Today the Expression Encoder Team has announced Expression Encoder 3. Expression Encoder 3 is part of the upcoming Expression Studio 3 suite and comes packed with new features such as support for H.264 and the new Smooth Streaming technology.

And it also brings another super cool feature: Screen Capture.

Today, screen-casting has become quite popular with bloggers. Screen-casting allows bloggers to share what they are looking at on their PC screen with readers of their blog. It’s a great way to show off really neat software experiences that people should see for themselves.

With Expression Encoder 3, they are introducing the Expression Encoder Screen Capture feature. This feature can be launched right from the Start Menu (I’ve pinned it to my Taskbar in Windows 7). People can choose a specific region of their screen they want to record (or the whole screen) and choose to record audio from their microphone and video from their webcam too. It records in a special light weight codec developed by Microsoft Research that when recording video, it doesn’t use up so much system resources during the capture process. That means the actual recording process doesn’t steal so much system resources on your PC that what you’re recording doesn’t look so hot. After recording, you can import the capture into Expression Encoder for final encoding and publishing (including some awesome new Silverlight templates).

I’ve been trying this feature out for the last couple days and it is fantastic. I am definitely planning to do a lot more screen-capture videos with Windows 7 features.

Speaking of Windows 7 features, Expression Encoder utilizes the new Windows Taskbar in Windows 7 with encoding progress being displayed. The first encoding pass appears in yellow, and the second pass appears as green. Pretty slick!

Encoding First Pass:

Encoding Second Pass:
 

(Screenshots from Expression Encoder Team Blog)

For availability of Expression Encoder 3, keep your eyes on the Silverlight Team Blog for the official Expression Studio 3 announcement. Oh, and you should also check out…

For more information on Expression Encoder 3 and the Expression Encoder Screen Capture feature, click here to read the Expression Encoder Team’s blog post.

Microsoft will be addressing the issue discussed in Security Advisory 971778 concerning a vulnerability in DirectShow! Microsoft will be releasing...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Back in February the Windows Live Team informed us about the move from MSN Calendar to its new home, Windows Live Calendar. Here is a new update about what's happening:

It's almost moving time! As you've already heard, we've been busy getting Windows Live Calendar ready for when we move all MSN Calendar customers over to the new and improved service.

Over the coming months, we'll be moving all existing MSN Calendar customers over to Windows Live Calendar. The move will be gradual, so not everyone will see their calendars change on the same day.

If you're just trying Windows Live Calendar for the first time, you may notice that while MSN Calendar already gave you easy scheduling of appointments, reminders, and calendar sharing, Windows Live Calendar gives you even more:

• Multiple calendars that can be individually colored and shared
• An easy way to subscribe to public (iCal) online calendars
• Drag-and-drop rescheduling of events
• Holiday calendars based on your location
• A birthday calendar that pulls dates from your Windows Live contact list
• A to-do list to help keep you organized (we'll move all of your MSN Calendar's tasks and notes into your new Windows Live to-do list)

Here's what you need to know for the move:

• If you only access your MSN Calendar through the web, we'll move all your stuff for you. You won't have to do anything.
• If you use Microsoft Office Outlook to view your calendar, make sure you're using the newest version of Outlook Connector. This will allow Outlook to connect directly to your Windows Live Calendar. To find out which version of Outlook Connector you're using, open Outlook, click Outlook Connector and then select About Outlook Connector. If the version number is 12.0.6414.1000 or greater, you're good to go. If not, you'll need to download and install the latest version.
• If you've published or shared any of your MSN Calendars, you'll need to update the "Share" settings to make your calendar public or send invites to share them again in Windows Live Calendar.

That's it - we'll do the rest.

See you on Windows Live Calendar!
Windows Live Calendar Team

Related:

Reminder: Windows Live Calendar is coming soon!
Introducing Calendar Badge for your Blog and Website

 

How do I change the default settings?
In the Outlook Security Settings folder, click New, so that a new project using the Outlook security form. Select the default security settings for all users option. You can not change the name of the security group.

Open the project's default option of Outlook E-mail Security Update has been installed. Figure 1 and Figure 2 shows the default settings of the Outlook security form. Explanation of each setting, please refer to Readme.txt file when you extract the downloaded file to run admpack.exe.

Noted that there are several options mentioned in Figure 2 Collaboration Data Objects (CDO) and Simple Mail Application Programming Interface (MAPI)'s. External programs can use the programming interface, Outlook Object Model rather than the automatic messaging. E-mail Security Update Outlook Simple MAPI function of restricting access to, instead of the CDO. CDO program settings apply to the separate system update CDO Security Update by http://officeupdate.microsoft.com/ 2000/downloaddetails/cdo2k.htm.

Can only create a default security settings item in the Outlook Security Settings folder. If there is more than one item, the default setting is, Outlook clients will use the settings from the recent Save the project.

How do I override the default security settings?

Your security settings can be individuals or groups of users more or less restrictions than the default settings. To override the default settings, follow these steps:

1. Create a new item in the Outlook Security Settings folder.
2. Outlook security form in the Outlook Security Settings tab, which Figure 1 shows, select group of security settings unusual choice.
3. To provide security group name.
4. Members text box, enter the name, separated by a semicolon, individual users, the Group will apply the settings. Did not provide the form of a button, let you choose the name from the Global Address Book (GAL); You must enter their own.
5. Press Ctrl + K, to resolve the name. If there is any name still does not have a prominent, which means that Outlook can not resolve the name. Check your spelling, and then press CTRL + K, and then try again to resolve.
6. Select your choice of two forms. See the readme file. txt files, a detailed understanding of each set.
7. Closed form, and select when Outlook is asked to save your changes.

You can not use distribution lists (racemic), in order to simplify the establishment of a member in step 4. Outlook E-mail Security Update does not resolve the members of the DL. Therefore, you must enter each user name.

In addition, you must be a member to take care of each user, there is only one Outlook security group, in other words, users seem to only one item in the Outlook Security Settings folder. If the user includes more than one group, the latest security settings to preserve a popular, and Outlook ignore any other person. Outlook E-mail Security Update will not check to see whether a user of Outlook included in the additional security group.

A trial version of Microsoft's liberated anti-virus code has been launched in the US, China, Brazil, and Israel.

Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) promises to provide grouping with base protection against viruses, trojans, rootkits and spyware.

The code giant has been criticised in the time for imperfectness to include liberated section code with Windows.

Its first section package, Windows Live OneCare, failed to attract some customers and will be discontinued.

Microsoft is hoping that MSE, available as a liberated download from its site, will prove more popular. It has said it will automatically update it for users.

However, rival section vendors have questioned whether Microsoft can compete with more established anti-virus players.

Family doctor

\"Early reviews of the beta are display that it under-performs when compared to existing freeware products, and substantially below paid solutions,\" said section firm Symantec in a statement.

\"Referring to Microsoft's base anti-virus and anti-spyware creation as an essential section resolution is misleading. Consumers requirement firewall protection, web protection, anti-spam and identity safeguards,\" it said.

J.R Smith, chief executive of section firm AVG, said Microsoft's entry into the section market could \"further confuse consumers most the inexplicit section of their computer\".

\"It's important to discern that Microsoft's persona in the internet section demesne is much like your relationship with your trusty kinsfolk doctor. They can support diagnose the problems. In addition, they treat some general ailments. In the end, though, they are not a replacement for a specialist when you requirement one,\" he said.

Initially 75,000 trial versions of MSE, codenamed Morro, will be available in the US, Brazil, China and Israel.

Foreword

For the past couple of days, I’ve been thinking and dreaming about hashes, file hashes to be exact. My fascination with hashes started with an idea to host a universal hash database that could be used to identify every file in the world. If you think that wasn’t bold enough, then I think I might have just come up with a system that in hindsight, abstracts data distribution across networks and protocols.

The main reason I’m publishing this idea, and not ringing a patent lawyer, is because I want as many eyeballs scrutinizing this idea as possible. Even though I’ve already put a lot of thought into it and got some talented people to help validate it, nothing would be worse than blindly driving down a dead end. On the other hand if the idea holds up, I really need the motivation and support of the wider community to realize it.

Background

Now to cut to the chase, my idea can be said to be a mashup of many existing technologies, some have been technically documented and others have even been implemented in existing distribution methods. But, I believe the idea as a whole – and can only work as a whole – has never been publically discussed or realized.

As a starting point, it is my understanding that currently the most popular file distribution methods – notably HTTP and BitTorrent among others – are all arguably “filename”-based. For example, to distribute a file from a HTTP server, you specify a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) such as “http://server.com/file.txt“, and using BitTorrent, you create a .torrent file which specifies the filename “file.txt” among other things.

A disadvantage to the “filename”-based distribution is that it does not consistently identify unique files. For example, a simple text file can have as many names as an appropriate file system supports. On that note, this is where my idea begins.

Hashes

My good friend the hash, and specifically those created by the SHA-1 hashing algorithm can be used to identify unique files. If you hash a file using SHA-1, the hash you generate will not change unless the contents of that file changes. Why this is useful for file distribution is that it normalizes the identifier of the file. After all, all we really want is the contents of a file; it doesn’t really matter what it is called. Of course, you could argue that the file extension is useful, if not important, in which case you’d be glad to know these are not lost.

The skeptical will be thinking, so how do you prevent collisions? Well, it’s part of a good hash design that there are no collisions and so far SHA-1 has lived up to expectations. In the event that SHA-1 is compromised, the system could very well accommodate any new hashing algorithm that becomes the standard, or multiple hashing algorithms simultaneously.

Magnet links

Owning up to prior art however, the aforementioned idea is not new to the world of file distribution. Magnet links, as they are called, is a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) scheme which does exactly what I described. Most popularly used for peer-to-peer distribution networks and notably eDonkey, it creates an “URL” that is identified by a hash.

For example, “magnet:?xt=urn:fakehash:123ABC&dn=file.txt” describes a file whose hash using the “fakehash” algorithm is “123ABC” and is suggested to be named “file.txt“.

Transfer

Now with a method of identifying unique files via hashes, the next step is to figure out how the file transfer transaction actually occurs. If I may say so myself, this is where the idea really shines and in true Web 2.0 mashup-spirit too.

To answer the question with a question if you will, “what are the best methods to transfer files today?” And the answer to that question is that there is no best way. Notably different types of networks (server-client, peer-to-peer) and their respective protocols (HTTP, FTP, BitTorrent, etc) are all unique, and each has a set of advantages and disadvantages that complement each other. Using these in synergy would maximize the speed and redundancy the infrastructure has to offer.

Web service

To get all these protocols to work in unity, this is where a central web service comes into play. (For the sake of simplicity, assume central does not mean one server at a single URL that is prone to failure, but a distributed system with redundancy.)

What this web service will do is abstract the resources on different networks. To put this into practice, let’s assume you are after a particular movie trailer video file; you come across a website which includes a magnet link to a high-definition 1080p version of the trailer. In this magnet link is among other things, the hash of the file and a suggested filename.

Clients

Now, using a client which associated itself with the magnet link, the application will launch and then send the hash to the web service. The web service will return you a set of claimed resources with the original content. This could be on Apple’s HTTP server as “http://apple.com/trailers/movie_trailer.mp4“, on a movie trailer website as “http://trailer.com/movies/19428.mp4“, on a FTP server as “ftp://files.com/the_fantastic_movie.mp4“, and available on a specific BitTorrent tracker as “awesome-trailer.mp4“.

A particular client may only support a small subset of the file transfer protocols available so the web service will only send back a list of resources that is applicable. Assuming this client supports HTTP and BitTorrent, it will now begin to download the segments of the file concurrently.

Resources

You might be asking, “how does the web service know where the resources for a hash are located?” It will ultimately be up to the users of this system – either manually or systematically – contribute to the resource “pool”.

Luckily, it just happens one part of the Magnet URI specification allows you to append an “alternative” resource link. In practice, it would mean different sites would append different alternate resources, which clients then send to the web service over time, taking advantage of existing infrastructures.

For example, the Apple site might have the magnet link “magnet:?xt=urn:fakehash:123ABC&dn=file.txt&as=http://apple.com/trailers/movie_trailer.mp4“. The movie trailer website might have “magnet:?xt=urn:fakehash:123ABC&dn=file.txt&as=http://trailer.com/movies/19428.mp4“. The BitTorrent site might have “magnet:?xt=urn:fakehash:123ABC&dn=file.txt&as=http://torrentsite.com/t/cool_movie_trailer.torrent“.

The pool will not be empty to begin with since one person must intend a file to be shared for it to exist in the web service database. Therefore it will have at least one resource location available. Over time the distribution becomes decentralized as more resources become available.

Resource integrity

Of course as we all know, people can be evil little buggers. How do we trust that all resources in the pool are for the same hash? How do we ensure the resources have not tampered with? Also, it’s a reality that resources can disappear without warning, so what happens if they no longer exist?. In all of these cases, we treat the resource as an improper resource.

So how do you validate the proper resource from improper ones? By hashes of course! Granted, if the resource is a big download like a high-definition video file, it wouldn’t be the best user experience to find out a resource was improper after hashing the complete file. This is why we need to segment the files in order to avoid the situation.

The size of these segments will be calculated algorithmically so that it is consistent across the system. Assuming a 1GB file is divided into 10MB pieces, we then hash the individual 10MB piece. It turns out BitTorrent does this too, to ensure integrity at the block level. However to deliver one step beyond BitTorrent, we can use a hash tree to ensure that not only is there integrity at the block level and at the whole-file level, but that we also ensure integrity between these levels. That is to say, we can verify the individual block hashes do in fact add up to the root hash.

Trust

The paranoid ones will probably ask, what happens if a client mistakenly or with malicious-intent claim a resource is improper when it is proper, or vice versa? In response to this, I propose a karma-based system which ranks the “quality” of unique user’s claims in a specific time period. Other clients who verify a claim in turn boosts the karma, and others who disagree with a claim will reduces karma of that user.

I haven’t worked out the specifics of this but I welcome suggestions.

Transition

So that’s pretty much it for the technical implementation, but as we all know, technicalities is not all that matters. To implement such a system, transition is critical. Getting users and most importantly entities which distribute files to switch to such a system could admittedly be considered impossible without some sort of a bridge.

But as previously mentioned, since magnet links have native support for “alternate” links, links which work without any new clients or infrastructure, means that there is always a fallback option. A current HTTP download client could continue to support just HTTP and the same for BitTorrent.

Preemptive frequently asked questions

To conclude, I want to preemptively answer a few burning questions some people might have.

What you’re suggesting would require figuratively a “centralized” web service which can handle the file distribution requests of a potentially mindblowing number of clients at any one time. Where would you find the resources?

It is true that this system will only work at maximum potential when there is a centralized database of the resources, but centralized does not necessarily mean one server either. DNS is a server-client system which depends on a centralized database, and technologies like distributed databases and scalable web services hosted on Windows Azure make it possible.

Would this mean that the web service could potentially log (and trace) every download?

Short answer, no. The web service only coordinates requests of resources; intent to seek potential resources of a specified hash is not proof of file transfer. However, this won’t stop individual resources such as those hosted on a HTTP server to log every request a client may subsequently make, or a BitTorrent tracker which records the peers of a file.

Are there any other applications for this beyond file downloads?

Yes. If you think about it, downloads does not necessarily have to be a user clicking a link in a browser, it is whenever a file is transferred between two clients on the Internet. Of course the benefit of this system is exponentially decreased the smaller the file is. However, as content becomes higher in quality, it is a trend that files will continue to be larger and harder to distribute faster and more reliably.

Will this prevent malicious files from being distributed?

Unfortunately, no. Because the system only knows hashes, it has no idea about the original contents of the hashed file. However, this is not to say a third party cannot identify hashes which are known to be of malicious files and flag them as such (which I propose in my hashDB project), but this is outside the scope of this system.

What’s your business model?

I’ll consult the Twitter guys. Just kidding . Well because such a system would benefit both parties of a distribution, distributors and users, I’m sure there is some cost benefit somewhere that one can tap into to fund the system.

Of course if you’re an investor and are interested in helping me realize this, shoot me an email at long.zheng@gmail.com.

Ultimately if you’re looking for something, you no longer have to care what it’s called, where it’s hosted, if all the resources are available and safe, or even how the bits are transferred to you. You just get what the other party intended you to have.