November 27, 2006
Well, thanks to a really poorly written article in Smarthouse, the Mac tablet rumors have started up again, and once again, they seem to be based on
I'd really like this rather than
There's an overarching need for this. As we join the Macalope in pointing out that
This would be SO COOL is not in fact a product justification, let's take a look at the Smarthouse article written by David Richards.
Actually, let's take a look at David Richards, since the author's background and previous articles can give you an idea of how reliable a prognosticator of Apple products he is, and how seriously to take him or not. Well, one of his more (in)famous articles was the "60% Of Windows Vista Code To Be Rewritten" bit. Hmm. Yeah, that turned out to be accurate. Wait, no, he was full of crap. However, there is something really funny here, because I remember what Scoble's reaction to this article was. Let's see, where is it. Consult the all-seeing Eye of Agamotto Google aaaaand we get Scoble's reaction, which can neatly be summarized as
OFF WITH HIS HEAD!!!. Hmm..now he's a source Scoble is quoting. Well, Scoble either forgives and forgets really fast, or he's willing to overlook such things as long as it supports one of his various crusades. However, David's also penned some things that were right, so let's just say that he perhaps got a little too overeager on that one. Still, Scoble quoting him as a source is pretty amusing. Not surprising, since "Scoble" and "research" go together like water and sodium, but amusing nonetheless.
So now, reading the article itself, well, it's a mess. First, Richards can't decide what the hell he's talking about. In the blurb he writes:
Apple researchers have built a full working prototype of a Mac tablet PC and three Companies in Taiwan are now costing a product for a potential launch in mid 2007.
Well, um, okay. Apple having a tablet prototype somewhere is news to no one. I'd imagine they have multiple iPhone prototypes. Doesn't mean they're building one for production. As well, costing a product != full production. It means just that: seeing how much it would cost to build something in a given quantity with certain specs. I can cost almost anything, doesn't mean I'm going to build six million of them, or am even planning to. Again, research and production are not the same.
In the first paragraph though, Richards veers over into the tablet being a big remote:
Several months ago I was told that Apple was exploring a neat new device that is basically a touch screen that links to various source devices including a brand new media centre that Apple is planning to launch next year.
What, it's not a tablet but a big remote? This is reinforced in the first sentence of the second paragraph:
The Mac tablet has been designed to handle third party applications such as home automation software that will allow users to control lighting, audio, entertainment devices and security feeds.
Well, that's kind of dumb. This isn't a Mac, it's an uber remote. Why would Apple build an Uber Remote? That market's saturated, and they're all dumb. When I have a 60" display right in front of me, why do I want to be looking down at a tiny display that needs a manual to use? I like the idea of using the TV/Laptop Screen for my menu display, that way, the bit in my hand can be small, and usable without me bobbing my head between it and the screen like a cracked-out chicken.
But in the next sentence, Richards changes what he's talking about:
It also acts as a full blown PC has wireless linking for a new generation of Wireless Hi Fi speakers that are currently being tested by Apple.
Dude, it's either a Mac, or it isn't. It doesn't "act as one", that's like being a little bit pregnant. As well, nothing about wireless audio is that stunning. I can do that now, and so do hundreds of bands. Wireless audio's been around for a while. But he adds a new requirement:
Also taken into consideration was the use of the device in educational environments where presenters often want to walk around while having access to source material being presented to a screen or auditorium speakers.
Again, you can do that now with existing tech, and anyone who thinks that presenting and diddling with a tablet while walking around is going to be the wave of the future needs to go buy a Tablet PC and try it out for a 90 minute stretch. Still not seeing the compelling reason, at least not in this description of the chimera Richards is creating. (With really bad grammar too. Dude...punctuation marks are your friend. Get cozy with them. Really.)
But now he starts describing things in more detail:
The new MAC tablet has Intel processors as well as a docking station that allows the device to link to screens with HDMI input. The docking station also has additional memo0ry capability so that users can stream content to either the tablet PC or the docking station or directly to a media centre if one is being used.
Okay, this is a minor niggle, but it's "Mac" not "MAC". MAC is an acronym, Mac is an Apple product. Anyway, this just doesn't make any sense as a reason for a docking station. First, Apple is hardcore into dealing with wires and portables not by using docking stations to hide the mess, but by getting rid of wires. Wireless networking, excellent Bluetooth support. If all you need to connect is a power cable that a 2 year old can use and a single HDMI cable, there's no need for a dock. Really. Besides, isn't he now describing the iTV? He kind of is. So this tablet would directly compete with the iTV? That's a Microsoft move, not an Apple move. Apple products compliment each other far better than this. The "WTF" factor in this paragraph is his "docking station with additional memo0ry"[sic] line. Dude, streaming is CPU - bound FAR more than memory bound. A MacBook can stream data across a network just fine. Streaming is not a real RAM - intensive operation. But even more confusing...the user can stream content to the tablet, the docking station or the media center, (iTV???) if one is being used? Stream from what? Even worse, stream to a docking station? What, the docking station is also a media center? If it is, then why do I need the tablet? Just use the docking station. If it isn't, then I'm not streaming to the docking station, am I? David, a hint: people really like it when your statements make sense. Just a thought.
Okay, now that I've reset myself from the David Richards Feedback Loop...the rest of the article is using patents and iPhone sillieness to justify Richards' ever-changing product. Which is inane, since patents no more indicate a shipping product than prototypes or costing do.
Really, if this is what people are using to say "Apple is shipping a Tablet in 2007", they need to pull their heads out.
But let's assume that Apple is considering this. Where are the advantages? Well, we'll have to assume a few things for this to make sense:
- That David Richards' prediction is actually as bottom of the beer-barrel as it seems. It's too much of a mish-mash of a product to be something Steve Jobs would sign off on. It has no focus.
- That Apple is not going to repeat the mistakes of ever Tablet PC to date, and create something that's either so underpowered that it's only good for you if your entire computing experience consists of short notes taken in odd postures, or something that has similar specs to a modern laptop, but with a $400 or more price premium so you can write on the screen.
- That Apple is not going to sacrifice the form factor of the current MacBook (Pro) line, and create a new laptop that's clunky and ugly just to have a tablet. That will be a neat trick with hinge complications a tablet introduces, but Unca Steve has surprised us before, so it's not impossible. Just because Wintel boxes skew ugly doesn't make that a requirement.
So now, where are the advantages of a Tablet? Well, let's look at what the Tablet people like to say, and see if they have any use.
- Graphic Designers will love them. Scoble and the rest love to push this one. The problem is, current Tablet PC hardware blows ass for a designer. The average screen size on them is 12.1". Yeah, you just go ahead and spend all day in CS 2 with that screen. Sure, you can use an external monitor, but now you have just paid a rather large premium for a desktop with an external tablet. If I have to sacrifice the mobility to get a usable screen size, then where's the advantage of the Tablet? For short doodles? I'm gonna pay $400 bucks for short doodles? I think not. Now, if you take a MacBook (Pro) and add tablet functionality, so that I can run Photshop or Painter with a 15" or 17" direct input area, and not give up the features that make a MacBook (Pro) rock and not hit me with a $400 or more premium, well, then I imagine the Graphic Design crowd is all in favor of it. Hell, at that point, it's attractive to everyone
- They're better for writing. Why do people keep saying this? It won't make it true. They're not better for writing, they're better for jotting down notes. But not much better, unless you need to jot while standing. If you think that writing lots of content via longhand, (and the magic of handwriting recognition aside, what you're doing on a tablet in this case is writing in longhand. Only with a crappy pen, that fixes your crappier penmanship), is better than typing, you either can't type, or you don't write lots of long articles, reports, etc. A decent typist can smoke, and I mean brutally smoke anyone writing longhand speed-wise. There's no contest.
As well, when you're typing, you can multitask far better than when you're writing longhand. That's because typing is a tactile function that is not dependent on keyboard location, whereas writing is a visual function that is quite dependent on pen location. When you know how to type, you don't have to look at the keys. So you can talk to people, read, etc. Even a modest typist can pay attention to what someone is saying while typing notes, and they can do this for a long period of time. You try writing notes for a 90 minute meeting longhand without spending a lot of time staring at your screen. Good luck with that. As well, I can type and type, and my hand position has nothing to do with where the cursor is. When you're writing on the screen, you have to pay a lot of attention to visual boundaries, or you're no longer taking notes, you're writing in a different window, or jotting on a menu. Longhand writing is a visual, single-tasking experience, typing is a tactile, multi-tasking experience. True, you can handle a lot of this by writing only in a specific "input area" on the screen, but then you're changing everything you've learned, conscious and not, about writing. You're now trying to change a rather fundamental behavior solely to use that behavior on a computer. That's kind of counterintuitive, and again, you're not gaining any real advantage over typing, barring you doing this standing up in an impromptu meeting. While those happen, are they justification enough for a tablet? So far, sales figures indicate "no".
On the meeting thing. Scoble loves to say "Well, a tablet is less obtrusive in a meeting than a laptop." As usual, he's partially right, but you have to think about things more than he does. This is not hard to do. Initially a tablet is less intrusive. However, there's the eye contact issue. If i'm writing a lot of notes longhand, I'm looking at the screen. What's that mean for the poor schlub running the meeting? That if he has a room full of tablet users, he's looking at the tops of their heads a lot. That means little eye contact, and much less verbal and other interaction. I've run meetings full of Blackberry addicts, and it sucks. You get very little feedback from the top of someone's head. With a laptop, I can type, and look at the person. I may occasionally glance at the screen, but I can spend far more time looking at and talking to the person running the meeting. Typing is less modal than writing over time, and the increased multitasking typing allows for quickly outstrips the initial advantage of longhand.
- They're better for vertical markets, like medical, construction, and factory use. Yes they are. No argument there. None. Like any product, there are places that Tablets kick ass, and those are three of them. Places where you need to do most of your input/output while mobile. Not just at a desk in between spurts of mobility, but while you're actively mobile. Tablets rule. Places like a factory floor, outside work, or construction, where a keyboard is going to get beaten up, gunked up, or just destroyed? Oh hell yeah, tablets rule there too. However, in all of these cases, we're talking specific - use, short input. No one in these cases is standing around writing long reports. We're talking quick notes and taps on controls on a screen. Tablets are pretty much designed for this. But is that a reason for Apple to build a tablet? Based on Apple's primary, and even secondary markets, no. Success in vertical markets requires intimate knowledge of those markets, and Apple is really too small of a company to pull that off. Besides, if they wanted to go after those, they could have at any time in the last ten years. It's not like they didn't create the first really solid and popular handwriting based platform...oh wait, yes, they did. Never mind.
Look, I'm not saying that there's no need for a laptop with tablet features, or that pen - based input sucks in all cases. But it's not a damned magic spell. It's a technology with good and bad points, and people need to evaluate it as such. If Apple can come out with a MacBook (Pro) tablet that doesn't sacrifice existing features or form, and doesn't hit the wallet for more than the price of a separate tablet, then booyah, it'll probably rock, and I'll bet the Wintel tablets will suddenly get a lot better just to keep up. That would be good for everyone.
David Richards' article is not a sober analysis of a product, it's a spaghetti test, and when you really read it, none of it stuck. As far as Scoble goes, you couldn't get him to critically analyze tablets any more than you can get him to think critically about anything he's on a tear about. (I'm beginning to doubt that he's physically or psychologically capable of critical analysis. He seems to be only capable of religious cheerleading or castigation.) Tablets, HDTV, Blogging, etc. He's a large myna bird with crusading tendencies. Not the stuff that makes for critical thought.
Anyone taking Richards' article, as written, seriously, needs to be slapped with their Tablet PC.Comments ()
November 26, 2006
More Acrobat 8 thoughts
At some point, they have to restructure the preferences. It's getting just a little ridiculous. I mean seriously, when the simplest settings pane has 2 drop-down lists and 4 checkboxes, and there are thirty-three separate panes, you need a redesign. For example, why does 2D and 3D measuring need 2 separate panes. Multimedia and Multimedia trust? It's bad enough that switching preference panes pushes my MacBook Pro into beach-balling for a couple seconds. All I'm doing is changing preference panes, not rebuilding my font cache.
On and on. Yes, yes, I know, Windows compatibility, but that's a false god. Being compatible and marching lockstep in precisely the same UI are not the same. The Acrobat 8 preferences UI is blindly following the god of "More is better" writ large with no real nod to making things easy to understand or use.
How come, in this day and age of XML, I can't directly import XML into Acrobat? What's the deal here? I could come up with some rather cynical reasons, but really, I don't care what Adobe's justification is. XML data is as much a common business language as PDF, and not allowing Acrobat to just import it is dumb. It would allow third parties to more easily integrate with Acrobat. You'd think that would be a good thing, especially if it let someone write a decent Office -> Acrobat plugin on the Mac, since the chances of Adobe doing that approach that of a Phelps/RuPaul duet of "I love being a Girl". The really funny part is, I can export PDF as XML. Acrobat uses XML for the Extensible Metadata Platform, XMP. (Yes, I did in fact hit the online help to see if the UI was perhaps lying to me. Nope, nothing about directly importing XML. If it's there, it's so well hidden that it's not there anymore. Either option is dumb.)
Speaking of online help, why do I need a separate help viewer application? HELLO! OS SERVICES!
On the positive side, Acrobat no longer eats my entire monitor when I open a PDF in it. That only took 3 versions, but I'll take it. It opens a lot faster than version 7, but that's not saying much. Instead, I'll say it opens pretty quickly on my MacBook Pro, other versions not withstanding.
The UI has changed a lot, and it's kind of meh, skewing towards it's a new version, let's change stuff. It's more cartoony than it used to be. The toolbars can no longer be docked anywhere but in the window. This sucks, since I like to do a lot of my Acrobat work with the document on one monitor, and the toolbars docked on the other under the menubar. But then I remember the Acrobat team's primary OS and one true love, and it makes sense. (If you view Acrobat as a Windows application first, then a lot of the UI oddities make sense.) However, this leads to situations where I can hide the window and its docked toolbars under toolbars that aren't a part of the window. Mmm...UI goodness for all. Again, this situation really won't happen in Windows where most users run all windows maximized, (yes, they do. It was a rather important bit of justification for the Microsoft Office 2007 Ribbon.) but on a Mac, it's going to be damned annoying. Oh, unless you dock your toolbars in a window, you can't dock them to each other either. Thanks Acrobat team, because everyone on a Mac works just like they do in Windows. Sheesh.
On the plus side, I can finally customize my toolbars in one place. However, you can't even approach the level of customization that you get with Office 2004, and when I click on the "master" checkbox for a toolbar, like the Page Navigation Toolbar, I don't select all of the options for that, I get what Adobe has decided I get. To select everything, I have to do it manually. This is pretty much the opposite of how this should work, but hey, Adobe knows best. Oh, and if you have the "More Tools" dialog open, the existing floating toolbars float on top of everything, including windows from other applications. Nice touch, especially when I can't move them without dismissing the More Tools window. Of course, when an option called "Customize Toolbars" creates a Window called "More Tools", intuitiveness is taking it in the shorts anyway, so why should functionality be any different. Just because there are two separate models for handling toolbars that work really well, (Apple's and Microsoft's), why should Adobe use either? Just because people are used to them? Pish-Tosh, this is Acrobat, you do things their way. Oh, even better, some toolbars select everything, some don't. Here's a fun variant. By default, the Print Production Toolbar has no options enabled. Say you only want to enable one. Logic dictates that you'd click on that one item, say "PDF Optimizer...". Silly logic, this is Acrobat. No matter where you click in the Print Production Toolbar settings, the first click enables all the items. (Or sometimes I get what I had previously selected. Who knows what the hell will happen in this dialog. Is there any consistency at all to this idiocy, or was the Jack Daniels' flowing freely in that meeting? I really shouldn't be reminded of Carlin's "meatcake" bit when using a computer program.) How do you get to just the one you wanted? Yeah. You manually deselect the other ten. Nice job guys. Wait, wait, there's more! (yeah, I know, beating a puppy, but it's just too easy.) So let's pretend that we only selected the one item in the Print Production Toolbar. What is the name of that toolbar when you're done? "Print", with the right part of the "t" cut off. No, really, look:
See? I can't make this stuff up. This is really some of the worst toolbar UI I have ever seen in my life, and that's including Windows and OS/2 applications. Oh holy crap! I selected the option that said "Menu Bar". How do I get my menu bar back? Well, that's via the very intuitive "Shift-Command-M" keystroke. Far more intuitive than oh, reacting to the mouse being held against the top of the main monitor for a second or so and just popping it down. Nope. Away it goes, and away it shall stay until, (from the Acrobat help viewer):
Ordinarily, it’s a good idea to keep the Acrobat menus visible so that they are available as you work. It is possible to hide them, using the View > Menu Bar command. However, the only way to display and use them again is by pressing F9 (Windows) or Shift+Command+M (Mac OS).
Yeah. That's great. A great way to freak people out. Freaking people out is not a good UI principle. Unless you're Adobe.
God, I have to stop, it's too depressing for one session.
Okay, I know I said I'd stop, but this one's important
Just so all the support people know: The Safari plugin, (No, it's not a browser plugin, it's a Safari plugin. It only works in Safari, ergo, not a browser plugin. included with Acrobat Pro 8 is a new version from the Acrobat Reader plugin. Of course, there's no Acrobat Reader 8. So, that means that if someone's having a problem with PDFs in Safari, you now get to ask them "Which version of the plugin are you using?" because the UI between the two versions is as different as the UI between Acrobat 7 and 8.
Thanks a pantload Adobe.
November 23, 2006
Acrobat 8 first impression
Oh my god, after 6-7 years, Acrobat Mac's PDFMaker macro finally does something more than a straight print to file!
It successfully keeps hyperlinks.
Wow, it's where InDesign was as of version two.
Still, even the most minor improvement counts, and should be noted. So there you have it. PDFMaker on a Mac finally does something that print to file doesn't.
November 21, 2006
From a Baptist who isn't preaching hate
Dear IE 7 people
Why do Microsoft sites cause me more warnings than any other site I hit?
boot to the head,
Dear Vista Security Team
I know you worked really hard.
I know you did your very best.
Security by Infuriation?
Well, it makes me happy to delay rolling out Vista, so I imagine in a sense, that makes Vista more secure. But I don't think that was the reaction you wanted.
Perhaps not using a cracked out Boy Scout with low self-esteem as your OS model would be a good idea.
November 18, 2006
WHY GOD WHY!?!
I just think there are places Dora shouldn't explore, okay?
Technorati Tags: WTF?| Comments ()
November 17, 2006
Once again Microsoft excels
At locking itself in for Dumbass of the YEAR. Just when you think Adobe is stumbling towards it, Ballmer squirts into the lead with this little bit of idiocy. A quote from the story:
In a question-and-answer session after his keynote speech at the Professional Association for SQL Server (PASS) conference in Seattle, Ballmer said Microsoft was motivated to sign a deal with SUSE Linux distributor Novell earlier this month because Linux “uses our intellectual property” and Microsoft wanted to “get the appropriate economic return for our shareholders from our innovation.”
“Novell pays us some money for the right to tell customers that anybody who uses SUSE Linux is appropriately covered,” Ballmer said. This “is important to us, because [otherwise] we believe every Linux customer basically has an undisclosed balance-sheet liability.”
Ballmer did not provide details during his comments Thursday. But he was adamant that Linux users, apart from those using SUSE, are taking advantage of Microsoft innovation, and that someone — either Linux vendors or users — would eventually have to pay up.
“Only customers that use SUSE have paid properly for intellectual property from Microsoft,” he said. “We are willing to do a deal with Red Hat and other Linux distributors.” The deal with SUSE Linux “is not exclusive,” Ballmer added.
It's not just that article. My god, looking at Ballmer talk about Linux users, it's like a perverted quote from 2001: A Space Oddessy:
My god...it's full of dumb
Yet more Ballmerism...from eWeek:
The distributors of other versions of Linux cannot assure their customers that Microsoft won't sue for patent infringement. "If a customer says, 'Look, do we have liability for the use of your patented work?' Essentially, If you're using non-SUSE Linux, then I'd say the answer is yes," Ballmer said.
"I suspect that [customers] will take that issue up with their distributor," Ballmer said. Or if customers are considering doing a direct download of a non-SUSE Linux version, "they'll think twice about that," he said.
Jesus, and people let this clown run something bigger than a hotdog cart?
Yo Ballmer, I'm running Ubuntu, I DARE you to come and collect.
You know, I'm almost frightened of what anyone else would have to do to get Dumbass of the Year at this point. I think it would have to involve public sodomy.
It's at times like these when I wonder if they just issue new Mac BU employees a new liver along with their cubicle. Sorry guys.Comments ()
November 16, 2006
It keeps getting better
The story of one man's CS Suite 2.3 upgrade...sit down children, and tend well to my words:
So, as you may remember from this post, yesterday, I was...less than pleased with the hoops I was dealing with in my download purchase of the CS Suite 2.3 Premium Upgrade.
It hasn't gotten better. I did check to see if my Acrobat 8 serial number had shown up today, and it had. Great! Let's get this running.
Oh no. It's not that easy.
The serial number they provide me is bad. Huh? How the hell hard is it to generate a serial number. What, one of the pterodactyls slipped while carving the stone tablet?
Okay, fine, I'll call Adobe, and get this straightened out.
Oh wait, no, no I shan't. Well, I can call Adobe, but what I get is:
Due to the overwhelming response to the announcement of Acrobat 8, we are experiencing heavier than expected call volume. Please call back later.
Oh no they didn't.
Bullshit. Luckily, one button redial and a speaker phone means I will get in. So it only took ten minutes for me to get into the phone queue. I'll update this with the hold time.
Real impressive Adobe, real impressive. Way to differentiate yourself from Microsoft's mishandling of this kind of thing.
Before you read the blow by blow here, let me be clear on one thing...the individual Adobe people I've talked to have all been as helpful as possible. I've gotten straight answers from them, even when I didn't like them, or they sounded like crap. This is a criticism of the entire process, not of the individuals I've dealt with, who have all been stellar.
Oooh...it only took me over 45 minutes to get a human.
One hour total, and I'm on hold for tech support!
At 1:10:00, the first TS dude said, "I have no idea, I'm in Photoshop support." Luckily, he has the sense to realize he can't help me, and is working on getting me to someone who can. Annoying, but I respect the sensibility. Still not being impressed with Adobe. This ball hasn't just been dropped, it got drop-KICKED.
90 minutes just ticked by, and now it looks like they mis-serialized my CS download...with a DW serial number????? le sigh
At just a tick under 1:45:00, I find that somehow, the serialization process got hosed, and they're redoing everyone's serial number. I should get mine via email tomorrow. We shall have to therefore adjourn for now. I'm so glad I went for the convenience of the download.
Almost 24 hours later
Still no serial number. Wow, Barbie was right, math is hard.
Five days after the purchase and download
Still no serial number. This is coming up on three days after I was promised one in 24 hours. Wonder if I'll get one before Macworld?
Oh yeah, on hold again with customer service.
22 November, 2006, 1118 CST
Calling Adobe now, let's just see what happens today. Mmm...bad jazz.
1138: got a human.
1158: She's doing her best, but re-entering the bad serial number, or trying my CS 2 serial number didn't work either. Truly, Adobe is shining here.
1217: Now the serial number is good but it's an install issue. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot. The real irony? This is my "reward" for being a good, honest IT person. All the pirates have functional copies of 2.3 already. Thank god for activation keeping things honest and not punishing the legit customer.
1226: Now talking to installation Tech Support. They're trying to find out what the hell is going on. Welcome to my world.
1246: They're emailing me a set of procedures to uninstall CS. That's right. I have to completely blow it away, then reinstall and re-patch. Assuming it works, which i have not been given a guarantee of. Like I said, the customer service folks and tech support folks have all been great, but I am SERIOUSLY considering billing Adobe for my time on their incompetency. Here's a hint. When you have to email me instructions on how to uninstall, you are doing something WRONG.
If this doesn't work, I shall be displeased.
1517: Yeah, that didn't work at all. However, Dreamweaver installed. One for two. Calling them back. Not happy.
1539: Curiouser and Curiouser...now I am told it appears that Acrobat 8 has a separate serial number from CS 2.3. TS has to talk to VIP types about getting my Acrobat 8 serial number? Am confused, wish I had pie.
1545: Strawberry poptarts are a good substitute for pie. Indeed, Acrobat 8 has its own serial number which is now being acquired for me. You know, this just isn't real damned impressive with one exception: While Adobe has fuxx0r3d this from the get-go as a corporation, the individuals I've talked to have all tried hard to help me out. The customer and tech support folks have all been outstanding, and they all need a big fat raise and a new Mini-Cooper S for Christmas.
1556: SUCCESS! I cannot WAIT until the "cutting the heads off of straw" practice tonight. Mmmm...sharp blades.Comments ()
Oh for pete's sake
Not only is Carlin right about our idiotic need to redefine things with flaccid language, he's psychic about it.
According to the USDA, we will no longer have "hungry" people in this country.
That's right, no longer will people who can't afford enough food suffer from "hunger".
They will now suffer from "low food security". So I suppose the morbidly obese have "high food security"?
what the fuck?
You know what would be cool?
A Sync Services plugin for Google Services. Contacts, Calendar, and Mail. I know the Mail one would be tricky due to Gmail being allergic to folders, but it would be really, really cool. I might even use more Google stuff than just Google Talk and Google Earth if I didn't have to do all my syncing manually.
Oh yes, that reminds me.
Gmail's still POP only, no IMAP access.
cold bad coffee to you,
Dear Zune team,
When you wrap DRM around a piece of music whose license specifically disallows that, or when you wrap it around music whose creator does not wish for Big Daddy Ballmer to decide how their music shall be listened to?
You don't just suck, you suck nasty, sweaty monkeyballs.
Boot to the head,
November 15, 2006
A quick non-technical review and plug
The week of Nov. 6th, I was in Research Triangle Park in North Carolina for an IBM Websphere Class.
That sucked, but one of the real benefits was being able to finally meet a guy I've known from various mailing lists for a while, Paul Vail. Paul let me come hang out at his house for a few hours, and just shoot the breeze/eat pizza. It was a lot of fun. Paul makes some kick ass homebrew, and he has one of the cutest kids I've ever seen. She's a delightful little girl, and Paul is in SUCH trouble in about ten years. Thank you very much for that Paul, it was a nice break from the stupidity that made up most of that week.
However, the review is not about Paul's house, (very nice), homebrew, (rocked) or daughter, (dude, you're doomed). Paul's SO has her own business, MoonDance Soaps & More. I got to meet Rachel briefly, nice lady she is. So on the way out, Paul let me grab some stuff from her stock. Some smellgood soaps for Melissa, and some actual shaving soap for me.
Now, yes, shaving cream is easier, and more common, but using real shaving soap is a completely different experience. (There is something absolutely and totally masculine about using shaving soap. It's hard to explain until you've used it.) I picked the Tangerine Cream, as I have always preferred citrus-based scents, I find them to be cleaner, and less heavy.
How does it work?
Glorious, simply glorious. If you ask Melissa, my beard rapidly approaches a wire brush in consistency, so shaving for me is a bit of a painful experience. Razor burn is my constant companion, but no more. The scent is just there enough to be noticed, light and clean, and it really made the shave nice. No pain, no dry skin, no excess oil. (I have oily skin, so stuff that just reek of moisturizer aren't my friends either)
Considering that a block of soap that normally costs five bucks will outlast my next 3 cans of decent shaving cream, that's a hell of a bargain. (Yes, I know I didn't pay, but I guarantee you I will in the future.) So yeah, go buy lots and lots of MoonDance stuff, it rocks.
Technorati Tags: Reviews| Comments ()
Some quick ones
Your CS 2.3 upgrade download process blows ass. three separate files of around a GB in total? Lame.
Telling me I have to wait 24 hours or more for my Acrobat 8 download serial number?!? What, you've been taking lessons from Microsoft in how to piss off your customers? Of course, the 40 minutes it took me to contact customer service and find this out didn't help. Even better is the poor customer service rep giving me some lame stock answer about "serial numbers being delayed due to demand." I was nice and didn't laugh in her face, because it's not her fault that the person that told her this is full of shit, and thinks all her customers are stupid.
Here's a clue...see, we download because we don't want to wait a day or so to start using the product. We give up the pretty packaging for the speed. If I can't use it for a day or two, then there's not much point in the download, and that makes you suck.
Oh, yes, and for this suck, you're the Dumbass of the Month along with the Microsoft Windows team. Seriously.
Why does installing Websphere suck so much?
Dear Microsoft Windows team,
No, making me click an endless train of dialog boxes is not the same as asking me to authenticate my actions, nor is it 'better local security'. That's stupid, and your network connections UI in Vista blows ass. You're always Dumbass of the Month.
Boot to the head,
Dear Microsoft Mac BU,
Just a reminder, you don't suck. It's just the rest of your parent company is being run by an ADD Poster Child with a bellyfull of chocolate-covered espresso beans, left alone with unlimited funds and a fast internet connection. Bad combo. Keep your heads down and keep working. Oh, to all the new MacBU people...no, you cannot imagine the bizarre shit you will run into at Macworld Expo. I've been going for a long time, and I can't imagine it. But there's a lot of booze in SF, so it's okay.
November 1, 2006
Once again, Amit is the man
Anyone concerned about Apple's (non)use of TPM, go to Amit's site and read the straight dope.
Amit Singh is the man.| Comments ()