/ miscellany:

“no pleasure endures unseasoned by variety”—Publilius Syrus

/ oct 2010

Page 1 of 2 | next

Yer Outta Here! Bye-Bye Bobby Cox

Bobby Cox Ejected

Art nerd, rocker, slacker, Don Juan, music geek, shutterbug… I’ve been called many things. Rabid sports fan is not one of them. But baseball is one of only two sports close to my heart (tennis eeking out first place in the list).

As a New Yorker, I’ve never developed filial warmth for either the Mets (junkyard dogs) or the Yankees (wealthy over-achievers, though they do have the best uniforms). But as a former southerner growing up in Atlanta, I’ve rooted for the Braves from their dismal years in the early 80′s through the insanely exciting early-mid 90′s. And though my love for the team was temporarily dampened by redneck John Rocker’s shocking, ignorant and racist remarks about my adopted home city of New York, I remain a fan to this day (despite the totally tired and obnoxious crowd cheer known as the Tomahawk Chop. Dudes, enough already, really).

Bobby Cox Past and Present

Today, with the Braves heartbreaking loss to the San Francisco Giants in the National League Division Series, baseball fans everywhere bid a sad farewell to one of the most modest, dynamic and successful managers in Major Leagues history. His tearful post-game exit interview tonight brought back 30 years of Braves baseball memories (Bob Horner hitting 4 back-to-back home runs in one game; Sid Bream slowly chugging to home plate for a thrilling 9th-inning come from behind win of the 1992 NLCS). Not to mention one mischievous night in the early 80′s when me and my high school entourage spent a debaucherous teenage evening in Mr. Cox’s home in Atlanta, sneaking swigs from his liquor cabinet (at the time, one of our tribe briefly dated his daughter Keisha). Thankfully, he was on the road, or surely we would have been ejected with extreme prejudice.

So long, Bobby, and thanks for all the fish…

Selected highlights and stats:

  • Manager of the Year four times (1985, 1991, 2004, and 2005)
  • One of only four managers to have won the award in both the American and National League
  • Named Manager of the Year eight times (1985, 1991, 1993, 1999, 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005)
  • Fourth-winningest manager in major league history, with a record of 2,195 wins and 1,698 losses
  • Led the Braves to a division title every season from 1991 to 2005
  • Won a World Series Championship in 1995.
  • In 2001, he took sole possession of first place for most wins as a manager in Braves history
  • Fourteenth among the all-time winningest managers.
  • One of only four managers in Major League history with over 2500 career wins
  • Despite a calm demeanor, as of the end of last season has been ejected 158 times, currently holding the all-time record for most ejections
  • The only person among all players and managers to be ejected from two World Series games

More about Bobby Cox

Bobby Cox in Your Face

If I Hear the Word “Facebook” One More Time
I Swear I’m Gonna Beat Someone

Social Media Revolution

As a designer, web developer and recovering media junkie, I’m both required and inspired to keep up with the Interweb and it’s noisy, bleating spawn. But as I get closer to joining the old-fogey demographic, I’m often left with a cold metallic taste in my mouth at the end of each day spent in front of Photoshop, Twitter, Maunet, Wikipedia, Google, Email, YouTube, Flickr, etc… Notice I didn’t include Facebook? Yeah, I fucking hate Facebook. Nothing against you personally, kind reader, but still… it’s the Antichrist– a douchy, narcissistic, time-sucking Tupperware party. Not unlike this blog, I guess. Oops. But let’s move on…

The iPhone hasn’t helped calm my frayed early-middle-aged nerves either, as I compulsively reach for it’s perfect, shiny, enticing form every 5 minutes to do… what? Check my email for the 10th time in 10 minutes? See if anyone mentioned me on Twitter? (no one ever does). Play Angry Birds for two minutes before checking the weather as I sit on my balcony on a chilly grey Brooklyn evening? You don’t need an iPhone to know which way the wind blows…

So what I’m sayin’ is, I’m kinda really fucking over the whole Social Media thing, even as I reluctantly skirt it’s fringes (no, I do not have a Facebook account, did I not make that clear?). Boy am I glad I don’t plan to have children. All my parents had to get crotchety and protective about was the Led Zeppelin blaring from my room as I puffed on a doobie while leafing through Penthouse and downing a six pack of Coors Lite at alarming speed. No instant access to porn, no sickeningly violent video games (Donkey Kong still rules in my book) and definitely no medium as addictive and pervasive as Social Media. It really is the new crack and we’re all gonna shrivel up into ashy little prunes as we suck on that bandwidth pipe…

Nevertheless, I guess it’s here to stay. Sigh. Hopefully someone will start a rehab program as the Mark Zuckerberg Clinic for Social Media Addicts. Hmm… maybe that’s the billion-dollar idea I’ve been looking for. Anyone got some loose investment capital to lend me?

This video from Socialnomics presents some frightening “facts” on the subject. Its claims are astounding, alarming, inspiring and ultimately exhausting. But the typography’s pretty sweet…

Thanks, Knight, for passing this along. Rob, if you tell me you posted this on Facebook last month one more time, I’ll break your face with your bass at our next rehearsal, I fucking swear I will ;-)

  1. Tuesday 10.12.2010 | 2:54 EDT

    El Jefe says:

    If you push all the pubescent navel gazing aside, don’t you think “Twatter” is an interesting and compelling platform for both big and small business? I recently worked through a customer service issue with Adobe via Twatter. I Twatted (?!) my issue, they responded and after some back and forth it was solved. No calling “Larry” in India… no emails… Twatter!

    And as for FB… I do instantly unfriend or block anyone who mentions Justin Beiber, invites me to compare horoscopes or posts about anything related to Farmville or Mafia Wars, but it does allow me to monitor certain brands and get deals on merchandise. Gotta love that, right?

    1. Tuesday 10.12.2010 | 3:13 EDT

      chairmanmau says:

      mos def, Jefe. Twitter does have it’s place, I use it to promote maunet and c23. It’s kinda annoying with all the douchy “I’m having coffee” posts, but I guess it does the trick and it’s not as much of a time sucker as FB

      In the spirit and voice of this blog, I was mostly being cheeky and opinionated about FB (ok, more than mostly). I still hate it for myself, but it def has its place in people’s lives, personally and occupationally. it’s a great tool, and most of my friends love it… I’m just not a joiner and would rather have my time sapped by other activities, online and off. Not to mention that I don’t really need to “keep in touch” with long-lost “friends” from the past.

      In response to Max’s comment, I never implied that FB followers were indecent, unintelligent folk. His words, not mine, tho I appreciate his crusty opinion, mostly in line with mine.

      Thanks all for posting comments… Now go forth and post this on your Facebook page ;-)

  2. Friday 10.08.2010 | 6:14 EDT

    Max says:

    Well Mau I absolutely agree with you. Facebook makes me feel physically ill. That is not a metaphor. Until quite recently I thought most of my friends were reasonably decent and intelligent people, and some of them may even have thought the same about me.

    But wait a minute Carey, you spurn Facebook, yet you Twitter? Is there any logic in this?

    Max Eider, aged 51 and a half

  3. Friday 10.08.2010 | 12:53 EDT

    melania says:

    Right on! What a fantastic blog entry. If i didn’t hate Twitter, I would be Tweeting (how did this become a verb? blech) this. The numbers/facts in the video are very interesting, though I had to pause multiple times and rewind to read the facts. It’s a little too hip and the music is annoying.

    What I find sad is that many people have become much more ADD than before. The checking for – whatever – during dinner is rude. I know what they’re doing under the table. This is why I always get the most basic phone possible. I’ve never taken a photo or read email with my phone.

    So far, I’d say the web world in Zürich is about 15 years behind NYC. At first this was depressing but now I don’t mind as much. Returning to basics is fine for me, for now. Thanks for helping me keep my edge – I hope you write more often. Oh yeah, and your “10 Years of Maunet Compilations” are on my desktop around the clock. They’re all I listen to at work.

    Full disclosure: I play FarmVille.

    1. Friday 10.08.2010 | 1:01 EDT

      chairmanmau says:

      1. let’s all decide to call it “Twatting” from now on. Wait. Is that offensive? Sorry.

      2. Yes, the music is in fact annoying. They should have used Message in a Bottle instead.

      3. Depending on who you’re sitting next to, there’s much more interesting things to do under the dinner table ;-)

      4. I’ll take issue with one thing: camera phone. It’s the new polaroid: http://bit.ly/9TbUcv

      5. glad you like the compilations. evidence that i’ve always favored OCD over ADD. Spread the word!

      1. Friday 10.08.2010 | 3:08 EDT

        melania says:

        ok, i’m sold. and i LOVE your iPhone #41. i’m also relieved you haven’t posted any “hipstamatic” shots. they’re all over FB (:

  4. Friday 10.08.2010 | 12:35 EDT

    Yuri says:

    can i “like” this on facebook?

    1. Friday 10.08.2010 | 12:38 EDT

      chairmanmau says:

      ah, the irony ;-)

  5. Friday 10.08.2010 | 12:03 EDT

    kimchi says:

    awww. I miss the sweet, bitter, cynical rantings of you city-folk.

    Here’s a big fat cushy hug from the mountains of British Columbia where everyone is… well… really “nice”… ewwww!

    xoxo

  6. Thursday 10.07.2010 | 11:28 EDT

    m!ke410 says:

    the angrier your get, the more I want to follow you.

/ jun 2010

The Oatmeal: Time To Pretend

Time To PretendComputer Genius

So work has kept me from posting in a while. Stupid Work. But something of substance is forthcoming, with new photos of The National European tour coming soon.

In the meantime, the guy from The Oatmeal is quickly becoming my new hero:
Why It’s Better To Pretend You Know Nothing About Computers

Don’t get me wrong. I love providing friends and family with Tech Support. Just love it. It gives me that warm and fuzzy feeling inside.

But maybe it’s Time To Pretend…

/ may 2010

Smoke + Mirrors: Adobe CEO
Shantanu Narayen Responds to
Steve Jobs’ Position on Mobile Flash

steve-jobs-vs-shantanu-narayen

Guess what? My Mac’s Safari browser just crashed while watching a Flash video on The Wall Street Journal (scroll down to watch it). The subject? Adobe’s response to Steve Jobs’ recent arguments agains using Flash on Apple mobile devices. But let’s put that aside for now. In my last post on this debate, I did my best to be humble; to refrain from partisanship as much as an Apple fanatic is capable; and to give any of you the opportunity to fill in the gaps in my knowledge on this subject.

When I read Steve Jobs’ Thoughts on Flash, I noted how struck I was by what seemed like Steve’s relatively dispassionate position on this subject. Maybe my vision is blurred while reading between the lines, but Jobs’ arguments were not delivered with his typical bravado (i.e. arrogance). It seems to me that point by point, Steve proposed lucid, practical reasons for not embracing Adobe Flash’s on Apple mobile devices. Maybe that’s just me. But:

What was glaringly obvious to me during Adobe CEO Shantanu Narayen’s rebuttal was his delivery of the same lame corporate marketing bromides you hear at every mid-level management meeting across America: “value proposition.” “world vision.” “delivery mechanism that allows us to amortize investment.” Who is us? Whose investment?

The interviewer points out that Steve’s response seemed “personal” and “nasty.” It’s no secret Mr. Jobs can be an arrogant ass and a real tyrant. But you don’t see many titans of industry adopting the genteel protocol of Victorian drawing rooms (nor the watered down language of corporate marketing). Asshole he may be, but he delivers innovation like no other technology company in recent history and does it with a confidence and panache that comes from nowhere if not straight from his heart. Even with all his faults, his recent response did not feel like the tantrum of a man that is used to having his way. I detected no belligerence or defensiveness in the tone of his language. More importantly, I felt informed by Jobs’ response. In contrast, Adobe’s response felt like a sales pitch worthy of an alternate Glenngary Glenn Ross script.

I was sincerely hoping to hear countering arguments that completed the picture for me. I have no interest in debunking Adobe in favor of my beloved iPhone. I simply wanted facts, straight up. I wanted specifics that would enable me to defend either side of this debate with informed intelligence. Unless I forgot to take out my earplugs (I did not play my drums last night), I couldn’t cobble together a single lucid piece of information from the smorgasbord of Narayen’s clichéd language. He even uses the word “factoid” to bolster his own weak arguments. Consumers, and certainly technology professionals, are not interested in something as politically slanted as a “factoid,” which is defined as “a brief or trivial item of news or information. An assumption or speculation that is reported and repeated so often that it becomes accepted as fact.” Seems like Mr. Narayen needs to polish his rhetorical skills if he hopes to present viable arguments to this debate.

Narayen uses the word “smokescreen” multiple times to describe Steve’s “allegations”. That’s where this man’s credibility completely fell apart for me. The interviewer repeatedly asked him to respond to the specific points in Jobs’ agenda. He responded to none of these in any substantive, factual manner, choosing instead to continue using corporate platitudes to deflect pointed questions. Wait a minute. Isn’t that a smokescreen? His whining tone, flimsy language and closed body language tells the real story.

Narayen goes on to state that “technology is not the issue.” Do what? Ok, you lost me with that one, sir. Then he goes on to mention that InDesign, a print application, can bridge a development gap for an interactive platform? C’mon.

There’s plenty more in this interview that I could dissect and debunk. But I have little interest in tearing down a company that has gifted the world with Photoshop– an application that shakes my atheistic leanings through the sheer depth of it’s capabilities. But the bottom line is: hey, it would be great to have Flash on the iPhone/iPad. But if the rhetorical and business positions of these two guys are to be my only guide, then I’ll side with Steve and wait till a better solution comes along. Apple ain’t dumb. It can’t be that far off.

Can’t we all just get along? Watch the video below. Hope it doesn’t crash your Mac.

  1. Saturday 05.01.2010 | 4:11 EDT

    kph says:

    I have very bad news for all of the Applephiles out there – this is pure business, and you should be a little scared. It is so very comical to listen to Jobs say that the biggest issue is that Flash is “closed and proprietary”, when Apple’s entire stack is closed and proprietary itself. Here’s the real reason they don’t want Flash: Apple wants absolute and complete control of everything that goes onto their devices, and that means that the applications that install on iPhones and iPads *must* use the programming languages and API’s that Apple endorses. Flash would allow developers to skirt these restrictions and use Adobe’s API’s, and Apple sees this as a risk because they don’t have control of them and can’t fully account for them.
    This is but the tip of the iceberg, however. Presently, if you are using a desktop/laptop/notebook from any vendor, you can purchase software from a multitude of vendors that have written the software using any number of programming languages (this is true for Macs, Windows, Linux, you name it.) You do not need permission from the hardware or software vendor of your notebook to install the software; if you pay for it/download it and it’s been written for your OS, you can have at it. What Apple has done with the iPhone and iPad is control two fundamental things:
    1. What apps are made available for install on their devices (via the App Store)
    2. What development tools can be used to build iPhone/iPad apps
    If you haven’t heard of apps being denied by the Apple police, read this:http://www.niemanlab.org/2010/04/mark-fiore-can-win-a-pulitzer-prize-but-he-cant-get-his-iphone-cartoon-app-past-apples-satire-police/ . If you’d like to get a developer’s perspective on why controlling programing languages and API’s is “evil”, have a look at this:http://www.taoeffect.com/blog/2010/04/steve-jobs-response-on-section-3-3-1/ . Apple is proving itself to be no different that Microsoft of old, and sadly those end users that bought into Apple as the anti-Microsoft have been willing to look the other way because of the brand. Yuck.
    As a software developer, I find Job’s attempt to “explain” the situation with Flash so transparently convenient I want to smack him. The conclusion had been set – no Flash. He simply needed to come up with a halfway-coherent sounding justification for that conclusion and present it as if the justification lead him to the conclusion as opposed to the other way around. How silly.
    If Apple wants to actually be “open” and not just talk about it, then it should read Google’s short manifesto here: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/meaning-of-open.html . Google, which has done more than its fair share of evil things (i.e. censoring search in China) actually sat down and thought about their core values and *did something about it*.
    Have fun,
    -kph

    1. Saturday 05.01.2010 | 4:24 EDT

      chairmanmau says:

      thanks kph. you make some great points here. Apple does occasionally smack of Big Brother as of late. Their tight reigns on hardware AND software implementation by third parties opens them up to easy criticism. But I must point out the OTHER Big Brother (i.e. Microsoft), by licensing their OS to third-party vendors, shot them selves in their very very wealthy foot. Their products suffer from appallingly bad design and UI that fail to address an immediate consumer need: simple, efficient and, yes, attractive devices and software. By opening up their software development to such a wide audience, it targeted the lowest common denominator. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not calling PC users philistines. All I’m saying is that without SOME control, the quality and innovation of the product fails. One of my favorite Steve Jobs quotes (yes, it’s extremely arrogant, but true: http://bit.ly/2ZJIGQ

      This open vs closed debate is indeed a tricky one. So far, there’s no truly right answer. And of course Apple has their own interest at heart in some of these arguments. But I will say that I’d rather date a hot, smart, discerning yet difficult woman than an insipid, well-mannered one than tries to be everyone to everyone.

    2. Saturday 05.01.2010 | 5:40 EDT

      KBJ says:

      Thanks for the info and the links, kph! However, I think most anyone that’s been a true Applephile for the past several years – at least the ones I know – are well-aware of these nasty tendencies and have something of a love/hate relationship with the company. (Indeed, I even worked for them until I quit last June, disgusted with their corporate shenanigans!)

      The company does appear to be on its way to Evil Empire status, and I hate them for that, but they continue to provide a user experience that, for me anyway, just can’t be beat.

      Jobs certainly has a Flash agenda, and I’m sure Apple will remain more closed than open to the developer community…that’s kind of how they’ve always been, I suppose, and that’s really not very admirable at all but may be part of the secret to their success. However, I still prefer the way their products look, feel and operate to any others I’ve encountered. Until something better (for me) comes along, they’ll have my often kicking & screaming support….

  2. Saturday 05.01.2010 | 3:24 EDT

    KBJr says:

    Well put! I got the same sense about him here, and agree that, surprisingly, Steve Jobs’ tone in his piece wasn’t arrogant or accusatory. Narayen spoke frequently about the need for singular workflows for multiple platforms…I would think he’d focus on creating developer tools for the oncoming HTML5 set et al in order to provide his ‘customers’ an easy transition into what appears to be a more streamlined approach to delivering content in the upcoming years. Flash is of course by no means dead, but it’s beginning to feel like a once champion thoroughbred whose time for pasture is approaching. Fast.

  3. Saturday 05.01.2010 | 3:15 EDT

    cindy says:

    Flash is cross platform in terms of Mac and PC but it cannot be called multi-platform because phones like iphone and google’s droid among other touch screen smart phones do not accept flash. There software is built using Apple’s webkit. If the future of viewing the web is via phones, ipads and other tablets, along with computers, then we need to accept a technology that will reach all of these various platforms. Obviously, flash cannot achieve this, but flash has also been on it’s way out ever since SEO became a household name. No one wants a flash website anymore.

    In this instance Google is to blame. Considering that most flash sites are built using xml and Google love for xml, Google still doesn’t want to search a flash file or it’s xml counterparts in order to provide SEO results. In order to have SEO using flash, a site has to be built in flash pieces with html putting all those pieces together while using alt tags for each part of the site. This can get annoying and if an iphone can’t view the site or navigate it then that’s a problem. Clients simply will opt for html5 and that will be that.
    I love flash but I’m facing facts and beginning to learn html5 out of necessity. It also makes me sad that technology continues to make products that do not allow for creatives to stay on top but handing creative reigns over to developers who are usually not very creative. Developers are not designers. This basically means the end of creativity unless we creatives can get a grasp on coding which is simply not our forte. There are plenty of tutorials out there now and literature on html5 if one wants to learn. I’d say the one place flash will still have a home is banners. Animation is simply much easier when you’re just animating frame by frame and I can safely say I’d never want to tackle that with html code that’s just sacrilegious.

    If Adobe wants to stay on top, I’d say they better fix flash and make it a public language like they did flex. Otherwise, they can kiss flash goodbye. It would be a shame to lose flash, after all we need the creativity that it helps to promote with such ease. Adobe needs to open their eyes and realize that just like with SEO, consumers will choose what most quickly puts their product in the eyes of the public and if flash can’t perform, it’s as good as dead.

    1. Saturday 05.01.2010 | 4:36 EDT

      chairmanmau says:

      It’s surprising, and refreshing, to get this response from a very talented Flash developer who actually started out as a cream-of-the-crop graphic designer (and now excels at both). The line between creative and technical disciplines is indeed beginning to blur in a very disheartening manner. Developers are not designers and vice versa, nor should they be. This puts creatives in a position of having to do two things only marginally well.

      On another note, creatives have typically resisted the use of Flash, not from a technology standpoint, but from one of usability. Witness the nascent days of Flash, when clients HAD TO HAVE all the bells and whistles if offers, JUST BECAUSE. So many sites continue to suffer from over-use of Flash. Adobe’s own website is the biggest culprit. Anyone tried to buy software from the Adobe site lately? Not only is the IA all fucked up, but Flash sticks its clumsy paws into each step of what should be a quick and intuitive process. Ever tried to send a deep link to a particular product suite to a client for evaluation? No can do… Adobe’s overuse of Flash obscures deep linking. Page load times? Abominable for an e-commerce site. Sure, there’s some nifty design and wizardry, but it promotes it at the cost of usability. It’s not hard to make something beautiful AND functional. If you have the right tools….

      I’d love to see Adobe an Apple play nice together. But in this case I’m really leaning towards the point of view that Adobe does not want to address the technical clumsiness of its platform. They’re a stellar company. I’m sure their brain trust can come up with a better solution.

/ apr 2010

Stick It To ‘Em: Steve Jobs Responds to
Mobile vs Adobe Flash

apple-vs-adobe-flash

I could easily be accused of partisanship on the side of Apple. I’m a die-hard Mac-head and an iPhone addict. But in this case, Steve Jobs’ recent rebuttal to the ongoing mobile Flash support debate offers the most compelling arguments I’ve yet heard on the subject.

I like Flash. It does some cool things. My own design + development company has used it extensively over the years. But as SEO becomes a higher priority to our small entrepreneurial clients, we have begun to move away from it in favor of JavaScript/CSS/HTML (though we still love SiFR to render branded, system-agnostic typography–without the mobile device/SEO penalty). Not to mention that, as a closed system requiring a very specialized skill-set, professional-grade Flash developers are much scarcer than their HTML-based counterparts. It’s also harder to pass on a Flash/ActionScript code base to new vendors, and it’s typically more expensive to execute and more unwieldy to maintain, particularly when used in conjunction with a Content Management System.

I have a considerable financial investment in the Adobe software suites that are crucial to running my business. But as a compulsive iPhone user, I’m only occasionally frustrated by the lack of Flash support, though to such a negligible extent as to be almost irrelevant. And although widespread adoption of newer technologies like HTML5 is still a ways away, I’ve begun to lean towards Steve’s point of view.

Though I found his points regarding “Touch” user interfaces extremely compelling, one could argue that DHTML navigation (as much as I f’ing hate it) suffers similar disadvantages as Flash on a touch-screen device. Moreover, his arguments do side-step the glaring fact that, despite Google’s embracement of more “open,” non-Flash technologies, Flash is supported on their own Andorid mobile operating system. But friends don’t let friends drive Androids (and most definitely not BlackBerries) ;-)

android-superheros

I’m just a graphic design guy in love with user-friendly Interface design and Information Architecture, so I’m by no means an expert on the mobile Flash debate. I’m sure many of you could counter with your own, more well-informed arguments. And of course Jobs by definition must promote his own agenda–but his recent, uncharacteristically open rebuttals make a lot of sense without coming across aggressive or excessively partisan.

Read Steve Jobs’ thoughts on Flash vs Mobile Devices here.

In the spirit of non-partisanship (and humility in admission of my own incomplete grasp of the subject), fill in the gaps in my arguably tenable position by commenting below.

  1. Saturday 05.01.2010 | 9:21 EDT

    Johnnie says:

    KPH makes the point we all need to keep in mind in assessing any large firm’s restrictive-by-choice architectures and that is – business is king. With the MSFT, GOOG, APPL s of the world it’s all about shareholder value. And again with them, free is a loss leader.

    Case in point a recent NYorker article talked about the iPad vs Kindle biz models. Apparently, Jobs is being lauded by publishers for making deals with them that don’t cut them out by going directly to authors like Amazon. Hurrah SJ right for preserving the publishing biz right ? The agreement has a 2 year cap after which all is fair game. Enough time that is for a firm of Apple’s resources to take a huge chunk of market share and populate iBooks with as many titles as Amazon.

    Just sayin’ So in the end, controlling demand is the way to get the “right” outcomes for users. So what’dya say, shall we all switch to Droids? Eeeehmmm you first….i love my iPhone ;-)

  2. Saturday 05.01.2010 | 12:16 EDT

    kph says:

    I have very bad news for all of the Applephiles out there – this is pure business, and you should be a little scared. It is so very comical to listen to Jobs say that the biggest issue is that Flash is “closed and proprietary”, when Apple’s entire stack is closed and proprietary itself. Here’s the real reason they don’t want Flash: Apple wants absolute and complete control of everything that goes onto their devices, and that means that the applications that install on iPhones and iPads *must* use the programming languages and API’s that Apple endorses. Flash would allow developers to skirt these restrictions and use Adobe’s API’s, and Apple sees this as a risk because they don’t have control of them and can’t fully account for them.

    This is but the tip of the iceberg, however. Presently, if you are using a desktop/laptop/notebook from any vendor, you can purchase software from a multitude of vendors that have written the software using any number of programming languages (this is true for Macs, Windows, Linux, you name it.) You do not need permission from the hardware or software vendor of your notebook to install the software; if you pay for it/download it and it’s been written for your OS, you can have at it. What Apple has done with the iPhone and iPad is control two fundamental things:

    1. What apps are made available for install on their devices (via the App Store)
    2. What development tools can be used to build iPhone/iPad apps

    If you haven’t heard of apps being denied by the Apple police, read this: http://www.niemanlab.org/2010/04/mark-fiore-can-win-a-pulitzer-prize-but-he-cant-get-his-iphone-cartoon-app-past-apples-satire-police/ . If you’d like to get a developer’s perspective on why controlling programing languages and API’s is “evil”, have a look at this: http://www.taoeffect.com/blog/2010/04/steve-jobs-response-on-section-3-3-1/ . Apple is proving itself to be no different that Microsoft of old, and sadly those end users that bought into Apple as the anti-Microsoft have been willing to look the other way because of the brand. Yuck.

    As a software developer, I find Job’s attempt to “explain” the situation with Flash so transparently convenient I want to smack him. The conclusion had been set – no Flash. He simply needed to come up with a halfway-coherent sounding justification for that conclusion and present it as if the justification lead him to the conclusion as opposed to the other way around. How silly.

    If Apple wants to actually be “open” and not just talk about it, then it should read Google’s short manifesto here: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/meaning-of-open.html . Google, which has done more than its fair share of evil things (i.e. censoring search in China) actually sat down and thought about their core values and *did something about it*.

    Have fun,

    -kph

/ mar 2010

Windows 7: Apple’s Idea. Shocker!

Have you seen these ridiculous adverts for Windows 7? I know us Mac geeks are wont to take any shot we can at our old nemesis, but this one is a slam dunk.

Pretty girl in bad British accent revels in the fact that W7 now has a “new task bar…Now I can see everything I have open!”

Wow! Revolutionary! How did we ever get along without this new feature? Well, 10 years ago we all got Mac OS X. That’s how.

I’ve spent an hour or so on W7 (I feel so dirty) and it is an improvement from XP and Vista (a monkee could have improved those). But as always, those improvements were pilfered from functionality that’s been native to the Mac OS for 10 years.

Apparently some illustrious souls have shot back at these ads with pretty much the same sentiment. Cheerio, chaps! Suck it, Windows!


  1. Tuesday 03.23.2010 | 5:53 EDT

    KBJr says:

    Yeah, those ads make me laugh. Every single feature is something we Mac users have had for years, as you say. Also entertaining is how the people in the ads become sexy ‘models’ in their remembrances of how they came up with the idea….

Mixology: Shitty Beers, Great In a Can

Great Beers in a Can: Sappoor, Tecate, Heineken

Beers in a can suck
They lose their crispness and body and deny us the eye candy of a glistening, sweaty golden bottle of lager or the thick foam of a chocolaty, full-bodied stout. (Sorry, I got carried away there, but I’m sure there’s such a thing as beer porn out there).

Now, cans certainly afford us a pseudo-manly display of strength as we punctuate our last slug with a crushing hand (shark hunter Captain Quint did it best). But the canned beers’ charm ends there. At least until recently. Three beers negate the theory:

  1. The Sapporo tall boy: Housed in a tank of a can, it’s a stalwart silver monster that will defeat all but the manliest hands. It’s crisp, flavorful, delicious. Drunk from a glass bottle: Insipid and lame, tastes like ass.
  2. The Heineken Mini Keg. Also quite the sturdy vessel. When offered the same beer in a bottle, I opt for wine, whiskey, gin, hell – even a Coke. But not so in the mini-kegger. It’s delicious, crisp, relatively full-bodied. But don’t be fooled – the run of the mill canned version also tastes like ass.
  3. Tecaté: For some, it’s Mexico’s Budweiser, except, you know, actually tasty.
    Add a lime and it’s sublime.
  1. Thursday 03.04.2010 | 10:19 EDT

    Kayacetag says:

    i honestly adore your posting type, very interesting.
    don’t give up and keep writing for the reason that it’s simply well worth to following it,
    impatient to see a whole lot more of your own articles, good bye :)

Page 1 of 2 | next