Tuesday, December 25, 2012

A Christmas Story ??

Here’s a funny little story … actually a short story … and today’s Christmas snow storm reminded me of it. I was teaching a class called “Programming Fundamentals” in Rochester, Minnesota. Besides being the home of a large IBM facility, Rochester is famous for the Mayo Clinic located there. It is about 60 miles south of Minneapolis, but the winter weather doesn’t improve that much in those short miles. Minnesota weather can be pretty cold and snowy in the winter. A wonderful place in the summer, but winter … brrrr. I used to fly into Minneapolis and then drive down rather than wait for a puddle jumper airplane to take me the last few miles of the trip.

I remember one October, I was driving down late on a Sunday evening for a class I was teaching on Monday. I stopped at a small, local restaurant, and overheard a conversation where the waitress asked if this mother had bought her family new snowmobile outfits for the winter. They weren’t snowmobilers, they wore those full coverage outfits, sort of like what Ralphy’s brother wore in "The Christmas Story," to keep them warm on the way to school. My family in Alaska could relate, and probably tell some stories of their own.

The Programming Fundamentals class was fifteen weeks long, or about four months, and it had started in August, so we knew some winter would probably visit us before the class was done. In the mean time, we were enjoying the great fall weather.

We were teaching the class at the IBM facility in Rochester, but about three-fourths of the students were from other IBM locations such as Raleigh, North Carolina; Endicott, New York; and Boca Raton, Florida. I was teaching with another IBM instructor named Dan Smith. Dan was my mentor in the programmer retraining process. Prior to our development of the Programming Fundamentals, Dan had been the lead instructor of the predecessor class. It was only eight weeks in length, compared to PF, which was fifteen; and the previous class used IBM mainframes and an internal IBM programming language as the vehicle to teach programming. PF used the new IBM PC for the student’s labs and taught Pascal, a language intended for teaching modern programming … at least what was modern in 1985. That was before object oriented programming, and Pascal was an excellent “structured programming” language.

While I was the technical expert, Dan was the leader on class management. He knew how to deal with a bunch of students living in hotels, and how to make sure people showed up on time and issues of that type. I think he’d been teaching IBM training classes for over twenty years. So, one night, Dan was telling me stories about classes he’d taught and some of the rules he enforced. In addition, Dan had worked at the plant in Rochester for over ten years before transferring to Austin, and he knew all the good restaurants and was a good mentor in many ways.

There was a tendency with IBM training classes that you would finish up early on the last day. That made it easier for the students to catch early flights home. Our fifteen week long class had a very short final day planned at the end, only a couple of hours so the students could book flights as early as noon.

One night, as we partook of an excellent meal at a restaurant almost twenty miles outside of Rochester, “You’ll love the prime rib here, and the owner is an old friend,” Dan told me about a class he taught in Rochester in the middle of winter. The class was five days long, but had a lot of material, so, on the first day, he cautioned the class that they would be going until 5:00 PM on Friday. Therefore, students should either book evening flights or travel on the following Saturday.

At the first break after Dan’s little admonition, one of the students came up to him and said he had to take the noon flight back. Dan reminded him that it was important he stay for the entire Friday class and asked why he had to fly out so early.

The student explained that he was from Hawaii and had to be back to his IBM branch office before it closed. Dan asked why. The student explained that he had the “Department Overcoat” and had to get it back before closing because another student was coming to a class the following week. It turns out that most people in Hawaii don’t have a heavy coat. So when people from the IBM branch office came to the states, and particularly places like Chicago or Rochester, there was an overcoat that they would wear. But the branch office only had one overcoat and he had to get it back in time for the next person going to class to wear. It was the “Department Overcoat.”

That story led to another Rochester anecdote. This time it was an employee from Puerto Rico. He was working temporarily in the lab in Rochester. He had parked his car in the very large parking lot in front of one of the IBM buildings in the morning. During the day a heavy snowstorm had covered all the cars with snow. Dan was headed home when he found this guy wandering around in the parking lot wearing only a thin jacket. The guy didn’t remember where he had parked his car. In fact, since it was a rental car, he wasn’t even sure what it looked like or what color it was. So Dan had him hop in with him, and they cruised around the parking lot looking for the car. Dan said that, if he hadn’t stopped and picked him up, he might have frozen to death wandering the parking lot all night.

Here's another story from Dan. As I said, he worked at the Rochester plant for several years before transferring to Ausin, Texas. Dan explained that, although summers in Rochester were idyllic, the winters were quite cold and snowy. So he said he took his snow shovel and put it on his shoulder and started walking south. Finally, when someone asked him, "What's that on your shoulder," he made it his home. That's how he ended up in Austin. I can understand that story. I've spent many a January in Austin amidst the green shrubs and no sign of snow.

Dan had about a million stories like that, and it was great fun traveling and teaching with him. He lived in Round Rock, a few miles south of Austin. (Round Rock is famous for the large Dell Computer facilities there.) I spent many a pleasant evening with Dan and his wife whenever I was teaching in Austin. I always assumed that, if IBM closed the Boulder facility — which was possible a few times — I would transfer to Austin. After all, the saying was that I.B.M. stood for “I’ve Been Moved.” Alas, I spent my entire 33 years in Boulder. And I’m glad for that, but I do still love Austin. After shoveling two inches of “Merry Christmas” off the drive way, I’m thinking there’s still time to head south. So, Merry Christmas all and Happy 2013.

Sunday, December 23, 2012

A Shiny New Chrome Book

Click on the picture for a bigger view.

I purchased one of the new Samsung Chromebooks for my wife. She primarily uses the Internet and plays Bejeweled, and her HP laptop was acting up. So, given the low cost of the latest Chromebook and how well it would fit her use, I bought one. Happily I soon learned there were several versions of Bejeweled available for the little Internet device, and the transition went smoothly. This was a good excuse to get my hands on the quite affordable little toy and see how it compares to various Windows and Apple products.

Back when the great Microsoft anti-trust trial was underway … and remember it was primarily about Internet Explorer misusing the MS monopoly to eat the competing Netscape Navigator browser … I read the entire final decision. It was about sixty pages and much of it was legal-ese, that language full of wherefores and parties of the first part that lawyers use for a secret code, but the body of the document was very understandable, and I was surprised how well the judge understood the crux of the issues.

What he wrote rang very true to me since, at that time, I was deeply involved in IBM’s OS/2 and the latest version called “Warp.” The judge wrote of an almost insurmountable barrier to entry of new operating systems. The obstacle was all the existing programs or applications written for Windows and how hard a newcomer would have equaling that body of available code. I really thought IBM had a competitor to Windows in Warp, but quickly realized that the feature of OS/2 that let it run Windows programs was going to be its downfall. Why write programs for Warp when it can run Windows programs.

In the final judgment of the antitrust suit, the judge spoke of the Windows ecosystem and the impossibility of new players entering the PC operating system race due to the giant head start the thousands … if not millions … of Windows applications gave to Microsoft. I assumed that, if IBM could not break the stranglehold of Microsoft Windows and all those available programs, no one could.

I was wrong. About ten years later we started a new age of “Mobility.” Led quite conspicuously by Apple whose iPhone and later iPad completely changed the equation, the world has changed. Now we see Microsoft playing catch-up and releasing Windows 8 in an attempt to match Apple and Google, while attempting to keep the original Windows ecosystem relevant.

Of course, we didn’t have to wait for the iPhone to see competition to Windows. Apple produced competition all along in the Macintosh computer system. Remember, the original Mac predates any version of Windows, and it was always Bill Gates’ goal to match what the Mac had. It just took MS a long, long time to do that.

Apple has had several different variations over the years. The iMac experienced a large change in 2001 with the release of version 10 called OSX. This was much more than an incremental release like from Windows 2000 to Windows XP. No, this was an entirely revamped version that lost compatibility with the earlier version 9. Key to this new version was the fact it was based on Linux and the previous UNIX variant produced by Steve Jobs’ former company, NeXT and the OPENSTEP OS.

Also true is the fact that variations of UNIX and particularly Linux had been barking at the heels of Microsoft all along. Many features of DOS and later Windows were copied from that very successful operating system developed originally in the 70’s, although Windows didn’t use UNIX code. What Apple did with OSX was put a nice user friendly GUI or Graphical User Interface on the powerful UNIX kernel. Although several distributions or versions of Linux and other UNIX variants had GUIs, they did not have the elegance of Apple’s version, which followed the original Macintosh leadership that was actually the true genesis of Windows. In other words, Mac came first (well second if you count Xerox PARC) and Windows copied Mac.

Still Apple never had more than 15 — 20% market share, and Windows was still a monopoly, regardless of what the courts ruled. But, as I said, then along came the “Mobile Revolution.” Suddenly all the programs (or as Apple calls them, “apps”) needed to be rewritten for the special needs of mobile devices and the large Windows ecosystem lost a lot of relevance. As mobile merged with desktop, Windows seems to be loosing advantages. Further, as brilliant as the evolution of Windows is … and it is very brilliant as the MS programmers tamed the awkward and unsecure code into some pretty good copies of the Mac GUI, culminating with Windows 7 which is a pretty decent implementation … although it still lacks security … but then OSX isn’t all that secure either … a topic for another note.

During this time of Internet explosion and mobile revolutions, a new player appeared on top: Google. The battle for market share and mindshare now included three giant software firms: Microsoft, Apple, and Google. Google, using UNIX and Linux as a base, created an operating system for desktop computers. This is what we now call the Chrome Operating System. It actually predates Android, which is also UNIX and Linux based and is a copy of iOS, Apple’s mobile operating system (which is also UNIX and Linux based!)

Low cost Linux systems still exist and are popular servers making the Internet possible, but are not very suitable for the average, non-computer science degreed users. Linux distributions or version include GUIs, but they have not caught on like the user interface to either Mac OSX or iOS.

Chrome OS is an operating system designed to work exclusively with web applications. Google announced the operating system in July 2009 and made it an open source project, called Chromium OS, by the end of the year.

Unlike Chromium OS, which can be compiled from the downloaded source code, Chrome OS only ships on specific hardware from Google's manufacturing partners. The user interface takes a minimalist approach, reminiscent of the Google Chrome web browser. Since Google Chrome OS is aimed at users who spend most of their computer time on the Web, the only application on the device is a browser incorporating a media player and a file manager.

Former Google engineer Jeff Nelson wrote the first version of the operating system, code named "Google OS", in 2006. He based it on a Linux distribution and the Firefox browser, as Google's own Chrome browser was not yet available. The impetus was speed. Nelson thought that both Windows and Linux were needlessly slow. His solution was to move the operating system off the hard disk and into RAM. Restarting Firefox, he recalls, "went from about 45 seconds to about 1 second. Browsing a directory in the file explorer went from about 8 seconds to about 0.01 seconds.” Even compiling code became 60% faster, and he could run non-indexed, recursive greps (powerful UNIX search commands) of the entire RAM resident file system in under 15 seconds. Because of the size constraints of RAM, the operating system relied on applications that resided on the Internet and stored user data online. Nelson filed a patent for his invention, titled "Network-based Operating System Across Devices," on March 20, 2009. It was granted in August 7, 2012 and assigned to Google since he had departed the company.

The current Samsung Chromebook Series 3 (XE303C12) is their third generation version of the Chromebook and runs the latest version of the Chrome OS. The physical design the computer seems to have “influenced” significantly by the design of the Apple Mac Air laptop … which seems to be “situation normal” for Samsung, a company that obviously believes imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and seems to “borrow” a lot of ideas from the Cupertino company. (However, Samsung is also known for considerable innovation of their own and is one of the leading hardware companies in the world and a powerful rival of Apple.)

Samsung did not copy the Apple price tag, however. For one thing, a Chromebook is an abbreviated device and not something you would want to pay a high price any more than the purchaser of a bicycle is looking for something in the Ferrari price range. (The comparable Apple Air costs about four times as much … or more.) When you pay top dollar, you want top performance. No, the Chromebook is more of an economical compact suitable for trips downtown, but not good transportation for a coast-to-coast road trip. (On the other hand, low-end Windows laptops, especially the so-called “netbooks” can also be had for two or three hundred dollars … consider them bicycles with a motor. So it is a little hard to see what niche this machine fits in since the price isn’t that unique.)

As my pictures show, the Samsung Chromebook and Mac Air look almost identical. But, what the pictures don’t show, is that the construction of the Chromebook is decidedly “cheap.” While Apple used expensive machined aluminum for their case, the Samsung laptop is enclosed in silver colored plastic. Other features such as the display are not up to the same grade as the Mac’s either. However, it does appear that Samsung invested money in things that really matter. For example, the Chromebook has a USB 3.0 port (in addition to a USB 2.0 port) as well as an SD Card reader and HDMI video output. Apple tends more toward proprietary solutions such as Thunderbolt and Lightning, while Samsung stays more pedestrian.

Sadly Samsung did not copy the magnetic latched power connector used by Apple (although MS wasn’t shy about ripping off that excellent idea for the Surface) and uses a power connector about the size of the lead in an automatic pencil. I prophesy that this little power connector will soon be bent beyond use, although it does appear that damage will be to the adapter rather than the computer motherboard and so may not be as expensive to repair.

You do need an Internet connection to run a Chromebook, and Samsung supplies excellent wireless with all the latest 802.11 a/b/g/n support. You can connect to Ethernet using a USB dongle and, for $75 more, you can get a model with 3G capability. The computer also has the latest version of Bluetooth radio to connect to mice, earphones, and other wireless devices.

Like other mobile devices, the Samsung Chromebook uses a low end ARM processor originally designed for smartphones and tablets, but this does preserve battery life. If you can come to grips with using cloud-based tools like Google Docs and Google Drive instead of regular software and local storage, the Chromebook becomes extremely enticing, especially for writers and students, who may not require much more than Word processing and Web access. The Chromebook is also tempting when compared with more expensive tablets, which don't offer the same level of productive capability of a physical keyboard. The Chromebook has always been a niche product, but at this price, there are plenty of little spaces to fill.

The Samsung laptop comes with 2 “gigs” of memory and a 16GB solid state drive, the latter makes the computer smaller, lighter, and less likely to fail, and which also improves the boot up time. I clocked my Series 3 booting in around 10 seconds, which beats my Air (which also has a solid state drive, although of a much larger capacity) at 15 seconds. That alone is great if you are tired of starting Windows and having coffee, plus a complete breakfast, while you wait for the thing to boot. Restarting after sleep is almost instantaneous. Now that’s what I’m talkin’ about!

The Chromebook Series 3 doesn't exactly have a standard keyboard. It's still a full-size QWERTY keyboard, but the layout has been tweaked by Google to optimize the Web-based Chrome experience. The Caps Lock key is replaced with a dedicated search button (you can still Caps Lock by pressing Alt-Search), and F1-F12 have been replaced with Chrome-specific function/hotkeys (Escape; Web specific Back, Forward, Reload; Full Screen; Next Window; Brightness Down/Up; Volume Mute/Down/Up; and Power switch). The Delete key has also disappeared, with the Backspace key pulling double duty (to delete, just press Alt-Backspace). There is no equivalent to the Windows or Apple key, just wider Ctrl and Alt keys, which will actually get plenty of use, as the Chrome OS offers a lot of keyboard shortcuts. I found that Chrome's keyboard navigation was both fast and intuitive. If you came to the Chromebook from a Mac or Windows PC, you'll find that many of the same shortcuts and key combos work.

After booting you are presented a typical GUI screen complete with a picture show desktop. Several beautiful scenic views are provided or you can load your own picture of your playful hound rubbing his back on the carpet or your newborn baby.

However, similar to Google search, the screen interface is decidedly minimalistic. Dedicated icons in the lower left corner of the screen pull up Gmail, Google Search, Google Drive, and YouTube. Like Windows Start — Programs, the final button produces a list of programs. The selection of apps can be added to by download from the Chrome Web Store, and includes Google Calendar, Google+, a calculator, camera (which uses the Chromebook's webcam), and Chrome Remote Desktop, which lets you access other PCs remotely through the browser. The last is a workable (albeit slow) solution to Chrome users who want to either access their primary computer and software, or who need to do some remote troubleshooting for a relative. In an effort to expand the usefulness of these apps, Google has also added offline capability to Google Drive and Gmail, letting you access at least some of your stuff when WiFi isn't available. Further apps and extensions can be found in the Chrome Web Store, with thousands of offerings, many for free.

The computer comes with free access to 100 GB of storage on the Google (Google Drive).

There's also a basic file manager in Chrome OS, but the key word here is basic. Plug in a USB flash drive or SD card and it will pop up a list of the drive's contents, with an interface that looks much like Gmail or Google Drive. Documents and PDF files are opened using Chrome's in-browser document viewer, while photos are viewed and edited with Chrome's lightweight image editor. Music and video files are opened with Chrome's media player, but Google expects most media to be streamed over WiFi (using apps like Google Play Music), and for robust cloud-based editing tools (such as Aviary and Creative Kit in Google+) to be used for extensive media editing. A Chromebook is not the solution if you are looking for a computer to run Adobe Photoshop, but then I would say the same of the Mac Air … at least a MacBook Pro is needed for that kind of heavy bit crunching.

Weighing only 2.5 pounds, the Chromebook Series 3 is extremely portable, while still offering a large enough screen and keyboard to use without feeling hemmed in. Despite the slim body and complete lack of cooling fans, the system never got particularly warm during my use. The display measures 11.6 inches diagonally and yields 1366 x 786 resolution, the same as the Mac Air and the Windows Surface R/T. The screen is backlit and relatively sharp and clear, although even the old Mac Air has it beat and it certainly is not a Retinal display. Still it is very adequate for your coffee shop Internet fix and you can browse pictures of your friend’s new grandbaby quite well.

The Chromebook Series 3 ditches the Intel Atom and Celeron processors used in the previous Chromebooks and Netbooks in favor of Samsung's Exynos 5 dual-core ARM processor (1.7GHz). This is a trend I expect to continue as mobile processors become more powerful and long battery life becomes a key specification.

The large touchpad works very well. Like Apple, it is physically pushed down to click, and I prefer it to most touchpads I’ve encountered on HP and IBM laptops, but not quite as responsive as the Mac’s, although it does emulate the modern multi-finger functions pioneered by Apple.

Bottom line is it is a fun little computer you could carry around with you and not be continuously paranoid you will either drop or have stolen a piece of hardware worth as much as a used automobile. No, you won’t find many cars for only $250 these days … at least cars that actually run … and this little runabout gets around quite nicely … as long as you only want a trip across town.

My main complaint is, like many other computers based on Linux (including Apple’s), they’ve completely hid the Linux away. Here I was ready to “sudo” and “ls” and all I can do is “click.”(Mac OS does have a terminal window for those who need a command line fix. I haven't found such an animal on the Chromebook, although there may be one on the Web Store. Think I'll check that out.)

Currently there are some limitations. I understand that Netflix won’t work on this processor (although Samsung is working on that), but Hulu works fine, as does Sony and Amazon video. I haven’t tried Netflix … I prefer my Apple TV for that.

Seems to me that, if you have kids, and you want to keep their peanut butter and jelly covered fingers off your thousand dollar plus computer equipment, this little plastic box might be just the ticket. There are a ton of games available for the Chromebox and it might be worth $250 to have some quiet time in the house. The average family with three-and-one-half computers never has to share. Actually, Acer has a Chromebook for only $200. Soon they may be giving them away in Cracker Jack’s boxes. Me, I might wait for the “Chromewatch.” It had better do Netflix though. Say … what time is it?

Saturday, December 22, 2012

One Laptop per Child and the Original XO Computer

Writing about our new Chrome laptop and the Raspberry Pi reminded me of another educational project I was involved in. That was the “One Laptop Per Child” organization or OLPC. I actually have one of the XO laptops. That is unusual because they were not for sale. They were primarily delivered to third world countries to try to improve their educational system, although there were a few US school boards that also purchased the low cost laptops (Birmingham, Alabama was an early adopter). I have one because I was a member of the OLPC organization and a donor.

The original idea came from Nicholas Negroponte. He is founder and chairman of the One Laptop Per Child non-profit. He is currently on leave from MIT, where he was co-founder and director of the MIT Media Laboratory, and the Jerome B. Wiesner Professor of Media Technology. A graduate of MIT, Negroponte was a pioneer in the field of computer-aided design, and has been a member of the MIT faculty since 1966. He is also author of the 1995 best seller, “Being Digital,” which has been translated into more than 40 languages. In the private sector, Nicholas Negroponte serves on the board of directors for Motorola, Inc. and as general partner in a venture capital firm specializing in digital technologies for information and entertainment. He has provided start-up funds for more than 40 companies, including Wired magazine.

His and the organization’s aim was to provide each child with a rugged, low-cost, low-power, connected laptop. To this end, they designed hardware, content, and software for collaborative, joyful, and self-empowered learning. With access to this type of tool, children are engaged in their own education, and learn, share, and create together. They become connected to each other, to the world, and to a brighter future.

The original goal was to build a $100 laptop. That was an ambitious undertaking in 2005 when first proposed. At that time laptops were rarely cheaper than $1,000. In addition, there was a very specific set of design goals. The original laptop called the XO was intended for children six to twelve, although use by younger children would be possible too.


XO is the computer name. It also makes this logo and is used throughout the interface.

The XO has been designed to provide an engaging wireless network. This evolved to what is termed a “mesh network.” What that means is that, if XO number 1 can connect to an Internet access point, then XO number 2 can connect to XO number 1, XO number 3 to XO number 2 or 1, and so-forth. This spread the network through the entire village or settlement and also allowed a great deal of collaboration as all the laptops would be connected automatically. The computer display and main interface is designed to assist this mesh connection and identify all the network nodes. Children in the neighborhood are permanently connected to chat, sharing information on the local network or web, making music together, editing texts, or using collaborative games.

A most basic principle of radio engineering is the antenna. To maximize radio performance requires a well-designed and located antenna. What the XO employed was a dual antenna system for maximum range of reception and transmission. The designers placed the antennas into the large latches on the sides of the display near the top. The latches served double duty securing the typical clamshell designed screen to the keyboard when the laptop was being carried. When open and in use, the latches served as vertically polarized antennas located near the top of the computer.
 

Latches are also the wireless network antennas.
The laptop can be charged by solar or mechanical power, or through special bulk-chargers at school. Some original plans even had a hand crank installed on the laptop, but the final solution was a computer with over 8 hours of battery life so a single charge would last all day. They could still be charged up from manual systems if there was no connection to main power. Even today a laptop battery life this great is almost unheard of. A lot of sophisticated power management and a special display screen went into the design to accomplish such longevity.

An important aspect of the low power use was the display. It used “e-paper.” That is a technology where power is only used when the screen changes. This is the same type of display in the Kindle Reader. Very power efficient for things that are static for periods of time while pages are being read.

Screen reversed for reading.

In addition, this unique XO display allows the use of the laptop under a bright sun. All of this makes it easy for children in a community to connect to one another almost anywhere. Remember, In Africa and other target locations, it is very possible that the classroom is out of doors. The screen supports black & white in the sunlight, but will display color when backlit. So the computer can be used outside during the day and also at night with no other light. The design is actually two screens sharing a Liquid Crystal display or LCD.
Journal files.

You can always at least see gray scale, even in direct sunlight. You get color from the backlight. Though as sunlight gets brighter, the colors wash out and it looks like gray. The backlight uses power. So you can turn it down or off to make the battery last longer. Turning off the backlight also tells the screen not to worry about color, so it can give a slightly higher resolution, which can make hours of reading more comfortable.

The computer lacks an accelerometer, but a button on the side of the screen allows the user to rotate the view to any 90-degree angle so the computer can be used sideways and up-side-down if you wish.

Membrane keyboard -- waterproof.

In many ways, the display was the key to getting the cost of the laptop down, as it was the single most expensive item in laptops – both then and now. There were many technical breakthroughs in the ultimate design and the design team was led to those advances by Mary Lou Jeppsen.

She studied Studio Art and Electrical Engineering at Brown, and received a Master of Science in Holography from the MIT Media Lab. She then returned to Brown to receive a Ph.D. in Optical Sciences. Her PhD work combined rigorous theoretical coupled-wave analysis with lab work, in which she created large-scale, embossed surface-relief diffraction gratings with liquid crystal-filled grooves with high diffraction efficiency in un-polarized illumination – a forerunner of the technology used in the XO.

Membrane keyboard -- water proof.

Jepsen helped pioneer single-panel field sequential projection display systems, co-founding Microdisplay, the first company whose sole effort was the development of tiny displays, in 1995. There she served as its chief technology officer through 2003. From 2003 until the end of the 2004, she was the chief technology officer of Intel’s Display Division. In January 2005, Jepsen joined Negroponte to lead the design, partnering, development and manufacture of the laptop, and for the entire first year of the effort was the only employee of One Laptop per Child.

By the end of 2005, she had completed the initial architecture, led the development of the first prototype, and signed up some of the world's largest manufacturers to produce the XO. By the end of 2007 she had led the laptop through development and into high volume mass production.

Controls next to screen.

At OLPC, notably, Jepsen invented the laptop's sunlight-readable display technology and co-invented its ultra-low power management system -- and -- has transformed these inventions into high volume mass production rapidly. The XO laptop is the lowest-power laptop ever made, and the most environmentally friendly laptop ever made.

After 3 years with OLPC, In early 2008 she left OLPC to start a for-profit company, Pixel Qi, to commercialize some of the technologies she invented at OLPC. Pixel Qi's business is based on the concept that the screen is the most critical component of any mobile device.

Controls next to screen.

Mary Lou Jepsen is one of the first contributors in Google's "Solve for X” projects with her idea of "Imaging the Mind's Eye". For her work in creating the laptop Time Magazine named her to its 2008 list of the 100 most influential people in the world, and she has won the Edwin Land Medal for 2011 from the Optical Society. She has been named to numerous "top" lists in computing by Fast Company and Laptop Magazine and IEEE Spectrum and others.

You can tell that the OLPC organization had top notch talent.

Another unique design feature was the ability to rotate the screen around and close over the keyboard like a tablet computer. It didn’t have a touch screen, but there were several controls on the side of the screen, so programs could be interacted with without using the keyboard.

Touchpad (areas to right and left were for precise positioning, but not implemented.

Even the color of the computer was well thought out. It was a bright green and white, intended to look like a child’s toy. That reduced the likelihood that the device would be stolen and resold in poor countries. The computer was designed with a built-in handle to facilitate carrying the computer to and from school on foot and the plastic case and internal components were designed to be very rugged, able to handle repeated dropping without breakage. The laptop can sustain 5 foot drops. And, Unlike most modern laptops, if the display was broken, it could be easily replaced with simple tools.

The XO also pioneered the used of solid state drives so there would be no moving parts and the computer could be repaired by low skill technicians with simple tools. All designed for the intended environment. 



XO Home Screen.

The computer also had a built-in video camera to encourage the use of video in school projects, presentations, and home movie production. The laptop was intended to be a complete learning laboratory. Some of the exciting software included used simple sensors to measure distance and the OLPC encouraged children to use this tool to explore their environment … for example, survey their village.

Other software supported art, graphics, and music. Programming environments included Python and Pippy (an activity for exploring Python), Forth, JavaScript, Csound (a music programming language, Etoys … an implementation of Squeak … a programming language designed for children that uses a Lego Block programming idiom), Turtle Art, and Adobe Flash. Also Gecko, GUI toolkit, Matchbox, Pango, Gnome, Cairo, X Windows, Freetype, Telepathy, Avahi, GStreamer, Bitfrost, Mesh, Pygame, and Gettext. (Do a little google search if these are not familiar.)

View of the mesh network neighborhood.

There are programs for interaction, journaling, video editing, security, mathematics and calculating, and the list goes on. Further, using open source technology, the OLPC expected the tool set to be expanded by users and educators all over the world. The XO included tools for exploring, tools for expressing, tools for communicating, on-line games and tools for networking and internet access. The operating system is a version of Linux based on the Fedora distribution. There were several emulator environments available to allow program development using other, more powerful computers.

The final result met almost all the design criteria with one glaring exception. The cost was not $100, but nearer to $200. Although that was an excellent price given the technology of the time, it was not as low as was hoped for. Otherwise, at least in my opinion, the laptop met all of its design criteria. Criticism came more from the grand scheme of how the XO would change the education system in poor countries.

In addition, one of the original partners, Intel, later produced their own low cost and low power laptop and partnered with Microsoft sell the machines with Windows installed. Part of their sales pitch was the importance of introducing Windows to these populations. There were other political issues with dealing with national and local governments, but perhaps the overall problem was just the grandness of the scheme.

To quote the OLPC organization:
 
We aim to provide each child with a rugged, low-cost, low-power, connected laptop. To this end, we have designed hardware, content and software for collaborative, joyful, and self-empowered learning. With access to this type of tool, children are engaged in their own education, and learn, share, and create together. They become connected to each other, to the world and to a brighter future.
This connectivity will be as ubiquitous as a formal or informal learning environment permits. OLPC propose a new kind of school, an “expanded school” which grows beyond the walls of the classroom. Last but not least, this connectivity ensures a dialogue among generations, nations and cultures. The OLPC network will speak every language.

All children are learners and teachers, and free and open source tools amplify this spirit of collaboration.

Selecting a program

A child with an XO is not a passive consumer of knowledge, but an active participant in a learning community. As children and teachers grow and pursue new ideas, their software, content, resources, and tools should be able to grow with them. The global nature of OLPC requires locally driven growth, driven in part by the children themselves. Each child with an XO can leverage the learning of other children. They can teach each other, share ideas, and support each other's growth.

No mention of improving standardized test scores in the OLPC claims, you'll notice. No talk of "student achievement." "The best preparation for children," according to the OLPC website isn't test prep. It is "to develop the passion for learning and the ability to learn how to learn."

Multi-tasking control

Standardized test scores in math and in language do not reflect "the ability to learn how to learn" -- they don't even purport to. But we fixate on test scores nevertheless. It is worth noting here that the study that prompted headlines about OLPC's "disappointing" test results -- one conducted by the Inter-American Development Bank using data collected from some 300 primary schools in rural Peru -- did find some improvement in students' cognitive skills (as in, "the ability to learn how to learn").

That study links that boost in cognitive skills to "increased interaction with technology." Make of that what you will. The study also found that having access to computers increases your access to computers.

The study points out other things too, and it asks "Could stricter adherence to the OLPC principles have brought about better academic outcomes?" Many students were not allowed to take their laptops home. Internet access was "practically non-existent." Just 70% of teachers had 40-hours of professional development before their students were given the devices.

Programming Interface

That last (missing) piece -- training for teachers -- has long been something that gets overlooked when it comes to educational-technology initiatives no matter the location, Peru or the U.S. It is almost as if we believe we can simply parachute technology in to a classroom and expect everyone to just pick it up, understand it, use it, hack it, and prosper.

There is no inherent external dependency in being able to localize software into their language, fix the software to remove bugs, and repurpose the software to fit their needs. Nor is there any restriction in regard to redistribution; OLPC cannot know and should not control how the tools users create will be re-purposed in the future.


A music synthesizer.

OLPC's goals require a world of great software and content, both open and proprietary. Children and teachers need the chance to choose from all of it. In the context of learning, knowledge should be free. Further, every child has something to contribute; we need a free and open framework that supports the human need to express and share.

My early experience with military electronic hardware was that the federal government would specify and purchase very expensive devices designed to be rugged and able to operate in the field. However, the commercial market often produced better and much cheaper equipment, although it did lack the metal, hard-shell case and environmental protection. Perhaps the XO is not longer relevant as the marketplace has produced very inexpensive hardware. Still the unique design of the OLPC laptop did make it particularly useful in these primitive environments.

One of the music editing programs.

The OLPC continues to produce new designs with several machines following in the footsteps of the original design, but the excitement has worn off and I am no longer a member of the organization. My current work is more focused on my local communities needs, but I found my time with OLPC to be very rewarding and they did enjoy some success, although I am more focused on the design success rather than the program success.

It will be interesting to see if the Raspberry Pi (or even a Google Chromebook) will succeed where OLPC failed. The organization went on to develop follow-on products to the XO and still exists today, but it has not grown into the success originally imagined by the founder and staff. The largest area of success for the organization has been in South America with recent installations in Argentina, Peru, Paragay, and Columbia. There are a total of nearly 2 million machines out there now, and so it may be too soon to be so dismissive of the final success.

One Laptop Per Child … seems like a grand goal to me. Although I’m no longer involved with the organization, I am still supporting this goal.

Friday, December 21, 2012

New Computers


My very first computer was a Sinclair ZX80 that I bought for $200 in 1980. That put me a little behind the curve as both the Radio Shack TRS-80 and the Apple II were out before then, but they were also out of my reach financially. At that time I was the poor father of two … one a newborn. I was well employed, but I was also attending college in the evening and working my own business repairing stereos and guitar amplifiers, and $200 was a lot of money for me and the fancier computers were out of my range entirely. When the box arrived in the mail, and I pulled out this little computer about the size of a pocket book, my wife asked, “Is that all you get for $200?”

This was BM, Before Microsoft. PC DOS was still a different product waiting for Gates to buy and put in the IBM PC two years later. The ZX80 was a home computer produced by “Science of Cambridge Ltd.” (later to be better known as Sinclair Research). It eventually got a new case and was sold as the Timex Sinclair 1000; it took a lickin’ and kept on tickin’.

The ZX80 was named after the Zilog Z80 processor, an early copy of the 8008 microprocessor from Intel, with the 'X' for "the mystery ingredient".

Internally, the machine was designed by Jim Westwood using the Z80 central processing unit or CPU and ran at a clock speed of 3.25 MHz. It was equipped with 1 kB of static RAM and 4 kB of ROM. The ZX80 was designed around readily available Transistor-Transistor Logic ( TTL) chips, and the only proprietary technology was the firmware.

The ROM contained the Sinclair BASIC programming language, an editor, and an operating system. BASIC commands were not entered by typing them out but were instead selected somewhat similarly to a scientific calculator — each key had a few different functions selected by both context and modes as well as with the shift key. That was a good thing because you couldn’t really touch type on the membrane keyboard and single finger “poking” was the standard operating procedure.

The machine was mounted in a tiny white plastic case, with a one-piece blue membrane keyboard on the front; it owed its distinctive appearance to industrial designer Rick Dickinson. There were problems with durability, reliability and overheating (despite appearances, the black stripes visible on the top rear of the case are merely cosmetic, and are not ventilation slots).

The UK version of the machine was the standard, and only changes that were absolutely necessary to sell units in other markets were made. In fact, the only real change made in most markets involved the video output frequency (the ZX80 used an external power transformer, so differences in AC line frequency and outlet were not an issue to the machine itself). One outcome of this is that the machine had some keyboard keys and characters that were distinctly British: "Newline" was used instead of "Enter", "Rubout" instead of "Backspace" or "Delete", and the character set and keyboard included the British Pound symbol.

Sales of the ZX80 reached about 50,000 — an unheard of number for the day which contributed significantly to the UK leading the world in home computer ownership through the 1980s. 

Owing to the unsophisticated design and the tendency for the units to overheat, surviving machines in good condition are quite uncommon and can fetch high prices by collectors. Sadly I gave mine away to my friend William, and I’m sure he disposed of it somehow in the last thirty plus years.

The primary audience for such computers at the time was hobbyists, and the ZX80 was primarily marketed towards that end. In the US, the ZX80 was available in two forms: a prebuilt unit for US$199.95, or a "kit" version, which provided all the parts but required assembly, for US$149.95. Capitalizing on the price, the system was advertised (in computing and electronics magazines) with the slogan "The first personal computer for under $200.”

So that is the background to my two most recent computer purchases. As everyone knows, the last thirty years since the introduction of the IBM PC in 1982 have been dominated by Microsoft — first DOS and then Windows. There were challengers from Apple (several different versions … most recently OSX), Linux and other variations of low cost UNIX, and even, for a short time, IBM OS/2. But DOS / Windows has remained on top of the heap with giant market share, mind share, and application program ecosystem. That is starting to change with what many call the “Mobile Revolution” lead by new devices such as iPhones, Android, and other smart phones, as well as tablets/slates/iPads. These devices typically run operating systems and processors designed specifically for mobile applications with the low power battery source and mostly lacking real keyboards. Windows is responding, but that is not the point of this writing.

I’m talking about my two latest computers. I’ve already spoken about my new Raspberry Pi, also a product of British design. It runs a fairly standard version of Linux, but the real breakthrough is the low cost. $35 for the basic board. You have to add things like keyboard, mouse, display, network, and even an SD card, but still it is very, very affordable and actually pretty powerful even by today’s standards. The real point of the Strawberry Pi is the effect it will have on early grades of education … at least that is the hope of its creators. Already a small ecosystem has sprung up around it with hardware boards and experiment boards in addition to programming software designed for 6 to 10 year olds. It is revolutionary, and — if successful — will likely be cloned and copied.

That was one of my new computers and I will write more about it soon.



The other new computer is a Samsung Chromebook that sells for $249, very close to the original ZX80. But what a difference. This computer includes a high resolution display and a “real” keyboard. It is basically a laptop, or more precisely a member of the “netbook” family. Netbooks are small, typically under powered, but low cost lap top computers intended primarily to browse the internet. Their small size and weight, combined with their equally small purchase price, created a niche that was quickly filled with models from most manufacturers.

The difference is that the netbook ran Windows, although often a low end version such as XP after Vista was already announced. (The latest Netbooks run a special version of Win7.) Chrome is an operating system created by Google out of Linux and, like a Netbook, is primarily intended for use as an Internet browser.

What I’m amazed at is how much value the Samsung / Google partnership has gotten out of this low cost machine. The styling seems to be a direct copy of the Apple MacBook Air although inexpensive plastic is used where the Air uses fine finished aluminum. There is no mistaking the low cost manufacturing tricks used by Samsung, but they seemed to have put the expense into things that really matter.

It is very modern with a USB 3.0 port (plus one 2.0 port) as well as an HDMI video output and an SD memory card slot. It has a touch pad with physical click just like the Air, but does lack the quality of the Air’s display, even the non-retinal Air.

Two very excellent features: it has amazing battery life, lasting in the six hour range, and it boots up from dead cold in 12 seconds flat. It has 2 GB or RAM and — most exciting — a 16 GB solid state drive. It also comes with 100 Gb of free Google Cloud storage.

Some of the early Chromebooks were not nearly as elegant and Chrome itself had a lot of rough edges. However, as this offering from Samsung proves, the manufacturers are getting wiser and the latest version of Chrome is really getting there. This latest offering has everything you would need from the latest wireless standards to a built-in web camera and surprising good sounding speakers (if you don't turn it up too loud).

There’s still a ways to go, but if you are looking for a very inexpensive and simple to use computer that is highly portable (a version with cell phone connection is only about $75 more) and — maybe the best part — NON-WINDOWS computer, then give this Samsung a try.



Monday, December 17, 2012

Sssshhhhhh, It's a Secret -- Secret Societies

Ernest Avery Lincoln
Linda’s grandfather and great-grandfather were both Masons or “Freemasons.” We have two gorgeous gold pins that belonged to the two men. They are beautiful works of art with many strange symbols on them. We asked around and were referred to a pawn shop owner up in Cheyenne, Wyoming. Linda spoke with the 90+ year old gentleman on the phone. He couldn’t tell us a lot about the pins since, after all, they are secret.

We took them up to him for appraisal. Upon arrival we were told by his family members that he only works a few hours a day, and he had left for home. they agreed to call him up and he came back down because he was interested in these Masonic relics.

We showed him both pins, and he was very interested. He weighed them and said they were worth $800 just in the gold; but were not really valuable to anyone but other Masons, especially the lodge in Fall River where they were issued from. He did not recommend and we didn’t want to have the pins melted down for their base metal. It just seems they are an important part of the family history, and so we decided to keep them. Sadly the lodge in Fall River, like the town, has fallen on tough times. So we have decided to just keep the pins for now. They are excellent mementos of Linda’s family.

It did peak my interest in these societies. Seems they are rapidly becoming part of the past. Many remain, including the Masons and other, more common organizations such as the Moose, Elks, and Eagles, but they are losing members and many are disappearing outright. Things have changed and fraternal organizations of all types that were very active in the twentieth century are now disappearing.

My dad was a Lion. They did community service ... the Lion’s specialty was selling light bulbs to benefit the blind. The Masons are famous for their children’s burn hospitals. When I was in the Navy in Norfolk, I was a Moose. I still remember the secret password. However it was more because Virginia didn’t allow mixed drinks in bars, so social clubs like the Moose and Elks were one way to get a cocktail. You would buy a bottle at a package store and the Moose club would keep that bottle for you and serve it with mixes, etc. Nothing fancy, but you could have a simple mixed drink.

That was then, and this is now. Now there are many things to do at home from TV to the Internet  to DVD or Netflix. So those old social clubs and societies tend to include mostly people in their sixties, seventies, and even older. I attend an annual Pie Night at an old Grange. The youngest in the organization was 80, and so they’ve recently sold the building to the Masons who have done some needed remodeling and repairs. Thankfully we can still have our annual orgy of pie and music during the season of gluttony.

As I researched the Masons, I learned about the ancient secret societies and their roles in our history. That led me to a rather high tech story of the decoding of a secret society’s secret code. Using a program designed for language translation, a team was able to read, for the first time, a secret document from the 18th century. After years of work, this is what the translation yields:

The master wears an amulet with a blue eye in the center. Before him, a candidate kneels in the candlelit room, surrounded by microscopes and surgical implements. The year is roughly 1746. The initiation has begun.

The master places a piece of paper in front of the candidate and orders him to put on a pair of eyeglasses. “Read,” the master commands. The candidate squints, but it’s an impossible task. The page is blank.

The candidate is told not to panic; there is hope for his vision to improve. The master wipes the candidate’s eyes with a cloth and orders preparation for the surgery to commence. He selects a pair of tweezers from the table. The other members in attendance raise their candles.

The master starts plucking hairs from the candidate’s eyebrow. This is a ritualistic procedure; no flesh is cut. But these are “symbolic actions out of which none are without meaning,” the master assures the candidate. The candidate places his hand on the master’s amulet. Try reading again, the master says, replacing the first page with another. This page is filled with handwritten text. Congratulations, brother, the members say. Now you can see.

For more than 260 years, the contents of that page — and the details of this ritual — remained a secret. They were hidden in a coded manuscript, one of thousands produced by secret societies in the 18th and 19th centuries. At the peak of their power, these clandestine organizations, most notably the Freemasons, had hundreds of thousands of adherents, from colonial New York to imperial St. Petersburg.

Dismissed today as fodder for conspiracy theorists and History Channel specials, they once served an important purpose: Their lodges were safe houses where freethinkers could explore everything from the laws of physics to the rights of man to the nature of God, all hidden from the oppressive, authoritarian eyes of church and state. But largely because they were so secretive, little is known about most of these organizations. Membership in all but the biggest died out over a century ago, and many of their encrypted texts have remained uncracked, dismissed by historians as impenetrable novelties.

It was actually an accident that brought to light the symbolic “sight-restoring” ritual. The decoding effort started as a sort of game between two friends that eventually engulfed a team of experts in disciplines ranging from machine translation to intellectual history. Its significance goes far beyond the contents of a single cipher. Hidden within coded manuscripts like these is a secret history of how esoteric, often radical notions of science, politics, and religion spread underground. At least that’s what experts believe. The only way to know for sure is to break the codes.

A photocopy of the manuscript was given as a going-away present to a linguist from Stockholm. Years later, she attended an Uppsala conference on computational linguistics. The featured speaker was Kevin Knight, a University of Southern California specialist in machine translation—the use of algorithms to automatically translate one language into another.

Knight was part of an extremely small group of machine-translation researchers who treated foreign languages like ciphers — as if Russian, for example, were just a series of cryptological symbols representing English words. In code-breaking, he explained, the central job is to figure out the set of rules for turning the cipher’s text into plain words: which letters should be swapped, when to turn a phrase on its head, when to ignore a word altogether. Establishing that type of rule set, or “key,” is the main goal of machine translators too. Except that the key for translating Russian into English is far more complex. Words have multiple meanings, depending on context. Grammar varies widely from language to language. And there are billions of possible word combinations.

But there are ways to make all of this more manageable. We know the rules and statistics of English: which words go together, which sounds the language employs, and which pairs of letters appear most often. (Q is usually followed by a u, for example, and “quiet” is rarely followed by “bulldozer.”) There are only so many translation schemes that will work with these grammatical parameters. That narrows the number of possible keys from billions to merely millions.

The next step is to take a whole lot of educated guesses about what the key might be. Knight uses what’s called an expectation-maximization algorithm to do that. Instead of relying on a predefined dictionary, it runs through every possible English translation of those Russian words, no matter how ridiculous; it’ll interpret a particular symbol as “yes,” “horse,” “to break dance,” and “quiet!” Then, for each one of those possible interpretations, the algorithm invents a key for transforming an entire document into English—what would the text look like if that symbol meant “break dancing”?

The algorithm’s first few thousand attempts are always way, way off. But with every pass, it figures out a few words. And those isolated answers inch the algorithm closer and closer to the correct key. Eventually the computer finds the most statistically likely set of translation rules, the one that properly interprets “#&*gy%q@” as “yes” and “n^xr*lt$$” as “quiet.”

The algorithm can also help break codes, Knight told the Uppsala conference—generally, the longer the cipher, the better they perform. So he casually told the audience, “If you’ve got a long coded text to share, let me know.”

After the conference the Linguist said she had just such a long coded text to share and a copy of the cipher arrived at Knight’s office a few weeks later. Despite his comments at the conference, Knight was hesitant to start the project; alleged ciphers often turned out to be hoaxes. But Schaefer’s note stapled to the coded pages was hard to resist. “Here comes the ‘top-secret’ manuscript!!” she wrote. “It seems more suitable for long dark Swedish winter nights than for sunny California days—but then you’ve got your hardworking and patient machines!”

After months of work and several small breakthroughs, a wider team eventually made sense of the document, determining its original language and some of the subject matter. The big breakthrough was recognizing a phrase in the translation that referred to the “Ocultists” which is a reference to the eye or “optics.” A phrase in the manuscript text, a reference to the “light hand” required to be a master of the society, had seemed familiar to a team member. So she dug up an academic article she had read some time before about a secret order in Germany that called itself the “Great Enlightened Society of Oculists.” The “light hand” was mentioned in their bylaws.

Active in the mid-18th century, the Oculists that created this document were fixated on both the anatomy and symbolism of the eye. They focused on sight as a metaphor for knowledge. And they performed surgery on the eye. “We exceed all other [healers] by being able to pierce all cataracts, whether they’re fully developed or not,” the group boasted in its public — and uncoded — bylaws.

Centered in the town of Wolfenbüttel, Germany, the Oculists, it was believed, played the role of gatekeepers to the burgeoning field of ophthalmology. They kept out the “charlatans” who could cause someone to “lose their eyesight forever.”

On their crest, the Oculists featured a cataract needle and three cats (which, of course, can see in near darkness). In their bylaws, the Oculists’ emphasis on the master’s “light hand” seemed to be a reference to members’ surgical skill. And they appeared to have a rather progressive attitude; women could be Oculists, just like men.

One of the team members contacted the state archives in Wolfenbüttel, which housed a collection of Oculist materials. The archives had a coded text just like the document they were trying to read—and some cool amulets too.

The team plunged even deeper into the cipher. But the text confused them. The weird rituals it described didn’t exactly seem like medical school classes. Although the document mentioned the master’s “light hand,” they couldn’t find anything in the coded text about eye surgery or cataracts.

Instead the manuscript noted that the master had to “show his skill in reading and writing of our cipher.” These Oculists might have been presenting themselves as ophthalmologists in public. But inside the order’s chambers, the light hand must have meant something else. Could it have been about keeping secrets through cryptology?

Even with its code broken, the manuscript’s swirl of ritual and double-talk was getting harder and harder to follow — especially for someone whose experience with secret orders was drawn mainly from cheesy movies. The team knew they needed help figuring out what these societies were all about. So they asked around for someone who could tell her what really happened in those candlelit initiation rooms.

They learned that hundreds of thousands of Europeans belonged to secret societies in the 18th century; in Sweden alone, there were more than a hundred orders. Though they were clandestine, they were often remarkably inclusive. Many welcomed noblemen and merchants alike — a rare egalitarian practice in an era of strict social hierarchies. That made the orders dangerous to the state. They also frequently didn’t care about their adherents’ Christian denomination, making these orders — especially the biggest of them, Freemasonry — an implicit threat to the authority of the Catholic Church.

In 1738 Pope Clement XII forbade all Catholics from joining a Masonic lodge. Others implied that the male-only groups might be hotbeds of sodomy. Not long after, rumors started that members of these orders actually worshipped the devil.

These societies were the incubators of democracy, modern science, and ecumenical religion. They elected their own leaders and drew up constitutions to govern their operations. It wasn’t an accident that Voltaire, George Washington, and Ben Franklin were all active members. And just like today’s networked radicals, much of their power was wrapped up in their ability to stay anonymous and keep their communications secret.

After reading the Oculists’ cipher, it is possible that it described one of the more extreme groups. Forget the implicit threats to the state or church. In part of the document, there’s explicit talk about slaying the tyrannical “three-headed monster” who “deprive[s] man of his natural freedom.” There’s even a call for a “general revolt.” Remember, this book was written in the 1740s — 30 years before the Declaration of Independence. To someone at the time, this would be like reading a manifesto from a terrorist organization.

Arba N. Lincoln 1886

Decoding the manuscript was a significant achievement. Traditionally, historians have just ignored documents like this, because they don’t have the tools to make sense of them. That’s why the Oculists passed as early surgeons for so long. But there are scores of these enciphered documents — many in Switzerland alone. Some concern new rites of a fraternal order; others could detail political movements. There’s no way to tell for sure, because they’re cryptologically sealed. There’s a whole secret history waiting to be told. There are so many more codes.

As the use of computer algorithms for translation and decoding expand, more of this secret society and the missing history of this period will be revealed. I’m reminded of the statement about conflicts between nations and armies and the fact that “history is written by the winning party.” What secrets do the secret societies hold about our past? Use of computers is a very cutting edge method of answering these questions, but as this story indicates, it takes a lot more than computer scientists to break through the secrets. Linguists, historians, librarians, code breakers, what is often called an “interdisciplinary team.” Plus, it took a lot of just good old hard work for this one breakthrough. But then one should never underestimate the power of a doctoral student in pursuit of his or her thesis. Perhaps more secrets of secret societies will be unveiled.

Sunday, December 16, 2012

LTE vs. 4G

My new iPhone supports both 4G and LTE networks, quite an improvement over the old 3G service my previous iPhone provided. A while back I spoke with my brother-in-law about networks and network speed. I did some research and came up with this short explanation.

Third-generation mobile networks, or 3G, came to the U.S. in 2003. With minimum consistent Internet speeds of 144 kilobits per second, they were supposed to bring "mobile broadband." There are now so many varieties of 3G, though, that a "3G" connection can get you Internet speeds anywhere from 400 kilobits per second to more than ten times that.

New generations usually bring new base technologies, more network capacity for more data per user, and the potential for better voice quality, too.

4G phones are supposed to be even faster, but that's not always the case. There are so many technologies called "4G," and so many ways to implement them, that the term is almost meaningless. The International Telecommunications Union, a standards body, tried to issue requirements to call a network 4G but they were ignored by carriers, and eventually the ITU backed down. 4G technologies include HSPA+ 21/42, WiMAX, and LTE (although some consider LTE the only true 4G of that bunch, and some people say none of them are fast enough to qualify.)

Both 4G and 4G LTE refer to networking standards that are starting to replace the older 3G data networks used by wireless carriers, but they all use different technology. “4G” stands for Fourth Generation and “4G LTE” stands for Fourth Generation, Long Term Evolution.

4G LTE is the most advanced in terms of speed. The general claim is that 4G LTE networks can download data at speeds between 5 and 12 megabits per second — enough for smooth streaming for live video and better response times for online multiplayer games. (Data-transfer speeds from the network to mobile devices like smartphones and tablets vary due to factors like the carrier and coverage area.)

In comparison, the realistic download speeds for 4G networks can range anywhere from 3 to 8 megabits per second, depending on congestion, the wireless carrier and the specific technology the company has used for its data network. The older 3G networks can typically download data around 800 to 950 kilobits per second.

While 4G LTE speeds are impressive, there is a downside. 4G LTE networks are still under construction in many places and coverage is not available all over the country yet. Note that even the fastest wireless signal, 4G LTE, at 5 to 12 megabits per second can't match wi-fi running at 54 megabits per second and the new 802.11g standard calls for 108 megabits per second for this, so-called, Extreme-G or Super-G Wi-Fi networks. So your nearest Starbucks is still the hottest hot spot in town.

Of the four major U.S. wireless carriers — AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon Wireless — Verizon claims to have the largest 4G LTE network in the country, while AT&T says it has the largest 4G network; T-Mobile has made the same 4G claim. The Web sites for all the main carriers have coverage maps for the various parts of their cellular data networks, which you can check to see what service is available in your area.

Where Did All the Systems Engineers Go?

In the early days of computing when IBM was the King — we employed a role called "Systems Engineer." This person usually worked directly with the customer defining and designing the complete solution and recommending exactly what equipment — all IBM, of course — the customer would need to solve their particular business problems. These System Engineers or SEs were very experienced in putting together the needed components for a complete business solution. Back when the focus was much more on hardware rather than software, the SE was often the chief advocate for software and a solution architect.

As time went by, IBM tended to replace the SE with a CE or "Customer Engineer." They often didn't have the depth of knowledge of the original SEs, but then systems were becoming easier to combine and integrate … except where they were becoming harder to combine and integrate! Also, the solutions were shifting from pure IBM to hybrid combinations of hardware and particularly software, so the focus was less on an IBM representative  anyway. In any case, the "solution engineering" tended to move out of the field and into the plants and laboratories. That may have been the best thing to do from a business perspective, but many of my fellow IBMers would bemoan the loss of the SE in the field as a direct technical representative and information source. The CE was more of a repair person, and they did that job well, but they didn't replace the SE for technical competence and communication.

To this day, system engineers are involved in the creation and implementation of computer systems, and computer systems engineers are professionals who are actively engaged in the process of matching current technology with the needs of a company. As part of this task, the computer systems engineer engages in the evaluation and installation of software, hardware, and other types of support equipment into a workable network that supports a variety of functions within a corporation. The computer systems engineer may function as an employee of the company, a representative of a manufacture of computer components and hardware, or as an independent consultant. At IBM the role of SE has largely moved over to the consulting arm of the business.

In the field and the customer's location, a computer systems engineer is a representative of a company that creates and sells computer equipment. The systems engineer will work to match up the products offered by the firm with the needs of a client. In many cases, this will involve getting to know the corporate culture of the client. As part of that process, the computer systems engineer will seek to meet not only the expressed needs of the client, but also look for additional ways to make the installation of the computer systems more advantageous for the customer.

On the other hand, for the computer manufacturer, the more broad systems engineering is an interdisciplinary field of engineering focusing on how complex engineering projects should be designed and managed over their life cycles.. Issues such as reliability, logistics, coordination of different teams (requirement management) and different disciplines become more difficult when dealing with large, complex projects. Systems engineering deals with work-processes and tools to manage risks in such projects, and it overlaps with both technical and human-centered disciplines such as control engineering, industrial engineering, organizational studies, and project management.

In the computer design arena, systems engineers are often the ones that combine the various microprocessor and support chips into a functioning computer system. The providers of these chips, especially the processor chip, have made this seem easy by providing design notes and specific families of chips intended to be combined and a specified manner. For that reason, the role of systems engineer has been declining at the large personal computer manufacturer companies. I'm not sure about Apple, but I know Dell, IBM (who still makes plenty of computers, just not PCs anymore), HP, and probably others have not been hiring in this role for some time. I'm concerned what that means.

I've spoken before about my concerns at HP and how they have been in decline. There are, or at least there were, several HP plants here in Colorado and many former students and friends work there. Try to find an engineer under 30 at HP anymore. HP hasn’t hired any young engineers in years. The company has focused on retaining a core cadre of veteran engineers with deep expertise; many younger engineers fell victim to the various waves of layoffs over the last few years. The situation was similar at IBM and the former IBM Printing Division where I spent my last years in harness. When Ricoh first bought out IBM Printing Systems and named the division InfoPrint, there was a sincere and fruitful hiring wave that brought young talent into the business. What a refreshing change that was.

Another long time friend from HP and Microsoft fleshed out those observations over lunch recently. Only a few computer systems engineers are left at HP, he said. They work closely with HP’s contract manufacturing partners, typically in Asia, overseeing their work, he said. These systems engineers are approaching retirement age. When they are gone, there will be no one left to replace them, he added.

HP is not alone, but its situation is not exactly universal either. Recently, I was talking with a veteran IBM ThinkPad engineering manager who now works for China’s Lenovo, the smartphone and PC maker that acquired IBM’s notebook group years ago. I asked him about system design at Lenovo.

“We are unique in this area because we do our own design work and manufacture quite a bit of our systems, too,” he said. “Some systems we have made by suppliers, but even then we do the design work ourselves — that’s one of our key strengths,” he added. That's also one of the reasons I've become a recommend-er of Lenovo products

I’m sure IBM still has several systems design engineers creating those custom boards needed for its mainframes and Power servers. I don’t know if it actually makes any of the boards, but I doubt it.

Transfer of manufacturing to the Far East has also led to transfer of skills and employees. Many of my engineer friends have traveled to foreign countries only to train their replacements. They then return to empty factories and labs and are often laid off.

Recently, Applied Micro Circuits Corp. showed four dense, complex server boards it created as reference designs for its X-Gene ARM server SoC (Systems on a Chip). That means they are a complete roadmap of "how to" for computer design. It designed one of them with engineers at Dell, I suspect some of the old hands there that — like HP — don’t do much design anymore but tend to specify things and work with suppliers in Asia. I know that most HP computers today have ASUS motherboards. Well, then why buy HP? Go right to the source and buy ASUS.

I compare this to changes I've seen in the home construction industry. Experienced carpenters are being replaced by prefabricated components like roof trusses and automation like air hammers, and the level of skill is dropping along with the wages. I suppose you could write off much of this as progress and these prefabricated building components are actually key to higher quality and lower cost housing. But I worry about the loss of talent that is ultimately required … if for no other reason than when something doesn't go as intended.

There are young computer systems engineers in Silicon Valley. They just aren't at HP. They work for Facebook, designing what goes into its data centers. They're at Twitter or YouTube or a dozen other up and coming Internet companies. They have young systems engineering peers inside Amazon, Google and Microsoft—but not Dell, HP or IBM. Amazon is hiring, but what about HP and IBM?

So it goes.

The issue spans notebooks and desktops as well as servers. I know electronics design has become relatively straightforward for many Wintel computers over the last 20 years with more focus on industrial design and software than chip and board-level choices. But the winds are changing.

Waves of x86 and ARM SoCs from Intel, AMD and a whole range of new ARM licensees are coming down the pike between now and 2014. Right behind them is another wave of SoCs using 3-D stacking that will add a whole new level (pun intended) to the technical choices.

I think OEMs are going to have a painful need for systems engineers over the next several years. Good luck stealing them away from Google and Facebook!

Sadly the tendency to outsource, to become "lean and mean," and to rely heavily on contractors and temporary personnel, even for important engineering tasks further aggravates what I view as a very dangerous situation — dangerous for our technical leadership. Dangerous for our employment situation. Dangerous for our student populations that need work when they graduate.

I'm glad that certain areas of our high technology industry … Google, Facebook, Amazon, and several other companies that have only come into being in the last twenty years understand the need for new ideas … or maybe they are just doing so much hiring they have to hire the fresh out of school, inexperienced engineers, but I'm sad that the powerhouse companies that originally built this industry from IBM to Dell to HP seem to be relying more and more on their older engineers. I'm not arguing for age discrimination, but I can tell you based on the experience of Boeing in the '90s that over dependance on aging engineering staff can lead to a dangerous bubble when they all retire at once.

I loved working at IBM and I loved the people I worked with even more. But it was obvious to me that we were not replacing the old hands with fresh faces. It was a problem that I brought to management more than once and was always told, "We know. We know." OK, then better do something about it.