble and light. The clicks are quick, actions are taken instantly. I like it.

Stability:
On my machine, where FF3 crashed everytime the population of the world hit a multiple of 3, and FF2 and Safari also would go for a toss every couple of hours (let's not talk about IE at all shall we, after seeing the "test results"), Chrome has not crashed ONE SINGLE TIME so far - 5 days, and not even a tab has crashed. Rock solid so far.

Cons:
I've heard about search issues, but I've not needed that functionality so far, so can't comment. But yesterday when I was browsing techmech.wordpress.com/, I realised that the browser window did not have a scroll bar, the wheel did not word, even the up & down arrow keys did not work.Well, the content did flow beyond the first fold, because when I clicked in the window and dragged down, the content did slide up. I'm sure this is a minor bug, which should be rectified soon, if brought to Google's notice.

Hypnos verdict:
Lighter than others. Stabler than others. I've faced a slight glitch, but I think I can live with that right now, given that I'm living a more peaceful life due to the two big plus points I already mentioned.