Dropbox Chat! - Chat through Dropbox (Or any shared folder).

I wanted a new learning project and after leaving a few notes for friends in shared Dropbox folders, I came up with an idea for a new project!

Drop Box Chat!

This is a very small program - It simply loads up an XML file called "chat.xml" in its current directory (or creates one if it doesn't already exist), and then reloads the file every time it changes.

Put your name in the first box, message in the second and click send!

It does work fine at the moment, although I am sure there are a few bugs, and there is much more for me to do (delete, make the whole thing look nice etc.)

That being said, I am happy with what I came up with considering the time spent.

Please note - this is NOT a real time chat program and it works by saving the chat.xml file and syncing it via drop box. It is simply an alternative to writing notes everywhere. If you use it a lot or at the same time as someone else, there will most likely be sync issues/a conflict. Simply reload the application.

This program should work over any sort of shared folder and the only requirements are .Net Framework 4 (although, I can probably recompile for a lesser version).

Download link (V 0.0.0.1)

Download link (V 0.0.0.2) - Better formatting, Auto Expand/scrolls to bottom.

Download link (V 0.0.1.0) - Message Box now auto clears.
Download link (V 0.1.0.0) - Enter for send and a few other tweaks.

Please leave feedback if you like!

Error 0x80070643 installing ASP.NET MVC 3 / MVC 3 setup fails

Do you get this message?

Basically from what I can tell, this update is basically a package of numerous KB updates and silently installs it.

Unfortunately, it does not display any errors that the individual installs may return.

After a bit of digging, I found the log file and this line:

Returning IDOK. INSTALLMESSAGE_ERROR [Error 1706.An installation package for the product Microsoft Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate - ENU cannot be found. Try the installation again using a valid copy of the installation package 'vs_setup.msi'.]

Why it doesn't report this, I do not know - however, all you need to do is plop in the disk, or mount the ISO and it should clear this error.

--UPDATE--

I thought it was fixed, however, this was just one error and whilst that got over one hurdle, the bigger install still failed.

After running the update once, it extracts all the individual components to a folder on your hard drive - for me, this was c:\temp\ext47334 - I was able to run every KB on its own, apart from `aspnetwebpages.msi`

This keeps failing with:

"Error 1721. There is a problem with this Windows Installer package. A program required for this install to complete could not be run. Contact your support personnel or package vendor. Action: WebConfigCA_Remove, location: C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft ASP.NET\ASP.NET Web Pages\v1.0\WebConfig\WebConfigCA.exe, command: -u "

I have tried numerous solutions - manually launching that command, removing it from add/remove programs (which fails with another error), deleting the folder along with many others - but they all fail.

I have no idea what is wrong here at the moment but will update once it is sorted.

---

Update: As I thought this is 100% related to the "Microsoft ASP.NET Web Pages" Component.

It is now Solved! Thanks to Matt Garvenn on the ASP.Net Forums, it is down to the Visual Studio SP1 update placing trailing backslashes in two registry keys.

Steps to workaround are:

1. Remove the trailing backslash from the following registry keys:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\ASP.NET\4.0.30319.0\Path

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\ASP.NET\4.0.30319.0\Path

2. Uninstalled the old version of "Microsoft ASP.NET Web Pages".

3. Add the trailing backslash back to those keys.

4. Install MVC 3.

... I see from analytics that I get a good few visitors now but people rarely seem to leave comments - if this helps and you have a few seconds, please leave a message! (no sign up needed)

comment!

Response to Experts Exchange blog post.

This is in response to this blog post made at Experts Exchange.

Whilst I agree on a few of the points you have made, as a user and a promoter of various Stack Exchange websites, I feel like I have to speak out on a few of the incorrect statements you have made, especially reading the negative tone they were made in.

I am an internet user since the early days, and, I honestly liked you! As an IT Pro, when there were certain problems, you usually came up first - with a good answer (I agree, search is good), and you saved my a$$ a few times.

But, in this modern world of questions and answers, YOU SUCK worse than Yahoo answers! I am sorry, I just had to say it.

For years, if I had a problem and you were the first result on Google, I always without hesitation skipped over you as you hid the useful answer. Like many people now, I know the stupid trick of just scrolling to the bottom to view the answers, but why should I have to! In the years that you forcefully hid your answers, I learnt to live without you.

For the past year or so, Stack Overflow and the original trilogy of sites (Super User and Server Fault) are coming higher in Google, regularly hitting the number one spot, and unlike you, I can quickly read the answer, search and navigate the site without having to log in... more of that a bit later.

Now, for my response to your Q & A that almost wasn't.

Q: What makes Experts Exchange different from other Q&A sites on the Internet?

A. Most of our nearly 3 million solutions revolve around specific technology questions, and the majority of those have a sense of urgency to them, People don't like to ask questions; we're searchers by nature. So when a user arrives at the point where they have to ask, they want to know they can trust the solution.

One of the big things that makes Experts Exchange unique is a patented system that requires askers to select their best answer. Most Q&A sites (StackExchange included) let the community vote for the best answer, when really the person whose opinion matters most is the one who asked the question.

I had a question that I asked earlier tonight, I got a response in TWO minutes, and it has been up voted by the community 5 times. I see this as a sign of trust in what was written and will shortly be accepting the answer.

Stack Exchange question askers are the only people who can accept an answer, the community can vote on both questions and answers to show the quality of the content. Your website automatically accepts answers of a certain age whether correct or wrong.

I would hate to be someone who goes through the annoying process of signing up in order to view an answer, only to discover it is incorrect.

You proudly state that you have nearly 3,000,000 questions in the 15 years you have been going. Stack Overflow has 1,315,643 in under 3 years.

There is more that I can say, but this whole post started because I just wanted to make two little comments on your blog, following what you wrote:

So what about you, EE lovers (and haters)? What else do you want to know about EE?

I thought, ok, I will register... However, I couldn't because I need to give a bloody credit card number just to leave a comment on your blog! ... and once I started writing, I couldn't stop myself.

I do not care in the slightest about "gamification" which I can't tell if you are for or against. you seem to bitch about the Stack Exchange community voting, whilst stating how good this system is and the fact you do it. Stack Exchange has just taken it a step further and made it a core part of the site.

I am a happy Stack Exchange user. To date, I have answered a few thousand questions and I hope to answer many thousand more. I do not have a lot of spare time and have been contributing less in recent months, however the reason I freely give away my knowledge is the enjoyment I get knowing that I am helping someone with a genuine problem, who without me, may not get a solution. I would hate thinking that I am only helping someone simply because they have money.

I realise I am being hypocritical here as I own a IT consulting company, and to be honest, I don't have an answer to this (Maybe I should start a question!), but compared to Experts Exchange (and a few other question and answer sites I have visited), Stack Exchange just feels right.

Lower age discrimination

I thought age discrimination was treating anyone different based purely, and only on their age. I am sympathetic and understand the arguments for upper age discrimination, however, when you look across the internet, there is practically nothing about lower age discrimination.

If you search through Google for "Ageism" or "Age Discrimination", every site has pictures of older people. After speed reading through many of the sites, all I could find is this one line " though it can also related to young professionals, teens and even children" on about equal opportunities.

As far as I am concerned, my understanding of discrimination is that it is just wrong for anything or anyone to treat someone different based on a fact that they can not change about themselves. This includes (but not limited to) age, sex, race.

I would rather not get in to race/crime, but instead just something even higher, sex - according to the 2008 crime statistics, men are almost twenty times more likely to commit crimes than women. I know this isn't the best example as some places (gyms etc.) do have rules at certain times - however I would argue that whilst generally accepted by the masses, this is just as wrong.

The reason for writing this is because of the local pub near where I live (and loads of others) have a rule of "no under 21s" and I just don't see why that is allowed, or why it is just accepted by everyone.

If a few 18-21 year olds act stupid, have bad behaviour or generally just get drunk - ban/kick them out by all means! However, the fact that they just and only refuse to serve someone based on their age, as far as I am concerned is pure age discrimination and I have no idea why it is allowed or just accepted by everyone.

Not all under 21s act bad and on top of this, whilst many supermarkets are eating in to the pub industries profits, I would have thought that the pubs would want anyone willing to be a patron!

Anyway, I have been meaning to write this for a while, my rant (for this week) is over!

Computer chip fire...

In all the computers I have built/repaired, I have never seen this...

A client came to me with a P4 machine that had failed after many years, they wanted it fixed up as cheap as possible. I could not find a direct replacement as it takes DDR, but the closest was a DDR2 motherboard, so I purchased this and new memory, then replaced parts over.

I turned the machine on and the fans started, along with a motherboard LED and there was also an "electric smoke" type smell, I thought nothing of this as the machine has not been used in a while and you sometimes get this sort of smell...

After about 15 seconds, there was nothing on the screen, then I noticed.... It wasn't an LED on the motherboard, it was a chip....

I have never seen this before and am rather worried that no fuse tripped and this just went on...

No idea what on earth caused it. I diagnosed that the old motherboard was faulty, but I am wondering if this motherboard was a DOA (Dead on Arrival) faulty unit or if something else is to blame.

... Not really sure what to do next, left an awkward message on the clients answer phone... and hoping to speak to him later tonight or tomorrow.

Bankers Bonuses, good or bad?

For the past few years, every once in a while, the subject of bankers pay comes up and it always gets negative views by everyone (which is fully understandable). There are those (idiotic) people who just go "NO NO NO" without looking at the facts. I am really mixed about it - but I am much more for it than against.

(simplistic view) I think it is so stupid that we live in a world where a company/bank can fail simply because a few people can say they think it will, they quickly sell, so everyone else does. But, at the end we do, and it is a fact we have to live with.

Computers have changed banking forever, traders are able to trade millions at a time by pressing a few buttons. Banks will never be like the old days.... So we have to stop thinking like that.

As far as I am concerned, the argument against is simply that it is far too much and in the majority of cases where a bail-out is concerned, it is public money.

My only real gripe is not that it is public money (If the banks don't spend it, I am sure the government will find another way to waste it!), but that it is just so much, other than that, I really think it is fair, and now I will say why!

Commission (in most industries) is a good way to make things happen, it rewards success and only success. If you were to organise a deal from scratch which would of never happened without you and made your company a million, would you be happy getting absolutely nothing?

The answer to the above question may be yes if you were a good worker, but there would be very little motivation to go out of your way and make another (or better) deal.

Without a banker, a deal will never happen, so, every bank wants bankers and how do you get them - offer money/commission, and as they only get the big money on successful deals, they don't mind hiring them!

So, the argument of they are having public money does not really wash with me as if it wasn't for them, the bank wouldn't have this additional money in the first place.

I think that by offering the bonuses, it is actually much better for the public as it means we will get paid back the government investment quicker and most importantly, we also get a lot more tax from the bonuses than we would in corporation tax alone which is what would happen if the banks did not pay the bonuses.

If the publicly owned banks were not allowed to give bonuses, the bankers would simply move to one of the many other banks where they were not under this restriction.

I hope I have said fairly the argument. At the end of the day, I see the only way that we can ever limit it, is by an all out restriction/limit on bonuses, however, this could mean that many leave the country and work where these restrictions do not exist... This in turn could open up more jobs, but quite frankly, I am not sure it would/could work and we may just be best off letting it go.

Until I am persuaded of a better solution, I am for the bonuses.

Ipad update and more problems with mail and SSL.

Well, I know a few people did not like how negative the last entry was, however I do not really think that anyone really disagrees!

The fact is, I love using the Ipad, and it is great for viewing PDFs/Ebooks, browsing the internet and emails - Which I did a lot on Friday/Saturday (and it was a joy to use), but after that, it is just a big Ipod/Iphone and I can not really see any "extra" benefits, if anyone wants to prove me wrong or say why you like it so much, please feel free.

Anyway, now a little update about the email problem.... and a bit more technical.

My setup here is basically a bog standard mail server that uses the standard SMTP, POP3 and IMAP ports, in addition, I have port 26 for Secure SMTP and 144 for Secure IMAP.... This is in addition to ports 465 for secure SMTP and 993 for Secure IMAP which the Ipad uses as default.

The reasons for alternate secure ports is simply down to the fact a few clients had problems connecting through some ISPs that blocked. It is not really the point, AFAIK, this should not affect anything as you can configure the ports on the Ipad.

The SSL / secure ports are set in the mail server using a self signed certificate with no chain. The mail server itself was the root of this certificate. In addition, this certificate is installed on any client machines that allows it, this includes a mix of Windows, Linux and Mac machines, as well as Iphones, Blackberrys, Nokias and a bunch of other devices. Apart from one Mac machine about a week ago, there has never been any problems connecting to the server.

Now comes the tricky bit!

I found the Iphone configuration utility (Works for Ipods and Ipads!). It is a brilliant tool that allows you to see a console log of the device

I used wireshark to try and understand what is going on at a deeper level. It seems that the Ipad tries to do some "funky" stuff and if the server either does not allow SSL or has a standard certificate, there is no problem. If however you have a self signed/single chain certificate, it fails.

I tried installing the certificate, it installs without problem, but the mail just doesn't seem to work.

Next, I always wanted to have a proper signed root certificate that I can sign other certificates against - for a brief time I used the Microsoft solution but that was a while ago. I just wanted a very small easy solution, so I used OpenSSL.

I created my root certificate, distributed it to all client devices, and created a new certiicate for the mail server (with the new root in the chain). When I applied the root certificate, it worked!

In this time, I also created a new SSL certificate for my intranet, website and a few other things.

I did this on Thursday night, and I was so happy - not only did I finally have my own root certificate configured, I got mail on my Ipad!!! Everything was fast and good - it worked just as you would expect.

When I went to a business event on Friday/Saturday, everything was perfect, (even connected well to my Microsoft VPN Server). I was using the web browser and mail the entire time and I cannot say how much I enjoyed it (which being from Apple, I am ashamed to say!).

Coming home, I was feeling a little tired so stopped at a service station for a little rest (and a quick email check!) - This time it was a public WIFI point. Again, after getting a little confused by the BT Opezone sign on system (I don't like the way Ipad opens up the page, and if you cancel, it disconnects... I found it a little weird, but I want to investigate it later), it worked fine.

Then I got home yesterday and the real fun begun. Over the trip, I must of connected to about 9 wifi points that I will never use again. One of my hates over all IOS devices is that there is no option to delete old WIFI points, so I chose the "Reset Network Settings" option... BIG MISTAKE.

(Additional Problem here, but one I can live with - even if you have a profile set that includes a WIFI SSID and code, it will keep the profile "installed" but will wipe the code - you need to retype. I can see this being a problem in enterprises as unless you have a 3G device, or reconnect it (via wire) to the configuration utility you will have to manually type it.)

Now comes the big problem - for some unknown reason, since then, MY MAIL STOPPED WORKING AGAIN.

The log shows:

I have tried everything I can imagine, deleting and reapplying the email account and the root certificate have not helped at all.

But, things get even worse now - I performed the same "reset network settings" option to the Ipod Touch here, and now it as well can no longer connect to the mail server (either unencrypted or encrypted).

In addition to this, it just appears that the root certificate does not get applied correctly - It is too hard to explain/show via Mail, so using Safari, I can show the following pictures.

Picture speak a thousand words, so here is something that I hope may help someone to help me...

Visiting an Intranet site with the Root certificate installed, or removed produces this:

Clicking details with the root installed: - Note the "Not Trusted".

Clicking on "Details" with the root removed :

Profile showing that the root is installed:

Using Safari and browsing to the certificate with the root installed (notice that it is trusted):

Using Safari and browsing to the certificate with the root removed:

Please note that even if I specifically install the certificate, it still does not work - this is not relevant as installing the root is all that should be necessary.

The last two are exactly as I expect it should work, I just can't explain the second picture - It knows the root, but isn't verifying.

This time, I have no idea. Because of all my previous problems, I can only conclude that SSL on the Ipad (and possibly other IOS devices) simply does not work as it should.

Oh - and, final note, Apple support are completely and utterly useless... their solution - "You can set up a Gmail account and forward your emails there"... When I tried to ask about SSL in particular, they put me on hold whilst they check... After the call was on for about 10 minutes, they hung up. Next call, I spoke to an idiot. Apple really do not make it easy for someone to try to like them...

I have tried reporting this, ask for help/feedback, but I am just getting no where. If anyone wants an email account on one of my servers, the public root certificate, a link to an SSL site protected by the root, or anything - I am happy to help if you think you can help!