About winning "Hands Down" (WC2010)

You know, I think it comes from a cultural difference, this French way of winning their qualification to the FWC2010.

In English, there's this expression "Winning hands down". The origin is supposed to come from the horse racing world where a jockey would win so easily that he could afford to release the grip on the horse's reins.

I could not find the origin  of the French equivalent expression which is: "Gagner haut la main"(Winning hand high)...but now I guess it comes from soccer!

Well done, Tony Parker!

 

Read More

Synology DS109 NAS

I became increasingly concerned by the safety of my data after that some loss and corruption occurred on my NexStar LX NAS, apparently following episodes of heavy disk activity. I'm still not sure who to blame: the NAS or the old Seagate Barracuda inside.

So, I had in mind to find a new NAS and hard drive in the next few months. I first saw the QNAP TS-109 on DealExtreme.com, which gave me an idea of what the ideal NAS should be: something more than just a hard disk enclosure with some SAMBA, FTP and BT agent, but rather an always-on, multi-purpose server to second my 10 years old patch-worked computer. I found very attractive the mySQL and PHP enabled web server, and the secure HTTPS and SFTP connectivities. Thanks to the users comments on DX, I realized that this model was both outdated and overpriced.
The successor TS-119 Turbo (priced around €250) with its superb Ajax web interface looked even more appealing. But then I discovered its most direct competitor, the Synology DS109 and none of them would have been a bad choice really.
What decided me in the end was an offer on a German shop for a Synology DS109 @ €234...including a 500GB Hitachi DeskStar hard disk! Their all-but-friendly ordering system was a pain to deal with but it was really worth it!

One week after receiving their "shipment tracking email" ...with no tracking number, the package arrived.

First surprise, a small bag of sweets was included in the package. That's nice, I'd have preferred that easy-tecs.com reply to my emails (about the missing tracking reference), but at least they try to add a friendly touch to the process.


Upon opening the NAS by removing 2 screws and pushing the upper part forward, I could see the promised hard disk already in place. 

 I am using it for a few weeks now and this little gem really delivers. The management interface is extremely clear and simple in all aspects. I could even use the Surveillance Station with one of my FI8908W IP cams. I say one of them because, for each additional camera configured (up to 8), you have to buy a license, and it cost roughly the price of my camera, so it's just plain non-sense for me. Also, as there is no camera profile for the Foscam models, the Pan and Tilt cannot be exploited .

I had one annoying problem though with this unit:
- I wanted to use the USBCopy feature to recover the content of my old NAS. The copy process started normally but stopped some time after with the log entry "USB drive ejected".
 The Synology tech. support proved helpful and responsive, and we could finally blame this on the few bad sectors present on the source. Synology R&D team confirmed that bad sectors couldn't be skipped (which is not normal: I could backup my old NAS through USB on my PC w/o problem) and promised to look after this in a future update.

 

Pros:
- Very simple to use despite the large choice of features
- Clear and nice Ajax interface
- Silent and low energy (9-19W)
- Reactive technical support


Cons: 
- Synology agent may not always find the DiskStation on some PC's
- USBCopy fails on bad sectors instead of skipping them.
- Additional camera license cost the price of an actual camera!



More stuff on Synology DS109:

Synology Download Center
3rd-party Apps integration 
Ajax interface overview

Read More

Bloody Blogger!

I don't consider myself very knowledgeable on Blogger stuff, with my first blog not yet six months old, I'm still a newbie. But I certainly learned a lot because of all the problems I had so far, and in particular this week.  

I hope this short story of my recent misadventures with Blogger will help some of you: 

I must have been on another planet, but I read only this month that Google Pages would come to an end this month, and that's where I stored my shared files! This started a cascade of consequences for me.

First: Until now, I was using Google Pages as a convenient free storage for my few files and had to look for a alternative.
I wanted to avoid as much as possible a host like filefactory.com but instead a storage giving direct access with no waiting time to the files. As I only have a handful of small files, I tried free websites like Weebly and Jimdo. One was constantly nagging me with "Website not published" even though I made it public and published several times, and the other one gave me dns errors on the early stage of the registration.
Then I came accross DriveHQ.com which free membership comes with 1GB storage. They also have a client application that allows to drag and drop files from a local PC to their server: very convenient. See a review here. There's a drawback though, only a limited quantity of bytes can be downloaded monthly.

Second: I had to change all the references to the old file server (geekandfun.googlepages.com) by the url of the new one (www.drivehq.com/file/.../PublicFolder). That part was simply done by exporting the whole blog from the settings > blog tools, then performing a full search/replace for one string to the other using Notepad++.

Third: The fun really began here: Re-importing the blog turned into a silent disaster.
Silent, because, at first, everything looked fine, but once I started to click on the links in the Recent Comments section, it lead to a 404 error! Then I realized that, upon importing the posts, blogger had renamed all my posts with a numeric suffix at the end, so a page like:
"war-of-clones.html"
was now named:
"war-of-clones21.html"

So all the local links in my blog were now wrong!
From my researches, what happens is that old deleted posts are still in blogger index, and the new one are automatically renamed. I tried leaving the new posts for a day, hopping that they would be re-indexed and the re-importing would allow to recover the original names, but it can take days before a re-indexing occurs, so I had to take a more drastic measure.

Fourth: I went to Blogger dashboard and imported both blog backup and template into a brand new blog. Then I had to re-assign the domain gadgetvictims.com from http://gadgethell.blogspot.com to http://geekandfun.blogspot.com.
Apparently, this "new" blog is in the process of being indexed right now, and everything came back to almost normal. Some links will be invalid though as Blogger still found the way to rename some posts like "wireless-pan-tilt-ip-camera.html" into "foscam-wireless-pan-tilt-ip-camera.html" but that's the price to pay to keep the readers comments safe. If you don't find a page after clicking on a link, just use the tag sphere or labels below each post to narrow down to that article, everything is still there!

I just hope that I won't have to find another file host any time soon!

Read More

The War of the Clones

Foscam sent me a picture with the new sticker layout that comes with the FI8908W produced from October 2009. It was supposed to help identifying a Foscam camera from a clone. And, guess what? It does exactly the opposite !





I was expecting to see their name on it, but instead it's actually a label we could already see on the non-Foscam clones:

The Model: identifies the embedded Wi-Fi module (VIA networking as established in a earlier post by Josef)
The MAC address: the first part of it identifies the Ethernet controller manufacturer (00606E is for the Davicom).


So, this is official: I'll just stop trying to distinguish them visually at all for now on ! It appears to be a waste of time!

But why is it important to distinguish a Foscam from another clone anyway ?

Well, first of all, to avoid bricking your camera if it's from another manufacturer.

I initially didn't look for a particular 'brand' of ip camera, just the cheapest, and it occurred that I received a Foscam in the first place.
Over time, I found convenient to keep that one brand for the following reasons:
- Their customer support actually replies to questions, and takes suggestions into account (I could verify this with several improvements added in the newer firmwares)
- They provide improvements through firmware updates on a regular basis (3 updates since June 2009...yes, by the way, there's a new one, read on)
- It is simpler to keep all the cameras under the same firmware line.
All these are added values to such a cheap product and good reasons for me to stick with this brand.
So if you happen to have an IP camera that looks like a Foscam FI8908W, the hardware won't make the difference, but upgrade availability and customer support will.

---

On to the treat:

Foscam just sent me their latest firmware update 11.14.1.46 for  FI8908W.

It is said to contains some minor updates and some much bug fixes. There is no new WebUI. It is still the same that came with 11.14.1.43

For some unclear reason, I bricked my older IP camera with this one but Foscam re-tested the same firmware file on a FI8908W and confirmed that it works. My second camera updated fine, so this update seems to be as safe as the previous ones.

It is still quite new (received yesterday), so I don't know yet what are the exact improvements, but I can already say it's not in the area of uPnP that remains as useless as before.
I do not see anything new on the interface which is logical since there the WebUI file hasn't changed.

As always, make sure that your ip camera is compatible with Foscam firmwares and in doubt, ask the reseller to confirm the origin of the device.

For instance, New Star and MayGion are legal manufacturers of clones with different software and should be contacted respectively for firmware updates and feature requests.

Read More

Replacing the lens of your IP camera

This very simple tweak cost 5€ and was suggested by a Spanish reader of this blog (thanks Villamany!).

The pictures he posted were not only demonstrating a much wider angle of vision but also a much better image quality than with the original lens (in the case of the Foscam fi8908w). So it convinced me to do the same.


I bought a 2.1mm 160-degree lens from DealExtreme.com (M12x0.5 thread) (same can also be found on eBay) which finally arrived today.

The procedure below applies to many other ip and web cam models, as long as they use the M12x0.5 thread standard. It can of course also be used with other 2.1mm lenses if you don't want the fish eye effect. DX also has a 6 lens pack deal ranging from 2.8 to 16mm. They can be fitted but their lens ring is of smaller diameter than the hole in the casing, so, beside being unsighty, it will also allow dust to get in the camera.



First, a small disclaimer: this kind of change, even so small will not be covered by your camera guarantee, and I won't send you any of mines if you screw up!



The first thing to do is to unscrew the original lens completely. 

The next obvious step is to screw the wide angle lens all the way in but with caution: 

First, as the thread is super-fine, make sure that you don't force it while screwing in.

Then, once roughly in place, you should re-connect the camera to do the fine-tuning with the "Live Video" page open.




Once in place, not only the field of vision will be much larger, making the PTZ function almost un-needed, but you may find that the image is also much sharper and brighter.




Below are comparative examples (click to see in full size)

There's been reports that some lenses would get blinded by the IR leds. 
I didn't have that problem with the sku 15237 from DX, so just make sure you buy lenses with IR filters.

Read More

An original fi8908w and a clone side by side

Outside characteristics of Foscam camera have changed with time and the clues below are no longer valid. The best way to ensure that you buy a Foscam camera is to check their list of recommended resellers.

The best way to find out if the camera you already bought is a Foscam is to contact them directly with your device ID. You will then know if you can use firmwares found on this blog.

---

The comparative below has been kindly posted to me by Tim who is the lucky owner of a genuine Foscam as well as a counterfeit compatible equivalent. Please note that there are also legal clones with their own packaging and their own firmware, but this one is an example of intended imitation using the same packaging and the same firmware.

While it seems natural to buy the camera from the people who actually do the R&D work, it is nearly impossible to distinguish them before you buy. Foscam points at some resellers that provide counterfeit products on this page. According to an email from them, the newest production will finally have a distinctive label on the bottom.

I've copied Tim's email below almost as is for your information (click on pictures for full size). I think the outside packaging differences are not relevant as I also have slight differences on my own 2 (1 old black and 1 recent white) Foscam.

One suspected difference is that the fakes seem to all have the same MAC address. Recently produced Foscam also have an improved lens filter following our numerous complains about the weird colors restitution.


Here, the black unit is the fake one!

---

...

In all of the photos below the genuine Foscam items are on the right.

As I mentioned, I now own both a genuine Foscam FI8908W which I obtained from a US source and a counterfeit one which I bought online at DealExtreme.com. Although I did not specify which color I wanted, the US source sent me a (genuine) white one and the fake one is black. As most people have found out it is getting very difficult to tell the difference.

Both of these IP cameras are running the newest firmware, versions 2.4.8.12.bin and lr_cmos_11_14_1_43.bin.

Neither came with the latest version but both accepted the flash update and are operating perfectly.

The bottom scans below reflect what you had posted earlier in the thread, it is easy to tell the difference between the two. I did obscure the MAC addresses, but I think all of the fake FI8908W IP cameras come with the same MAC address which ends in :D7:63, but you might want to confirm this.

The packaging is nearly identical, but there are a couple of minor differences.

The genuine Foscam camera was packed inside a cardboard liner, the fake one in a white Styrofoam liner.

The boxes were almost identical with only one side panel having differences. They are shown in the photos below (the genuine box is on the right)

Here is a close-up that shows the differences.

Finally here are my two cameras side-by-side, notice the absence of the lens sticker on the genuine camera, else they look identical with the exception of the bottom decals.

Finally, and this is a biggie, the image quality is most definitely different. The genuine Foscam has a much clearer and sharper image edge to edge than the fake Foscam, and the colors in the genuine one also are much more saturated and realistic looking. It is also very slightly wider.

I set the cameras up right next to each other, the settings and firmware for each camera were identical. I also turned the lens on the front of each camera to get the image focus from each as clear as possible. My dogs volunteered to be models. You can easily see that the genuine camera is better at least in this case, I don't have any others to test. Genuine is on the right again.

Tim

Read More