Scammers are morons...

Check out this very dumb spam email that was sent to, of all places, the Debian Hurd mailing list, and received a suitably chastening response. I mean, seriously, Linux has a reputation for being geeky, Debian has a reputation among Linux distros for being geeky and the Hurd port is no doubt even geekier (I'm on the mailing list, but only really because I'm interested in the idea of the Hurd and I would like to be able to play with it once I have sufficient skills). Who is dumb enough to think that people on this mailing list will not realise this is a scam? Not to mention the nature of it:

Dear Webmail Account User,

This message is from the webmail administrator/
IT support center to all webmail account users. We are
currently upgrading the data base and e-mail center due tO
unusual activities identified in our email system.
Therefore, We are deleting all unidentified Webmail Accounts
to upgrade and create space for new ones.

You are required to verify your webmail account by
confirming your Webmail identity. This will prevent your
Webmail account from termination during this exercise.

In order to confirm your Webmail identity, you are to
provide the following data below;

First Name:
Last Name:
Username/ID:
Password:


*Important*
Please provide all these information completely and correctly
otherwise due to security reasons we may have to deactivate
your webmail account temporarily.

If anyone falls for that one they probably shouldn't be allowed near a computer ever again! I guess it goes to show that most online scammers are in fact utterly stupid people who bank on there being someone even stupider to fall for it.

Kill Bill in One Minute

I loved this video! Check it out!

See more funny videos and funny pictures at CollegeHumor.

INX

I stumbled across an incredibly useful tool the other day, which I thought I'd share with you. INX is a custom Ubuntu respin that lacks an X window server. In other words, it's a command line only system.
Now, this may at first make you think "meh, what can that do?", but INX sets out to prove you wrong by letting you do virtually everything you can do from a GUI! Including browse the web graphically, read email, listen to internet radio even watch videos!
INX is two things: First of all, it's a great demonstration of just how much you can actually do from the command line. Second, it's a great learning aid. It includes loads of tutorials on how to use the command line. I learned a load of things from one go, including how to use GNU Screen.
If you're even remotely serious about learning to use Linux properly, I highly recommend grabbing a copy from the link above!

Programs wanted for old-style chips

Interesting idea, but seems strange to use 8-bit processors when it would probably be easier to use a more modern x86 CPU that was coming to the end of its lifetime - older Intel chips can be had pretty cheap, and this would let them use the variety of free software available such as Linux. Why reinvent the wheel?

read more | digg story

Musings on learning Python

I realised that I hadn't posted for a while and I also hadn't mentioned how I was doing learning Python, so I thought I'd best write a new post.

Well, I've been using Python Programming for the Absolute Beginner, 2nd Edition, and I've skimmed through it once to familiarise myself with the syntax and am now working through it a second time, but this time I'm making sure I pass all the exercises before I move on. I did have a significant setback during this time because I had to spend two and a half months working on Network Technology Foundations, the final module for my CIW Associate course (got 19 out of 21 on the test though! Just waiting to hear from my tutor about doing the final exam, though), but I finished that in mid-February. So, in the period from mid-October to start of December, and then again from mid-February onwards, I've been spending a little time every day learning Python. Now I can devote a bit more time to it, I think I'm making a fair amount of progress.

And how do I find it? Well, I already have reasonable knowledge of HTML/XHTML, and did a little bit of programming in BASIC on my Amstrad CPC when I was a kid, and I'm already reasonably familiar with the bash shell (though I haven't really done any shell scripting), so I wasn't a complete novice. From my experience, and from attempting a few other languages (Perl and Java, mainly), I've found that Python is the first language that I really feel I can make progress with. I've already surpassed my meagre BASIC knowledge, and I feel it's doing me good because unlike with BASIC, Python encourages good programming practices such as indentation, which will no doubt do me good when I choose to learn another language.

I've heard in the past that Python just seems to "fit your brain" better than other languages, and my experience bears this out. I can already follow the flow of pretty much any Python program pretty well, and I was really pleased the other day when I found a listing in a magazine for a game written in Python and I understood every line perfectly. I still haven't gotten very far with learning object-oriented programming, but that will come with time.

I've also tinkered with C a tiny bit, and learning Python has meant that I find it easier to understand what's going on in C, which is great. One of the things that drew me to Python was the fact that it was relatively easy, but at the same time was a full-featured, modern programming language, not some kid's teaching language, so I could learn the basic concepts behind programming using Python, such as object-oriented programming, then apply the principles I'd learned to more demanding languages, as I've always heard that once you know a few languages it's easy to learn another. I've already found that if I look at a program in pretty much any language now it's possible to get some idea of what's going on.

As a very welcome side-effect, my skills with Vim have increased tremendously, and combined with the fact that I can now touch-type, when you compare how long it took me to enter a BASIC program as a kid to how long it now takes me to enter a Python program of roughly equal length, there's no comparison. The downside of this is that at work when typing letters (I work in a customer services role), I keep reaching for j to move down, the Vim key bindings are burned so far into my brain!

I'm going to continue learning more Python, but I'm getting a little bored with my current Python book so I will finish this read through and move on to something else. I have Apress's Beginning Game Development with Python and Pygame, The Definitive Guide to Django and Practical Django Projects, as well as O'Reilly's Learning Python and Programming Python, so that means I've got plenty to learn about Python. I find reading several different tutorials about a subject gives you a more balanced view of it, and there's also plenty of tutorials online about Python so there's loads of scope to learn more.

I have some idea of the path I'd like to take with learning to program after I'm reasonably skilled with Python. I'm interested in learning to program the iPhone and iPod Touch, and now I have a MacBook that's a possibility that's open to me (note that this is pretty much for fun, I'm not one of these people who thinks they're going to write an iPhone app that everyone will buy, after all a year or so ago everyone was thinking the same about Facebook apps and now most people are pretty bored of them), so I've got Apress's Learn C on the Mac, Learn Objective-C on the Mac and Beginning iPhone Development. I wanted to learn C at some point anyway, partly because it's useful to learn it for other languages, and partly because it's pretty much required for any kind of serious Linux or Unix programming, so if I learn that (or, at least enough to get by), then learn Objective-C, then that'll stand me in good stead for learning how to use Cocoa and Cocoa Touch.

I also plan to learn Java and/or C# at some point since both languages are in demand, and I may do this after I finish my current course as the people I'm studying with offer courses in both of these.

OK, that's quite a lot on my plate, I know, but hey, ambition counts for a lot!

The Teenager Audio Test

Apparently people over 25 can't normally hear this, but I could at 30, and it was irritating! Pointless, but fun - see if you still have the hearing of a teenager!

Created by Train Horns

I really like today's Dilbert:

Enjoy!

Ubuntu causes girl to drop out of college? Errr...

I expect by now most of you will have seen this article, about a young woman who bought a new Dell laptop, but for some reason got it with Ubuntu preinstalled, and was complaining that it had forced her to drop out of college.

My first thought was how? Dell's website doesn't exactly make show Ubuntu prominently, you really have to go searching round for it to find it. Also, it has a pretty big disclaimer saying that if you buy one of these computers, you won't be getting it with Windows. Dell certainly don't sneak it onto your computer.

Second, it's certainly not Ubuntu's or Dell's fault. If she'd bought a Mac, for example, the Verizon setup CD probably wouldn't work on that either - even now Macs aren't always well supported.

I don't really blame the girl, although she REALLY should have asked for help earlier, and not gone to the TV station! If she'd logged into the Ubuntu Forums plenty of people would have been willing to help. Hell, I would have been willing to help someone in that position myself, it's certainly not a terribly hard issue!

That girl represents the overwhelming majority of people who use computers for just surfing the net, emailing and writing a few documents. Ubuntu can perform very well in that role, however most Internet Service Providers are still very Windows-centric. I'm sure many Mac users experience these kinds of issues too. So getting broadband working using ISP-provided hardware and software in anything other than Windows can be an uphill struggle.

I guess the issue really here is more about ISP's than end users or operating systems. I truly despise the setup CD's used by most ISP's. Why install software you don't need to use? It's not hard to configure a broadband connection if someone just gives you the information you need.
Here's what I think ISP's need to do:

1. Ditch those stupid USB DSL modems most ISP's use. On Windows you normally need to install a driver to use them, whereas Linux and Macs will generally either work straight away with them or won't work. A much better option is something that connects via Ethernet. As a general rule, it won't require any drivers to work on any OS you wish. More and more broadband packages include a wireless router, so just make this a decent Ethernet one rather than a USB one. If they don't need to install a driver, that's a whole step in the process gone, like that! Could cut down on tech support calls in one stroke.
   
2. Ditch the automated configuration software and use a web interface. These are generally just as user-friendly, but don't require you to install anything. My D-Link wireless router has a web interface and I can configure it on my MacBook, or one of my Linux machines if I wish. If the ISP provides the router, make it one with a web interface, and have the setup instructions concentrate on that router, but provide information that's sufficient to cover any router. Also, what if people are going to be using the connection primarily with something other than a computer, such as a PlayStation 3? This way, no matter whether they use Windows, a Mac, Ubuntu, Slackware, Solaris, FreeBSD or a PS3, they can get online.
   
3. Get rid of automated setup CD's for Internet connections. Every remotely user-friendly OS, Ubuntu included, has its own wizard for setting up an Internet connection. Give people the information they need to do it, and let them do it. I really think one of the reasons people have problems with computers is over-zealous hardware and software suppliers trying their best to hide every last little detail, even filling in a few numbers and ticking a few boxes.
   

I'm all for making things easy to use, but end users should not be spoon-fed. It makes more sense to me to give people the information they need and let them get on with it. Configuring a router via a web interface if you have all the information you need on a sheet of paper is no harder than filling in a form online, which anyone with half a brain can do. If you can join Facebook, you can configure your router if someone gives you the information you need.

Instead people get told to put in the CD, run it and attach the modem. They expect it to work straight away, and if it doesn't are lost, because every last detail has been hidden from them so they don't know where to turn next. If they have input those details themselves, they can go back and see if they have entered something wrongly.

I appreciate there are many people who don't want to learn the technical details. Fine, I don't want to force them to learn. But we should be trusting people to input a few details on their own, rather than pushing everything out of sight.

Unix commands work in Google!

Holy crap! Did you know you can use some Unix commands in Google? I just Googled the following:

ubuntu | grep icewm

and got a load of responses about Ubuntu, all mentioning IceWM! Now that is a SERIOUSLY useful tool, which I will be making very heavy use of indeed! Wonder what other Unix commands work in Google?

A review of OpenSolaris 2008.11

I'm always willing to try new operating systems, and naturally it's a plus if they're free and open source. I like the Unix environment in general, and find that it better suits my needs than Windows.

So I guess it was inevitable that I was going to give OpenSolaris a try at some point. For the uninitiated, it's an open source operating system based on Sun's Solaris operating system, which is itself a version of Unix.

OpenSolaris feels very similar to popular Linux distros such as Ubuntu - it boots from the CD into a Gnome desktop with all the same applications as you'd expect to see in Ubuntu - Firefox, Thunderbird and Pidgin. OpenOffice isn't included by default, but is available from the repositories. This similarity is no accident - Sun hired Ian Murdock, founder of Debian, to help them create an official OpenSolaris distribution.

OpenSolaris's implementation of the Gnome desktop has to be the best I have ever seen. Check out this screenshot:



This shows the default theme, Nimbus. I prefer Dark Nimbus:



Compared to Ubuntu, the fonts that come by default are nicer, and no need to worry if you're brown-phobic too! It also includes Compiz by default.

As yet, OpenSolaris only offers the Gnome desktop. Not great if you prefer KDE like I do, but it does mean the whole thing is geared towards one desktop, making it a bit more uniform than most Linux distros - you won't find KDE apps that stand out like a sore thumb!

One downside is that compared to most Linux distros, OpenSolaris can be rather leisurely. It took several minutes to boot up in Virtualbox, and while the installer was no harder than Ubuntu's to use, it took a LOT longer. Installing new software was also very slow.

The graphical package manager is very similar to Ubuntu's Synaptic, and won't cause problems for anyone who's used to the idea of package management. However, OpenSolaris doesn't seem to have the sort of simple update manager that Ubuntu has.

One aspect that would no doubt come in very handy is the new Time Slider feature. Reminiscent of Apple's Time Machine, this feature allows you to automate backups in a simple user-friendly fashion. Sun's ZFS filesystem is undoubtedly extraordinarily powerful, and Time Slider makes it easy for the average user to use it.

This is Unix, so naturally there's a shell. While there was apparently a controversy over their selection of the bash shell, as used in Linux and OS X, over the Korn shell which is more often used in Solaris, I feel they made the right decision. Since bash will be familiar to people who use Linux or OS X, the two most prominent *nixes, it makes sense for them to adopt this.

I think for many people, OpenSolaris may be the open source operating system they have been waiting for. Some people do complain about the fact that there's no one company behind Linux and they get confused by the different distros. If so, OpenSolaris may well be the answer to their prayers. While there are other OpenSolaris "distros" such as Belenix, OpenSolaris is the official distribution. It offers an end-user experience that compares favourably with modern Linux distros. Also, the fact that it only supports Gnome so far means that it's consistent, although I personally would prefer to have the option of using KDE instead.

Also, Solaris is one of a number of operating systems that have been certified as real Unix. While as far as I know OpenSolaris has not been certified as this, it's based on the same code base as Solaris. So if you like your desktop Unix, but don't want to pay the premium for a Mac, you may want to consider this.

Sun have announced plans to offer OpenSolaris preinstalled on some Toshiba laptops. This is nothing short of astonishing considering how long people have waited for preinstalled Linux, and I guess that really shows how much difference one company's unwavering support can make.

If you're in the market for an open source operating system, OpenSolaris is well worth a try. This is only the second release, and it's really shaping up well. It still needs better driver support, and it could do with being faster, but I like what I've seen so far, and I look forward to following the fortunes of OpenSolaris over the next few years.

Why the Budget All-in-One Desktop Will (NOT!) Fail

I just read an interesting post on Wired about the phenomenon of all-in-one desktop computers, built with laptop or netbook components (for example the Asus Eee Top). They point out that budget devices such as netbooks do well in poor economic conditions, and that compartmentalisation has proven acceptable in many Apple devices. However, they then go on to claim that these devices will fail because they're not mobile. Huh?

These devices aren't intended to be mobile! They're intended to be cheap and cheerful desktops that nonetheless look good. The fact is, great as netbooks are, you would NOT want to use one as your primary computer, unless you used it for only a few minutes a day. For a price that's not much more than a netbook, these devices offer a full-sized screen and keyboard. And I don't know about anyone else, but I find I'm often more productive on a desktop than a laptop for tasks that require you to spend long lengths of time typing, such as coding. An ergonomic desktop will always be more effective for that kind of task than a laptop which is designed for mobility.

Furthermore, they're missing the point. These are affordable, stylish devices for the ordinary user, rather than the type of user who reads Wired. They don't actually need to be that powerful. Here's what the ordinary user tends to use their computer for:

• Web browsing (typically Facebook or another social network, eBay, maybe Flickr etc, and sometimes buy something online)
• Email
• Instant messaging
• Writing letters
• Sync their iPod

And that's pretty much it. These machines will perform fine for this kind of task. Ultimately they are designed for people who use their computer primarily as a portal to the Internet.

I suspect the Wired writer may have fallen into the "power user trap". Just because a power user wouldn't necessarily find it a good deal doesn't mean everyone else would feel the same way. These are ideal computers for the following uses:

• A child's computer (I believe strongly that children should have their own computer if possible, it encourages them to tinker with it in a way you wouldn't want them to do if they had to share the family computer)
• For elderly relatives.
• People who just want to surf the net etc
• A first computer for almost anyone

They compared it to the iMac. Well, that's a far more expensive computer, so you'd expect it to have a lot more features. No-one would consider these as an alternative to the iMac, nor would they consider the iMac as an alternative to these.

In fact, I've been considering buying some kind of small form factor desktop myself, because I really don't have the room for a full-sized desktop, but I really could do with that kind of productivity boost. I have had back problems caused by using a laptop in the past, and also have occasionally suffered from RSI, so a desktop might work better for me as my main computer. I'm not much of a PC gamer, and I prefer Linux to Windows or OS X so I can get by with a machine that isn't very powerful - just use a minimal window manager like Fluxbox.

There's several options - one of these net-tops like an Eee Top, a Mini-ITX machine (has the advantage that it comes without an OS so I could just install a Linux distro of my choice), an Eee Box, or a Mac Mini. If Apple had actually updated the Mac Mini like they were rumoured to have done then I might well have gone for that as I already have a mouse and keyboard I could use, I'd just need to buy a display for it (although I strongly suspect that a Mac Mini refresh is on the cards at some point later this year, maybe when Snow Leopard is released, and if I hadn't got a desktop by that point a refreshed Mini with Snow Leopard would be a strong contender). So either the Mini-ITX or Eee Box might work well for me.

So, in my opinion the phenomenon of the budget All-in-one desktop will not fail, because it's targeted at ordinary users, and it's often hard for power users to appreciate what people like that want.

Tempted by Android...

I had the occasion to have a play with a colleague's T-Mobile G1 today, and all I can say it this:

WOW!!!!!!!

Excuse the somewhat childish overuse of caps and exclamation marks, but I really had to get the point across!

I have a 32GB iPod Touch and have also tried other people's iPhones, so I have a fair idea of how the iPhone compares to the G1. And quite frankly, I think that Android is going to utterly annihilate the iPhone.

Believe me, I don't say this lightly. I'm certainly not an Apple fanboy, by any means, but I do like my iPod Touch. It's polished, it works pretty well, and the apps I've used so far have been pretty cool.

However, the iPhone and iPod Touch have plenty of flaws too. I don't like the iTunes music store - I think it's a bit of a rip-off for downloading music compared to Amazon's MP3 store, which is cheaper and DRM-free.

At present, Apple may have more apps already available, but I feel that longer-term, Android is likely to attract more developers. Here's what I find restrictive about the iPhone and iPod Touch for software development:

• You can ONLY develops apps for them on a Mac, using XCode.
• Apps are written in Objective-C, a programming language with little support outside the Mac community.
• You have to be in the Developer Program which costs $99 (OK, it's not much, but it's still a barrier to development - after all, what if people in the developing world wanted to develop apps?)
• You need Apple's approval to make your app available - this has been discouraging developers who have seen their apps being rejected for vague reasons, and these are the people you really don't want to piss off as they are the lifeblood of any software community.

Now, compare this with Android:

• You can develop apps on Windows, Mac or Linux, with Eclipse being the main development environment, although others are supported.
• Apps are written in Java, probably the most popular programming language in the world, with a massive existing developer base, and already widely used on mobile platforms.
• No requirement to join a developer program.
• No need to have Google approve your app - Android Market has no restrictions on apps, unless they are outright dangerous (OK, someone will say that makes them potentially dangerous - I'd answer that Android is Linux-based so it should be pretty rock-solid, and Java apps run in a Java VM so they are sandboxed, so I think that's probably safe enough as long as they sort out the notorious bug where it would run text commands as root...)

So in my opinion, Android has the potential to attract a LOT more developers than the iPhone. Add to that the fact that there are a large number of handset manufacturers that have signed up to the Open Handset Alliance, including well-known manufacturers such as Motorola, Sony-Ericsson, LG and Samsung, all of whom will have an interest in contributing to the pool of applications available, and I would expect Android's developer community to quickly expand over the next couple of years, until it dwarfs the iPhone developer community.

A lot of people have said that the G1 doesn't stand up to the iPhone on various counts. OK, that's fair enough, but they miss and important point - the G1 isn't Android, it's the first Android phone, and is largely for developers and early adopters. There will be others, and some of those are courtesy of manufacturers that really know their stuff. I love Motorola phones, so I might consider getting an Android-based Motorola device.

From what I hear, the Cupcake branch of Android is making staggering progress. Thanks to its being entirely an open-source project, Android can very likely develop faster than the iPhone OS can. In a year or two, I would expect Android to have outpaced the iPhone OS. If you compare Android now to the iPhone OS when it was released, I'm pretty sure Android is superior. The Android of a year hence will no doubt have seen a lot more development, and crucially, a LOT more real-world use, and will therefore no doubt be a completely different beast.

Having seen it in action now I'm sorely tempted to get a G1, and I'm only inclined to wait because of the promise of even better in the future. I've mentioned that I'm currently learning Python, and I have plans to learn another language after that. I've considered Objective-C as creating an iPhone app, even if I didn't make it available, might be an interesting challenge, but now I'm thinking that learning Java and creating Android apps might be more interesting.

Finally, just like to wish everyone a Happy New Year!

Real UNIX my ****!

I've heard that writers write about whatever gets caught in their filters, so usually they tend to write about things that piss them off. That must apply to blog authors, because I've got a real bee in my bonnet about this issue.

According to Wikipedia the current OS's which are licensed to use the UNIX trademark are AIX, HP-UX, IRIX, Solaris, Tru64, A/UX, Mac OS X Leopard (on Intel only), and part of z/OS.

Now, I don't know about IRIX, Tru64, A/UX and z/OS, but as I understand it AIX, HP-UX and Solaris are derived from AT&T's original UNIX source code, as IBM, Hewlett-Packard and Sun respectively licensed this from AT&T, so they include code from the original UNIX.

Now BSD was created at University of California, Berkeley, using AT&T's original UNIX source code. Later, in the early 90's, all the code that was licensed from AT&T was reimplemented. Therefore, as I understand it, BSD contains none of the original UNIX source code, and operating systems like FreeBSD and NetBSD can't call themselves UNIX for that reason.

OK, so that explains to my satisfaction why AIX, HP-UX and Solaris are real UNIX, and I assume the same applies for IRIX, Tru64, A/UX and z/OS. But OS X?

Unless I've got my wires crossed somewhere, OS X contains none of the original AT&T UNIX source code:

• The XNU kernel consists of the Mach microkernel, which was developed as a replacement for the BSD kernel, together with userland tools taken from FreeBSD4.4. So, as I see it, no AT&T source code here.
• The shell used in Leopard is bash. Many of the other tools used are also the GNU versions as used in GNU/Linux and GNU/Open Solaris.
• I believe the X Window Server used is a fork of Xfree86.

So, correct me if I'm wrong by all means, but I can't see that OS X contains any of the original UNIX source code. If so, surely it's not really got any more innate right to call itself real UNIX than Linux has?

So far as I can see, UNIX certification means that it's been certified as being POSIX-compliant by the owner of the UNIX trademark. Well, that really doesn't mean that much, does it? To the best of my knowledge, this would just mean you'd pay The Open Group to certify it as being real UNIX. Is there any reason why any Linux vendor couldn't pay this fee and have their distro certified as being real UNIX? I really don't think this would be a good use of their money, but I see no good reason why this couldn't be done.

So, dear lazyweb, here are my questions:

1) What actual benefits are there to an OS being certified as real UNIX?
2) Does OS X Leopard contain any of the original UNIX source code?
3) If not, what right does it actually have to call itself real UNIX?

Seriously, I'm not trolling here, I just cannot see that Leopard has any more right to call itself real UNIX than Linux does on the basis of the source code. And if it's based on certification, then what's to stop a Linux distro vendor from having their OS certified as being real UNIX?

Linux - Stop holding our kids back

This is one article that genuinely made me angry - it's worrisome how ignorant the teacher mentioned is.

read more | digg story

Are Macs designed for the left-handed?

I had a bit of a bizarre revelation this afternoon, which I'd like to share. I own a total of four laptop computers:

• A Dell Inspiron 1150 running Kubuntu Hardy
• A Philips X58 dual-booting Vista and Ubuntu Intrepid
• An Asus Eee PC 2G Surf running the default Xandros
• An early 2008 MacBook

Now, the Dell has two USB sockets at the back, the Eee has two on the left and one on the right, the Philips has two on the left and two on the right. So with these machines you can easily have the mouse on the left or right-hand side.

The MacBook is different. It has all the USB and other sockets on the left-hand side, so you have to plug in your mouse on the left. If you want to use a mouse on the right-hand side it effectively shortens the length of the wire. Also, the touchpad has only one button, so there's no right or left button in the same way.

So that begs the question - Are Macs designed specifically for people who are left handed?

Think about it - the ration of right-to-left handedness is about 90:10, similar to the proportion of Mac users to users of other PC's (yes, Macs are PC's!). Macs have a reputation for being used by creative people and creativity comes from the right hemisphere of the brain, which is linked to the left side of the body, meaning that creative people are more likely to be left handed. So if creative people are more likely to be left handed, it follows that they are more likely to prefer a computer designed for them.

Now, I'm right-handed, and I'm also a good example of a left-brained logical type, and while I quite like OS X (I do think it's better than Windows), I prefer Linux. Linux is more likely to appeal to the right-handed, left-brained people who like getting lost in technical details simply because you can get lost in the technical details, but also most people run it on hardware other than Macs, and like I said above, my impression is that most PC's are designed more with the right-handed in mind.

It also explains why some people absolutely rave about Macs, and plenty of others (myself included) are ambivalent about them (although I am actually writing this post on my MacBook, naturally as it's what I had to hand when I first noticed this!) and can't understand what the fuss is all about. If you were left-handed, wouldn't you prefer a computer designed specifically for you, to the point that you'd never want to go back?

It wouldn't surprise me if a survey were to find out that the majority of Mac users were left handed, and I'd be curious to know if such a survey has ever been done. Any thoughts, anyone?