Internet Addiction Disorder, commonly abbreviated as IAD, is a disorder that is not officially classified by medical science at present. I want to make that clear right up front.

However it may, if you can believe it, exist in the next edition of the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) which will be published in May 2012. It is being debated whether or not to be listed there.

One who would suffer from IAD would exhibit the following four symptoms (source):

1. Excessive use usually accompanied by a loss of the sense of time.
2. Feeling withdrawal when not online.
3. Tolerance (as in increased tolerance), feeling the need for better more powerful computer equipment to spend more time online.
4. Negative repercussions, such as being more argumentative, feeling overly fatigued and exhibiting social isolation.

I’ve made mention of the site I’m about to link before, but yet again it rears its ugly head, www.wowdetox.com really drives home the fact that some people are truly addicted and need real help. And like it or not, most people point to gamers as the people who suffer from IAD (which once again I’ll mention is not officially classified as a disorder) the most.

My personal feeling on IAD is that yes, it will be classified as a real disorder at some point in the future. Will it be classified as such by 2012? Probably not, but then again it all depends on how many well-defined instances of serious mental health related issues – or death – are directly caused by excessive internet usage. And yes, there are instances of that unfortunately. And because internet addiction is so widely believed to be a true disorder, there’s even a center dedicated to helping people just for that.

My question to you is this: Do you personally believe IAD exists?

If the answer is yes, have you ever encountered anyone you think has it? Did they have the four symptoms mentioned above?

If the answer is no, do you believe it’s something that’s a result of a disorder or combination of disorders that already exist (a common argument against IAD)?

Before closing this out, I’m not trying to spread FUD. Not in the slightest. IAD is something that could very well be classified as a real disorder in the future.

What I want to know is if you think IAD exists.

Lastly, if it did exist, what would be the treatment? I have no idea other than my own personal recommendation, which would be: "Subject suffering from IAD is hereby ordered to get out of the house and see the sun once in a while. If subject fails to leave the house, administer a cold bucket of ice water over subject’s head, then run. Hopefully he or she will follow so you can get him or her get out of the house that way." It’s tough love, but it works. Or at least I think it would.

Before social media was even a twinkle in a programmer’s eye, there were the early days of internet, affectionately known now as Web 1.0. Nobody knows the exact date of when Web 2.0 started, but it is believed to have started some time in 2004, which at this point is five years ago (oh, how time flies..)

Many of you out there will remember these pre-2004 attempts at audience participation, all in its glorious lameness.

Guestbooks

There was a time when web sites were positively littered with these things. Imagine for a moment that there was a forum, but there was only one thread, and that thread was flat. And it also exposed your email address for the world and spam-bots to harvest. This was the guestbook.

Guestbooks were things that everybody had but nobody ever used. It was an island that connected to absolutely nothing, and most didn’t even notify the admin of new posts.

The guestbook was pummeled into obscurity due to lack of interest and for the fact spam-bots not only harvested email addresses as mentioned above, but also spammed the crap out of them. CAPTCHA? What CAPTCHA?

As insane as this sounds, guestbooks are still available. Bravenet offers one, for free of course, because nobody in their right might would ever pay for it.

WebRings

This was an attempt to create user-generated communities/directories by having owners of web sites/pages link together by category, hence the "ring." The only problem is that nobody ever clicked the links tacked at the bottom of the web pages they were on. Like guestbooks, many web sites were littered with these things as well – usually right after the guestbook.

Some WebRing services still exist. There is the original WebRing which appears to now have a broken web site. Yahoo! used to own this believe it or not, but wisely dropped it. There is also alt-webring.com, which does appear to be active and functioning well, and RingSurf. All do the same thing, but nobody cares about them anymore and haven’t for some time.

ShoutBoxes

This was the next generation of the guestbook. A simple box on a web page that allowed to to post a one-line phrase (your "shout,") hit Submit, and that was that, it was online.

ShoutBoxes were actually pretty cool and useful, but suffered from spam-bot infestation just like guestbooks did.

The original code for a ShoutBox required you to install a Perl script on your web server. These days if you want one, ShoutMix offers them for free – on their server. The feature set is decent, but the moderation options are simply too little to work with.

Using a ShoutBox is completely obsolete considering Disqus does the same job, except a whole lot better, completely for free, has threading, awesome moderation, etc. If you want to enable a simple comment area on your web site, want completely hassle-free code and full options, Disqus is it. The only other feasible option that’s as easy and feature-rich is HaloScan (odd name, good service.)

On-Site Chat

There have been many iterations of live chat over the years in respect to embedding it within a web page.

One of the earliest used a system (said loosely) called meta refreshing. This was a live chat, except not in real time. You would type in your line and hit submit, then the browser would refresh every 5 seconds or so to see not only your message but other messages other people in the "room" would be typing. The whole experience was just plain weird.

Another way was to embed an IRC channel right in the web page via Java using PJIRC. I actually installed this before years ago and it worked very, very well.

The latest and easiest iteration of chat-on-site is Meebo. It is by far the easiest of the lot.

There’s one inescapable problem with chat-on-site however, and that’s the awkward factor. Unless the "room" is active and you see chatting going on, few wouldn’t bother if the place is empty – which most of the time it would be.

These days, the only time chat-on-site actually works is if it is accompanied by a live video feed. Otherwise people simply don’t bother and will go use IRC instead – assuming they even use that.

Groups

A group is a version of a forum, and its singular largest advantage was that it has very good privacy options. The most popular of the lot which still exists is Yahoo! Groups. MSN had groups until 2008. Google’s offering is Google Groups.

What killed the use of groups was the way Yahoo! handled privacy issues. They did so very poorly. First they said at one point that absolutely nobody owns their content when it was under the assumption that users did retain content ownership, and second was the use of what’s known as "web beacons" that really ticked off people because of the way it was implemented. Many people dumped Yahoo! Groups after that and never went back, because the wonderful privacy options at that point were worthless.

There is no real reason to have a 1.0-style group system today when you’ve got things like blogs, forums that don’t use those beacon things, and so on.

What will possibly fall into obscurity in the future?

RSS

Per very recent events, there are those who say RSS is a dead horse.

Instant Messaging

Major IM offerings are very long in the tooth and simply don’t have features people want or need any longer, but are edging to fix that soon by the inclusion of social media connectivity. Yahoo Messenger 10 will have the ability to receive updates from Twitter. AIM 7 now has "Lifestream" with support for both Twitter and Facebook. But even with these updates, they will not be enough to sway people back to those bulky IM clients. Too little, too late. Nobody who uses Pidgin is going to switch back. Not a chance.

I don’t believe IM will ever truly go away, but it will probably never be in the top spot as the preferred method of communication ever again.

Discovery services

These are web sites like StumbleUpon and Digg. These sites are getting stomped by social media because they’re just not quick enough on the draw, and they’re both maligned with seriously dopey commentary from its users. You’ll find more interesting stuff from your friends on Facebook and Twitter.

And if you don’t believe me, try an advanced Twitter search, and enjoy how easy it is to search and zone in right where you live by location, mile radius, date range, etc. That’s a good discovery search.

The definition of a web site that refuses to upgrade is one that does not "understand" anything other than Internet Explorer 6 or 7. For many this is a constant source of frustration for three very good reasons:

1. Internet Explorer 8 has been in existence for almost seven months at the time of this writing. The administrators of these "IE only" web sites couldn’t figure out how to write in support for 8 in this span of time? Apparently not.
2. Many choose not to use IE, but they’re out of luck when certain web sites will only support IE 6/7 and nothing else.
3. Windows 7 comes provided with IE 8 (unless you’re in the UK.) These computers will be on the shelves very soon and in come places already are. What does one do in that situation since they can’t "degrade" to IE 7 or 6 just to get certain web sites to work?

There are two ways to get around problematic web sites like this.

Method 1. Using IE 6 or 7 in WINE for Linux

WINE has had the ability to run a whole bunch of different IEs for some time now. Versions 1 all the way thru 8 are available, but the ones you would be interested in for compatibility’s sake are 6 and 7.

The only problem you may encounter running IE this way is that certain plugins for IE may not work when used in WINE. This is rare, but it can happen if it’s some ActiveX oddball plugin or something like that.

Method 2. Windows 2000 or XP virtual PC

On my Windows 7 desktop I purposely keep a barebones setup of XP running with IE 6 in VirtualBox. When I upgraded to Win 7 I already had an existing fully licensed copy of XP Professional Edition, so that’s what I have used in the virtual PC.

In Windows you have three major choices for computer virtualization, that being the aforementioned VirtualBox, Microsoft’s Virtual PC or VMware. I choose VirtualBox because it operates exactly the same in Windows, Mac or Linux – and I truly like that kind of compatibility because no matter what OS I’m on, VirtualBox is always familiar. However you may like Virtual PC or VMware better as far as your personal preferences are concerned. I will say the easiest of the bunch is Microsoft’s version because it’s very straightforward – but it only works under Windows.

Setting up your virtual PC with IE 6 or 7, and other notes

If you have a fully licensed OEM disc of Microsoft Windows XP, such as I do, this comes with IE 6 as its bundled web browser. What I’ve done in my virtual XP PC is used Microsoft Update to patch up every single thing I possibly could except the browser. This can be done easily. What I have is an XP that does have IE 6 for those web sites that absolutely refuse to work right with anything else.

VirtualBox running XP Professional Edition with the IE 6 browser

A bunch of updates in the virtual PC with XP, including Service Pack 3 – but still on IE 6

It is the fortunate case that web sites that are IE6-only are dwindling slowly but surely off the internet, but instead of embracing multi-browser capability, they’re latching on to IE 7 which is just as bad.

For the time being, I use a virtual XP with IE 6 and if I have to go to 7, this can be downloaded without going to 8 with XP, and I’m sure Microsoft will be keeping this download on their web site for at least a few more years.

Even if you are running XP with IE 8 now and plan to stick with that for a while, you can still use Virtual PC or VirtualBox to install another Windows XP (assuming you have another legal licensed copy) with IE 6 or 7. This will work fine.

The only thing you cannot do is have both IE 7 and 8 in the same Windows OS at the same time. While that would be really great if you could do that, it’s simply not an option. The easiest workaround is to have a virtual PC with a previous-generation browser.

For those of you out there who do not have another legal copy of Windows, my suggestion is to use VirtualBox and install a distribution of Linux, such as Ubuntu, and use IE 6 or 7 via WINE. Most distributions make this very easy to install, and I may even write up another article on how to do just that so it’s even easier for you.

People save web pages to ensure they can retrieve information later without having to load it on the internet. It also is a way of retrieving a web page just in case the original web site has an outage or goes offline for whatever reason.

There are two basic ways of saving web pages, that being via the browser or "printing it" to a PDF.

Via the browser

The browser that has the absolute best web page save feature is Internet Explorer 8, due to the fact it can save entire web pages as a "Web Archive." When you click File/Save As (if you don’t see that in your IE 8, press ALT on your keyboard to bring up that menu,) you’ll see it as a save option:

When you choose to save it will "crunch" everything into a single file:

Why is this the best? Because it’s a single file that contains everything (and that’s why it’s labeled as an archive.) All the text, all the images and everything included. If you load it afterward, it looks exactly the way it was originally. It is to the best of my knowledge the only browser that does it right.

Other browsers, such as Firefox, save as "Web page, complete" and it’s nothing but a huge mess. An HTML file will be saved which is the web page, but a subfolder will also be created with all the images, JavaScript files, etc. You can literally get 20+ files out of a single web page save.

Love or hate IE 8, it rules the roost when it comes to web page archiving.

Drawbacks:

• Only one – it’s proprietary to IE 8. Otherwise it’s the best way to archive a web page.

Via PDF Creator

If you don’t use IE 8 and want a web to save web pages a single files that include images and so on, the best way to do this is to use PDF Creator to create PDF files. This is free software that will install a virtual print driver and can be used in your web browser of choice.

Once installed, go to any web page, load it, then click File/Print or press CTRL+P. 

Choose PDF Creator from the window that appears:

..click OK.

The page will be crunched and made ready for PDF rendering:

You’ll see this:

Click the Save button at bottom right. You’ll be asked to name the file and where you want to save it to. Once done, the page is archived as a PDF.

Drawbacks:

• Many times the PDF creator will default to a serif font (Times New Roman) instead of the font seen on the original web page.
• Any links in the web page will not work in the PDF.

These drawbacks are usually acceptable being it’s the text you care about the most when it comes to a web page. Any images on the page will be embedded in the PDF; all text is searchable as well.

In addition, the PDF created even for very large web pages will be small in file size, suitable for sending in email if you want to send it off to a friend.

Via ScreenGrab

This is for Firefox only.

ScreenGrab is a FireFox plugin. It allows you to save a PNG or JPEG screen shot of any web page, but does so far better than ALT+PrintScreen. ScreenGrab will take an image of the entire page including the full length. The screen shot taken will look identical to what you see on-screen.

Drawbacks:

• Since the output file is an image, none of the text can be searched and links won’t work either.
• The default output file is a PNG. If the web page you save is very long, the file saved will be enormous.
• On very large web pages it can cause Firefox to freeze up when attempting to take a full screen shot, particularly on slower computers.

You can make the screen shot ScreenGrab takes to be smaller by purposely not using the browser maximized, because yes, ScreenGrab captures everything – including all the white space on the sides.

To use ScreenGrab, install the add-on, then on any web page, right-click and choose ScreenGrab:

"Complete Page/Frame" will save the entire page, length and all.

"Visible portion" only captures what the browser is displaying at that moment.

"Selection" allows you to select what you want captured.

"Window" acts like ALT+PrintScreen does.

Choosing to Save will save the file. Choosing to Copy will copy the image to the clipboard buffer where you can paste into another program such as an image editor, Word, etc.

In our last episode.. I talked about how much web browsers suck. But now it’s time to discuss how great they are.

The best way to describe the greatness of modern web browsers is to point out the features we have now that most people take for granted.

1. Tabbed Document Interface

Most people know this as simply tabs. This was one of the best improvements ever made in a web browser. And said honestly, I cannot browse without them. I first remember first using a tabbed interface with Maxthon (which used the IE engine). IE took a very long time to develop a tabbed version of their own, but finally brought one to the table with IE 7. Better late than never, I suppose.

2. Zoom

I first used a zoom feature in Opera way back at version 5 and it was great. Unfortunately Opera was a pay-browser back then so that was a no-go for me. IE always did have the ability to increase text size but not images (that wasn’t until much later). Firefox always had a zoom but it didn’t work properly until version 3. Fortunately, all browsers now have a proper zoom feature. They will even zoom Flash content now.

3. Better bookmarks

Bookmarks now not only hold information on the URL of the site you want to go to, but also the "favicon" (small image representing the site, should it have one) and can also contain keyword tags in browsers like Firefox.

4. In-browser search bar using search engine of choice

This is something a ton of people take for granted. Early browsers had absolutely no search bar whatsoever. You had the address bar and that was it. If you wanted to search Yahoo, you had to physically go to www.yahoo.com to do it.

Before the search bar there were add-on toolbars for both Netscape and IE. One of the more popular offerings was Google Toolbar (which is still available). However with any toolbar you were forced to the search engine provided and no other.. that is unless you wanted to install yet another toolbar. And of course people remember their Netscapes and IEs back then with 2 or more toolbars in it. Rather terrible. And crash-prone.

Search bars now allow any engine to be used with no additional memory munched up since it’s integrated into the browser.

5. Full screen mode.

This is yet another vastly underrated feature. It is (to the best of my knowledge) universally accessible on the Windows platform by pressing F11 in IE, Firefox or Opera. You press F11 again to go back to windowed mode.

Full screen mode is great because it dedicates your entire screen to whatever web page you’re viewing. In fact, you can make it "book like" by pressing F11, then increasing the zoom a few times (CTRL-plus or just plus in Opera) for maximum readability.

A small note for those looking to buy a netbook: Know your full-screen feature in your browser because I’ll guarantee that you will use it. A lot.

What features of modern browsers do you like?

Chime in with a comment or two.

For those who remember installing Internet Explorer either an an upgrade or fresh install, the process was specifically tailored to replace your default browser settings when electing to use the "Express" installation method. This is no longer the case.

This comes shortly after it was announced that Windows 7 upgrade for UK users would not come with IE 8 preinstalled due to an anti-trust ruling.

What will happen now is that if you choose to install Internet Explorer 8, the first run will be much more straightforward, directly asking you, "Do you want to make Internet Explorer your default browser?"

This is a welcome change that was applauded by not only Windows users but other competing browser software makers, such as Mozilla.

From then to now

Fortunately we now live in a time when most software we install doesn’t try to hijack any settings you don’t want changed. This is drastically different compared to what it used to be like 10 years ago.

For example, in 1999 software like AOL and RealPlayer tried to hijack everything. It was a sad time for computer software back then.

This is not to say that all software stays on the Light Side of The Force. Some titles still do things that are, shall we say, unethical.

Do you know of software that still pulls hijacking tricks?

Let us know in the comments.

The most-used browser on the internet is still Internet Explorer. It surprises me how many people do not know how to make basic customizations to this browser. This video will show you how to do it. You may learn a few things you didn’t know about the browser before. See video below.

How are pre-order sales of Windows 7 doing in the UK? Very well. However there are two major differences compared to the US version.

First, it is required to have a clean install. For most people this means the drive must be wiped in order to use it to get rid of the old Windows (Vista or XP).

Second, there is no Internet Explorer in the UK version. This is probably the reason why the clean install is mandatory for 7. UK’s 7 doesn’t have IE because of a European Commission anti-trust ruling.

Can you install IE 8 after you install the OS? Yes. It will most likely be listed as an optional (keyword there) download in Windows Update. There may even be an icon purposely placed on the desktop that says "Download Internet Explorer" or something similar. And to be honest I hope that’s the case because otherwise a whole bunch of people wouldn’t really know how to get it.

You can’t say, "Download Firefox to a USB stick from another PC, plug it in to the new one and install to 7 that way", because if it’s the only PC the user has, what are they going to do? Go to a command prompt, connect via FTP over to ftp.mozilla.org and get a browser that way? Would you want to instruct a newbie how to do that? Probably not.

This marks the first time Windows will be sold without a browser since Windows 95. For those who remember, the very first edition of 95 did not have IE preinstalled.

It is also clear that Microsoft does appear to have a winner on its hands with Windows 7 on both sides of the pond, even though the UK version is IE-less.

For those of you out there using the Internet Explorer 8 web browser, customizing the Command Bar makes it a lot easier to get to specific functions in IE 8 faster.

This is what mine looks like:

From left to right:

Home, InPrivate Browsing, Internet Options, Page, Safety, Tools, Manage Add-Ons, Zoom

In particular, I really like having the InPrivate, Internet Options, Manage Add-Ons and Zoom there because it saves me from having to hunt for them (as some are quite buried).

To modify, right-click an empty area of the Command Bar, then click Customize, Add or Remove Commands…, like this:

You’ll see this window:

Add, move or remove your selectable buttons in the Command Bar from here.

Also remember that to see all the icons you add in there, uncheck the option for Lock the Toolbars (see screen shot above) so you can drag the bar out to see everything, then re-lock afterwards if you like.

Free is a relative term because it doesn’t necessarily mean "no money required". If to get the free access you must do something decidedly inconvenient, that costs you time and effort. But in these times, some are willing to be inconvenienced if it means saving a buck or two.

Method 1: Hotel parking lot.

Many hotels offer free wi-fi, and most have no security in place on access whatsoever. It’s completely open.

Method 2: Coffee shop, some restaurants

Shops like Panera Bread have free wi-fi. As long as you’re a customer you can sit with your laptop, have a coffee and check your email.

Other chains that have free wi-fi in most of their stores are Chick-Fil-A, First Watch and Hooters. Some independently owned Subway shops also have free wi-fi, but you have to call and check.

Method 3: RV campground areas

RV means Recreational Vehicle. Many campgrounds have free wi-fi on the premises. And no, you don’t need an RV to drive on one of these properties.

Method 4: Retail stores

All Apple stores have free wi-fi as do Office Depot stores.

Method 5: Airports

Most larger airports will have free wi-fi access.

Method 6: Vacation rental properties

Most of these rentals will openly state on the internet if the location has free wi-fi or not. All it takes is a drive over, start up the laptop and see if you can connect.

Method 7: Free Dial-Up

There are a few ISPs that offer dial-up for absolutely zero dollars. One of them is FreeDialup.org, available in New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Rhode Island.

Method 8: Driving around (literally) using NetStumbler

I have not seen a better wi-fi scanner than NetStumbler for the Windows operating system. All you have to do is turn on the laptop, enable the software, set it on the passenger seat and just drive around slowly until your hear a tone telling you there’s a wi-fi nearby. When you hear it, take a quick glance at the screen. The software will tell you instantly whether it’s protected-access or not. For the open ones, save the settings for later use.

Disclaimer: Don’t do this. Using a laptop while driving is dumb.

Flash is one of those things on the internet that’s been a source of irritation ever since it first appeared. From the perspective of a programmer, it’s bulky and difficult to "mold" into what you want it to do. From the perspective of the user, it’s "That thing that makes me wait to load just to view it, and when it does can potentially crash my browser."

Speaking of crashing, Flash does not play favorites on which operating system it likes to crash browsers on. From time to time, something will go wrong with the plug-in and completely lock up the browser, forcing a restart of the program. Not even Linux is safe from this.

If you’re saying, "I can load any Flash page just fine", try it with multiple tabs. Chances are it’s the only type of content that will make your browser slow down and even potentially choke, even with the most powerful computer. Does that mean your computer sucks? Not in the slightest. It’s just Flash.

Flash is so absolutely hated by some that there are specific browser add-ons to block it. This is because there is no manual way (nor has there ever been) to turn Flash off without uninstalling it. I’m not kidding.

Unfortunately we are forced to use Flash for video on the internet, both for viewing and broadcasting. Every video sharing web site is chock full of it. Every broadcasting site like Stickam, BlogTV, Ustream, Livestream (formerly Mogulus) and so on are also full of Flash.

When I produce videos for PCMech, I don’t use Flash because I want to. It’s because I have to. Personally I would love to switch over to WMV or MOV format as both are far superior to Flash-based FLV. But the problem is that one is Windows specific and the other for the Mac. Mac people hate Windows Media Player. Windows people hate QuickTime. FLV is the only one that can play no matter what OS you’re using because everybody has the Flash plugin installed.

When Dave (owner of PCMech) produces videos, he also has constant arguments with the Flash video format because it’s literally a crapshoot on whether or not the encoding will work correctly. Bear in mind Dave uses Macs. I use Windows. And we both curse Flash almost every time either of us use it.

Ironically, Flash is now having the exact same problem it did years ago, but this time on smartphone devices.

The original problem was that many computers weren’t powerful enough to run the Flash plugin. Now they are, but only because our processors and memory are well along enough to handle Flash’s bloat.. even though it still locks up browsers from time to time.

Smartphone browsers on the other hand simply aren’t powerful enough to handle "full" Flash. Yes, it can handle a watered-down version, but it’s a repeat of the same problem that happened in Web 1.0 days.

Is Flash the worst thing on the internet? Yes. Slow to program, slow to load, crash-happy, incompatible with many mobile browsers.. the list goes on and on.

Since we’re all forced to use Flash to view "rich content" on the internet, how long is it going to take for Adobe to release a version that isn’t so unbelievably crappy?

My guess is not any time soon.

What’s your opinion?

Do you think Flash is the worst thing on the internet?

Most web sites will work with no issue using Firefox 3 or Internet Explorer 8. But there will be times you encounter a web page that will instantly crash your browser. One such example is crappy MySpace pages. It is very common to find pages with the following junk in it:

• Animated background graphic
• Animated Flash graphics
• Auto-play music player
• Other graphics pulled in from many different web sites (from the "comments" section on such pages)

It’s awful. And even if you have an absolutely default browser with no add-ons/plugins installed, pages like this can still crash your browser.

A way around this is to use the "No-Style" option which effectively kills almost all the crap on pages like this and keeps the browser from crashing.

In Firefox and IE: View / Page Style / No Style

In IE, if you don’t see the "View" on the menubar, just press ALT to see the menu.

Using No-Style will make web pages look Web 1.0-like. It reverts the style to the default font and makes otherwise "heavy" pages easy to scroll and read.

In addition, you can whiz thru the pages much faster. Granted, it may be "ugly", but it’s much faster than with everything loaded.

I do use this feature periodically because there are some web designs out there that are simply awful. And while (on Windows) Times New Roman 16-pixel size in black on a white background may be not-so stylish, it sure is easy to read.

Also remember that selecting "Basic Page Style" or "Default Style" puts the browser back in normal viewing mode, which it’s in by default.

In the context of this article I’m referring to consumer grade home internet routers, as in the type that typically have one WAN or "Internet" port and four LAN ports.

It’s quite difficult to pin down what specifically causes a router to fail. For example, if you have a dead router, hand it to an electrical engineer and asked him or her…

"Can you tell me what caused this thing to die on me?"

…the engineer would not say, "It was x that killed it."

Instead, testing would have to be done to determine the cause, and it would take a while. Maybe it was crappy firmware. Or an electrical short. Or it suffered from some heavy EMI. Or it was tiny bits of condensation. Or it was something as simple as a bad power adapter. Or something else entirely. There are any number of ways to kill a router.

It’s more important to rule out false positives and know how to recognize warning signs, if any, that a router is about to fail.

Ruling out false positives

False positive for a router failure: Google Maps

I know of one real-world example that can be replicated easily, making it appear like your router is having a problem when it in fact isn’t.

Using the web site Google Maps on the Windows operating system with any web browser, if you load up a map then quickly pan the map in combination with some fast zoom in/outs, this will make too many network requests and cause your internet connection to "freeze" for up to 90 seconds.

Google Maps works in such a way where it contacts several different servers at once when panning/zooming around the map, and using it too quickly will time out the connection temporarily in Windows.

You may say, "But my router can handle a ton of connections. What gives?"

Since Windows XP Service Pack 2 up to present with Vista and Windows 7, the Windows OS is purposely engineered to limit network requests whereas previously it wasn’t.

End result: Not a router problem. It’s Windows doing it – by design.

I have only been able to replicate this issue using the Google Maps web site. Google Earth doesn’t have this problem and neither does Yahoo! Maps, Windows Live Maps, MapQuest or any other mapping site. Or any other web site for that matter.

To rule out my own router as the problem, I tested this on another ISP using a router made by another manufacturer. Same result. Time-outs with Google Maps – but only on Google Maps when using it heavily as noted above.

False positive for a router failure: Bad network cable

A new router obviously won’t cure a bad network cable. If troubleshooting a router, always replace the network cable first, both to the PC and to the cablemodem.

Ruling out a bad port

It is not outside the realm of possibility that the port on the router that connects the network cable to your PC’s network card is bad. If you’re plugged into port 1, try port 4.

Why 4 and not 2?

Because it’s the furthest away from the port which may be causing the problem.

To note: Having a bad port is an unlikely situation, but as said above it’s not outside the realm of possibility.

Are there warning signs when your router will fail?

In most instances there are no warning signs when a router is about to stop working. You’ll be using the internet normally and then *poof*, dead connection. Modem lights look fine but router lights are either all on, all off or blinking in a "weird" way.

More expensive routers will give at least a little bit of warning (usually 4 to 7 days) before failing altogether, seen in the form of random disconnects. One reason this this may occur is because the crash recovery isn’t working properly any longer, causing the connection(s) to drop at random intervals. And that’s all the warning you need to know that yes, the router will stop working soon.

What can you do to extend router life?

It’s easy to extend the life of your router if you follow these simple steps:

1. Keep it off the floor

Some people simply run out of desk space and "demote" the router to the floor. Bad idea, because that’s where all the dirt is. And even though your router most likely has no fans, that doesn’t mean dirt cannot get into it and end the router’s life early.

2. Avoid cable stress

Network cables that are pulling on their ports is just bad news. If you’ve got a network cable that’s just slightly too short and has tension on the port it’s connected to, do yourself a favor and just buy a longer network cable.

3. Keep it away from the PC

Common occurrence: Seeing a router sitting directly on top of the PC. It shouldn’t be there. The PC is vibrating, even if only slightly. Those vibrations can lead to early router failure later.

Not all PC cases vibrate, but many do – especially when the optical drive is in use.

4. Never shut it off unless you absolutely have to.

I have heard the story more than once where someone shuts a router off, turns it back on, and it dies.

Unless troubleshooting a network connection, there’s really no reason to ever shut a router off.

5. Don’t upgrade the firmware unless it’s required.

Router firmware updates are like BIOS updates in the respect that you should never apply the upgrade unless there’s something specific in it that fixes a legitimate problem. If there is no problem to be fixed, don’t do it.

Read the release notes for router firmware updates first and always.

If from the release notes you learn the update patches a security hole or two, then yes, you should apply it immediately.

If on the other hand you discover the update doesn’t fix any security holes (which most likely means that none exist), add any features you need or the like, don’t do it.

Have you ever had a router die on you? If so, were you given any warning?

Post a comment or two and let us know. Remember to list your router make and model.

Ah yes, Internet Explorer 6. It has more holes than Swiss cheese, is exploited easily and is slow as molasses. It doesn’t even do tabs.

You might be thinking, "What moron would still use IE 6 when you could use 7 or 8?"

Corporations would, that’s who.

Windows 2000 is still used widely in the enterprise environment. And as anyone who uses 2000 knows, it won’t support any IE version higher than 6.

Additionally, the majority of enterprise environments absolutely will not allow the installation of any other browser, such as Firefox or Opera.

According to an article published on Lifehacker, a whopping 60% of companies still have the default browser as IE 6.

Concerning your web site or blog, if you want to ensure the widest possible audience, it should work in IE 6.

"But I don’t have IE 6 to test with", you say. Not a problem. There are ways around that.

Workaround 1: Install a virtual environment of Windows XP or 2000.

Download VirtualBox, grab your copy of XP or 2000 and install it, and you’ll get IE 6.

Workaround 2: BrowserCam

This is a web designer’s best friend for testing compatibility of your web site. It is a paid service but there is a free trial so you can see if it’s your thing or not. This service tests web sites in Windows/Mac/Linux using a plethora of different native-environment browsers from you to choose from. I have used this service before and it works great.

Workaround 3: Internet Explorer Application Compatibility VPC Image

"VPC" is "Virtual PC". Microsoft does understand that designers need to test things in previous editions of IE and has VHD (Virtual Hard Disk) images ready to download for that purpose.

This is essentially the same as creating your own virtual machine, but with Microsoft’s available offerings they’ve done all the work for you. All you have to do is download, install and go.

The last time I wrote about IE 8 was on March 19. It’s March 30 today, I’ve been using the browser here and there, and here’s what I have to report on it.

Is IE 8 good enough to make me switch back from Firefox?

Not a chance. When I switched to FF way back in the day when Firefox was still called Firebird, I did so with a clear conscience. While the IE 8 browser is decent (and it truly is), I can’t give up the plugins I have in FF that aren’t available in IE.

Is the InPrivate feature useful?

Yes. I really like it. Google Chrome has this with its Incognito feature and IE 8 has it with InPrivate. It’s really nice to know with a quick CTRL+SHIFT+P or by doing it the menu/tab way I can pop up a session that will completely delete itself cache/cookie wise once the window is closed.

Firefox really, really needs this. Now.

Have I noticed any weird/odd problems with some sites I use?

Yes. However it’s only been on web sites that have been programmed improperly. Part of the way IE 8 renders web pages is that it pays stricter attention to whether it’s code compliant or not. Programmers who go "by the book" have applauded IE 8 for finally paying attention to this in much better detail, but the users of the browser have complained certain sites just don’t work like they did in IE 7.

To those people I say blame the programmer, not the browser, because the browser is in fact doing what it’s supposed to do.

The complaint I’ve seen the most from 8 users is that certain web forms do not work properly. Again I say blame the programmer. Take the PCMech site for example. All the forms, the forums and so on work just as they did with 7. If 8 was so bad, PCMech wouldn’t be accessible using that browser whatsoever. But obviously 8 works anywhere on PCMech just like it should.

It also should be noted that if you notice a site that doesn’t work proper with 8, use the "Compatibility View" feature, like this:

The "broken page" icon, which is Compatibility View, will correct issues. So it’s not like Microsoft didn’t prepare for this.

Does it use less memory/run faster than 7?

In my experience, yes. I won’t say it’s like a night-and-day difference, but overall the memory use is less with the 8 browser compared to 7.

I particularly noticed this on my father’s computer, which is an older single-core 2.4GHz with 512MB RAM. Not only does 8 use less memory but it loads faster, renders pages faster (even when not cached) and has an overall better experience.

What’s your take?

Have you upgraded to 8 yet? If so, is the browser to your liking or do you think it sucks? Let us know.