AmateurRadio.com

The September issue of PC Pro (a British computer magazine) arrived today. Featured on the front cover was an article exposing the rip-off prices charged by music download sites. Madonna’s Celebration (which I presume is a popular music album) would set you back £11.18 at MSN Music or £11.99 at Spotify but would cost you only £2.98 from Amazon.

Included with the magazine was a DVD which contained a free copy of Paragon System Backup 2010. As I didn’t have any backup software for 64-bit Windows I thought this was fortuitous, so I decided to install it. But after handing over my email address in exchange for a free registration code it failed to install. The developers had used the ridiculously overpriced, overcomplicated and error-prone InstallShield (programmers will know what I mean) to create the setup wizard and only a few seconds into the install it threw up an error message about being unable to initialize the Javascript runtime and died.

I tried the obvious things like checking that Java was installed, running the installer in administrator mode, and even Googling the error message and trying the suggested remedy of registering the Javascript DLL, all to no avail. So I decided that I was not going to rely on backup software from a company that could not even produce an installer that would run on a brand-new computer, and consigned Paragon to the Recycle Bin (both literally and virtually.)

I spent a couple more hours downloading, being unimpressed by and then uninstalling a number of other free backup programs. I even discovered that there was a backup program included with Windows, but for some reason the version that comes with Windows 7 Home Premium has been hobbled by only being able to back up to writeable DVDs or removeable hard drives, not my network attached backup server. After being advised that the backup would take 6 or 7 DVDs I decided against it.

In the end I decided to stump up for a copy of Acronis, which most people seem to regard as hands-down the best backup software you can get. It can create disk images from which you can restore even if Windows won’t run and it has a continuous backup option that backs up your files while you work so you can revert back if you mess up a file. It even has a “Try and Decide” sandbox that lets you safely try out software you aren’t sure about to see if it will do anything nasty to your hard drive.

The Acronis website informed me that this paragon (small p) of backup software would cost £39.95. After checking some reviews, in my usual lazy fashion I typed “acronis trueimage” into the Google search box to find my way back to the website, and Google helpfully included three “shopping results” in its list of related sites. Included there was an offer of Acronis TrueImage Home 2010 from Amazon for £17.99.

Eh? I can buy online and pay £40 for an electronically delivered product the manufacturing and delivery costs of which are near zero, or I can have a physical product that has been mastered onto CD and put into a printed box, possibly with a manual, which has then been driven to a warehouse and stored waiting for me to buy, after which it will be put into a cardboard mailer and sent through the post to be delivered to my door, for less than half the price (with SuperSaver free delivery.) Sorry, I don’t see the logic in that, but thanks very much Google and Amazon.

Steve, GW7AAV, spotted a news item on the NZART web page which states that the authorities in New Zealand have become concerned about IRLP, D-Star, Echolink, APRS and similar modes as they do not appear to fit within the New Zealand license conditions. Their concerns include the use of unattended transmitters and unlicensed digipeaters for APRS and amateurs based overseas operating a NZ amateur station via the internet.

It’s easy to forget that other countries don’t have such liberal licensing conditions as we do in the UK, although I would point out that operating an Echolink, D-Star, IRLP or packet radio (including APRS) node is not within the standard license conditions here either – you are supposed to apply for special permission. I know there are many who feel that is a good thing, and even that internet linking is not amateur radio and should not be allowed anywhere in the world, at all, but my opinion is that prohibiting it devalues amateur radio.

This policy is probably one of the main reasons why the APRS RF network is broken for messaging as many people (myself included) who are unwilling or unable to comply with the requirements for obtaining permission avoid the problem by operating receive-only gateways. Consequently we have the situation where smartphone-based APRS using mobile internet connections are more useful than APRS over radio.

I certainly believe that the point of our hobby is to use radio wherever possible, but where the internet makes possible something that could not practically be achieved using RF alone I think that we should be permitted to use it.

I’ve just been for a pleasant afternoon drive down to the coast with Lynn, KJ4ERJ, developer of the APRSISCE software, currently on holiday in Spain. No, I didn’t nip down on EasyJet for the day. Actually I was following him on APRS using the Google Street View feature in the beta version of aprs.fi.

With the new software, when you click on a station you get the option to Track in Street View. If you do then the browser window splits in two, with the top half showing the view the person you are tracking sees, facing the direction he is going, and the bottom half showing the track on the map. It works pretty well. You just have to remind yourself that you are viewing images previously taken by Google, not live images!

This is beta software, so you won’t find it on the regular aprs.fi just yet. But it’s a pretty cool application, I think you’ll agree!

This blog is meant to be about my hobby, amateur radio. Occasionally I have given in to the temptation to blog about some other event that has affected me, or let off steam about some topic that has annoyed me. But as I discovered a few months ago when a couple of the American ham radio blogs I read decided to vent about Obama, health care and other issues that Americans care deeply about, it can be very disconcerting to encounter far off-topic subject matter in a specialist blog, especially if the opinions expressed are ones with which you profoundly disagree. So in recent months I have tried to resist the temptation of controversial posts.

Sometimes I still get the urge to write about these topics, though. So to satisfy that urge I have started a new blog. Its title is One Foot in the Grave; the subtitle is Ramblings of a real-life Victor Meldrew. British readers who have seen the BBC comedy series of the same name will know what to expect from this. Readers from other parts of the world will have to see for themselves, though perhaps much of what I will be writing about won’t be of much interest to them anyway since it is going to be mostly about the trials and tribulations of life in the UK.

Nevertheless I hope that a few of you may find it worth following One Foot in the Grave and even telling other people about it.

I received an email from a German CB operator named Dieter (I presume he is a CB operator from the callsign) asking if I knew of a program to design a SuperMoxon antenna for 27 or 28MHz. I replied, as I would have done to a licensed amateur who had asked the same question, that I didn’t. The SuperMoxon was designed and made by Ron, GW3YDX. Only he knows how he designed it.

My reply to Dieter’s gmx.de email address bounced back with the message: “Sorry, your envelope sender has been denied: The recipient 550 5.1.1 does not want to receive mail from your address.”

Dieter wouldn’t have known, since he contacted me through the form on my website, that I use a Gmail email address. So if I understand correctly, the German ISP gmx.de is blocking all mail from the largest email service in the world (though I suppose it’s possible that it is only blocking email from me.)

I guess this has something to do with preventing spam, since I read recently that a lot of spam comes from fake Gmail addresses. But if gmx.de can’t distinguish spam from real email – something Gmail does extremely well, and one reason why I’ve been very happy to use this free email service – then perhaps it should stop using half measures and turn off email altogether rather than leave its customers wondering why they don’t receive replies from some of the people they contact?

This morning I see that Peter G4NKX has written on his blog about “Personal Web Targeting“. Peter wrote it after noticing that ads were appearing on various sites that were related, not to that site, but to things he had previously been looking for. These days I earn my living from internet marketing, so it is something I know a bit about. I was going to comment on Peter’s post but it would have been rather a long comment. In the past I have been asked by a couple of my readers to write about topics related to running a website and blog but there have always been other topics that took priority. Someone even slammed my blog’s rating at eHam because “the ads were annoying.” So this is perhaps a good opportunity to tackle this topic. If it is of no interest to you, you may as well skip the rest of this post.

First, why ads on websites? Put simply, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. Web hosting costs money. If you run a professional site and need to employ people to run it, paying their salaries costs money too. Sites like Fred AA7BQ’s QRZ.com cost a lot of money to run and the ads allow people like me to access it for free. If you don’t like the ads, Fred provides the option to remove them by paying a subscription. If you don’t want to pay, you also have the option of not visiting QRZ.com. I certainly don’t expect Fred to pay the running costs out of his own pocket. The same goes for most of the sites you visit on the internet. If there weren’t ads, most of the web wouldn’t exist and a lot of the rest would be subscription-only, as the websites owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation have recently become. It will be interesting to see where that ends.

I’ve sometimes been asked why there are ads on my website. I’ll be as brief as I can. For best part of the last 20 years I have worked freelance. As the demand for my services declined due to recession, people who hired me moving on and so on, I was forced to look for new ways to make money. I stumbled into internet marketing more or less by accident and since my ham radio hobby site was one of my most popular sites I thought I’d try advertising on it. I certainly couldn’t live off the income generated by this site, far from it, but during times when my income only just paid the bills the fact that my hobby made a bit of money allowed me to resist selling my gear and even make the occasional new purchase.

Currently my business website makes us a comfortable living. But as I will eventually be retiring without the benefit of a final salary or inflation-linked pension scheme, in fact without much of a pension at all, I will soon be back in the situation where hobby expenditure is a luxury. So I expect I will be trying to make pocket money from my hobby right up until the day I finally become a silent key.

The issue Peter raised in his post was about ads appearing that related to something he had previously searched for, not the site he was currently on. Though he doesn’t mention it specifically, I presume he is referring to Google, which recently changed the way its context based advertising service AdSense worked. Previously, the ads that were displayed on a web page through the Adsense program were related solely to the content of that web page. When I first tried AdSense on my sites I felt that it actually enhanced the value of the pages. I have found out about radio products I might otherwise never have known about through the ads that have appeared on my and other ham radio web pages, so on balance I consider AdSense a good thing.

For the last couple of years the world has been in recession. The number of internet advertisers and the amount of money they have to spend has fallen. So Google has looked at ways to try to maintain advertising revenues. It has gone into partnership with DoubleClick, a long established web advertising company, to create what it calls interest-based advertising. Essentially it gets your browser to store a piece of information called a cookie when you visit a site, containing information about the topic of that site. When you visit another site that displays Google ads it can display ads related to the previous topic rather than the topic of the current site if the previous topic’s ads are likely to be more profitable to Google (and the site owner.)

Personally I think this is a step backwards. I would prefer people who visit my site to see radio-related ads primarily, not ads about bathroom fittings or whatever else they have been looking for. I haven’t observed a significant increase in advertising revenue since Google introduced its new policy. But in this new tough economic environment where people have to justify every cost website owners have to take what the advertisers will give them. I don’t think the subscription-only model is going to work for News Corporation, it certainly isn’t an option for hobby sites like mine (or even QRZ.com) and I am not going to forego my small but still worthwhile advertising earnings just because some people consider that advertising invades their privacy. You open a newspaper or watch TV and see ads about all kinds of things that aren’t relevant to what you’re reading or watching. Why does it become such a big deal when it’s on a web page?

Google has a Privacy Center which sets out its privacy policy with regard to advertising and also provides a link to the DoubleClick privacy policy. There you will find an Opt Out button that allows you to opt out of interest-based advertising or alternatively to set preferences for the types of ads you don’t mind seeing.

There are also software tools including plug-ins for Firefox that can block ads from appearing in your browser. However I hope you don’t use them. Personally I regard blocking the ads that help pay to keep a site running as a bit like stealing. As I said earlier, there’s no such thing as a free lunch and every website that you visit for free is costing somebody something to provide it.