TrueCrypt Bug, or Hardware Failure

For the last couple of years I've been using an offsite backup method. And today the drive I use for that failed on me. My backup program reported that it could write (or read) data to the drive.

Investigation showed that several directories in the TrueCrypt volume were gone!!!!! Thankfully, the data on my Drobo and server were still pristine condition.

Disk Utility and several other tools reported problems with the drive (or at least the TrueCrypt part/volume). So I erased the drive, and re-initialized it. No reports of trouble while I did that. After that I recreated the TrueCrypt volume and restarted the backup to the drive (which takes forever).

All I can do now is wait for the backup to finish, and pray that the house doesn't catch on fire.....

After that a new case for SpinRite.

Photoshop CS4 and Snow Leopard

Photoshop CS4 was released as an Universal app (system requirements). So both PowerPC (PPC) and Intel support. Since it's an Universal app, you shouldn't need Rosetta on an Intel .
So upgrading to Snow Leopard shouldn't be a problem... Until you're gonna use the droplet functionality of Photoshop CS4. That piece of code still needs Rosetta to function.

So no way that CS4 is Universal. It's just another piece of buggy Adobe software.

What's next? An announcement that this crap won't be supported and that you can upgrade to the >1000USD Adobe CS5 suite next year?

PGP and Snow Leopard

It seems that the current versions of Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) are NOT compatible with Snow Leopard. Incompatibilty issues are are something that mostly occurs on mayor OS upgrades. The upgrades that overhauls the entire OS. But Snow Leopard is merely a fancy service/feature pack. So I have no idea why this would cripple PGP.

The blogposting is of August 27th. 1 (ONE) day before the release of Snow Leopard. And according to the post they are still in some sort of beta stage in the Snow Leopard compatibility development. This raises the following question(s);

• Why aren't they further in the development?
• Have they missed the news that Snow Leopard was on its way (announced somewhere last year)?
• Don't they have access to the developer tools (and associated beta's of the OS)?
• Were they asleep the last couple of months?

Instead of patching the 'old' v9.x of PGP they will release a new (commercial) version 10 which will be compatible with Snow Leopard. This shows the 'real' commitment of supporting the current customers. I'll try to make a list of applications which were incompatible with the release of Snow Leopard, but are pathed for FREE. Just to show that real service still exists.

I'll be keeping my eyes in the mean time on the MacGPG pages (the free implementation of the opensource part of PGP).
No more PGP for me. I'll be heading towards S/MIME and Truecrypt for the time being.

Windows Vista x64 and Fujitsu Hardware

No x64 SupportOké. I have this Fujitsu Lifebook E8310 from work (we're not allowed to use Apple hardware :( ). This piece of hardware was released with an OEM version of Vista Business, but work-related circumstances forced me to install Windows XP at first. Now about 1.5 years later I wanted to try the included Vista Business version, and since I have 4GB RAM I installed the x64 version. What's the use of the additional RAM otherwise?

B.t.w., you may see this as an addition to this posting about Windows 7.

Installing Vista Business x64 isn't the problem (so this is no rant against Microsoft), but trying to get every piece of (integrated) hardware to function properly is something completely different. Vista is on the market for ages (or so it seems), and still NO decent driver and application support for the x64 versions (example 1, 2, 3 of an endless list). What the f#ck is wrong with hardware (and software) developers? 64bit (client) computing is available since the release of Windows XP. Every new piece of WINTEL hardware released in the last two years has (multiple) 64bit cores or CPU's.

x64 Operating Systems mean that you have more memory at your disposal to do bigger (memory consuming) tasks. Windows-based 32bit systems can only address up to  3.2GB of memory.

As long as this will continue to stay this way, I'll continue to rant about this, and personally not buying (or advice) any more WinTel hardware (or software).

Apple Favors Own Products, or FileVaults Screws Up

Apple FileVaultSomething everyone would do I guess (the favoring part at least :) ). But Apple is doing this in a very peculiar way. When you run OSX with a ton of third-party applications you won't notice things, since everything runs as it should. But when you're going to use FileVault, things change. A lot....

FileVault is the way Apple secures your data. When turned on the OS creates a sparse iage of your userdata. So everything stored within your user directory is encrypted using AES-128.

The use of FileVault screws up certain system files. One of those is (or several for that matter) is used to store the default applications. Like FireFox for Internet instead of Safari. Every time you reboot your system the default application settings are read.
This weekend I also found out that at least one handy program also disagrees with FileVault. Little Snitch won't properly save it's registration info when you're using FileVault.

You know what the worst thing is? This BUG is present since Panther (OSX 10.3). I wonder if this is going to be fixed in Snow Leopard. To be honest, I doubt it. If they can't figure it out in 4 years, they probably never will.

As a security savvy nerd I want to use FileVault on my MacBook, but the problems with FileVault made me decide to uninstall this feature. Too bad that there are no other real alternatives. Truecrypt (or PGP) is nice, but it can't encrypt your hard disk (from which you boot) or even your user directory. Check Point seems to have software, but there's no way of buying it easily. So it seems that's it's mainly reserved for corporate environments.

UPDATE: w00t... They solved this annoying 'feature' Apple OS X 10.6 a.k.a. Snow Leopard. Way to go Apple. Although it being several OS releases/years too late!!!!

Adobe Lightroom Quirks

The reason for using Adobe Lightroom is mainly because of the tight integration with other Adobe products, and a little legacy from my Microsoft days. So I had no real reason to look at the competition (Apple Aperture).... Until now (I guess).

The biggest drawback is that you can't open multiple catalogs at the same time. Something like having multiple personal folders within Microsoft Outlook. You can open them, access the content and if you want you can detach it again to save resources.
So opening a catalog means that you can't access photo's in other catalogs.... Therefor I use one (large) catalog. Mainly because I can't be bothered with the whole exporting and importing scenario to move (or copy) images between catalogs.
By the way, I suggested such functionality to Adobe (along with some other improvements regarding the syncing of catalogs). Now let's hope that they will implement this in version 3.0

This feature is something Apple Aperture since version 1.0 (if I recall correctly), and I get the feeling that I'm near the how far I can push Adobe Lightroom.

For the last couple of days I get the strangest behaviour from Lightroom. Importing photo's normally means you can add tags, and select a way of storing them on the hard disk. Lately it seems that Lightroom is having a mind of its own. Photo's end up all over the place. Tags are getting lost.

These problems are most likely cause by two factors in my opinion;

1. A relatively large catalog which I browse a lot
2. A lot of processing power going to other applications while browsing/editing photo's

I can accept that Lightroom is getting slower with thousands of photo's, but it shouldn't get a mind of its own when my iMac is busy doing all sorts of things.

Apple Releases Safari 4.0.2

Apple released Safari v4.0.2. Besides the regular security fixes they also fixed the bug which made Rabobank Internet Banking 'go haywire'. So I could in theory move from Firefox to Safari.... In theory I said :).

Nik Color Efex Pro versus Topaz Adjust

For those who follow the photo's on my flickr account may notice that I do like HDR(like) post-processing on my images. I use Photomatix's Tonemapping functionality to create the basic HDR. After that I add (a lot of) drama to the picture by using Nik Color Efex Pro.

Nik Color Efex Pro has a plugin called Tonal Contrast. This plugin adds the detail/drama in the picture. Last weekend I ran into Topaz Adjust from Topaz Labs. This plugin is able to create the exact same drama in the picture. The difference is that Topaz costs only $49,99, while Color Efex Pro (with the Tonal Contrast filter option) costs $299,95 (but you also get a lot more filters for that price).

The following pictures are the result of either Nik Color Efex Pro Tonal Contrast filter or Topaz adjust. The differences are minimal if you ask me.

Nik Color Efex Pro Tonal Contrast Post HDR Processing Topaz Adjust Post HDR ProcessingSo if your looking for HDR-like drama in your photo's you might wanna consider Topaz Adjust. It's relatively cheap compared to Color Efex Pro, but you get 52 filters for that price (instead of one filter with several presets).