Tag: Annoying

I just read that Tech Crunch had a post showing the Motorola Droid Razr HD pictures. Most of the specs aren’t something that we haven’t seen already, but what did catch my eye was the battery size. The rumor is that it will have a 3,300mAh battery! Compare that to the 2,100mAh battery that the current Samsung Galaxy S3 has.

According to this post if the S3 with it’s screen set to 50% brightness lasts about 8h:26m then this phone should last about 13h:15m (3300/2100 * 8.43 = 13.25). That’s generally the most that I can get out of my S2 (1,650mAh batterY) with it’s screen off!

I hate the fact that whenever I use my phone to it’s fullest (e.g. using GPS) my first concern ends up being the battery life. So, I am very happy to see that manufacturers are finally starting to pay attention to the battery life.

This is just not cool. T-Mobile is comparing a Samsung Galaxy S3 on a 4G connection to a Verizon iPhone, which only supports 3G. What’s even worst is that they classify this as a 4G connection comparison. Seriously, T-mobile, you are being shady to the extreme.

I am currently on Sprint, and I am in the market for a better service provider (slow data speeds). I was looking at T-Mobile for a bit, but such shady marketing practices just screams trouble down the road.

Honestly, I am sad at the current state of carriers in the US. I was pretty much settled on Verizon, but their recent practice of locking the boot loader on the S3 really disappointed me.

The one thing that I hated about Firefox was that you had to restart it every so often because it would start taking up way too much memory after some time. Chrome initially didn’t have this issue, but lately I have noticed that it has started misbehaving as well. Take a look at the following screenshot of the Task Manager in Windows XP.

A friend was recently looking for a used iPhone so we decided to browse the local craigslist. After some searching we saw an amazingly good deal (first red flag? :)) that included both an iPhone and iPod Touch from what seemed like a good seller. We decided to follow-up, but it wasn’t until 1am that we sent the contact email. Next day we got the following reply back…

sorry I sold them.. but I ordered them from suppliers I found from WEBSITE_REMOVED .. they have much cheaper prices than amazon.com

sorry again I hope I could have been of some help

kind regards,
steve

Sent from my iPhone.

I have removed the website URL (WEBSITE_REMOVED) because I don’t want to promote it any further 🙂 I was amused by this reply because it was sent around 3am (two hours after our inquiry) and it sounded a bit too much like an advertisement. Also, I get many emails from friends that have iPhones (some of whom have decided to keep that signature!) and that last line didn’t look right. So, I decided to look further into it. The obvious things to check were the email headers to see if they had any signs of an iPhone. Before I looked at the headers for the reply I checked out the headers from a genuine reply. The most obvious sign was the X-Mailer header.

X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (7A400)

Then I looked at this header in the reply from “steve,” and guess what I found.

X-Mailer: Chilkat Software Inc (http://www.chilkatsoft.com)

A quick look at that site and I found out that Chilkat Software makes .NET libraries. Well, that, along with the bogus “Sent from my iPhone.” proves that this is definitely a scam. Another evidence is the peculiar timing of the reply (within 2 hours, at 3 in the morning!), but that can’t be used to prove 🙂 Also, it was the period at the end that isn’t part of the stock “Sent from my XYZ Device” message, subtle but noticeable.

So, stay away from “steve” and the site that “steve” is promoting because that is a scam. A quick search on google also reveals more bad experiences with that site.

Here is a very technical entry. Are you getting syntax error when using prototype with IE to load HTML? In prototype 1.6.0.3 the error happens on line 604.

 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12

var Enumerable = {
  each: function(iterator, context) {
    var index = 0;
    try {
      this._each(function(value) {
        iterator.call(context, value, index++);
      });
    } catch (e) {         /////// <---- IE complains of syntax error on this line
      if (e != $break) throw e;
    }
    return this;
  },

The error is misleading and it took me a little time to figure this one out. Basically, this happens when you load HTML from server using AJAX and have prototype evalScripts, and the content being loaded has javascript encapsulated in an HTML comment.

1
2
3
4
5

<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
alert("The comment tags are the problem.");
// -->
</script>

Removing the HTML comment tags should resolve this syntax error. You can read more in this ticket.

I love firefox, but everything has its bad sides, and this is one bad side of Firefox that I don’t like.