<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Martin McDowell&#039;s Blog &#187; Technology</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/category/technology/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com</link>
	<description>... from a Slovenian in Wales</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 20:18:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>My GMail account hacked by 115.52.213.93</title>
		<link>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/my-gmail-account-hacked-by-115-52-213-93-1725.html</link>
		<comments>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/my-gmail-account-hacked-by-115-52-213-93-1725.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2010 21:26:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin McDowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics and opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/?p=1725</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Unfortunately my GMail account martin [dot] mcdowell got somehow hacked today and someone (or something) in China sent a spam message to all my 119 e-mail contacts in my address book at 15.35 this afternoon. The IP address the hack originated from was 115.52.213.93 and is assigned to the Chinese ISP CNC Group CHINA169. It looks like [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="plus-one-wrap"><g:plusone size="small" href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/my-gmail-account-hacked-by-115-52-213-93-1725.html"></g:plusone></div><p>Unfortunately my GMail account martin [dot] mcdowell got somehow hacked today and someone  (or something) in China sent a spam message to all my 119 e-mail contacts in my  address book at 15.35 this afternoon. The IP address the hack originated from was <a href="http://whois.domaintools.com/115.52.213.93" target="_blank"><strong>115.52.213.93</strong></a> and is assigned to the Chinese ISP <strong>CNC Group CHINA169</strong>.</p>
<p>It looks like there was a  <a href="http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/gmail/thread?fid=3d06568e966df9f0000495be59b0950c&amp;hl=en" target="_blank">Google-wide attack</a> as their systems crashed. There are several reports  of hacked accounts on Google forums. The message was just a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-mail_spam" target="_blank">spam</a> and did not contain any viruses or worms in itself.</p>
<p>Subject: How are you doing,my dear friend?</p>
<blockquote><p>How are you doing,my dear friend?</p>
<p>I am really happy now because i got my new iphone.haha&#8230;</p>
<p>I really want an iphone,you know that,right?</p>
<p>And i just found a cool place to buy it with a cheaper price.</p>
<p>&lt;www.newelecn.com&gt;</p>
<p>Hope you can have a look.</p>
<p>Have a nice day and best regards!</p></blockquote>
<p>For  what its worth I have reported the matter to the <a href="http://www.dyfed-powys.police.uk/en/" target="_blank">police</a> and I have also  got in touch with the attacker&#8217;s internet service provider China 169. Unfortunately I  have no suggestions, other than change your password regularly, on how anybody else should avoid this specific  attack as I am convinced that both my computers are clean, one of them is even a GNU/Linux machine! I take  security quite seriously but I do apologize to anyone who received this spam from my  e-mail account.</p>
<p>Here is what I saw when I tried to access Google calendar about the time of the attack:</p>
<p><a href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Google_Server_Error.png" rel="lightbox[1725]"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-1726" title="Google_Server_Error" src="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Google_Server_Error-300x202.png" alt="" width="300" height="202" /></a></p>
<h3>Update 24 November 2010</h3>
<p>The one thing that angered me was that Google has a unusual activity detection system and even though I was on GMail at the time of the attack I saw no warnings. In fact the only warning I received as about 7h later at about 10pm. The original access table said the Chinese access came from a browser, now it says its &#8216;Unknown&#8217;.</p>
<p><a href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/google_intruder_alert_censored.png" rel="lightbox[1725]"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-1733" title="google_intruder_alert_censored" src="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/google_intruder_alert_censored-300x288.png" alt="" width="300" height="288" /></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/my-gmail-account-hacked-by-115-52-213-93-1725.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>This blog has a new home</title>
		<link>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/this-blog-has-a-new-home-1690.html</link>
		<comments>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/this-blog-has-a-new-home-1690.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Oct 2010 18:46:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin McDowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bluehost]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hosting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/?p=1690</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After many problems that I had with the previous hosting provider Bluehost I have finally decided to uproot this blog and move to another provider. Instead of using a provider in the U.S. I have opted for somebody local, not just locally in Europe, but actually in the UK. The infrastructure they seem to be [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="plus-one-wrap"><g:plusone size="small" href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/this-blog-has-a-new-home-1690.html"></g:plusone></div><p>After many problems that I had with the previous hosting provider Bluehost I have finally decided to uproot this blog and move to another provider. Instead of using a provider in the U.S. I have opted for somebody local, not just locally in Europe, but actually in the UK. The infrastructure they seem to be using is part of the BlueConnex system that has data-centres <a href="http://www.blueconnex.net/network.php" target="_blank">all over the country</a>, mine in particular is in <a href="http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&amp;safe=off&amp;client=firefox-a&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;q=BlueSquare+House+Priors+Way+Maidenhead+Berkshire+SL62HP&amp;fb=1&amp;gl=uk&amp;hq=BlueSquare+House&amp;hnear=Priors+Way,+Maidenhead,+Berkshire+SL6&amp;cid=0,0,6444984408629946428&amp;ei=vpy4TNShN9fPjAfgiuXEDg&amp;sqi=2&amp;ved=0CCoQnwIwAQ&amp;z=16&amp;iwloc=A" target="_blank">BlueSquare</a> and <a href="http://whois.domaintools.com/213.229.109.215" target="_blank">located</a> just down the road right next to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_motorway" target="_blank">M4</a>.</p>
<p>The speeds from where I am are much better and as most of my traffic comes from withing Europe it should improve speeds for most of my visitors. The back-end WordPress admin pages certainly load MUCH MUCH faster then before. Don&#8217;t get me wrong, I think Bluehost is an excellent host provider, very cheap with lots of features. However I think they seem a bit to big for their shoes. I have heard admins having problems with speeds of their DNS servers but it is also the fact of internet latency &#8211; the signal has to come all the way cross the Atlantic and that does not help the whole speed issue. I tried pinging their server box450 where my website was located from home, my work and from Slovenia and was getting poor responses all the time. The Bluehost support was also not helpful in this respect as they kept blaming my ISP. It clearly wasn&#8217;t a problem, possibly could be down to their ISP and the way it was routing traffic across the Atlantic to Europe.</p>
<p>Please give me your feedback on any technical problems through my contact page.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/this-blog-has-a-new-home-1690.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Using Gmail phone to Slovenia</title>
		<link>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/using-gmail-phone-to-slovenia-1682.html</link>
		<comments>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/using-gmail-phone-to-slovenia-1682.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2010 06:55:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin McDowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Skype]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/?p=1682</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When I looked up my GMail account this morn morning I saw that they activated the GMail phone feature for me and so far it is looking much better than Skype. These are the per minute call rates to a landline to Slovenia. Skype (PAYG): 0.041 GBP/min Google Voice: 0.026 GBP/min Prices above include VAT [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="plus-one-wrap"><g:plusone size="small" href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/using-gmail-phone-to-slovenia-1682.html"></g:plusone></div><p>When I looked up my GMail account this morn morning I saw that they activated the GMail phone feature for me and so far it is looking much better than Skype. These are the per minute call rates to a landline to Slovenia.</p>
<blockquote><p>Skype (PAYG): <strong>0.041</strong> GBP/min</p>
<p>Google Voice: <strong>0.026</strong> GBP/min</p></blockquote>
<p>Prices above include VAT and were taken from the <a href="https://www.google.com/voice/rates#S" target="_blank">Google</a> and <a href="http://www.skype.com/intl/en-gb/prices/payg-rates/#cc=SI">Skype</a> websites on 27. August 2010.</p>
<p>Limitation with Google Voice at the moment is that they let you add funds to your account only by $10 ONLY exactly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/using-gmail-phone-to-slovenia-1682.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Extortionate price of fixing an Olympus u700 compact camera</title>
		<link>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/extortionate-price-of-fixing-an-olympus-u700-compact-camera-1604.html</link>
		<comments>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/extortionate-price-of-fixing-an-olympus-u700-compact-camera-1604.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2010 14:32:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin McDowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Camera]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Olympus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[service charges]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/?p=1604</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just had a nasty surprise about my Olympus µ700 compact camera I bought 3 years ago from Pixmania and cost me about £164. Last year it started to bleach/overexpose all outdoor photos. Defaulting to factory settings did not work. I finally called the Olympus UK support line this morning  and they told me that for [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="plus-one-wrap"><g:plusone size="small" href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/extortionate-price-of-fixing-an-olympus-u700-compact-camera-1604.html"></g:plusone></div><p><a href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/olympus-u7001.jpg" rel="lightbox[1604]"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-1605" title="Olympus u700" src="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/olympus-u7001.jpg" alt="" width="225" height="159" /></a>Just had a nasty surprise about my Olympus µ700 compact camera I bought 3 years ago from Pixmania and cost me about<strong> £164</strong>.</p>
<p>Last year it started to bleach/overexpose all outdoor photos. Defaulting to factory settings did not work. I finally called the Olympus UK support line this morning  and they told me that for that model they charge <strong>£90.77!!! </strong>to repair any kind of fault. Does not make any sense at all. That is just over £73 less than the price for when it was new.</p>
<p>Sort of reminds me of the story of inkjet printers with their high repair costs and overpriced ink cartridge prices.</p>
<p><strong>Update April 2011</strong></p>
<p>After contemplating what to do with it I threw it in the trash at our local recycle centre.</p>
<p>External links:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympus_Stylus_710">Olympus µ700 on Wikipedia</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.olympus-europa.com/consumer/29_mju_700.htm">Olympus µ700 on the Olympus website</a></li>
</ul>
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="margin-top: 10px; height: 15px;"><a class="zemanta-pixie-a" title="Reblog this post [with Zemanta]" href="http://reblog.zemanta.com/zemified/d6645966-ee2b-4a63-97b5-1a9b1319554d/"><img class="zemanta-pixie-img" style="border: medium none; float: right;" src="http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=d6645966-ee2b-4a63-97b5-1a9b1319554d" alt="Reblog this post [with Zemanta]" /></a><span class="zem-script more-related pretty-attribution"><script src="http://static.zemanta.com/readside/loader.js" type="text/javascript"></script></span></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/extortionate-price-of-fixing-an-olympus-u700-compact-camera-1604.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google StreetView hits Pembrokeshire</title>
		<link>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/google-streetview-hits-pembrokeshire-1556.html</link>
		<comments>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/google-streetview-hits-pembrokeshire-1556.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 20:22:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin McDowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics and opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google Maps]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google Street View]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pembrokeshire]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/?p=1556</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Google StreetView&#8217;s coverage has been extended to about 90% of the country and that now includes Haverfordwest and Pembrokeshire. The images are pretty high quality. I have heard there is a bit of an anomaly with the High Street in Pembroke Dock as part of it was filmed in once season and the other part [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="plus-one-wrap"><g:plusone size="small" href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/google-streetview-hits-pembrokeshire-1556.html"></g:plusone></div><div id="attachment_1558" class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="width: 510px"><a href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/hwest_on_gstreetview1.png" rel="lightbox[1556]"><img class="size-full wp-image-1558" title="hwest_on_gstreetview" src="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/hwest_on_gstreetview1.png" alt="" width="500" height="208" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Taken from Google StreetView</p></div>
<p>Google StreetView&#8217;s coverage has been extended to about 90% of the country and that now includes <a class="zem_slink" title="Haverfordwest" rel="wikipedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haverfordwest">Haverfordwest</a> and <a class="zem_slink" title="Pembrokeshire" rel="wikipedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pembrokeshire">Pembrokeshire</a>. The images are pretty high quality. I have heard there is a bit of an anomaly with the High Street in Pembroke Dock as part of it was filmed in once season and the other part in another, with Christmas decorations still visible.</p>
<div id="attachment_1559" class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="width: 510px"><a href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/pembs_on_gstreetview1.png" rel="lightbox[1556]"><img class="size-full wp-image-1559" title="pembs_on_gstreetview" src="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/pembs_on_gstreetview1.png" alt="" width="500" height="335" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Taken from Google StreetView</p></div>
<p>As I did and most of the people I showed this to, also did, we went and had a look where we live and where we used to live. So go on, knock yourself out.</p>
<p><a href="http://maps.google.co.uk/" target="_blank">http://maps.google.co.uk/</a></p>
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="margin-top: 10px; height: 15px;"><a class="zemanta-pixie-a" title="Reblog this post [with Zemanta]" href="http://reblog.zemanta.com/zemified/3246530a-0c40-4f97-ac7f-e4fce678ae42/"><img class="zemanta-pixie-img" style="border: medium none; float: right;" src="http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=3246530a-0c40-4f97-ac7f-e4fce678ae42" alt="Reblog this post [with Zemanta]" /></a><span class="zem-script more-related pretty-attribution"><script src="http://static.zemanta.com/readside/loader.js" type="text/javascript"></script></span></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/google-streetview-hits-pembrokeshire-1556.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Waterstone&#039;s e-book conundrum</title>
		<link>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/the-waterstones-e-book-conundrum-1402.html</link>
		<comments>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/the-waterstones-e-book-conundrum-1402.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 20:37:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin McDowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics and opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[E-book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[E-book reader]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shopping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waterstone]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/?p=1402</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Logic dictates that an e-book should be cheaper than its paper counterpart, yes? One of the main reasons why people should buy e-book readers is the fact that you don&#8217;t have to pay for the overpriced printing and hopefully can save a few trees at the same time. OK, lets ignore the fact that a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="plus-one-wrap"><g:plusone size="small" href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/the-waterstones-e-book-conundrum-1402.html"></g:plusone></div><p><a href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/waterstone_ebook_conundrum_011.png" rel="lightbox[1402]"><img class="alignright size-medium wp-image-1401" title="waterstone_ebook_conundrum_01" src="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/waterstone_ebook_conundrum_01-300x245.png" alt="waterstone_ebook_conundrum_01" width="300" height="245" /></a>Logic dictates that an <a class="zem_slink" title="E-book" rel="wikipedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-book">e-book</a> should be cheaper than its paper counterpart, yes? One of the main reasons why people should buy e-book readers is the fact that you don&#8217;t have to pay for the overpriced printing and hopefully can save a few trees at the same time. OK, lets ignore the fact that a lot of books are already made from recycled paper and that making an e-book reader creates a marked size number 11 carbon footprint of its own.</p>
<p>This was why it was very surprising that I found an e-book on Waterstone&#8217;s website that was more expensive than the printed version.</p>
<p>As you can see the cheapest <a class="zem_slink" title="Paperback" rel="wikipedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paperback">paperback</a> edition is <span>£4.79 and the e-book edition is </span><span>£6.25. This screen capture was taken after calling the <a href="http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/simpleSearch.do?simpleSearchString=The+Bodies+Left+Behind&amp;typeAheadFormSubmit.x=0&amp;typeAheadFormSubmit.y=0" target="_blank">following URL</a>.<br />
</span></p>
<p><span>I have looked around the website and could not find this repeated again. I would welcome anybody else&#8217;s feedback. Has someone found the same anomaly?</span></p>
<p><span>I did contact <a class="zem_slink" title="Waterstone's" rel="homepage" href="http://www.waterstones.com">Waterstones</a> and this is what they said:</span></p>
<blockquote><p>Dear Martin,</p>
<p>Thank you for your email.</p>
<p>I am sorry to hear that you are unhappy with the price difference between Waterstones.com and our High Street stores.</p>
<p>There are a number of reasons that there are different prices online to instore. Firstly there is the difference in overheads, and secondly there are the negotiations that take place through Waterstones.com . We have a buyer who negotiates different special deals and promotions for the site outside of those negotiated for the high street. All our books are sourced from one third party distribution centre, which in itself allows reductions in price that are not always seen in the high street stores. We also compete in an online environment that is very different to that of the high street.</p>
<p>That said I appreciate that sometimes this can be a confusing message when coming from the same company so please accept my apologies for any disappointment or confusion caused.</p>
<p>Kind regards,</p>
<p>[name witheld by blog author]<br />
Customer Service Team<br />
Waterstones.com</p></blockquote>
<p>Fair enough. I hope this will not be a common discrepancy, otherwise I cannot see myself getting the currently overpriced e-book reader that are marked at about <span>£</span>200.</p>
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="margin-top: 10px; height: 15px;"><a class="zemanta-pixie-a" title="Reblog this post [with Zemanta]" href="http://reblog.zemanta.com/zemified/ba6ad6cf-6487-48cf-98b5-e5bfa1853124/"><img class="zemanta-pixie-img" style="border: medium none; float: right;" src="http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=ba6ad6cf-6487-48cf-98b5-e5bfa1853124" alt="Reblog this post [with Zemanta]" /></a><span class="zem-script more-related pretty-attribution"><script src="http://static.zemanta.com/readside/loader.js" type="text/javascript"></script></span></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/the-waterstones-e-book-conundrum-1402.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How does Ubuntu Karmic Koala stack-up against the rest</title>
		<link>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/how-does-ubuntu-karmic-koala-stack-up-against-the-rest-1379.html</link>
		<comments>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/how-does-ubuntu-karmic-koala-stack-up-against-the-rest-1379.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2009 10:17:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin McDowell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/?p=1379</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The surprising thing for me here is that Vista came in third. In other boot speed tests I have read about it usually cam in dead last, with Windows 7 being faster, but not faster than any of the two Ubuntus. Speed test courtesy of Tuxradar.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="plus-one-wrap"><g:plusone size="small" href="http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/how-does-ubuntu-karmic-koala-stack-up-against-the-rest-1379.html"></g:plusone></div><p><object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" width="500" height="405" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/88aal60AqBs&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1&amp;" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="500" height="405" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/88aal60AqBs&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1&amp;" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></p>
<p>The surprising thing for me here is that Vista came in third. In other boot speed tests I have read about it usually cam in dead last, with Windows 7 being faster, but not faster than any of the two Ubuntus.</p>
<p>Speed test courtesy of <a href="http://www.tuxradar.com/content/vista-windows-7-ubuntu-904-and-910-boot-speed-comparison">Tuxradar</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.martinmcdowell.com/how-does-ubuntu-karmic-koala-stack-up-against-the-rest-1379.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

