Don't Hate
My Notetaking Workflow
Mar 7th
I didn’t have much time this year to follow TED (In fact, when I first sat down to write this, it was still going on). To be honest, I usually watch the videos a few months afterward, once they’re all finally uploaded and the hype has died down. It’s easy to get caught up in how much certain talks are plugged compared to others, especially with how much live information leaks out over twitter.
But I did break that trend this year a bit. I noticed an intriguing project by Robert Scoble on a blog post of his involving taking photos of notes by the attendees and posting them to flickr. Intrigued, I expected to be wowed by the different creative and thoughtful methods employed which I could use myself for note-taking.
Imagine my disappointment, then, when what I saw that most attendees were either using their iPhones or BlackBerries, scraps of paper, nonstandard spiral bound notebooks, or just generally chaotic methods for taking notes. I mean, aside from the now-famous mind-mapping note girl (photo here; I can’t look at it again because it makes my brain hurt and my teeth start gnashing), there really wasn’t anything TED-level-inspiring.
Numerical Breakdown
Let’s just break it down for a second:
- 34 pictures in the set
- Mobile devices: 9 – 26.5%
- iPhones: 7 – 20.6%
- BlackBerry: 2 – 5.9%
- Paper: 25 – 73.5%
- Notebooks (spiral or bound): 14 – 41.2%
- Mini Notebooks (or similarly sized): 6 – 17.6%
- Program/Scraps: 4 – 14.7%
- PowerPoint Handouts (Bill Gates): 1 – 2.9%
- Mobile devices: 9 – 26.5%
Generally, I abhor excel plots, but this does a good job communicating my point:
But that’s not all; of the iPhone note photos, virtually every single one used the built-in notes application. Yeah, the notes application that ships with the iPhone which lacks just about everything imaginable.
No Evernote love? No Google Documents love? That’s certainly surprising. Yet these attendees consider themselves shakers and movers? Definitely avant-garde? Perhaps ahead of the curve at adoption of new tech? Sorry, virtually every one of you was thoroughly beaten by mind-map girl entirely by default, entirely because of her uniqueness factor. Even more surprising, the journalists in the photo set aren’t even using Steno pads.
With the exception of Bill Gates (who obviously is using PowerPoint handouts for his presentation), there’s really no excuse.
Granted, this could entirely just be bad sampling on Scoble’s part. Whatever the case, it’s a unique opportunity to segue into how much I love the way I take notes.
OneNote – The best kept secret for organizing everything
Ok, those words aren’t entirely my own, but they’re the truth. Microsoft OneNote 2007 (and its predecessor) aren’t just about notes, they’re about collecting, organizing, searching, and making accessible just about anything and everything. You don’t need a tablet, and it isn’t just about text. I think it’s pretty fair to say that OneNote is almost the best kept secret and most undiscovered part of Office 2007.
My freshman year of college, I decided that I wanted to try using it for all of my notes. At the time, I was intrigued by the notion of using a Samsung Q1 Ultra V, a UMPC, due to its tiny form factor and long battery life. That worked, but I’ve since moved on to a Latitude XT in favor of its active digitizer and capacitive multitouch screen. Regardless, I’ve used OneNote for virtually all my notes since, and it has numerous advantages over paper:
- My notes are searchable, entirely. Not just text in its native form either, but handwritten text from the tablet, images (it searches the images), and audio.
- I don’t have to carry around spiral bound notebooks that are heavy, or waste money on dead trees (hey, this is one aspect of my life that actually is green).
- I can annotate and take notes directly atop PDFs, PowerPoints, or whatever materials are being studied without having to print them beforehand. This is extremely useful as I can get anything into notes by printing it to OneNote.
- My notes can be (and are) backed up regularly. That’s something you can’t really do with paper notes, short of making copies or scanning every day.
- I can keep every year’s worth of notes in one place. Obviously, that’s a ton of stuff 3 years in. I think you’d be hard pressed to carry around your spiral bound notebooks every day.
- I can organize with sections, tabs, notebooks, and pages. The analogues to a notebook are obvious, but there are other things as well that make a lot more sense in the context of digital notes.
- Something which always comes in handy is being able to instantly send my notes to other people; I can make PDFs of pages, sections, or entire notebooks.
- Everything lives in one place: text notes, powerpoints, images, clips of webpages, even file.
I honestly can’t see how it’d be possible to take notes electronically without OneNote at this point. Granted, there are a lot of other alternatives, but I find that they either have gamestopping flaws or are otherwise unwieldy:
- Microsoft Word
- I see this one a lot in classes, and don’t even know where to start. Word is great as a word processing tool, but that’s about all. Sure, you can take notes, but they won’t be searchable (which is a huge drawback for me), and ultimately you’re constrained by this page-by-page model that lies at its core. Combining graphics with notes is possible, but hard. OneNote is almost like Word without pages.
- How the heck are you supposed to take equations down quickly in Word? If you’ve used the equation editor, you know what a lesson in frustration it is.
- Google Docs
- I think using google documents makes a lot of sense, especially given the online nature, but it seems just as difficult to manage with lots of media. Of course, the fact that you can access it anywhere is a huge plus.
/LyX
- A while back on Slashdot I read a great article I could relate to about taking notes in class for science and engineering. It discussed/asked what the optimal computerized note-taking suite was given an emphasis on entering equations. Of course,
came up, along with its GUI-wrapped similar cousin LyX. I’m a big big fan of
, especially for documents and other things, but I can’t see it being practical or fast enough for taking notes every day. Granted, there are people out there (like some of my crazier friends) that are faster at typing the equations than writing them, but I find myself being able to write faster.
- You run into the same problems that Word has here; you’re stuck managing files for each set of notes.
- A while back on Slashdot I read a great article I could relate to about taking notes in class for science and engineering. It discussed/asked what the optimal computerized note-taking suite was given an emphasis on entering equations. Of course,
I’ve been meaning to try Evernote, and have heard great things about integration across virtually every platform. It seems like the way to go, and if I’d definitely like to try it out.
I guess the point that I’m trying to make is that there are so many better solutions than just using pen and paper or the default notes application that ships with most smartphones. Even though those are what you might grab for at first, you’re setting yourself up to be locked into two methods that leave much to be desired.
First AnandTech Story
Feb 22nd
I’ve been working on it for a while now, but I’m excited that my first AnandTech story is now up and live on the AT website here: http://anandtech.com/gadgets/showdoc.aspx?i=3749
It’s an analysis piece on Windows Phone 7 Series, and I expect more to develop as MIX10 creeps closer. There’s a lot more coming, and I’m definitely excited to write more reviews and posts. Just wanted to make note of it here.
I’ll definitely keep writing here as well!
AT&T Observations and Bandwidth
Feb 14th
Bandwidth and Latency Data
I’ve always kind of been obsessed with bandwidth. I find myself constantly testing latency, bandwidth, and connection quality (mostly, in fact, through smokeping). Needless to say, that same obsession applies to my mobile habit, and especially given the often-congested perception of AT&T.
It sounds weird, but the two most-run applications on my iPhone are Speedtest.net Speed Test and Xtreme Labs SpeedTest. The Xtreme labs test used to be my favorite, largely because of its superior accuracy and stability. As great as Speedtest.net’s website is for testing, the iPhone app continually fell short. Tests ended before throughput stabilized, often the test would start, then the data would start being calculated a second later (skewing the average), or it’d just crash entirely. I could go on and on about the myriad problems I saw which no doubt contributed negatively to perception of network performance.
A few months ago, I wrote a big review and threw it up on the App Store. In the review, I noted that being able to export data would be an amazing feature. At the time, I had emailed Xtreme Labs and asked whether I could get a sample of my speed test results for analysis (I have yet to hear back). On Feb. 2nd, Ookla finally got around to releasing an update to the Speedtest.net app; it included the ability to export data as CSV.
Since then, I’ve been using it exclusively. I’ve gathered a bit of data, and thought it relevant to finally go over some of it. This is all from my iPhone 3GS in the Tucson, AZ market, largely in the central area. I’ve gathered a relatively modest 76 data points. Stats follow:
Gathered Statistics
| Downstream (kbps) |
Upstream (kbps) |
Latency (ms) |
|
| Average | 1880.3 | 263.3 | 1029.2 |
| St. Dev. | 1179.6 | 101.6 | 1140.2 |
| Max | 4279.0 | 356.0 | 6011.0 |
| Min | 82.0 | 18.0 | 366.0 |
These stats really mirror my perceptions. Speeds on UMTS/HSPA vary from extremely fast (over 4.2 megabits/s!) to as slow as 82 kilobits/s, but generally hang out around 1.2 megabits/s. On the whole, this is much faster than the average 600 kilobits/s I used to see when I was on Sprint across 3 different HTC phones.
Next, I became curious whether there was any correlation between time of day and down/up speeds. Given the sensitivity of cellular data networks to user congestion (through cell breathing, strain on backhaul, and of course the air link itself), I expected to see a strong correlation. I decided to plot my data per hour, and got the following:
Some interesting trends appear…
- I apparently sample at roughly the same time each day (given the large vertical lines that are evident if you squint hard enough). Makes sense because I habitually test after class, while walking to the next.
- There is a relatively large variation per day for those regular samples, sometimes upwards of a megabit.
- There does appear to be a rough correlation between time of day and bandwidth, but the fact that I’m moving around from cell to cell during the day makes it difficult to gauge.
- Upstream bandwidth is extremely regular, and relatively fast at that.
I’m still mentally processing what to make of the whole dataset. Obviously, I’m going to continue testing and gathering more data, and hopefully more trends will emerge. You can grab the data here in excel form. I’ve redacted my latitude and longitude, just because my daily trends would be pretty easily extracted from those points, and that’s just creepy.
3G Bands – Where is the 850?
Lately I’ve been getting an interesting number of hits regarding the 850/1900 MHz coverage of AT&T here in Tucson.
To be honest, I’ve read a number of different things; everything from certainty that our market has migrated HSPA (3G) to 850 MHz, to that AT&T doesn’t even have a license for that band in Arizona. For those of you that don’t know, migrating 3G to the 850 MHz bands is favorable because lower frequencies propagate better through walls and buildings compared to the 1900 MHz bands. In general, there’s an industry wide trend to move 3G to lower frequencies for just that reason.
I’ve been personally interested in this myself for some time, and finally decided to take the time to look it up.
Maps, maps, maps…
The data I’ve found is conflicting. Cellularmaps.com shows the following on this page:
Note that the entire state of Arizona doesn’t have 850 MHz coverage/licensing.
However, the GSM authority over at GSM World shows three very different maps:
Note that the 3G data coverage map is labeled ambiguously; HSPA coverage exists, but it could be on either 1900 or 850. However, what we do glean is that (at least according to GSM world) there is equal 850 and 1900 MHz coverage in Tucson and the surrounding area. This contradicts the earlier map.
Then you have maps like these, which are relatively difficult to decipher but supposedly show regions of 800-band coverage from Cingular and AT&T before the merger:
Finally, you have websites such as these that claim Arizona is only 1900 MHz.
So what’s the reality? Uncertain at this point.
The map given by cellularmaps.com is sourced from 2008, whereas the GSM world maps are undated, and ostensibly current. The other maps are also undated, but the majority consensus is that AT&T isn’t licensed to use 800 MHz in this market.
If anyone knows about some better resources or information, I’d love to see it.
Photosynthing everything
Feb 1st
These past couple of days, I’ve finally gotten some time to work on the tremendous backlog of photos that I have sitting around from a number of trips. Among those pictures are sets of photos in the hundreds destined for photosynth. A number of my friends have expressed interest in what the software is, what it does, how it works, and how to take photos best suited for processing. I think now is a great opportunity to go over the basics.
What Photosynth Does
First of all, what Photosynth does is create a 3D point cloud model/representation of an object or scene from a set of photos. Depending on the scene complexity, the number of photos might be in the tens, or hundreds for sufficiently complicated scenes. It all depends on the model and how much time you have on your hands.
Perhaps the best way to explain it, is to see it. The following is a synth of the Pantheon that I recently finished processing, constructed from photos taken by my brother and I from a D80 and D90:
How it does it
The software uses feature extraction to identify textures in parts of each image that are similar, then tries to fit each corresponding from each image together to create a perspective-correct view. The process is extremely computationally intensive, but only needs to be done on the initial set of images to determine position and location. The beauty, of course, is that this process requires no human input for reconstructing the scene; it’s entirely computationally derived.
I won’t claim to be the most qualified to talk about it, but it does use feature extraction and some fancy fitting to work. An important note is that the software works based on unique features in texture, not necessarily on structure. This is why synths with lots of unique patterns turn out extremely well, while others don’t.
Creation
Creating the actual Synth is actually the easiest step; just create an account, install the software, add your photos, and go.
The real work in that process is creating proper tags, descriptions, and then adding geotagging data from photos, or later on in the web interface. Doing so is a great way to get your synth recognized.
How to take the best shots
There’s a great how-to on the official Photosynth website that goes over how to take pictures optimally, but I’d like to share some of my own.
If I’m taking a photo of a single object, something like this column, for example, I’ll try to stay equal distance away from the object, and take photos in steady progression around the subject.
The important thing to keep in mind is that although Photosynth can extrapolate the point cloud from features, it still cannot extrapolate images that you haven’t given it. Simply put, if you want to get the nice scrubber bar to circle around an object, you’ll need to take the requisite photos to make it. I find that pacing steadily around while taking photos at regular intervals is the best way.
- Take photos of subjects from a variety of angles. If you can, from every angle possible in an equal manner.
- Take photos from a single perspective pointing in multiple directions. I find that spinning around taking photos from each corner of the room works marvelously well; even though you look slightly special in the process.
- The most important thing to keep in mind is that quantity is generally on your side; so long as there is variety in the shots, but overlap as well.
- Choose subjects that have a variety of textures and features. Things like the Sistine Chapel synth really well because unique texture is everywhere, while cars generally don’t because of their solid color.
- Take wide angle shots of the entire room from the four corners first, then one from the center. Afterwards, take photos of objects/features close up. These are things that people will want to focus on when viewing later; a good example are pictures on the wall in a museum or specific fresco sections on a large wall.
Shameless plug
Some of my favorite Photosynth creations are:
- Piazza San Marco: Link
- Sistine Chapel: Link
- Artemision Bronze: Link
- Salpointe Graduation 2009: Link
- Replica of Equestrian Statue of Marcus Aurelius: Link
- Library of Celsus: Link
- Pantheon: Link
For equal comparison, here are some that didn’t turn out so well:
7 Wishes for iPhone OS 4.0
Jan 26th
Tomorrow’s big unveiling will likely be focused around the much-hyped, illusory tablet (whose name nobody even knows), but a large part of its launch will be iPhone OS 4.0.
Much debate has taken place regarding whether the tablet will run OS X, iPhone OS, or something in-between. Thanks in large part to an errant comment by the McGraw Hill CEO on MSNBC, I think it’s safe to assume that iPhone OS was the right guess all along.
Or was it? It’s likely that instead of releasing the tablet running the 3.x line OS, apple will launch a 4.x fork to bridge the handheld iPhone/iPod Touch experience with that of the tablet, and in so doing bring the mobile OS closer to its desktop counterpart. It makes sense considering keeping two disparate app stores running could cause a colossal flustercuck.
Since its launch in March of 2009, OS 3.x has begun showing some signs of age, especially compared Android 2.x. Here’s a list of what I think OS 4.0 needs to really keep the platform competitive:
1- Google Voice integration
Although Google just launched an HTML5 version of the google voice interface (no doubt specifically targeted at the iPhone and WebOS platforms), it still pales in comparison with how seamless Google Voice integration is on Android. Users of that platform can completely transition to their new number.
Plus, let’s be honest, using a web based version is just hackety compared to being able to use a much more responsive app without having to jailbreak. Until the day comes, I’ll stick with using the still-banned GV Mobile.
2- Google Latitude integration
This is the one that actually started the whole Google – Apple divorce, in case you have forgotten. It’d be amazing to finally see latitude integrated into the maps app the way it should have been the same month latitude launched.
Even better, the maps application (maintained by google) on BlackBerry OS and Android allows for seamless background position updating. As it is right now, iPhone OS users have to go to an HTML5-based version of the same application to update their position. Or jailbreak and use a solution like longitude (some screenshots/info here) and have it done on a schedule by a persistent background process. This is the solution I ultimately decided on
Perhaps this functionality isn’t allowed because of “duplication of functionality” with Mobile Me? Whatever.
3- Better gmail integration in the mail app
Let’s just come out and say it, the mail app on the iPhone is extremely barebones. Coming from Windows Mobile, I was kind of shocked at how barebones, in fact. No ability to change font, underline, bold, italicize, or do anything regarding formatting. As it is right now, the best you can do is some copy paste.
ArsTechnica really did a good job highlighting a number of subtleties that I’ve noticed in their article here. The most annoying of which is that folders aren’t fully synchronized until you go into them. For example, opening a sent folder will cause all the sent emails to load chronologically. This can get frustrating if you’ve sent a lot and just want to look at one; instead, you’ll have to wait for all of them to load. I can do without a unified inbox or unified messaging app, because honestly I view that as a more of a nightmare to be avoided than a feature.
But those aren’t my main gripe, it’s that there isn’t a gmail app (like what Android has) that supports Labels, Stars, or any of the features that make Gmail integration with email clients over IMAP or Exchange difficult. It’s that whole decision they made to not use “folders” and instead use labels that drives me crazy, and to this day, I’m lucky if I can find any sent email in my google apps account.
Forget about background and push, just fix the email client.
4- Notification customizations for SMS, scheduling
Even though the platform has good customization for ringtones, the alert sounds for system events such as email and new SMSes are surprisingly limited. In fact, at first, I assumed I was “doing it wrong” and failing at finding the proper way to load them. Nope, turns out, what you have is what you have, and what you will have forever.
That default “Tri-tone” sound is what everyone uses, and it’s annoying as hell to have it go off in a crowded room and watch 8 people all go for their phones (myself included). Allow some variety, without the need to jailbreak.
A lot of the other platforms also have alert profile scheduling. Namely, you can specify whether you should be alerted audibly, with vibration, or not at all, on a time schedule throughout the day. I’ve defaulted to always leaving my phone on vibrate simply because this is missing.
5- Background apps done right
This is probably everyone’s #1 wish for OS 4.0. Multitasking done right. Sure, you can jailbreak and do it, but it doesn’t lend itself to having a nice task-switcher. Instead, you’re left using what amounts to a task manager, which is completely the wrong way to do it.
Every other platform has it, only one platform (WebOS) has done it right so far. Can you, apple?
6- Better App organization
If you’re like me, you have 9 pages of applications that you’ve tediously organized. But sometimes, categories that are logical don’t come in sets of 16 (how many you can fit on one ‘page’). The real solution is to allow some sort of management. Be that folders, a menu, or something else.
Also, there’s no reason that people should be limited to 4 apps on the bottom row just for aesthetics when you have the room for 5. I couldn’t live without having 5 anymore.
7- Better power management – centralized reporting, on/off, scheduling
Something that I think Android really executed properly was the centralized power management screen. HTC has added this to virtually every single device in recent memory as well. That feature is centralized management of radio hardware and other large current draws.
This is something that, if executed properly, could also be a selling point for making hardware “green.” Hell, as a potential EE, I’d be absolutely in love with a screen showing current consumption from all the chipsets in the hardware that report it, plots of use vs. time, and more intelligent prediction of how much life I’ll get out of the device with current use.
But on a more basic level, what we really need is a feature that allows users to schedule the hardware itself. Imagine you’re on a trip without your charger; odds are, you don’t need the radio hardware on while you’re sleeping, but you do need the device on so the alarm works. Allowing users to schedule power events lets you balance use ahead of time.
But a feature I think is really needed is a so-called “last legs” setting. Basically, after the battery has crossed a user-defined threshold (say 15-25%), the software automatically does everything it can to preserve battery life; WiFi is turned off, 3G is turned off in favor of EDGE, screen brightness is reduced to 20%, push services are put on hold, email fetch intervals are doubled or quadrupled, background processes are killed.
The hardware and software essentially would work together to squeeze every last minute of use out of the hardware when battery gets low. This is especially important for when you cross the threshold while the phone is in your pocket, when you probably don’t even know it’s dangerously close to death.
Conclusions
Historically, Apple delivers products that have extremely polished, working features. Essentially, they err on the side of only releasing features that work, always work, and work well, instead of releasing features that don’t always work, or lack polish.
That said, a lot of the market has caught up since 2009. It’s time to address all of those gripes, and I’m hoping OS 4.0 fills some of the glaring holes in the feature set tomorrow. We’ll find out soon.
Mobile Phone Signal Bars – Thoughts
Jan 24th
Something that’s bugged me for a long time is how crude and arbitrary signal bars on mobile phones are. With a few limited exceptions, virtually every phone has the exact same design: four or five bars in ascending order by height, which correspond roughly to the perceived signal strength of the radio stack.
Or does it? Let me just start by saying this is an absolutely horrible way to present a quality metric, and I’m shocked that years later it still is essentially the de-facto standard. Let me convince you.
It isn’t 1990 anymore…
Let’s start from the beginning. The signal bar analogy is a throwback to times when screens were expensive, physically small, monochromatic if not 8 shades of grey, and anything over 100×100 pixels was outrageously lavish. Displaying the actual RSSI (Received Signal Strength Indicator) number would’ve been difficult and confusing for consumers, varying between 8 already difficult to distinguish shades of grey would have been hard to distinguish, and making one bar breathe in size could have sacrificed too much screen real estate.
It made sense in that context to abstract the signal quality visualization into something that was both simple, and readable. Thus, the “bars” metaphor was born.
Since then, there have been few if any deviations away from that design. In fact, the only major departure thus far has been Nokia, which has steadfastly adhered to a visualization that makes sense:
Namely, their display metaphor is vertically ascending bars that mirror call quality/strength. This makes sense, because it’s an optimal balance between screen use and communicating the quality in an easy to understand fashion. Moreover, they have 8 levels of signal, 0-7 bars showing. Nokia should be applauded for largely adhering to this vertical format. (In fact, you could argue that the reason nobody has adopted a similar metaphor is because Nokia has patented it, but I haven’t searched around)
It’s 2010, and the granularity of the quality metric on most phones is arbitrarily limited to 4 or 5 levels at best.
Better designs?
Thus, an optimal design balances understandability with level of detail. On one hand, you could arguably simply display the RSSI in dB, or on the other hand sacrifice all information reporting and simply report something boolean, “Can Call” Yes/No.
Personally, I’m waiting for something that either leverages color (by sweeping through a variety of colors corresponding to signal strength) or utilizes every pixel of length for displaying the signal strength in a much more analogue way.
Green and red are obvious choices for color, given their nearly universal meaning for OK and OH NOES, respectively. Something that literally takes advantage of every pixel by breathing around instead of arbitrarily limiting itself to just 4 or 5 levels also wouldn’t be hard to understand.
Fundamentally, however, the bars still have completely arbitrary meaning. What constitutes maximum “bars” on one network and device has a totally different meaning on another device or carrier. Even worse, comparing the same visual indicator across devices on the same network can often be misleading. For example, the past few months I’ve made a habit of switching between the actual RSSI and the resulting visualization, and I’ve noticed that the iPhone seems to have a very optimistic reporting algorithm. No doubt, this is due much in part to the systematically-poor perception of AT&T’s network quality.
There’s an important distinction to be made between the way signal is reported for WCDMA versus GSM as well:
First off one needs to understand that WCDMA (3G) is not the same thing as GSM (2G) and the bars or even the signal strength can not be compared in the same way, you are not comparing apples to apples. The RSCP values or the signal strength in WCDMA is not the most important value when dealing to the quality of the call from a radio point of view, it’s actually the signal quality (or the parameter Ec/No) that needs also to be taken into account. Source
That said, the cutoff for 4 bars on WCDMA seems to be relatively low, around -100 dB or lower. 3 bars seems around -103 dB, 2 bars around -107 dB, and 1 bar anything there and below. Even then, I’ve noticed that the iPhone seems to run a weighted average, preferring to gradually decrease the report instead of allowing for sharp declines, as is most usually the case.
Use dB if you’re not averse to math
What you’re reading isn’t really dBm, dBmV, or anything really physical, but rather a quality metric that also happens to be reported in dB. For whatever reason, most people are averse to understanding dB, however, the most important thing to remember is that 3 dB corresponds to a factor of 2. Thus, a change of -3 dB means that your signal has halved in power/quality.
The notation dBm is refrrenced to 1 mW. Strictly speaking, to convert to dBm given a signal in mW:
Likewise, to convert a signal from dBm back to mW:
But even directly considering the received power strength or the quality metric from SNR isn’t the full picture.
In fact, most of the time, complaints that center around iPhones failing to make calls properly stem from overloaded signaling channels used to setup calls, or situations where even though the phone is in a completely acceptable signal area, the node is too overloaded. So, as an end user, you’re left without the quality metrics you need to completely judge whether you should or should not be able to make a data/voice transaction. Thus, the signal quality metric isn’t entirely a function of client-tower proximity, but rather node congestion.
Carriers have a lot to gain from making sure their users are properly informed about network conditions; both so they can make educated decisions about what to expect in their locale, as well as to properly diagnose what’s going on when the worst happens. Worse, perhaps, carriers have even more to gain from misreporting or misrepresenting signal as being better than reality. Arguably, the cutoffs I’ve seen on my iPhone 3GS are overly optimistic and compressed into ~13 dB. From my perspective, as soon as you’re below about -105 dB, connection quality is going to suffer on WCDMA, however, that shows up as a misleading 3-4 bars.
Conclusions:
What we need is simple:
- Transparency and standardization of reporting – Standardize a certain visualization that is uniform across technology and devices. Choose something that makes sense, so customers can compare hardware in the same area and diagnose issues.
- Advanced nodes – For those of us that can read and understand the meaning of dB and real quality metrics from the hardware, give the opportunity to display it. Hell, perhaps you’ll even encourage some people to delve deeper and become RF engineers in the future. It’s annoying to have to launch a Field Trial application every time we want to know why something is the way it is.
- Leverage recent advances in displays - Limiting display granularity to 4 or 5 levels doesn’t make sense anymore; we aren’t constrained by tiny monochromatic screens.
- Tower load reporting - Be honest with subscribers and have the tower report some sort of quality metric/received SNR of its own so we know which path of the link is messed up. If a node is congested, tell the user. Again, people are more likely to be happy if they’re at least made aware of the link quality rather than left in the dark.
WVC54GCA Firmware v1.1
Jan 20th
Fix Some, Break Others
I noticed a strange but rather interesting problem the other night while working on one of my WVC54GCA cameras which was accidentally reset to defaults. But before I explain, I should back up a bit.
I mentioned in my previous post about ZoneMinder that I had not completely finished reviewing or evaluating the new V1.1 firmware that Linksys made available just recently. I now can, with a bit more certainty.
In the Linksys Release Notes, it states:
Version v1.1.00 build 02, Jun 15, 2008
- Support of Setup Wizard is temporarily disabled to address security issue
- Fix security issues
- Fix Camera stability issues
- Fix VLC multicast playback issues
- Update TZO DDNS client
- Change Firmware version format
- Enable HNAP protocol support
- Fix OCX stability issues
- Update valid value range of RTP Data Port. New range is even value of 1024~65514.
Version v1.00R24, Jan 7, 2008
- Updated TZO DDNS client code to resolve an issue with incorrect TZO server address being used to resolve the customers FQDN.
Now, this all sounds fine and dandy, but I think Linksys has fixed some issues and broken some others at the same time.
Concerned about the security issues (which are supposedly fixed in 1.1), I upgraded both cameras from my previous trusty (but somewhat unstable) V1.0 R24 build. At the time, everything worked. The cameras continued functioning over WiFi, all of my previous settings were preserved, everything seemed fine. However, I noticed that the wireless configuration page shows something a bit odd: “undefined.” Take a look:
Well, that’s odd. But WiFi worked. For the record, I’m using a Linksys WRT54G-TM running Tomato 1.27 with WPA/WPA2 AES and an alphanumeric key over 20 digits long.
The other night, my roommate inadvertently reset one of the cameras to default running the new V1.1 firmware. When I brought it back over ethernet and configured it to connect to WiFi, I noticed the configuration screen had changed, subtly:
The fields had changed. In addition to making the password field now the proper type (showing only bullets or whatever character your browser uses), there are two drop downs for which WPA version you’re using, as opposed to one. That seems fine, until after about a half hour of trying, I couldn’t make the 1.1 camera connect to my wireless. Arrgh.
Much tinkering, taking the thing apart, making sure the wireless card was seated, e.t.c. later, I tried something else. I remembered how much of a hassle the previous release was and how flashing to some strange German version of the firmware and then back made wireless magically work.
Amazingly, Linksys doesn’t keep a nice repo around (or, at least I couldn’t find one, perhaps there’s an FTP dump somewhere). I found the old 1.00 R24 build here, and for backup’s sake, here’s a version I’ll host and keep around forever.
I flashed back to 1.00 R24, and immediately was able to connect. In addition, flashing back up to V1.1 after configuring wifi on 1.00 R24 makes everything work just fine. It’s a mess, but that’s the only way I can make it work.
I have a feeling that Linksys hasn’t completely nailed down the configuration settings/supplicant for that Ralink card they have in there, or that the open source drivers just aren’t that great. I strongly suspect this is partly the reason for the introduction of the WVC80N, although reviews do look promising. I’d like to get my hands on one of those!
Scanning Books – My Take
Jan 16th
Why Scan Books?
With the prevalence of eBook readers like the Nook, Kindle, Spring Design Alex and others, comes the necessity of building and maintaining a vast digital library. There are more resources online than one can easily list for both purchasing (and downloading) books in a suite of electronic formats, from PDF to DJVU, but what if you already own a book of the traditional dead-tree sort? What if you aren’t willing to purchase it again just for the convenience and ease of reading it on your brand new eBook reader?
Scanning becomes your only option.
I’ll be honest, the process isn’t easy, quick or glamorous. But it beats spending a day craning over your flatbed scanner or cutting the spine out of your expensive book to feed it through an equally expensive loose-leaf scanner (speaking of which, what the heck is up with how expensive they are?!). If the book is sufficiently expensive, it becomes an economical prospect quickly given the few hours required from start to finish.
I’m not going to address the legal/ethical/moral considerations. You could argue that making a PDF copy for yourself constitutes Fair Use, but the law being what it is, who the heck knows? Regardless, just exercise some moral introspection and decide for yourself.
Equipment
- A relatively decent Digital SLR with wide to normal focal length lens
- Large sheet of black construction paper
- Tripod/Monopod and a way to hold the camera
- Snapter or other image processing software
- Adobe Acrobat/other PDF creating utility
- 2-4 hours of your time, depending on the book complexity
The specific equipment I use is:
- Nikon D80 with Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 lens
- Nikon SB600 flash (optional)
- Nikon remote shutter release (IR)
- Large piece of black construction paper from Michael’s
- Monopod, table, and a copy of my CRC Handbook (more on that weird combo later)
- Snapter for processing images
- Adobe Acrobat 9 Pro for making PDF and OCR
Software
I’ve already mentioned Snapter twice, and although they’re commercial software (with a very generous 15 day free trial that gives you all the functionality of the real book), don’t let that fool you. I’ve had a lot of success with their software just because of how easy and functional it’s been in my experience. So much so that I went ahead and got the paid version.
That said, there are a few open source alternatives that do a pretty good job and are worth mentioning:
- Scan Tailor – http://scantailor.sourceforge.net/
- Unpaper – http://unpaper.berlios.de/
Scan Tailor is pretty good, has a nice GUI, and is very active. Unpaper doesn’t have a GUI but offers a lot for a command line tool. There’s always the advantage both OSS solutions offer that you can either code/propose functionality changes in the software itself with the active developers.
Another relevant article with tips is from /. , which posted ironically the week after I had already embarked on and discovered the ins and outs of scanning with a digital camera myself.
Setup
My setup is simple: I mount the camera on the monopod, stick it on the table, and balance it there with my trusty CRC handbook and some other heavy books.
You might be wondering why I didn’t just use a tripod. The reason is that it’s a much more challenging prospect to carefully both tilt the tripod and balance it so the camera is completely perpendicular to the book’s surface. For the best photo quality, one needs the book to be as close to coplanar with the camera sensor as possible. It makes sense, otherwise we’ll have a more challenging time getting the book totally in focus (depth of field will come into play), and have a harder time flattening the book in software.
I generally tape the black paper down to the floor, snap photos of the cover and back cover, and then tape those down as well. More on positioning later.
The whole thing looks like the following:
I have the flash set to bounce from the ceiling, just because in practice this yields the most readable photos. I also use all the light I can from the room itself.
A difficult consideration is that sometimes the print/copy itself has glare. This seems a lot more common with newer books than older ones; it’s almost like the print has a layer of varnish atop it. Just make sure you preview a few images and can actually read the copy.
Positioning the book is the tricky part; it’s difficult to balance between filling the frame with the book (so you have good resolution), and leaving enough space at the edges so that your software can do edge detection. Leave too little space around, and you’ll have a nightmarish time trying to field flatten. Leave too much, and you’ll be throwing away a ton of your image. Even worse, if you don’t tape the book down, it will gradually creep out of the frame.
Another big consideration is rotation. I’ve discovered that Snapter doesn’t really account that well for material that has even subtle rotation. You end up with slight skew in the resulting images. It isn’t a big problem, but rotation will immediately cause you headaches.
I usually go for something like this:
You could zoom in a bit more in this case if you wanted; in practice you’ll discover for yourself what works best.
I set the camera to use a relatively big F/# (in this case F/5.6) so there’s as much depth of field as possible. You want the whole book in focus.
Now just snap away
This is the grueling part, capture images of every page. Snag a friend or something as having two people makes this process go much faster. One can turn the page and crease stubborn ones into place, and the other can trigger the shutter with the remote and make sure the book isn’t creeping out of the frame.
I find this can take anywhere between a half hour to much longer, depending on how much trouble the book gives you. The most challenging parts are the very beginning and the end. At these points, the pages have the most curve to them, sometimes sticking up. This is where sometimes creasing them down or using some tape on the stubborn ones can make or break your day.
Eventually, you’ll have a directory full of images somewhere you need processed.
Processing
Snapter-ing?
At this point, you can use whatever tool suits your fancy, but if you’re using Snapter, read on.
Click Book, grab all your photos, and go make yourself a drink as you wait for it to do initial edge detection and processing on images. Nothing is being changed, it’s just generating the initial traces around the book it finds.
After this is done comes the only other bothersome part. It’s very worthwhile to manually go through each page and make sure you’re happy with the edge detection. Frequently, pages that have black or dark color at the edge cause headaches. Drag the handles around until they match closer. This can be grueling, but it’s important.
Click Input, change the background color to black (since we’re using a black piece of paper, or at least I did). Under Output, I also generally turn cropping each page off since I’d rather deal with a spread. Grayscale output will save on space later, and I keep the DPI the same since I’ll compress and downsample later in Acrobat. Now, you can click process and have yourself another drink.
After this is done, you can preview the results on the right. If everything is right, click Save and wait a little longer.
Now you should have a directory full of images waiting to be made into a PDF.
Adobe Acrobat
You can use whatever you’d like to make the PDF from the resulting JPEGs, however, I’ve had luck just using Acrobat.
Click Create -> Merge Files into a Single PDF, and then grab all those images you have.
Combine them, and you should now have a huge PDF. Save it, but you aren’t done yet. At this point, I generally take a look at the PDF Optimizer under the Advanced tab, and click Audit Space Usage. Yeah, it should be pretty huge.
If you absolutely need color, just skip this. If your book is black and white, converting is going to save you a ton of space.
To convert pages to grayscale, under Advanced click Print Production -> Convert Colors. Check “Convert Colors to Output Intent” and select “Gray Gamma 1.8.” I usually then exclude the front and back covers from the page range, unless you don’t care about that pretty color you’ll be missing out on.
This process also will take some time. Adobe is multithreaded, but still doesn’t use all my 8 logical cores on my i7 920. Just be patient.
After this finishes, you should now see a dramatic difference under the space audit report for Images. There might be a lot of document overhead, however. Don’t worry, this is normal.
At this point, it usually makes the most sense to do some OCR if you want, just to make the document searchable. Document -> OCR Text Recognition -> Recognize Text Using OCR does the trick.
Click Edit and select Searchable Image (Exact). This won’t resize your images or do compression; we’ll do that later. Now, wait a long time while it consumes CPU cycles and hopefully makes your document so much more powerful and useful.
After this finishes, you’re ready to do some compression and hopefully make your document small enough to not be an embarrassment, you storage hog, you. I usually downsample to around 300 DPI, leave monochromatic images alone (since we don’t have any), and opt for JPEG2000. Check everything in the Discard Objects, Discard User Data, and Clean Up tabs.
Click Ok, and now be prepared to wait the longest you have yet. Even on my rig, this takes an hour or two.
Check the space audit once more, and you should now have a reasonable sized, fully searchable, readable PDF, ready for your enjoyment.
My ZoneMinder Configuration
Jan 10th
Why Home Security?
In recent months, home security and monitoring has become a matter of increasing concern across the country. Whether the reason is local downturn due to a spike in crime or just peace of mind, the price and difficulty of setting up an enterprise-level security system at home is lower than ever.
That said, the variety of hardware, open and closed source monitoring software, and configuration options makes it a bit daunting to jump right into. I’ve worked and experimented with a number of configurations and finally settled on one that I think works best (at least for my needs).
Camera Hardware
Camera 1 – Linksys WVC54GCA
I originally started out with just one Linksys WVC54GCA. It’s a 640×480, wired/wireless 802.11b/g network camera with built in web server for stills and video, and some simple motion detection and alert functionality. The reason for its choice was simple; price. It’s Linksys’ primary network camera offering, and you can find it as of this writing for $89 at newegg. In addition, there’s a newer camera with 802.11n, the WVC80N.
However, it isn’t perfect. To quote the cons of my newegg review:
Cons: Wireless range isn’t excellent; I have a very powerful wireless AP with a 12 dBi omnidirectional antenna and a 6 dBi directional antenna, and I had to reposition it so the camera could send video back at a decent bitrate (around 2 megabits is where it sits).
An important thing to note is that the latest .24 firmware breaks WPA/WPA2 support. Mine shipped with .24 and I had to downgrade back to .22 for it to work. A bit disappointing, but hopefully future firmware will fix this glaring problem. The linksys forums have the link to a custom built .22 (oddly enough with german language selected by default, but don’t worry, all the menus are still english).
Motion detection isn’t perfect, sometimes false positives will get annoying. I have sensitivity set all the way down and still get a few random videos of nothing going on.
More recently, I discovered that the software (despite being open source and a *nix derivative) locks up after anywhere between 6-24 hours when the camera is connected wirelessly. This is fixable (in a haphazard sort of way) by calling an internal page that reboots the camera every 3 hours through a schedule in my Tomato router:
Thus far, this has proven a robust fix and makes the cameras entirely usable. I’ve notified Linksys and even had a chat online with a higher level tech that passed my findings on to a firmware engineer. They’ve recently released an update which purports to fix stability issues:
Version v1.1.00 build 02, Jun 15, 2008 - Support of Setup Wizard is temporarily disabled to address security issue - Fix security issues - Fix Camera stability issues
I have yet to fully test it. As an aside, the cameras are actually embedded x86 inside, sporting an AMD Geode SC1100 processor, 32? MB of SDRAM (2x TSOP marked PSC A2V28S40CTP), and Ralink 802.11b/g/a(?) chipset (RT2561T) as pictured.
Image quality is a little above average but nothing wonderful due to the relatively tiny plastic fixed focus lens system. Low light sensitivity is ok, but nothing stellar; you still need moonlight or ambient street lighting to get usable results at night. If you don’t mind those caveats, you’ve basically got the beginnings of a very robust (and cheap) network camera.
There are a number of relevant pages that are undocumented on the camera itself:
Reboot: http://USER:PASS@ADDRESS/adm/reboot.cgi
MJPEG stream: http://USER:PASS@ADDRESS/img/mjpeg.jpg
JPEG still: http://USER:PASS@ADDRESS/img/snapshot.cgi?size=3 (3- 640×480, 2- 320×240, 1- 160×120)
The options offered in the camera’s internal setup pages aren’t very robust, but offer just enough for you to do almost everything you’d want to.
Camera 2 – AXIS 207W and MW
After acquiring another Linksys camera for myself (and another 3 for the parents), trudging my way through the reboot issue, and reasonable but not stellar image quality, I decided I was ready for something more. Axis seems to have very good support, choice, and performance, in addition to heaps more customization and options for the camera itself. The catch? Price.
I decided to start off with Axis’ cheapest offering, the 207-series of network cameras. I managed to snag an Axis 207MW that had been used just once at a trade show that was being sold as used on eBay, and my dad went ahead and just purchased outright a 207W from Newegg. The distinction between the 207W and MW is that the 207MW has a 1.3 megapixel camera supporting resolutions of up to 1280×1024, whereas the 207W is just 640×480. They’re both 802.11b/g so you can move them throughout the house, and have almost identical setup and configuration pages. Of course, like the Linksys WVC54GCA, there’s optional ethernet support as well. Virtually all the other features are the same between the 207W and 207MW.
As of this writing, the 207MW is $328 at Amazon, and the 207W is $286 at Amazon.
Right off the bat, you can tell this camera is much different. It’s got an actual glass lens system, focusing ring, and a compact form factor with a longer cable. In addition, the antenna is external and swivels and snaps out so you can position it however suits getting the best signal. There are a variety of status LEDs on the back that make troubleshooting limited wireless connectivity simpler. The front clear ring is actually a large lightguide for four LEDs that can be either green or amber depending on the status of the camera. These can be disabled as well.
Image quality is also much better on the Axis 207MW than the Linksys. Originally, I had a WVC54GCA mounted where the Axis is now inside the garage. The Axis is both much more stable, and also gets better wireless reception outside in an otherwise difficult to reach trouble spot.
Among other things, the Axis offers many more configuration options within its internal administrative pages, as well as (if you’re interested in running it) many more options for built in motion detection. One of the more important things I’ve come across is the ability to change exposure prioritization so the otherwise very well lit driveway doesn’t come out a homogeneous white from pixels saturating as often. This kind of exposure prioritization can be done on the Axis, but not on the Linksys as shown:
There are just a wealth of options that really make the Axis shine over the cheaper Linksys if you delve deeper. I could write pages about the differences that the extra nearly $200 makes (if you can afford it). Both cameras offer the ability to upload images and 5-10 second video clips of motion detection events to an FTP share, or attach them to an email. Detailing the differences between the two (and the ultimate shortcomings of both) is another article in and of itself.
At the end of the day, I found motion detection somewhat unreliable on both the Axis and Linksys; either I wound up with far too many motion event video clips or nearly nothing. Even worse, downloading and then watching hundreds if not thousands of false positives a grueling task. If you’re a basic user or just interested in having a camera for temporary purposes while you’re away on a trip, perhaps just the in-camera features are enough. However, if you’re looking for something more robust for a number of permanent cameras with much better motion detection, keep reading. At the end of the day, I use both types of camera just as inputs for ZoneMinder as you’ll see later on.
ZoneMinder Setup
ZoneMinder is a GPL’d, LAMP-based web tool for managing and monitoring virtually every kind of possible video source. Its supported sources span everything from cheap USB Logitech webcams, to network security cameras with built in webservers (like the two I’ve covered), to traditional video sources through a video capture card. Their documentation is a bit overly complicated (you can get to their supported hardware list here), and at the end of the day you’re going to either need to have local linux driver support (and a path to video like you’d expect for a webcam/TV tuner), or a path for JPEG, MJPEG, or another kind of MPEG4 stream.
The aim of ZoneMinder is to do all motion detection, video archiving, and image processing in one centralized place; simplifying use and making it easier to keep track of new events as they happen. Of course, the only downside to this is that all that motion detection and video capture requires a relatively powerful computer. Official documentation claims that even an ancient Pentium II should be able to do motion detection and capture for one camera at 25 FPS.
On the old computer I’ve configured (with a Pentium 4 Northwood 2.8 GHz and 2 GB of RAM), I’ve found that adding an 8 FPS VGA network camera and doing motion detection and capture adds between 10-20% CPU load.
Installation
Luckily ZoneMinder is relatively easy to setup if you’ve ever been near a modern linux distro with aptitude. As I noted earlier, ZoneMinder should ideally be run on a LAMP or similar web server, however, they claim that distro, web server, and SQL database support is actually quite diverse. I performed my installation on a fresh install of Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic by following instructions similar to Linux * Screw’s:
sudo apt-get install zoneminder apache2 php5-mysql libapache2-mod-php5 mysql-server ffmpeg
Once that was finished, the following:
sudo ln -s /etc/zm/apache.conf /etc/apache2/conf.d/zoneminder.conf
sudo/etc/init.d/apache2 force-reload
http://_YOUR WEBSERVER ADDRESS_/zm/
At this point, I’d encourage you to enable user authentication in Options -> System -> ZM_OPT_USE_AUTH. Ticking this box and saving will enable another tab, Users. I generally configure one admin for making changes and a less privileged “User” account for simply viewing the cameras and motion detection events as shown:
The remainder of options are largely fine in their defaults; the only major thing that you should be concerned with are the paths if you care about certain disks being used. I’ve recorded almost 800 events so far in VGA resolution and have used up an additional 1% of the meager 80 GB HDD on the system.
Adding Sources
Now, to add some video sources. This is where you really have to either know the path to either JPEGs or a MJPEG stream on the camera.
Click “Add New Monitor” in the bottom right. Now, if you have an Axis or Panasonic network camera (arguably the two de-facto industry standards) there are some presets that are worth checking out that you can use by clicking “Presets” in the top right. Change the source type to Remote (if it isn’t already from using a preset), and name it appropriately. I also usually set the FPS to either 5 or 8; from what I’ve seen, higher really isn’t feasible.
Now click the “Source” tab. This is where if you used a preset, your life is much easier, as the remote host path is already filled in. If not, it’s still simple, you just have to know how to get the relevant data from your source. In my example, I have the following:
From the above screenshot:
Remote Host Name: user:pass@_PATH TO YOUR CAMERA_
Remote Host Port: 80 (Or something else, if you’ve changed it)
Remote Host Path: /axis-cgi/jpg/image.cgi?resolution=640×480
Note that this is for the Axis 207 series cameras, although in general all the Axis cameras follow the same syntax (nice, isn’t it?). You can’t use whatever resolution you want, however, all the major and obvious choices work. You’ll notice I’ve just used VGA instead of the full 1.3 MP 1280×1024 resolution image from the 207MW. This is because using full resolution does seem to generate too much network traffic for my 802.11g network (despite my best efforts, the garage remains a dead zone thanks to chicken wire stucco construction), and FPS takes a large hit. No doubt that if the connection were wired, higher would be feasible. However, VGA is more than enough for now.
Adding the Linksys sources are just as easy given the paths I outlined previously. I haven’t added any internal sources, personally, however I imagine that configuration is the same if not easier; it requires knowing the path and setting a few additional constraints so you don’t overload your server.
Configuration
Now that you’ve added sources, you can configure their function.
You would think these options would be intuitive, however, they caused a bit of confusion for myself personally due to their shortened names. They are as follows, from the ZM documentation:
- None – The monitor is currently disabled and no streams can be viewed or events generated.
- Monitor – The monitor will only stream feeds but no image analysis is done and so no alarms or events will be generated,
- Modect – or MOtion DEteCTtion. All captured images will be analysed and events generated where motion is detected.
- Record – In this case continuous events of a fixed length are generated regardless of motion which is analogous to a convention time-lapse video recorder. No motion detection takes place in this mode.
- Mocord – This is a hybrid of Modect and Record and results in both fixed length events being recorded and also any motion being highlighted within those events.
- Nodect – or No DEteCTtion. This is a special mode designed to be used with external triggers. In Nodect no motion detection takes place but events are recorded if external triggers require it
In practice, my cameras are generally set to Modect, unless I have an indoor camera with particularly high traffic, in which case Monitor makes more sense since all the motion detection events would be me moving around and about (take it from experience, you see yourself doing some pretty strange things). This is also a nice way of judging how much load each camera adds, as the setting is pretty immediate if you’re watching htop.
With time, you should now have a zoneminder console similar to mine:
I’ve noted in particular how offline hosts appear red, while online hosts appear green or orange depending on their function.
Perhaps the only last area of configuration are the zones themselves (finally, the zone in ZoneMinder!) These define the regions of interest, in each video source, that will be used for event detection. Clicking on “1″ under Zones will allow you to modify the default zone for the video source. This is where you’re really given a lot of control far beyond anything in-camera will ever offer from even Axis. You can add points and create polygons, as well as tweak sensitivity on an interface that looks like this:
Returning to the main “Console” view, the rest of the interface itself is relatively self explanatory.
Daily Use/Monitoring
If you’re interested in viewing all of the video sources currently enabled, clicking “Montage” should give a view similar to the following:
You’re also given the FPS below each camera, this is also handy. Lower resolution (eg I show a 320×240 source blacked out) cameras are somewhat intelligently tiled as well, using the available space pretty well.
Clicking on any of the events back on the console page should bring up something similar to the following, showing details about all the motion detection events from the given source (or all sources):
Clicking on any of the event IDs or names pulls up a window where you can review the event, from a few seconds before, to just after. You can also click anywhere below on the scrub bar to jump ahead or back, as expected. It isn’t perfect, but does a surprisingly good job:
Perhaps the coolest is “Timeline” view, a high-level plot of motion detection activity across all cameras overlaid on a timeline. This gives you an at-a-glance overview of whether the same events were being detected across all cameras at the same time, or to quickly pick out what time of day generates the most activity. In this view, mousing over times and activity as demarked by red on the plot refreshes the thumbnail appropriately, as well as with the detection region highlighted in red.
It isn’t always the most useful way to review events, but perhaps one of the more unique. I’ve found it useful for reviewing a few days or weeks at a glance when I’m gone. There’s also certainly a nice pattern that emerges over time, at least for me.
Mobile
ZoneMinder supposedly has a nice mobile view available, however, I’ve had relatively little experience with it and had difficulty enabling it on my iPhone 3GS. Viewing the normal ZM site works fine, however, motion detection playback doesn’t work all the time.
In the meantime, I continue to use IP Vision for monitoring all my MJPEG sources:
If you’re interested in me detailing this, just let me know. Setup is again straightforward and merely involves knowing the correct paths and forwarding a few ports in your router. Also, it’s a great way to quickly consume tons of 3G bandwidth!
Conclusions
Setting up a robust, nearly commercial-level reliability home video surveillance system is now easier than ever thanks to the huge variety of video hardware and open source software available. I’ve moved from one single camera with in-camera motion detection sending alert emails with 5 second video clips to a gmail account (which quickly filled to the limit), to a secure and expandable motion detection suite monitoring at times 7 cameras that is accessible virtually anywhere I can get online.
If you’re only interested in home monitoring during a vacation or time away, setting up a system like this might not be the best solution, so long as you’re willing to sift through either an FTP dump full of videos and stills or a gmail account choc-full of videos. However, if you’re serious about having a manageable system with a number of fixed (or PTZ!) cameras that you need constantly monitored, ZoneMinder makes sense and gets the job done. In the future, for serious users, it can even be hosted commercially or simply store the event cache on a network share elsewhere to prevent physical tampering or theft.
The Challenge of Marketing 3D
Jan 7th
Although I couldn’t make it to CES this year, I have been following it pretty closely through reading liveblogs, news items, press releases, and unsurprisingly live webcasts. Unsurprisingly, probably the main highlight of the conference this year is popularization of 3D media. Displays, cameras, movies, and all the compute power to render, edit, and distribute it.
What’s become immediately obvious, however, are the challenges that this new format will face before becoming widespread. The most glaring of which, is how all the 3D I’ve been able to see so far is this:
No, not Bono or how content providers hope this will sell yet another copy of media we already have, or how 3D is somehow the end of movie piracy ( this time in a 3D format. Parallax.
Of course, parallax is fundamental to how 3D displays work; you present different images to each eye with the subject shifted proportional to how much depth should be perceived. The chief problem that I think adoption will face is that, ultimately, you need to see an example of 3D to become a fan of 3D. In essence, it’s impossible to convey what 3D displays look and seem like (especially over print or 2D monitors) until you already have one.
Forget the primary hurdle to 3D, the glasses (unless you have a very special 3D monitor that doesn’t require them because it uses voxels or a surface pattern to create the parallax). It seems to me like, already, you’re going to have to go either see a 3D movie or find a very lucky friend who has a 3D monitor to make an educated decision about it yourself. And although it seems like the industry has already decided this is the next big trend, consumers must first be convinced it’s the way to go.














































