I verified that the problem on my machine was with the Hoefler Text font by using Font Book to disable the font, then opened the problematic document in Pages. No crash, though of course the text that was in Hoefler Text now appeared in a different font. Turning the font back on in Font Book made the problem reappear.

Some people suggested that the solution was to replace the version of Hoefler Text that ships with Snow Leopard with a version that shipped with a previous version of Mac OS X, and they provided such versions for download. I didn't want to do that if I didn't have to, so I did some more digging. Here's what worked for me:

1. Restart your Mac.
2. As soon as you hear the startup sound, hold down the Shift key. This tells the Mac to do a Safe Boot. Instead of the regular startup sequence, you'll see a progress bar in the lower third of the screen. As part of the Safe Boot sequence, the Mac is doing a bunch of things (see this Apple support document for more detail), but the key here is that it is trashing the user font caches, which will be rebuilt automatically.
3. When the progress bar finishes, you'll see the Login screen (even if you usually have it turned off). Enter your password, login, and wait until you see the Mac desktop.
4. Restart again, this time normally (i.e., don't hold down the Shift key).
5. Fire up Pages (or whatever program is giving you trouble) and see if the problem has gone away. It did for me.

The main reason for the iSight cameras on Macs or Apple monitors is to do video iChats (yes, I know about Photo Booth, which people use once, go "Huh." then forget about). If you were to try to do video chats on an iPad, held in your hand, the video would shake and move all the time. And that's a bad user experience. Apple doesn't do those. You can fix the problem some with image stabilization software, but probably not enough for a 10-minute chat using a camera forced to have a narrow field of view. And a stand would be a simple solution, but they've mostly come out of the gate positioning it as a device that allows you to do anything you want to do with it while you hold it in one or two hands.

I have no doubt that there are prototype iPads with cameras in Apple's labs. But I'm guessing they haven't licked the problem of shaky hands to their satisfaction yet. Give them a year or so.

However, if you want to be taken seriously as a web pundit it seems to be a requirement that you put in your own two cents, so here's mine.

If you've seen me at any web-related conferences in the last few years, you've probably seen me wearing a button like the one on the left (if you want your own, you can get them here).

I wear it because I think the state of "web standards" has been horrendously screwed up for several years; not just this year or last year, but for a good long time. I'd date my frustration as beginning with the W3C's announcement of XHTML 2, which was, imo, a solution in search of a problem. The W3C hasn't had their act together since then (did they ever?), and I don't expect that to change any time soon.

Initially, the WHATWG and their rough HTML5 spec looked promising. With representation from Apple, Mozilla, and Opera, I thought they could really accomplish something positive—if Microsoft could/would join the club. When I asked that question a few years ago, I got a very straightforward answer from MS: the WHATWG doesn't have a patent policy, and so long as that's the case, MS can't join. If you don't have the vendor with the #1 market share at the table, you're just wasting your time.

I became more hopeful when it looked like the W3C and the WHATWG might be able to work together on HTML5. But so much for that—the W3C architecture astronauts couldn't leave HTML5 untouched, and apparently the WHATWG may have drunk a little of the AA Kool-aid as well.

And now? The WHATWG have picked up their ball and gone home. They've scratched the number off of "HTML5," so it's now just HTML. No more version numbers—we're now in the "versionless" future, what ever that means. For web designers and developers (Remember them? Funny, the W3C and WHATWG don't) it means they can never again hold browser vendors to a promise to support x version of a spec. For tech writers, it means that they can never again say their book, article, tutorial, or video covers up through y version of HTML.

What's next? My crystal ball is fuzzy, but my guesses:

• Browser vendors are going to start doing whatever the hell they want. Why shouldn't they? With no way to hold them accountable, and no way to measure their compliance with a standard, it'll be just like the bad old days.
• Side note: when is the Mozilla Foundation going to realize that they're dead? Most of their income comes from Google searches by Firefox users—and now that Google's got their own browser, why keep paying? If I was a Google stockholder, I'd be interested in the answer to that question. Even non-profits need business models, and Mozilla doesn't have one.
• Book publishers are going to freak the hell out. Not right away, but when they get it, it's gonna be ugly.
• Your average web designer who just wants to know how to do something is going to go insane. Looking at the specs won't be useful, as browser makers can ignore them. Trying to find how-to's online will be a PITA, as they'll only be useful for the one moment in time that they were written.
• Life will be very good for Adobe—so long as they can update Dreamweaver often enough to keep up with the browser maker's zigging and zagging. Adobe BrowserLab will be huge.
• In the long run, a new group will arise: a web equivalent of Underwriters Laboratories. A vendor wants the seal of approval for their browser? Gotta meet this list of requirements. If you don't, fine—but after enough pain, governments and corporations will start requiring it, so it's better to get with the program early.
• Thinking about starting a group like this? My advice: don't allow browser vendors to join. Even better: don't allow W3C or WHATWG reps to join. Keep the decision making about the requirements list completely separate from the spec designers and the browser makers, or the tail will end up wagging the dog.
• That requirements list may or may not have anything to do with some version of HTML—and that's okay. Much of the interesting stuff on the web in the last decade has come from vendors, not standards writers. If it shipped, and cool stuff could be done with it, web builders pressured other vendors to implement it too. That method has been working, and that's okay.

And at the end, it all comes back to that slogan on the button—all that really matters is what actually ships and what's actually usable. There are some lovely theories in all those XHTML and HTML specs that will never see the light of day, and that makes them completely irrelevant to 99% of us.

Let's stick with figuring out how to make the stuff that does work, work for us.

Building Better Documents with Pages

Pages, part of Apple’s iWork suite, makes it easy to create great-looking documents, whether for print or electronic distribution. Because Pages is both a word processor and a page layout program, there’s a lot of hidden power and flexibility in the program. In this hands-on, beyond-the-basics lab session, you’ll learn how to create Pages documents that get your message across with clarity, strength, and excitement. By harnessing the power of Pages, along with practical layout and design tips, you’ll leave the session knowing how to build better documents with less effort.

In this session, you’ll learn:

• The best tool you can use to begin creating your documents
  
• Advanced text handling tips to add professional flair to your pages
  
• The ins and outs of creating and using paragraph and character styles to speed your document creation
  
• The best ways to structure and manage longer documents
  
• How to use Pages’ graphics tools to prepare stunning images
  
• How to adapt Pages’ page layout templates to fit your needs
  
• How to find and use third-party templates to save time and break your documents out of the pack
  
• All about using Numbers data in Pages to add terrific charts, do mail merges, and more
  

The Macworld Expo folks have set up a special promotional rate for this session; it's only $199 if you sign up by January 10. If you want to learn more about Pages, I hope to see you there!

Today marks a big milestone for us: we've lived in this house for 10 years. We moved in December 23, 1999 (only four months later than the builder's original promise!). Dori reminded me of the original site we did to document the move (we didn't call it a "blog," as the term hadn't been invented yet).

Since then, we've grown to appreciate what a special community this is. We love living in Healdsburg, in the middle of the Sonoma wine country. We've had some great experiences here and made some great friends along the way.

Aerial image courtesy of Bing maps

This is the first house I'd ever bought, though Dori had owned before. We've been through some minor (though they didn't seem that way at the time!) remodels, and I'm happy to say that we like this house more now than when we bought it.

Friday will be our eleventh Christmas here, and we're looking forward to many happy years after that.

To accompany the yummy appetizers, made by our friends Marc and Stormy (a peanut curried chicken in crispy cups and a cheese mixture around asparagus hearts), we opened a Toad Hollow 2007 "Eye of the Toad" Pinot Noir Rosé. Light, but very tasty.

For the white wine drinkers, there was a Hawley Vineyards 2006 Viognier. I tasted this after the meal, because I'd been drinking the reds, and it was really good.

With the turkey and the rest of the main meal, we opened the 2007 La Crema Anderson Valley Pinot Noir. I pretty much love everything La Crema makes, and this was no exception.

Finally, with dessert, there was the 2005 Paradise Ridge "Ode To Joy" (review) Late Harvest Russian River Valley Sauvignon Blanc dessert wine, in the 375 ml bottle. We got this because we are wine club members at this winery, as I recall. It seems to be difficult to get except at the winery. It was very good. Tasted like honey in the glass. I'm happy that we still have a bottle of the 2007 here!

Thanks to our friends David and Care Morgenstern for hosting and providing the dinner and a fine evening.

Somehow, this blog's tenth birthday snuck up on us—and yes, this blog really is ten years old. In Internet years, that makes it what, 70? Which, I guess answers the question as to why events sneak up on us, and we can just chalk it all up to incipient senility.

I could say lots of things about the last decade: where we started, where we've traveled, or where we are now. Or about how this blog has evolved into something other than my initial expectations. Or about how blogs themselves have changed overall. Or about the number of wonderful people we've met due to having blogging in common.

But the one thing I find I must say is, whether you've been reading this blog for one month, one year, or the entire decade: thank you for reading this.

After that, I happened to park next to a rare 1973-1978 V8 Series 3. The Series 3 was black and looked like it needed some work; the paint was dull and it was kind of dirty.

It's interesting to learn just how few of these cars were made; the DB5 is a filmic icon, but according to Wikipedia, only 1,021 of them were built, and the original one used in Goldfinger, has a sad history:

The first DB5 prototype used in Goldfinger with the chassis number DP/216/1 was later stripped of its weaponry and gadgetry by Aston Martin and then resold. It was then retrofitted by subsequent owners with nonoriginal weaponry. The Chassis DP/216/1 DB5 was stolen in 1997 from its last owner in Florida and is currently still missing.

There's an interesting article about the DB5's used in the movies, as well as details about the star car's theft and the insurance wrangling, here.

These are amazing cars, and it's nice to see them being used on the street, rather than being garaged.

If so, come and join us at the Mac Computer Expo in Petaluma, put on by NCMUG. It's the best (not-so-)little Mac show since the good ol' days of MacFair LA.

Want to know more? Here's the speaker list and schedule.

Free admission and free parking!

And please: stop us and say Hi!

And on the off-chance you didn't know this, either: it's Intel-only, so if you have an older PowerPC Mac, you're out of luck. Pffft.

I can't help but think of all the things she missed in my life. The end of my first marriage. The second marriage that would have brought her a new daughter-in-law and a grandson.

When she died, I had barely begun my career. I was in the middle of writing my first feature story for Macworld, which ended up being the cover story early in 1990. Later that year, I was named a Contributing Editor for the magazine.

She missed my first book, which wasn't published until five years later. Now I'm closing in on my fortieth book. She would have been proud. We dedicated our JavaScript book to her and to Dori's father, also gone now.

We had our differences in the years leading up to her death; I was born with a disability, so we were especially close when I was a child. But I think that she found it difficult to make the transition when I grew up, and I don't feel that she ever really accepted me as an adult. I regret that we were not able to bridge that gap before she was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. And then it was simply too late; time began to move too quickly. It was only six weeks from that diagnosis to the end.

Rather than sketching my remembrance of hospitals and pain, I'd like to share a picture of her that her sister, our beloved Auntie Theresa, gave us a few years ago. It shows a young girl of 8 or 9, smiling into the camera, a girl who had her whole life ahead of her. She didn't know what the future would hold, but I know her story. All those possibilities led to her long and happy marriage to my father, Joe Negrino, and to her legacy of her four children: my sister Marie, my late sister Pattie, my brother Robert, and me.

This was Dorothy, who became Dorothy Negrino, who became my mother.

I love you, Mom. I remember you.

The tactics also include a long chain email that purports to go through many portions of the House reform bill, and tells you what is in the bill, with scary detail of what a hellish thing reform will be.

Almost everything in the email is a lie.

If and when you get a copy of the email (or its inevitable mutations) from a well-meaning relative, colleague, or friend, be prepared with the facts, and be ready to send them to the debunking analyses below. In fact, I'll just give you something you can copy and paste into a reply:

Hi,

It turns out that most of the "facts" in this email about the health care reform bill in the Congress just aren't true, and the source of the email is a vociferous right-wing opponent of health care reform.

Politifact did their fact-checking thing on the email, and rated many of its falsehoods in their "Pants on Fire!" category, the most egregious category. See their analysis here.

Shorter link for the above: http://bit.ly/ABtWJ

There is an even more detailed debunking by a health policy expert, writing in the Huffington Post. You can find that here.

Shorter link for the above: http://bit.ly/Ud1iN

I hope this clears things up. It's obvious that America can't go on with the current broken health care system; insurance companies have too much control over our people's health care, and are driven by what will make them the most profit, not by what will provide the best care for us. Most of us, even if we have insurance, are just one serious illness away from medical bankruptcy. If you do get sick and lose your job, you may never be able to get affordable health insurance ever again. And too many people aren't covered at all. That's just not right.

There's plenty of room for people to disagree on what should be in health care reform, but poisoning honest debate with lies isn't the way.

Best,

That should do it. Copy it, sign it, and send it.

You're welcome.

Which of the below do you add as the final member of your panel?

1. An expert in social networks
2. An academic who has studied the declining numbers of women in tech
3. The head of a non-profit that supports women in tech
4. A guy who tried to hire a woman, but wasn't able to find one
5. A designer who works with technical people
6. A consultant who uses words like "synergy," "paradigm," and "liase"
7. Other

Put your answer in the comments, please.

There's a variety of reasons why I haven't blogged in ages, and those who know me well should be able to figure out the main reason(s). But it's also partly because I've been dreading writing the above post, which I've decided to separate out so as to not confuse things.

First, let's note what my hardware setup is. I have a MacBook (13-inch, Aluminum, Late 2008). Its video output is a Mini DisplayPort. But as mentioned below, this solution works (with some changes) with any modern Mac.

My TV is a Samsung 61" rear projector. That doesn't really matter; what's important is that it has a HDMI/DVI video input, and a set of stereo audio jacks that are assigned specifically for use with that particular HDMI port. In the picture of my TV's connection panel below, those ports are numbered 4 and 5, respectively.

OK, so here's what I did:

Video connections:

Planning on doing presentations from my MacBook, I had previously bought the pricy ($29) Apple Mini DisplayPort to DVI adapter, so I used that. I had also bought the Apple Mini DisplayPort to VGA adapter (also $29), which would work as an alternative using a VGA cable if your TV has a VGA input (sometimes labelled PC In, as in the picture above).

I wanted to keep the video signal all digital, so I bought a DVI to HDMI adapter from Monoprice.com. Then I used a cheap male-to-male HDMI cable that I also got at Monoprice to make the connection to the TV. So the hookup is:

MacBook > Apple Mini DisplayPort to DVI adapter > DVI male to HDMI female adapter > HDMI cable > TV.

Some alternatives: if I were to do this from scratch today, I would use something from Monoprice that wasn't available when I bought the Apple adapters, namely a Mini DisplayPort to HDMI adapter. Then all I would need would be the HDMI cable. If I had an older MacBook Pro with a DVI port, I could get by with just the DVI to HDMI adapter and the HDMI cable.

Audio connection:

The HDMI standard says that an HDMI cable can carry both video and audio. However, the MacBook's external video output only does video, so you need to deal with audio separately. I used another cable from Monoprice, the 3.5mm Stereo Male to 2 RCA Male Cable. I plugged the stereo RCA jacks into the TV, and the stereo plug on the other end of the cable into the MacBook's headphone port.

Update: A wise commenter points out that modern Mac headphone jacks are also optical digital audio jacks, which put out full surround sound. That doesn't help you much with Hulu, which is currently only stereo, but I expect them to upgrade that in the future. Then I'd buy a mini-Toslink to Toslink cable from Monoprice for about $3, and switch the whole setup to run through my home theater receiver. This works great today if you want to use any current Mac as your home theater PC to play DVDs as well as do streaming video; for example, it would work well with a Mac Mini.

Watching Hulu:

I switched the Samsung TV to its HDMI/DVI input, and turned on its internal speakers (normally the sound comes from my home theater receiver). The MacBook immediately recognized the TV as an external display. I left the MacBook in display mirrored mode. I fired up Hulu Desktop for Mac, pressed Command-F on the MacBook to put Hulu Desktop into Fullscreen mode, and I was up and running. I was able to relax back on the couch and use the little Apple Remote to navigate to the shows I wanted to watch. Both the video and audio quality were quite acceptable. The MacBook was getting the Hulu stream via 802.11n WiFi, but 802.11g (or wired Ethernet, of course) should work just fine.

In the future, I may connect the HDMI and audio outputs of the MacBook to the home theater receiver, so the sound comes through the far better home theater speakers, rather than the ones built in to the TV. But for now, the current setup works pretty darned well.