There are really 3 sides to this issue. The school board, people near the schools that are closing, and people near the schools that are opening.  Each have their own agendas, and none of them are compatible.  There is simply no way to make everyone happy, and it will probably make it more difficult for everyone.

The families that live near these schools are clearly devastated by the possibility that the schools will be closed.  And they should be.  I cannot imagine what that would have done to me if the school that I was going to closed while I was still going there.  It is truly truly sad that these people have to go through this, and I do not blame them at all for fighting to keep the schools open, I would be doing the exact same thing.  I just fear that the numbers are not on their side.

EAVB_DXKFNSFMTP

In 2001, Windows XP was released to the world. At the time, it was Microsoft’s best operating system release. Windows Vista improved on it in nearly every way. Let me say that again. Windows Vista improved on it in nearly every way. The biggest problem with Vista was the high barrier to entry, however, it was no more higher than the barrier to entry Windows XP faced in 2001. As I wrote previously, we were spoiled by lower hardware costs, and the fact that running Windows XP on cheap hardware from 2006 was akin to running Windows 95 on hardware from 2001. It could be run very well on very cheap hardware. In 2009, pretty much every computer except for the netbook class computer can run Windows Vista very well, and this is where Vista truly shines.

Many of the technologies that make Windows Vista so good are beyond the scope of this article, so I will concentrate on the features that the end user will see.

The first, and most useful, is start menu search. Windows XP had the add-on Wnidows Desktop Search software for years, however it was slow, not integrated into the OS, and in my opinion, just plain not useful. In my experience, it actually slows down a Windows XP PC quite a bit. Windows Desktop Search 4.0 for Windows XP did address some of those issues, but the simple fact is that Windows XP was never meant to have a built in quick desktop search application, and using an application like Windows Desktop Search or Google Desktop really highlights that deficiency. Windows Vista was designed with the instant search built in. This instant search, appearing in the start menu, allows you to quickly find applications, documents, even specific email if you use outlook. simply hit the start menu, or press the windows key on your keyboard, and start typing. Usually the first few characters of the application is enough for what you are looking for to appear. Type “word” and Microsoft Word will be the first result. You can even search for a particular document, and open it directly. Start menu search has many more functions, but at it’s core it is used as a fast way to launch a document. Ever since my first experience with the beta of Windows Vista way back in early 2005, it has been my preferred way of launching applications. I truthfully rarely even go into “All Programs” in Windows anymore, as start menu search is a much faster and more efficient way of getting to where I need to go.

Speaking of the start menu, it received an overhaul for Windows Vista as well. Gone is the word “Start” present in every version of windows since late 1994. Also gone is the multi-column all programs menu. Instead going into all programs places the menu in a scrolling list in the left side of the start menu. As someone who regularly dealt with 2, 3, sometimes 4 columns of applications in Windows XP, this change is welcome for the few times I need to go into all programs. Other changes are more minor, but appreciated, including more streamlined access to the networking section of Windows, and more.

The second feature, which is arguably the single most important feature of Windows Vista, and remains integral in Windows 7, is User Account Control(UAC). Windows Vista represented a fundamental shift in how Windows handles user accounts and security. In every Windows version up to, and including, Windows XP, a normal user ran as a system administrator, meaning that the user has unrestricted access to the computer, and can make any change without prompt. The “limited account” option that existed in XP was an attempt to stop this, but in reality the limited account was so restricted a user could not really do many day-to-day applications with Windows. This method of user accounts remains the single biggest security vulnerability in Windows XP, even after 3 service packs and hundreds of security updates. Many types of malware take easy advantage of the fact that that they can make changes to Windows, install applications and services, and generally have their run of the operating system. Windows Vista changed all that. Instead of operating with unlimited permissions, all accounts, even computer administrators, operate under the principle of least privilege. This means that a user runs as a limited user, and when a change is made that requires administrator access, UAC will display a prompt. A computer administrator may simply click continue, and a standard user must enter an administrator password to continue. This ensures that no operating system changes are made without the user’s knowledge, and any changes that are made are done so as a direct result of user interaction. This is the security model that UNIX and linux based operating systems have been based off for decades, and what Apple as adopted for OS X, which is UNIX based, back in 2001. UAC in Vista is not perfect, and many people feel that it prompts too many times. This is partially true, however, many people turned UAC off because of this, and they really shouldn’t. UAC is the biggest piece of the security puzzle in Vista, and while turning off may add some convenience to using Windows Vista, it is much more open to attacks. After Windows Vista is set up, and most of the users applications are installed, UAC is much less obtrusive, because 99% of the day to day operations of Windows do not require elevated permissions. UAC is also much improved in Windows 7, with the same security as in Vista, but with far fewer prompts.

Windows Vista also introduced Aero. The Aero desktop is the visible component of the Windows Presentation Foundation, which was a complete re-write of the Windows User Interface. the new UI design allows for Windows to use more advanced graphics effects, such as transparent windows, the “glass” look of the windows, live window previews, and new transition effects between Windows. Many skeptics of Aero in Windows Vista say it was nothing more than an attempt to make Windows Vista look “pretty” and did not offer any real benefits. On the surface, this is actually true. However, like many things in Windows Vista, the underlying system was completely re-written, and Windows Vista represented the growing pain, and Microsoft implementing a brand new system for it’s user interface. The truly advanced elements possible in Aero are evident in Windows 7. Going from Windows XP, to Windows Vista, and up to Windows 7, it is very easy to see how Windows Vista is the stepping stone, and many of the advancements in Windows Vista are taken and improved upon in Windows 7.

These are just a few of the changes in Windows Vista. As I have stated, Windows Vista represents a change that was as big, if not bigger, than the leap from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95. Many of the changes are good changes, and many of the changes represent brand new ideas for Microsoft. For that, Windows Vista will fall in place as a transitional operating system. Is it perfect? No. There are many things in Vista that drive me crazy. But I do not let those things detract from what is otherwise a very solid operating system from Microsoft.

If I had written this 6 months ago, Windows Vista would have gotten a 100% recommendation from me. In fact, 6 months ago, I was urging people who were considering buying a new computer, but afraid because of the stigma of Vista, to upgrade. Very few people that I know that have purchased a new PC with Windows Vista on it have told me they dislike it. Give Vista a chance, a real chance, and you will generally be surprised with how good it is. However, with the release of Windows 7 just 2 months away, there truly is no point. Buying a new PC today will come with Windows Vista, but many will come with a free upgrade to Windows 7 anyway. I have no qualms telling people to run Vista, but cannot recommend people buy a new computer right now. Wait until Windows 7, and buy a new computer with the new operating system. In many ways, it is a shame, because many people will never really know just how good Windows Vista is, and how it provided the critical stepping stone to Windows 7, which is being regarded as the best release of Windows ever. So, as you move on to Windows 7, know that at it’s core, you are using the technology of Windows Vista, and working day to day with everything Vista had to offer.

Author’s note:  Part 2 had originally been intended to be an article about what makes Windows Vista a good operating system. That will now be featured in part 3.

there were nearly 4.5 years between the release of Windows XP and Windows Vista.  That is an eternity in the world of technology, and because of that, many things had changed.  Windows Vista is very much a reflection of that change.

Many of the changes going from Windows XP to Windows Vista are very technical, things I will not get into in this article.  But suffice it to say, that except for the name, and the mostly familiar feel, they are very different operating systems.  Windows XP was created in the age before most people had high speed internet, before twitter, before Facebook, before Myspace.  Windows XP comes from a time before Social networking.  When XP came out, Google was not the biggest search engine in the world.  It sat at least behind AOL search.  Windows XP launched within a month of the very first iPod. In 2001, fewer than 50% of the people in North America owned a cell phone.  The 5 most popular pop music artists/groups in 2001 were, in order:  Destiny’s Child, Jennifer Lopez, Janet Jackson, ‘N Sync, and the Backstreet Boys.  America went to war in Afghanistan and Iraq between releases.  As you can see, XP seems to come from an era of our past.

In the time between Windows XP and windows Vista, many things changed.  Computers became infinitely more powerful, and less expensive.  The internet became almost as common of a utility as having a phone line.  People used their computers in an entirely different way in 2006 than they did in 2001.

With those differences, came the challenges.  With the proliferation of the internet, so too came the proliferation of security vulnerabilities.  Windows XP was actually designed in the late 1990’s.  XP was built off of Windows 2000, which actually came out in late 1999.  Windows 2000 and XP, by design, let the user do whatever they may want without their computer without any difficulty.  The reason for this is that the largest concept of security in the late 90’s revolved around someone gaining physical access to a computer to compromise it, so less attention was paid to security.  As the internet grew, more and more computers were connected.  XP’s mentality of giving a user full access to everything on the system was it’s largest downfall.  This meant that it was very, very easy for a program downloaded from the internet to compromise a computer, because it could run even without the user knowing.  There were little to no safeguards.  Windows XP, the most stable Microsoft operating system at the time, was severely vulnerable to attacks from the internet.  And despite all of Microsoft’s best efforts, to this day, that is still true.  It is simply the way the operating system was designed.

In the internet age, it became clear that Windows had to change.  Many of the technologies at the core of Windows XP were actually first designed in the early 1990’s.  That simply would not cut it anymore.  A newer, safer, and more secure Windows was needed.  Windows Vista was the result of that.  Microsoft nearly re-wrote the entire operating system.  Many, many elements were changed.  Many of the things that were done in Windows Vista were brand new to Windows, represented a radical change for Microsoft in not only how Windows worked, but how the company made windows.

In many ways, Windows Vista is the operating system that was a proof of concept for many new things, and because of that suffered many growing pains.  In many years when we look back at Windows, we will see Windows Vista as the beginning of a new type of operating system for Microsoft, and the release that began the transition of Windows from an operating system built for a personal computer, and an operating system built for the internet connected person.

In part 3, I will discuss what Vista actually brings to the table that is better than XP, and how it is the foundation for the upcoming Windows 7.

1. My Printer, scanner, or [insert other piece of hardware here] doesn’t work in Vista.

This is, in my opinion, one of the top 2 reasons why people complained about Windows Vista. This, however, is something that is only partially Microsof’s fault. Now, without getting too technical, the reason why this happened is that Microsoft changed the architecture for drivers in Windows. Now, a driver is essentially the software that allows your windows to work with the printer, scanner, mouse, iPod, anything. What this meant, was that for a lot of peripherals, the manufacturer, not Microsoft, was responsible for creating that driver. What many companies, printer companies especially, decided to do was not create those drivers for older printers. This was a business decision designed to get consumers to buy a new device.

The overall question though, is that is this a good thing? Again, without getting too technical, the changes that Microsoft made in the way drivers need to work were good changes. They unfortunately come with growing pains. Now, 2.5 years after Windows Vista launched, everything works just fine with it. And Windows 7 uses the same, improved driver model, so essentially everything that works with Windows Vista will also work with Windows 7.

The third party companies that make the hardware are the ones that are responsible for not supporting Windows Vista. Now, I fully admit that for them to support Windows Vista for devices that were, in some cases, 6-7 years old would have cost them a lot of money. They would have to allocate people and resources to create drivers for printers that no one in the company had supported for years. The return on investment for doing that likely would have been too small to justify the cost. However, that did not change the fact that when the average consumer bought a new computer with Windows Vista, and their printer did not work, they were un happy.

Overall, I’m going to call this a draw. Microsoft and the third parties were both justified in their decisions, and in the end, it did affect the customer. An unpleasant, but necessary growing pain for Windows.

2. Vista runs very slowly on my 4 year old computer, or the $800 computer I just bought runs vista very slowly

This issue has largely disappeared recently. Back in 2006, the consumer world had grown accustomed to a $700-$800 PC running Windows XP well. However, in early 2007, when Vista became available to consumers, windows XP was over 5 years old. even low end PC hardware in 2006 was significantly more powerful than what was a high end computer in 2001. Unfortunately, the consumer has been conditioned that they should be able to buy a computer for $700, and have it run well. In 2006, that was simply not the case, nor should it be. Windows Vista is a modern, advanced operating system that offered numerous improvements over XP. That’s not to say it was perfect. It does have problems, even today. But to expect an new operating system to run on either hardware that was 4-5 years old, or on a computer made as cheaply as possible, is not fair to Microsoft.

Both of these reasons are the main contributors as to why Windows Vista received such a bad reputation at launch. There are other reasons, such as Apple’s relentless ads against them, the emergence of netbooks, which Windows Vista does not run well on, and many businesses not moving to Vista. In part 2 of this article, I will discuss why people should be using Vista, and why it is so good.

Dear Mr. Vandermeer,

I am a member of your constituency, and I am a strong conservative supporter.  However, I am deeply concerned with Bill 44.  This piece of legislation is one that truly concerns me as a Canadian, an Albertan, and a human being.  This bill serves no other purpose except to cripple our education system, stunt the growth of our youth, and harm a teacher’s ability to teach.

the Education curriculum, which is defined and maintain by the Government of Alberta, is largely based on though provoking subjects designed to open the eyes of our youth to new ideas, especially in the area of social studies.  So much of our human history is fuelled by religious beliefs.  From the medieval times when wars were fought over beliefs in different versions of the same god, to more recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Almost every important event in our history can be connected to religion in some way.  I know that a new Junior High social studies curriculum is being introduced soon, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are included in the studies.  Bill 44 will cripple the social studies curriculum, because any time a teacher wishes to talk about something that might have to deal with religion, a letter will have to be sent home, and if a single parent voices concern, the teacher simply cannot talk about that subject.  How can a teacher be expected to teach well when the potential exists for virtually the entire social studies curriculum may not be teachable because of Bill 44.  A teacher will also have to tip toe around everything they do in fact teach, because as soon as religion is brought into the discussion, they risk having a human rights complaint brought against them.  Teachers should not have to teach in fear, and I am afraid that if Bill 44 passes, that will happen.  I know several teachers, and they are all terrified of Bill 44, and the consequences of it passing.

On the topic of human sexuality, I do not understand why new measures need to be implemented over what already exists.  When I was going to school, consent forms were sent home before any sex education classes, and any parent who did not want their child to learn about that, the child would be taken out of the class and given other activities to do for that period of time.  Bill 44 overly complicates this, and again further opens up the teachers to risks of human rights complaints.  What about biology classes that teach human physiology.  A parent could potentially launch a human rights complaint because their child is learning about the physical human body.

I will concede that homosexuality is a difficult issue.  Alberta is not the first jurisdiction, nor will it be the last, to deal with these issues.  I believe in equal human rights, and it is my personal belief that people who are homosexual are discriminated against because they are not always given the same basic rights that I am.  To be totally frank, the issue of homosexuality will not go away until people of my generation move into prominence, and become the decision makers in the world.  In my experience, it is the older generations who are mostly afraid of this issue, and are the ones pushing against it.  As the younger generation takes over, this issue will go away.  However, until that happens, consider this.  Teenagers commit suicide every day because they discover they are homosexual, and cannot bear the weight of the persecution, public perception, and lack of equality they are given.  Children who discover they are homosexual are scared, made fun of, and have their self esteem destroyed.  Bill 44 will further pile on to this, because as long as a single parent disagrees, a child will be unable to talk about homosexuality in a classroom.

I firmly believe that this bill will stunt the growth of the youth of this generation, because it will take away much of the thought provoking substance of the curriculum.  It is difficult enough to get the youth actively engaged in what is being taught, and if the best parts of the curriculum are taken away because one parent wishes them taken away, then the curriculum loses most of it’s effect.  The subject will be bland, with no substance, and will get the youth further disconnected.  With the cultural diversity that now exists in our country, where it is not uncommon to find Christians, Catholics, Muslims, Protestants, Jewish people, and Atheists in a single classroom, as well as people who are hetero and homosexual, teaching will be nearly impossible, since there is no way to discuss a single subject without offending at least one person.

Our schools are supposed to be a haven for youth.  It is a place where our youth and teachers can talk about many subjects, some of which youth of today, especially teenagers, are not comfortable talking with their parents about.  A student should be able to trust their teacher, but if Bill 44 passes, the teacher might not be able to be the trusting figure for sensitive matters, for fear of human rights violations.

Please, vote no on Bill 44.  It is a dangerous Bill which could harm the school system of our province, our teachers, and our youth, in ways that cannot be described.  If Bill 44 passes into law, not only will I be ashamed to be a Conservative supporter, but for the first time in my 22 years, I will be ashamed to be an Albertan.

Thank you,

Tyler Hardeman

Please note that I am also sending a copy of this e-mail to Premier Stelmach.

While my full time job is working in IT, I still work as a lifeguard at a City of Edmonton pool.  It was the job that got me through college, and got me to the position I am in now.  I still do enjoy the job, and the environment of working in a pool, so I still do it once a week.  Because of my background in actually lifeguarding a pool, I feel that I can share a first hand perspective and opinion on this matter.

To put is simply, I think this is a bad idea.  In fact, I think this might be one of the most short sighted ideas the City Administration has had in recent years, and that is saying something. Usually the people who plan these types of facilities have never worked in one, and often plan what is best on paper, not what is the best option for both the patrons that use the facility, and the staff tasked with working there.  While I can see their idea in theory, as someone who works in a pool in practice, this is a recipe for disaster.

The pool that I work at has three change rooms.  It has a full change room for males and females, as well as a large family change room.  The family change room has four changing stalls, two showers, and three private bathrooms. as well as lockers.  In terms of pure size I would say it is about 1/2 the size of the changing area of our actual men’s and women’s change rooms.  Our family change room use is restricted for families, which we define as parents with children.  So a father can take his two kids into the family change room, or a mother can take her young son.  If there is say, a father and an 8 year old son, we prefer they use the men’s change room, but it is not a requirement.  The family change room may also be used by people with limited mobility, or people with disabilities.  We ask that everyone else use either the men’s or women’s change room.  It’s a fairly simple solution that I personally believe has worked very well over the years.

There are many reasons why I do not believe that unisex change rooms can work.  The first is simple math.  for an evening public swim during the summer at the pool I work at, we can get as many as 350 people who are trying to get into the pool at the same time.  These range from families with young children, to groups of teenagers.  This is a scenario that happens nearly every night for two full months during July and August.  Trying to push 350 people through a single change room with roughly twenty stalls would lead to chaos.  You will have shy teenagers who want to change by themselves, so a stall meant for five people might only have one in it.  While this is happening you will have families who are stuck waiting for a changing stall to open.  It can be a challenge getting 350 people through the cashiers and change room at a pool that does not have this configuration, I cannot imagine the difficulty of this scenario.

The second reason is one that I believe will become an issue in about 10 minutes after the pool opens.  Groups of teenagers will cause continual frustration.  All it will take is one 14 year old boy exposing himself to everyone in the change room to completely ruin the experience for everyone.  And believe me, it will happen.  What happens when a 14 year old exposes himself, as a joke, to a girl around his age, or someone younger?  This has disaster written all over it, and leads into my fourth point later on.

A third reason, and one that I look forward to the least, are groups of people changing together who should not be changing together, and the consequences of that.  I think many of us would agree that two 15 year old children who are dating, should not be changing together in a stall in a unisex change room.  There is also the issue of people of any age engaging in sexual activities in those stalls.  I know this will happen because it is something that we have to deal with on a semi-regular basis at the pool that I work at.  A young teenage couple will change in the family change room so they can engage in certain activities.  Or, on more rare occasions, adult couples will do the same.  I have caught more than my fair share of teenagers doing things they should not be doing in the family change room over the years.  This is a problem that would likely multiply ten fold in a unisex change room only configuration.

The second and third points both lead into my fourth, which is the effect on pool staffing.  Because of the issues that the second and third points will cause, lifeguards will likely be required to patrol the change room more often.  With recent city budgetary difficulties, we have seen staffing at my pool reduced, which makes it harder to do those checks.  When there is an incident in a city facility, the staff members involved in dealing with that incident are required to do some paperwork via filling out incident reports.  This means that the staff member is either unavailable to resume normal duties until that report is complete, or the report has to be done after their regular shift is over, which is paid time.  To have locker room checks at the frequency that would be required in a unisex change room format would likely require an additional staff member working than what we would normally see, which will mean the pool needs a larger budget, which is another burden on the city budget, and at the end, the tax payer.  Incidents will be more frequent, and you will likely run into very undesirable scenarios as a staff member.  As a male lifeguard I have run into multiple awkward situations with teenage girls in the family change room, the same can be said for my female co-workers.  This will add to the stress of an already stressful job as a lifeguard, and could turn people away from the job altogether.

I think that the concept of a family change room is a fantastic idea.  When utilized properly, the family change room at my facility is an excellent option for people to use.  I believe that every facility should have a family changing area, but not at the expense of a men’s and women’s change rooms.  They are a useful option, but not the only option.

I absolutely see the ideas behind having a single, unisex change room at a swimming pool facility.  However, in the opinion of this lifeguard, someone who works on the ground in a pool on a regular basis, the potential for problems simply outweigh any possible benefits.

[Read] – iNews880 article (identical article can also be found at 630ched.com)

[Read] – Global Edmonton Article

[Read] – Edmonton Journal Article