My uncle was in town recently and loves to go flying. I had an opportunity to go along with him and visit the airfield where he goes. Now to set the stage, he was formerly trained in the Swiss Army and as such (mostly due to the culture) is a very precise individual. So I was a little surprised when we walked up to the craft we did.
This particular flying device had a battery that wasn't charged at all which as such meant we had no radio communication with ground. There wasn't any air conditioning either, so if you needed to cool down, you simply stuck your hand out of the window to cause a little resistance which blows the cooler air into the cabin. Our most sophisticated instrument was both a piece of yarn and to watch the birds flying around us. And if you haven't already guessed, there was NO engine on board what so ever!
That's what I got into with him to go up flying in. Now please don't misunderstand the above paragraph as any tone of ungratefulness. I merely write it as I surveyed my approach to what is called a glider. It's an ultra light-weight flying machine capable of staying in the air for quite some time so long as there are thermals (warm air rising from the ground) for us to circle on and gain altitude. A tow-plane hooks us up and drags us down the runway and up into the air. On this occasion, we were towed to 2,000 feet and then the rope is released. That action alone can be very daunting the first time! From there we watched the birds to see where they were lazily circling about which gave us an indication of where to circle the plane. Even without an engine, we were able to double our altitude to 4,000 feet! That little piece of string I mentioned was taped on the outside of the canopy is known as a yaw string. It helps serve as an indicator to if we are making a balanced turn. If, while turning, the string points straight back, then we don't need to adjust our pitch.
Getting to fly as we did was such an amazing experience. You're up there with no noise but the passing wind rushing by. You're close enough to the ground that you can still see what's going on but high enough to just coast gently above it all. What was even more exciting for me (and also the scariest part I had in the whole experience) was being given the ability to fly it. I understand the basics of flying but once the wind shifted a little bit, experience is your best friend and I don't yet have that. Either way, my uncle was able to stay in control and allow me to successfully make some maneuvers.
I pass this story on because in flying it, I was challenged. My apprehensions and fears were put to the test and I got better myself as a result. It does help that I love to fly, but it was the act of being taken outside of my comfort zone which was truly where the growth, if any, was able to happen. If this encourages you to take off on your own adventure, hopefully one day I will see you up in the skies.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Customers Are Right Less Often Than NASCAR Drivers
Get it? They turn left. Anyway, we all know the old saying "The customer is always right". We also know the old adage that when someone breaks a mirror they get seven years of bad luck. Last I checked no mirror, especially not shattered ones, have any kind of cosmic ability to create mischief for us. But to be entirely truthful, my time in retail leads me to believe that magical reflective surfaces in a state of smitherines are more likely to exist than all, if nothing less any, customers are right.
I did extensive research (one Google search and believing the first result) on the history of the phrase and it's shrouded in mystery. The phrase came about at about the turn of the century (last century, not this one). I have to imagine that it's creation came about from a drunken executive who said it in a board meeting as a joke. For fear of losing their jobs, his entire company just went along with it, and the coiner, realizing that no one got the joke, told various tales of other people saying it so he wouldn't take the heat.
Never the less, it's been the true cause of all of this country's problems since Day 1. Anyone who works in any capacity dealing with everyday people will tell you that, as a whole, people are irritable asshats. And you're average E.I.A. (Everyday Irritable Asshat) has a few misconceptions in their tiny pea-brains that dominate their actions. The first is that they are innocent. For example, a customer who says they've been with a company for years and has never had a complaint is a lying sack of whatever unpleasant substance you like. They have called into Customer Service almost religiously at every opportunity, even when irrelevant. "How come my Macbook isn't working????" "Ma'am, this is Microsoft..." (That was an iDrone joke!)
The second is that despite how much smarter they (the EIA) are than everybody else, you (the retail worker) are supposed to know everything. Unnoticed hypocrisy aside, the most sinister part of this misguided notion is that when an EIA asks you a question, they aren't asking for the answer. They are in fact asking for the answer that they like the best. The EIA will ask the PURE (Poor Unfortunate Retail Employee) a question, and upon hearing the truth, they will become upset at the PURE, demanding an alternative, and ultimately wrong, answer. Upon finding out that there is none, they will become enraged and flail about like a toddler at the PURE or his/her boss. And the PURE has no escape, because giving a false, customer-approved answer will only multiply the EIA's rage exponentially upon finding out the truth later.
And the final, and probably most laughable, ill-conceived notion is that the individual EIA is important. Fun Fact: Multi-Million/Billion Dollar Companies do not need any individual's business to thrive, let alone survive. In fact, since most whiny customers are "legacy" (the business name for people who have been paying them money for a long time, but don't pay as much as newer check-writers), companies may even save money with that many less customer service calls. And while companies won't (usually) go out of their way to be dicks, they will not bend to the EIA's will for their inane desires.
So much money and time has been wasted on the intellectual voids that are EIAs that we are now in a global recession. Some blame banks, some blame irresponsible governments, but ultimately these organizations wouldn't have to make such awful decisions if the average person weren't a useless black hole of thought. But fear not, readership I have a solution! And that solution is... to be discussed in the next (and final) post of this series! Make sure to tune in next periodic and unpredictable period between posts (probably this week)!
I did extensive research (one Google search and believing the first result) on the history of the phrase and it's shrouded in mystery. The phrase came about at about the turn of the century (last century, not this one). I have to imagine that it's creation came about from a drunken executive who said it in a board meeting as a joke. For fear of losing their jobs, his entire company just went along with it, and the coiner, realizing that no one got the joke, told various tales of other people saying it so he wouldn't take the heat.
Never the less, it's been the true cause of all of this country's problems since Day 1. Anyone who works in any capacity dealing with everyday people will tell you that, as a whole, people are irritable asshats. And you're average E.I.A. (Everyday Irritable Asshat) has a few misconceptions in their tiny pea-brains that dominate their actions. The first is that they are innocent. For example, a customer who says they've been with a company for years and has never had a complaint is a lying sack of whatever unpleasant substance you like. They have called into Customer Service almost religiously at every opportunity, even when irrelevant. "How come my Macbook isn't working????" "Ma'am, this is Microsoft..." (That was an iDrone joke!)
The second is that despite how much smarter they (the EIA) are than everybody else, you (the retail worker) are supposed to know everything. Unnoticed hypocrisy aside, the most sinister part of this misguided notion is that when an EIA asks you a question, they aren't asking for the answer. They are in fact asking for the answer that they like the best. The EIA will ask the PURE (Poor Unfortunate Retail Employee) a question, and upon hearing the truth, they will become upset at the PURE, demanding an alternative, and ultimately wrong, answer. Upon finding out that there is none, they will become enraged and flail about like a toddler at the PURE or his/her boss. And the PURE has no escape, because giving a false, customer-approved answer will only multiply the EIA's rage exponentially upon finding out the truth later.
And the final, and probably most laughable, ill-conceived notion is that the individual EIA is important. Fun Fact: Multi-Million/Billion Dollar Companies do not need any individual's business to thrive, let alone survive. In fact, since most whiny customers are "legacy" (the business name for people who have been paying them money for a long time, but don't pay as much as newer check-writers), companies may even save money with that many less customer service calls. And while companies won't (usually) go out of their way to be dicks, they will not bend to the EIA's will for their inane desires.
So much money and time has been wasted on the intellectual voids that are EIAs that we are now in a global recession. Some blame banks, some blame irresponsible governments, but ultimately these organizations wouldn't have to make such awful decisions if the average person weren't a useless black hole of thought. But fear not, readership I have a solution! And that solution is... to be discussed in the next (and final) post of this series! Make sure to tune in next periodic and unpredictable period between posts (probably this week)!
Kids Say The Darndest Things - And Then Some
I don't know off hand which part of the psycho-sexual developmental stages kids realize that having a sub in the room is the same as not having any adults in the room. What I do know is that it leads to some very interesting conversations by the students, and even more interesting and disturbing things for the sub to overhear if they're even remotely observant.
Before I started subbing, I heard all the statistics (and as I'm way too lazy to look these up, these may not be accurate). One in 4 kids has had sex by the age of 16. 1 in 7 by 14. 1 in 10 by 11. That seems ridiculous, especially as someone in his mid twenties who remembers the time when by senior year only about half the kids weren't virgins (again, probably not accurate, but that's how I remember it). I didn't believe that all this was really going on, and you probably don't either. Its not like they haven't used statistics to lie in plain sight. However, let me assure you, its all true.
In high school, its rampant. Just walking through the halls there are kids sucking face in a way that would be over done in a porno, and every snippet of conversation you hear is "she sucked my d*%&" or "her p*$$@ was so wet" etcetera. Now, these things in of themselves could be dismissed as guys just trying to act cool in front of their buddies. However, I have yet to be in a high school classroom where there wasn't at least one group of girls (usually 4 or 5 of them) talking to each other about their experience last night or last weekend.
Even in middle school I hear it. Girls talking about their first time. Guys talking about how good a chick was. How she spits or swallows. And not just in the I-want-to-be-cool-and-fit-in way.
Sex isn't the only issue. Realistically, its a consequence of the other issues. I hear middle school kids talking about what kind of drinks they like. And they don't just say "beer" or "rum". They talk about long islands, whiskey sour, jager-bombs, etc. Smoking is rampant. They talk about going to parties and getting trashed. Kids come into class hungover (in middle school even). And its not like this is a very select group of real losers. It could be as much as 50 to 60 percent of a class talking about it.
Ultimately its the parents who are to blame. Why are they so incapable of keeping track of their kids? If I had come home hungover my parents sure as hell would have noticed, and had my head for it. Parents are afraid to punish their kids now. Kids know that there is nothing that there parents will actually do, so the kids don't even try to please them. I've heard kids talk about hitting their moms and throwing things at their dads.
The problem is where this leads. Even if it was just high school kids, that would be 4 years worth of births that were useless. Even if it was just 6th through 12th grade, that's almost a whole generation. The bigger issue is that with so much stupidity, comes a whole new level of problems. These morons are breeding new, and probably even bigger, morons. I had a kid in a sophomore reading class show me a picture of his son and said "We're expecting another one now, and I'm really hoping its a girl."
Why is this ok? Why is the only thing we hear about clips on the news about teenage sex statistics, birth statistics, underage drinking statistics? Where does this current trend lead our country?
In two words: To hell.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Subsidies and Contracts: Actually the Devil, or Mass Unwarranted Hysteria?
If you're reading this, you probably know that I'm a cell phone salesman. So you may immediately think "Well of course he's going to say that contracts are good. That's his job!" If you know me well at all and you still think this, let me know so I can stop associating with you entirely. Thanks in advance. If you don't know me all that well, then here's why the big bad contract isn't big or bad.
Think about the last cell phone you bought. Now think about how much you paid for it. Now most people will say they paid anywhere from nothing to $199 for their phone. Let's say you bought a Motorola Droid on the day it came out for around $200. Not bad, considering it retails for $600 or so without a contract. Many people will say it's a ridiculous price since that's way more than what it cost to make. And they would be wrong. The parts and manufacturing costs for the Droid put it at $187.75 per Droid made. Now a $600 value for something that costs $187.75 doesn't seem right! Wrong again. That figure is in raw form. It does not take into account how much the makers of each part (screen, bezel, camera, etc.) have to pay the company who supplies the raw material, shipping costs from wherever each part comes from, shipping costs from wherever the phone is made to warehouses, shipping costs from warehouses to stores, the boxes, the chargers, the people trained to do tech support for it, the network bandwith it takes (contract or not), the pay of the people selling it to you, and all these other invisible costs that the end user (you) don't see. Suddenly that $600 makes more sense.
But the average person asks, "Why should I give a damn about those costs?" It's very simple. Your wireless phone provider is not your friend. They are not there to make you happy. Despite what any representative may tell you, they do not need you. You need them. And while yes, some make the point that people lived before cell phones, it's a moot point. You need them now. You are used to having them, and if you're anything like me and have a decent social life, you have to have one. This isn't a bad thing. Many of us couldn't live without a car anymore. We couldn't live without electricity. The cell phone has evolved from something you have in case you NEED it to something you have for when you WANT it. What people often forget is that your carrier is a company, and company's have only one goal in mind: Make money.
Nobody is stopping you from buying a Droid for $600 and signing up on the same plans as contract customers. You can do that. But even considering the $350 fee for breaking contract, it makes no sense to do that, since the only thing you benefit from not having a contract is the ability to go elsewhere. Now think about how many cell phone companies you've owned personally. The answer is probably one or two. The majority of people finish their contracts out and stick with the same company for more than 2 years anyway. People who complain about the price of the phone without a contract have no leg to stand on. Of course the company isn't going to cut you a break on the monthly service since you bought the phone. You've made it clear that you don't care about earning them money, so they really don't care about you. You might not like it, but tough cookies because it's their service, not yours. That's where many Americans make the big mistake: Despite what your employer told you about your customers, the customer is not always right.
My next post (look for it this week) will go more in depth (meaning less techy) on this country-wide misunderstanding, but for now, I'll leave you with this. Customer service is there not to ensure your happiness, no matter how much it seems like it. They are there to ensure that you're happy enough to keep writing checks. That's it. And people need to realize that no matter how strong your sense of entitlement based on how long you may or may not have been with a company may be, the loss of your small, contract-free plan every month won't hurt them. In fact, you may save them money on their phone bill from your 8 million calls for every time YOU mess up your bill.
Think about the last cell phone you bought. Now think about how much you paid for it. Now most people will say they paid anywhere from nothing to $199 for their phone. Let's say you bought a Motorola Droid on the day it came out for around $200. Not bad, considering it retails for $600 or so without a contract. Many people will say it's a ridiculous price since that's way more than what it cost to make. And they would be wrong. The parts and manufacturing costs for the Droid put it at $187.75 per Droid made. Now a $600 value for something that costs $187.75 doesn't seem right! Wrong again. That figure is in raw form. It does not take into account how much the makers of each part (screen, bezel, camera, etc.) have to pay the company who supplies the raw material, shipping costs from wherever each part comes from, shipping costs from wherever the phone is made to warehouses, shipping costs from warehouses to stores, the boxes, the chargers, the people trained to do tech support for it, the network bandwith it takes (contract or not), the pay of the people selling it to you, and all these other invisible costs that the end user (you) don't see. Suddenly that $600 makes more sense.
But the average person asks, "Why should I give a damn about those costs?" It's very simple. Your wireless phone provider is not your friend. They are not there to make you happy. Despite what any representative may tell you, they do not need you. You need them. And while yes, some make the point that people lived before cell phones, it's a moot point. You need them now. You are used to having them, and if you're anything like me and have a decent social life, you have to have one. This isn't a bad thing. Many of us couldn't live without a car anymore. We couldn't live without electricity. The cell phone has evolved from something you have in case you NEED it to something you have for when you WANT it. What people often forget is that your carrier is a company, and company's have only one goal in mind: Make money.
Nobody is stopping you from buying a Droid for $600 and signing up on the same plans as contract customers. You can do that. But even considering the $350 fee for breaking contract, it makes no sense to do that, since the only thing you benefit from not having a contract is the ability to go elsewhere. Now think about how many cell phone companies you've owned personally. The answer is probably one or two. The majority of people finish their contracts out and stick with the same company for more than 2 years anyway. People who complain about the price of the phone without a contract have no leg to stand on. Of course the company isn't going to cut you a break on the monthly service since you bought the phone. You've made it clear that you don't care about earning them money, so they really don't care about you. You might not like it, but tough cookies because it's their service, not yours. That's where many Americans make the big mistake: Despite what your employer told you about your customers, the customer is not always right.
My next post (look for it this week) will go more in depth (meaning less techy) on this country-wide misunderstanding, but for now, I'll leave you with this. Customer service is there not to ensure your happiness, no matter how much it seems like it. They are there to ensure that you're happy enough to keep writing checks. That's it. And people need to realize that no matter how strong your sense of entitlement based on how long you may or may not have been with a company may be, the loss of your small, contract-free plan every month won't hurt them. In fact, you may save them money on their phone bill from your 8 million calls for every time YOU mess up your bill.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Proof that Pyramid Schemes Will Fail
I was approached today by a customer of mine who was kind enough to invite me to join him on this "business venture" of his. I shuttered, immediately knowing the direction he was going to take the conversation in; my mind racing over all of the things I could say to pull myself quickly and painlessly out of this impending conversation.
You see, I'm somewhat of an expert on rejecting these propositions because I have been asked to join these things several times. I'd be flattered that somewhat thought enough of me to want me to make a lot of extra income like them, but really that's just nonsense because most of these people I don't know well enough to merit that courtesy.
My business-oriented mind kicks in and I realize that on many levels, these businesses are doomed to fail from the start. Sure a few acorns at the top of the tree might be raking in checks that would make all but a few people envious but by the time those "testimonials" happen, the little guy is just going to get trampled on in the process.
Generally the structure of the business is as follows. First, you start out paying an entrance fee into the company ("to test your loyalty" etc) though they reassure you because you won't have to pay anything monthly again. That's sure great, because last time I checked, a company paid ME for my services, not the other way around. Then there is this website that is given to you for "free" where you can sell stuff. In this context, stuff is substituting another four letter s-word synonymous with crap. Really, the products themselves don't matter because that isn't the main focus stressed through the sales meetings they put on.
The crux of it all is what makes these schemes ultimately fail. So much so that they now refer to themselves as "multi-level marketing" in hopes of avoiding the negative stigma of calling something a scheme completing overshadowing the fact that these business formats are illegal. They ask you to bring on two or three more people, and that when you do that you are "moving up" such that you'll get to pull yourself and those people up as they bring in more people to the company.
Now even if nothing else about this business plan has smelt fishy this is where the red flags should be held high. I mean we can forgive the fact that a company wants you to pay them for working for them and its not like other sales organizations don't sell crap and or focus on their product line ups, but this... this is too much. Why? Well take it to it's logical conclusion. If you have to bring in even two people, and so does everyone else at your level (as had been done before you) then everyone that was brought in had to bring in two people, one must realize that at some point there will be no more people left to bring in. And if your primary business function is doomed to fail from the start, I'd like nothing to do with it.
How is it doomed you say? Well I did the math to figure out how many times the cycle could occur in full before 7,000,000,000 (7 billion) people would be involved. Turns out, if one person starts this company and asks only two other people to join, and those two people ask only two other people to join, and then in that next tier they only ask two people to join each, the number of times this could continue is just under 30 full times before EVERYBODY on the planet was a participant. That is a very finite number for a company that would like me to earn hundreds or even thousands of dollars a pay check. If you have to bring in three people each, that number is even less at only a little less than 22 times. Subtract all of the people that would find this scheme stupid or those that are too young / old / sick etc. and that number gets even smaller. The mathematical proof behind where these numbers came from can be found at http://i45.tinypic.com/dr6p8z.png.
Remember, once a person has joined, they aren't going to join again. This is unlike a normal participant in a company (customer) who may return several times to that company because they continue to need the product. Furthermore supposing the company realizes this and shifts attention to that free sales website they gave everyone, in affect everyone is their own supplier and would just buy from themselves.
Suffice it to say, I really wish a greater awareness over these multi-level marketing programs would go out so that people would be better informed about the decisions they make, and more importantly to whom they give their money to.
You see, I'm somewhat of an expert on rejecting these propositions because I have been asked to join these things several times. I'd be flattered that somewhat thought enough of me to want me to make a lot of extra income like them, but really that's just nonsense because most of these people I don't know well enough to merit that courtesy.
My business-oriented mind kicks in and I realize that on many levels, these businesses are doomed to fail from the start. Sure a few acorns at the top of the tree might be raking in checks that would make all but a few people envious but by the time those "testimonials" happen, the little guy is just going to get trampled on in the process.
Generally the structure of the business is as follows. First, you start out paying an entrance fee into the company ("to test your loyalty" etc) though they reassure you because you won't have to pay anything monthly again. That's sure great, because last time I checked, a company paid ME for my services, not the other way around. Then there is this website that is given to you for "free" where you can sell stuff. In this context, stuff is substituting another four letter s-word synonymous with crap. Really, the products themselves don't matter because that isn't the main focus stressed through the sales meetings they put on.
The crux of it all is what makes these schemes ultimately fail. So much so that they now refer to themselves as "multi-level marketing" in hopes of avoiding the negative stigma of calling something a scheme completing overshadowing the fact that these business formats are illegal. They ask you to bring on two or three more people, and that when you do that you are "moving up" such that you'll get to pull yourself and those people up as they bring in more people to the company.
Now even if nothing else about this business plan has smelt fishy this is where the red flags should be held high. I mean we can forgive the fact that a company wants you to pay them for working for them and its not like other sales organizations don't sell crap and or focus on their product line ups, but this... this is too much. Why? Well take it to it's logical conclusion. If you have to bring in even two people, and so does everyone else at your level (as had been done before you) then everyone that was brought in had to bring in two people, one must realize that at some point there will be no more people left to bring in. And if your primary business function is doomed to fail from the start, I'd like nothing to do with it.
How is it doomed you say? Well I did the math to figure out how many times the cycle could occur in full before 7,000,000,000 (7 billion) people would be involved. Turns out, if one person starts this company and asks only two other people to join, and those two people ask only two other people to join, and then in that next tier they only ask two people to join each, the number of times this could continue is just under 30 full times before EVERYBODY on the planet was a participant. That is a very finite number for a company that would like me to earn hundreds or even thousands of dollars a pay check. If you have to bring in three people each, that number is even less at only a little less than 22 times. Subtract all of the people that would find this scheme stupid or those that are too young / old / sick etc. and that number gets even smaller. The mathematical proof behind where these numbers came from can be found at http://i45.tinypic.com/dr6p8z.png.
Remember, once a person has joined, they aren't going to join again. This is unlike a normal participant in a company (customer) who may return several times to that company because they continue to need the product. Furthermore supposing the company realizes this and shifts attention to that free sales website they gave everyone, in affect everyone is their own supplier and would just buy from themselves.
Suffice it to say, I really wish a greater awareness over these multi-level marketing programs would go out so that people would be better informed about the decisions they make, and more importantly to whom they give their money to.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
The Top 5 FREE Google Services You're Not Using
Ok, we all know that Google is king of search engines by a mile and a half. First off, allow me to explain a very important term: Marketshare. Basically it means the amount that one product/service is being used compared to competing products/services in that market. For example, Google is currently dominating the search engine market with 65%, with Yahoo! in second with 17%, and Bing at 11%. But as many know, Google isn't just being awesome in search, but a ton of other stuff too, and the majority of it is free! Here's what you're probably missing out on:
1) Buzz. Now, to be fair here, Buzz is brand spankin' new this week. Essentially it's a cross between the all-powerful Google Maps and Twitter. Buzz doesn't require any additional programs and works through Gmail and Google Maps apps on mobile devices, which is really nice. You simply make sure your GPS is on, type in what you want the world to see, attach a picture if you like, and it becomes available to anyone following you (friends) or anyone who is nearby and looks on Maps or clicks "Nearby". It's very new, but it seems it's catching on so far. In my explorations in Maps (I got as far as Savannah, Georgia in Maps), I saw one Buzz that said "If you mention this Buzz, get $2 off your meal!" It made me realize that it could be used for quick reviews, speed trap warnings, special sales, all kinds of real-time, real-place goodness. All you need to start is a Gmail account, which is free and will be further discussed in a bit.
2) Trends. Ever feel like you're the last person to hear about something? Google Trends can end that. Since the majority of information is spread online and so many people use Google to find it, Google Trends allows you to tap into what's being searched for. For example, one of the Hot Topics (don't mind the name, you won't find many "edgy" teens there) right now is "what is Google Buzz?" It's also pretty entertaining, since you can view timelines and compare between two searches, making the relationship between Vibrators, Dildos, and Brokeback Mountain hilarious (search it, you'll see).
3) Calendar. This is a big one that will make your life so much more organized (like I'm qualified to talk about that!) Calendar is incredibly easy to use. You can set up appointments, reminders, locations (for easy Maps use), and invite contacts that are involved too. You can also sync it to your smartphone so it will automatically remind you that you're late to work. And you can set up multiple calendars to be even further organized. You can have a work calendar, a TV calendar to remind you of your favorite shows, sports calendars, etc. They can be viewed seperately or together to make sure there are no conflicts.
4) Gmail. This one was not in my Top 5 at first (this spot was for Documents), but I decided to double check the email marketshare, and it made me want to cry. Yahoo! is winning by a very wide margin, with Windows Live/Hotmail in second, and then Google's Gmail. Ok, seriously, what is this? 2000? Gmail is so simple, yet so powerful, allows for limitless organization and customization, and gives you access to all of Google's services in one place. http://mail.google.com There you go. No more excuses.
5) Chrome. Last but not least, Google's killer web browser. This statistic made me even sadder than the email one. 58% of people are still using Internet Explorer. REALLY? I mean, it's better than Netscape, but as a friend said: "IE is good for one thing: downloading another browser" (All credit to Neckbeard Ned, big ups sir). Now, Firefox takes second place, and given its age, it's rightfully so. While it may be a much better choice than IE or Safari, it is a big memory hog and is prone to crashing whenever least convenient. This happened to me once, and I got sick of it so I decided to give Chrome a try for a full week. It's been 3 months now, and I've never looked back. While Firefox has a lot more, Chrome has the extensions I needed. I've got drop-down style extensions for Twitter, Facebook, Gmail, and even Woot! (feel free to talk about your favorite extensions in the comments!) And it's all much quicker than Firefox was, and I greatly appreciate how minimalistic it is. Plus, Incognito Mode allows you to browse without saving any cookies or adding to your history. I'll leave you to find a use for that (I plead the Fifth).
So there you have it. The top free Google services that aren't used enough. There's a lot more, like Documents, that may make your life easier or more entertaining, and to find them just click "More" and then "Even More". Also make sure to check out the Labs section to see what's being worked on. Google Mars anyone (not making that up)?
1) Buzz. Now, to be fair here, Buzz is brand spankin' new this week. Essentially it's a cross between the all-powerful Google Maps and Twitter. Buzz doesn't require any additional programs and works through Gmail and Google Maps apps on mobile devices, which is really nice. You simply make sure your GPS is on, type in what you want the world to see, attach a picture if you like, and it becomes available to anyone following you (friends) or anyone who is nearby and looks on Maps or clicks "Nearby". It's very new, but it seems it's catching on so far. In my explorations in Maps (I got as far as Savannah, Georgia in Maps), I saw one Buzz that said "If you mention this Buzz, get $2 off your meal!" It made me realize that it could be used for quick reviews, speed trap warnings, special sales, all kinds of real-time, real-place goodness. All you need to start is a Gmail account, which is free and will be further discussed in a bit.
2) Trends. Ever feel like you're the last person to hear about something? Google Trends can end that. Since the majority of information is spread online and so many people use Google to find it, Google Trends allows you to tap into what's being searched for. For example, one of the Hot Topics (don't mind the name, you won't find many "edgy" teens there) right now is "what is Google Buzz?" It's also pretty entertaining, since you can view timelines and compare between two searches, making the relationship between Vibrators, Dildos, and Brokeback Mountain hilarious (search it, you'll see).
3) Calendar. This is a big one that will make your life so much more organized (like I'm qualified to talk about that!) Calendar is incredibly easy to use. You can set up appointments, reminders, locations (for easy Maps use), and invite contacts that are involved too. You can also sync it to your smartphone so it will automatically remind you that you're late to work. And you can set up multiple calendars to be even further organized. You can have a work calendar, a TV calendar to remind you of your favorite shows, sports calendars, etc. They can be viewed seperately or together to make sure there are no conflicts.
4) Gmail. This one was not in my Top 5 at first (this spot was for Documents), but I decided to double check the email marketshare, and it made me want to cry. Yahoo! is winning by a very wide margin, with Windows Live/Hotmail in second, and then Google's Gmail. Ok, seriously, what is this? 2000? Gmail is so simple, yet so powerful, allows for limitless organization and customization, and gives you access to all of Google's services in one place. http://mail.google.com There you go. No more excuses.
5) Chrome. Last but not least, Google's killer web browser. This statistic made me even sadder than the email one. 58% of people are still using Internet Explorer. REALLY? I mean, it's better than Netscape, but as a friend said: "IE is good for one thing: downloading another browser" (All credit to Neckbeard Ned, big ups sir). Now, Firefox takes second place, and given its age, it's rightfully so. While it may be a much better choice than IE or Safari, it is a big memory hog and is prone to crashing whenever least convenient. This happened to me once, and I got sick of it so I decided to give Chrome a try for a full week. It's been 3 months now, and I've never looked back. While Firefox has a lot more, Chrome has the extensions I needed. I've got drop-down style extensions for Twitter, Facebook, Gmail, and even Woot! (feel free to talk about your favorite extensions in the comments!) And it's all much quicker than Firefox was, and I greatly appreciate how minimalistic it is. Plus, Incognito Mode allows you to browse without saving any cookies or adding to your history. I'll leave you to find a use for that (I plead the Fifth).
So there you have it. The top free Google services that aren't used enough. There's a lot more, like Documents, that may make your life easier or more entertaining, and to find them just click "More" and then "Even More". Also make sure to check out the Labs section to see what's being worked on. Google Mars anyone (not making that up)?
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Congrats to the Academy, This Time, I Didn't Want to Vomit!
Usually around this time, the Academy announces it's selections for Best Picture, Best Actors and Actresses, and then 80 other awards that no one (maybe not even those nominated) actually cares about. And more often than not, the selections are full of pretentious drivel and self-importance. This year, however, the nominations didn't make me release a sigh of disappointment. So let's review them:
Best Supporting Actor: The obvious winner of this one is Cristoph Waltz from Inglorious Basterds. His portrayl of Hans Landa has given him my top spot in the Best Villains Ever list. Ridiculously brilliant in a ridiculously brilliant film.
Best Supporting Actress: I'll be honest here, I only saw Up in the Air, which has two noms here, and Nine, and neither of them stood out as spectacular here, and these women are no exception. Penelope Cruz was hilarious and, for lack of a better word, hot in Nine, but I wasn't blown away by her acting prowess. And Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick from Up in the Air didn't strike me as Oscar-winning either. Of the ones I saw, I liked Kendrick the best, but I think Mo'Nique will snag her second award for Precious (she's already got the SAG award under her very large belt).
Best Actor: Who I want to win: Jeremy Renner from the Hurt Locker. Who I think will win: Toss-up between Jeff Bridges of Crazy Heart and George Clooney of Up in the Air. So between those two, I'd rather Bridges. I may seem like I'm hating on Up in the Air, but I just didn't find it Oscar-worthy, despite it's relevance to our economy. But hopefully Renner can pull it off as the dark horse, because his performance was flawless in the most suspenseful movie of the year.
Best Actress: Have to be honest here again, didn't see a single one of these movies, so I'm not even going to pretend like an expert here.. I think Sandra Bullock will take this one, and I really hope she does. She's had a long career with no real break like this, other than Crash (though Miss Congeniality still cracks me up, and I'm man enough to say it).
Best Animated Film: Up. It's Pixar. Need I say more?
Best Film: Now they went from 5 nominations to 10 this year, and my original thought when I heard this was why bother? Well now my opinion has changed. I love that they did it. There are so many good ones in this category that I really don't know who to pick. Inglorious Basterds has a real shot, and it's one of my most favorite Tarantino flicks. Again, I thought the Hurt Locker was incredible, it's suspense, character depth, and social relevance gives it a realistic chance of winning, and it's my personal favorite of the year. But I'd love to see Up take it here as well, since everything Pixar does is amazing, and it'll make up for Wall E being snubbed a few years ago. Though it has zero chance of winning, I love how the little SciFi flick District 9 got the nod, and it's absolutely deserving of it. As for Avatar, it'll win everything visually, and while I think it is deserving of the highest grossing film awards, it was not the best movie of the year. The story was told in ground-breaking and incredible ways, but the story itself and its characters weren't as revolutionary.
There you have it folks, those are my picks, we'll find out how far off I am March 7th. If you want the full list, go to http://oscar.go.com/nominations/nominees
Best Supporting Actor: The obvious winner of this one is Cristoph Waltz from Inglorious Basterds. His portrayl of Hans Landa has given him my top spot in the Best Villains Ever list. Ridiculously brilliant in a ridiculously brilliant film.
Best Supporting Actress: I'll be honest here, I only saw Up in the Air, which has two noms here, and Nine, and neither of them stood out as spectacular here, and these women are no exception. Penelope Cruz was hilarious and, for lack of a better word, hot in Nine, but I wasn't blown away by her acting prowess. And Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick from Up in the Air didn't strike me as Oscar-winning either. Of the ones I saw, I liked Kendrick the best, but I think Mo'Nique will snag her second award for Precious (she's already got the SAG award under her very large belt).
Best Actor: Who I want to win: Jeremy Renner from the Hurt Locker. Who I think will win: Toss-up between Jeff Bridges of Crazy Heart and George Clooney of Up in the Air. So between those two, I'd rather Bridges. I may seem like I'm hating on Up in the Air, but I just didn't find it Oscar-worthy, despite it's relevance to our economy. But hopefully Renner can pull it off as the dark horse, because his performance was flawless in the most suspenseful movie of the year.
Best Actress: Have to be honest here again, didn't see a single one of these movies, so I'm not even going to pretend like an expert here.. I think Sandra Bullock will take this one, and I really hope she does. She's had a long career with no real break like this, other than Crash (though Miss Congeniality still cracks me up, and I'm man enough to say it).
Best Animated Film: Up. It's Pixar. Need I say more?
Best Film: Now they went from 5 nominations to 10 this year, and my original thought when I heard this was why bother? Well now my opinion has changed. I love that they did it. There are so many good ones in this category that I really don't know who to pick. Inglorious Basterds has a real shot, and it's one of my most favorite Tarantino flicks. Again, I thought the Hurt Locker was incredible, it's suspense, character depth, and social relevance gives it a realistic chance of winning, and it's my personal favorite of the year. But I'd love to see Up take it here as well, since everything Pixar does is amazing, and it'll make up for Wall E being snubbed a few years ago. Though it has zero chance of winning, I love how the little SciFi flick District 9 got the nod, and it's absolutely deserving of it. As for Avatar, it'll win everything visually, and while I think it is deserving of the highest grossing film awards, it was not the best movie of the year. The story was told in ground-breaking and incredible ways, but the story itself and its characters weren't as revolutionary.
There you have it folks, those are my picks, we'll find out how far off I am March 7th. If you want the full list, go to http://oscar.go.com/nominations/nominees
Monday, February 1, 2010
Denny's - Even Worse Than...Denny's
So last night, we had a little bowling party for some people that I used to work with. All three of the contributors here were present. The bowling isn't really all that important (if for no other reason that that I lost), but after words, we went to Denny's. The experience in of itself was both horrifyingly bad and hilarious, but I am going to use it as an example of how strangely my mind works as well.
There were 6 of us in total, Travis, Matt, A, M, D, and me (didn't really ask permission to use their names in the post, so I'll just use the letter). We all ordered with very little problems. Travis and I each ordered the new Meat Lovers Trio, and the rest ordered a collection of appetizers and deserts that really aren't all that important. When she brings the food, D and M each notice mistakes with their orders and the server leaves to correct them. I then realize that Travis and my Meat Lovers Trio is a Meat Lovers Duo, due to the fact the the "NEW Sausage and Cheese Smother Hashbrowns" are just hashbrowns (it is important for me to point out that our meal includes a piece of country fried steak with gravy on top). When she comes back, she says "Oh, sorry, let me fix that." She reaches to take our plates and as she takes Travis' she says "Nice gravy."
Matt then realizes a mistake in his order, finds her to tell her. Not to be left out, the kind of pie A wanted was frozen solid, so she asked for pumpkin and the server brought lemon (though afraid her next piece would likely include an unwanted special sauce, she just ate the lemon pie). A good five minutes later, we all have the correct food and are eating. For the entire 5 minutes I have been thinking about only one thing: "Why did she say 'nice gravy'?"
My first possibility was because he spread the gravy over the steak. There were two problems with that. First, I assume that most people spread the gravy (I had done the same thing) for even distribution. Plus, she didn't comment on my equally and effectively spread gravy. Another possibility was she was being sarcastic, and noting how little gravy there was. This was disproved by there being no more gravy added when given back. The other option was that she was just commenting on how nice Denny's gravy is. This seems highly unlikely as Denny's gravy could be called many things (the two that stand out in my mind are "edible" and "decent") but "nice" isn't one of them. Plus, even then it doesn't make a lot of sense to say this to the person that would be eating the gravy. You might say it to the cook or even herself as she poured it.
So after the five minutes of running through all the possibilities, I ask the rest of the table. Most of them didn't even notice it was said, and no one had any clue as to why it would be said. Travis and I also had an ridiculously long and convulsive laugh about it on the way home, which made driving difficult the the steady stream of tears coming out of my eyes.
In the end, it will bother me for a long time. I can't come up with a legitimate reason for her to say that. It just makes no sense. People will probably say "Well, she works at Denny's, what do you expect?" to which I reply, while offensive to Denny's workers this statement is true. However, even through stupidity I can usually understand what someone meant. This just doesn't make any sense.
Oh well. Nice gravy to you all.
There were 6 of us in total, Travis, Matt, A, M, D, and me (didn't really ask permission to use their names in the post, so I'll just use the letter). We all ordered with very little problems. Travis and I each ordered the new Meat Lovers Trio, and the rest ordered a collection of appetizers and deserts that really aren't all that important. When she brings the food, D and M each notice mistakes with their orders and the server leaves to correct them. I then realize that Travis and my Meat Lovers Trio is a Meat Lovers Duo, due to the fact the the "NEW Sausage and Cheese Smother Hashbrowns" are just hashbrowns (it is important for me to point out that our meal includes a piece of country fried steak with gravy on top). When she comes back, she says "Oh, sorry, let me fix that." She reaches to take our plates and as she takes Travis' she says "Nice gravy."
Matt then realizes a mistake in his order, finds her to tell her. Not to be left out, the kind of pie A wanted was frozen solid, so she asked for pumpkin and the server brought lemon (though afraid her next piece would likely include an unwanted special sauce, she just ate the lemon pie). A good five minutes later, we all have the correct food and are eating. For the entire 5 minutes I have been thinking about only one thing: "Why did she say 'nice gravy'?"
My first possibility was because he spread the gravy over the steak. There were two problems with that. First, I assume that most people spread the gravy (I had done the same thing) for even distribution. Plus, she didn't comment on my equally and effectively spread gravy. Another possibility was she was being sarcastic, and noting how little gravy there was. This was disproved by there being no more gravy added when given back. The other option was that she was just commenting on how nice Denny's gravy is. This seems highly unlikely as Denny's gravy could be called many things (the two that stand out in my mind are "edible" and "decent") but "nice" isn't one of them. Plus, even then it doesn't make a lot of sense to say this to the person that would be eating the gravy. You might say it to the cook or even herself as she poured it.
So after the five minutes of running through all the possibilities, I ask the rest of the table. Most of them didn't even notice it was said, and no one had any clue as to why it would be said. Travis and I also had an ridiculously long and convulsive laugh about it on the way home, which made driving difficult the the steady stream of tears coming out of my eyes.
In the end, it will bother me for a long time. I can't come up with a legitimate reason for her to say that. It just makes no sense. People will probably say "Well, she works at Denny's, what do you expect?" to which I reply, while offensive to Denny's workers this statement is true. However, even through stupidity I can usually understand what someone meant. This just doesn't make any sense.
Oh well. Nice gravy to you all.
Quick Blurb: Our Postess With The Mostess Award in Comments for January
It is the pleasure of both Brad and Matthew to congratulate Travis on his post of The Apple Tablet (iPad) Part II: "Magical Because We Say So!" for having the highest amount of comments on a single post achieved during the month of January. Winning this is a direct result from all of the feedback we get from our readers, and it all goes to help define where we'll go with this blog in the future.
In future, we will probably congratulate ourselves over how much is written too. For now though, enjoy our newest features like the Facebook fan page, http://www.facebook.com/blueprintsblog, the Twitter feed, http://www.twitter.com/blueprintsblog, and our newest feedback tool, http://www.formspring.me/blueprintsblog. Happy reading!
In future, we will probably congratulate ourselves over how much is written too. For now though, enjoy our newest features like the Facebook fan page, http://www.facebook.com/blueprintsblog, the Twitter feed, http://www.twitter.com/blueprintsblog, and our newest feedback tool, http://www.formspring.me/blueprintsblog. Happy reading!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)