steven n fettig's Jitterin' Thoughts

There are so many web applications out there that I have resisted at first glance. A prime example are all of the Google applications that don't have to do with searching. (The exception being that I have a Gmail account that anyone can write to, but only because storage isn't an issue with Gmail and I don't want to deal with that on my personal server.) I like desktop applications for a number of reasons. The biggest of which, although my friends and family may not agree, is because I am not always connected to the net and like the opportunity to work independent of that connection. The other part is functionality; I like stand-alone applications because they are consistent in functionality and do not necessarily rely on browser API's or hooks that may not be available on my latest favorite browser.
Lately, though, two web services/applications have become favorites of mine, because one solves a very simple problem and the other is simply fun to use - and accents my current use of weblogs. I started using del.icio.us a month ago because I finally outgrew my own personal bookmarking system that had resided at Cogito Ergo Sum (rescogitans.net/blog/bookmarks/) for years. I had so many bookmarks that I was finding it difficult to find old ones that I rarely used and couldn't edit the system such to handle "fluid" and changing needs. The relatively new concept of tagging hit a cord with me (i.e. take a term or URL and tag it with various words to define what the URL is for and/or about) and I watched on the sidelines as del.icio.us grew and I saw more and more people I tracked use it. With some extra insomniac time one weekend, I decided to take the plunge and try it. I haven't looked back since. Tagging is über convenient for me and the search utility works well for all of my needs. Since moving to del.icio.us's system, I've found myself tagging more and more content, making it easy to find later on and keeping track of some of my changing interests.
The second service I just started using is Twitter. The service is ridiculously voyeuristic, but at the same time, a fantastic compliment to my blogging habits. I go for days and weeks without posting anything to my weblogs. Often this is because of lack of time, not for lack of ideas and/or want. With Twitter, I can create a trace of the ongoings (for my own good) in my life and yet, because the service is intended to be short twitters of what is happening, it never becomes the burden I sometimes feel when I sit down to actually write a post for one of the blogs.
Technology ought compliment your lifestyle. For those addicts like myself, it is difficult to find pieces that actually fit together well and in the case of those things I need/want, del.icio.us and twitter have filled a nice void.

me @ del.icio.us
me @ twitter

Technorati Tags: web applications, technology

Sorry - I have a css mess on my hands ;) I'll be back asap...

Update 24 March 2007: Well, the beginnings are done. I'm still working on better navigation and a background image for the header, but I like the plain, clean look. Comment if you don't (now having integrated all three blogs, commenting should finally work and be under a bit of control) or if you have any advice. (By the way, IMing me would be easier.)

For years, I've been planing on setting up a text-driven version of my websites. I never liked the fact that the design only came out correctly on full-blown laptops or desktops - i.e. something with the screen real-estate to handle a page that scales to a minimum of 800x600. Something occurred to me this morning, though: as long as I provide full rss feeds (where the feed includes the full content of the posts), does it even matter? If someone wants to avoid my design choices (e.g. they don't like my choices of layout and/or color), they can simply read the feeds from the sites and mangle/mash/change it any way they wish (trust me, I wouldn't be insulted). What about handling mobile or custom devices the same way? If I were providing content like a news source or selling items like e-commerce sites, then I guess it would matter whether or not my site was accessible across every imaginable platform. That is not the case, though, and I am doubting that the work would be worth going through (besides the academic exercise in learning how to do it). Anyone else with thoughts or comments?

I ordered an Apple TV when Apple announced that they were for sale and finally received my first batch this week. For the past two years, I've been using Mac Mini's as a type of custom home theater PC to access content I store on a central server. While this works quite well for me, guests and my wife find the process of getting to the content overly complicated (and I find the same thing when problems arise). So, it appears that the Apple TV will fit in well and bridge the gap between what we are already using and what we are missing.
I started transcoding a bunch of HD programs I had recorded into h.264 files. I set the resolution at 1280x720 and tried different bit-rates. I ended up finding that 2500 kbps and above worked pretty well. While 1500 kbps worked, it lacked the color composition that seemed to come out of a higher bit-rate. In reading the Apple TV documentation, I found that the Apple TV is capable of reading 1280x720 h.264 content at 24 fps. Now I'm wondering if that last piece means that I had to transcode at 24 fps or that it was simply capable of reading 24 fps regardless of the encoded framerate. Tonight I was able to finally test a number of recordings and was thoroughly disappointed. At 24 fps, the picture is choppy, especially if the scene has any movement or detail with movement. My tests in transcoding are far from scientific and I realize that I may have made a mistake in other settings choices, but I see the same issue when playing the content back on the Mac Minis, PowerMacs or MacBooks. In those cases, though, I usually don't bother in transcoding because they are capable of handling the raw HD content.
So, tonight, I am re-transcoding a bunch of episodes of CSI to compare to what I saw this evening. This time, I'm leaving the frame-rate at automatic and am going to see if the Apple TV can at least read the file. Even on a PowerMac (dual G5), transcoding to h.264 is very slow going - about 3 hrs per 1 hr of HD content, without multi-pass enabled (which further degrades the quality of the output video - usually I use multi-pass). We'll see... For now, though, I do not recommend the 24 fps setting on EyeTV 2, it is unlikely you will be satisfied with the picture.

Technorati Tags: apple, apple tv, transcoding, video

I guess I'll update this as I go along, instead of posting a single long essay once I have things figured out to my satisfaction. So, last night I wrote about the fact that transcoding HD content with EyeTV 2 to h.264 at 24fps left much to be desired. (Later today, I'll provide specific screen shots of what I was doing, what I did and what I'll try.) I started transcoding another CSI episode, this time no specific fps, rather, I left the settings at automatic (which means ~30 fps). I set the bit-rate at 3500 kbps (usually, more than adequate to get the color and picture content), but didn't transcode using multi-pass. Well, this morning, I fired up the Apple TV and played the clip and... it still sucks. The choppy frame-rate is gone. So, that means that the device is capable of handling over 24 fps encoded material. The picture, however, exhibited jagged edges around all of the characters on screen. The more movement, the more jagged the edges got. I remember this being an issue when I first was testing without Apple TV, but in this case, I wanted to make sure that it could handle a 24 fps+ encoded file. It obviously does. So, back to the workshop. I'm taking the same clip now and transcoding with the same settings, but this time with multi-pass set. We'll see what happens later...

Technorati Tags: apple, apple tv, technology, transcoding, video

This will be a short post on my continuing EyeTV 2 HD content to h.264 for the Apple TV. Either the Apple TV was using a cached version of the CSI episode I'm testing or moving the transcoding to multi-pass did not help one bit. The character and object edging is simply horrible. It is definitely not worthy of displaying on an HDTV (or even EDTV, for that matter). I just decided to start over with a batch of episodes of CSI and Numbers and see what type of transcoding actually looks good. What is confusing me at this point is the fact that I have a transcoded version of X-Men 3 encoded in h.264 at only 1000kbps (with multi-pass) from Handbrake and it looks much, much better than the HDTV-to-h.264 content. I'm not sure what the reason could be and why there is such a markable difference between the two. Unfortunately, if I want to really test, I need hours and hours (if not, days) to re-transcode material for testing. We'll see where it takes me now. If anyone has advice, please drop me an email.

Technorati Tags: apple tv, h.264, hdtv, transcoding, video

I have really grown to enjoy the service (i.e. Twitter) - not because I like to use it for messaging, but more for the fact (as stated in another post) that I am able to make shorter postings that really are in a no-man's land between blogging and ... nothing. The one problem that has consistently prevented me from using it to the extent that I would like (especially when taking notes for c.ogi.to essays), is that posting can be dreadfully slow. I realize, and so do many users, that Twitter is experiencing a huge growth spurt that is taxing its servers (and apparently its ability to scale was not known in the beginning - my speculation), but it still causes trouble for those who would really like to use it as a tool. I find that if I am in the mode of tweeting a lot, I can't get the service to keep up with me. I've been thinking of turning it off for the time being and relying on another method of note-taking, but I still can't find what and how. I need/want something to which I can make posts using SMS and plugins to Firefox (or Safari) and those are tall orders to fill. I also have difficulties with the 140 character limits, but at the same time, it has forced me to re-think what I am writing, which is a good thing at times - it forces me to write concisely. With all of the niche needs that Twitter is able to handle for my usage, it is hard to find or come up with a replacement solution and therein lies Twitter's power. I agree with many that the uses of Twitter can be ridiculously superfluous, but so are weblogs (for the most part) and yet the cream of the crop tend to take the power of the tool and rise above the average junk. I think the same will happen with Twitter - or continue happening. I just hope they resolve the current issues pretty quickly or the tool is going to be more difficult to use than it is worth.

Technorati Tags: twitter, random, technology