I recently updated a 15-year-old IBM Thinkpad R32 laptop (Pentium 4, 1 GB RAM, 20 GB hard drive) to Lubuntu 16.04, and I set it up to run my Blog Poster script written in Ruby.

Since this is a Linux environment, I like to use the Ruby version that the system offers in its repositories, also installing as many Ruby gems as I can from those same repos (instead of using gem install from the console).

The Blog Poster app, which attempts to make it easy to create social and regular blog posts from the command line, uploading them to the blog and sending them directly to Twitter, is fairly simple. It uses two gems: Nokogiri to help pull the titles of web pages and Twitter to (you guessed it) send a post to Twitter.

On Windows I used gem install to get both of those gems, and I could do the same in Lubuntu. But I'm very comfortable with Linux package management, so I opted to install ruby (which, believe it or not, isn't in the Ubuntu/Lubuntu default install) as well as ruby-nokogiri and ruby-twitter, all from the Ubuntu repository.

It worked.

Curiously, the script's call to vim did not work. There is, theoretically, no vim in the Ubuntu/Lubuntu default. But there is vi. You can install vim, but I opted to stick with the vi default, and I modified the system call in my Ruby code to call vi instead of vim.

Also, copy-pasting into the terminal (LXTerminal is what I am using) via right-click works great (though ctrl-v does not work).

The Ruby script works great, and I did a few successful updates to my blog and Twitter feed with this very aged laptop.

I'm a procedural programmer at this point. I understand the idea behind object-orientation, but going from those hokey examples (start with an animal class, then add a dog class) to actual code is another thing entirely.

I planned to base this post on a link that was supposed to be about procedural programming vs. OOP, and the article was pretty much a mess and didn't help me, so I'm not linking to it.

I need to see real code that uses OOP. That's the only way I'll figure it out.

Even though the new Firefox promises to be twice as fast as the old one and a legitimate competitor once again to Google Chrome, I have to stick with Google's browser. I'm working today, and I have 25 or so tabs open. I can see all 25 at once in Chrome, but Firefox only shows so many -- you have to hit arrows on either side to see them all. That doesn't work for me.

After I installed the Windows 10 Fall Creators Update on my HP Envy laptop, the Windows Hello facial recognition login feature stopped working.

I Googled and found a simple solution that works.

Basically:

• Open Device Manager
• Expand Imaging Devices
• Right-click on IR camera (or any camera, probably) and choose to update the driver

The driver updated, then I went to Set Up Face Sign-In and re-configured Windows Hello.

And now it works.

If you have an old computer, you should definitely consider Linux (and not just Chrome OS, as this ZDNet article suggests), but when it comes to new hardware you're buying right now, Windows 10 is more of a contender than the Microsoft operating system has ever been, even for people -- like me -- who have been using Linux as their OS of choice for years.

First of all, Windows 10 works well, is pretty slick, and handles HD (and presumably UHD) displays very well.

And since much of our (or at least my) computing is application-based and not so much OS-based, it doesn't really matter if you run the Google Chrome browser in Windows, Linux or Mac OS. It's still basically the same browser.

I still have the Geany text editor (though there is no terminal window in the Windows version). I code in Java and Ruby and haven't run into any problems yet.

But I wouldn't be here, still running Windows 10 on my 8-month-old laptop, if if werent for the Windows Subsystem for Linux, aka Bash on Windows, aka Ubuntu on Windows.

My "critical" Linux stuff -- mainly the scripts that run this blog -- still live in a Unix environment (believe me, I've tried it in Windows, and it's not happening). I use the WSL every day.

I also use Vim every day -- both in the WSL and in Windows, which has its own version of Vim (and GVim).

So far I've had one regression with the Windows 10 Fall Creators Update -- the facial recognition on this HP laptop stopped working. Maybe it'll get fixed. It's not at all critical.

I just didn't want to go through the fight to get Linux just right on this laptop when my interests these days are more in writing code in Ruby and Java and less in how my OS is handling graphics, sound, networking and the like.

If these things were a problem in Windows 10, I'd be running back toward Fedora. Or Ubuntu. That might happen. And I still have my Fedora-running laptop. But once you go to an HD screen, it's hard to go back. I'll probably say the same thing about UHD when I get a laptop that offers it.

But for now, the OS is not important. I am running a browser and a few programming languages, various and assorted text editors, and until Windows 10 crosses me, I'm not motivated to buy myself any trouble (and don't tell me how you installed your favorite Linux system and had absolutely no problems ever; fixing those problems veered into hobby territory for me, but I'm just not feeling it these days). I recognize that Microsoft is spying on me. So is Google. I'm probably more comfortable with the former than the latter. And I'm way more comfortable with either one of those than I am of Facebook. That's a topic for another day.

I've gone all this time being a guitar player and never before set the intonation on a guitar. It's mostly because my Gibson ES-175 has a wooden compensated bridge, and all you can do is move the whole thing forward or backward (and also side to side, but I digress). You don't generally do any intonation adjustments on acoustics, though luthiers can work a little magic with the nut and bridge saddle.

My 1979 Fender Lead I has a strong, thick neck that has never needed a truss rod adjustment, which is a good thing because getting to the truss-rod screw means loosening the neck from the body.

The Fender Lead's six-saddle hard-tail (meaning no tremolo) bridge is somewhat Strat-like, though it doesn't have springs between the intonation-adjustment screws and the individual bridge saddles. In lieu of those springs are nuts that hold the adjustment screws in place.

I had my little wrench to loosen the "lock" nuts, a Phillips screwdriver to turn the adjustment screws, and a clamp-on electronic tuner to check the pitches. I was set to go. I didn't even use an amp.

I've tried to set the intonation in the past, but I was never terribly successful. This time I used the cheap clamp-on tuner to compare the 12th-fret harmonic vs. the fretted note, and I went down the line and set all of the strings.

I also figured out that it's a lot easier to turn the screws (and you won't strip the heads) if you detune each string until it is slack before you make an adjustment at the bridge, then re-tuning the string to check how close you are to matching the pitches at the 12th fret. Words to live by: Don't adjust intonation at pitch!

Before yesterday, the guitar was out of tune as I played up the neck. Now that I have the intonation set, I will be playing it a lot more, and I might even "fill out" the extra Lead II pickguard I've had for years, turning the single (but super-versatile) humbucker Lead I guitar into a two-single-coil pickup Lead II-style guitar. With this change, the neck pickup sound should be closer to what I'm looking for, which is a jazz tone like Ed Bickert gets with his Telecaster. The hard-tail bridge of the Lead I, with the strings anchored through the back of the body, brings it closer to the Tele vibe. I wouldn't say that the Lead models sound like Strats or Teles (the Lead I sure doesn't), but I'll report back if I ever do swap out the pickguard and electronics for the Lead II-style setup.

Again, what I wanted to say was that after decades as a middling player, I never before did a full intonation setup. I really needed it and am too cheap to pay for it. So I'm glad I did it, and now I can really enjoy the Ernie Ball Power Slinky strings I've had on the guitar for some time. I have a couple more sets -- one pure nickel, the other nickel-coated steel -- in the wings, and I love the sound of this .011 set on the guitar.

The new Firefox -- version 57 -- is being touted as faster then ever, with the unspoken message being, "if you do serious work in the web browser, you no longer have to use Google Chrome to avoid pulling your hair out."

I've been testing the new Firefox all morning, and I can say that's pretty much true. That said, there are still some design choices -- and I'm talking about how multiple tabs are handled -- where Chrome still wins. And after a morning of use, Chrome still retains a performance edge.

It didn't used to be a contest. When I used to run Firefox with multiple tabs open, it was a prescription for pain. But with the new Firefox, none of the performance issues I had with previous versions of Firefox are bothering me. I have my usual 15 or so tabs open, and I am able to switch between them with no lag and no blank screens. Nothing is freezing, which means everything is moving. Once my session "aged" a bit, I noticed a lag when trying to select text on a web page for copying. But I could still switch between tabs and start new ones with no trouble and no loss of speed.

About the only complaint I have is an old one: When you have more than, say, 15 tabs open in Firefox, you have to scroll to see them all. In Google Chrome, the tabs just keep getting smaller and smaller, and you can always see them all in your browser window. That's one thing that Chrome still does better -- for me, anyway.

But the fact that Firefox is no longer a performance nightmare compared to Chrome and is once again a viable alternative is huge. Google has much too big a piece of all of our pies to not have Firefox as a backstop against monopoly.

I've already been using the Firefox browser (the privacy version) on my Android phone, where it has been performing well for months. I can't tell a difference between it and the built-in Chrome, with the possible exception being that the Firefox browser is optimized to prevent spying and Chrome is very much not.

I hope Mozilla takes the browser where it needs to go -- performance equal to or better than Google Chrome. We really need the diversity in desktop and mobile browsing that Mozilla brings to a world where Google is the major player and Microsoft and Apple try to snare users of their platforms with each company's own in-house browser.

Things with Mozilla have been awkward. Company CEO (and JavaScript inventor) Brendan Eich's ouster over his anti-gay-marriage activism was the beginning of a very dark period for the non-profit entity.

With all the publicity of how much money Mozilla was getting from Google for search placement, any calls for donations from Mozilla were met (from me anyway) with a "how could they??" Even now, I'd like a bevy of compelling reasons for supporting Mozilla, financially and otherwise. A renewed Firefox that's going places, along with the Rust programming language that at least partly makes that possible is one. Advocacy for an open Web not controlled by "not evil" (in their own mind) corporations is another.

But that brings me back to the financials. Is Mozilla worthy of our money? Does it even need it? I applaud their efforts to bring Firefox back from the dead. It was basically killed by Google Chrome for sheer performance reasons, and Firefox's "return" has been delayed for years, it seems.

If I haven't said it already, we need Firefox, and we need Mozilla in its role as advocate and innovator. I will be using Firefox more, and since I haven't used it at all for the past few years, that should be easy. The open Web is important, but so is a more open world for the mobile devices and networks that have dwarfed "traditional" computer use over the past five or so years.

Mozilla tried to address this with Firefox OS, which failed fairly spectacularly. When the Firefox browser itself also fell behind, that was another ominous sign, and hopefully this week's release is the beginning of a new era for critical software that isn't controlled by an enormous company intent on making money by selling its users to bidders high and low alike.

One of the best, deepest and most innovative solo jazz guitarists working today, John Stowell, plays "Ligia," "Nobody Else But Me," and "Remembering the Rain" during a live session at WEEU-AM 830's The Sound Room in Reading, Pennsylvania.

His harmony is so innovative, and his chords so unconventional, that he's pretty much re-inventing how jazz is played on the guitar. I think Ed Bickert played chords kind of like this, but Stowell is definitely in his own arena when it comes to playing tunes his way.

I just upgraded to the new Firefox (version 57, in case you're playing along at home), and it is a lot faster than the previous version.

Speed is the one thing that drove me away from Firefox and toward Chrome, and truth be told I would rather run Firefox and have Google spying on me just a little bit less.

The other thing that I need in a browser is the ability to have maybe 20 tabs open with the abilty to switch between them without pain. That's a big reason why Chrome became my go-to browser.

If Firefox can handle multiple tabs, it will be a whole new game. I commend Mozilla in advance, and I'll tell you how it goes.

I'm thinking that it's time for me to break out these social-style posts into their own blog.

I haven't done a hard analysis, but if I had to guess, I'd say I'm putting out 50 social posts for every traditional blog post. And since the social posts are in a subdirectory (aka a category), it's easy to go to that category and see all of the social posts, or see all the posts, traditional and social.

But there's no way to exclude the /updates directory and see everything but what's in that part of the filesystem. I'm sure I could code this into Ode, which is nothing if not flexible, but the more "natural" way to handle this is to have a separate blog for social posts, keeping this one for traditional, long-form writing.

It's an idea. The good thing about Ode and its flat-file structure is that I could move all of the "old" social posts into the new blog by simply copying the directory and its contents into the new site's /documents directory.

I'm not ready to do it just yet, but I am thinking about it. If I'm only putting out 10 social posts a day, I think a single blog is manageable for the reader. I am probably doing 25 some days, five on others.

So I may stick with the current arrangement (the preferred choice of the lazy), but another thing having two sites does is simplify the sending of posts to social-media sites. With two separate blogs, there would be no contortions to get traditional updates (post title and post link) automatically sent to Twitter with social updates (post body only) either excluded (I'm using my Blog Poster app to send them to Twitter) or sent automatically.