Guy Techie

The Finer Points of Backslash

2013-03-08T03:18:26Z

The insistence of using backslash to indicate the domain in logins is the bane of our IT existence. There are many users who put in help desk tickets for login issues simply because of the requirement of the company's domain. Why can't the domain be forced? Why can't the user just type their username like any other entity that requires a login?

The web-facing Microsoft products we use (Outlook Web Access and Remote Destop Web Access) even insists on "Domain\user name:". As techies, we are used to this. Of course, "username@domain" is also a valid login credential. So why doesn't Microsoft use @domain as the standard login prompt for all things domain? Instead of asking for "Domain\user name", they could simply say "username@domain:" by default, and give techs an easier way to change it to "Company Email Address:".

Of course, real domains would have something like "username@domain.com". People are used to the @ sign. They do not know much about the backslash (or \). Here are some reasons why the backslash shouldn't be used for the general public:

People are used to using forward slashes, especially since they enter in URLs.
Most people do not even know where the backslash is on the keyboard.
Mobile devices hide the backslash key several layers deep because it isn't used often in "real life".

As techies, we're used to the backslash because we need to use it to enter login credentials with domains as well as using it for disk paths (\\server\folder\filename.txt or C:\Windows\notepad.exe). This seems trivial to us. However, if you have to deploy Outlook Web Access or Remote Desktop Web Access for the "normals", be prepared for a flood of help desk tickets and phone calls.

Case Study

The pain that started this rant was actually Windows Server 2008 R2's RD Web Desktop. After many users flooded our gates with login issues (not reading the email we issued), my boss decided to fix the issue on our side.

It was actually a maddening experience for both users and IT. RD Web Access allows you to log into the web portal with just your username (sans domain). However, when you click on any resources (RemoteApp, Remote Desktop, etc), you get an error. This is because RD Web Access is simply passing the username (sans domain) to RD Gateway as if you were logging in as a local user as opposed to a domain user). I'd be happier if it gave a "username invalid" error at the very begining!

I found this Microsoft Technet thread very helpful. However, not being a code monkey myself, it took a lot of concentration to figure out what to really do. I eventually asked one of our web development people to hold my hands, but it worked out in the end.

Reading through, I initially edited the login.aspx file (Lionel Chen's suggestion in the thread). This is the login screen that shows up right after you punch the URL into Internet Explorer. And yes, it has to be Internet Explorer because it requires Active X (why, I don't know, since it justs invokes the Remote Desktop Client via a custom RDP file). There was a way to insert the domain into the username text box. However, the cursor defaults to the beginning of the line so if a user starts typing their username right away (from habit), it would become "usernamedomain\" all mashed up.

That won't work. Now what?

Well, further into the thread, Ross CP's idea was to modify the javascript to add the "domain\" before the username. This worked, but if a seasoned user already typed in their domain, you're essentially sending "domain\domain\username" or "domain\username@domain.com".

Further down the thread, Markus E improved the code to check for any backslashes or @ symbols in the input. If it detects any, it would skip the code that adds "domain\" to the username.

The Bright Side

In the end, it was a painful ordeal for a simple request: force a default domain. Why doesn't Microsoft allow us to do this without stupid hacks?

On the bright side, I learned a little Javascript. Also, the payoff was worth it. The result was more elegant than training all 1000 users or messing with Microsoft's insistance on "domain\" continuity.

I hope this helps someone out there.

T-Mo and Metro, Together At Last

2012-12-01T00:56:38Z

Just as I was playing around with my T-Mobile SIM in my AT&T Galaxy S3, I received a text from none other than T-Mobile. I thought they caught me using an unauthorized phone (scary), but in fact, they just wanted to let their customers know they have aquired MetroPCS.

Screenshot and link here: http://t-mo.co/metro-news

T-Mobile 1900 MHz 3G Refarmed in Chicago!

2012-12-01T00:39:28Z

I was testing a T-Mobile SIM on my unlocked AT&T Samsung Galaxy S3 (SGH-I747) when I noticed an H+

near the signal bars! I did a speed test, and everything looks like true. HSPA+ on 1900 MHz, people! This mean iPhone users on T-Mobile will automatically see 3G speeds here!

Of course, this also means that unlocked AT&T and world phones that doesn't have HSPA+ on 1700 MHz AWS radios will now get HSPA+ speeds on T-Mobile!

Check it out!

Backing Up SMS and MMS in Android (Also Dec 31, 1969 Messages Issue SOLVED!)

2012-08-15T15:28:10Z

I actually found out how to back up SMS and MMS (along with the multimedia attachments) by accident when trying to troubleshoot another issue. The issue I was having was deleted MMS message threads would come back blank with a date of December 31, 1969. Without going into details, the only way to solve this was to delete the database that housed the SMS and MMS data because it was corrupted.

Using the app History Eraser did not help, nor did clearing the app data/cache, nor cache paration and Dalvik Cache helped with the issue. History Eraser gives you the ability to remove ALL messages (gives you a clean slate), but the problem comes back when I receive an MMS and decide to delete it. It comes back as a blank message with the 1969 date.

Time travel jokes aside, threads from different Android forums came to a dead end. All were dancing around the actual fix, so after reading them all, I got a better understanding of how Android stores it's SMS and MMS data. Know this helped fixed the problem, but also gave me a better way to backup and restore my messages along with the attachments. It's a boon to anyone who is ROM flashing addict.

Without further ado, here's where the magic goes:

/data/data/com.android.providers.telephony/databases

/data/data/com.android.providers.telephony/app_parts

In the databases folder, the file "mmssms.db" holds your SMS and MMS text messages, while the app_parts folder contain all of the MMS's attached files (photos, videos, audio, etc).

If you have the Dec 31, 1969 issue like I did, and you don't care to back up your messages, you can delete the "mmssms.db" file, as well as clear the contents out of the app_parts folder. You can then clear your Messenger app's data and cache and reboot your phone. You will have a clean slate. This is because the database file was corrupted and utilities that delete messages just deletes the contents inside of the bad databse file instead of deleting the actual file itself.

After all of this, your Messenger app will recreate the missing "mmssms.db" file from scratch.

Now that you know how to fix the issue, as you can imagine, backing up the same file along with the app_parts folder will allow you to restore your message contents if you ever need to flash a new ROM or move to a different phone.

All of this requires root, of course. You have many options to access these files, but the easiest for me is to use a root file manager such as Root Explorer to navigate to the path and copy & paste the files and folders to my external SD card. When restoring, you may want to take note of the permissions of the original files and folders so you can set them back on the restored copies.

The funny thing is I believe the corrupted database file was caused by using an SMS backup app. It saves your SMS and MMS in an XML file and restores the contents back into the database. The issue may be that MMS backups are not well supported, (they contain attachments and treated like email, unlike SMS). Unfortunately, it's still the best way to back up and restore individual messages with a surgeon's precision. Just make sure not to backup any MMS messages!

How to Create an OS X Mountain Lion Bootable DVD

2012-07-27T04:11:00Z

How to Disable LTE on AT&T Android Devices to Increase Battery Life

2012-07-23T23:46:09Z

For those who have Android devices on AT&T's LTE network, you may be able to get more battery life by switching back to AT&T's HSPA+ network. It may be a slower network, but it's fast enough. After all, AT&T's LTE isn't much faster than HSPA+ in some areas. What you lose in speed, you gain in battery life (another couple hours).

In my case, I was getting around 13 hours in my normal use of my Samsung Galaxy S III on LTE. Switching to HSPA+ gave me a more reasonable 16 hours.

Of course, your mileage may vary.

You can always switch between HSPA+ and LTE on the fly. It does take between 10 to 30 seconds to reconnect every time you switch, so it's not horrible.

Here are the steps to take:

1) Go to Settings.

2) Under "Wireless and Network", go to More Settings.

3) Go to Mobile Networks.

4) Go to Access Point Names.

5) Hit the Menu button, then the "New APN" button.

6) From here, enter the information below:

Name: AT&T HSPA+
APN: wap.cingular
Proxy: leave blank
Port: leave blank
Username: WAP@CINGULARGPRS.COM
Password: CINGULAR1 (must be all CAPS)
Server: leave blank
MMSC: http://mmsc.cingular.com
MMS Proxy: wireless.cingular.com
MMS Port: 80
MCC: 310
MNC: 410
APN Type: leave blank
APN protocol: IPv4
Bearer: leave blank

7) Hit the menu button and then Save.

8) Select the newly created APN (AT&T HSPA+) to switch to the new APN.

Your network indicator will show that your data is unavailable for about 10 to 30 seconds. You will notice when the indicator comes back, it will now say 4G and not 4G LTE.

Again, you can always come back to the Access Point Names and switch back to LTE by selecting the previous APN setting (on mine, the old APN setting was called "AT&T PTA").

The name is not important. It's the settings. In fact, if you ever lose your LTE APN settings, add a new APN and enter these settings and save:

Name: AT&T PTA
APN: pta
Proxy: leave blank
Port: leave blank
Username: leave blank
Password: leave blank
Server: leave blank
MMSC: http://mmsc.mobile.att.net
MMS Proxy: proxy.mobile.att.net
MMS Port: 80
MCC:310
MNC:410
APN Type: default,mms,supl
APN protocol: IPv4
Bearer: leave blank

So what's the actual speed difference? Just like with battery life, there's too many variables. In the same spot on my desk, I tested HSPA+ (4G) and LTE (4G LTE), and here's my results.

Of course, I've seen AT&T HSPA+ go as high as 6 Mbps down and 2 Mbps up. On AT&T LTE, I've seen it go as high as 26 Mbps down and 8 Mbps up. The above speed test is what I typically get at my house and at my work place.

Trust me, you don't need 26 Mbps on a mobile phone. It's nice to have but it's nicer to have that extra battery life instead.

A Suggestion for Android Phone Makers

2012-05-25T14:29:56Z

Listen up, Motorola, HTC, Samsung, LG, or whoever is making the next big Android smartphone. You want to be an instant hit with both mainstream users and enthusiasts? Become both a big hit and a cult classic? Here's a suggestion for you: make a stock Android experience ROM available for download for your phones that you fully support.

This will work better with HTC or Samsung, who already have a huge mainstream market share. It'll work because there are many users who are actually in love with the customized skin. I'm talking about the HTC Sense and Samsung TouchWiz. Come to think of it, I think HTC may benefit more since there are more fans of Sense than TouchWiz. If that's the case, HTC should also think about going back to removable batteries and expandable storage.

I know every manufacturer of Android phones want to differentiate from every other manufacturer, which is why they make these custom skins. I don't think it's a bad thing necesarily. A lot of non-technical people find them a lot easier to live with. Some even add real features missing from the stock Android experience. However, there are those "minority" who still want a stock Android experience.

Those people will flock towards Nexus phones. However, after the Nexus One, the other Nexus phones didn't really push the boundaries when it came to hardware. The Nexus S came out with a single-core CPU and a 5 MP camera when phones were coming out with dual-cores and 8 MP cameras. The Galaxy Nexus seem more like what the Nexus S should have been, but they still stuck with a 5 MP camera. Neither of the two had expandable storage. But, they were the only phones available with stock Android and (supposedly) frequent Google-sanctioned updates.

While the Nexus line of phones were behind, HTC and Samsung were producing excellent phones with drool-worthy specs. Of course, you do have to give up the stock Android experience for whatever HTC or Samsung decides to put on the phone.

So my suggestion? Why not also produce a fully-functional non-warranty breaking stock Android ROM that's downloadable for those people who want it? It can be updated quicker, and you'll appease both the mainstream and the cult users. It'll be an instant hit! And the kicker? Since you're the only company doing this, you will garner a lot of attention as well as customers. And guess what? If everyone else follows, you'll be a legend since you will be known as the company that started it!

To sweeten the pot, the stock Android experience ROM can be fully open source. This means that the community can improve the OS for your hardware, making it more desirable to have. You may have to make a deal with some hardware vendors (camera, GPS, etc) for making their closed-source drivers available to users, though.

As for proprietary technology such as Beats Audio and S Voice? Well, you can leave those out of the stock Android experience. After all, those who are looking for the stock Android experience don't care for such things anyways. Since it's open source, if they want these extra features, someone in the community can create something like it to fill in those gaps. And those who want it can support those programmers.

So who will be first? Any takers?

If I Was in Charge of T-Mobile USA

2012-03-22T16:08:52Z

I'm sure we all of us has fantasized being in charge of an established company. Maybe you have an idea that could turn them around, or make them better. My ideas seem to keep me up at night, so I decided to write them down. Maybe someone who matters (or their competitors) will pick it up. If so, don't forget to write me a check.

T-Mobile has always been looked at as the underdog, but they are also looked at as the favorite carrier of smartphone enthusiasts. They are more flexible than any of the carriers here in the US, and they are the only other carrier that uses GSM. GSM allows us to swap phones easily due to the use of the standard SIM card. However, their use of the AWS (1700 MHz) band for UTMS and HSPA+ (3G/4G) limits their phone choice. However, they are already changing for the better.

The Ship is Already Turning Around

I am happy to hear they are starting to refarm their 1900 MHz band that's currently being used for GSM for HSPA+. This will allow more unlocked phones on T-Mobile's network, and will also allow the use of Apple's iPhones and iPads at full speeds. My international model of the Samsung Galaxy S II will also work on T-Mobile, as do other global unlocked phones. I can't wait! If you can't make them come to you, why not come to them?

Another benefit to this move? Areas where T-Mobile does not have 3G/4G coverage (1700/2100 MHz HSPA+), but already have EDGE (2G) and voice will now have coverage! That's because the area is already being blanketed with service in the 1900 MHz band for EDGE.

Their primary reason to refarm their 1900 MHz band isn't to make more phones available to them (though I wished it was - they could have done this sooner!). Instead, their motivation is to reclaim their current AWS (1700 MHz) band for a new LTE network. That's good news!

However, I wonder if the rest of the world will deploy LTE using the same band. LTE is a good reason to start with a clean slate - lets collaborate and make everything work! But alas, it doesn't work that way. Every country and region has their own way of assigning or licensing bands. Here in the US, we have the FCC.

Still, T-Mobile USA is heading in the right direction. Of course, I still have some ideas that I would implement if I were in charge of T-Mobile.

Be the Most Open Carrier

As stated before, T-Mobile is the choice of smartphone enthusiasts. This is because T-Mobile as a whole is more accepting of unlocked phones. However, almost every T-Mobile store I go to, their employees are ignorant of cell phone world that's beyond T-Mobile's sandbox.

Unofficial iPhones on T-Mobile may be the only exception, but I've seen many confused looks when I brought in the Samsung Galaxy Nexus (GSM international model) which supports the AWS band. Also, the enthusiast customer-base is more interested in contract-free plans because they are the ones who bring in their own phones.

T-Mobile should start training their retail stores to be more accepting and open. If you are number 4 carrier, you should start thinking differently. You should also start marketing yourself as such. There's no shame in being a "dumb pipe". In fact, it's a great selling point.

In advertising, push your contract-free plans more than your contract plans. Make sure to let people know they can bring in any unlocked GSM phones. Educate people on how to unlock popular locked phones. Point them to Newegg, Expansys-USA, and Apple to purchase new unlocked phones that T-Mobile doesn't carry natively. And of course, sell unlocked phones in retail stores. Market them as "unlocked global phones". Hell, make sure to point out it also works on AT&T. If you can't get them on your service, get them with a one-time sale of a phone!

In the spirit of being open, start selling contract-free SIM cards with service at retail stores! Those nice "online exclusive" plans such as the 100 minute voice, unlimited text, unlimited data (5GB high speed) for $30/mo - make them available in stores, too! There's something about instant gratification. It can be a deal maker.

T-Mobile should mirror the experience found overseas. When I was visiting Hong Kong, I was able to walk into any 3HK store (their local carrier) and purchase a plan that made sense for my short visit and just their SIM card. The kicker? They even knew the APN settings for MMS and data. Very few employees in T-Mobile and AT&T know what APN is, nor do they know how to deal with a customer who just wants a SIM card and a short-term plan. Cater to the visitors from abroad, and cater to your US customers who think differently.

Plans that Makes Sense

Play to your strengths. So you say your number of contract customers is down? Why not play up your no-contract plans? With the economy the way it is, people see value in a low-cost monthly bill that's possible due to unsubsidized phones.

They should also use Ting as an inspiration. Ting is a Sprint MNVO that lets you choose to have voice, text, and/or data. They let you mix and match. Also, any unused minutes, text, or data in your chosen tier gets refunded or applied to next month's bill.

There are some people who simply do not talk on the phone much. Heck, I don't even text all that much. I'm a data man who occasionally uses minutes and texts. I was doing fine with 500 minutes, 1000 text, and unlimited data - which is what I used to have with AT&T (and it still cost $85/mo - damn AT&T).

Right now, T-Mobile's offer of 100 minutes, unlimited text, and unlimited data (5GB full speed) for $30/mo works for me. Add the $10 for unlimited mobile-to-mobile and the plan is sweetened. But I'd still like to see the uncoupling of these services. It allows the customer to feel like they have control over their plan and their bill.

The Upshot

While I know this was a long read, I do believe they make sense for both the consumers and the company. It's a good way to bump up to number 3 at least. Their competitor who can steal these ideas and bury T-Mobile would be AT&T. AT&T is the only other GSM carrier in the US. If they become more flexible, push out discounted no-contract plans, and offer unlocked unsubsidized phones. Because they already have 3G/4G (HSPA+) on the "right" bands, unlocked phones from all over the world can already benefit on AT&T's network. However, AT&T has their heads deeper in the sand than T-Mobile and won't acknowledge this. Heck, I've had the Samsung Galaxy S II (international GSM model) on AT&T when the iPhone 5 didn't come out as people hoped for (July 2011).

So if I was in charge of AT&T, I'd do all of this. But since I like the underdog, I'd like to see T-Mobile take the ideas instead.

T-Mobile is Faster on EDGE When Throttled on 3G/4G

2012-03-11T01:49:04Z

Yes, I got throttled on T-Mobile, too. I have a 5GB full speed plan, and I was pushing it the first month just to test them out. I hit the limit only one day before the next billing cycle. Unfortuneately, the full speed data came back around mid afternoon and not at midnight of the new billing cycle.

During that time, i found out that if you turn off 3G/4G (HSPA+) on your phone to drop down to EDGE, you actually get faster speeds! Here's my demonstratin of EDGE actually being faster than 3G/4G (HSPA+) when throttled.

Why T-Mobile $30 - Monthly 4G 100 Minutes, Unlimited Data & Text Makes Sense

2012-01-28T01:02:23Z

I recently changed carriers due to AT&T throttling me at 2 GB ($30 unlimited plan), even though the same price can get me 3 GB of data. That didn't make sense to me, and seems like this is how AT&T is trying to snuff out their remaining grandfathered customers.

Instead of going with a limited data plan, I jumped ship and gone T-Mobile. They have prepaid plans called Monthly 4G. There is one plan that is very interesting for people who don't talk all that much but instead rely on data and text. I'm talking about the $30 plan that only have 100 minutes but gives you unlimited data (5 GB high speed) and text.

If you rely on nights and weekends, this isn't for you. However if you make calls mostly in the day, the math makes sense. You get charged $0.10 a minute beyond the allotted 100 minutes. So if you add the usual $40 for voice (what AT&T and T-Mobile charges for 500 minutes usually) into the bucket, you get an additional 400 minutes. With the 100 minutes you already get, you're Even Steven with the other plans - same price, same minutes (again, with the disadvantage of no free nights and weekends).

And like with AT&T, your unused minutes "roll over". Well, actually, because it's prepaid, what you didn't use for the month stays in the bucket in dollar amounts.

Because of this, even if you talk more than the 100 minutes, you might still end up saving more than the T-Mobile $70 plan that has 500 minutes.

The only time this $30 plan will cost more than the $70 plan is if you talk more than 500 minutes a month. And remember, this plan doesn't have free nights and weekends.

For me it works. Even including day, nights, and weekend minutes, I don't ever go over 500 minutes. I'm usually just under 400 minutes. If I cut it down by using VoIP (such as Google Voice via GrooVe IP), I save even more. Now that I have more data, VoIP is a choice I can easily make.

Just a word of warning though: VoIP (at least with Google Voice via GrooVe IP) doesn't work consistently on the 3G network. Even when both up and down throughput is fast, some people say I am coming through crackling. Sometimes I am clear but a few seconds delayed, making conversations awkward. Sometimes I can hear them, but they can't hear me. An vice versa. Of course sometimes it works great.

Even on WIFI, it can get bad, but the experience is better and more consistent than 3G. Strangely, it can work as well as 3G when you're throttled (tested it on my throttled AT&T SIM card) which is to say hit or miss.

So this plan is essentially a data and text plan for $30. It is a very compelling plan for a niche demographics, but I'm glad it exists.

Thank you, T-Mobile. Good bye, AT&T.