Note, this didn't involve finding a new power source or wiring to the fuse box. Instead power was taken from the 12v lighter/accessory socket in the ashtray. The actual ashtray was removed (it is designed to be removable) so it can be put back at a later date.

The jack end of the tomtom power cable can be stowed in the ashtray cavity when not in use, with the lid closed - hiding it from view. 

To perform this job requires a couple of tools designed for the job. Ideally you need "dash tools" - these are strong plastic wedge shaped tools that allow you to pop the fascia off the front of the dash. The fascia in all modern cars is just clip on plastic. You also need a suitable star-shaped spanner set - as most car fittings use this form factor. This is used for removing bolted in items such as the ashtray container and air conditioning controls. A set for about £20 is a good investment if you intend working on your car a few times or on several cars. Finally, i also used a "magnamole" - a new invention (as shown on Dragon's Den") of bendy flexible sticks with a magnetic end - very handy for routing and picking up wires in small spaces you can't get your hand.

The tomtom itself is mounted on the dash using the standard suction mount onto a tomtom-supplied sticky disc, designed for the purpose. They cost about £5 for two. (I've also used one to mount a video camera in the rear of my car)

Pictures of the installation follow:

starting the job: dash fascia removed (tools shown on seat)

upper cable routed behind air vents

 This was a bit tricky getting the USB end through the small hole. Ideally I'd have gone through the gap at the side, but it was just too small.

cable routed behind A/C controls to drop down behind lighter socket

This was the bit that needed the Mangamole to pick up the USB cable from behind the lighter power socket. I removed the A/C controls and dropped the rod down behind to grab the metal end of the cable from inside the lower part of the dash.

 Hole drilled in ashtray cavity to route power cable

     Drilling the hole was unavoidable - the ashtray cavity is totally sealed and any attempts to come round/over the side/top prevent the flap from working. However, the actual ashtray has been removed (it's designed to for cleaning/emptying) so the hole is easily covered if the cable is removed and the ashtray replaced.  

finshed job - mounted on a tomtom dash suction plate

The final job is pretty neat and discreet. It avoids those tell-tale suction marks on the windscreen that thieves love and with or without the mount in place is easily covered with a small hat :-)  It is also much safer for driving as there is no risk of the trailing cable getting caught up in anything (gear lever, hand) and the iPhone is in much closer reach of the driver.

The power cable stows neatly in the ashtray when not in use and is plugged into the lighter socket when required.

The positioning of the iPhone tomtom also improves handsfree performance as both speaker and mic are closer to the driver.

In the case of Atkins and low carb diets there are various reports that caffeine and artificial sweeteners (namely Aspartame) can contribute to a slow down in weightloss. Certainly when I hit my plateau recently, both those things were still in my diet - probably in raised quantities because I was drinking as a replacement to eating.

Cutting out the caffeine is easy, but cutting out Aspartame is much harder, when natural fruit drinks are out of bounds and most soft diet drinks contain it. However sucralose based sweetener is ok, so the challenge is on to find diet drinks that contain that rather than Aspartame. 

So far my search has thrown up two very palatable options:

• Tesco Diet Dandelion & Burdock
• Tesco Diet Cloudy Lemonade

I thoroughly recommend both drinks and I'm pleased to report my plateau is on the move again :-)

I’m really excited to present this recipe - particularly useful for anyone on a low-carb (low carbohydrate) diet such as Atkins. I’ve adapted it (read “improved”) from a recipe I found on a low carb advice website. The measurements given there were in "cups" (is that an American thing?) which seems wholly unscientific and destined to lead to potential failure - I have at least 5 or 6 cup sizes in my cupboard. So, I applied a bit more science and experimentation to come up with some measures that are more accurate.

• The original recipe contained salt. After trying it, the cakes were way too salty, so I have eliminated the extra salt. What’s more - I find that when on a low carb regime, I’m far more sensitive to salt. If you want to add it back in, so be it.
• The original recipe suggests that liquid sweetener is preferred - whether this really makes a difference or not, I'm not sure - as these muffins come out just fine with granulated sweetener. Personally I just go for what's simple. 

• 200g Ground Almond (this is basically your flour)
• 100g dessicated coconut (this is optional - I add it to add sweetness & I like the texture. I think it's worth it!)
• 35g butter - I find regular butter too salty (esp. on Atkins) so I used Tesco "Soft Spread"(which says "perfect for cakes" on the side! - and I agree)
• 4 medium eggs
• 10g of sucralose-based sweetener - e.g. Splenda (though Tesco do their own brand for almost 1/3rd the price) - remember that 10g of this type of sweetener is basically equivalent to 100g of normal sugar. 
• 75mls lemon juice (or you can use water, I guess, but for best flavour go with the lemon)
• 2 teaspoons baking powder

Below is my election statement. If you are a member of the Trust you'll have received a voting form and if you agree with my statement I would welcome your vote.

2010 Election Statement

If re-elected I’ll continue to represent those who feel unheard, misunderstood, inadequately cared for and isolated by mental illness, whether sufferers or carers. I’ll also focus on cost control and value for money as well as new ways to engage closely with users using Internet technology. 

I’ve been an active voice as a Governor, involved in anti-stigma, information provision and getting out on the street and online with direct action and communication.

My experiences have brought me into close contact with the devastating effects of conditions such as Depressive Illness and related aspects, whilst highlighting the misunderstanding and stigma associated with mental health issues. I'm dedicated to doing everything possible to change this perception and improve the care available for sufferers and carers, who often go unsupported.

 

I'm passionate about "levelling the playing field" for mental health, with greater provision, awareness and education, ensuring available funds are well spent.

If re-elected I’ll continue to represent those who feel unheard, misunderstood, inadequately cared for and isolated by mental illness, whether sufferers or carers. I’ll also focus on cost control and value for money as well as new ways to engage closely with users using Internet technology.

 
I’ve been an active voice as a Governor, involved in anti-stigma, information provision and getting out on the street and online with direct action and communication.

My experiences have brought me into close contact with the devastating effects of conditions such as Depressive Illness and related aspects, whilst highlighting the misunderstanding and stigma associated with mental health issues. I'm dedicated to doing everything possible to change this perception and improve the care available for sufferers and carers, who often go unsupported. 

I'm passionate about "levelling the playing field" for mental health, with greater provision, awareness and education, ensuring available funds are well spent.

We live in such a different era to when I was first able to vote: wall-to-wall blanket media coverage, 24 hour opinion and speculation, and something I've found particularly interesting, helpful, amusing (and silly at times): the whole social media channel - which in a sense has given real-time interaction and access to opinions that are not edited by TV moguls with an agenda.

However - that's not to say all this coverage has been excellent or impartial - far from it. Nothing is more annoying to me than selective use of facts simply to create spin - and there has been plenty of that.

So, I thought I would list out some of the key facts from the outcome of the election and list some of the possible statements that can be made - all true - but selected depending on what spin you wish to give.

If i had more time I'd turn this into an interactive tool that allows you to construct any statement you wish, but for now, here are the guts of it.

Quantity of votes

(Con ~10.7m ~8.6m Lab LD ~6.8m) source bbc

CON > LAB
CON > LIB DEM
LAB > LIB DEM

Thus

"labour did not win"
"lib dem did not win"

CON ~ >1/3rd vote
Lab ~ <1/3rd vote
LidDem ~1/4 vote

"~2/3rds did not vote for con"
"~2/3rds did not vote for lab"
"~3/4ths did not vote for Lib dem"

+ "and yet they are getting their policies implemented" etc.

when it comes to seats

CON < 326 (the number required for an outright majority)
LAB < 326
LD < 326

thus:

"con does not have a mandate to govern" or "con did not win"
"lab does not have a mandate to govern"
"ld does not have a mandate to govern"
"we have a PM that was not voted for"
"we have a Deputy PM that was not voted for"

CON + LD > LAB
LAB + LD > CON
CON + LAB > LD

thus:

a con + LD coalition represents the majority
a lab + LD coalition represents the majority
a con + lab coalition represents the majority

Because both coalition parties have to compromise on policy:

"con no longer represents their voters / has sold itself down the river"
"LD no longer represents their voters / has sold itself down the river"

and so on..

I've not even covered level of turnout, which means something like ~35% of the populations' views are unknown and thus can be used to reduce the mandate of all the above figures.

You can do this stuff all day.. :-)

My reaction at the was one of slight incredulity - how on Earth could such a thing either be provable or enforceable. Policies without teeth are surely pointless?

Many years on I actually see the point and I actually disagree with my former self. Perhaps I'm older and wiser and understand human nature a bit better.

Perhaps I thought that bullying was always something physical. Perhaps I thought it had to involve coercion. Perhaps I thought that the bully always got their own way. I don't believe any of that now. 

For starters, bullying is most definitely in the eye of the beholder: different people respond differently to being subjected to the same behaviours. 

The confident employee who is pal-y with the boss may take jibes, swearing, back-slapping, throwing of objects (lightheartedly or otherwise) and unreasonable demands with a pinch of salt. A less-confident employee may, on the other hand, take such things very much more personally. It might affect their work and their ability to feel open. It might further harm their confidence. It might make them start to fear engaging with their boss. If it gets to that point, then actually whether you label it "bullying" or not, it's a problem - it's "inappropriate behaviour".

Which begs the question - what is bullying? 

Is it physical? is it coercive? Is it about someone else getting their own way?

It can be all of things, but it doesn't have to be. 

For example, inaction can be as damaging as action. Blanking or ignoring someone can be damaging and controlling. Busting a gut to produce a great piece of work, only to be met with silence and blankness can obviously be hurtful. If this is directed discriminately at specific individuals or is part of an ongoing pattern, even more devasting. This type of behaviour is sending psychological signals to an individual - controlling them in a subtle way - in my book, bullying.

The same is true of an explosive temper. (Interesting word "temper", also meaning "make more temperate, acceptable, or suitable by adding something else; moderate; "she tempered her criticism")  Of course all humans have in in-built anger mechanism and have times when this needs to be released. What we try to do is ensure that in the workplace, at least, this is - if you pardon the pun - tempered. If it is not, then it can create a culture of fear. If employees' actions or mistakes are met with colleagues' explosive rage then, again, this is essentially a psycholigical tactic to control another employee's actions - whether or not that tactic is done consciously or unconsciously, spontaneously or in a considered way.

Probably most people agree that rage and anger and temper and other 'destructive' emotions certainly have the potential to cross that line in the sand that separates "enthusastic personality" and "someone who gets things done" from "bully" and "tyrant"; and different people will draw different lines. But the conundrum for me is that I also think bullying can be done in a spirit of generousity and love. Yes, really.

I argue that any kind of controlling behaviour is a form of bullying. It doesn't matter what the motivation for that behaviour is - when one person tries to systematically control the actions or desires of another, it's bullying.

You see this sometimes happen in families. Take, for example, the person who always insists on paying for meals out. Always. On the surface it's an act of kindness and generousity. But what this behaviour does is deny anyone else the same privilege. It denies anyone else the same expression of kindness or generousity towards their family. IT DENIES ANYONE ELSE THE SAME. 

It turns out then, that this behaviour, when performed relentlessly, is selfish - even though it is driven by generous motives. Now that's wierd. 

That's why bullying IS in the eye of the beholder - because it's about the EFFECT of behaviours. It has less to do with an absolute value judgement of the behaviour of the bully, and whether their actions are well-intended and apparently harmless.  

Well - food for thought (am I'm not paying). 

When I recently invested in my bread machine I thought I was probably doing the former - reducing cost - because I anticipated the price of raw ingredients to be much less than the price of the finished product (a loaf of bread). 

It turns out this assumption is not as starkly true as I had hoped. Sure - there is a lower price point for raw ingredients, but it's more marginal than I had imagined. Silly me for not doing my ROI (return on investment) calculations based on more detailed research/discovery.

Notwithstanding, my bread machine is still saving me loads. How?

Because, for one, it's cutting down wastage. The ability to make my bread "on demand", to make the appropriate quantities I need, AND the ability to store the ingredients until they are needed (rather than keep unused bread until it is mouldy) means my purchasing and consumption patterns are much more closely aligned. I'm putting less into the system, but still getting what I need out. And it's fresher - i.e. better quality. In a sense, my process is more lean.

But there's a third factor two - possibly even the most significant - that is contributing to my results: transformation.

That's right - I have transformed my behaviour. And this is the third way to cut costs - by changing what you do.

In the case of the bread maker, my behaviour has changed so that I eat more bread, more often. This change in behaviour translates into less eating of other, more costly, foodstuffs (such as snacks and ready meals). And that is where the significant savings come. If I can feed myself on bread and soup for a day, it'll cost me, say £2 - when I might otherwise have spent £5 or £10 on alternatives (TV dinners, take aways, or even home-cooked meat & two-veg). The effect of transformation is stark. 

And this is how it applies in business too - technology is an enabler. It may slice a bit of cost off here, enable a slightly more efficient process there - but ultimately, it's by transformation - change in behaviour - that the big bucks can be saved. 

So there you go - the essence of business process transformation in a nutshell - or indeed, a bread machine.

I think the pressure has been gnawing away from within the family network - not only did I defect from Volvo/Saab (I like my fast, swedish, quirky cars) to Skoda a few years ago, but so did my sister (at the same time and completely independently) and finally my mother recently, prompted by the UK scrappage scheme. 

The leap on paper was big for me - not only from a 300bhp SAAB to a "lesser" badge, but a diesel car at that. But, I was too tempted by the alarming regularity of rave reviews, much lower all round purchase & running costs, capacious load carrying, and a fun pokey engine in the vRS - which is essentially a Golf GTI by another name and body shell. 

I've never looked back. Thrilled by fun, low cost, high economy motoring, not a day goes past without the car putting a smile on my face. A spirited drive does not cost the earth, unlike that of my brother's volvo T5 - for which you have to take steps to arrange a bank loan before you give it a long blast through the mountains. And, should you care to chip your diesel vRS you can have 430Nm of torque propelling you past pretty much any line of traffic. Even my 300bhp saab only managed 400Nm. 

So, spurred by Skoda's current "tax free" deal (i.e you pay list price before VAT is added, saving about £3500 on a top spec car) my brother has jumped ship - also to a diesel Octy vRS estate. He won't regret it. Not to be outdone, I'm changing mine too - for the same thing. This is the first time I've replaced a car with one the same - that's how much I love my Skoda. 

It'll be interesting to compare cars - his is the manual, mine will be the DSG auto (with flappy paddles). Both will benefit from the new common rail diesel engine which allows a higher rev limit, and if my test drive is anything to go by, a smoother power delivery across the range. I was mightily impressed by the DSG - responsiveness, comfort and ease of use. I doubt I will go back especially once it's come into its own in all those M25 queues. 

Roll on March - we've ordered them only 2 days apart and from the same dealer - so they may arrive together. That'll make a nice photo :)

For the first machine i just followed the standard Microsoft line and did a custom install "over the top" of XP. This takes your existing setup and stores it in a windows.old folder on the new machine running windows 7. You are then free to do with that folder what you will (such as delete it). This was ok on my first laptop as I'm just using it as a windows 7 media centre - didn't need my old stuff.

However, for my next (main) machine, that wasn't the case. It's the main machine that I use for all my personal work, which includes a lot of image creation and production (more on that in a later blog). I absolutely could not afford any downtime nor a whole weekend or more of solid copying and re-installing. (A process which from experience drags on and on for weeks in my experience.)

Thus the promise of a smooth migration, keeping all the existing XP setup alongside windows 7 was sufficiently tempting for me to take up. The system is called zinstall XP7 and you install it after you have done your windows 7 custom upgrade (keeping your old files in windows.old). When you install zinstall it wraps up all those old files and creates a fully functioning virtual machine of your old installation. Absolutely everything remains intact, all programs work correctly and all data is preserved. 

In use the system places an icon in both the windows 7 system tray and the XP system tray (is it just me that finds it quite clever it can install itself into an operating system that has been replaced?). Double clicking this icon allows you to switch between windows 7 and XP. XP is displayed full screen, even though it's running in a virtual machine and could theoretically run in a windowed container (I intend to try this). Presumably this is to make it less confusing for novice users - zinstall describes its mode of operation as "TV Channels" - which makes it easy to understand.

You can copy and paste between each system with ease, and see the file system on each system for moving files between the two. 

So what's the point of all this? Well - it means you can get windows 7 up and running, but keep your old system running in parallel - allowing you the time (as long as you want) to re-install and move applications and data to Win7. And if you have applications that will only ever run on XP, then you can keep them running indefinitely. 

It should be noted this is not the same as Microsoft's own "XP Compatibility mode" which consists of their own VM container ("Virtual PC") and a specially licensed copy of XP to run in it. The hardware requirements for their solution are stricter and you get an empty XP which you have to get your programs and data back into. This compares starkly with zinstall which is a one-click process and retains everything as is.

After 3 days, I'm giving zinstall a big thumbs up.