Recently, the Linux community were rejoicing with the news that Dell were to ship systems with Ubuntu as its operating system.

On the face of it, this does appear to be a good move. For the first time we could see leaflets on our doormats of a morning offering us cut price Ubuntu systems. The ease of being able to order your PC over the phone or online. The “supposed” great level of post sale technical support. Most importantly, the low cost Dell can manage which could quite possibly be the factor that dictates the level of success this experiment brings Dell.

But looking back at how Dell dealt with Windows, is this a wise move? Most consumers would have never heard of Ubuntu, or Linux. Their first experience with Ubuntu will be from using a Dell machine. If history tell us anything about Dell, they don’t half know how to fill a machine with a bucket load of crappy software. Most of which goes unused. If they take Ubuntu down the same route, would the first impression of Ubuntu be a negative one?

Will consumers be bothered to learn a new system? I would guess not. Windows widespread adoption in businesses, schools and homes means users now exist in a Windows comfort zone which Linux will find difficult to erode.

Dell technical support, chances are they will need retraining. (I know, obvious joke :) ). If Dell allocate a small number to man the Ubuntu support center, how will they cope with the predicted number of calls from users who can’t get a web cam or a printer they purchased from a local store to work. Despite the split between number of shipped Ubuntu and Windows systems, the number of support calls could end up being equal.

Finally, the deciding factor… cost. If Dell decide to ship Ubuntu systems at the same price as its Windows systems, where is the incentive for a customer to want to choose a new system, one they have never heard of or used before over one that they have probably spent the last half decade using. Its a big ask.

If Ubuntu does take off and fly off the warehouse shelves (which I hope does happen), I long expect the local PC repair and support economy to boom, assuming they are prepared. ;)

NSIS (Nullsoft Scriptable Install System) is an open source installer with strong scripting capabilities.

A recent project required packaging up a RealBASIC (RB) application. When installing the RB application the folder it created for its own use under My Documents needed to have its own icon.

This was where, at long last, desktop.ini file came in handy.

Desktop.ini consists of three sections. The first two, [ExtShellFolderViews] and [{5984FFE0-28D4-11CF-AE66-08002B2E1262}] are if you want to use a custom Folder.htt template. Folder.htt allows you to create an alternative view of a web folder.

The third, [.ShellClassInfo] is where you format the look of the folder.

Lifted straight from MSDN:

ConfirmFileOp
Set this entry to 0 to avoid a “You Are Deleting a System Folder” warning when deleting or moving the folder.

NoSharing
Set this entry to 1 to prevent the folder from being shared.

IconFile
If you want to specify a custom icon for the folder, set this entry to the icon’s file name. The .ico file extension is preferred, but it is also possible to specify .bmp files, or .exe and .dll files that contain icons. If you use a relative path, the icon will be available to people who view the folder over the network. You must also set the IconIndex entry.

IconIndex
Set this entry to specify the index for a custom icon. If the file assigned to IconFile only contains a single icon, set IconIndex to 0.

InfoTip
Set this entry to an informational text string. It will be displayed as an infotip when the cursor hovers over the folder. If the user clicks the folder in a Web view, the information text will be displayed in the folder’s information block, below the standard information.

Replacing the folder icon involves setting the IconFile property to the actual .ico file like so:

[.ShellClassInfo]
ConfirmFileOp=0
NoSharing=0
IconFile=logo.ico
IconIndex=0
InfoTip=This is a tip

Your installer setup should now consist of your application, icon and destop.ini with IconFile set to the name of the icon.

The next step is to tell NSIS how to package them all up. (I have assumed that you have already a basic script ready for this to drop into). In your .nsi script add the following:

; Create the folder within My Documents
CreateDirectory "$DOCUMENTS\My Folder"
; Tell where to output to next
SetOutPath "$DOCUMENTS\My Folder"
; Extract both files
File "logo.ico"
File "desktop.ini"

; Set the new folder as a system folder
SetFileAttributes "$DOCUMENTS\My Folder" SYSTEM
; Set file attributes to system and hidden
SetFileAttributes "$DOCUMENTS\My Folder\desktop.ini" HIDDEN|SYSTEM
SetFileAttributes "$DOCUMENTS\My Folder\logo.ico" HIDDEN|SYSTEM

This creates the folder within My Documents, sets it to a system folder and extracts desktop.ini and logo.ico into the root of the new folder and sets them both as hidden system files.

Hopefully, you should now have the folder displaying your icon instead of the default folder icon. Any problems then ask.

List of CSS snippets, in no particular order. Naturally, most if not all will not work in IE6. I plan to add this list as and when.

Surprisingly, very few people are aware of Google Applications. Most know about Google Mail (Gmail), but did you know you can edit documents, keep a calendar, edit spreadsheets and create and publish simple web sites?

When setting my VPS server, one task was to set up and configure my mail server. A quick read of POSTFIX nearly sent me into a coma. Fortunately, an added bonus of Google apps is the ability to use them as your mail server. If you have control over your DNS you can add the settings (MX record) found in Google’s help pages and have it manage your incoming and outgoing emails.

There is a premier package, for a small amount you can be part of a service which guarantees 99% uptime. I have the basic free package and have yet (touch wood) to encounter any downtime.

For more information:

Google Applications
Setting up MX record
Setting up your MX record on Slicehost

Recently, I was using Dreamweaver to develop a site and wondered if there was a newer version from Adobe on the horizon. A quick browse of Adobe.com revealed that there was in fact an entire suite of applications out, the CS3 family. Part of which was Dreamweaver CS3. A Google search for prices returned the usual bunch of sites. Then I stopped and wondered if I actually needed to upgrade, do I? I have been working fine up until visiting Adobe’s site. I keep up to date with development languages and techniques through my usual sites, so surely all I really use Dreamweaver for is as an editor. That’s when the realisation hit me. I spent a lot of money on a copy of Dreamweaver with its vast array of features to only use it as a simple bloomin’ editor. What about Dreamweaver templates? Don’t do them. If I don’t do Dreamweaver templates, and all coding is done by hand. Then what the bloomin’ eck did I spend my money on? A BIG POSH VERSION OF NOTEPAD!

Where else has my money disappeared into? Editing word documents, I have a copy of Office XP. Frig knows what version we are at now, but all I use is centering, bold, italics and layouts using tables. Maybe the odd image or two so I cannot see any reason to upgrade. So why do we upgrade? I have many friends and colleagues who continuously upgrade to the latest versions but when asked why their responses are along the lines of “the latest standards and the upgrade in coding wizards such as CSS are essential”, but they hand code…

Books, hundreds of pounds have been spent on books. It is quicker to find information using a search engine than it is to find it in a book. Oreilly, Adobe Coldfusion MX, Wiley, the list is endless. Whilst sitting here typing this I had to look at the bookshelf, Why? because I could not remember what I had bought. Some are so pristine that I cannot actually remember if they had ever been opened. Do we need to buy books ever again? Having quickly totaled up how much was spent, this is something I plan to find out.

Is it possible to survive on older versions of software and the internet alone?

I believe it is, rarely have I thought to open a book to do any research. The internet has always been a vital source of answers through forums, newsgroups and blogs.

Software itself only needs upgrading if there is a legitimate reason for it. Does it prevent you from completing a piece of work to the point that you have to stop working on it? Probably not.

What about the cheaper alternatives?

This is an avenue I plan to go down. MS Office can be replaced with Open Office. Dreamweaver with the many other editors such as PHP Designer 2007 and Rapid CSS (currently trialing both). There is this tendency to lump for the big brands such as Microsoft and Adobe without ever investigating alternatives. Yet, a quick Google search reveals many alternatives for a fraction of the cost which in fact often far superior.