So I decided to install Presto My PC on my wife's laptop to see how it worked. She has an Acer Extensa 4420 running Windows Vista. One of her biggest complaints is that it takes forever to start up. Presto promises very quick boot times.
I was impressed with the ease of install. It took less than five minutes to install (the installer works from within Windows XP or Vista), and the next time I started the laptop the Windows Boot Loader asked me which OS to start. I selected Presto, and Bam! I was in. After a couple of quick changes to the network settings (I use manual IP, it's configured for DHCP by default). It automatically picked up both the wireless and wired network cards, something that impressed me greatly.
I was up and online in under a minute the first time, and under 30 seconds from no power to firefox running on the second boot. I was very impressed.
Until...
I wanted to try to connect the laptop to our windows-based server. I found no way to do this. I tried manually installing Samba using the command line (I had to use ALT-F2 to run xterm, there is no icon to launch it), and I was able to install this, and a number of other packages using apt-get. I even installed Synaptic to make it even easier to select and install packages. The problem, though, is that the kernel is built to load quickly, so they do not include cifs support, which is required to mount samba shares.
Now, I have absolutely zero experience with the kernel. This became very frustrating very quickly. I am going to try to find a way to add cifs support to the kernel, but honestly I think that Presto should look at making cifs a part of their system. The only file system that is supported is NTFS. I am sure this is part of the reason that boot times are so quick, but I would be more than willing to sacrifice a few seconds of my time with the promise of being able to connect to my Windows shares.
I guess I'm going to have to learn how to work with the kernel :)
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
I forgot about my blog
It was to my surprise that I found I had a blog. I posted my first (and only) post over a year ago. So, the question begs asking, do I really need a blog? Does anyone really need a blog? What the heck is a blog, anyhow?
Well, I don't think I need a blog, but that doesn't mean I don't want one. It's an excellent forum to express one's opinions on a variety of topics.
My first post was a commentary on market forces. It seems to me that we are currently in what analysts are calling a recession. As far as I am concerned, this is the optimum time to invest. When you (or your wife, as the case may be) go shopping, you want to get the best value for your money. So what do you do? You look for sales. Well, right now, most stocks are on sale. It strikes me that this means that we should be looking for value and buying. That being said, certain companies that may have previously been considered safe havens are no longer in that category. Each investor needs to look at the risks and benefits of each stock. The auto industry seems to be unsafe, as they have not adapted to the demands of consumers. The recording industry is in a similar boat. What we need to look for is companies that are able to quickly adapt to change and keep up with the demands of their customers.
I work in the outsourcing industry. I will not say which company, as we are currently in a blackout period while we announce our financial results, but it strikes me that this is the way to go as far as investments are concerned. Outsourcers have to constantly adapt not only to the demands of their customers, but also the demands of their customers' customers. Also, this is a growth industry. As businesses look to cut costs they will increase the amount of work they outsource, moving from internal support to less expensive external support. This may or may not include offshore solutions. So if you are looking for a solid investment vehicle, look for companies that have operations on multiple continents and provide services that are not going to go away. Demand may weaken, but everyone needs front-line agents to handle customer inquiries and support. The other nice thing about the outsourcing industry is that they generally have a broad spectrum of clients. If one client drops out, they are usually able to find more to fill the gap. This prevents the need for restructuring costs (i.e. severance, etc.), and allows organisations to dynamically adapt to the conditions of the market.
During boom times we see companies looking to maximise profits and become more appealing to investors. This leads to outsourcing. During bust times (i.e. now) companies look to cut costs to keep up with the cost of doing business. This also leads to outsourcing.
In short, outsourcers are a solid investment at any time. Given the current economic conditions, and the fact that stock prices are all depressed (on sale, remember?), this is the optimum time to buy in to an outsourcing company.
Well, I don't think I need a blog, but that doesn't mean I don't want one. It's an excellent forum to express one's opinions on a variety of topics.
My first post was a commentary on market forces. It seems to me that we are currently in what analysts are calling a recession. As far as I am concerned, this is the optimum time to invest. When you (or your wife, as the case may be) go shopping, you want to get the best value for your money. So what do you do? You look for sales. Well, right now, most stocks are on sale. It strikes me that this means that we should be looking for value and buying. That being said, certain companies that may have previously been considered safe havens are no longer in that category. Each investor needs to look at the risks and benefits of each stock. The auto industry seems to be unsafe, as they have not adapted to the demands of consumers. The recording industry is in a similar boat. What we need to look for is companies that are able to quickly adapt to change and keep up with the demands of their customers.
I work in the outsourcing industry. I will not say which company, as we are currently in a blackout period while we announce our financial results, but it strikes me that this is the way to go as far as investments are concerned. Outsourcers have to constantly adapt not only to the demands of their customers, but also the demands of their customers' customers. Also, this is a growth industry. As businesses look to cut costs they will increase the amount of work they outsource, moving from internal support to less expensive external support. This may or may not include offshore solutions. So if you are looking for a solid investment vehicle, look for companies that have operations on multiple continents and provide services that are not going to go away. Demand may weaken, but everyone needs front-line agents to handle customer inquiries and support. The other nice thing about the outsourcing industry is that they generally have a broad spectrum of clients. If one client drops out, they are usually able to find more to fill the gap. This prevents the need for restructuring costs (i.e. severance, etc.), and allows organisations to dynamically adapt to the conditions of the market.
During boom times we see companies looking to maximise profits and become more appealing to investors. This leads to outsourcing. During bust times (i.e. now) companies look to cut costs to keep up with the cost of doing business. This also leads to outsourcing.
In short, outsourcers are a solid investment at any time. Given the current economic conditions, and the fact that stock prices are all depressed (on sale, remember?), this is the optimum time to buy in to an outsourcing company.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Bear Markets
For my first Blog post, I have to respond to the comments that the stock markets are entering "Bear Territory". I was watching CNN the other day and they were talking about the Dow Jones and the Nasdaq entering bear territory, and I couldn't help but cringe. There should be no such thing as a bear market at this point. We understand the mechanics of the stock market, and have had many years to figure things out.
First of all, people associate bear markets with recession. Recession is caused by lower national spending. Lower spending is associated with higher saving. So, if we are saving this money, where is it going? Certainly not into...say...the stock market? Even if individuals stop investing in the stock market, the big players (banks, trusts, etc.) are certainly investing their money in the markets. So to say that a recession and a bear market go together is incorrect. If anything, a recession should trigger a bull market, as people invest (or save) their money instead of spending it.
Next I would like to talk about what a bear market entails. Lower stock prices (particularly the index funds) lead people to think that the bear is in the house. The way I see it, lower stock prices mean that it is time to invest! This is when the stocks are on sale, to take a term from retail. If you had a choice of buying a thousand shares of a solid company (think blue-chip) at $100 a share or at $85 a share, what would you pick? As an investor, one should look at the bear market as an opportunity. Stocks almost always recover (barring bad management), so why not throw some more money into the pot when the stocks are cheap? If I go to buy a car, I look at a number of factors - price, functionality, features, safetey, etc. Why not apply the same formula to the stock market? Price should not be the main concern - the management and potential of the company should dictate one's investments. If a company has a solid product line and excellent management, they will be able to weather almost anything that comes along. Even a recession.
Thirdly, I would like to talk about stock market returns. One can not look at the stock market as a way to make a quick buck. I remember back when I was in high school all the talk was about Bre-X. Everywhere I turned, people were talking about this hot stock. Well, I warned them. I said don't invest in companies that have high market valuations. Well, look what happened. A lot of people lost their shirts in the Bre-X scandal. They bought when the stock was very high (one of my friends purchased shares when they were over $200/share), and a lot of people lost everything. The smart thing to do would have been to invest in a company that had an under-market valuation. At approximately the same time I started following the shares of Corel Corp. They were hovering around $2-3/share. At the time of writing, they are at $8.77/share. This is significant return (300% in 10 years). They peaked in 1999 around $60/share. So, who is the smart investor there? Look at a company's history, their potential, and their products to make a decision - not CNN's news feed. I believe it was my father who told me "If a company is in the news, it's too late to invest". What a great rule of thumb. Do your research and you will do well. Invest based on news stories and you will always be behind those who do their research.
Finally, and back to the point of bear markets, one has to look at the performance of their own portfolio. If your portfolio is being outperformed by the index funds, you may want to diversify. If you invest heavily in one or two sectors, you leave yourself open to failure. If you diversify your portfolio, you will be able to have gains and losses that yield you a net gain across the board, even if one or two sectors start to fall. A good example of this is the tech sector. Does anyone else remember the tech bubble? Does anyone remember when it burst? I do. A lot of people lost a lot of money because they were invested heavily in tech stocks. Everyone was talking about when the bubble would burst, but nobody wanted to get out. Everyone was buying, and when we finally realised as a society that these companies were not producing any revenue, everyone sold at the same time - the bubble burst. The smart thing to do would be to invest elsewhere - resources, for example, and when the bubble did burst, be there to happily pick up the stocks of the companies that were actually solid investments from the start - at bargain basement prices.
So, in conclusion, a bear market is really just a clearance sale for stocks. It's a time to invest, not a time to sell. It may be a time to shift your investments around to create a well-balanced portfolio. The real key though is not to sell when the markets are down. If you can't afford to invest more, keep what you've got. Over any given 30 year period, the stock market has ALWAYS outperformed any other investment vehicle, including real estate, treasury bills, GICs, and bonds. People who look at stocks as a get-rich-quick scheme are missing the point. The stock market is an investment. So invest. Don't try to get rich off of one big hit, plan for the long term and buy stocks that have low market valuation and high potential.
First of all, people associate bear markets with recession. Recession is caused by lower national spending. Lower spending is associated with higher saving. So, if we are saving this money, where is it going? Certainly not into...say...the stock market? Even if individuals stop investing in the stock market, the big players (banks, trusts, etc.) are certainly investing their money in the markets. So to say that a recession and a bear market go together is incorrect. If anything, a recession should trigger a bull market, as people invest (or save) their money instead of spending it.
Next I would like to talk about what a bear market entails. Lower stock prices (particularly the index funds) lead people to think that the bear is in the house. The way I see it, lower stock prices mean that it is time to invest! This is when the stocks are on sale, to take a term from retail. If you had a choice of buying a thousand shares of a solid company (think blue-chip) at $100 a share or at $85 a share, what would you pick? As an investor, one should look at the bear market as an opportunity. Stocks almost always recover (barring bad management), so why not throw some more money into the pot when the stocks are cheap? If I go to buy a car, I look at a number of factors - price, functionality, features, safetey, etc. Why not apply the same formula to the stock market? Price should not be the main concern - the management and potential of the company should dictate one's investments. If a company has a solid product line and excellent management, they will be able to weather almost anything that comes along. Even a recession.
Thirdly, I would like to talk about stock market returns. One can not look at the stock market as a way to make a quick buck. I remember back when I was in high school all the talk was about Bre-X. Everywhere I turned, people were talking about this hot stock. Well, I warned them. I said don't invest in companies that have high market valuations. Well, look what happened. A lot of people lost their shirts in the Bre-X scandal. They bought when the stock was very high (one of my friends purchased shares when they were over $200/share), and a lot of people lost everything. The smart thing to do would have been to invest in a company that had an under-market valuation. At approximately the same time I started following the shares of Corel Corp. They were hovering around $2-3/share. At the time of writing, they are at $8.77/share. This is significant return (300% in 10 years). They peaked in 1999 around $60/share. So, who is the smart investor there? Look at a company's history, their potential, and their products to make a decision - not CNN's news feed. I believe it was my father who told me "If a company is in the news, it's too late to invest". What a great rule of thumb. Do your research and you will do well. Invest based on news stories and you will always be behind those who do their research.
Finally, and back to the point of bear markets, one has to look at the performance of their own portfolio. If your portfolio is being outperformed by the index funds, you may want to diversify. If you invest heavily in one or two sectors, you leave yourself open to failure. If you diversify your portfolio, you will be able to have gains and losses that yield you a net gain across the board, even if one or two sectors start to fall. A good example of this is the tech sector. Does anyone else remember the tech bubble? Does anyone remember when it burst? I do. A lot of people lost a lot of money because they were invested heavily in tech stocks. Everyone was talking about when the bubble would burst, but nobody wanted to get out. Everyone was buying, and when we finally realised as a society that these companies were not producing any revenue, everyone sold at the same time - the bubble burst. The smart thing to do would be to invest elsewhere - resources, for example, and when the bubble did burst, be there to happily pick up the stocks of the companies that were actually solid investments from the start - at bargain basement prices.
So, in conclusion, a bear market is really just a clearance sale for stocks. It's a time to invest, not a time to sell. It may be a time to shift your investments around to create a well-balanced portfolio. The real key though is not to sell when the markets are down. If you can't afford to invest more, keep what you've got. Over any given 30 year period, the stock market has ALWAYS outperformed any other investment vehicle, including real estate, treasury bills, GICs, and bonds. People who look at stocks as a get-rich-quick scheme are missing the point. The stock market is an investment. So invest. Don't try to get rich off of one big hit, plan for the long term and buy stocks that have low market valuation and high potential.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)