{ insert Pazaak printf("Fixed\n"); }
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Friday, January 6, 2012
My wife left me, my dog died, and now I'm RAKING IN THE DOUGH.
Despite the formulatic nature of country music (male singer = tough guy gets touchy feely; female singer = takes revenge on the non-touchy feely guy); there is some country music that I like. I'm especially fond of Garth Brooks. My mother, more so.
One of the happiest days in her life was when I put one of my old PCs in her bedroom with nothing but iTunes on it, then ripped the entire Garth Brooks box collection onto it. I have failed in instructing her on anything else about computers, but she can start iTunes and listen to Garth to her heart's content. This from a person who still has a difficult time figuring out the satellite TV box. May this be a lesson to you; motivation is the key to leap any technological hurdle.
So, when I heard that Garth would be playing more dates at the Wynn hotel in Las Vegas, I figured I'd surprise my mother with a trip and a show. Then, I saw the price tag: '$225 plus tax and service charge'. That's per seat. Which means, after tickets, hotel, meals and gas, I might be pushing $1,000.00 just for a concert.
The crazy thing is, he'll probably sell out all his concerts.
This is coming from a man who will not sell his music on iTunes and believes that the service is killing music as we know it.
I know where he's going with this. He doesn't like a song being sold for $1.29, when you can sell the same song for $12.99 and get 9 other songs that you could care less about. Perhaps he's too dependent on people like my mother, who have no clue what BitTorrent is, or who live too far in the sticks to have Internet access.
However, I don't believe iTunes is killing music. Truth be told, I think it's taking music back to its roots.
Many of you out there have never seen a vinyl record, and even fewer of you remember listening stations, where you could pull that record out of its sleeve and play it in the store before buying it. Previewing music; a feature of iTunes.
Many artists lament that their albums are hacked up and sold as parts of the whole, believing that single song downloads are killing the album. Never mind that rock and roll pretty much owes its existence to the 7 inch. We also have the EP so that we can get a smaller, concentrated stream of awesomeness, as opposed to 10 tracks of suck (Morrissey, in fact, thrives in, and even prefers, this format). Singles, as well as creating your very own EPs; a feature of iTunes.
The fact is, iTunes isn't killing music. It's sticking its finger in the dyke to keep it from breaking. If you want to point the finger at someone, let's aim it at the music industry itself. I'd elaborate the faults of the record producers, but it would involve bashing an endless list of 'artists' who are merely elevated to fame as part of a pop machine, then frequently discarded as so much used tissue paper after exploiting their 15 minutes of fame. The same system that ignores people with real talent because they 'don't sell', yet ironically WOULD sell if they put half the effort into marketing those talented people as they did with the talentless hacks.
I have purchased whole albums from people that I had only heard of 5 minutes prior to the purchase. There are some people who I had adored yet would not spend one more dime on because they've become terribad. Music, just like any other product, relies on these things:
1) Producing a good product
2) Marketing that product
3) Providing an efficient and cost effective way to distribute that product
I guess what I'm saying is, don't blame #3 when there are epic fails in #1 and/or #2. Especially when you've got nothing to complain about.
One of the happiest days in her life was when I put one of my old PCs in her bedroom with nothing but iTunes on it, then ripped the entire Garth Brooks box collection onto it. I have failed in instructing her on anything else about computers, but she can start iTunes and listen to Garth to her heart's content. This from a person who still has a difficult time figuring out the satellite TV box. May this be a lesson to you; motivation is the key to leap any technological hurdle.
So, when I heard that Garth would be playing more dates at the Wynn hotel in Las Vegas, I figured I'd surprise my mother with a trip and a show. Then, I saw the price tag: '$225 plus tax and service charge'. That's per seat. Which means, after tickets, hotel, meals and gas, I might be pushing $1,000.00 just for a concert.
The crazy thing is, he'll probably sell out all his concerts.
This is coming from a man who will not sell his music on iTunes and believes that the service is killing music as we know it.
I know where he's going with this. He doesn't like a song being sold for $1.29, when you can sell the same song for $12.99 and get 9 other songs that you could care less about. Perhaps he's too dependent on people like my mother, who have no clue what BitTorrent is, or who live too far in the sticks to have Internet access.
However, I don't believe iTunes is killing music. Truth be told, I think it's taking music back to its roots.
Many of you out there have never seen a vinyl record, and even fewer of you remember listening stations, where you could pull that record out of its sleeve and play it in the store before buying it. Previewing music; a feature of iTunes.
Many artists lament that their albums are hacked up and sold as parts of the whole, believing that single song downloads are killing the album. Never mind that rock and roll pretty much owes its existence to the 7 inch. We also have the EP so that we can get a smaller, concentrated stream of awesomeness, as opposed to 10 tracks of suck (Morrissey, in fact, thrives in, and even prefers, this format). Singles, as well as creating your very own EPs; a feature of iTunes.
The fact is, iTunes isn't killing music. It's sticking its finger in the dyke to keep it from breaking. If you want to point the finger at someone, let's aim it at the music industry itself. I'd elaborate the faults of the record producers, but it would involve bashing an endless list of 'artists' who are merely elevated to fame as part of a pop machine, then frequently discarded as so much used tissue paper after exploiting their 15 minutes of fame. The same system that ignores people with real talent because they 'don't sell', yet ironically WOULD sell if they put half the effort into marketing those talented people as they did with the talentless hacks.
I have purchased whole albums from people that I had only heard of 5 minutes prior to the purchase. There are some people who I had adored yet would not spend one more dime on because they've become terribad. Music, just like any other product, relies on these things:
1) Producing a good product
2) Marketing that product
3) Providing an efficient and cost effective way to distribute that product
I guess what I'm saying is, don't blame #3 when there are epic fails in #1 and/or #2. Especially when you've got nothing to complain about.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
The passing of a legend
(Please bear with me as to the tardiness of this post. I know it's about 2 months late in the coming, but I've been busy.)
October, 2011 saw the loss of one of the most important and influential computer minds of this generation.
I'm not talking about Steve Jobs. Whoooooooooah, no.
I will concede that he had a major influence in the computer world, but let's face hard reality. Apple Computer, Co. was instrumental in bringing the PC to the masses, thanks to the Woz and his engineering genius. Steve Jobs, on the other hand, was a salesman, a go-getter, effectively the face of Apple, but not the mind. Woz was lacking in the inter-personnel department; the reclusive, creative Ying to Job's Yang. However, the reality is Jobs brought nothing to the table technologically. He had the business mind and charisma to brand and market.
What this means is, and I hate to break this to you, but Steve Jobs didn't invent the iPod. He was the whip cracker over a group of extremely intelligent group of people. The people who actually did the work.
No, the person I'm referring to is Dennis Ritchie. The creator of the C programming language and a key developer of the Unix operating system. Without his contributions, you wouldn't have Mac OS X and your shiny new iPad would look a lot different.
Dennis Ritchie, or dmr, was found in his residence a week after Steve Jobs died. Of course, most of the sobbing, the accolades and the fanfare went to Jobs, leaving Ritchie's passing rather obscured. Few outside the technological field even knew his name, yet his work has impacted every person who has ever touched an electronic device. And I mean that quite literally. The same cannot be said of Steve Jobs.
This, of course, is typical. Its the loudest, most conspicuous people that get the attention, while often the real innovators stand back from the limelight, preferring to do the work so that the loud ones can continue in their ostentatious ways.
Case in point...how many people would actually get a reply from Steve Jobs if they had sent him an email? Yet, dmr frequently responded to questions or requests for clarification regarding Unix questions.
So, for anyone who has ever laughed uncontrollably from this unintentionally hilarious scene, let's remember the nerds, the people who actually contributed to the computing world. Not just the ones who sold it.
October, 2011 saw the loss of one of the most important and influential computer minds of this generation.
I'm not talking about Steve Jobs. Whoooooooooah, no.
I will concede that he had a major influence in the computer world, but let's face hard reality. Apple Computer, Co. was instrumental in bringing the PC to the masses, thanks to the Woz and his engineering genius. Steve Jobs, on the other hand, was a salesman, a go-getter, effectively the face of Apple, but not the mind. Woz was lacking in the inter-personnel department; the reclusive, creative Ying to Job's Yang. However, the reality is Jobs brought nothing to the table technologically. He had the business mind and charisma to brand and market.
What this means is, and I hate to break this to you, but Steve Jobs didn't invent the iPod. He was the whip cracker over a group of extremely intelligent group of people. The people who actually did the work.
No, the person I'm referring to is Dennis Ritchie. The creator of the C programming language and a key developer of the Unix operating system. Without his contributions, you wouldn't have Mac OS X and your shiny new iPad would look a lot different.
Dennis Ritchie, or dmr, was found in his residence a week after Steve Jobs died. Of course, most of the sobbing, the accolades and the fanfare went to Jobs, leaving Ritchie's passing rather obscured. Few outside the technological field even knew his name, yet his work has impacted every person who has ever touched an electronic device. And I mean that quite literally. The same cannot be said of Steve Jobs.
This, of course, is typical. Its the loudest, most conspicuous people that get the attention, while often the real innovators stand back from the limelight, preferring to do the work so that the loud ones can continue in their ostentatious ways.
Case in point...how many people would actually get a reply from Steve Jobs if they had sent him an email? Yet, dmr frequently responded to questions or requests for clarification regarding Unix questions.
So, for anyone who has ever laughed uncontrollably from this unintentionally hilarious scene, let's remember the nerds, the people who actually contributed to the computing world. Not just the ones who sold it.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
He got an 'F' in Analogies
As you have probably heard, Hank Williams, Jr. masterfully crafted an analogical comparison between Barack Obama and Adolf Hitler. (This is sarcasm folks. Calm down.)
Now, as everyone knows, it's never OK to use a Hitler/Nazi comparison on broadcast TV unless 99.5% of the network's audience equally reviles that person. In fact, unless you're on MTV (or Fox News if it's a right wing statement), you generally must never say anything slightly controversial.
The best part of this is, ESPN didn't fire Hank Williams, Jr. No no no no no...Hank quit.
I'm sorry...that's not the best part. The BEST part is, and I quote, "(ESPN) stepped on the Toes of The First Amendment".
Now boys and girls, pay close attention, because this is what happens when you rely on your 4th grade understanding of the First Amendment. Don't let this happen to you and learn from this, because when you grow up and enter the real world, knowing what the First Amendment actually protects is very important.
For those of you who don't know, the First Amendment provides that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..."
In simpler terms, it says that you have freedom of speech and Congress can't prevent you from saying or printing it. It does not say that you have the right to say whatever stupid drivel that first enters your brain and do so with no consequences. Hank has the right to say stupid stuff. ESPN also has the right to choose whomever it wants associated with its name. ESPN is a business, not your vehicle for spewing nonsense, and if it feels you are a liability then they have every right to protect the image of their brand name.
There's also another consideration. Not all speech is protected. There are some very notable exceptions to the freedom of speech (defamation; time, place and manner restrictions; child pornography; commercial speech; etc.). This means you can't yell 'FIRE!' in a crowded theater (unless there actually IS a fire), you can't print in a newspaper that your boss is a thief (unless he's an attorney), you can't advertise that your Chinese food is MSG-free if you're liberally sprinkling Ac'cent on it, so on and so forth.
(This isn't a comprehensive list of exceptions, and there are even exceptions to the exceptions. What I'm trying to say is...don't take this as legal advise. I'm probably getting into enough trouble with this post as it is. All I need is for one of you guys to go out there and say something stupid, point the finger at me and say 'but he said it's ok!').
One of these exceptions is Radio and Television, due to the "scarcity rationale'' (i.e. there are more people wanting to say stupid stuff than there are wavelengths available to carry it). ESPN is regulated by the FCC. While I doubt the FCC will pull ESPN's license for a Hitler comparison, they can't simply cater to an escalated lack of prudence to any future gems that Hank decides to bring up.
So remember friends, there are very important lessons to be learned here:
1) Say what you want, but not on your employer's dime.
2) Be prepared to face the consequences of what you say.
3) The Lions are awesome this season. Deal with it Dallas and Chicago.
Now, as everyone knows, it's never OK to use a Hitler/Nazi comparison on broadcast TV unless 99.5% of the network's audience equally reviles that person. In fact, unless you're on MTV (or Fox News if it's a right wing statement), you generally must never say anything slightly controversial.
The best part of this is, ESPN didn't fire Hank Williams, Jr. No no no no no...Hank quit.
I'm sorry...that's not the best part. The BEST part is, and I quote, "(ESPN) stepped on the Toes of The First Amendment".
Now boys and girls, pay close attention, because this is what happens when you rely on your 4th grade understanding of the First Amendment. Don't let this happen to you and learn from this, because when you grow up and enter the real world, knowing what the First Amendment actually protects is very important.
For those of you who don't know, the First Amendment provides that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..."
In simpler terms, it says that you have freedom of speech and Congress can't prevent you from saying or printing it. It does not say that you have the right to say whatever stupid drivel that first enters your brain and do so with no consequences. Hank has the right to say stupid stuff. ESPN also has the right to choose whomever it wants associated with its name. ESPN is a business, not your vehicle for spewing nonsense, and if it feels you are a liability then they have every right to protect the image of their brand name.
There's also another consideration. Not all speech is protected. There are some very notable exceptions to the freedom of speech (defamation; time, place and manner restrictions; child pornography; commercial speech; etc.). This means you can't yell 'FIRE!' in a crowded theater (unless there actually IS a fire), you can't print in a newspaper that your boss is a thief (unless he's an attorney), you can't advertise that your Chinese food is MSG-free if you're liberally sprinkling Ac'cent on it, so on and so forth.
(This isn't a comprehensive list of exceptions, and there are even exceptions to the exceptions. What I'm trying to say is...don't take this as legal advise. I'm probably getting into enough trouble with this post as it is. All I need is for one of you guys to go out there and say something stupid, point the finger at me and say 'but he said it's ok!').
One of these exceptions is Radio and Television, due to the "scarcity rationale'' (i.e. there are more people wanting to say stupid stuff than there are wavelengths available to carry it). ESPN is regulated by the FCC. While I doubt the FCC will pull ESPN's license for a Hitler comparison, they can't simply cater to an escalated lack of prudence to any future gems that Hank decides to bring up.
So remember friends, there are very important lessons to be learned here:
1) Say what you want, but not on your employer's dime.
2) Be prepared to face the consequences of what you say.
3) The Lions are awesome this season. Deal with it Dallas and Chicago.
Friday, July 8, 2011
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
An open letter
Dear Hackers of the World,
I get it. You want to bring down the man. But seriously, enough.
You're making it a pain to log into Netflix on my PS3. I can't download games. Now, I'm gonna have to wait even longer.
What's your agenda? You hate being able to use your PS3? You decided that you wanted to become Templars for the cause of Micro$oft and the XB360 (boy, who woulda thunk. Hackers for M$)?
Please. Go do something productive. Quit interfering with my downtime.
Love, The Poor, Innocent Victims of Cyberspace.
I get it. You want to bring down the man. But seriously, enough.
You're making it a pain to log into Netflix on my PS3. I can't download games. Now, I'm gonna have to wait even longer.
What's your agenda? You hate being able to use your PS3? You decided that you wanted to become Templars for the cause of Micro$oft and the XB360 (boy, who woulda thunk. Hackers for M$)?
Please. Go do something productive. Quit interfering with my downtime.
Love, The Poor, Innocent Victims of Cyberspace.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Really? Official?
I cannot turn on the radio for any length of time without hearing a commercial about Jameson Whiskey being the 'official' drink of St. Patrick's Day.
I wonder what Jameson had to do to get an endorsement from the Catholic Church and the Church of Ireland? I mean, granted, you cannot think about church without immediately thinking about Jameson, but to be the 'official' drink, is there an application process? Were there other drinks in the running? I'm pretty sure that the competition between Jameson and Guinness was fierce. Twitter bombs may have been involved.
This will really shake up the establishment. Probably haven't seen anything this shocking since McDonald's attempted to steal the 'official dinner of Christmas' title from KFC. I guess having the Shamrock Shake wasn't enough for them.
Can't we all just get along? All this fighting is detracting from the real meaning of St. Patrick's Day; finding an excuse to wear silly green hats and drinking one's self into a slobbering stupor.
All this ranting has made me hungry for some chicken.
I wonder what Jameson had to do to get an endorsement from the Catholic Church and the Church of Ireland? I mean, granted, you cannot think about church without immediately thinking about Jameson, but to be the 'official' drink, is there an application process? Were there other drinks in the running? I'm pretty sure that the competition between Jameson and Guinness was fierce. Twitter bombs may have been involved.
This will really shake up the establishment. Probably haven't seen anything this shocking since McDonald's attempted to steal the 'official dinner of Christmas' title from KFC. I guess having the Shamrock Shake wasn't enough for them.
Can't we all just get along? All this fighting is detracting from the real meaning of St. Patrick's Day; finding an excuse to wear silly green hats and drinking one's self into a slobbering stupor.
All this ranting has made me hungry for some chicken.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
