Enterprise Mac | Tom Yager » May 2006

May 30, 2006 | Comments: (0)

CANDID ISIGHT 4 U

TAGS: Desktops and notebooks

I recently updated Comic Life, a very cool app I'll describe below. When I launched the new version of the app, the green tally light next to my MacBook Pro's built-in iSight camera lit up. I didn't expect that; the app's image capture pane is not active when Comic Life launches. No preview window was shown, so from where I sat, it looked like the camera had been activated for no good reason. In any case, the camera turned on, I had an active broadband connection to the Internet, and my imagination took it from there.

With the original, standalone iSight Webcam you can shutter the lens, point the camera away from you or unplug the FireWire cord, none of which the built-in iSight lets you do. If you're looking at the display, some part of you is in your Mac's viewfinder, just waiting for some app to turn the green light on, however briefly. There are times in your life when you don't want that.

I'm not alarmed by this. There are so many practical jokes and varieties of petty blackmail one could carry out with the aid of an ever-ready camera. Spy on your babysitter using your cell phone. Find out what your employees are actually doing while they're “working at home.”

As for its potential to be (ab)used by hackers, law enforcement or the NSA, I'll let your imagination spin on those possibilities. Someone would need access to your system to install an iSight-enabled application, and if you're sloppy enough to give someone that access, snapping piccies of you will be the least interesting thing they could do with planted code. If it worries you, put a little masking tape, or something else that doesn't leave gunk behind, over the camera.

Comic Life, published by Plasq and bundled with my Intel-based iMac and MacBook Pro, is a fanciful idea turned into an brilliant app. It takes images from your iPhoto library (or any other location) and arranges them in a comic book layout. You can place, scale and rotate multiple images, add graphics layers that contain text, frames and balloons and create comics spanning however many pages you like. Or you can paste up one graphic and save it out as a JPEG like the one I pasted into this entry. Think of Comic Life as the Garage Band of comic books, or just pop-art relief from iPhoto's canned themes.

Posted by Tom Yager on May 30, 2006 08:59 PM

May 30, 2006 | Comments: (0)

Remote Desktop 3 "curtain mode" bug

TAGS: None

I've encountered a bug in Remote Desktop 3. After I switch on curtain mode, which masks the user's display while permitting remote control, the remote interface hangs. Ironically, the mouse and keyboard continue to drive the target machine, but you can't see what you're doing (so don't do anything).

Turning off curtain mode re-enables the target's display and you're still driving it remotely, but the console's screen never updates. Changing the session's color depth forces the console to reconnect to the target, and all is well. It's a bummer, though, because curtain mode is one of ARD 3's best new features.

I'm using a MacBook Pro console and a Power Mac G5 Quad target.

Posted by Tom Yager on May 30, 2006 01:30 PM

May 29, 2006 | Comments: (0)

17-inch MacBook Pro review: Speedy, spacious and indestructible

TAGS: Desktops and notebooks

You can download this review as a PDF (requires Adobe Acrobat Reader or OS X Preview)

To me, the 17-inch MacBook Pro makes the 15-inch model feel like a practice run. The 17-inch MacBook Pro is everything that Apple's previous world-beater, the last 17-inch PowerBook G4, was, but with a vastly superior (compared to the 32-bit PowerPC) dual-core CPU, dramatic improvements in memory and bus speed, a more powerful graphics processing unit, a first-rate display, a dual-layer DVD burner and--be still my heart--a configure-to-order option for a 100 GB, 7,200 RPM hard drive. These don't add up to incremental improvements over the 17-inch PowerBook G4. The 17-inch MacBook Pro is a quantum leap.

Way ahead of the 15-inch MacBook Pro
The 15-inch MacBook Pro (InfoWorld review) is the foundation for the 17-inch MacBook Pro's design, but the 17-inch model is no mere copycat with a bigger screen. The surface advantages that the 17-inch model enjoys over its lesser alternative include three USB 2.0 ports, two FireWire ports (one 400 and one 800 Mbps), an astonishingly rich speaker system, a dual-layer SuperDrive, and, yes, the super bright 17-inch diagonal LCD panel showing 1680 x 1050 pixels.

This notebook is comparable in heft to a desktop replacement-grade PC notebook with a 15-inch display. The thin case makes the MacBook Pro far less awkward to carry and use than machines in its weight class. In addition to the larger display, and the 17-inch MacBook Pro is decked out with standard peripherals that PC notebooks lack. For example, the MacBook Pros' dual scan DVI output with a full-size jack is mighty rare, and the 17-inch model's dual FireWire ports are full sized and supply power to external peripherals.

The new machine banishes the late model PowerBooks' cheap keyboard, twitchy trackpad, stagnant processor performance and sub-state-of-the-art graphics processing units. The 17-inch MacBook Pro's improved cooling, longer battery life, added I/O ports, larger display, higher durability and stronger, richer speakers create an unexpectedly wide gap between the 17 and the 15-inch MacBook Pros. This doesn't make the 15-inch model a bad machine. It just makes the 17-inch MacBook Pro a great one.

Performance
The 17-inch MacBook Pro is a 2.16 GHz, dual core, 32-bit x86 notebook. If you have the latest, fastest PowerBook G4, the 17-inch MacBook Pro will singe your eyebrows. You just need to sit tight until commercial Mac software gets rebuilt as Universal (native to both PowerPC and x86) Binaries. All will be set right in August, but this is a rush you'll want to beat.

The 7,200-RPM drive option (also available for the 15) gives the 17-inch PowerBook a potent kick that you can feel everywhere: Application load times, video and audio editing, DVD encoding, managing large digital images in Aperture, major software builds, delays going into and coming out of hibernation, the performance of the Parallels Desktop virtualization software, and total system responsiveness. It costs you some battery life and generates extra heat. But the faster drive helps take the reins off the faster CPU/GPU/chipset and RAM. I recommend it.

Heat, battery life and noise
The 17-inch MacBook Pro's operating temperature is a big improvement over the 15's. My 17-inch MacBook Pro eval unit, with a 7,200 RPM hard drive (a major source of heat), runs much cooler than the 15-inch model with a 5,400 RPM drive. My 17-inch model's battery life is, on average, 45-60 minutes longer than the 15-inch MacBook Pro's, even with the higher power draw of the faster drive and the larger display. The 17-inch MacBook Pro gets as warm as the 15, but with all that aluminum on top, it cools rapidly once the computing load is reduced, and the larger notebook also responds nicely to a big of air circulation underneath. Giving the 15-inch MacBook Pro airflow underneath made no difference, and the only way to cool it off was to turn it off. The 17-inch MacBook Pro gets power and heat right.

If you're in a quiet room, the MacBook Pros emit a barely perceptible high-pitched whine while they're running on battery power. This quirk does not detract from the user experience, and the 17-inch MacBook Pro is dead silent compared to all desktop replacement-grade PC notebooks I've tested.

Audio
I'm running Apple's new Final Cut Express HD on the 17-inch MacBook Pro and for the first time with any notebook I've used--including the 17-inch PowerBook--I don't need headphones. The 17-inch MacBook Pro's four built-in speakers have a remarkable frequency and dynamic range. The lows tail off at around 70 Hz and the bass will distort if pumped up too high, but the lows are present even without emphasis, which in itself is remarkable for notebook speakers. Above the bass, the entire spectrum is rendered evenly with clarity and volume that I'm certain will surprise all who hear it.

In this podcast/iChat age, it's time to evolve beyond the $0.19 (comparable model) omnidirectional mic element that Apple tucks under the MacBook Pros' left speaker grille. I would be delighted with the likes of this little number (unidirectional, $0.99/ea, linked here to show I know a little about microphones), mounted under the display bezel. Toshiba does wonders with three like this to track your voice and reduce noise. Failing that, I'd settle for a mic input.

The 3.5mm stereo line input and output jacks carry either analog or S/PDIF digital optical signals at up to 96 KHz per channel. Keeping it digital means there's no injected noise, no potential for ground hum, and no need for compression. The MacBook Pro requires only $5-$8 Toslink cables, not a USB or FireWire adapter, to link to audio devices with optical digital ins and outs.

The display
Update: Glossy displays are now available! Apple is now offering a glossy display surface as a free configure-to-order option for MacBook Pros. I am a glossy, mirror-finish guy when it comes to photographs, so I've asked Apple to swap this MacBook Pro eval for a glossy one. I'll touch base if that happens. I'm actually rather excited about that.

This notebook's display quality thoroughly outclasses all PowerBooks', and I've yet to see any PC notebook display this bright, sharp and contrasty. Apple's drivers and frameworks make every Mac equal to the expectations of graphics and video professionals by optimizing for a given model's graphics processing unit and display. That is to say, any manufacturer could buy the LCD panel Apple chose for the 17-inch MacBook Pro, but none has the software and creative chops to make it look so sweet.

I desire little more than contrast and sharpness for productivity apps, but creative endeavors call for spot-on color. The 17-inch MacBook Pro leaves no questions about whether gray is standing in for black, orange is standing in for red, or ecru (or god knows what) is the machine's best approximation of white. The display's rendition of deep tones is striking: I have forest images with lots of shadow, and dark greens of the shaded moss that are mottled or lost on other displays are done justice on the 17-inch MacBook Pro. I am very pleased with this display.

Surviving (a)typical use
Being a short drive from Apple and within easy reach of a replacement, I beat on the 17-inch MacBook Pro. I needed to find out if the dip in quality that 17-inch PowerBooks took toward the end was addressed. I'll skip the details and share just my conclusions, but be assured that if I had treated a person as I treated this notebook, I'd be out on bond awaiting trial. My conclusions are as follows: The 17-inch MacBook Pro proved impervious to violent vibration, moderate impact (not enough to deform the case) and compression. I have seen no effects from high (non-condensing) humidity or rapid transitions from dry to humid air or vice-versa. I forced the machine to overheat and it never shut down even after the entire case had become too hot to touch. All of my tests were performed while the machine was powered up and lit, with du . running in a Terminal window.

Many of the customers for this machine will treat it like gear. The 17-inch MacBook Pro will get stuffed in duffelbags and thrown into vans, helicopters and ships' holds, and sloppily packed into boxes full of heavy things with lots of corners. It'll be set on damp ground, it'll teeter on barstools over concrete floors at photo shoots. The 17-inch MacBook Pro is fast, bright, sweet-sounding and all of the things a notebook should be and which is Apple's specialty. But don't make assumptions based on its slender profile and alluring GUI. The 17-inch MacBook Pro is no wuss. I have no doubt in my skeptical mind that the machine I'm typing on right now will still be in active use, somewhere, five years from today. You see, Apple can make 'em like they used to.

Posted by Tom Yager on May 29, 2006 09:55 PM

May 19, 2006 | Comments: (0)

Apple responds to my "proprietary OS X kernel" column

TAGS: Politics, strategy and culture

I was serendipitously in San Jose when my column on Apple's closed-source OS X x86 kernel posted on-line. Apple had set up a day of meetings for me to discuss MacBook (nice!), Final Cut Express HD (overdue, underpriced and very powerful) and Apple's WorldWide Developer Conference (I'm jazzed). After the column ran, my agenda expanded to include a discussion with leaders of Apple's OS and open source programs. The gist of their message was that I had sensationalized and misrepresented a topic of interest only to me and an almost immeasurably small group of "geeks." I was told that the question of OS X kernel openness is still an open question, and while they concede that my column was accurate as a whole, anyone who didn't read past the second paragraph might misconstrue my meaning.

I told Apple that I'd address these objections in a blog post. So here it is.

I stand by every point I made in my column as it appeared in print in InfoWorld magazine and on-line at infoworld.com. I have nothing to do with any other sources for or interpretations of my column. Go to the link above and read the whole story. A thorough read obviates the need for clarification. However, I will address the objections and observations that Apple expressed during our meeting, because the discussion itself was enlightening. Apple's remarks are set in bold type.

My column didn't tell Apple anything it didn't already know. Where my Mac editorial is concerned, I write for my readers and for Apple's prospective commercial and professional customers, as well as Mac developers. I write as a proxy for vendors' customers, not for vendors.

Apple hasn't made public any decision to open source or keep proprietary the OS X x86 kernel. I allowed Apple plenty of time to publicize a decision. Steve Jobs announced the delivery of the first Intel-based Macs during the first week of January. My column ran in the second week of May. That interval reflects a promise that I made to Apple back in February (expressed in a 2/22 blog entry on OS X x86 syncing with open source Darwin x86) to delay my column by several weeks to give the company ample time to state its position first.

When Apple lands on an open source kernel policy, neither the decision nor the timing will have anything to do with me, my column or other external pressure. This was presumably to head off any gloating I might do over an Apple decision to open its code. Noted.

A lot of people linking to, paraphrasing or interpreting my column are getting the wrong idea because they failed to read past my column's second paragraph. I have higher expectations of my readers' attention spans than others do, and I don't break every point I make down to the molecular level to aid those who just don't understand the issue.

I misrepresented Apple's motivation for keeping the OS X x86 kernel closed (to slow piracy). In the May meeting, Apple said that this "represented the agenda of one person," who happened to be the one Apple person who would speak to me on this subject in February. This is the same individual for whom I held this story until now.

My concern over Apple's commitment to keeping the OS X x86 kernel open is held only by me and a fraction of a fraction of Apple's customers, and a fraction of InfoWorld's readers. Not so; I've gotten plenty of feedback on this subject from people who agree and disagree, but they were all concerned enough to write.

I did bring something to the table that gave pause to those present: If the OS X x86 kernel stays closed, commercial Linux will have an easy time pushing OS X out of competitive bids by asserting that Linux is fully open, while Apple quietly transitioned OS X x86's privileged code to closed source.

Commercial, professional, scientific and academic Mac users are the only ones I care about. I also don't concern myself with what's happening now; that's reflected in my column's title (Ahead of the Curve). Consumers buying today's Macs would be just as well served by their Macs if OS X were completely proprietary. Server and workstation customers are making plans and setting budgets now for the kinds of machines that Apple will start selling in the fall. They're not flipping a coin or making an Intel-based Xserve impulse buy while they're out shopping for an iPod skin. It's my job to lay out facts and opinions for people who have real money riding on Apple's solutions so they can select and spend wisely. And the fact is that Apple's OS X kernel for Intel-based Macs is proprietary. It's no surprise that Apple knew that I knew what they knew and so forth. It is a wonder that Apple figures you, unless you're in that tiny fraction of a fraction of my geekiest readers, don't care how open an open-source OS is.

All that having been said, I came away from that discussion fairly confident that Apple will open the OS X x86 kernel. The fact that Apple was concerned about having its motives misread was a fair tip-off. If you hadn't made it all the way to the bottom of this story, you'd have missed this paragraph!

Posted by Tom Yager on May 19, 2006 02:12 PM

May 15, 2006 | Comments: (0)

OS X Leopard: Hello, hypervisor

TAGS: Software

Speculation is rampant that Mach, which is a component of the OS X kernel, will be axed from OS X 10.5 (Leopard). If you read Cringely's treatise on monolithic kernels you'll get the gist of the argument in favor of dumping Mach in favor of what's presented as a more modern monolithic kernel design.

In reality, that which is referred to in these discussions as the monolithic kernel is the dinosaur. A monolithic kernel grabs ownership of all system resources at boot time. It expects full trust from the loader, and the OS trusts itself to run with full privileges to poke at CPU registers, map physical memory, set up direct memory access (DMA) transfers, link interrupts to handlers and the like. The one system, one OS model has a negative impact on efficiency, stability, scalability and security. I blame a number of Microsoft's worst security woes on Windows' monolithic design. All of the most-privileged parts of the OS are trusted implicitly and equally. There's no place to slide in a layer that tightens up security, protecting Windows from itself, or permits the safe, low-overhead operation of multiple OS instances.

I don't ponder whether Mach will survive in Leopard. I see Mach as a placeholder for a hypervisor. Working from a set of policies set by the administrator, a hypervisor can transparently allow, refuse or reroute privileged operations. The hypervisor alone has the authority to manage CPU privilege levels.

In a system with a hypervisor, with each system power-up or reset, a signed OS boot loader or hypervisor is located, validated and loaded atomically, meaning that there's no opportunity to subvert the process. The x86 Mac's Trusted Platform Module (TPM) sets up the boot-time validation and Intel's virtualization extensions enable a hypervisor that imposes minimal overhead.

Apple's use of the TPM is worth a separate blog entry, so I'll give it one tonight. Just know that you can't implement a proper hypervisor without a TPM or something like it.

The Mach API (application programming interface) could create a painless path to a potent and extremely secure hypervisor foundation for Apple's OS. OS X's privileged code already puts Mach in charge of physical resources and sets up a sort of mailbox infrastructure for passing commands and data in and out of Mach. If Apple stays true to the Mach API, which is extremely simple, Leopard can boot to an inviolably trustworthy, policy-controlled environment with no changes even to device drivers and the BSD kernel. From a hypervisor, it's a far shorter and safer leap to running multiple simultaneous OS instances without the necessity for, or with diminished need of, software host/guest virtualization.

Is a hypervisor part of an OS's kernel? Can't you boot a monolithic OS on a hypervisor and still say you have a monolithic OS kernel?

If such questions are important to you, I'll leave it to you to work them out. I know that Microsoft is scrambling to build a hypervisor into Longhorn Server. I know that OSes need hypervisors to keep them secure and to give administrators a single, trusted, low-level interface for the granting of access rights and the allocation of resources. Mach, the Mac's TPM and the Intel virtualization extensions give Apple a huge head-start on a hypervised OS.

Posted by Tom Yager on May 15, 2006 08:57 PM