Technology

Windows has entered a new era

The decade—indeed, the century—began with Windows 2000, which I consider the first great version of the operating system. XP was the version that brought widespread success, and people just seem to refuse to upgrade; even today, almost three quarters of the computers on the net are on XP.

Despite the dismal failure of Windows Vista, it too brought change, which was followed by the enhancements of Windows 7. Compare my desktop today to the ugly screens of a decade ago:

Apple deserves an honourable mention for the ground-breaking work they’ve done on the Mac, elevating it to a newly trendy status.

Portable media players have completely changed

A decade ago, CD players and tape-based Walkmans were still the norm for ‘portable’ audio players. The iPod, launched in 2001, entirely changed the game. (I suppose this and the iPhone were the “comeback of the decade”.) It was no longer a device that played removable media. That was followed by thousands of other portable media players, to which the public generally refers inaccurately as “MP3 players”, reflecting the popularity of the 15-year-old MP3 format that has also been notorious for illegal file sharing (see below).

Cell phones and mobile devices have become ubiquitous

These devices used to be ugly, huge and heavy objects. As we move into 2010, cell phones have become more compact (usually this means thinner and lighter) and more powerful.

In China, about 739 million people have cell phones; that’s more than there are Internet users in China (which is about 360 million).

Mobile devices have become truly powerful. The iPhone, purportedly the most popular cell phone of 2009, is one of the biggest platforms for software development. And it has a touch screen. RIM’s BlackBerry, initially launched in 1999, is the most popular smartphone among business users.

Ordinary people begin to embrace ultra-portable netbooks for lightweight computing. The move to mobile is probably the most noticeable trend in end-user gadgetry in this decade.

Illegal file sharing has emerged

I don’t personally think of torrenting itself as a major problem, and it’s difficult to sympathize with big companies when the RIAA is being stupid. At the same time, it’s pretty easy to see how having hundreds of movies, TV shows and music albums distributed through torrents can take away from earnings for content producers. (Some dispute this and argue that those who pirate movies and TV shows are those who will purchase related memorabilia or boxed sets.)

In any case, it is virtually undisputed that new technologies have made distribution of such content much easier. In the previous decade, pretty much everyone was on dial-up Internet and only the students at universities with blazing connections were able to do it (think about the controversial Napster).

The best known site for illegal content

YouTube happened

YouTube and hundreds of other video sites have revolutionized the way we watch video. What used to be distributed on tapes and discs has moved onto the Internet in a way that allows ordinary folks—not videophiles or geeks—to share their multimedia with the world.

YouTube is also the icon of the so-called Web 2.0, which is oriented on user-generated content. (Flickr deserves an honourable mention for high quality pictures, just like Vimeo for high class videos.) It has made it possible for teens with crazy personalities and high-pitched edited voices, artists who post music videos, and crazy dancers who travel the world to reach out to a vast audience. Above all, it’s a legitimate new form of entertainment.

Following the success of online video, major content producers began to license music for online distribution (think Pandora or Last.fm, not to mention Internet radio) as well as movies and TV shows (think Hulu).

Click here to view the embedded video.

Open source projects have become worthy challengers

More than a decade ago, in 1996, the Apache HTTP server became the most popular web server in use; today it has surpassed 100 million web sites served.

Mozilla Firefox, having risen out of the ashes of the Netscape browser, although not the most widely used browser in the world (it’s 2nd), is apparently used by 32% of the market analyzed by StatCounter.

While I still use Microsoft Office, OpenOffice.org is also a notable alternative to the proprietary and dominant office suite, especially on non-Windows operating systems.

And then there are the programs used by geeks, like the Eclipse IDE or Aptana Studio, that are depended upon. (For all of you multimedia geeks, there are open source programs that do the job much better than their closed source counterparts; think about Handbrake, VLC…)

Businesses can now also depend on open source projects like Sugar CRM that build their revenue model around support and premium features.

News has moved onto the Web

My primary news source  now is the Web. Google News is one of my frequently visited sites, as it is a fantastic aggregator of headlines. I subscribe to e-mail summaries from the Toronto Star and breaking news alerts from the New York Times. ArsTechnica and TechCrunch are my sources for technology-related news, and occasionally Mashable and Neowin. Those pesky short links in the tweets of people I follow also make for engaging news articles.

Wikipedia happened

At the beginning of this decade, I was researching in books and print encyclopedias. The conventional wisdom today of “just Google it” didn’t work so well then. And certainly there wasn’t a Wikipedia for the wealth of human knowledge that it now contains.

Today, I can near-instantly read up on the history of Wal-Mart or read up on the Beslan school hostage crisis and its media coverage. If I truly need it, Wikipedia connects with Wikisource, the free library and Wikibooks where I can read Anna Karenina online (and I wouldn’t, because Constance Garnett’s translations are really lacking).

It’s truly amazing that the sum of all human knowledge can be collaboratively archived and updated through the likes of Wikipedia. Perhaps they need your support this holiday season!

What do you think? Did I miss out on something big that happened in this decade in the world of tech? Write a comment!

(I did, however, intentionally exclude social networking—i.e. Facebook—because I don’t think it’s been revolutionary in any major way. Sure, it has connected people in new ways, but it’s still relatively fresh and more time is needed to see where it goes. Similarly, I omitted touch because it hasn’t entirely caught on yet; tablet PCs were a dismal failure a few years ago and I haven’t yet seen their widespread success. Furthermore, I omitted cloud computing because it doesn’t directly affect a large number of people. Feel free to disagree with me in the comments.)

Worldly Matters

I think September 11, 2001 marked the start of a new era of warfare and international affairs. The terrorist attacks, inasmuch as they have been abused to justify ill-advised battles, did shock the world.

I recommend you head over to the Big Picture where you’ll be dazzled by splendid photos of this decade, including commentaries on the World Trade Center attacks and war. And dozens of other things like natural disasters (remember Katrina, or the Sichuan earthquake?), the Beijing Olympics, and terrorist attacks in London.

2009 has been a fantastic year. I look forward to the future.

Happy holidays and all the best in 2010!

Click here to view the embedded video.

I watched the spectacular opening ceremony for the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing this morning. It was simply amazing.

Exceptional fireworks, amazingly coordinated dancers and artists (thousands of them!), excellent majestic music, and fabulous high-tech shows. Amazing!

Since I’ve categorized this under “Graphic Matters”, I might as well show you some pictures.

And the lighting of the cauldron:

Spectacular, isn’t it?

The New York Times has more.

Let’s start with something about the environment:

Andy the Engineer: “China’s success has been built on the back of the environment – they have ruined beautiful rivers, strip mined scenic mountains and poured every type of vile and disgusting exhaust you can imagine into the air – and the Olympic Games will broadcast this to the world.”

Let’s word this more accurately and less xenophobically, shall we? It is the success of the WESTERN WORLD (including Canada — we have our fair share of this blame) that has been built on the back of China’s environment. And India’s. And Taiwan’s. And Japan’s. And … well, basically every early-industrial nation with cheap labour.

I’m fed up with people whose entire wealth is based on the use and abuse of people and resources in other countries who then turn around and act as if they are morally superior to those same exploited people. Grow up.

- MichaelWH

See what they have to say after the jump.

More on the environment:

Beijing reminded me of LA a few years ago. People are having joyful picnic because it was a brighter day than any other normal days. When I went to the top of Griffin Park and saw the whole LA sky filled with dark smog. Welcome to the real world of pollution. Beijing is not the only one. Toronto is getting there too.

- Opinioner (Dartmouth, NS)

Another comment on the same article:

China is still fighting to get out of poverty.

Globally, the share of people living on a dollar (US) a day or less plummeted from 40% in 1981 to 18% in 2004. China’s growth alone has lifted more than 400 million people out of poverty. These numbers are from Freed Zakaria’s recent book “The Post-American World”.

No other nation in the world in the entire human history has done so much good in such short a period.

- flu888 (Mississauga, ON)

I think I’m starting to show my bias. So let’s read some comments from those who do nothing other than criticize.

The smog in Beijing is the tip of the iceberg. Although still not the polluters of the United States, they are on an accelerated path to capture the crown as the world’s worst polluters. Remember, at 1.3 billion people, once technology and wealth spread around the country, they will have 4 times as many people polluting as the US. And because they are still in many ways a developing nation, environmental controls will be the least of their concerns, they are still just trying to catch up. They all want what every american [sic] has, and will take the short cuts [sic] to get there. Green actions are only taken in the countries that can afford them and are now self conscious of their own pollution. China is neither[.]

- Klaatu (Windsor, ON)

And how about the topic of censorship?

I don’t understand why the Chinese government block Fa Lun Gong’s webiste. We Chinese living overseas have access to their information, but who believes what they say? Nobody. I think the government should be more self-confident.

- JackCBC (Toronto, ON)

Okay. Some people have strange things to say, too.

Is it just me or does the PEW survey from last week says [sic] more than these journalists? If you don’t remember, the survey concluded Chinese are the most confident in their government’s job than any other country in the world, with the second being Australia. Who are some of the least confident? Britain, France and US.

Put yourself in Chinese shoes, you are confident in your goverment [sic] and optimstic [sic] about the future, but those people from overseas who are extremly [sic] unhappy with their own country’s direction and goverment [sic] are trying to tell you your goverment [sic] should be more like them. Will you think “hey, good idea” or “what a bunch of hypocritical self-centered bigots”?

- iewgnem (Toronto, ON)

All comments are used under the Fair Dealing doctrine.

After reading all of these comments, it’s only right for you to contribute your thoughts. Navigate to the CBC articles (following the links at the beginning of this post) to comment there or send us your thoughts by commenting on this post.

I am not in support of any efforts to politicize the Games, and am especially opposed to groups such as Reporters sans frontières (Reporters Without Borders) (how could they call themselves reporters?!?!) who are funded and operated in order to specifically destabilize foreign governments.

Before we continue: I’m not a journalist, the Timelog isn’t a news agency or newspaper, and it has never been my intention to give breaking-news coverage of current events. Look to more reliable sources for that news (hopefully not CNN), and come here for my take. Like I’ve previously stated, I’m not always neutral.

A few days ago, Sichuan province in China suffered a devastating earthquake measuring 8.0 on the Richter scale that could be felt throughout a large portion of China. People as far as Beijing and Taipei could feel the ground shaking. (My relatives in Northeast China did not.)

Approximately 32500 people have now died.

A short while ago, I was watching a memorial program hosted on CCTV4, the media channel for overseas Chinese people. It was difficult not to relate emotionally to the event.

But that program demonstrated to me the strength of China and its peoples. Know the following:

• More than 130000 rescue workers have been deployed. Not to mention the hundreds of helicopters, planes, and other military equipment used to get them there. Or the life sensing equipment that has allowed them to rescue and treat as many as 55000 people.
• Donations have at least exceeded $1.3 billion USD. At the end of the program, a large number of representatives from various companies were on stage, each carrying a red card with their donation amounts. Some of those representatives stood for individual donors. In total, the donations showcased on the program exceeded 6 billion yuan.
• Students from the disaster-stricken areas will find it less difficult to get a good education. The minimum marks will be lowered to allow more students to qualify, and certain donors have taken on the burden of paying for these students’ university education.

We must applaud their rescue efforts.

The armed forces had pulled 21,566 people both dead and alive from the debris, treated 34,051 injured people, transferred 205,370 people to safety, airdropped 307 tons of relief supplies and repaired 557 kilometers of damaged roads.

Compare that with the relief efforts following Hurricane Katrina.

Anyhow:

These rescuers are as heroic, if not more, than those American volunteers who helped out in the aftermath of September 11. Yet, only 3000 people died in those two towers. This natural disaster has impacted a large portion of China, larger than many European countries.

One of the donors near the end of the program said something that can be translated roughly to the following:

Any loss, if divided by 1.3 billion, is bearable.
Any contribution, if multiplied by 1.3 billion, is an ocean of love.

Donate. A simple word. My family has already contributed to the Canadian Red Cross, though that has left us wondering if we chose the right place to contribute. CCTV4 has provided account numbers for wire transfers, and we feel that might have been a better place.

If every person of Chinese descent contributed an amount, we can all ensure a better future for the survivors of the quake. After all, we amount to one-fifth of the world’s population. (My next post will be about Chinese pride. Maybe a few graphics.)

What would products cost if the US banned trade with China as part of “sanctions”? What would be the economic impact? How would consumers respond, or more importantly, how would 2+ billion Chinese people react?

Consider these questions, and get back to me (using the comments feature).

A pro-China demonstration on Parliament Hill on Sunday attracted about 5,000 Chinese-Canadians from Ottawa, Montreal and Toronto eager to show support for the troubled Beijing Olympics.

The planning of this event had been orchestrated online, facilitated by thousands of willing volunteers who wanted to show their support for China. There were some hiccups with the chartering of buses, when (allegedly) an opposing entity threatened the busing company. However, sources state that a Chinese-Canadian businessman arranged (out of his own pockets) for more than 30 buses to transport demonstrators and the elderly to Parliament Hill.

This event is an instance of powerful Chinese patriotism which has brought thousands together against “media distortion” and attempts to disrupt China’s hosting of the Olympics.

A few hours ago, approximately 5000 protestors also gathered in Australia for the same cause.

Isn’t it strange, though, that news of these events aren’t on the media… aren’t found on the homepage of Google News (the last time I checked)… aren’t even mentioned?

Interestingly, Jack Cafferty (whom I had respected previously) on CNN made a comment that “…they (Chinese) are basically the same bunch goons and thugs they have been in the past fifty years.” Absolutely intolerable!

Watch him make his offensive comment:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Or, you can download a H.264 QuickTime movie.

Click here to view the embedded video.

You can download the above clip in an MP4 format (H.264 and AAC) suitable for the iPod or downloading.

Here’s something about media bias:

Click here to view the embedded video.

And, of course, the follow-up to the above video:

Click here to view the embedded video.

And more of the Tibetan violence!

Click here to view the embedded video.

Here’s an example of someone who is strongly biased against China, and who has uploaded more than 120 videos, many of which are anti-China. (Well, anything that is against the government of China is anti-China.) Interestingly, a lot of this user’s uploads violate copyright (as do many videos on YouTube) and do not qualify for fair use, yet are not being removed. (You’d think that if someone uploaded more than 120 copyrighted video clips, they’d be flagged or something.)

On March 29, 2008, several hundred Chinese students and Chinese patriots gathered in the Yonge-Dundas Square in downtown Toronto for a pro-China rally in support of their homeland. Unsurprisingly, regardless of how peaceful this rally was, it was depicted as a conflicting protest by some biased media. Furthermore, a day later (today), few if any major television stations even discuss it.

Yet, a few days prior, another group of several hundred Tibetans organized a “protest march”, walking around the streets of Toronto, and this protest managed to get on the air and stay there. Unsurprisingly, Western media appears to be (and is) pro-Tibetan.

Allow me to first quote a paragraph from an article titled “Over 1,000 Tibetans Hold Protest March in Toronto“:

“Toronto, Canada (AHN) – Over a thousand people, led by Buddhist monks, held a rally at Canada’s capital city (?) Monday to call for freedom for Tibet. To express their strong emotions over the killing of hundreds of their countrymen back home, the Toronto-based Tibetans laid down on the streets, waved Tibetan flags and photos of victims of violence in Lhasa and wore Free Tibet sweaters.”

Maybe the fact that these sorts of protests around the world are led by monks supports China’s claim that the Dalai Lama is orchestrating the riots.

I would then question whether the author of this article knows what the capital of Canada is.

Let me quote some (yes, these are only one side of the story) comments on the CTV web site:

“As a [C]anadian I totally support ‘peaceful’ protest in Tibet, but those violent demonstrators killed innocent people, burning the stores and looting. Those kind of demonstrators should be treated same as terrorists like 9.11 in New York City. I hope that our gover[n]ment should not send any “Tibet statement” to encourage those situation and supports the declared policy of the Chinese government to protect the lives and property of its citizens from violent demonstrators with minimum use of force. We can’t put double standard for the same violent behaviour.” -Peter Kary

–

“If you ask any chinese in Canada, I think most of us will support the chinese government this time. We are coming from China, we all know what is happening in China and the west. We watch all the news reported from China, Hong Kong and the west.

“If you ask the people inside Tibet, over 90% will support one China. The West now only focus on the 10% of Tibetans who want Independence. There are 56 nations in China, Tibet is one of the 56 nations, we all want One China.

“We all sure that Dala Lama is a liar this time.

“We are Not supporting ‘China 1989′, but we ALL support ‘China 2008′.” -A group of people from Hong Kong living in Toronto

–

“Surprisingly the result of ‘Tibet incidence’ is not about Tibet. It has polarized the opinion of Chinese and Westerners. The Chinese (in China and overseas) generally believes that the West is trying to tarnish China’s image. The West is trying to force its opinion on China and Chinese people.” -lianwee

–

“Let’s put away our daggers for China or our reverence for the Dalai Lama and try to find out what the truth is for a moment. In an article titled ‘Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth’ by Michael Parenti, it notes that Tibet was ‘a despotic retrograde theocracy of serfdom and poverty, so damaging to the human spirit, where vast wealth was accumulated by a favored few who lived high and mighty off the blood, sweat, and tears of the many.’” -brian

–

“Do any of you have any slight idea what the old Tibet looked like before 1950? Do any of you know slightly about Chinese and Tibetan history? When Tibet came part of China? … I respect Dalai Lama and I’m amazed on how he’s transformed himself from a Lama to a modern spiritual figure with a huge influence to Tibetans and the world.

I doubt he personally organized the world-wise demonstrations on March 10th followed by the riot. But they were clearly organized events. The problem was that when the riot started to broke out on March 14 in Lhasa, banks, schools and Han people owned stores were either smashed, or burned down. Some of burned properties with people inside! The victims burned to death not only have Hans, but also Tibetan shop clerks. Han people were beaten in the street; a woman’s ear was cut off by a rioter. These were no longer peaceful demonstrations. There are the crimes committed to ordinary citizens. Any country has law and order, these kind of riot have to be stopped. People committed crime will have to face the justice.” -Gordon

–

“Brook, come on, when [was] Tibet a nation or was a country? Tibet was already part of China in Yuan Dynasty and Qing Dynasty, so in recent hundreds years, Tibet has been always part of China. [H]ow much do you really know about the Dalai Lama other than his
displayed charm? It is worth checking out an article by Micheal Backman on ‘Behind Dalai Lama’s holy cloak’.” -AndyToronto

–

“… I’m sorry to say not all monks are true and honest as we like to think them. ‘True’ monks don’t promote their supporters to go around killing innocent people by setting everything on fire and say its a ‘peaceful’ protest.” -Ann

Then, allow me to talk about the real event on March 29. The students here in Toronto decided that they had had enough of the twisted version of events portrayed by Western media, and they wanted to organize a peaceful rally for support.

Patriotic music, Chinese & Canadian flags, chants of “One China!”… totally peaceful and conflict-free until a group of Tibetans decided to organize an anti-protest.

Those Tibetans are the same ones who claim that the students who participated in the rally “are visa students… who are being controlled by the Chinese Consulate…”

What can we conclude? Well, we can definitely see that the methods used by both sides correspond with their ideals.

• The Tibetan monks incite instability and doubt.
• The Chinese students in Canada promoted unity and peace.

The Chinese students didn’t burn down shops, cutting the ears of women, looting stores and businesses, or rioting. They wanted to show unity. At the same time, many other similar rallies are occurring all around North America, where the Chinese population is high.

The message is clear: “Beijing 2008… One World, One Dream… One China.”

It’s not my belief that the situation in Tibet demonstrates any violations of human rights. The right to peaceful assembly was not denied, for those who were protesting were violent, as even Tibet’s government-in-exile would admit. Smashing in windows and attacking innocent bystanders who happen to be non-Tibetan Chinese citizens does not constitute peaceful assembly.

And, if no such right were denied, then China’s military & police being sent in is the same as what any other nation would have done to suppress a dangerous riot.

As the BBC’s article notes, protesters were filmed burning the Chinese flag near Hezuo. Consider the following: flag-burning may be a protected right in some countries, like the United States, but cracking down on those who burn the national flag in China does not violate any rights, because flag-burning is NOT a given or human right.

Some believe that the right to free speech has been violated. Consider the following: the right to free speech may be a human right, according to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but the debate about free speech continues today, even in North America. How far does free speech go? Is such a right protected even when it injures or harms others? Furthermore, does freedom of speech include the violence that went along with the protests in Tibet?

Perhaps, just perhaps, those protesters who were suppressed in Lhasa weren’t simply targeted for their message, but rather for their means of getting out their message.

Of course, then we must consider China’s important law that one may not threaten the stability of the nation. Surely, in democratic countries, the stability of the nation is always threatened, particularly when lobbyists or political parties attempt to sabotage the system in one way or another. Democratic countries cannot understand the need for such a law. Yet, China is Communist, and to maintain such a system, a nation’s stability is vital. Other countries who believe that this law should not exist are those who want to apply their own democratic system to China. As a sovereign government, Beijing has the power to justifiably create such a law.

We must then consider whether Tibet is a part of China. Many countries do not see it as such. If this is the case, why do they claim that China’s government is causing harm on its people? If Tibet is not part of China, how can the Chinese government be harming its own people?

Yet, if Tibet is considered a part of China, the argument that the government is harming its own people could be justified. However, nevertheless remember that violent protests which threaten the stability of China are illegal in China, and Tibetan protesters (who are part of China for the purposes of this argument) have violated the law. If they do violate the law, then Beijing has every right to go and control the situation in order to maintain the strength of the government.

Nancy Pelosi and others are hypocritical when they attack China’s human rights record. Every nation has had human rights issues in their past. The United States is no exception, and their violations continue today, particularly with Guantanamo Bay and the prison + detention camp there. For instance, most of the prisoners at the detention camp are not American citizens, were not on American soil when they committed the acts they are accused of, and many may have been protecting their homeland from an invasion. The American military has seized them, removed them without consent from their homeland, and placed them on American soil (and even that is debated) to be tried under American laws or American military laws. Additionally, of the 355 prisoners currently detained there, apparently only 60-80 will be put on trial, leaving 270+ prisoners held without charge. And what about the alleged & the proven mistreatment there? Or torture?

Perhaps, if China’s claim that the Dalai Lama instigated the violence is true, then it’s possible (isn’t it?) that the Tibetan protesters did what they did not because they felt it would impact how Beijing dealt with it, but because they knew it would trigger the deployment of military & police, some deaths, and international attention. If international attention was what they wanted, they’ve certainly been successful at getting it. If the rest of the world will support protesters who have violated not only the laws in China, but also what the laws would be in other countries (violent riots, destruction of personal property), then they are interfering unnecessarily in China’s internal matters and supporting the use of violence to achieve results.

In any case, regardless of whether the Tibetan claims are valid, the ends don’t justify the means.