So I figured with all this Apple nonsense, I'd take a break from gadgets and write about something else nerdy. It was announced recently that there would be no more Spiderman 4 with Sam Raimi featuring Tobey Maguire. Instead, Mark Webb, director of (500) Days of Summer, has picked up the franchise. In my opinion, that is freakin' awesome. But ultimately that leads to one big question: Who will be the next Peter Parker?
I have picked my favorite 2, and if it's either I'd be pretty stoked. But before that, let's talk about a few rumors. The first one I saw made me almost throw up in my mouth a little. One website had Zac Effron as Spidey. Peter may have gone emo in Spiderman 3, but I don't remember him being gay (not that there's anything wrong with that). Another one that I kinda liked, kinda didn't was Anton Yelchin, of Star Trek and Charlie Bartlett fame. While I think he'd be good at it, I don't like him as much as I do my top 2 picks, at least not yet.
So who do I want to be the next Spiderman? Either Emile Hirsch or Joseph Goron Levitt. We'll start with Emile. The dude is a brilliant actor. His work in The Girl Next Door, which might not have been an amazing movie, showed that he can pull off the role of a kid in over his head. And Into the Wild (which is still one of my favorite films ever) and Milk showed a big range for the 24 year old. He'd be much less... I guess the only word I can think of is "Doofy" than Toby, which while it might not be as accurate a portrayl of the comic book legend, would make for a much more entertaining watch.
And as for JoGo Levitt, I only see one problem: he's 28. But his appearance and his great acting ability would allow him to defy that when necessary and make a "grown up and lesson-learned" Parker appear that much more mature. Plus, he's already had experience with Webb in (500) Days, which was phenomenal, and may be why Webb took the gig in the first place.
I'm really excited for the 2012 reboot, especially after how bad Raimi handled the amazing story of Black Suit Spiderman and Venom. One funny rumor I heard for a villain was Steve Buschi as Carnage (which could definitely work). But there's one cast member that had better stay the same, and that's J.K. Simmons a Jonah Jameson. That may have been the best casting in the histo of anything ever.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Friday, January 29, 2010
Haiti - Enough Already
I know that I'm not the only one that has the following opinions, but most people are too afraid to say them.
I have no intention of turning this blog into a political blog of any kind (if I had, I would have made a post about the laughable scene that was this year's State of the Union Address). However, there is one issue that I think is worth talking about: Haiti.
I was at Walgreen's less than an hour ago to buy feminine products for my wife. This is a horrendous experience for any man, and our only goal is to get in and out as quickly and invisibly as possible. One can only hope that there is another married man at the checkout line because he will know to avoid eye contact and speak as little as humanly possible. Unfortunately for me, the man that checked me out was an obvious loser and does not know where man code stands in this situation and looked me in the eyes and asked how my day was. I mumbled "Good" and continued to avert my gaze. He then asked me something that made me forget all about the thing I was buying "Would you like to add a contribution to The Red Cross for Haiti relief today?" I resisted the urge to strangle the man, said no, and rushed home to write this blog post.
Why must I be harassed everywhere I go about donating to Haiti? I get that a tragedy happened there, and people are dying. That really sucks. You know where else people are dying? EVERYWHERE! We live in a world that is out to destroy us at all turns. Earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, droughts, floods, forest fires, lightning, avalanches, Godzilla...these are all forces that can destroy whole towns, cities, and countries, and they exist everywhere. So why are we currently obsessed with Haiti?
The obvious reason is the scale of the disaster. Estimates say 200,000 people have likely died in Haiti. Well, if we're using number of casualties as a reason for intervention, why are so many people still against the war in Iraq? Saddam Hussein is believed to have killed as many as a million people, counting wars and battles he ordered.
So why does it annoy me so much that I'm asked 4 to 5 times a day if I want to donate to Haiti? The big reason is because the federal government is already donating for me. The US government has donated almost 400 million dollars to Haiti (and lets not forget the fact that we have a 12 trillion dollar deficit as a country right now). Where do you think that money comes from? The answer: my taxes. And that's still not enough. Every other commercial is the first lady telling me to donate. Every school I go to is begging the students to bring in money for Haiti. It never ends.
To date, 1.25 billion dollars has been given to Haiti, with almost another 800 million pledged and not yet sent. That's over 2 billion dollars to a country that has a GDP of only $11.6 billion ANNUALLY (in simple terms, that's how much the country of Haiti is worth). This earthquake is the most lucrative event in the history of Haiti. We're talking about adding 18% of their GDP. That would be like giving 2.5 trillion dollars to this country. The effect on the economy would be unimaginable (we could bring our debt back below 10 trillion dollars!).
In the end, there are no satisfying answers to these questions. The answer to why Haiti is such a big deal is the same as why the iPhone is so popular, why only Casey Anthony won't go away, and why Kim Kardashian is even known: The media. Whatever the media outlets take on as their obsession for this month is what's important, whether it deserves it or not.
I have no intention of turning this blog into a political blog of any kind (if I had, I would have made a post about the laughable scene that was this year's State of the Union Address). However, there is one issue that I think is worth talking about: Haiti.
I was at Walgreen's less than an hour ago to buy feminine products for my wife. This is a horrendous experience for any man, and our only goal is to get in and out as quickly and invisibly as possible. One can only hope that there is another married man at the checkout line because he will know to avoid eye contact and speak as little as humanly possible. Unfortunately for me, the man that checked me out was an obvious loser and does not know where man code stands in this situation and looked me in the eyes and asked how my day was. I mumbled "Good" and continued to avert my gaze. He then asked me something that made me forget all about the thing I was buying "Would you like to add a contribution to The Red Cross for Haiti relief today?" I resisted the urge to strangle the man, said no, and rushed home to write this blog post.
Why must I be harassed everywhere I go about donating to Haiti? I get that a tragedy happened there, and people are dying. That really sucks. You know where else people are dying? EVERYWHERE! We live in a world that is out to destroy us at all turns. Earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, droughts, floods, forest fires, lightning, avalanches, Godzilla...these are all forces that can destroy whole towns, cities, and countries, and they exist everywhere. So why are we currently obsessed with Haiti?
The obvious reason is the scale of the disaster. Estimates say 200,000 people have likely died in Haiti. Well, if we're using number of casualties as a reason for intervention, why are so many people still against the war in Iraq? Saddam Hussein is believed to have killed as many as a million people, counting wars and battles he ordered.
So why does it annoy me so much that I'm asked 4 to 5 times a day if I want to donate to Haiti? The big reason is because the federal government is already donating for me. The US government has donated almost 400 million dollars to Haiti (and lets not forget the fact that we have a 12 trillion dollar deficit as a country right now). Where do you think that money comes from? The answer: my taxes. And that's still not enough. Every other commercial is the first lady telling me to donate. Every school I go to is begging the students to bring in money for Haiti. It never ends.
To date, 1.25 billion dollars has been given to Haiti, with almost another 800 million pledged and not yet sent. That's over 2 billion dollars to a country that has a GDP of only $11.6 billion ANNUALLY (in simple terms, that's how much the country of Haiti is worth). This earthquake is the most lucrative event in the history of Haiti. We're talking about adding 18% of their GDP. That would be like giving 2.5 trillion dollars to this country. The effect on the economy would be unimaginable (we could bring our debt back below 10 trillion dollars!).
In the end, there are no satisfying answers to these questions. The answer to why Haiti is such a big deal is the same as why the iPhone is so popular, why only Casey Anthony won't go away, and why Kim Kardashian is even known: The media. Whatever the media outlets take on as their obsession for this month is what's important, whether it deserves it or not.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
The Apple Tablet (iPad) Part II: "Magical Because We Say So!"
So today was the day, and as you saw in my first post about it, I was trying to go in with an open mind. I was disappointed. Again. I posed the question: Will it be a giant iPhone or a tablet running OS X with some tweaks. And it's neither.
It's a giant iPod Touch with a few tweaks. Seriously. Out of the whole hour and a half conference, I saw 2 good things. The first is that the iPad will be compatible with everything in the App Store out of the box. The second is the monthly price for 3G use with AT&T, which is $15 for 250mb and $30 for unlimited, and it's prepaid so no contract. The rest is just bad:
Ok, not all bad. It's a 9.7" multitouch screen with a 1 GHz Apple made processor in there. It's only a half-inch thick and weighs a pound and a half. Let's talk about that processor. It really allows for Google Maps or web sites to just fly. Problem: It won't make Google Maps AND websites fly! Yeah, no multitasking. What the hell kind of cell phone/laptop substitute can't do two things at once? Oh, and since iPhone OS 4.0 was rumored to make an appearance today too, I wouldn't hold my breath on getting your iPhone to multitask in the near future either.
But like iPods, it can do Youtube, even in HD. That's pretty cool. It should make my Flash videos look great! Wait a minute... what's that little plug-in error block doing? During the demo, Jobs pulled up a site with a Flash video and it couldn't do it. So again, apparently the "best web browsing experience yet" doesn't involve what really makes most sites look so great. I think Jobs thinks he's in the mid 90s when Geocities was king.
So we have a big iPod Touch, but I mentioned some OS X goodies in there too. You can do some stuff with iWorks, so make spreadsheets, essays, presentations etc. Kinda cool I guess, but there's not a chance in hell that I'm going to type something long enough to sit there and peck it out on a touchscreen of any size. And when I say sit down, it's not a metaphor. There's no realistic way you can type on that beast without a lap or table to lay it on. One could say it has to sit on TOP of a LAP or DESK. Funny, I feel like I've seen the combination of those words somewhere...
But that nice big screen will make pictures, videos, and text nice looking. In fact, Apple is going to have an Amazon and Barnes and Noble-esque online bookstore. Nice thought, but no matter how nice turning a digital page might be, it's not an e-ink screen. There's a reason that e-readers have gone with the no-backlight e-ink screen. It's not a (literal) pain to read on. So if you really want to peruse War and Peace on it, well you may need to pick up some iGlasses for it (I should trademark that name...)
But what would a product be without cool accessories? There's a few docks unveiled thus far, like the one that just props it up for picture and video viewing, and those are good. But the one with the keyboard on it just cracks me up, because it basically admits that the iPad is useless (more on that in a bit). And one that attaches a camera, because one simply cannot be put in there internally. We are totally not at that level in technology yet. But the lack of camera also makes many apps no longer compatible. Yay contradiction!
And I have to touch on the name for a few seconds. iPad? Really? Let's ignore the fact that MadTV already came out with a sketch about it as a tampon, and that "iTampon" was a top trending subject on Twitter. Let's ignore how easy periods may flow onto the iPad. When I think "pad", I think of the things dogs take a dump on inside. And the poor people of Boston will be SO confused given their accent. Hopefully there will be some way to distinguish iPod and iPad for them. Like iPod and iDon'tKnowWhatThisIsFor.
And finally, the price. There's 3 models of differing memory space in the typical 16, 32, and 64GB layout. For the WiFi only versions, you're looking at $500, $600, and $700 respectively, and they'll be available in 60 days. Want one of the 3G models? Wait an additional 30 days (that's 90 if you don't have your iCalculator handy). Oh, and add $130 to the price. Now it comes unlocked, which sounds good, but it's using the never before seen microSIM card, meaning no other carrier will know what the hell to do with it. Now I bet that it would be $1200, so why do I find the price ridiculous? Well I figured it would be something, you know, useful. But even Apple has effectively said it isn't. The ending thought that Jobs left with people was that 75 million people know how to work the iPad, that number based on iPhone and iPod Touch sales. Well if it works the same, but just has a big screen and some iWorks stuff, why in the world would I need to drop a minimum $500 for this? Anyone with an iPod Touch or iPhone that needs iWorks compatibility has a Mac to do it, you know, something made to type quickly and efficiently. And if they don't own a Mac, they have Office, which is all but infinitely more used than iWorks.
The only thing showing us how necessary or useful the iPad is is the word of Steve Jobs saying it's "magical" and "revolutionary". Well it certainly hasn't revolutionized anything, seeing as it has brought no new functionality or even changed currently existing functions, and the only thing magical about it all is the fact that Steve Jobs is able to stay on the ground with as much hot air is in that inflated head of his.
UPDATE: So I've watched a video or two of it in action, and allow me to say this: For what it does, it does it well. For what it is, it's pretty cool. But when you look at the rest of the tech world, you'll find that what it does and what it is is entirely useless to be it's own entity. Hope that clarifies it for you guys.
It's a giant iPod Touch with a few tweaks. Seriously. Out of the whole hour and a half conference, I saw 2 good things. The first is that the iPad will be compatible with everything in the App Store out of the box. The second is the monthly price for 3G use with AT&T, which is $15 for 250mb and $30 for unlimited, and it's prepaid so no contract. The rest is just bad:
Ok, not all bad. It's a 9.7" multitouch screen with a 1 GHz Apple made processor in there. It's only a half-inch thick and weighs a pound and a half. Let's talk about that processor. It really allows for Google Maps or web sites to just fly. Problem: It won't make Google Maps AND websites fly! Yeah, no multitasking. What the hell kind of cell phone/laptop substitute can't do two things at once? Oh, and since iPhone OS 4.0 was rumored to make an appearance today too, I wouldn't hold my breath on getting your iPhone to multitask in the near future either.
But like iPods, it can do Youtube, even in HD. That's pretty cool. It should make my Flash videos look great! Wait a minute... what's that little plug-in error block doing? During the demo, Jobs pulled up a site with a Flash video and it couldn't do it. So again, apparently the "best web browsing experience yet" doesn't involve what really makes most sites look so great. I think Jobs thinks he's in the mid 90s when Geocities was king.
So we have a big iPod Touch, but I mentioned some OS X goodies in there too. You can do some stuff with iWorks, so make spreadsheets, essays, presentations etc. Kinda cool I guess, but there's not a chance in hell that I'm going to type something long enough to sit there and peck it out on a touchscreen of any size. And when I say sit down, it's not a metaphor. There's no realistic way you can type on that beast without a lap or table to lay it on. One could say it has to sit on TOP of a LAP or DESK. Funny, I feel like I've seen the combination of those words somewhere...
But that nice big screen will make pictures, videos, and text nice looking. In fact, Apple is going to have an Amazon and Barnes and Noble-esque online bookstore. Nice thought, but no matter how nice turning a digital page might be, it's not an e-ink screen. There's a reason that e-readers have gone with the no-backlight e-ink screen. It's not a (literal) pain to read on. So if you really want to peruse War and Peace on it, well you may need to pick up some iGlasses for it (I should trademark that name...)
But what would a product be without cool accessories? There's a few docks unveiled thus far, like the one that just props it up for picture and video viewing, and those are good. But the one with the keyboard on it just cracks me up, because it basically admits that the iPad is useless (more on that in a bit). And one that attaches a camera, because one simply cannot be put in there internally. We are totally not at that level in technology yet. But the lack of camera also makes many apps no longer compatible. Yay contradiction!
And I have to touch on the name for a few seconds. iPad? Really? Let's ignore the fact that MadTV already came out with a sketch about it as a tampon, and that "iTampon" was a top trending subject on Twitter. Let's ignore how easy periods may flow onto the iPad. When I think "pad", I think of the things dogs take a dump on inside. And the poor people of Boston will be SO confused given their accent. Hopefully there will be some way to distinguish iPod and iPad for them. Like iPod and iDon'tKnowWhatThisIsFor.
And finally, the price. There's 3 models of differing memory space in the typical 16, 32, and 64GB layout. For the WiFi only versions, you're looking at $500, $600, and $700 respectively, and they'll be available in 60 days. Want one of the 3G models? Wait an additional 30 days (that's 90 if you don't have your iCalculator handy). Oh, and add $130 to the price. Now it comes unlocked, which sounds good, but it's using the never before seen microSIM card, meaning no other carrier will know what the hell to do with it. Now I bet that it would be $1200, so why do I find the price ridiculous? Well I figured it would be something, you know, useful. But even Apple has effectively said it isn't. The ending thought that Jobs left with people was that 75 million people know how to work the iPad, that number based on iPhone and iPod Touch sales. Well if it works the same, but just has a big screen and some iWorks stuff, why in the world would I need to drop a minimum $500 for this? Anyone with an iPod Touch or iPhone that needs iWorks compatibility has a Mac to do it, you know, something made to type quickly and efficiently. And if they don't own a Mac, they have Office, which is all but infinitely more used than iWorks.
The only thing showing us how necessary or useful the iPad is is the word of Steve Jobs saying it's "magical" and "revolutionary". Well it certainly hasn't revolutionized anything, seeing as it has brought no new functionality or even changed currently existing functions, and the only thing magical about it all is the fact that Steve Jobs is able to stay on the ground with as much hot air is in that inflated head of his.
UPDATE: So I've watched a video or two of it in action, and allow me to say this: For what it does, it does it well. For what it is, it's pretty cool. But when you look at the rest of the tech world, you'll find that what it does and what it is is entirely useless to be it's own entity. Hope that clarifies it for you guys.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
The Apple Tablet: Giant iPhone? Or Something Useful?
Before I start all this, I'll be completely honest. If you know me, you know that I am not a big fan of Apple, especially when it comes to the iPhone. I disagree with it being a smartphone when the company that makes it makes such stupid decisions with it (Adobe Flash 10.1 will be wicked nice on pretty much every single smartphone except it, by Apple's choice). And when it comes to their desktops and laptops, the price is just ridiculous for what you're ultimately getting.
That said, Apple does deserve some credit. There's two things I will never take away from them: Their hardware is really good and their advertising is the best in the industry. For their hardware, I'll even give the iPhone props. It does have a very nice processor and the screen is gorgeous. I personally am not a big fan of software keyboards, but the iPhone's is really good. And their ad schemes, while incredibly pretentious and often misleading ("There's an app for that...BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE IT"), are incredibly effective. The proof of this is when you ask the average person what the most popular phone out now is, chances are they'll say iPhone. It seems as if every spoiled kid, college hipster, sorority girl, and aging yuppie has one.
So when the rumblings and grumblings of a possible Apple tablet started, all of the iDrones (my name for the Apple obsessed who buy whatever almost all-white device with fruit on the back comes out) came out in force. And they may possibly have reason to be excited. It really comes down to one question: What the hell is it going to be? Is it going to be a giant iPhone, or is it going to be a multitouch, no-keyboard Mac? Personally, I'd rather see the latter.
The biggest problem I have with the iPhone is it's absolute lack of customization and Apple's ruthless and random control of it's apps (yes, we all know about jailbreaking, but you can't say Corolas are faster than Ferraris if your Corola is "suped up"). If the Apple tablet suffers the same fate, then it won't be hard to imagine that some of its coolest features will be blocked for some half-assed, if any, reason. As you can tell from my post about the 4 Relevant Devices in the future, I'm not a fan of tablets in general because they have such limited uses that laptops can't do anyway, but if Apple continues to, well, be Apple then your iSlate users will quickly become annoyed. But I really don't think this will be the case. Jobs isn't stupid, and an iPhone-esque tablet will only compete with the iPhone, allowing for people to have one and not the other.
So by my logic it will be a mutlitouch Mac sans-keyboard. And I'll be honest, it'll be good for what it does. If the rumors are true, you'll find some good content from some big names bringing magazines and such that may or may not be specially made for the interface. And if those are true, we may see some wireless carrier support like Sprint and AT&T's work with Amazon's Kindle e-reader. But then we have 2 questions: What carrier will it be with and will we have to pay?
AT&T is having all kinds of trouble with the data intensive iPhone already. They simply don't have enough bandwith to accommodate all data-hogs they created. Don't believe me? Try making a call or getting 3G in New York and San Francisco. Good luck. And frankly, a device like the tablet with as much hype as their phone may just break AT&T's network totally. So if not them, then who? T-Mobile, with less strain and less 3G? Not likely. Sprint? Not a big enough subscriber base for Apple, I think, and more importantly their pricing isn't high enough to allow for what Apple will want to make. So will it go to Verizon? It seems like the likely choice. Not even AT&T will argue with them having the best 3G coverage (Openly they do, but in the lawsuits around the maps, they never even tried to deny their accuracy). The problem with Verizon is that it's CDMA, which while it isn't a problem to me, it isn't worldwide. Apple is trying to increase it's global marketshare, and creating a US only device won't help, and I doubt they'll make a US version and a Global version. Which leads us back to: AT&T. AT&T isn't smart enough to admit that it can't take it so they'll try. And let the finger-pointing begin!
Or will we find it carrier-less just running on WiFi? I certainly think so. Attaching it to a carrier is too netbooky, and while it's rare, I agree with Apple that the netbook is a dead-end technology. Sure, they're cheap, but for a few hundred dollars more, you can double the power and screen size. And it's not like not having a carrier is a bad thing, otherwise Macbooks wouldn't continue to increase sales like they do.
So how much will we pay? I have a bet with Matt and our co-worker right now. Matt says it'll be at $999 with a 2 year contract with a carrier, and if he's right, you can expect the same $59.99 for 5GB (thanks, FCC) of data transfer per month. I have it at a carrier-less $1200, and our coworker has it at an Apple-inflated $1500. Even though I have no intention of buying another Apple product again (the girlfriend demanded an iPod last Christmas...), what they do is always interesting and usually is a game-changer. And tomorrow, we'll all find out how wrong we all are.
That said, Apple does deserve some credit. There's two things I will never take away from them: Their hardware is really good and their advertising is the best in the industry. For their hardware, I'll even give the iPhone props. It does have a very nice processor and the screen is gorgeous. I personally am not a big fan of software keyboards, but the iPhone's is really good. And their ad schemes, while incredibly pretentious and often misleading ("There's an app for that...BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE IT"), are incredibly effective. The proof of this is when you ask the average person what the most popular phone out now is, chances are they'll say iPhone. It seems as if every spoiled kid, college hipster, sorority girl, and aging yuppie has one.
So when the rumblings and grumblings of a possible Apple tablet started, all of the iDrones (my name for the Apple obsessed who buy whatever almost all-white device with fruit on the back comes out) came out in force. And they may possibly have reason to be excited. It really comes down to one question: What the hell is it going to be? Is it going to be a giant iPhone, or is it going to be a multitouch, no-keyboard Mac? Personally, I'd rather see the latter.
The biggest problem I have with the iPhone is it's absolute lack of customization and Apple's ruthless and random control of it's apps (yes, we all know about jailbreaking, but you can't say Corolas are faster than Ferraris if your Corola is "suped up"). If the Apple tablet suffers the same fate, then it won't be hard to imagine that some of its coolest features will be blocked for some half-assed, if any, reason. As you can tell from my post about the 4 Relevant Devices in the future, I'm not a fan of tablets in general because they have such limited uses that laptops can't do anyway, but if Apple continues to, well, be Apple then your iSlate users will quickly become annoyed. But I really don't think this will be the case. Jobs isn't stupid, and an iPhone-esque tablet will only compete with the iPhone, allowing for people to have one and not the other.
So by my logic it will be a mutlitouch Mac sans-keyboard. And I'll be honest, it'll be good for what it does. If the rumors are true, you'll find some good content from some big names bringing magazines and such that may or may not be specially made for the interface. And if those are true, we may see some wireless carrier support like Sprint and AT&T's work with Amazon's Kindle e-reader. But then we have 2 questions: What carrier will it be with and will we have to pay?
AT&T is having all kinds of trouble with the data intensive iPhone already. They simply don't have enough bandwith to accommodate all data-hogs they created. Don't believe me? Try making a call or getting 3G in New York and San Francisco. Good luck. And frankly, a device like the tablet with as much hype as their phone may just break AT&T's network totally. So if not them, then who? T-Mobile, with less strain and less 3G? Not likely. Sprint? Not a big enough subscriber base for Apple, I think, and more importantly their pricing isn't high enough to allow for what Apple will want to make. So will it go to Verizon? It seems like the likely choice. Not even AT&T will argue with them having the best 3G coverage (Openly they do, but in the lawsuits around the maps, they never even tried to deny their accuracy). The problem with Verizon is that it's CDMA, which while it isn't a problem to me, it isn't worldwide. Apple is trying to increase it's global marketshare, and creating a US only device won't help, and I doubt they'll make a US version and a Global version. Which leads us back to: AT&T. AT&T isn't smart enough to admit that it can't take it so they'll try. And let the finger-pointing begin!
Or will we find it carrier-less just running on WiFi? I certainly think so. Attaching it to a carrier is too netbooky, and while it's rare, I agree with Apple that the netbook is a dead-end technology. Sure, they're cheap, but for a few hundred dollars more, you can double the power and screen size. And it's not like not having a carrier is a bad thing, otherwise Macbooks wouldn't continue to increase sales like they do.
So how much will we pay? I have a bet with Matt and our co-worker right now. Matt says it'll be at $999 with a 2 year contract with a carrier, and if he's right, you can expect the same $59.99 for 5GB (thanks, FCC) of data transfer per month. I have it at a carrier-less $1200, and our coworker has it at an Apple-inflated $1500. Even though I have no intention of buying another Apple product again (the girlfriend demanded an iPod last Christmas...), what they do is always interesting and usually is a game-changer. And tomorrow, we'll all find out how wrong we all are.
Friday, January 22, 2010
Three Greatest Words Ever Used in Tandem - Free Scotch Tasting
Those people that know me, know that I like to drink. My wife will tell you that I like to talk about drinking even more. She'd probably be right.
The truth is, I like the taste of different drinks, and I don't mean just alcohol. Its a family thing. When we used to go out to dinner, the server would have to put a pitcher of tea down for my dad, brother and I. That would get refilled 4 to 5 times during a meal. When I was in high school, I used to drink a 2 liter of soda in school...every day. When I turned 21, the addition of alcohol added a whole new variety of beverages I could try. Beer or all varieties, wines, liquors, mixed drinks, martinis, margaritas, the list is endless.
You see, I don't drink to get drunk or even buzzed. I enjoy the taste of all of it. So when my buddy asked "Do you want to go to a scotch tasting tonight?" I said "Is there any stronger affirmative than yes?" Scotch is my favorite drink of all, so needless to say, I was excited.
I usually just drink cheap scotch, like Johnny Walker Red or Black label. I like that. This tasting let everyone try 4 different kinds of scotch. Black Gouse, Highland Park and MacCallan 18 year old, 21 year old Highland Park, and a 25 year old MacCallan. I've always thought there couldn't possibly be a reason to spend so much more on scotch just because its older. How much of a difference could it really make? I mean, there are kinds out there that are hundreds of dollars an OUNCE, thousands for a bottle. I don't see a time in my life when I would be willing to spend that kind of money on one drink, but at this tasting there was a chance to try an ounce of the Highland Park 40 year old scotch, valued at $345 an ounce. The guy from MacCallan that was the host of the event, was Scottish, and he knew his scotch. I learned lots of really cool things.
In the end, I was one of the people that got to try the Highland Park 40, and let me tell you, it was AMAZING. I've never tasted anything like it. It was sweet and strong and sorta caramelized in your mouth. It was smooth going down, much more so than any kind of scotch I have ever tasted. I managed to savor the half ounce I got to drink for a solid 20 mins.
I still don't think I would ever spend that kind of money for myself, but I can say that it was an experience like nothing I have ever tasted.
Then, in my infinite wisdom, I washed down my $345 aftertaste with an 89 cent five layer burrito from Taco Bell.
The truth is, I like the taste of different drinks, and I don't mean just alcohol. Its a family thing. When we used to go out to dinner, the server would have to put a pitcher of tea down for my dad, brother and I. That would get refilled 4 to 5 times during a meal. When I was in high school, I used to drink a 2 liter of soda in school...every day. When I turned 21, the addition of alcohol added a whole new variety of beverages I could try. Beer or all varieties, wines, liquors, mixed drinks, martinis, margaritas, the list is endless.
You see, I don't drink to get drunk or even buzzed. I enjoy the taste of all of it. So when my buddy asked "Do you want to go to a scotch tasting tonight?" I said "Is there any stronger affirmative than yes?" Scotch is my favorite drink of all, so needless to say, I was excited.
I usually just drink cheap scotch, like Johnny Walker Red or Black label. I like that. This tasting let everyone try 4 different kinds of scotch. Black Gouse, Highland Park and MacCallan 18 year old, 21 year old Highland Park, and a 25 year old MacCallan. I've always thought there couldn't possibly be a reason to spend so much more on scotch just because its older. How much of a difference could it really make? I mean, there are kinds out there that are hundreds of dollars an OUNCE, thousands for a bottle. I don't see a time in my life when I would be willing to spend that kind of money on one drink, but at this tasting there was a chance to try an ounce of the Highland Park 40 year old scotch, valued at $345 an ounce. The guy from MacCallan that was the host of the event, was Scottish, and he knew his scotch. I learned lots of really cool things.
In the end, I was one of the people that got to try the Highland Park 40, and let me tell you, it was AMAZING. I've never tasted anything like it. It was sweet and strong and sorta caramelized in your mouth. It was smooth going down, much more so than any kind of scotch I have ever tasted. I managed to savor the half ounce I got to drink for a solid 20 mins.
I still don't think I would ever spend that kind of money for myself, but I can say that it was an experience like nothing I have ever tasted.
Then, in my infinite wisdom, I washed down my $345 aftertaste with an 89 cent five layer burrito from Taco Bell.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Monday, January 18, 2010
Being Smarter With Your Online Identity
As Travis alluded to in his post, smart phones will predominantly be the phone used as one of the four still relevant gadgets. But a bigger implication is in how much more we will be connected to the internet as a society. We use the internet as a means to stay in touch with the rest of the world, our jobs, friends and family, and even tasks like banking and purchases. In doing so we start to share more and more until our life stories end up online. Ultimately, our information becomes available for any one to view.
Most everyone can remember their mom warning us about making a good first impression, but where are the 21st century mothers telling us to also watch after our online presence too. Why is this important? Well, people who will make decisions about the type of character I am will read this blog knowing full well I participate in it (aka my background investigator) and make a judgement on me based on what is said. But other than the qualitative information my presence may yield, there is also the quantitative data such as where I live or how I can be reached on my cellular phone. This is information that has, at least for me, an inverse proportion over how much I want to share vs how many people I would like to share it with.
Now while all this sharing is going on, Google called light to something else: openness. They believed that for the internet to really thrive in its best form, information needs to easily be accessible to anyone [who should have access to it]. And to do that, better controls need to be put into place so that the user can see their presence and make appropriate decisions about what is shared and what isn't. In the case of what Google knows about you, the easiest thing you can do is to simply Google Yourself. Immediately, you will be able to see almost every part of where your online presence has been. Taking this a step further, most people have a Google account which allows you to use one of several services they offer (Mail, Blogger, Contacts, Docs, etc). In all, I have about 17 services my primary user account is linked to. Google wanted to take its own advice with openness and created an entire section where I can view everything Google knows about me from using their services. I can view it from their Dashboard, where I also have complete control to manage the content all from that one page.
Another website a lot of people use is Facebook. This is a perfect example of a way to better manage your content as Facebook recently updated their privacy settings to allow you to more accurately specify who can view your information and to what extent. I've created a simple / dynamic solution that groups people by how much I would like them to see. In my case, only three groups were created. The first group is just my overall friends on the site, the second is a select group of my closest friends (this group being the one that I want them to see everything about my profile) and the last being a group with only very limited access to see my profile. To separate them, I've created two lists and sorted friends into them: "myFacebook" and "Limited View" with my regular friends being left out of the list and in their regular "Friends" grouping as they are already technically grouped. Then on the Privacy Page, I set things like my phone number and current address to viewable only to the "myFacebook" list where as things like the about me section to everyone. Then there are things such as my wall where I want any of my friends to see, but maybe not the older relatives of whom I've added into my "Limited View" list. For that, I set the wall visible to Only Friends *Except* "Limited View". Now as I add new friends, Facebook asks me which list(s) I want my new friend to be in and I can add them into the appropriate group of people right then and there which automatically applies all privacy settings to them.
My last reminder is to set your profile(s) to private. If you aren't my friend, I don't want you to see anything on there. The same holds true for my Twitter accounts. Sometimes I'll add location data to a comment / post I make. I wouldn't be too comfortable with the fact if some random person I had never met just shows up where I am. I have even gone to the extent of disallowing someone not in my region to be able to search for me on Facebook simply for the fact that if I meet someone and I want to friend them on there, I'll go through another arrangement to do so.
There are a couple other tricks to do with lists and later on down the road, I'll probably share them here as a way to help you better your Facebook experience. Either way, I hope this post not only helps, but preserves your enjoyment with your online presence all while keeping you safe.
Friday, January 15, 2010
The 4 Gadgets That Will (Still) Be Relevant in 5 Years
Yep. Only 4. Right now, we've got a gamot of different devices, like cellphones, smartphones, personal media players, GPS units, desktop PCs, laptops, netbooks, smartbooks, nettops, tablets, slates, LCD and LED and plasma TVs, projectors, etc. Far too much crap to deal with. So here's the only 4 that will matter in a few years.
1) The cellphone. If you know me, you'll know this isn't a shock, but it's entirely true. My first instinct was to put the smartphone, but I think it'll take another 10 to 15 years for most phones to be smartphones. In 5 you can expect to hear that the smartphone has over taken the majority though. Even now, smartphones are not just phones with internet. They are our media players, our calendars, calcuators, GPS units, and more. The less crap filling our pockets and bags, the better.
2) The laptop/tablet hybrid. We all know how laptops are awesome. Some people like netbooks for reasons I don't understand (other than the built in ability for mobile broadband with your favorite wireless provider). And thanks mostly to the (largely unsubstantiated) rumors of an Apple tablet and the showings of HP and other manufacturers' tablets and slates at CES this year, tablets may just be the next big thing. The problem is that while there are a few uses for a tablet that a standard laptop has trouble with, but are not big enough issues to make much of a dent in laptop sales. The solution? Things like Lenovo's new U1 model. Looking at it, it looks like a normal laptop, but it just so happens to have a multitouch screen with your Windows 7 Home Premium. But then you take the screen off, and you see it running Lenovo's Skylight UI, making it a true tablet. HP came out with a similar design. You get the best of both worlds without having to choose, or dish out the extra money.
3) The home PC/TV unit. Similar to our pockets having too much crap, so do our homes, and the main thing is that it's not as connected as we'd probably like. While Microsoft is trying to bridge the gap with their connectivity with AT&T's U-Verse stuff, it's a bandaid on the wound. The solution to the connectivity issue is to just connect, or completely combine, the two units. I believe that we'll start seeing hybrids soon, and we may even see the wide use of home servers, making all your units one. Parents especially will love the ability to snoop that much easier.
4) This one is more of a bonus prediction than the other 3. It's Pranav Mistry's 6th Sense projection/camera based device. If you don't know what I'm talking about, Mistry's device is essentially a necklace with a video camera and a projector. The wearer also must wear 4 different colored finger tips, which the camera recognizes. Essentially, it does everything from read plane tickets and projects if it's late or not to playing a racing game by tilting a piece of paper (also some awesome stuff with graphs that I won't spoil for those who are just learning about it). It will especially be used by the deaf to audibly translate sign language. And if Mistry has his way, we'll see this at a surprisingly cheap cost so it's a realistic option for anyone.
There you have it, if you disagree at all, let me know in the comments!
1) The cellphone. If you know me, you'll know this isn't a shock, but it's entirely true. My first instinct was to put the smartphone, but I think it'll take another 10 to 15 years for most phones to be smartphones. In 5 you can expect to hear that the smartphone has over taken the majority though. Even now, smartphones are not just phones with internet. They are our media players, our calendars, calcuators, GPS units, and more. The less crap filling our pockets and bags, the better.
2) The laptop/tablet hybrid. We all know how laptops are awesome. Some people like netbooks for reasons I don't understand (other than the built in ability for mobile broadband with your favorite wireless provider). And thanks mostly to the (largely unsubstantiated) rumors of an Apple tablet and the showings of HP and other manufacturers' tablets and slates at CES this year, tablets may just be the next big thing. The problem is that while there are a few uses for a tablet that a standard laptop has trouble with, but are not big enough issues to make much of a dent in laptop sales. The solution? Things like Lenovo's new U1 model. Looking at it, it looks like a normal laptop, but it just so happens to have a multitouch screen with your Windows 7 Home Premium. But then you take the screen off, and you see it running Lenovo's Skylight UI, making it a true tablet. HP came out with a similar design. You get the best of both worlds without having to choose, or dish out the extra money.
3) The home PC/TV unit. Similar to our pockets having too much crap, so do our homes, and the main thing is that it's not as connected as we'd probably like. While Microsoft is trying to bridge the gap with their connectivity with AT&T's U-Verse stuff, it's a bandaid on the wound. The solution to the connectivity issue is to just connect, or completely combine, the two units. I believe that we'll start seeing hybrids soon, and we may even see the wide use of home servers, making all your units one. Parents especially will love the ability to snoop that much easier.
4) This one is more of a bonus prediction than the other 3. It's Pranav Mistry's 6th Sense projection/camera based device. If you don't know what I'm talking about, Mistry's device is essentially a necklace with a video camera and a projector. The wearer also must wear 4 different colored finger tips, which the camera recognizes. Essentially, it does everything from read plane tickets and projects if it's late or not to playing a racing game by tilting a piece of paper (also some awesome stuff with graphs that I won't spoil for those who are just learning about it). It will especially be used by the deaf to audibly translate sign language. And if Mistry has his way, we'll see this at a surprisingly cheap cost so it's a realistic option for anyone.
There you have it, if you disagree at all, let me know in the comments!
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Time to Experience The Movies | Part II
So now we get to the part where you've decided to go see Avatar. That's great, but where are you going to watch it? Certainly not in a rickety old theater with run down equipment, right? Oh no no no, that is just not going to do. You, my friend, need to go see this on something just a little better than that.
I’m referring to how you must go see this in an IMAX certified theater. So much work was put into this movie that not seeing it in all its glory would be complete and utter disrespect to the entire movie production. And we aren’t just talking a small amount of disrespect. This is on par with don’t come back to church until you’ve atoned for all that noise you were making disrespect. But beyond that, it is that simply there is so much about this movie to absorb in all of the details that you would never fully be able to appreciate this movie otherwise. The easiest way to describe it is that it’s one of those movies that after you left, you would have never forgiven yourself had you not seen it right. To bring you up to speed, I’ve got the details on both the sights and sounds that go into making these movies shine.
For IMAX, sound is of the upmost importance. Normally film would encode the sound right into the film strips. This is very similar to what a VHS tape would do for watching a movie. The creators of IMAX saw this as wasting film space. Sound is achieved by using a separate six-channel 35mm magnetic film (the size of conventional movie film). It is synchronized to the movie during playback. Speakers are placed all over the theater to engulf you in sound. Many IMAX theaters place speakers directly behind the screen, as well as distributing the speakers around the theater to create a three-dimensional effect.
But what about that film? This is the secret to what makes these movies great. IMAX film is considerably larger than its “Academy Format” brother. If you get a chance, view a drawing of the comparison in film negative size which will show off just how much more detail can be seen. Another analogy to this would be in how much better the picture quality would be when watching something from a standard DVD or going up to a Blu-Ray disk. With the amount of detail able to be preserved, you are able to not only see such brilliant pictures, but also enjoy them in whole new ways such as in three dimensions.
With respect to Avatar, the IMAX presentation is in 3D. Normally, I wouldn’t be so quick to recommend viewing a movie in 3D because you typically will be watching a movie where the director has less imagination than a comatose squirrel and therefore resorts to creating “gimmick” effects with the technology like making stuff blow up in your face. Avatar is no such movie. It is used to fully enhance the world of Pandora, with most 3D effects taking place from the point of reference of the screen backwards. If you are lucky enough to see it on a truly enormous screen (keep reading to find out), you will genuinely feel like you are in the movie.
Now with all great things, controversy will always find its way in. With respect to screen size, not all IMAX theaters are not created equally. You see, IMAX theater construction also differs significantly from conventional theaters. The increased resolution allows the audience to be much closer to the screen; typically all rows are within one screen height. (Conventional theaters seating runs 8 to 12 screen heights) Also, the rows of seats are set at a steep angle (up to 23 degrees in some domed theaters) so that the audience is facing the screen directly. It is possible to have an existing theater renovated and upgraded to conform to standards, but that doesn’t mean that the actual screen itself you watch the film on will be modified. To placate this issue, a lot of people are wanting theaters to be up front with their screen size so that audiences will know up front what it is they will be getting. And trust me, it makes a HUGE difference.
In Orlando, a few theaters have an IMAX screen, but only one is the genuine deal in that its screen is over 6 stories tall! And since IMAX resolution is so much greater than conventional film, audiences are able to be a lot closer to the screen. I’ve already gone to see Avatar twice in it, and I plan to go again simply so I can be absorbed right back into the story. If you ever are in the Orlando area, I strongly encourage you to check out the Pointe Orlando Regal Cinemas, which has such a glorious screen. To my knowledge, the record is a screen that is 8 stories tall but it’ll involve a little road trip of sorts. It is the LG IMAX theatre in Darling Harbour, Sydney.
Hopefully that provides a little insight into the movie world. And as they say at the closing of the Great Movie Ride (at Walt Disney World), I'll see you at the movies, the stuff dreams are made of.
I’m referring to how you must go see this in an IMAX certified theater. So much work was put into this movie that not seeing it in all its glory would be complete and utter disrespect to the entire movie production. And we aren’t just talking a small amount of disrespect. This is on par with don’t come back to church until you’ve atoned for all that noise you were making disrespect. But beyond that, it is that simply there is so much about this movie to absorb in all of the details that you would never fully be able to appreciate this movie otherwise. The easiest way to describe it is that it’s one of those movies that after you left, you would have never forgiven yourself had you not seen it right. To bring you up to speed, I’ve got the details on both the sights and sounds that go into making these movies shine.
For IMAX, sound is of the upmost importance. Normally film would encode the sound right into the film strips. This is very similar to what a VHS tape would do for watching a movie. The creators of IMAX saw this as wasting film space. Sound is achieved by using a separate six-channel 35mm magnetic film (the size of conventional movie film). It is synchronized to the movie during playback. Speakers are placed all over the theater to engulf you in sound. Many IMAX theaters place speakers directly behind the screen, as well as distributing the speakers around the theater to create a three-dimensional effect.
But what about that film? This is the secret to what makes these movies great. IMAX film is considerably larger than its “Academy Format” brother. If you get a chance, view a drawing of the comparison in film negative size which will show off just how much more detail can be seen. Another analogy to this would be in how much better the picture quality would be when watching something from a standard DVD or going up to a Blu-Ray disk. With the amount of detail able to be preserved, you are able to not only see such brilliant pictures, but also enjoy them in whole new ways such as in three dimensions.
With respect to Avatar, the IMAX presentation is in 3D. Normally, I wouldn’t be so quick to recommend viewing a movie in 3D because you typically will be watching a movie where the director has less imagination than a comatose squirrel and therefore resorts to creating “gimmick” effects with the technology like making stuff blow up in your face. Avatar is no such movie. It is used to fully enhance the world of Pandora, with most 3D effects taking place from the point of reference of the screen backwards. If you are lucky enough to see it on a truly enormous screen (keep reading to find out), you will genuinely feel like you are in the movie.
Now with all great things, controversy will always find its way in. With respect to screen size, not all IMAX theaters are not created equally. You see, IMAX theater construction also differs significantly from conventional theaters. The increased resolution allows the audience to be much closer to the screen; typically all rows are within one screen height. (Conventional theaters seating runs 8 to 12 screen heights) Also, the rows of seats are set at a steep angle (up to 23 degrees in some domed theaters) so that the audience is facing the screen directly. It is possible to have an existing theater renovated and upgraded to conform to standards, but that doesn’t mean that the actual screen itself you watch the film on will be modified. To placate this issue, a lot of people are wanting theaters to be up front with their screen size so that audiences will know up front what it is they will be getting. And trust me, it makes a HUGE difference.
In Orlando, a few theaters have an IMAX screen, but only one is the genuine deal in that its screen is over 6 stories tall! And since IMAX resolution is so much greater than conventional film, audiences are able to be a lot closer to the screen. I’ve already gone to see Avatar twice in it, and I plan to go again simply so I can be absorbed right back into the story. If you ever are in the Orlando area, I strongly encourage you to check out the Pointe Orlando Regal Cinemas, which has such a glorious screen. To my knowledge, the record is a screen that is 8 stories tall but it’ll involve a little road trip of sorts. It is the LG IMAX theatre in Darling Harbour, Sydney.
Hopefully that provides a little insight into the movie world. And as they say at the closing of the Great Movie Ride (at Walt Disney World), I'll see you at the movies, the stuff dreams are made of.
Fox + Fringe = EPIC FAIL
First and foremost: SPOILER ALERT! If you are not caught up on Fringe (upto Season 2 Episode 11), you may not want to read this.
I'm a big fan of the show Fringe. For those of you that don't watch it, here's a quick synopsis. Its about a division of the FBI that investigates paranormal activity, with the help of a mentally insane doctor and his con-artist son. Its a really good show with a great mix of suspense, drama, and comedy.
In the first episode of this season, the main character's (Agent Olivia Dunham) partner (Agent Charlie Fancis) is killed and replaced by a shape shifter. About three of four episodes later, the shape shifter is killed by Olivia, making the character dead for good and removed from the show (although there is possibility for a return because anything is possible in the realm of fringe science).
So as I'm watching episode 11 of this season, to my surprise, Agent Francis is helping the team again, solving a case. Now, he's not majorly important to the episode, and realistically, the episode isn't majorly important to any story arcs, but as I watch, all I can think about is "Didn't he die? Twice?"
Now, as I mentioned in my introductory post, I watch approximately 24 shows a week, so it is possible that I missed an episode of Fringe or I just forgot a major character being resurrected, but highly unlikely. So I started doing some internet research to figure out why Charlie was back. After about 3 hours of searching (by which I actually mean clicking on the second Google result for my initial query, so approximately 5 minutes) I found out that this was an unaired episode from season one and Fox, in their infinite wisdom, decided to air it and just say it was a current episode.
The first question that came to my mind was: Why? I mean, I would have been more excited and significantly less confused if they had PROMOTED it as an unaired episode. It would have been really cool. In cool promo-guy voice "Tonight on Fox, a very special Fringe event. An episode so scandalous that it never made it to the air, until NOW!" Even though the episode wasn't even remotely scandalous, people would have spent hours posting in forums, asking "What was so scandalous about that episode?" And more importantly, people wouldn't freak out that Charlie was back.
I'm a big fan of the show Fringe. For those of you that don't watch it, here's a quick synopsis. Its about a division of the FBI that investigates paranormal activity, with the help of a mentally insane doctor and his con-artist son. Its a really good show with a great mix of suspense, drama, and comedy.
In the first episode of this season, the main character's (Agent Olivia Dunham) partner (Agent Charlie Fancis) is killed and replaced by a shape shifter. About three of four episodes later, the shape shifter is killed by Olivia, making the character dead for good and removed from the show (although there is possibility for a return because anything is possible in the realm of fringe science).
So as I'm watching episode 11 of this season, to my surprise, Agent Francis is helping the team again, solving a case. Now, he's not majorly important to the episode, and realistically, the episode isn't majorly important to any story arcs, but as I watch, all I can think about is "Didn't he die? Twice?"
Now, as I mentioned in my introductory post, I watch approximately 24 shows a week, so it is possible that I missed an episode of Fringe or I just forgot a major character being resurrected, but highly unlikely. So I started doing some internet research to figure out why Charlie was back. After about 3 hours of searching (by which I actually mean clicking on the second Google result for my initial query, so approximately 5 minutes) I found out that this was an unaired episode from season one and Fox, in their infinite wisdom, decided to air it and just say it was a current episode.
The first question that came to my mind was: Why? I mean, I would have been more excited and significantly less confused if they had PROMOTED it as an unaired episode. It would have been really cool. In cool promo-guy voice "Tonight on Fox, a very special Fringe event. An episode so scandalous that it never made it to the air, until NOW!" Even though the episode wasn't even remotely scandalous, people would have spent hours posting in forums, asking "What was so scandalous about that episode?" And more importantly, people wouldn't freak out that Charlie was back.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Why This Generation is Sadly Like the Renaissance
So I recently started classes again, and my American Military History (it's like the "Here's the stuff you actually care about" history class) professor, who's probably around 65, made mention to his ineptitude when it comes to technology, but realizes that it is a great thing that is shaping the world unlike many other people his age and younger. It was this thought and realizing how some teachers and professors that I've had throughout my schooling have required at least a certain number of printed sources on a given paper or assignment that made me think about how much of a game changer this generation is. And we haven't quite seen, in my opinion, such a radical worldwide change like this since the Great Enlightenment. Allow me to explain.
Up until about about the 14th century, most people were absolute morons. Now one can argue that we haven't much changed in that respect, let me establish that even your narrow-minded shut-in biggots would marvel at the ignorance of your Dark Age peasants. Then a few inventions and a couple of less moronic people came along and with the historical equivalent of a poof, and people started reading. And unlike today, subsequent to that reading came thoughts (thoughts other than "OMG Edward/Jacob/any other vapid character!"). People started challenging the people who read to them and analyzed what they read. The thing is, they only had what was made available for them to read, so very few texts and thoughts from around the world got to them.
Now it's not like the written word didn't move around in the last 500 years because it definitely did. But it was expensive to and took a long time to move a book from one far off place to another, and often times when copies were made, translations changed things. But the globalization of the internet changed all that, because not only has it allowed for the transport of texts of a relative few people, but it's a platform for everyone to use should they wish. No longer did we have to watch CNN and Fox and try to figure out what was bias and what was fact, we get can get it straight from the source. A great (and soon to be cliche) example is the riots the resulted from the election in Iran. The Iranian government basically cut off all media from reporting what was actually happening and forcing them to report what they wanted the outside world to hear. Normally, this would have been an effective way of keeping up appearances, but Twitter went and screwed that plan up. Because of it's ease of use and SMS integration, it was impossible for the angry Tweets to be stopped. The message of the rioters was able to spread despite a full government's best efforts.
The internet used to have this notorious reputation for being a cesspool of misinformation, but that has changed as society has embraced it as a relevant and amazing alternative to older methods of spreading both new and old information. Thanks to the work of Google, many rare and otherwise unobtainable texts are easily read through. And people are challenging what was otherwise assumed to be common knowledge. It made me realize that professors who demand printed sources are of archaic mindsets, and while the reluctance or all out refusal of the previous generations to accept new ideas is far from new, it's incredibly sad to see, considering these same people could easily Google their actions and see how it effects the progress we have the potential to make (or Bing "How to not live like a jackass)
Up until about about the 14th century, most people were absolute morons. Now one can argue that we haven't much changed in that respect, let me establish that even your narrow-minded shut-in biggots would marvel at the ignorance of your Dark Age peasants. Then a few inventions and a couple of less moronic people came along and with the historical equivalent of a poof, and people started reading. And unlike today, subsequent to that reading came thoughts (thoughts other than "OMG Edward/Jacob/any other vapid character!"). People started challenging the people who read to them and analyzed what they read. The thing is, they only had what was made available for them to read, so very few texts and thoughts from around the world got to them.
Now it's not like the written word didn't move around in the last 500 years because it definitely did. But it was expensive to and took a long time to move a book from one far off place to another, and often times when copies were made, translations changed things. But the globalization of the internet changed all that, because not only has it allowed for the transport of texts of a relative few people, but it's a platform for everyone to use should they wish. No longer did we have to watch CNN and Fox and try to figure out what was bias and what was fact, we get can get it straight from the source. A great (and soon to be cliche) example is the riots the resulted from the election in Iran. The Iranian government basically cut off all media from reporting what was actually happening and forcing them to report what they wanted the outside world to hear. Normally, this would have been an effective way of keeping up appearances, but Twitter went and screwed that plan up. Because of it's ease of use and SMS integration, it was impossible for the angry Tweets to be stopped. The message of the rioters was able to spread despite a full government's best efforts.
The internet used to have this notorious reputation for being a cesspool of misinformation, but that has changed as society has embraced it as a relevant and amazing alternative to older methods of spreading both new and old information. Thanks to the work of Google, many rare and otherwise unobtainable texts are easily read through. And people are challenging what was otherwise assumed to be common knowledge. It made me realize that professors who demand printed sources are of archaic mindsets, and while the reluctance or all out refusal of the previous generations to accept new ideas is far from new, it's incredibly sad to see, considering these same people could easily Google their actions and see how it effects the progress we have the potential to make (or Bing "How to not live like a jackass)
Monday, January 11, 2010
It's Movie Time! Featuring Avatar | Part I
Before writing this I will admit to you readers out there that I am not really an avid moviegoer. Don't get me wrong, I do love the big silver screen and the joy that it produces. Consequently it is what I dislike such as the high ticket prices, even higher concessions costs for a bag of candy smaller than a pack of pocket-sized Kleenex tissue, and most of all just the people who go there that keep me from going in the first place.
Oh yes, you know who you are. You let your phones ring or even check them throughout the movie so that the display illuminates everything around you. Then there are those that must shuffle through every plastic bag just to crunch on that one last kernel of popcorn. My digression reserves one final group of people hated by moviegoers above all others: those people who love their babies so much that they bring them along to sit still in a loud environment for hours at a time. You may love that child, mother and father moviegoer, but the rest of us sure don't. Now to get back on track...
Amidst my distaste for the aforementioned experience, a movie will come along once in a while which will make these annoyances pale in comparison to what is being shown on the screen. The movie that brought me back is Avatar.
Avatar was directed by James Cameron. The plot (stolen from IMDB) tells of a paraplegic marine dispatched to the moon Pandora on a unique mission [where he] becomes torn between following his orders and protecting the world he feels is his home. The movie itself conveys several powerful messages all centered around how much influence perspective can have on a situation and even weaves a beautiful love story into the movie.
How did audiences respond? In just over a mere 21 days, Cameron's movie Avatar becomes the 2nd highest grossing film of all time worldwide at just over $1.1 billion dollars with huge potential to continue. To put that in perspective, only one movie in the history of movies has earned more money. If you don't know / remember, it was another James Cameron film from 1997: Titanic, which had earned $1.84 billion dollars. What sets Avatar apart is that Titanic took several months to reach that volume whereas this movie is well on its way in just under a month.
Cameron had the idea for this movie back in the early 90s but recognized that the technology needed was nowhere near what it would have to be for this film to be made. Just a few short years ago, he realized that while the technology still wasn't ready, it was close enough that the tech he would need could be adapted thus completing the leap from imagination to reality.
Spending almost a half billion dollars of the studios money, he didn't just invent new technology, but reinvented cinematography and the expectations we'll have for future movies. To do this, he created entirely new 3D camera systems which even leveraged motion tracking cameras to capture detail like never before. Every actor not only wore a motion body suit, but also a camera that was mounted directly in front of their face. While they were acting each scene, the computer was able to manifest the entire range of the actor's muscle movements in their faces, and thus the he was able to transfer real human emotion into the characters seen on the screen.
The actor’s faces were portrayed on a species called Navi. They would be the humanoid equivalent of us, standing nine to ten feet tall and capable of living on an otherwise uninhabitable planet. They fly six-winged hexapods known as Banshees for activities like hunting and travel. To capture flight on these creatures of the sky, entire rigs were created that had the freedom to move similar to that of a mechanical bull. The actors on them would be forced to use their center of balance during 'flight' with the motion of the rigs adjusted to mimic what each flight in the scenes would do. This translated to very realistic motion of the Navi throughout the movie.
Ultimately what made this movie such a success with me (and to the box office) was in Cameron's superior level of attention to detail. His focus on really bringing the CGI characters to life in a more human like form ultimately redefined how we think of CGI characters and how far we will be able to use them in the future. His attention to detail also extended to the world itself, being truly immersive much like the world in Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings. Entire species and ways of life were created. To illustrate this, one trailer created for the movie takes actual scenes from the movie and turns it into a four minute "Discovery Channel"-esque special about the organisms living on Pandora.
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Another Reason to Hate Twilight
For a living, I substitute teach. I am looking into becoming a full time teacher, but really that's not interesting in of itself. The interesting part is subbing.
Everyone remembers days when they had subs in school. It meant free period. Pop in "The Sandlot" or "Apollo 13" and chat with your friends about what Kimberly said to Jason between classes and how Billy and Trini kissed last night at the movie (and yes, I just went Power Rangers on your ass). I, as a little delinquent at that time, knew it meant fresh meat for me to screw with ("Teacher always lets us listen to our Walkmen during class.")
So before I walk into a room, I know its going to be lots of little delinquents trying to do the same kinds of things to me. Which is fine with me, because I can argue logic till the blind cows come home (take them longer than the regular cows), and I will always catch the students in their lies, and then point out to them how bad and obvious their lies were. But again, I digress from my story.
I don't know if it is because I am a man, because I'm younger than most teachers and subs, because I'm 6'2" 260 lbs, or they just want to waste time, but students always seem interested in me (which works, because I'm pretty interested in me too). It also doesn't seem to matter what grade level either, but middle school more than anyone. After my third or fourth day of subbing, I realized that I could use this to my advantage, so I tell my students that if they work quietly and get all their work done, I will let them ask me appropriate questions in the free time.
So this one class I am in is 8th grade English, and I was there for a full week. The first two days, they didn't have any free time, so by the third day, they are DYING to ask me questions. The questions are pretty basic: How old are you?, Are you married?, Where did you go to school?, favorite sport teams, etc. By the end of the third day, I had been through 5 classes and each had gotten their question time. My last class of the day was the honors class, and I am always a little more relaxed with honors kids anyways. So one of the girls asks me "Do you like Twilight?" to which I reply "No. I would rather gag myself with a spoon than read any of those books or see those movies." Being that there was a high female population in this class, this statement causes an uproar. The girls are shocked and upset, the men are agreeing (loudly as to be heard over the girls). I finally calm them back down and explain "First of all, I am not a 13 year old girl, so those books just aren't written for me, but more importantly, for the last 1800 years, vampires have turned to dust when they go out into the sun, not sparkled so it is a little late to change that now." Again, an uproar defending sparkling vampires. Once the class starts to calm down, one girl in the back goes "That's not true. My brother is 24 and he's read all the Twilight books and likes them." And without missing a beat I reply "So in other words, he's gay."
Not exactly the smartest thing to say to a group of middle schoolers, ESPECIALLY if you're the sub. The class is in complete chaos. There are LITERALLY kids falling out of their chairs they are laughing so hard. I am trying desperately to both not laugh and think about what my new job will be once I'm fired. I finally get the class calmed down and say "I'm really sorry. That was a joke, but completely inappropriate. I'm sure your brother is not gay, not that there's anything wrong with that, and I am truly sorry."
Thankfully, she didn't tell her parents and I didn't lose my job, so I am sure there will be plenty more stories for me to tell.
Everyone remembers days when they had subs in school. It meant free period. Pop in "The Sandlot" or "Apollo 13" and chat with your friends about what Kimberly said to Jason between classes and how Billy and Trini kissed last night at the movie (and yes, I just went Power Rangers on your ass). I, as a little delinquent at that time, knew it meant fresh meat for me to screw with ("Teacher always lets us listen to our Walkmen during class.")
So before I walk into a room, I know its going to be lots of little delinquents trying to do the same kinds of things to me. Which is fine with me, because I can argue logic till the blind cows come home (take them longer than the regular cows), and I will always catch the students in their lies, and then point out to them how bad and obvious their lies were. But again, I digress from my story.
I don't know if it is because I am a man, because I'm younger than most teachers and subs, because I'm 6'2" 260 lbs, or they just want to waste time, but students always seem interested in me (which works, because I'm pretty interested in me too). It also doesn't seem to matter what grade level either, but middle school more than anyone. After my third or fourth day of subbing, I realized that I could use this to my advantage, so I tell my students that if they work quietly and get all their work done, I will let them ask me appropriate questions in the free time.
So this one class I am in is 8th grade English, and I was there for a full week. The first two days, they didn't have any free time, so by the third day, they are DYING to ask me questions. The questions are pretty basic: How old are you?, Are you married?, Where did you go to school?, favorite sport teams, etc. By the end of the third day, I had been through 5 classes and each had gotten their question time. My last class of the day was the honors class, and I am always a little more relaxed with honors kids anyways. So one of the girls asks me "Do you like Twilight?" to which I reply "No. I would rather gag myself with a spoon than read any of those books or see those movies." Being that there was a high female population in this class, this statement causes an uproar. The girls are shocked and upset, the men are agreeing (loudly as to be heard over the girls). I finally calm them back down and explain "First of all, I am not a 13 year old girl, so those books just aren't written for me, but more importantly, for the last 1800 years, vampires have turned to dust when they go out into the sun, not sparkled so it is a little late to change that now." Again, an uproar defending sparkling vampires. Once the class starts to calm down, one girl in the back goes "That's not true. My brother is 24 and he's read all the Twilight books and likes them." And without missing a beat I reply "So in other words, he's gay."
Not exactly the smartest thing to say to a group of middle schoolers, ESPECIALLY if you're the sub. The class is in complete chaos. There are LITERALLY kids falling out of their chairs they are laughing so hard. I am trying desperately to both not laugh and think about what my new job will be once I'm fired. I finally get the class calmed down and say "I'm really sorry. That was a joke, but completely inappropriate. I'm sure your brother is not gay, not that there's anything wrong with that, and I am truly sorry."
Thankfully, she didn't tell her parents and I didn't lose my job, so I am sure there will be plenty more stories for me to tell.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
The Ugly Truth Behind Google's Nexus One
Let me preface this all by saying that from everything I've seen, the Nexus One looks like a really good phone overall. The Snapdragon processor looks to be awesome and I'm hopeful that it will become a standard for smartphones in the near future.
Now that that's over, let's get down to the nitty gritty. The Nexus One is essentially a myTouch 3G with a better screen and processor. They went to the trackball unlike the Samsung Moment's optical trackpad, which is largely irrelevant anyway given how well touchscreens work with Android. What does Android 2.1 add? Not a whole lot other than live animated wallpapers, which just uses more processor space anyway. Most importantly, it lacks a physical keyboard and multitouch, which is odd since it has the ability to have multitouch, but Google isn't supporting it as of now. At this point in the game, it's either one or the other, or both.
But that's not my main problem with the Nexus One. First off, it's headed to T-Mobile, America's worst 3G network, and web-centric phones kind of need a data network to back them up. But even beyond that, the way it's being sold makes little sense. You can get it unlocked for $530, which is not a bad price, or if you sign up brand new for T-Mobile and get it for $180. The catch? There is only one plan you can get, 500 minutes, unlimited text messaging and internet. Now I understand limiting it to data plans, but I can't understand why Google or T-Mobile would limit it to one minute breakdown. Already with T-Mobile and want one? Same deal, but the price jumps up a 100 bucks to $280.
I guess what I don't get is why such a smart company like Google is making such a bad decision like Nokia has been doing for years and hasn't learned for years. And the increasing disparity between the European and US versions of their products is concerning as well. Since it's Google I'm sure there's some grand reasoning behind it that we'll find out in a few months and will blow our minds, but I'd love to be clued in on the method behind the madness.
UPDATE: And now apparently Google is imposing it's own early termination fee on top of T-Mobile's for $350 if you cancel service within the first 120 days. Not even Nokia does this. What the hell???
Now that that's over, let's get down to the nitty gritty. The Nexus One is essentially a myTouch 3G with a better screen and processor. They went to the trackball unlike the Samsung Moment's optical trackpad, which is largely irrelevant anyway given how well touchscreens work with Android. What does Android 2.1 add? Not a whole lot other than live animated wallpapers, which just uses more processor space anyway. Most importantly, it lacks a physical keyboard and multitouch, which is odd since it has the ability to have multitouch, but Google isn't supporting it as of now. At this point in the game, it's either one or the other, or both.
But that's not my main problem with the Nexus One. First off, it's headed to T-Mobile, America's worst 3G network, and web-centric phones kind of need a data network to back them up. But even beyond that, the way it's being sold makes little sense. You can get it unlocked for $530, which is not a bad price, or if you sign up brand new for T-Mobile and get it for $180. The catch? There is only one plan you can get, 500 minutes, unlimited text messaging and internet. Now I understand limiting it to data plans, but I can't understand why Google or T-Mobile would limit it to one minute breakdown. Already with T-Mobile and want one? Same deal, but the price jumps up a 100 bucks to $280.
I guess what I don't get is why such a smart company like Google is making such a bad decision like Nokia has been doing for years and hasn't learned for years. And the increasing disparity between the European and US versions of their products is concerning as well. Since it's Google I'm sure there's some grand reasoning behind it that we'll find out in a few months and will blow our minds, but I'd love to be clued in on the method behind the madness.
UPDATE: And now apparently Google is imposing it's own early termination fee on top of T-Mobile's for $350 if you cancel service within the first 120 days. Not even Nokia does this. What the hell???
Friday, January 8, 2010
Introduction to the Writers III - This Time its Personal
So I guess its my turn to introduce myself. My name is Brad and I'm the psychologist of the group. Don't get me wrong I'm not actually a psychologist or anything. I have a degree in business. So basically, I have a piece of paper I can hang on the wall and say "See, that's why I wasted that 4 and a half years."
Anyways, I am the people person. My favorite past time is observing people. The great thing about having a pastime with no equipment needed is that you can do it any where and anytime. Especially at Wal-Mart.
And to clarify, I'm not one of those people who SAY they love people, but what they mean is they love vaginas. I'm married, and I don't "babe watch," I OBSERVE PEOPLE and their intelligence (and more often than not, their lack thereof).
I also am a techy, geek, and gleek, but I don't like titles. I love TV and movies, but TV more because you can expand on a story line SO much more in 24 hours of a season, than 2 hours of a movie. I watch approximately 24 shows right now (I haven't checked to see what has or hasn't been canceled yet) so when I say I watch it all, I really mean it.
One last thing. I (and most likely Trav and Matt too) will offend you at some point or another. You are welcome to debate with me via comments or email and tell me why you are offended, but don't expect me to change. I'm not saying this to point out how much of a rebel I am, I just want people to understand that I (and my companions) are opinionated and we're not going to hold back just to keep people happy.
So this is it. The official start of Blueprints Blog. Enjoy.
Anyways, I am the people person. My favorite past time is observing people. The great thing about having a pastime with no equipment needed is that you can do it any where and anytime. Especially at Wal-Mart.
And to clarify, I'm not one of those people who SAY they love people, but what they mean is they love vaginas. I'm married, and I don't "babe watch," I OBSERVE PEOPLE and their intelligence (and more often than not, their lack thereof).
I also am a techy, geek, and gleek, but I don't like titles. I love TV and movies, but TV more because you can expand on a story line SO much more in 24 hours of a season, than 2 hours of a movie. I watch approximately 24 shows right now (I haven't checked to see what has or hasn't been canceled yet) so when I say I watch it all, I really mean it.
One last thing. I (and most likely Trav and Matt too) will offend you at some point or another. You are welcome to debate with me via comments or email and tell me why you are offended, but don't expect me to change. I'm not saying this to point out how much of a rebel I am, I just want people to understand that I (and my companions) are opinionated and we're not going to hold back just to keep people happy.
So this is it. The official start of Blueprints Blog. Enjoy.
Get to Know the Contributors Part II: Electric Boogaloo!
Hey there blogosphere, my name is Travis, and I'm one of the writers of this here blog thing in whatever form it'll end up taking.
First up, a little about me. I'm from Atlanta, Ga currently stuck in Orlando. I'm a something in college at the University of Central Florida, studying History, aka the major that gets me out the fastest. Don't get me wrong, I like History and UCF, I just hate school work. Anyway, I sell phones for a living, and other than the sales aspect I love it. I'm an absolute gadget geek, so getting to play with them all day is pretty awesome. Other than tech, I love movies and TV amd playing my PS3 (I will attempt to beast you in Modern Warfare 2, but will most likely fail).
Now, I mentioned that I don't know what shape this blog will end up in for a reason. One of my other things I love is the internet, and the main thing I've learned about the Internet is that predictability is thrown out the window. Blogs end up being news sites and vice versa, Youtube almost became an open talk show channel, and a simple image board became the creepy alley way in Internet City.
My philosophy is this: Blueprints to me will be a way of getting information on some technical stuff for non technical people, but still have fun here for gadget-fiends like we contributors. And I'm sure some non tech related ramblings will probably sneak in here too. And I can only speak for myself, but feedback from anyone who reads this blog (if anyone does) will be my guide on what to write. I'm really excited to finally be starting this up, and especially with the great company I'll have in trying to make this a success.
First up, a little about me. I'm from Atlanta, Ga currently stuck in Orlando. I'm a something in college at the University of Central Florida, studying History, aka the major that gets me out the fastest. Don't get me wrong, I like History and UCF, I just hate school work. Anyway, I sell phones for a living, and other than the sales aspect I love it. I'm an absolute gadget geek, so getting to play with them all day is pretty awesome. Other than tech, I love movies and TV amd playing my PS3 (I will attempt to beast you in Modern Warfare 2, but will most likely fail).
Now, I mentioned that I don't know what shape this blog will end up in for a reason. One of my other things I love is the internet, and the main thing I've learned about the Internet is that predictability is thrown out the window. Blogs end up being news sites and vice versa, Youtube almost became an open talk show channel, and a simple image board became the creepy alley way in Internet City.
My philosophy is this: Blueprints to me will be a way of getting information on some technical stuff for non technical people, but still have fun here for gadget-fiends like we contributors. And I'm sure some non tech related ramblings will probably sneak in here too. And I can only speak for myself, but feedback from anyone who reads this blog (if anyone does) will be my guide on what to write. I'm really excited to finally be starting this up, and especially with the great company I'll have in trying to make this a success.
Writer Introductions | Matthew
Hello World!
And welcome to the BluePrints Blog. I am one of the writers selected to share this experience with you. My name is Matthew, and I come from what most call a "quirky" background. My trials and tribulations have taken me all over. Today however, they land me here on the internet, and more particularly on this blog.
So who am I that will be answering questions you haven't even thought to ask? Well let's see: I am excited by the fact that I am almost 25 and thus will be getting much lower premiums on my car insurance. I've graduated college but realized that besides some of the things I got to do while there, think I wasted my time and wish I would have known to go straight into my career path of choice: Law Enforcement. On paper, I'm a Republican but I find myself shifting more and more to a Libertarian view. I want what's best for the people if it is attainable and practical.
I like consistency in my life. I have a "Cheers" moment of sorts with friends where at around the same time on around the same day of the week, we go to the same restaurant and let of the steam of the week. Now some may find this boring, but I find it refreshing to go to a place where "everybody knows your name". Even the balloon guy is there (though he knows to avoid us as I particularly enjoy making sexual innuendos as he pumps his balloon bigger and bigger).
My passions include travelling, camping, technology, shooting, playing music, skiing, flying, and billiards. Once I get settled in life, I'd like to get my pilot's license. Every now and again I pick up my trumpet to play, and would do the same with my piano if I had it where I currently live. My taste in movies is everything from Big Fish to Moulin Rouge, and my musical selections include pop, oldies, jazz, classical, and of course: Howard Stern.
Now I've told you a little about myself, but that doesn't really explain why this blog will be any good. First off, I'm currently partnered with two other writers who are both as expressive and opinionated as I am. Their definitive outlook on issues provides a clarity and comfort to a plethora of viewpoints. But I'm also just really excited for this to be written without using an alias. I am a firm believer that while the internet makes it convenient to hide behind a false name, one shouldn't. I have done previous podcasts and blogs all where my username or handle was fictitious and I didn't feel like I had the opportunity to be really genuine with my readership.
So for now, I shall allow this description to suffice. I'll add more here if anything comes to mind. But for now, Internet, I am signing off until articles of interest come to mind that answer your unasked questions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)