iPatience

I keep seeing reports getting on Apple's case for not having introduced any major products since Steve Job's death.  Of course, you know everyone was just waiting to say this.  Truthfully, it hasn't been that big of a gap, but people have been wondering if the company can survive without him, and this is an opportunity for people in the press who don't understand technology of the tech industry to sound informed for once. You know they're just waiting for a full-scale round of told-ya-so's.

I wonder if these people have even been paying attention:  Do you really remember Apple under Jobs?  Did you get the impression that they were releasing new products every week?  Because here's how it actually happened:

• iPod - 2001
• iPhone - 2007
• iPad - 2010

The truth is, part of Apple's secret is to not release too many products too quickly.  They've always been careful not to rush products out without thinking them through (Hello, Windows 8!) or make a bunch of quick cash-in products.  That keeps the brand strong, and maintains the reputation that leads to business reporters having unrealistic expectations.

As you can see from their product releases of the past, they really aren't behind schedule when it comes to releasing some new line.  So the one thing the current Apple management had better have learned from Steve Jobs is: don't be afraid to be stubborn.

Knees Of Fire

I was relatively late in going from a desktop computer to a laptop.  So even as the world moves on to tablets and smartphones, I'm still getting used to the laptop.

For one thing, the heat this thing generates is really noticeable this time of year.  It takes away from my heating needs in winter, but if you actually want to use it on a lap, it can get uncomfortable this time of year.  I notice that fashionable lengths for shorts have increased with the popularity of laptops.  Coincidence?

And then there is the seating position.  If you're going to sit with it on your lap, you're limited to sitting there, legs together, facing forward.  No crossing the legs or slouching.  At least we'll be promoting a generation of good posture.  Though one of these days I'm going to dislocate my thumb reaching for the touchpad.

So how will tablets affect us?  Aside from a return to 70's short shorts, we'll be able to tolerate much more heat in our fingers.  And they'll discover a new form of wrist injury caused by trying to reach for the middle keys of the virtual keyboard without dropping the tablet.  Maybe they'll name that after me.

Damn You Zdeno!

I found a store selling hockey pucks as Canadian souvenirs.  Yes, there are lots of examples of embarrassing origins of souvenirs, but it's not often that it's something as distinctly Canadian as a hockey puck:

Aiming Low

One day you’re walking down a city street, when you notice the camera from the local TV station is pointed your way.  You take it as a compliment - they’ve picked you out as TV-worthy - but then you notice that the camera is too low.  You start to warn the camera man, excuse me, I think you need to adjust the tripod, I don't think you're going to get my head in the shot. Then you realize with a shock: they’re filming you for a story on obesity!  You're going to be one of the headless overweight people they show while telling viewers about the latest stats on poor nutrition!  You berate yourself, why did you let the gym membership lapse, why did you have to wear your distinctive Blue Oyster Cult T-shirt that all your friends will recognize?

At least I’m assuming that’s how it happens.  Or maybe they just take stock footage of people walking around, edit together all the overweight people, and crop it so you can't see the heads.  But I’d like to think that they have to go out and intentionally film from the neck down.  That means that occasionally someone must notice the camera, get angry and attack them, leading to bizarre, neck-down fight footage.  I’m off to find it on YouTube.

Geekdom Is The Mother Of Strange Internet-Fellows

To me, the fascinating thing about the vastness of the Internet is not that it covers every topic you could possibly want, but that it also covers just about every combination of topics you could want.  Interested in Lego and the art of Roy Lichtenstein?  Here you go.  Want to see Star Wars mixed with 1980's teen movies?  No problem.

Of course, in those examples, the constituents are partially or totally geeky.  So I wonder, can you find combinations of things that are not at all geeky on the Internet?  Let's try it:

• Two and a Half Men & Limp Bizkit - nothing, though it turns out Fred Durst signed a deal to star in a sitcom.
• American Idol & Barbie - There is an American Idol Barbie (no surprise) though that probably would have happened without the Internet.
• Starbucks & Adam Sandler - A fake Adam Sandler Twitter account mentioned Starbucks once, but that hardly counts.

So there you have it.  There is once aspect of the Internet that we geeks still control: bizarre pop-cultural mash-ups.

Chuck Jaeger

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this past weekend's movies, in which Pacific Rim debuted in third, behind Grown-Ups 2, with Despicable Me 2 in first, despite being in its second week:

• There was a movie about men confronting their age after they move back to their home town.  That was the dumb movie compared to the movie about giant robots fighting giant monsters.
• Here's how bad sequel-itis has gotten: Even when we produce a movie that's nothing but special effects, explosions and fighting, it won't succeed.  People will prefer a half-assed comedy, as long as it's a sequel.
• The same weekend the giant monsters movie comes out, the science-fiction speciality channel - the one that made Battlestar Galactica serious and thoughtful - will find a way to make an even dumber movie.
• I had worried about the use of the word "jaeger" to refer to the giant robots in Pacific Rim.  Specifically, I feared that when we finally make giant robots, they'd end up called "jaegers," rather than "mechs" as they're called in most anime.  Turns out I shouldn't have worried.

A Sudden Serious Turn

Honestly, I was all set to write a post about Sharknado, when the not-guilty verdict in he George Zimmerman trial came out and that all seemed quite meaningless.

I posted a link on Twitter explaining the verdict.  That page was actually written before the verdict, but predicted that Zimmerman would walk.  Basically, the argument is this: the accused is innocent until proven guilty, and it's hard to prove guilt when there are no witnesses.

In general, I can buy that concept.  I'd rather know that some guilty people go free, than know that some innocent people are going to jail.  Really, the problem I have is in the thought experiment in which a black vigilante confronts and shots an unarmed white teenager.  There's no way the black Zimmerman goes free, and I doubt he'd even avoid the death penalty.

One comment I saw on Twitter was that regardless of anything shown in the trial, the fact is that had Zimmerman just stayed in his car instead of confronting Trayvon Martin, none of this would have happened and Martin would still be alive.  That's the particularly sad part of this case.  Even if we don't know the details, we do know that the incident was produced out of nothing: Zimmerman approached Martin thinking him to be a criminal; whatever Martin did to Zimmerman was in response to that, and possibly shaped by his anticipation of what Zimmerman's intentions were.  So essentially it was a crime produced by the expectation of crime.  

That produces quite a danger going forward: regardless of whether Zimmerman was a perpetrator, a victim, or a bit of both, the fact is he made a very bad decision, and that decision has been exonerated by the courts.  We can only hope that this verdict is not taken as an endorsement of aggressive, proactive self-defence.  Innocent or guilty, that strategy didn't work for Zimmerman; hopefully others will realize that.