Telepresence Or "How To Be In More Than One Place At A One Time"

Monday 29th December 2008

Yes, it is possible (well, virtually possible anyway!)

The word "Telepresence" is derived from the Greek root "Tele", meaning "Far off" or "Distant".  This same Greek root, when partnered with the root derived from the Latin verb "Video", meaning "To see", is to make up the word "Television".  Literally, this can be taken to mean "Seeing at a distance", which accurately describes what it does.

Television is a unidirectional medium, in that the receiving apparatus has no means of interacting with the transmitter.  Indeed, the television transmitter has no knowledge of whether or not there is even a single active receiver, let alone how many of them or where they may be located.  

By contrast, telepresence can be thought of as meaning "Giving the appearance of being in one location, whilst actually being in an entirely different one".  In addition, it is bidirectional, in that the all of the devices functioning as transmitters also function as receivers and each device is fully aware of all the others.

In its simplest, most debased incarnation as videoconferencing, telepresence is in common use, especially amongst children and young people.  Equipped with a PC, a cheap webcam, a headset and a broadband line, they commonly use simple, free software such as MSN to make video calls to each other.  Of course, it could be said that all of us, whether children or adults, use telepresence whenever we make an ordinary voice telephone call.  After all, human beings were holding face-to-face conversations with each other long before Alexander Graham Bell ushered in the age of the telephone with his famous words 'Mr. Watson - come here, I want to see you!' on 10 March 1876.  As a result, we usually find it much easier to hold a telephone conversation when we imagine that we are physically in front of the person on the other end.  This is arguably telepresence, but kept strictly within the confines of our own heads.

"Real" telepresence goes considerably further than mere videoconferencing, aiming to foster the illusion that the participants really are all physically in the same room together,just as if they were participating in a real, face-to-face meeting.  This illusion is achieved by using high-definition cameras. microphones, screens and spatial audio.  As might be expected, Cisco are perfectly suited to providing all of the expensive, high-specification communications hardware necessary, such as routers, switches etc.  However, this is only the beginning.  Cisco has now begun installing telepresence suites in selected hotels of the Taj Group across Britain, the United States and India.  By overseeing every installation itself, Cisco can ensure that each one is identical, right down to the decor.  The intention is to provide participants with a level of illusion such that they will regard telepresence as an valid alternative to attending future meetings "in person", especially when air travel is required.  Although the cost of hiring the suites is typically up to about £520 per hour, this rapidly becomes insignificant when the savings in air fares and travel time are taken into account.  As a further advantage, consider the time differences between, say, the United States and Britain.  For an ordinary telephone call, these differences can be somewhat inconvenient and antisocial, but rarely cause severe disruption to normal business activities.  The situation is different when a traditional, "face to face" meeting, at which one or more of the participants will be travelling from across the other side of the Atlantic, is being planned.  Now the effects of "jet lag" must be taken into consideration, both before and after the meeting itself.  However, when the same meeting is conducted by telepresence, there is no such effect, with the associated benefits to the well-being of the participants.

So You Thought The Browser Wars Were Over? They Are, When You Back The Clear Winner!

Monday 22nd December 2008

When you can enjoy surfing the Internet with a browser as good as Firefox3, why stick with Internet Explorer 7?

For the first time in several years, Windows users really can enjoy the luxury of being able to choose their browser.  In the early days of the World Wide Web, by far the most popular browser was Netscape Communicator.  It may seem strange now, but in those far-off days (actually, only about 15 years ago), the concept of a "free" browser was unimaginable and users had to pay for their chosen browser.  After initially deriding the Web as an irrelevant, passing fad, Microsoft correctly realised that not only was it here to stay but that it could well become an integral part of many areas of daily life.  As on many other occasions, Microsoft's business acumen came to the fore and the then-unbelievable decision was made to include a free browser with the Windows95 "Plus Pack" add-on.  This was the beginning of the end for Netscape Navigator.  For several years, the two combatants continued slugging it out, but there was only ever going to be one winner.  Eventually, Internet Explorer became as dominant as was once Netscape Navigator.

However, this is by no means the end of the story.

Step forward and take a bow, the Open Source movement!  After the demise of Netscape Navigator, the Mozilla Foundation created a new browser from scratch using the Gecko rendering engine. This was "open-source", which meant that anyone who was so inclined could obtain the source code and potentially even modify it, provided that they operated within the terms of the GPL licence. 

The Mozilla Foundation's Firefox browser is available in versions for many different operating systems, all having as similar a look-and-feel as is reasonably possible.  The versions for the various flavours of Unix and Linux, for example, are practically indistinguishable from the Windows version, while the version for the Mac is only slightly different.  Certainly, anyone familiar with Firefox on one operating system will have no difficulty whatsoever in using it on any other operating system.  

In November 2008, Firefox was credited with achieving a 20% share of the browser marketplace.  Those who have never tried it usually cannot understand why anyone on their right mind would even think about using anything other than Internet Explorer - until they try it for themselves.  Apart from being quicker and much safer than Internet Explorer, Firefox boasts a vast array of add-ons, all of which are open-source like Firefox itself and available for free download.  Not everyone finds them all of them useful, but there really is "something for everyone", even if it is only the nifty little world clock which will display the current time in your chosen locations around the world.

One of the most unexpected, although very welcome, features of Firefox is that installing it is both quick and painless.  Furthermore, it does not even need a reboot afterwards.  Users of Internet Explorer tend to find this somewhat of a surprise, but it really is the case. 

At one time, "security" was a word more commonly associated with such matters as savings, banks and even prisons.  Nowadays, it is an essential factor to be considered when browsing the Internet.  So-called "Drive-by" exploits are no longer unusual and browsers must be able to resist them.  Sadly for many unwary surfers, such an exploit has just been carried out against Internet Explorer 7, with the aim of infecting the user's PC with a "trojan horse" virus.  To its credit, Microsoft rapidly released a critical-level update, which everyone should have installed by now.  Anyone who has not installed it should go to the Microsoft website and do so at once.  As always seems to be the case, this update takes quite a time to download, followed by an even longer wait whilst it is installed.  The final insult for the user is that the PC must then be rebooted.  Firefox users, on the other hand, need not worry about this exploit, because it does not affect Firefox at all. 

Both Firefox and Internet Explorer are necessarily subject to regular updates, but the contrast between Firefox and Internet Explorer could hardly be more marked.  The most recent update to Internet Explorer requires, as usual, that the PC be rebooted, even after the seemingly endless time taken to download and install the update itself.  Firefox updates are much smaller, so they download and install much more quickly.  In additoin, they do not require the PC to be rebooted.  Firefox is able to perform this seemingly miraculous feat because, unlike poor old Internet Explorer, it is not an intimate part of the Windows operating system.

Almost as good as the ease-of-use features are the choices available for users to modify Firefox's behaviour to suit their personal tastes.  For example, do you want Firefox to delete all cookies when you exit, except for specified sites?  No problem.  Do you want Firefox to remember only certain usernames and passwords, but not any others?  Once again, no problem.  How many days' browsing history would you like Firefox to remember?  You may specify any number you like, from zero upwards.

Tempted to try Firefox?  You should be!  All you have to do is download it from http://www.getfirefox.com, install it and start enjoying the benefits.  Installing Firefox will not interefere with Internet Explorer, or anything else for that matter and the download is only a lightweight 7MB, which takes hardly any time on a broadband connection.

Computer Games - Do They Represent A Real Threat To Our Society, Or Are They Merely Entertainment For The Socially Challenged?

Monday 15th December 2008

Few would argue that such games bring financial benefit to the software houses who write them and the retailers who sell them. However, what real value do they offer to anyone else?

Computer games are often derided as being a total waste of time or, worse, encouraging violent and even criminal behaviour.  While understandable, this is not entirely the case.  Some games are, indeed, violent in the extreme.  In the most excessive cases, this may result in the title being banned outright by the Authorities.  Whether or not on-screen violence in computer games has any significant influence on real-life behaviour is often a matter of heated debate. 

Aside from games such as the "Grand Theft Auto" series, in which the main object appears to be to engage in the greatest possible degree of violence, there are many others which require a considerable intellectual effort from the players.  Typically, these are "simulations" of one type or another.  Some, such as Sid Meyer's Civilisation series, are targeted mainly at adults, while the eponymous "The Sims" is more suitable for children and young people.  They all share the common factor that the player has to create, develop and maintain some form of social group, whether large or small, along with its interactions with other groups. Collectively, these are often referred to as "God sims".

As well as games whose primary purpose is entertainment, there are also genuinely educational titles.  One of the techniques used by the best school teachers is to make learning fun, which is the same strategy as adopted by ganes such as "Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing".  In addition, titles are available for older adults who may be unfamiliar with the use of a mouse or even the Internet.  These "Silver Surfers" use these titles as a way to build their confidence with equipment which was barely even within the realm of science-fiction when they were young.

The most avid, hardcore gamers demand that their games provide them with the most realistic and most immersive experience possible. As a result, they tend to spur on the hardware manufacturers to build ever faster processors and the software designers to create ever more photo-realistic games.  Although such equipment is very expensive indeed when it is first released, the prices fall rapidly and everyone enjoys the benefit.

In the final analysis, of course, the well-known adage first propounded by J M Barrie in his stage play "The Admirable Crichton" applies - "Circumstances alter cases".  This adage is no less true now than it was when the play was first produced at the Duke of York's Theatre in London, back in 1902.

Cookies - But Not The Ones We Eat...!

Monday 8th December 2008

So what are they and why would we want them?

One of the main problems with the modern Internet is the way in which it has been developed. There is an old joke about the man who is travelling in a part of the country with which he is not familiar.  Having unfortunately become hopelessly lost, he asks a passer-by for directions to his destination, only to be told "Well, sir, if I were you, I would not be starting from here!".  The modern Internet is in a somewhat similar situation, having been developed from the US military ARPANET network which was first built at the height of the Cold War.  This was designed to enable military computers to communicate with each other even in the event of the massive degradation which would arise in the event of an outbreak of nuclear war.  It had no concept of "websites" - indeed, it would be several years before Tim Berners-Lee invented the "World-Wide Web" as we now know it. 

One of the consequences of the way in which the Internet was developed is that it is "stateless".  This basically means that, whenever a server receives a request for a web page from a browser, that server is unable to identify the client uniquely.  This makes security well-nigh impossible, as well as making it difficult for owners of websites to track visitors' browsing patterns and paths through their sites.

Nowadays, most people tend to use Microsoft's "Internet Explorer".  However, this has not always been the case and the first browser to achieve a dominant position was the non-Microsoft browser "Netscape".  Netscape quickly recognised the problem with statelessness and invented the concept of "cookies".  These are tiny text files which the are served by the website along with the page requested by the user's browser and are then stored on the user's PC.  The browser can then submit their contents back to the website as a way of establishing the continuation of a session.  This technique is used for a number of purposes, only some of which are either morally or ethically sound.   

"Beneficial" cookies are used, for example, to enable a user to log in to a site and then to remain logged in while he accesses other pages on that site.  Such "session" cookies are normally deleted automatically when the user leaves the site, but can be made permanent by the site inviting the user to click the "Remember me on this site" button.  The same technique is often employed to remember user preferences throughout a site.

Unfortunately, cookies are often also used for dubious purposes.  Typically, these are "tracking" cookies, which sites send down clandestinely.  such cookies are used to track the hapless user across multiple sites in order to serve up appropriate advertising, which may take the form of banners or pop-up windows.  Since such cookies are not normally deleted automatically, they are especially popular with the scumware fraternity.  The resulting advertising material is not merely annoying, as it also consumes bandwidth while it is being downloaded.

Although anti-scumware applications, for example AdAware2008 and SpybotS&D, will detect and delete all types of cookies, a far better strategy is to use a browser which will respect the user's privacy and can be configured to delete any required types of cookies automatically on exit.  Such a browser is Firefox, from the Mozilla Foundation, which offers a number of additional benefits over Internet Explorer.  It is quicker, easier to use and more configurable to the user's personal tastes.  In addition, it is much less prone to attacks by malicious websites, it is open-source and available for free download from http://www.mozilla.com.  The final bonus is that its regular updates are quick and easy to instal.  When you could be enjoying your surfing with a browser as good as Firefox, why stay with Internet Explorer?