Warning: htmlspecialchars_decode() expects parameter 1 to be string, NULL given in /home2

/pixelpu1/public_html/blog/wp-includes/compat.php on line 105

I can’t figure out what that means… there are nothing in the configuration that even points to that directory. Comparing the old “compat.php” in WP 2.7 and WP 2.7.1 revealed that the new compat.php file is incredibly huge compared to the old one, seemingly with a lot more error checking routine than before.

The only thing I can do for now, is revert back to WP 2.7. I’m also considering a new blog layout that will probably make AJAxed WordPress unnecessary anyway…. Things to ponder…

• Disabling all addons other than AJAXed WP.
• Re-uploading all the files from WP 2.7.1.
• Re-uploading AJAXed WP files manually.
• Changing back to default theme.

Nothing’s worked so far… I’m gonna try a database repair or something next.

Update:

Performed some database maintenance routines… optimizing and removing overhead. It’s not having any effects.

Hope they fix it soon.

Update: Temporarily disabled the addon and inserted old school —more— tags on the more recent posts.

The perils of the public bathroom is often absent in the recess of our minds, which I suspect is a form of primitive self preservation technique. Denial is obviously the most effective tool for curbing one’s natural instinct to avoid dangerous situations. Despite my brain’s better effort to mask the dangers, thus disallowing any confrontations of the public bathroom, I will put my own life on risk to address this series of life-threatening issues today.

Bathroom Design – The Division

I don’t know who was the brilliant engineer that came up with “the division” between bathroom stalls. The proponent of the division would say, “What, would you rather have no wall at all?” My issue with the division isn’t the fact that it exists, but the fact that it doesn’t exist enough.

Let’s say, if you were building a house, would you ever consider putting in walls with six-inches hollowed on the bottom, or having two-inch space between the walls? Other than a certain type of “converted-loft-into-living space” lifestyle, where the open space is meant to focus and project any strange noise you make into a sonic boom that can be released by cracking your windows just an eighth of an inch (thus allowing all of your neighbors to know exactly what you were doing last Saturday night), it’s hard to imagine anyone would build houses with floating walls on purpose.

So why, in the name of whatever holy entity one might be subscribed to at the moment, would anyone think floating wall in the most holy sanctuary of men is enough? How much longer will I have to watch as shoes pacing by the front of my stall door and pray silently to myself, “Please don’t look, please don’t look please don’t look..” There is no dignity with floating walls, let’s just all pass a bill that makes it mandatory for every public bathroom to have walls that touches the ground, and doors that closes without leaving peeping cracks, okay?

Bathroom Design Part II – The Urinal

Make no doubt, men take pride in their urinals. It’s one of the few (very, very, very few) places where men can claim almost absolute superiority over women. “See, I can go pee in less than the time it takes you to drop your pants and sit down!” However, the urinal itself is filled with an impossible flaw:

Splash.

Back.

I’ve seen all types of urinals throughout my years. Small ones that required precise aiming, gigantic urinals that one can sit inside if so choosed, ones that stretches from top of the ceiling to the floor, and elongated urinals that makes you wonder, “Where do I stand?!” Regardless the size or shape of the urinals, there is one common inevitability. No matter where you “go”, it will splash, you will eventually get some on you in some very visible and embarassing place. You can aim high, you can aim low, you can aim at the little hole on the very bottom or the “cakes” that never seem to really absorb anything (a little tip, the cake usually causes the most amount of unpredictable splashback). It does NOT matter.

This is what leads me to believe, that the designers behind urinals are really all women. It’s a dark, hidden conspiracy. It was created, supposedly, to prove the superiority and the efficiency of the male gender by demonstrating just how fast we can zip in and out of the bathroom, impatiently waiting in front of the women’s bathroom while tapping our toes. In reality, we’ll be staring blankly at the bathroom mirror wondering to ourselves, “How did that get there?” Meanwhile mortified at the slight chance that our dates might even peek (and they will peek!) at the general region.

Gentlemen! Speed & efficiency is NOT the most important issue at hand here. Slow down, aim carefully, and use a toilet if you have to (preferrably one with full length wall enclosures)!!!

How the Fuck Did That Get There?!

Despite my previous recommendation to use the toilet at all cost. There is one exception to the rule: If you can’t aim… don’t use the toilet!!

Even with all its flaws, the urinal provides a much larger (usually) surface area and shorter (usually) distance of travel will make up for one’s lack of aim. Splashback is the price that one has to pay, but you don’t expect for human invention to make up for all of your personal problems, do you?

Men, by default, tend to overestimate their own ability to control anything around them, may it be environmental, circumstantial, or limbs & organs that are actually attached to their body (which by definition, they *should* have control over and yet remain hopelessly without). Men who overestimate their ability to aim, commits the worst of sins that can be associated with the bathroom.

We’ve all had this experience, when you walk into the bathroom toilet stall and think to yourself, “How the FUCK did that even get there?~!!” At times you would think that the person that was using this particular toilet before you, might have their internal organs arrangement inverted from the normal physical anatomy that we’ve studied in school. There are several variations of this reaction:

How the fuck did that get…

• on the toilet seat
• on the floor
• on the door
• in the next stall
• on/in all of the above

combined with…

• a manly growl
• a girlish scream
• utter look of disgust
• utter blank stare of shock

Worst of all, men being men, we are not programmed to innately understand the operation of cleaning apparatus of any kind. Even at the expense of exposing oneself as “the guy who just did that” by simply walking away from the stall with a person waiting directly outside the door, men would still choose to leave things as is, and assume the evidence will magically disappear in between sessions.

Is This Even Made From Paper?

Many people make fun of fast food chains for purchasing meat of such low quality, that they would never actually make it onto supermarket shelves. The same can be said of toilet paper for use in public bathrooms. I have no idea how to source and acquire these toilet papers, but it is not rare for one to consider that large print newspaper might be a better choice.

The types of public bathroom toilet rolls I’ve experienced:

• Thin to the point that any bit of moisture will rip through multiple layers. This will probably remind you of the mistake that you made when you purchased that condom from that gas station vending machine one time.
• Despite being thin enough to melt in the air humidity of say, Florida, the toilet paper still manages to be sharp enough to virtually erase your finger prints.
• Multiple layers that never lines up correctly, which isn’t a big issue, but tends to make me very confused and attempt to “fix” it. Somehow tacking on another 20 minutes to the time I spent in the bathroom when it’s all said and done.
• Perforations that never seem to tear away correctly. One tug, you get half a tear and another 3 sheets, and this will continue as long as you insist that the perforations are there to help you.

Worst of all, is when they use the one ultimate toilet roll that seems to combine all the attributes of above: Thin, rough, multiple layers that seems to be falling apart at rapid pace, and most of all… no perforations at all. I don’t know how much money is saved each year by the mere absence of perforations on toilet rolls, but they make these long, continuous rolls that leaves the tearing and separation of individual sheets to your own device.

How am I supposed to know how many square sheets of toilet roll I need, if there are NO square sheets at all? One simply cannot expect the average, normal people to have the mental acuity to be able to determine an arbitrary value of toilet paper length needed! Can’t they at least print some sort of measurement units on the toilet paper itself (although I doubt that will be cheaper than if they just added perforation).

Even more frightening still, is such toilet rolls are always without a doubt, combined with a toilet roll dispenser equipped with a safe, plastic cutting blade. PLASTIC! It seems to take strength and reflex of Olympic proportion to make sure you get just the right amount (relatively speaking) of toilet paper separated with these dull, plastic blades.

I undersand the plastic blades were invented to protect one from cutting themselves, and thus avoiding potentially embarassing lawsuit. However, I think that anyone who files a lawsuit because they cut themselves while dispensing toilet paper, should probably be quarantined away from the rest of the gene pool.

What Is That Smell?

I’m not talking about “the smell”, we all know what that smell is. I’m talking about the urinal cakes, the air fresheners (both the spray and plugin kind), the blue liquid stuff that comes out when you flush, and whatever fashionable contraception there is to keep the bathroom sanitized and “fresh”.

For some odd reason, none of these devices ever seem to work as advertised. It’s almost as if the aim of such devices is to create a mixture of smell with human excrements that can only smell worse by a factor of ten or more.

Personally, I think all these devices were created to speed up the process and flow of people in and out of public bathrooms. If anyone made a device that can actually completely neutralize the bathroom smell, it would only cause people to stay even longer in the holy sanctuary that is the bathroom. Think about the typical amount of time spent on the toilet reading while you’re at home, versus the time you spent on the public toilet. The time-spent-ratio favors home bathrooms by an enormous amount.

This is no accident my friend, very much like the headache-inducing music or nausea-incuding smell at popular clothing retail outlets, these are all subtle hints that pushes you to get in, get it done, and get out instead of lingering around.

In Conclusion…

The situation is dire, and I’m not sure what I said here will be enough, or in time to save anyone from the perils of public bathrooms. I can only hope that someone out there will read this message, and think twice before they enter a public bathroom. Even if you HAVE to go, please go as safely, as possible.

It’s an old, used, beat-up cliché, but I never thought I would one day consider myself closer to my dad’s category rather than being one of the hip kids that’s ingrained with all of the happenings in the tech world. The fact remains that I’m moving towards being one of the old geezer of the internet. Even though I’m still a notch below thirty, I have been in this tech bubble for nearly a decade.

This realization was made even more clear to me, as I was having a conversation with one of my friend’s friend’s friend, no doubt a connection that’s just enough zip codes apart that I’m likely to run into him at a coffee shop one day, but pretend not to recognize. He was one of the “kids” working at a brand new Web 2.0 start-up, with great aspirations and ideas on creating new software (read: Probably some Facebook/MySpace app), services (read: Odd niche that hasn’t been filled yet) and products (read: … Nevermind, I’ll address this in the following paragraphs).

Somewhere between his passionate speech about how his company is going to do this and that, and how they have this great plan towards building this huge community and thus deriving value, he actually paid half enough of a mind to ask me about what I did. This is where our generational separation came in play: He was absolutely astounded by the amount of money that has to be spent for our company to create, sell, and continue to support a hardware product. There were many statements that sounded like (but not verbatim, since I wasn’t in the mood to take notes about what a college newborn had to dispense) these:

“What is your CPA? Wow, how much? That’s incredible!”
“Wait, how many years of runway do you have to profitability? Really, it takes that long?”
“Wow, you have to maintain inventory? Like, have it stored in a warehouse somewhere?”
“Why would you do this with so much overhead?”
“See, our company’s product is just a service, it doesn’t need warehouse and there’s no overhead!”
“We’ll build a huge user base, and we’ll do it on a super small budget. Just a few servers, that’s it!”
“Oh, profitability? It’s okay, if we build great software, people will use it, and we’ll build value over time!”

What bothered me, is that despite this kid’s college education & apparent (or supposed) brilliance, there seems to be a distinct lack of history & perspective that’s been passed down from our generation to theirs.

Having been through the first internet bubble, a lot of us lived through the harsh reality of what creating a new market, a new industry is really like. The internet bubble was filled with promises, companies with high evaluation and inflated stock prices, all the meanwhile with no real product or real plan towards profitability. Eventually, stock prices normalize, or even just distintegrate completely. Venture capitalist will all want their investment back at some point. Nearly a decade later, we still haven’t figured out how exactly, that we can all profit from this “internet” thing.

The problem, as I see it, is that most of what drives internet’s true economy, is the same things that drives our old economy. For example, Amazon is hardly turning a profit from quarter to quarter (exactly how many quarters they’ve been profitable, I don’t know, but it’s not an amazing amount), but they’re still a sustainable company because they’re basically a traditional retailer in a different medium. EBay is doing very well, because they are basically an online classified/flea market. They are one of the few company, along with maybe Craigslist, that’s figured out a way to be profitable without having to invest huge stakes or store major inventory.

What it boils down to, is that everything we do on the internet, are still extensions of our traditional economy. Instead of going to the drug store, we might be shopping on drugstore.com. Instead of going down to the travel agent’s office, we simply book our flights & hotels online. However the basic product being offered by various internet-based companies hasn’t deviated all that much from tradition.

The web 2.0 companies introduced new concepts of creating user-driven communities, but has any web 2.0 company truly figured out how to monitize anything they’re doing? The methodology behind evaluating web 2.0 company’s worth is almost as ridiculous as the evaluation people used to give to web 1.0 companies. You count up the number of users you have signed up to your service, you give each user on your service some arbitrarily determined value in dollars of how much the “mindshare” of an user on your service is worth. Multiple arbitrary value to registered user base and daily traffic = your company’s value. Of course, this is an oversimplified version of what the actual calculation would entail, but when you have a company that doesn’t create any “real” products, what else is there to evaluate?

So most web 2.0 company’s “real” profitbility plan usually involves one, or both of the following:

1. Serving ads to the user base (Google loves you).
2. Get bought by some other established media entities (News Corp, AOL, MSN… etc…).

See, we really haven’t progressed much beyond what Yahoo and Excite (anyone remember Excite?) was doing nearly a decade ago. We just gave it a different spin, a different face, and a whole new generation of young, hot-blooded college grads willing to do the bidding of whatever VC is haunting their dreams.

No doubt, that web 2.0 is an important progression in the internet economy, but the problem is just as stagnant now as the original internet revolution itself. There are way too many companies that operate on the principle of:

Step 1: Make some software
Step 2: ?????
Step 3: Profit!!!

What bugs me even more, is that these kids seem to have completely forgotten and dismissed the traditional economy that their life is built on. The web 2.0 kids are treating the internet akin to a new age get-rich-quick scheme of sorts, without considering investing their future into a more realistic market. For example, “the kid” was tauting to me about how his company is running a very low overhead, high margin business as he’s holding no real physical product or inventory; I can’t help but wonder, so who is going to be providing “the kid’s” company with real products?

For example, if Dell was to decide that the PC hardware business is too low margin, too high risk and high overhead; if Dell was to abandone the computer market completely and move into just software & services, then who will “the kid” buy hardware from? It’s great that they’re creating brilliant web 2.0 application and all, but what happens if all PC hardware manufacturers decided to move into software, stop making hardware?

If we were to take this a step further, in a end-of-the-world-o-m-g sorta way (which is the mode that I often operate in anyway… it’s not easy being me), what if people who plants our corn & milks our cow decides that they should in fact, move into virtual products & goods as well, because physical products are just too archaic? Does this sound like Second Life gone bad?

The point is, the traditional market will always have its relevance, but almost all wide-eyed kids who just entered the real world are dismissive towards the “old ways of doing things.” They’re far more excited to be working at a web 2.0 company that makes nothing real at all, rather than building a solid consumer product that’s might take years to grow a new category, and spend millions of dollars in marketing. It’s easy to see the few web 2.0 company that’s been lucky enough to be acquired and seeing the owners walking away filthy rich (often still with their company struggling to find a real profitable plan for the future), and think that is the way of the future, a career path.

Consider this: Go see how much money Proctor & Gamble is making every year by selling you Swiffer refills & laundry detergents. It’s not sexy, but it’s a necessity of life.

Say that about Facebook? I still don’t have a Facebook account.

“you are a very good critic, b/c you are able to articulate your likes and dislikes very very clearly… especially the dislikes”
“If you don’t like something, you will find the best words to say it… and say it in different ways 200 times”

I guess nothing illustrates this better, than a recent email that I had to send off to my housemates. I hate to admit this is almost the best writing I’ve done in … a long time:

Hey gang,

I noticed that the lint filter is sometimes being left full of lint after a load. Please take the small bit of time to clean after your lint. I don’t really mind cleaning out the lint before using the dryer; but it’s just a nice common courtesy to clean after your own lint, rather than having your lint being cleaned after.

Another issue of mine, is the amount of time that’s been taken up to do laundry. IMO:

1. It really shouldn’t take multiple days to do laundry, unless you’re doing laundry for a family of four or five (I do remember the good ol’ days when my aunt always seemed to be doing laundry.. but that was a family of five).
2. Even if you separated all your colors & whites & delicates & whatever, it really shouldn’t take more than half a day.
3. I see laundry being left out there for days at a time, this creates a few problems:
   • I’m not sure when someone’s laundry is “done”. Sure, I can open up the washing machine and take a peek, but that’s almost an invasion of privacy. I don’t want anyone to look at my underwear & such, and I certainly don’t want to look at anyone else’s underwear & such. Which brings me to the next point…
   • I could remove your clothes from the premise, but I really don’t want to touch your underwear & such, just as I would like it if no one touched my underwear and such.
   • The only situation at which I would feel comfortable with seeing your laundry out in public display, or having to touch any part of your laundry while it is in public display is:
     • I happen to be your mother, and I’m doing your laundry for you.
     • We are in a physically intimate relationship where I feel comfortable with that.
   • Given that neither of the situation above applies to any of us (unless I’ve been ignoring obvious signals? If so, I apologize, I’m a bit of a dimwit when it comes to intimacy), I think it’s safe to say that I really shouldn’t be seeing someone’s laundry just “hanging out”.

Anyway, depending on the time of the day, the mood which you’re in, this email may come across as 1) Bitchy & whiny or 2) Hilariously entertaining. Whatever the interpretation, I hope we can all respect each other’s laundry rights and perform the aforementioned duty quickly & respectfully.

I can be such a bitch.

Well, Google released the Android SDK today. The SDK was pretty impressive, giving us a good preview of the the OS user interface (via Engadget). However, one can’t help notice how much the “mockup” looks like a Palm Centro, or any myriad of Palm or Windows Mobile device that’s been available so far. One also can’t help but notice how the UI takes many lessons from iPhone’s UI. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I suppose, but didn’t everyone expect a *lot* more from Google than just another software platform that looks just like any other software platform?

I listen to podcasts when I bike to work every morning (my form of reading the newspaper while having breakfast?), and one of the panelist on TWIT made a lot of sense, although I can’t recall it verbatim (and I’m too lazy to listen through a one-hour long podcast to find the exact quote). Whenever Google can’t conquer a market, they fragment.

Take for example, the “OpenSocial” initiative that Google just started. Google had their own social networking property (www.orkut.com), which was almost completely forgotten as a footnote to all their other services. Facebook became the monstrosity that overtook MySpace, which long before had overtaken Friendster. Orkut, however, was nowhere in anyone’s distant memory. By introducing OpenSocial, Google is undoing Facebook’s dominance in building web applets specifically for their service. In away, it seems like a move that benefits every developer, who can now develop for every social networking site (other than Facebook) and support many “platforms” at once. Of course, the “side” benefit is that Google has planted the seed that could possibly unseat Facebook from its dominance at the top, and also insert themselves as the tour-de-force of any social networking site that may eventually take the throne.

Taking a look at what they’ve done with Android, they’ve essentially fragmented any previous mobile Linux development, again inserted themselves at the helm of the movement. Furthermore, they’ve even fragmented the Java development community as well. CNet’s Crave blog has a great post on this, which touches on some of the issues with Android’s SDK and overall Java development. Of course this isn’t all bad, since Java in itself is a platform that has failed to satisfy anyone. However, once again it shows Google as a very shrewd company at being able to project themselves as a kind, gentle company that can do no evil; and at the same time, position themselves as the titan that is able to undermine an entire industry in one fell swoop.

Who does that sound like? You know it, it’s on the tip of your tongue, you know exactly who I’m talking about.

Yup, Apple.

So I was a little disappointed when NBC decided to have a bit spat with iTunes, and decided to pull all of their shows off of iTunes by the end of the year. What really gets to me, is how senseless the arguments the media companies are raising against Apple. This doesn’t pertain to just NBC, but all media companies dealing with iTunes as a whole.

Think back to when Universal was negotiating with Apple for their new music agreement. Their argument was that they’re not making enough money from iTunes Music Store, they want more control over pricing. Similar arguments has been brought up over the years with Apple multiple times, and they’re all along the lines of more control over DRM, more control over pricing, more profit for the record labels. Time and time again they insist that they can’t make enough money from iTunes Music Store alone.

Yet, look what happened these past few months. EMI started selling DRM-free tracks on iTunes, and doesn’t seem to be hurt by it as much as bolstered by it. All the other studios started offering completely DRM-free tracks on Amazon MP3 that sold for as little as $0.89 per track, depending on albums (although the misconception is all tracks are available at $0.89, they are not. Most out-of-print album tracks are $0.99, similar to how such albums costs more than new releases at record stores). They have agreed to sell less restrictive & less expensive music on Amazon, meanwhile telling Apple this is precisely what they cannot ever afford to do.

Now with this NBC deal, they’re complaining about revenue, about not making enough money. Same arguments as the record labels had with iTunes. At the same time, they’re going to be bringing out their own video service that allows you to watch entire shows for free (albeit with advertisements) and even embed videos on other sites in a very web 2.0-friendly fashion. So now they’re just serving up bandwidth and going back to relying on advertisement-based revenue models. Do they really make that much more money from webcasts compared to selling the shows? I’m sure the studios makes a huge amount of money from DVD sales of TV shows. Meanwhile iTunes’ sheer volume may not be as much as DVD sales now, it is a developing market that will probably grow bigger over time as we steer away from solid-state mediums for media delivery.

Furthermore, NBC’s little tirade about how much they’ve helped the iPod, and how they should get a share of that iPod sales revenue, is utterly ridiculous. Has RCA, Sony, Sharp and other TV manufacturers been sending part of their revenue to television stations? Obviously TV as a delivery medium wouldn’t work without the TV stations. So why isn’t NBC charging TV makers a fee for delivering their shows to millions of homes everyday?

We’ll see how this whole thing plays out. In the end, AmazonMP3 might take over iTunes Music Store, but that’s only because iTMS was there to pave the way first. Maybe Hulu.com will succeed, or maybe it’ll be a massive failure. Whatever happens, the end result probably wouldn’t impact iPod sales a slight bit. After all, no one’s stopped buying TV’s because NBC doesn’t have any interesting shows on Wednesday nights, right?

Why do we have asian/chinese “chicken” salad? Our cuisine covered an entire spectrum of all sorts of dead animals, why “chicken”? Is there a perception that Asian people only eat chicken, or somehow the only ingredient that you can mash into a salad from the entire range of Asian cuisine is chicken? Why isn’t there Asian barbecue pork salad? Asian fish salad? Well, if you really need to stay within the realm of poultry, how about Asian duck salad?

Of course, the mere fact that we have a certain salad created to cater to our culture is funny. I mean, growing up in Taiwan and all, Chinese people don’t eat salad, ever. Salad is clearly not a part of our traditional palette. So first we have our named tagged onto a type of food we don’t make, then have it limited to only one type of meat.

There is one possibility I have yet to consider though, maybe all Asian chicken salad strictly forbid the use of any other type of chicken excepted the ones imported from Asia…

Wow, that’s a whole ‘nother mess of complications.

Upon installing WP 2.3, I immediately was being fed errors due to the use of Simple Tagging plugin that I had before to manage tags. I had to disable Simple Tagging, then import the tags into WP’s new format. The import process was pretty easy and smooth. However I immediately found that there are no tag management UI built into WP 2.3 at all. Good thing that someone had already wrote a plugin to help manage tags, but it’s perplexing that you would have a blog that supports tags without any UI that help manage tags.

Furthermore, the tag cloud display that shipped with WP has no options whatsoever. It just displays a cloud, it doesn’t give you any customization capabilities. You can’t display a list view that I had before (although arguably I may stick with the cloud view anyway). Although there are a few early plugins that can help you customize the tag cloud display just a little bit, none of them had the flexibility of the Simple Tagging Widget.

Of course, retaining Simple Tagging isn’t possible, because the database structure that Simple Tagging used before is completely invalid with WP 2.3. So even though now there’s an “official” tagging structure in place, overall it is much less effective and usable than previous third party implementations. Over time, there will be third party enhancments to the built-in tagging mechanism for WP 2.3, but I’m really disappointed in how bad the out-of-the-box experience is.

I’ve ran into a few annoyances so far with the iPhone:

• I missed being able to manually manage music. Even though creating a playlist for the iPhone is still pretty much the same thing, it just creates one extra step that I didn’t have to deal with before.
• I’m guessing the above change was made due to the “always disconnected except for sync” nature of the iPhone. I think Apple realized people will need to answer their iPhone at any given time, they can’t wait for the “disconnect first” method of previous iPod and all USB mass storage devices. So unless you are syncing, the iPhone is always disconnected. I think they could’ve created some sort of logic to handle manual management as well… but they just didn’t have the time to do that, so manual management is out.
• As a result of the above change, USB storage mode is turned off, so you can’t use the iPhone as a hard drive. Well, not unless you have other apps to hack it, I suppose.
• For whatever reason, iPhone also do not charge from USB when the computer is turned off. My previous iPods can charge from powered USB hubs even when the computer is turned off. The iPhone cannot. Hence you will probably be wise to grab another dock cable and have that with your AC adaptor ready at all times.
• I really hate the recessed headphone port.

Those are the only gripes I have with iPhone. There are other shortcomings for more advanced users, such as not being able to install native iPhone apps without hacking it (and having to reinstall them again probably after every Apple firmware update to the iPhone). I do wish there is a robust eBook application of some sort, but for the most part I’m happy using the various web-based apps for things that iPhone can’t do with antive apps. For example, Meebo on iPhone works extremely well.

With the new, larger screen, watching movies and tv shows on iPhone is also much more pleasurable than before. Also the playtime is much longer than iPod Video due to the lack of hard drive access. I’ve purchased an entire TV series from iTMS for the first time, and actually enjoyed the private watching experience almost as much as I would have on my HDTV setup. I can watch the shows before going to sleep (instead of hanging around the living room and falling asleep on the couch), I can watch them during lunch breaks at work… etc.

I also ripped some of my DVD’s using Handbrake into iPhone compatible format. I never thought I would enjoy watching video on such a small screen, but there’s something about the private, personal experience I can have now with my movies, just as with my music, that is very satisfying. I don’t think I’ve been this happy with any consumer electronic device in a very, very long while (since my first Tivo?).

Despite of how much I love the iPhone, I still don’t believe in signing  a two year contract for AT&T/Cingular. I’ve been a customer with Cingular back since when they were PacBell PCS, I have no reason to be locked down to a contract to prove my loyalty to a carrier. Especially since the iPhone isn’t subsidized at all. If signing a contract meant I can save a few hundred dollars, then at least the value proposition is existent. There is absolutely no reason to a sign a contract for a phone that will inevitably be unlocked (and probably be available at the same price).

Service issues aside, the iPhone itself is simply one of the most brilliant consumer product ever made. It is a device that will completely reshape the mobile phone market. The problem is, the other phone manufacturers seem to be thinking, “Wow, the iPhone has a touchscreen, we must all move to touchscreen-only phones as well.” I’m not saying that iPhone’s touchscreen isn’t brilliant, but it isn’t the end-all solution to the woes of the mobile phone design we’ve seen in the past decade.

There are already several manufacturers that’s decided to manufacture their own versions of a touchscreen phone. Some of which has been offering touchscreen capability for years (for example, most of HTC’s Windows Mobile based phones). The problem with these phones isn’t whether or not your buttons are placed on a screen or engraved into a rubber nub, the problem is the underlying unresponsive, inadequate, and sometimes down-right ugly software.

It’s easy to credit an obvious invention (even though touchscreen has always been around, the type that iPhone uses, basically a type of clear laptop touchpad, is completely new to the market) for the success of a hardware product; ultimately it isn’t just the hardware design, but how the hardware design interact, melds and works with the underlying software. I don’t find the buttons on my Razr hard to press, I don’t find the features on my HTC Windows Mobile phone to be so hard to access or inadequate; but I also don’t understand why everything I do on either of these phones seems to take place 3 seconds after I’ve executed a command, clicked a button, or even just scrolling through the address book.

Years and years ago, there was this great, ambitious operating system called BeOS. It was built from the ground up to be a multi-threaded, multi-CPU operating system. The most impressive aspect of BeOS, was how responsive it was at handling tasks that were extremely taxing to other operating system at the time. You can run multiple windows of videos, move them around the screen, resize them and still have lightning fast response. Mind you, this was the age when most users were still living with Windows 3.1 (maybe some on Windows 95?). The software engineers of BeOS were able to achieve this, because they were very aware that the outward responsiveness of an OS is just as important to its interaction with the user as the underlying operations.

For example, while another OS will prioritize the task of writing files to the disk, BeOS prioritized the playback of that file being written, saved, copied. The writing of the file can still be finished up in the background, but the immediate feedback of that file being worked on is the most important thing to the user, and delivered a level of interactivity that was far more appreciable.  The OS was instantaneously more robust because it made sure that you knew what it is doing, what you’ve done, then went ahead and finished up all those tasks in the background where it wouldn’t bother you.

That is in essence one of the most important aspect about the iPhone. On the first week of iPhone’s release, CNet even performed a real-life, side-by-side test of iPhone’s UI speed against what Apple were showing in the commercial. There were all sorts of accusation that Apple had fussed with the footage, sped up some parts, edited out the lag time in between. Well, the CNet guys found that almost second by second, they can do everything that was done in the commercial with their iPhone. Sure, the touchscreen UI is slick and intuitive, but it is also the amazing responsiveness of the UI, the underlying robustness of the software, that really sets the iPhone apart from any phone that you’ve ever used before.

Another company named Pasen put out this video on Youtube recently:

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Sure, it’s a touchscreen device that completely rips off the iPhone. Look at the video, watch the number of times you had to click, double-click, drag fingers around, try to see if the device is responding. Wait, what is it doing now? Did I just select that? Is that playing now? How do I.. wait, let me click on that again.

I hope the rest of the consumer electronics industry doesn’t follow suit. It’s not just about the touchscreen.

Last season for Battlestar Galatica

All I gotta say is, ABOUT TIME!

This past season of BSG was complete, utter crap except for the last episode, which just gave you barely enough to want to see how it ends. The progression of plot in BSG is completely reminiscent of X-Files. One episode in the beginning of the season to continue the cliffhanger from season past, and one/or one two-part episode with a cliffhanger to keep you coming back the next season. Fill in everything in between with utter, useless crap that explores mini-plots that no one cares about.

Since the second season of BSG, I’ve felt that the show was written for maybe one mini-series, or maybe two seasons; then stretched out into many, many more seasons because the TV executives realized they have a franchise on their hand, and they can make a *LOT* of money from it. So let’s stretch out that story arc, fill in as much crap as possible, and figure out how to make money from it for another extra few years.

It’s sad when a series that started off with so much promise, left me in the end saying, “Good riddance.” Although, I’ll still Tivo the last season just to see where it goes, and probably watch the movies and whatever other property they’ll come up with after that as well. After all, I stuck it out for every single season of X-Files, even after Mulder was nothing but a guest appearance for three or four episodes a season.

What I find really disturbing, especially so soon after the Virginia Tech incident, is that at some point the media will focus their attention at the video game console that is in the center of this event. Just as some people tried to link the VT incident with video games as well, although later proven to be completely irrational. There will always be a part of media, and people, that like to sensationalize violence and associate it with new trends in society that they can’t fully accept. For the last generation, movies, music, television were their scape goats. For our generation, it’s video games.

Why do I find that disturbing? It’s not because I had a particular affinity towards protecting criticisms towards video games. I’m for the most part, completely indifferent about how other people feel about my video game hobby. This incident is disturbing to me, because despite repetitious display of outrageous public, violent act performed by troubled teens, the “tool” at which they use to their means continues to be ignored as one of the factor & culprit of these incidents. We focus on “what went wrong with this kid” and “who do we blame for what happened here”, rather than pointing our fingers towards a much more direct question, “Why does a teenager have a gun?”

United States, by my recollection, is the only so-called civilized country that allows its citizen to acquire firearms with ease. Private ownership of lethal firearms is outlawed in almost all other first-world country. Americans as a whole continues to ignore the role that firearm plays into these violent crimes.

I have handled shotguns, went to shooting club with my uncle, took target practice in the past. What surprises me is how easy it was to disassociate a extremely lethal weapon to the potential harm it could do if not used properly. Yes, stabbing a person with a knife is a violent, and potentially lethal act; but there is something strange about using a gun that disassociate at least part of the visceral impact, and the moral ramifications of what you’re about to do, to actually doing it. I think of it like fighter jet pilots in a war, where they bomb targets by following instrumentations. It’s like playing, *gasp*, a video game, where the act of what they do and the ramifications of what they’ve done is almost completely disassociated with the actions they are taking.

I just think, that there’s a very huge difference between being able to shoot, versus trying to kill another human being without the help and the instantaneousness of a firearm. If we didn’t have firearms commonly distributed to private citizens here in United States, a lot of these violent crimes would’ve happened on a much smaller scale, perhaps not even occured at all. Columbine does *not* happen if those kids only had knifes and bats. Sure, some kids might be hurt or killed, but it would not be as massively terrifying as it was. Virigina Tech does *NOT* happen without a gun.

So why are the media so obsessed with scapegoating video games, movies, television?

Problem is, responsibilities is also directly linked with faults and blame. It wasn’t the CEO that made the decision to focus on project A instead of B, it was the VP of some other department. It wasn’t the VP that made the decision either, it was the people working in the department that gave the VP the valid information, whatever that may be, that led to the decision for the VP to make the recommendation to focus on project A instead of B. Thus causing company to lose market share and money instead of potentially make millions and watch the stock prices go up (which is only a hypothesis, since project B never got off the groundf anyway).

So to preserve one’s “lack of blame”, one must create at least another level in the chain of responsibilities. Thus, at least this is what I theorized, focus groups & market research were born.

I’m not completely against market research or focus groups, but I *am* against using those as the only benchmark of a company’s ability to make the right decisions. Companies hire people with dozens of years of experience in a given field, trusting that their expertise will provide the company with the right process, visions and plans. Yet at the end of the day, the same said company will question their employees to come up with data & research that supports their every decision.

So what if Jack in Sales Operations has 15 years of experience, and knows that the marketing angle we’re taking simply won’t work? He’s only been in the field for 15 years, what does he know? Let’s go out and do a round of focus group, market research, surveys, then we’ll see if the evidence is substantial enough to prove Jack right or wrong. God forbid if there was inconclusive evidence, in which case we’ll just do another round of research and focus groups until we get enough evidence to be conclusive.

At the end of the day, if we don’t give at least some credence to the 15 years of experience that Jack had, why did we hire Jack anyway? Why didn’t we just hire some fresh-out-of-college data research geek? Google it, wiki it, then focus group, survey; all decisions in consumer product should be made that way, shouldn’t it?

I am Jack’s rambling rage.

So here are a few annoyance that I’ve found with my Mac:

• The Finder -
  The Finder is an adequate file management system. Part of my unhappiness with it is due to my experience with Windows Explorer for the past several years. Although Windows Explorer has its share of flaws, both file management system can take a few tips from the other. Although the more time I’ve spent with Finder, the more familiar and comfortable I became. It is also quite apparent that since moving to the Mac, I tend to interact with files a lot less with Finders than individual applications. For example, organizing my photos is done through iPhoto, music through iTunes. However, this also brings me to the next caveat…

Despite those complaints, the nuisances that I’m experiencing with OS X are far less troublesome than I had with Windows. I had installed Windows XP on this machine in Bootcamp, anticipating needing to run some Windows app at some point. I also pondered getting Parallels. The truth is, I haven’t found any software in Windows that I can’t find a replacement for in OS X. Often times the replacement software is much more intuitive than its Windows counterpart (that’s entirely another blog entry, eh?). The only thing I wish I can do is run Windows games, and I haven’t found a single game that really makes me want to dual-boot back to Windows at all.

I heard rumors that Parallels is working on getting game API calls routed through their virtual machine. There has always been such software for Linux to get Windows games to play within Linux. So… I guess that day will come.. eventually.

Although it isn’t perfect in the world of Mac, it’s close enough to convince me to get a Macbook Pro to go with my quiet behemoth at home.

Yet here, they are the common vehicles of the wealthy young or old alike. What’s most ironic though, is finding a middle-aged man with silver mane, proudly and triumphantly driving down the freeway in his exotic sports car traveling at 55mph. Perhaps they are just past their athletic prime and no longer possess the reaction time required for pushing their vehicles to the limit. Or maybe they’re just very aware of how much it would cost if a dent was ever placed on their precious gem.

Either way, there’s nothing funnier than following a Porsche at 55mph in the slow lane (I was heading for the exit, mind you), then watching the driver slam on the brake lights as if going any faster would tear their $100k vehicle apart (he, on the other hand, was not exiting).

I just spent half a day of work fixing Windows on my work computer, which Windows Update broke. Apparently, somewhere along the line, the automatic update got some corrupted install files. Every time I started up my computer, it attempts to run itself, then crashes svchost.exe with some memory error.

If you looked into your task manager, you’ll probably see several entries by svchost.exe. This is a process that Windows uses to execute DLL’s, thus an integral process of the system that just can’t be allowed to fail by any extent. After my svchost.exe took a dump (and not all of them, just one of the many processes), my XP-styled UI disappeared, reverting back to “classic style”. I couldn’t run certain applications, Internet Explorer hung & crashed, and I could not access any networked drives.

The solution was, to turn off automatic Windows Update completely. Reboot the computer so it no longer tries to run the Windows Update process. Then manually go to the Windows Update site to get my updates. After wasting a few hours figuring out what’s going on, and fixing it… now my computer is up and running again. Still, isn’t this the type of thing that should *never* happen with an automatic update process? Now I’m leaving my automatic update off permanently to prevent any future occurrences of this issue.

As much as I adore Paul Thurrot (and that’s no sarcasm, I really do admire how much time & effort he put into giving us accurate & detailed information), I can’t help but note the enthusiasm and appreciation he has towards one of the “most important Windows release in years.” I mean, if you only release one major OS revision ever fives years, are there anything less important? However the review eschews every possible comparison to other existing operating system and turns a blind eye towards the alternatives. There’s much to be said about judging an OS release on its own merit, but the whole mega-multi-part review just reminds me of how much Windows Vista is just playing catch-up.

The most apparent example of this, is the 3d-accelerated UI of Vista. The Aero/Glass (I’m still not sure exactly how it’s branded, Aero Glass, Glass Aero? Aero, then Glass? *shrug*) interface in itself is close to being unusable. For those of you who has not seen it yet, there are basically translucent UI element all throughout the operating system. The windows in background are blurred through the translucent elements, thus giving you the frosted “glass” effect for which the UI is named after. Problem is, having multiple windows stacked this way causes visual confusion and provides no improvement to productivity. Transparency in Windows has been done before via third party addons, although not accelerated by hardware, and from an usability stand point has never worked well.

So if the interface is so bad, why did Microsoft put it in? It’s the same reason why people mod their computer cases, cut out windows on the side and put in a bunch of neon lights. Anyone who thinks a bunch of tied down cables and liquid cooling tubes lit by a dozen LED and neon light is “cool” clearly has no appreciation for aesthetics and design. At some point Microsoft thought that’s the user base that they had to impress.

Flip3D is equally atrocious as a task-switcher. It’s Microsoft’s attempt to make something that resembles Expose, without just copying it completely. Expose on the Mac instantly zooms out all of the windows you have open, allowing you to look through the windows and find the application that you are working with. Flip3D, places the windows at a diagonal view that detracts from readability. Furthermore, it stacks the windows up, so a single view of all your open windows isn’t really possible. At the end of the day, it is no more effective the good ol’ alt+tab. What I found most offensive, is that for all the 3d accelerated power, the windows aren’t even anti-aliased, giving you an ugly jagged edge as it is repositioned into an isometric/diagonal viewing angle.

Interface aside, the underlying security improvements of Windows is nothing more than just catching up to Unix, the underpinning of MacOS X. The one thing that would’ve taken Vista past OS X, instead of just playing catch up, was the ambitious database-driven file system. So ambitious in fact, that WinFS was axed years before the final development cycle. Who knows when we’ll get WinFS? Another five years? Would WinFS still be relevant?

What about the bundled software? Vista finally has a built-in Calendar without people having to shell out money for their own PIM or Outlook. It also now has separate applications that handles photos and other media, instead of dealing with those media organization strictly from Explorer (not IE, but Windows Explorer) as it was in Windows XP. Basically, Microsoft just copied iCal, iPhoto, iMovie and iDVD. Way to go Microsoft.

The last item that I’ve found extremely disappointing, is that Windows Vista is supposed to be the version of Windows that finally allows us to take advantage of the 64-bit processor now found in most PC’s. It seems silly that all of our AMD Athlon and Intel Core chips has had 64-bit extension for more than a year now, and still yet to be able to take full advantage of it. However, Vista 32-bit and 64-bit are actually different installs. So if you install 32-bit Vista, you’ll have to reinstall completely if you want to use 64-bit. If you install 64-bit today, you’ll probably find software or device driver conflicts as they weren’t written for the 64-bit Vista.

MacOS X, btw, is 64-bit (even though I think few apps are written to take advantage of that yet), and has been for almost an entire year now. No separate installs, no separate drivers. It just works.

Vista will do just fine, because people with PC will eventually upgrade, new PC’s will ship with it, corporations will adopt. However, it is nevertheless a disappointing and underwhelming release. Anyone who sees through that will heavily consider switching to a Mac, just as I have.