Saturday, March 01, 2014

Blackphone and Webroot

Friday on NRP, Morning Edition featured the Blackphone, a smart phone with privacy as its number one priority.  Also mentioned were Black, Boeing's super secure smart phone, and Webroot, a security application.

Read more at http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2014/02/28/283523473/a-smartphone-that-tries-to-slip-you-off-the-grid.

Labels: , ,

Saturday, February 01, 2014

Disable Outlook's Junk Email Filters

After upgrading to Outlook 2010 over a year ago, it became apparent that its junk email filter continued to work even after we disabled it.

It took so long for me to notice because I use Popfile to categorize the email I download from my ISP's POP3 server.  Popfile would catch the most obvious spam before the Outlook junk email would process it.

But occasionally a message that Popfile marked as valid would end up in the Deleted Items folder.  Outlook's occasional false positive would make me wonder what was going on, but it happened so rarely that it was easier just to check for these false positives than to research the issue.  Besides, the corporate bulk mail filter running on the Exchange serve would stash things into the Junk Email folder, and I needed to check for false positives from that filter.

But then there was an incident that triggered an intra-departmental1 outcry about the issue.  It was the day that several messages from our Content Management System got flagged by Junk Email and deleted, causing folks not to notice updates on a few project files.

We all dutifully set Outlook's Junk Email filter to Disabled.  But I continued to see valid messages from my ISP placed into Deleted Items.  Recently I obtained a few spare moments2 and quickly found a solution to the issue.  It was my favorite Outlook/Exchange website that I landed on.  Here's the link:

http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/how-to-disable-outlooks-junk-email-filter/

The text says to change the value in a registry key, but in my case, the key didn't exist, so I created it, first.

Only time will tell whether this works.  I will know for sure only if it doesn't.  I suppose I can find an old message that triggered a false positive and send it to myself, but the header of that message would be different from the original header.


1 The emphasis is on the part of the work that contains "mental".

2 A good way to obtain spare moments is to schedule a meeting right after another meeting, so that if the other meeting runs late, the participants will be milling around outside the meeting room.  After a while, you get a sense of which meetings will run the longest based on the topic and especially on whether certain coworkers will be in them.  Some meetings can run so late that the folks who mill around will disperse and take an additional five minutes to reassemble, assuming they haven't gone off to lunch or embarked on an early vacation or retirement.

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, October 18, 2013

Excel Hyperlinks -- Relative vs. Absolute Path

I rarely insert hyperlinks into an Excel spreadsheet.  So every time I do, I get burned by Excel's predilection for turning Absolute paths into Relative paths.

Here's the scenario...

I'll use Excel to create a flat file database on my local hard drive.  I'll include links to the file server on the network using UNC paths, such as \\File-Server\Share-Name\Path2File\MyFile.ext.  (The Ctrl-k keystroke is really handy for creating hyperlinks, BTW.)

After building the table by adding fields in columns, adding formatting, and entering a few records in rows for testing, I'll consider the database to be production ready.  At this point I'll upload it to the same file server that my links point to.

The next time a user opens the network version of that spreadsheet, Excel will convert those carefully-entered absolute links to relative links.  So if the spreadsheet resides in \\File-Server\NewShare\Reports\Databases\LG.xls, the links to MyFile.ext turn into this: ..\..\..\Share-Name\Path2File\MyFile.ext.  They work just fine while the spreadsheet remains in that location.

But suppose the user saves the database and then e-mails it someone else in the organization, or copies it to his or her local hard drive.  The links are broken.  Furthermore, there's no easy way to fix them.  Search and Replace (Ctrl-h) won't find the ..\..\..\ in the hyperlinks.  You'll have to either fix them manually or write a program to do it.  And then the same thing could happen again, anyway.

But there is (thankfully) a trick to keep Excel from bastardizing your carefully designed links.  But it's a preventive measure -- you have to know about the trick before you get stuck with the link conversion.

The trick is to open the File Properties dialog.  Choose the Summary tab and enter C:\ in the text box next to the label that reads "Hyperlink base:".  Be sure to OK your way out and save.  These instructions are for Excel 2000 and 2003.  Later versions probably have the same properties dialog, but the way to open it might be different.

Really, it's best to do this before entering any hyperlinks.  Ideally, Excel would have an Option for this.  But alas, all I could find was a checkbox to enable Excel to prompt for workbook properties.

Hopefully, by writing this post, I've seared this information into my brain so that the next time I'm tempted to enter a hyperlink, I'll remember to set this property.

Hmmm, it just occurred to me to code this property using VBA....

Labels: , ,

Saturday, September 28, 2013

Brain Games

What kind of Geek could resist an opportunity to improve his or her mind?  If there is such a geek, I am not that kind.

So when I heard the advertisements sponsorship acknowledgments on NPR for Lumosity, I decided to check it out.

Lumosity develops and offers online games that improve mental function.  Their aim is to enable anyone to achieve his or her full potential, brain-wise, at least.

Lumosity provides two tiers of service: free, and subscription.  Users of free accounts are restricted to just three games per day, while subscribers have access not only to unlimited games, but also Personalized Training, Performance Tracking, and comparisons to other Lumosity users.

Since I joined way back on June 1, I've improved slowly and steadily to match the ability of someone half my age, assuming that someone is a slug.  Haha.  Just kidding.  Actually I have no idea because I'm using a free account.  All I know is that four weeks ago my score was 1025 and now it is 1111.

See?

Here's my Brain Performance broken down into various categories:


So check out Lumosity. It's free. It's fun. And you might just gain enough improvement to survive the upcoming Zombie Apocolypse.

Labels: ,

Monday, August 05, 2013

Outlook 2010 Macros -- Adventures in Getting Them to Work

In a post that included Outlook VBA code, I mentioned that I stopped using the macro because of Outlook's tougher security.

Today, I decided to try to eliminate the main problem that I had, namely an inability to run the macro except from within the VBA Project IDE.

Here's the scenario:  I have code that worked on Outlook 2000.  I assigned a toolbar button to call it.  But the toolbar button doesn't work in Outlook 2010.  Nothing happens.  Pressing Alt-F8 and clicking Run opens the VBA macro in the IDE and displays an error "Subroutine or Function not found" (paraphrased).  But then I can run the macro by clicking the play button.

One aspect of my solution was to make sure macros were not being disabled.  I choose to self-sign the macro rather than enable all macros.  First I used SelfCert.exe, which I found in the Outlook program directory (C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Office14).  SelfCert.exe can be used to create personal certificate -- it would work for me on my local computer.  After I created the certificate, I signed the macro (Tools | Digital Signatures | Choose).  After clicking OK, I immediately pressed Ctrl-sto save the macro.  And then I closed Outlook.  But when I did, it asked me whether I wanted to save VbaProject.OTM.  Odd.  First I responded No.  But when I reopened the VBA editor and checked for digital signatures, it reported that the macro was unsigned.  But answering Yes to the prompt to save didn't help either.  The macro still wasn't signed.

I wondered if the Read Only attribute had been set on VbaProject.OTM.  But no, I had Full Control rights on the file.  Yet, the file's timestamp was old!  It wasn't getting saved!  Ahh, but the old timestamp was a trick, an undocumented "feature".  According to this support thread, it was normal for the timestamp and file size of VbaProject.OTM to remain unchanged after a save.  (This is why the phrase "WTF?" was invented.)  I verified that the save was taking place by adding a comment to my code, saving, closing Outlook and then re-opening the macro.

After that little detour, I found that it was necessary for me to install the certificate in the "Trusted Root Certification Authorities."  This can be done deep within the bowels of the VBA editor.  Tools | Digital Signatures | Choose.  Click the link that says "Click here to view the certificate prope..."  Click the button "Install Certificate..." then Next.  In the next dialog box, click the radio button for "Place all certificates in the following store" then Browse.  Select "Trusted Root Certification Authorities" and then OK / Next your way out.  Save and close Outlook again.

BTW, every time you close Outlook, you should use Task Manager to verify that the Outlook process is not running.

Still the macro would not run except from within the editor.  But I found the solution in another thread.  My code was in a module.  After I moved it to ThisOutlookSession, I was able to assign an actual functioning toolbar button to it.

Whew!

It is very nice that even though I have other macros working that access the From and To properties of a message, I no longer get the annoying message box that warns me that my address book is being accessed and asks whether I want to allow that.


Labels: , , ,

Saturday, May 25, 2013

Android Tablet Possibly For Sale

So far my tablet is leading me to the conclusion that it's not worth buying one.  While the portability of it is really neat, it's still not small enough to fit in any pocket, except perhaps a generous jacket pocket.  Sans jacket, I've stowed it inside my button-down shirt by opening one button, slipping it in, and then closing the button.  But during bouts of warm T-shirt weather, I'm forced to either hold the tablet or put it down somewhere when I'm not actually using it.

For example, when I went grocery shopping last week, I placed the tablet in the "seat" of the shopping cart.  When I was done shopping, and I had loaded the car, I returned the cart to one of the spots set aside for the empty carts.  As I walked away, I glanced back to make sure I didn't leave anything behind in the cart, and then I drove home.  And as soon as I got home, I wondered where my tablet was.  I realized I had left it in the cart.  And the reason I didn't notice it when I walked away from the cart was that it lay atop a store circular that had been folded over it by the wind.  Luckily it was in the same spot I left it.  But had I not been able to find it, I'd've not bothered to replace it or even miss it.  I might've felt a bit relieved.  In fact, right now I'm wondering how much I can get for it.

I like having a computer.  It enables me to communicate through e-mail, blogs, message boards and even social media.  And the mobility of it would be extremely fantastic if: 1) Free WiFi were accessible everywhere; 2) It didn't take ten times longer to compose meaningful content.  BTW, I'm typing this right now on a public library computer, even though I have my tablet with me and have access to free WiFi.  Even with the Nexus' Speech-to-Text feature and the Hacker's Keyboard, I still prefer to enter content through an "old fashioned" keyboard.

The marriage of location-aware note-taking and image capture that Evernote provides would be useful if the Nexus had a good-quality rear camera.

Labels:

Friday, May 17, 2013

Blamed For Doing Its Job

The IRS recently was criticized for scrutinizing certain organizations applying for tax free status.  It seems that organizations that had "Tea Party" in their names received extra scrutiny.

First of all, "Tea Party" generally refers to a political organization.  And the fact is that political organizations are not entitled to tax free status.

Second, "Tea Party" is a reference to a revolt conducted by vandals who were opposed to paying taxes.

So these critics are essentially saying that an organization whose name implies that it's political in nature and opposed to taxes should not be scrutinized when it applies for tax free status?

Huh?

Labels: , ,