Trying out Windows Live Writer 2012, really quickly

I just wanted to kick the tires on Windows Live Writer 2012 since I just had a question from one of the many frustrated bloggers trying to use MS Word with Blogger on my ancient post about doing just that.

Spell Check works, so that’s a nice plus. I do wonder if it uses the same dictionary as Word does.

Let’s try a copy/paste of a print screen of a window…

Wow, that worked too. Nice. I actually did not expect that to work.

Formatting and positioning for the image is very similar to Word as well.

Automatic “smart quotes” work, as well as do—double dash to em dash.

Wow, Live Writer. You are really impressing me. Why isn’t this functionality just part of Word 2013?

Okay, saving and exiting without publishing, then coming back…

That worked perfectly as well. I may be a Live Writer convert. Let’s try a quick publish and see if that (most important) part works as well.

And it did. Wow. Color me impressed MS Live Writer 2012. You may be my favorite new bit of software. And I just noticed the Edit, Preview, and Source tabs on the bottom of the screen. Complete with inline CSS options. Live Writer, you had me at ‘Hello’ (although I do find your penchant for exploding out shorthand CSS for padding into four separate rules a bit odd, when you don’t for margins… but I can live with that).

Not so quick reply to veryannoyingname's comment on my previous post, "Chromecast isn’t Miracast/WiFi Direct/WiDi/Airplay… at least not yet"

Sorry to have to post instead of reply, but I seem unable to keep my replies under the character limit. :)

I'll have complete details later, but in short- I assure you I have set it up correctly (per manufacturer instructions). The connection to the S3 did work better out of the box (as your videos also show) with the Netgear PTV-3000 (I haven’t tried it with the Actiontec Screenbeam pro yet). The major issues I’ve had are not, in fact, with Wi-Fi Direct (Miracast certified) devices (like the Samsung Galaxy S3 and S4) connecting to it, but with Intel WiDi connections (from laptops and tablets running Windows 7 and 8). I've tried it at ranges of less than three feet up to sixty for both making the initial connection and testing the “walk away” support and automatic connect/disconnect options. The problem isn't that it never works, the problem is how inconsistently it works depending on the display you are connecting it to and the device you are transmitting from, again for WiDi based connections (not Wi-Fi Direct/Miracast certified). I've tried about a dozen displays and a half dozen WiDi devices so far, and the same devices, with the same receivers, behave differently with different displays--particularly bad with monitors that have default resolutions other than 1920x1080, especially slightly plus sized not quite 16:9 aspect ratios running 1920x1200 as their default resolution. I tried both receivers out of the box, and neither worked with every device perfectly (transmitting or display). Many just wouldn’t connect, some would initially connect just fine but then would run into “connection lost” issues, even when the tablets/laptops in question where within a few feet and stationary. I had the most up to date drivers on all transmitting devices, as supplied by the manufacturer. I then tried another round of testing with the most up to date firmware (as of a few weeks ago) for the Netgear PTV-3000 and Actiontec ScreanBeam Pro. The Netgear performed even more dismally with my WiDi devices when it had the latest firmware, but the Screenbeam started working like a champ- every device, every display, perfect connections at a range of resolution (including 1920x1080, but even fro some truly ridiculously higher resolutions beyond that). I then tried the Intel recommended driver updates for my laptop (from their WiDi support pages) and it didn't improve the performance with the Netgear at all, though the Actiontec continued to work just fine. However, my laptop actually started having a host of display issues (not related to WiDi) caused by the Intel suggested updates (no control over screen brightness anymore, etc.) so I rolled back to the latest drivers as supplied by the device manufacturer. Based on my experience, I do not recommend people use Intel's automatic check/update suggestions tool for Windows 8 laptops to resolve WiDi issues expect as a last resort—and be prepared to roll back if things go awry. Instead, look to your device manufacturer for their latest recommended drivers. My brief Miracast test (more of a sad last resort after a frustrating day of trying to get WiDi connections to work) with the S3 didn't result in it not connecting, just some oddities in how it connected (default was portrait with extreme letterboxing instead of landscape, extremely long lags when—and if—it would decide to switch from portrait to landscape when I rotated the phone, image quality didn’t appear to be a pixel to pixel match, but a zoom/blurred version in several apps) but, in its defense, the S3 test was just a quick try with a colleague's phone (to see if it would work) so that bit won't be included in my final review. I will post the full review for WiDi devices (including a table listing transmitting devices on one axis and display on the other) for both the Netgear and Screenbeam soon, and once I get my own S4 in a few months I’ll post another update on how well it performed with both the Netgear and Actiontec receivers using a broad range of displays (I need to know how well it works not just with HD televisions, but computer monitors and projectors). Again, I’m not saying they don’t ever work, nor that they can’t be cajoled into working with enough effort for a user’s particular setup. What I’m attempting to evaluate is how universally (or not) these devices will work. Should they be deployed as connection options in smart classrooms and conference rooms? Should people traveling to make a presentation pop one in their laptop bags as an additional connectivity option (so they can wirelessly transmit to whatever projector/display they may find when they get to their destination)? This is a more than a “can I get it to work with my one display and couple of devices” review—I want to do a more rigorous, broad set of tests to help answer the questions: are these enterprise-ready/level devices? So far my experience leads me to think the answer to that is a ‘no’ on the Netgear PTV-3000 and a ‘cautious yes’ on the Actiontec ScreenBeam Pro (especially if you get the kit that includes the USB transmitter for more “universal” support- at least for Windows 7 and 8 devices). I suspect, though the technical details aren’t clear on this, that the USB transmitter that comes with the Actiontec ScreanBeam Pro is a Wi-Fi Direct transmitter (though I can’t find any Miracast certification on it or the materials it shipped with). This might explain why ever time I’ve installed the software and drivers for it and tried it on several windows 7 and 8 computers that failed (or acted buggy) when connecting over WiDi that they always managed to connect to the ScreenBeam Pro when using the USB transmitter instead (and I suspect possibly even the Netgear as well, more on that in a future post). Your own testing (as you show on your youtube videos) seems to back up my hunch that Miracast works better than WiDi does (as far as being more plug-and-play style) at this time, which is disappointing, since most people I know want to be able to connect their laptops and tablets to their display more than their phones (although connecting a phone is a nice fringe benefit). I didn’t see any videos from you that showcase connecting to your PTV-3000 using WiDi on a Windows 7/8 device… am I missing them? I’d be very interested to see some if you do have them (or would be willing to make them) to see if they match, or contradict, my own experiences.

Replies from Google Support about Chromecast supported resolutions and audio output

The day the Chromecast was announced, I immediately knew I wanted to try one, but I wanted to make an informed purchase and not just rush out and grab one. Surprisingly, the Google product page about Chromecast was light on any technical details (and still is). I hopped on Google’s IM support and, although the representative I worked with was very eager to answer my questions, they simply didn’t have any information available beyond the limited amount Google had put up on the Chromecast page. They did, however, promote my questions up a tier into their (email based) Chromecast technical support queue. They got back to me surprisingly quickly (as I’m sure they must be getting crushed with an avalanche of information requests about the Chromecast), with a reply hitting my inbox on July 30. Sorry I didn’t have a chance to post their response until now. Here it is. By the way, the bit “[t]here is no delay for Optimized Playback. There is a slight (1-2 second) delay for Casting a tab,” was in reference to another part of the IM chat that had been forwarded to them, which had to do with the delay response time between taking an action when tabcasting (the HDMI over WiFi devices I’ve been testing generally have a delay ranging from 60-240ms, and I wanted to know where the Chromecast fell in that range). Despite this IM and email exchange confirming my suspicion that Chromecast is not a true HDMI over wireless device (screen mirroring or extension), I’m still intrigued and one is already on order for me (thanks to a relative that is at least as tech geek chic as me, and ordered one for me before I had a chance to get this reply even :)

from:  googleplay-support@google.com 
to:  robertslater@gmail.com
date:  Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 1:07 PM
subject:  RE: [8-1745000001364] Note

Hello Robert,

Thank you for contacting Google Play Support! I understand your concern. Rest assured I'm here to help.

I see that you had some questions about Chromecast specifications, and your questions were sent to the specialist team, who has replied with the following information.

There is no delay for Optimized Playback. There is a slight (1-2 second) delay for Casting a tab. Optimized Playback supports 1080p60 and 5.1 surround. Casting a tab supports 720p and stereo sound.

If you need any additional help, please let me know.

If there is anything further we can assist you with, please feel free to reply directly to this email or visit our help center at:

http://support.google.com/googleplay/bin/request.py?contact_type=contact_policy&policy=hardware

…

The Google Play Support Team

Chromecast isn’t Miracast/WiFi Direct/WiDi/Airplay… at least not yet

I got really excited when I caught wind of the new device Google rolled out earlier today, ChromeCast. I’ve been trying out a NetGear Push2TV PTV-3000 and an Actiontec ScreenBeam pro just the last few days, with a very frustrating and mixed bag of results (more on that in a detailed future post). I hoped that Chromecast might represent a big new player (Google) coming into the wireless HD market (so far, we’ve had very few players and only a handful of devices) that might herald in a new era of easy, platform agnostic connections between devices and screens. Such does not seem to be the case… yet. For now at least, Chromecast only allows you to stream what you can see in your Chrome browser to your TV, and even then possibly only a subset of the content that might be there (although it works on a ton of devices/platforms, so good on you, Google). As it stands now, Chromecast can’t show anything you can pull up on your laptop/mobile device, just what you can display in the chrome browser—that no Microsoft applications, no gaming, no running an app on your smartphone over the Chromecast, etc. But I hope that may be coming soon, especially since this approach requires no special chipset(s) to work (unlike Miracast/WiFi Direct/WiDi/Airplay), just a Wi-Fi enabled device.

I did manage to snag a chat session with a google rep who answered some of my questions, but they had to beg off when I ranged into too technical an area, shunting our chat over to a technical specialist for an email follow up. Once I get more details, I’ll cull from the chat and email and have a more detailed post (including things like frame rate, delay, audio formats supported). Oh, they were able to tell me it support “up to 1080p.” We’ll hopefully find out exactly what that ominous “up to” means later.

I currently have the “most read” article in the Journal of Web Librarianship… or do I?

I was tracking down and confirming a link to one of my articles* to send a colleague when I noticed a new feature on the Taylor & Francis web site; a sidebar that shows the most read and most cited articles in a journal (see the Journal of Web Librarianship most read articles page for an example).

I couldn’t find any information on how T&F are calculating this metric. I’m guessing it’s based solely on access to one of the full text formats, and doesn’t include the landing page/abstract/first page preview. I wonder if they filter out the major web crawlers. Do they count really brief views of the full-text, of, let’s say, under a minute? I’d like to know, since such quick browses are more likely a dismissal of the content than an actual “read” of it.

As you can see, I’m trying not to be too excited, because this feature could still be getting the kinks worked out of it and I could suddenly drop to the bottom of the pile. The numbers may be fairly accurate, and I could be the author of the most read** article in JWL, only to find out that means a few dozen people accessed it, and I only nudged out the articles ranked three through ten by a few readers. It’s possible that in aggregate the top ten articles only had a few hundred accesses among them, but I certainly hope that’s not the case. I’ll be up for my tenure review soon enough and I’m hoping that some of these accesses will get upgraded to citations by then.

---

* “Why Aren't E-Books Gaining More Ground in Academic Libraries? E-Book Use and Perceptions: A Review of Published Literature and Research.” Journal of Web Librarianship, Volume 4, Issue 4, 2010.
** Or accessed, at least, since we all know how little people read of the articles/chapters they access, both online and in print.
*** See, I linked to the landing page, not the full-text. I don’t want my own blog post to result in my hit count getting artificially augmented. Besides, I’ve got a server side app running now to hit it a few thousand times a day already. :)

Did you miss the Center for Multimedia Excellence Launch?

The Center for Multimedia Excellence had a kickoff meeting last week. I know several people around the library who wanted to attend, but couldn't fit it into their schedules. Luckily for all of us, they've recorded and posted the University of Illinois Center for Multimedia Excellence Launch.

Netbooks with e-paper screens

A few months ago, I was wondering when will the print book disappear?
One reason I didn't see that happening in the short term was that there was no ubiquitous device that served as a really good e-reader. Sure, there are e-books out there that are great for reading books, but that's all they can do. I bemoaned the lack of a ubiquitous mobile device that could serve as both an excellent e-reader (for static content like books, articles, etc.) and still be a fully functional computer. I have always loved e-paper- for reading static texts it beats any other electronic display I've seen. But e-paper is miserable at doing almost anything else you'd use an electronic display for- watching a movie, playing a game, or doing basically anything that uses moving elements. That's for two reasons; most e-paper displays are only gray scale (the rare, more expensive color ones aren't going to wow you either yet. It's more "Oh, look, color, finally!" than "Oh wow, that's beautiful. It's every bit as brilliant as my HDTV!"), and all e-paper has a limitation when it comes to the technology's refresh rate—how fast the display can update the image on the screen. For most people, it's too slow to even consider using it to type out even a short instant message. Think of that terrible frustration you feel when your computer gets bogged and the words are constantly about a half-sentence or more behind. Now imagine if that was the best your computer could ever do. And that limitation has, thus far, relegated e-paper to e-books, instead of netbooks, laptops, and other multi-purpose mobile devices. Well, I just saw two promising new products that solve exactly this problem—the enTourage eDGe e-book and a new screen LCD technology from 3qi.

The enTourage eDGe (enough with the case toggling guys—curse you iApple!) takes the brute force approach I suggested--just slap both an e-paper screen and an LCD display onto one netbook. Well, not quite a netbook… maybe next year enTourage? At its heart the Edge (I'm done toggling cases :P ) is more a beefed up cell phone than a pared down laptop/netbook. Quick rundown on some key specs: CPU: 1.2GHz Marvell ARMADA™ PXA168, 4 GB internal memory, LCD Display: 1024 x 600, E-paper Display: 1200 x 825 e-Ink, Operating System: Linux with Google Android. And all for less than $500 (which is about what I had expected—I predicted $450). I was on the cusp of overlooking the pokey processor and lack of an SSD to snap one of these up, but then I read about 3qi's new twist on some old school technology. If the interbuzz can be believed, these screens will soon be popping up on e-books, netbooks, and even full blown laptops soon.

3qi's new screen isn't actually an e-paper technology. It's a low
cost LCD that takes advantage of both transmissive (normal screen, like your laptop or HDTV) and reflective (like e-paper) light. This allows for both high-resolution, reflected grayscale images (at about 200 dpi) like e-paper, when in low power (.5 watts) backlight off mode, or full color, full motion content (just like your laptop) high power (2.5 watts peak) mode. The screen uses less power than traditional LCD (3qi expects it to consume about ½ to ¼ of the power of traditional LCDs under typical use), but it's not going to beat any actual e-paper. E-paper only needs to draw power when it is actually refreshing (redrawing) the screen. So once you pull up a page and start reading, your screen isn't drawing any power until you turn the page again. 3qi's screen will always being drawing some power, even when in backlight-off grayscale mode.

Me, I'm okay with sipping just a bit more power. After all, that means I only will be buying one device in the near future- a laptop with a 3qi screen (or similar tech from someone else :), rather than both a laptop and an e-book. I'm sure my overflowing book bag will appreciate that. If the 3qi screen is as impressive in hand as it looks on paper, then I'm sold.