Alfred for Mac

I get asked all the time, "Can you send me ___ again? I can't find it." or "How did you find that so fast?" The secret is search. You not only have to know WHAT to type, but you have to be using the right search TOOL.

I love "Spotlight", the built in search tool for macs. If I need to find a file, folder, or application quickly, this was the easiest way for me to find it on my computer (especially since the amount of ever increasing "stuff" I have to look though is increasingly cumbersome).

Then I found "Alfred".

Alfred is currently a free download in the mac app store. The app is not new, but it has just been updated with a better UI and the search functions are lighting fast. Not only can you search for documents and files, but you can search for applications, search the web, search your favorite websites, and more! I have only begun to scratch the surface of this application. It is incredibly powerful.

For instance: To open the app's search bar, I hold "alt/option + space".

To open "safari" I start typing "sa" and before I get to "f", Safari is my first highlighted option. All I have to do is click enter and Safari launches! That is actually FASTER than dropping my curser down to the bottom of my screen, waiting on the dock to "unhide" and then clicking safari. We are talking about milliseconds, but speed is speed.

Suggestion: In Alfred's settings, under "default results" DO NOT allow it to search Folders and Documents by default. Use the "Essential" items as suggested. If you are looking for those items, all you have to do is hit the spacebar one more time and you will see a an apostrophe appear and you are in "open file" or "find file" mode. You can also type the word "find" if you would rather.

After you launch Alfred, you can also use it for quick math by typing an equation. In Alfred's preferences, under accessories, you will see calculator. I chose to "Enable advanced calculator with keyword '='" which is based on the GCMathParser -- I'm a nerd. 

Alfred also allows for custom web search. I wanted to be able to quickly launch alfred, type a book and chapter of the Bible and then see that reference. I regularly use Biblia.com because they have an NASB and several comparative texts. I love the resources and its association with Logos. But how? First, I tested a search on the site and noticed that the URL looked like this (once I selected a translation & a chapter: http://biblia.com/books/nasb95/jn1

OK, but I am not going to be able to re-learn jn1 = John 1 with all 66 books. I tested http://biblia.com/books/nasb95/john1 and it redirected me immediately to http://biblia.com/books/nasb95/jn1 ! Great news! So, I just have to "mash" the book and chapter together in the search! Alfred wants to know the first part of this URL up to where the search query is implemented: http://biblia.com/books/nasb95/

In place of the book and chapter, I inserted "{query}" per their instructions. Then I set the keyword to "Biblia".

Now, I can launch Alfred with alt/option + space, type Biblia John1, click enter and I am there. That fast! Wow. If I wanted to zoom straight to a verse, I just type Biblia John1.7. So easy! If you have already downloaded Alfred and want to add the Biblia NASB search to your list, click here.

I also created a search query for The Weather Channel. I set my "keyword" as "twc". If you have downloaded Alfred and want to add this custom weather query, click here. Just search for a zip code. If you use the city name you have to use + signs between spaces and include the state abbreviation. Little+Rock+AR for example. Still faster than opening safari, going to weather.com and typing the city or state there.

Below is a slide show with quirky comments that I pulled directly from the Alfred website.

Heart Rate = Temperature?

Today, I'm SICK. I hate it. But an interesting thing happened yesterday.

I was feeling bad last night, stuffy nose, head ache, body ache; the works. When I laid down to sleep, I noticed my heart rate was elevated. I thought that was weird. I took a quick measurement and realized that my heart rate was 40 beats per minute higher than my average resting heart rate. Yikes. Now I was a bit concerned. So I did what all people my age do when faced with a major medical concern: I Googled it. I searched "elevated heart rate sick" and found an article that suggested that your heart rate can sometimes be elevated as your body attempts to figh infection, bactaria, virus, etc. Ok. I'm feeling a little better. Then I found a seperate article that suggested that for some people, the increase in heart rate can directly correlates with an increase in temperature.

Every 10 to 15 elevated beats per minute equals an increase in temperature of one degree.

I'm a "big fella" with a little higher resting heart rate than average (working on changing that), so I used the 15 figure knowing it would result in a lower temperate increase.

This would put my temperature at ~101.2 based on my increased heart rate.

We took my temperature: 101°.

That is crazy. I don't know if this will work for everyone, but I would love to hear some feedback if this works for you.

So, I knew I had a fever before I knew I "officially" had a fever. The end result, I still got sicker and sicker through the night and today, but I felt more knowledgable about getting sick -- even if this turns out to be an "old wive's tale" that is only right this time.

Thanks for reading!

iPad Mini -- a little more Apple

Today, Apple released the much anticipated iPad mini.

To keep our companies on the cutting edge of technology, I watch all of the "tech news" keynotes and major releases. The nerd in me gets giddy so it is part of the job that I don't mind.

I'm not going to go into the nitty gritty tech specs. I'll focus in on just a few big picture questions: 

1. What is it?
2. What is it's function?
3. Can we thrive without it?

1. What is it?

In short, the iPad mini is a smaller iPad. Sounds self explanatory and it is. All 250,000+ apps that work on iPad will work on the iPad mini with no changes necessary. It is literally a smaller iPad. The tech specs place is somewhere between the iPad 2 and the new iPad 4, on all sides of the iPad 3.

2. What is it's function?

In my opinion, this is the new "mobile" iPad. It will be the eReader for apple users. It will be the primary browser for the casual internet user. I can see heavy ebook consumers who use backlit eReaders AND carry an iPad using the mini Instead, especially when they go mobile. I could understand  minimalists via digitization using the mini as a streamlined solution to carrying a [now big and bulky] iPad around with them everywhere. I'm sure "seasoned citizens" would prefer the lower price point and smaller device for leisurely reading. But what about for business?

For business, I don't see it having a primary function or purpose. I see this succeeding in the consumer marketplace with very little adoption in the business realm - similar to other eReaders. This is primarily a personal mobile device. As the device ages and the price drops, I could see venders using them as cash registers or even interactive menus. It is too small to be used as a presentation tool and too large to be used as a mobile payment solution. We have iPads and iPhones for that. It is too small and expensive to be used as a second or third screen and it doesn't make since to purchase it as a mini display. I hope to see LOTS of leading tech advances in the business with this device and we will be exploring ALL of those possibilities. However, for now, this is a souped up eReader that puts everything you had on your iPad onto your eReader. This devices will be GREAT for reading books, reports, magazines, personal development,  note taking, etc. Similar to the iPad and the iPhone, it is great for content exploration and discovery and they are poor devices for content creation.

3. Can We Thrive without It?

Yeah. Our businesses will do just fine with out the iPad mini. Without an capital intensive investment and continual reinvestment [upgrades and replacing damaged iPad minis], I do not think we will have much of a use for the iPad minis at this time.

Personally, I am looking into it as a consumption device. I would love a "one hand" device for reviewing reports and research. At this point, it is still a "want", but I could see it developing into a future "need" as my library goes 100% digital. As a personal/professional development tool, I am very interested.

Would I get one for my kids? Not at that price! I will probably buy a used iPad mini down the road as people are trying to sell theirs for the iPad mini 2. My 2 year old uses our OLD iPhone 3G and I'm really happy I kept them around. The amount of educational apps and games that she already knows how to use are astounding, but I don't think she is ready for an iPad or iPad mini. She still sits with mom or dad when she is reading or playing on those devices.

In a nutshell...

I like the iPad mini, but I don't feel the need to purchase it at this time. I have an iPad 2 and an iPhone 4. I didn't upgrade to the iPad 3 because I anticipated the update when the iPad mini is released. I didn't upgrade to the iPhone 4S in anticipation of the form factor change in the iPhone 5. Of all of the devices, the one I need to upgrade is my iPhone. It is sluggish and has issues since the back is cracked to pieces. If I upgrade to the iPhone 5, I will most likely wait until Q2 of next year to see what Apple is going to do before buying the iPad mini or the iPad 4. There may be enough information released at that time to time and anticipate the launch of the iPad mini 2 and the iPad 5 next fall.

In the meantime, that $119 - $179 Kindle Paperwhite is looking pretty great for an affordable eReader for the next year...

UPDATE: I'm not the only one to think that: "AMAZON: We Had Our Best Day Of Kindle Fire HD Sales After Apple Announced The iPad Mini"  Although I don't prefer the Fire, I think the Kindle's affordability is very attractive to most consumers.

Nike+ iPod Review

This has been quite the adventure. I ran once with it last year December and it was WAY off, so I tried to calibrate the thing. It was a one time attempt and it didn't work, so I thought, "Well, I guess I need to read more about it."​

I finally got around to trying this again this week. This time, I felt like I had full knowledge and understanding of how to calibrate this device. On my iPod Nano, I go into settings, make sure the foot sensor is linked, then select calibrate, set the distance, run that distance and then tell the nano that I have finished the calibration. Simple right?​

Wrong.​

Monday, I ran 2 calibration runs of 0.5 miles. Each time, I attempted to maintain a fairly steady pace and stride.​ Each time, I finished the 0.5 mile run and each time the device said that the distance I said I was running and the distance I ran did not match -- and I thought that was the entire point of calibrating the sensor??

So, I again thought that there must be something I am missing. Maybe my distance was wrong (it wasn't, I double checked), but it couldn't have been as far off as the sensor was telling me! I read through all of the instructions again and I even watched a few videos that showed how "easy" it was to calibrate the sensor.​

​Tuesday, I ran 4 calibration runs of 0.25 miles. Each time, I attempted to maintain a steady pace and stride. Each 0.25 mile run was only a few seconds off from the last. Each time, the device said that I did not run the distance that I told it I would run. HOWEVER, THIS TIME, I had a back up plan. I was using the Nike+ GPS Running App that utilizes the phone's GPS and Accelerometer to determine a more accurate distance reading. The Nike+ GPS Running App was within a few feet of the actual distance I measured on Map My Run, so I know it was right. Each time the Nike+ Running App would chime in my ear to tell me I had run 0.25 miles, I would check my nano that i was attempting to calibrate, only to find that it was reading 0.01 miles! 0.01??!? Yes, it really was that far off.

After 4 more unsuccessful calibrations, I am finished with this stupid little Nike+ iPod system with the foot pod sensor. ​It is NOT worth the $30. Save your money!

I really wanted this to work. I like the Nike+ website user interface and I wanted to have a solution for all of my future "short runs" so I don't have to wear a brick (aka the iPhone) on my arm every time. I wanted something small, light, and fast that would stay in the same tracking system. No such luck.​ Since testing this device, it has made me re-evaluate the use of the Nike+ tracking system as a whole. So, before I get to deep into statistic tracking and settle with a system that will collect all of my data, I plan on reviewing a LOT of running apps. Do you have a favorite? Let me know. In the meantime, I will be using dailymile.com to log each run, no matter what device or app I am using. I have a feeling that all this will be a prelude to a "real" running gps -- at least I hope it is!

"Mix in the Pan" Chocolate Cake

Last week I made a chocolate cake from scratch. I was looking for an "easy chocolate cake" recipe that is somewhat classic or original. I found one from the Joy of Baking that seemed pretty basic.  I liked it a lot, but it didn't live up to my expectations of moist, melt in your mouth, luscious cake. As I posted about, I have very high standards when it comes to cake! If you have to do more than add eggs and milk or oil to a box of mix, then the scratch cake must taste better than the box cake version or it isn't worth the effort!

Recipe Review: The best part about this cake was the chocolate ganache that I made to top it and that you can make the entire cake in a single pan if you want to. The cake itself had a good chocolate flavor and the texture was "ok", but it wasn't life changing. Ha! In the "how to video" below, she calls it a "snack cake" and I think that is the prefect description. It is great to quickly whip up and eat with ice-cream, but in my opinion, it might not be worth the effort. You can use a box chocolate cake mix, add a few eggs and boom, you have a cake that is just as good if not better and you've spent a little less time. It is really up to you.

Recipe Rating: As is, without the ganache, I would rate this about a 6 out of 10. On the cake scale, I'd say it was a D+/C-. I would not repeat this recipe without any changes. The changes I would make is in the cooling process. I believe that allowing the cake to cool as instructed dries it out too much. See the tips section below. With that change, i believe this cake could be a 7 or 8 out of 10.

Recipe Tips: It takes a LONG time to cool this cake in the pan and it takes a LONG time for the ganache to cool. Even though this is a "mix in the pan" recipe, I suggest using some bakers spray or oil in the pan and then would dump the cake out to cool. I would also put the cake in the freezer for a few hours. The top layer of moisture freezes and holds all of the moisture in the cake as it cools. ​THEN I would top it with the ganache. You could even put it back in the pan that you started with if you wanted to. That would probably take this cake to the "next level" as far as texture and moistness goes.

Here are the photos from my experience​:

​​Here is the How to video and original recipe from Joy of Baking:

Recipe from ​Joy of Baking
Chocolate Cake: Preheat oven to 350 degrees F (177 degrees C) and place rack in center of oven.

 In an ungreased 8 inch (20 cm) square cake pan, stir together the flour, sugar, sifted cocoa powder, baking powder, baking soda, and salt.

Add the melted butter, water, lemon juice, and vanilla extract. With a fork, mix all the ingredients together until well blended.

Bake in preheated oven for about 30 minutes , or until the cake springs back when lightly pressed and a toothpick inserted in the center of the cake comes out clean. Remove from oven and place on a wire rack to cool.

Frosting: Place the chopped chocolate, cream, and butter in a heatproof bowl. Place over a saucepan of simmering water and melt until smooth. Remove from heat and let stand at room temperature until it is of pouring consistency. Then pour the frosting over the cooled cake. Let stand until frosting has thickened.

Serves 8 - 10 people.

Chocolate Cake

• 1 1/2 cups (195 grams) all purpose flour
• 1 cup (200 grams) granulated white sugar
• 1/4 cup (25 grams) unsweetened cocoa powder (not Dutch-processed), sifted
• 1 teaspoon baking powder
• 3/4 teaspoon baking soda
• 1/4 teaspoon salt
• 1/3 cup (75 grams) unsalted butter, melted
• 1 cup (240 ml) warm water
• 1 tablespoon lemon juice (or vinegar)
• 1 teaspoon pure vanilla extract

Chocolate Frosting

• 6 ounces (170 grams) semi-sweet chocolate, chopped
• 3/4 cup (180 ml) heavy cream (35% butterfat)
• 1 tablespoon unsalted butter, room temperature

Read more: http://www.joyofbaking.com/ChocolateCake.html#ixzz24IhtpzSQ