Miscellany
John points to a 94x magnification of Velcro being pulled apart. Wicked cool. You can also see Scotch tape being ripped, more Velcro, still more Velcro, and Equisetum strobilus, all worth a look.
How much do I love Default Folder? Its functionality should be built in to OS X. (I was just using it quite a bit today, lots of saving in different locales, etc., and I thought a shout-out was in order.)
After months of waiting, I found it. Part of a pint was consumed this evening. It was yummy. Retrophisch™ Recommended!
Tivoli's latest iPod accessory
It's a shame that at the time I reviewed the Tivoli Audio iSongBook, there wasn't the black version. Such is life. Now, Tivoli has the unusually-named iYiYi coming in the fall. Billed as a digital home entertainment system, the iYiYi doesn't look to have many more features than the iSongBook, but it does have a deeper casing. This means it's not as portable as the iSongBook, but will likely sound better, since the iYiYi will be capable of delivering deeper, fuller bass sounds, one of the areas in which I found the iSongBook lacking. [Wave of the phin to Uncrate.]
This is how you remind me
I like iCal's alarm features, but there is one feature request I have: I'd like to have both an e-mail sent and have an alarm message pop up on screen. For now, it's an either/or proposition, and which one I select depends on the type of event I need the reminder for, and when said event takes place. Having the option of setting both types of alarms covers all of the bases.
Miscellany
Oh, if true, a tabbed Finder would rock. (Yes, I am aware Path Finder has this functionality already.)
You may have seen Seurat's "Sunday Afternoon on the Island of LaGrande Jatte", not realizing what a masterpiece of impressionist painting it is. My first exposure to it, and I'm betting for lots of children of the '80s, was thanks to Ferris Bueller's Day Off. Now, the famous painting has been recreated by those crazy cheeseheads.
It kind of sucks that the 1.0b1 version of a piece of software has crashed more on me in two days of use than the alpha verisons have in the past year. Update: I guess I wasn't clear in my above disappointment. For those keeping score, I've "downgraded" to Adium X 0.89.1.
How do I love thee? Let me check the pitch count
In an IM conversation earlier this evening, a friend was telling me of a conversation he had had with an acquaintance. The acquaintance could not understand my friend's love of baseball, and I thought his answers were worth sharing:
It's the thinking man's sport, to me. It's the game within the game. Where a team sport can have one hero. Where great hitting teams can get crushed by great pitching. Where no-name guys with sub-par careers can make history by pitching a no-hitter, and the greats who pitch seven no-hitters.
The game of inches and 90 feet, strange-shaped ballparks with short porches and high walls.
Where fans root for the opposing hurler because he pitched a no-hitter against their favorite team.
Well, except in New York.
Where players come back out for a curtain call.
Batboys, batmen, batwomen.
Batgrannies.
Where a regular $40 baseball shoots up to $1 million just because some guy hit it for his 500th homer.
Where caps first got their bills bent, and a player can go from goat to hero in the span of an inning.
Where there is no clock and you play until the tie is broken, but the home team still has a chance to win.
Where the managers dress just like the players and aren't called coaches.
And umpires put on the armor, too.
Where fans are so much a part of the game, they can even affect a play, like robbing a flyout into a home run or turning a triple into a ground-rule double.
Where a guy's speed turns a triple into an inside the park home run. Where teamwork can create two outs on one pitch, and, on the rare occasion, a triple play.
Where sacrifices are also a statistic.
And it's the only American past time that another country made into their present time: besiboru ... Japanese baseball. Why do you love it?
Mostly baseball miscellany
Sometimes, it seems like the Starbucks growth pattern really is this bad, doesn't it?
Texas Rangers All-Star Michael Young became the 10th-fastest MLB player to reach the 1,000-hit milestone, cranking off a single in the fifth inning yesterday. Last year's AL batting champ continues to impress, and remains one of our favorite Rangers.
I should also note that while my little phisch will see a game on the tube and remark, "Baseball!", he's not to the point where he knows players' names.
LSU athletics director Skip Bertman was inducted in to the College Baseball Hall of Fame. Topping Bertman's impressive accomplishments are the five NCAA championships he led the LSU Tigers to, making them the dominate team of the 1990s.
I can still remember where I was and what I was doing when the Tigers won the first championship in '91. I was at my hometown church, in the gymnasium, buffing the floors, while my bride-to-be was cleaning the kitchen. Starting in high school, I took on the janitorial duties there as a part-time job, and the once-a-month gym floor buffing happened to take place the weekend of the College World Series finals.
Congratulations, Coach, and Geaux Tigers!
Adium 1.0b1
I note with amusement my pal Damien's post on TUAW regarding the release of the 1.0b1 version of Adium, in which he writes, "Please note that this is still in beta, though I was using it last night without any significant problems presenting themselves." I realize TUAW's audience includes many non-geek types, who are happily using iChat, and haven't yet discovered Adium, but it still brought a grin to my face to see a somewhat boilerplate beta-warning line for software that, while technically still in development, has been very stable--for me, at least--over the past year I've been using it. This is the first version I've seen with the 1.0 moniker attached to it in any form. If you don't use the voice and video chat features of iChat much, you should check out Adium (new beta). It supports multiple chat protocols (AIM, Yahoo, MSN Messenger, Jabber (Gtalk), ICQ, IRC, and more...), has a logging feature I have found most useful in finding URIs or other bits of info I forgot to note elsewhere, and is open source, so there's no proprietary lock-in, if that's something you're concerned about.
Miscellany
I would pay good money to see "The Running of the Congressmen."
You know the Oprahfication of America is out of control when Cookie Monster is reduced to introspection. McSweeney's:
Me love cookies. Me tend to get out of control when me see cookies. Me know it not natural to react so strongly to cookies, but me have weakness. Me know me do wrong. Me know it isn't normal. Me see disapproving looks. Me see stares. Me hurt inside.
You, too, can help Cory Doctorow remove his Apple tattoo. I join Gus in snickering.
Another Firefox benefit
Blake Ross gives yet another reason to consider Firefox over Internet Explorer:
People ask me, "Well, gee, if IE7 is starting to catch up to Firefox, and if they've got their hand back in development right now, and eventually they might actually catch up to Firefox in terms of features, what's the benefit of using Firefox? Why are you guys still around if you say that your only goal is just to make the Web a better place?"
My answer to that is, how much can you really trust a company that five years ago completely left you abandoned? If they do, in fact, succeed in taking back some of the market share that Firefox has gotten back from them, who's to say that they're not going to disappear again? My issue is not so much at a product level, it's at a company level. How do you trust a company that left everyone out in the cold for five years?
Independence Day 2006
A Nation of Resolve Two-hundred-thirty remarkable years have passed since July 4th, 1776--but what lies ahead for our liberty-blessed land? Let us take stock, at this anniversary of our nation's founding, of how we started on our course as a nation, and whether we still possess the character of that free people our Founders envisioned us to be. Read the Declaration again with a fresh appraisal, and note the measured tones of the stirring words that begin the treatise: "When in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation." "When...it becomes necessary..." Armed hostilities had commenced on 19 April 1775, at the battles of Lexington and Concord, and a year before asserting American independence, on 5 July 1775, the Continental Congress adopted the Olive Branch Petition, beseeching the British king for a peaceful resolution of the American colonies' grievances. As with tyrants ever, the King declined the proffered peace. The Founders further remarked on their natural hesitation to act boldly in severing ties to England: "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States." A second time in this passage, the Declaration signers contended they acted out of necessity. The Founders described their entreaties to the British government: "In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people." Once more: "We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation..." It is remarkable, indeed, how our nation's character has changed. Upon deciding that independence was necessary, our Founding Fathers acted decisively. How often these days do we match such resolve? Postmodern American man, steeped in moral relativism and doubtful of ascertaining truth, is a bundle of eclectic capacities and features---a far cry from the Founders' notion of human nature. They believed that each individual human is created in the image of God, with the stamp of that divine impress best seen in the fact that each of us is a morally choosing being, fully capable of knowing and distinguishing right from wrong. Our Founding Fathers thus treated liberty of conscience, most particularly in regard to faith, as central to the project of freedom: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..." The Founders believed our lives are not vehicles of pleasure but have moral consequence based on our chosen path of conscience and that government should follow our lead. So started the American Revolution, with this formal statement: "We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States..." The signers concluded, "And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." The Founders forged the earliest temper of our populace on the anvil of freedom, and we diminish such courage and resolve at our own great peril. These were men, "heroes and patriots" in Noah Webster's words, intent on founding a country fit for citizens possessed of sturdy virtue, firm determination and sound judgment, and to inculcate within the new land's citizens a resolve for liberty. This is the heritage we celebrate this Independence Day. Let's live up to it. --The Patriot Post, 06-26 Digest
On flag burning
I admit to having varied thoughts with regard to the free speech versus protecting our national emblem from being burnt aspects of the "protest" burnings of the American flag. Men and women have bled and died for our flag, from the time when our fledgling nation did not have a single standard, but several, to the present day and the present conflicts of the Long War on Terror. Yet it was not a scrap of red, white, and blue cloth these men and women sacrificed, but what that cloth represents. For anyone to burn a flag of the United States of America, except as the proscribed method of taking said flag out of service, dishonors the memory of those men and women. The other side of my mind, however, screams that the protest burning is the kind of freedom those sacrifices were made for. Quite the contest of ideals raging in my grey matter. Yet another reason to love the Internet: if you wait long enough, someone's going to come along and say what it is you want to say, only better. Tod Lindberg:
To tell you the truth, I'm not that crazy about such a constitutional amendment, for the simple reason that flag-burning is unique in the annals of protest for the way in which it perfectly encapsulates what a jerk the person burning the flag is. It is auto-discrediting in a way that no placard or chant, however idiotic, can equal. To set fire to the national emblem of a country that allows you to say and do as you please, including burning the national emblem, is to make the point that your freedom is so visceral a part of your nature that you are oblivious to it. It doesn't reflect well on you to be oblivious in this fashion, but it reflects well on your country for how deeply it ingrains the spirit of freedom into those lucky enough to live here.
That said, the last thing that a constitutional amendment banning flag-burning strikes me as is a slippery slope toward broader restriction on freedom of expression. Besides, our nation has more important things to worry about, like stopping radical Islamists from popping a nuke in one of our major metropolises. I don't think a majority of voters, while perhaps concerned one way or the other on the flag-burning issue, have it ranked as a high priority. It's more of a "when the jihadists are all dead or in prison" sort of issue.
The always popular double standard
It's nice to see anti-Semitism alive and well at the Guardian. Then again, at least it's nice to see a major media source wear its bias on its sleeve, rather than pretend it's purely neutral. Will Hutton decides to rebuke Israel for its recent incursions into Gaza, which netted eight cabinet members, thirty members of parliament, and thirty other officials of the Hamas-led Palestinian government, calling these acts, as well as the bombings of infrastructure targets in Gaza, a declaration of war by the Israeli state. Memo to Mr. Hutton: Well, duh. Hutton notes "Missiles from Gaza are regularly fired at Israel." Yet in Hutton's world, this apparently does not constitute an act of war against Israel by the Palestinian state, despite his earlier statement, "The Hamas government has not yet renounced its commitment to the elimination of Israel or to the use of terrorism." The "elimination of Israel" as a tenant of what Hutton claims is a legitimate and sovereign government is not a "declaration of war"? I'm not sure how much clearer Hamas, and thus, the Palestinian people, who put Hamas in power, have to be in their declaration of war against Israel to satisfy Mr. Hutton. Far from being, as Hutton claims, an inexcusable act of war, Israel's bombings of and raids in to Gaza are more of what Israel needs to be doing to stand strong in the face of an enemy which seeks its utter annihilation. There may be a sliver of hope for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, if Palestinian Prime Minister Abbas were not being undermined by the Hamas majority in the government. But when a majority of a nation seeks not only the defeat of its neighbor, but the elimination of that nation's people, there is little reasoning that can be done with such persons to secure peace. Israel must project strength to protect itself, to assure the Palestinians and any other group or nation that it is willing to do whatever it takes to ensure "Never again." Writers such as Mr. Hutton would do well to pack away their double standards for the Israeli state and, well, "remain silent" would be the polite term.
A compliment from MDJ
MacJournals recently released the third installment of its 2005-2006 MDJ Power 25. The Power 25 is a ranking of the twenty-five most influential persons with regard to the Macintosh platform. These persons are voted on by a select group of Apple insiders, developers, and media types. In the "Unheralded" section of the final installment, MDJ had this to say:
Only writers from TidBITS and Macworld made the list again, blanking out the talented staffs at print publications like MacAddict and at online journals such as About This Particular Macintosh (whose editor, Michael Tsai, is also the author of DropDMG and SpamSieve, two best-of-class shareware products). I have long thought that we have a fantastic staff working on ATPM, one reason why I continue my involvement with the publication. Unlike the other publications noted in the MDJ quote, our staff is all-volunteer; we all have "real" jobs. (Well, most of us do, any way.) Each month our writers churn out reviews and how-to columns, as well as opinion pieces, you won't find anywhere else. We don't regurgitate product specs and marketing materials, throwing in a few hours of the product use. We live with these items, attempting to integrate them in to our daily workflow or play time. Many a reader has told us how much they like our publication because of that depth. We strive, each issue, to be the "e-zine about the personal computing experience". I feel as though this publication is, in a way, an extension of my family, and I always like to see my family's work recognized and appreciated. Thanks, Matt, for the recognition. Kudos, and thanks, to the staffers of About This Particular Macintosh. You guys and gals rock.
Every day at the ballpark is a good day
It's an even better day when your team wins.
Last night I took in my second game of the season at the Ballpark in Arlington. (New readers should note I try not to dignify the Ballpark by its new, corporate name.) My good friend Francisco organized a gathering of friends and coworkers, but it ended up just being four of us, which included his coworkers Patrick and Russ. We had wanted to sit in the Home Run Porch out in right field, but was told by the nice lady at the ticket office that it was sold out, so we went to the upper deck behind home plate. The Home Run Porch never did fill up.
Vicente Padilla had one of his best games for the Rangers that I've seen, going eight innings, allowing only four hits and a single run. He threw an impressive 79 strikes out of 111 pitches; it would be nice if games like this became the norm for Padilla, rather than the exception.
With the bases loaded in the seventh, Astros pitcher extraordinaire Roy Oswalt walked Brad Wilkerson, giving up the go-ahead run. The Rangers notched a third in the eighth inning and closer Akinori Otsuka did what he was brought from Japan to do.
I always have a good time at the Ballpark, no matter if the Rangers win or lose. Jumbo hot dogs (all-beef Hebrew National, of course; they answer to a higher authority) and peanuts, chilled Ozarka bottled water (brought in to the park, not purchased), and good camaraderie with pals makes for a great outing. We missed you, Brent, but given the circumstances, totally understandable. Hopefully we can all get together at the end of July.
ATPM 12.07
The July issue of About This Particular Macintosh is now available. Paper or plastic? Wes ponders the news of Mark Pilgrim's publicized switch from the Mac OS to Ubuntu Linux, as well as the ensuing conversations around the blogosphere. He also points to items on OS X's kernel, the Apple v Does case, Apple conspiracy theories, John C. Dvorak's admission that he trolls for Mac users, and Windows Vista running on a MacBook Pro. We have another double-dose from the prolific Mark Tennent, who loves Call of Duty, but wonders where Apple's next design inspiration will be springing from. Ted takes a rabbit trail off the outlining pathway in this month's ATPO, exploring some of the nature and philosophy behind outlining. Chuck looks at script parameters and results for you FileMaker jocks. Miraz Jordan notes how iWeb's current incarnation isn't a friend to web accessibility, and Sylvester gets around to using Automator. This month's desktop pictures are of Alaska, and are courtesy of John Lowrey. Some of you may know John from Northern Softworks. I have several of John's photos in my desktop rotation, and we thank him for sharing his work with our readers. This month's Cortland features a radical departure as artist Matt Johnson explores a corner of the web comics universe. Looking for a solution to his DVD-burning needs, Chuck reviews DiscBlaze, then turns his attention to Dobry Backuper, which, if you failed to infer from its title, is yet another data backup app. Wes wasn't blown away by Google Map Hacks, while Matthew attempts to find out if he indeed did assassinate the President in XIII. I hope ATPM offers some cool news as the northern hemisphere slides through the hot days of summer, and as always, we thank our readers for...well, reading.
And I thought they wanted you to stay over on Saturday night
Earlier this evening, I booked a round-trip flight, on American Airlines, from Baton Rouge to DFW for my grandmother. It's for the first weekend in August, to celebrate my son's birthday. Initially, I was looking at mid-morning flights out of Baton Rouge on Saturday, August 5th, and a mid-afternoon return flight from DFW on Tuesday, August 8th. I found great times for each, but the total ticket, even with a supposed senior discount, was $361, after applicable taxes and fees. I changed the flight out of Baton Rouge to Friday, August 4th, same time of the day, and the price dropped to $260. So apparently the new savings comes in with the Friday stay-over...
Miscellany
Photojojo has a review of the Lensbaby 2.0, a $149 retro novelty lens for digital SLRs.
From the "Things That Make You Go 'Huh?'" Department, Tom gives us Mr. Martin Heidegger. After reading Heidegger's quote, I have the mental equivalent of wanting to get a bad taste out of my mouth...
In line with my smart-aleck nature, there are more good t-shirts I want, but I would need to perform a serious shirt purge first.
Veto the line-item veto
I'm sure, like Jeff and Mark Alexander, I fall in to a distinct minority of conservative-minded folks in that I do not approve of the line-item veto. Jeff gives a great example of the sort of situation fiscal conservatives point to as their case for the line-item veto:
Congress has embraced the notion of passing ten-thousand-page omnibus bills that provide an appropriation for buying missiles, invest taxpayer dollars in education, reform the health-insurance, and by the way also fund half a dozen wasteful squanderings of the federal treasury. And if the President wants to veto it, he has to veto it all. Nuts, right? As Jeff goes on to say, yes, it is nuts. But members of Congress need to stand up and defend their reasons for why they want these "wasteful squanderings" included along with the legitimate items in such bills. (Though I will quibble that the government has no business in the health insurance business, either.) Equally so, the President--and this is any president, not just the current one--should get the message out to the American people why he's vetoing the entire bill, despite all of its good and legitimate items. More communication is the key. As Jeff puts it, the American people need to be made smarter as to the machinations of their government. The two parties seem to enjoy playing politics, so why not extend that to budgetary items? If Congress sends you a spending bill with bridges to nowhere in it, you veto it, tell the American people you vetoed it because of the bridges to nowhere, and mention you'd be happy to sign it when it comes back without the bridges to nowhere within. Likewise, if Congress sends a spending bill without any largesse--stop laughing, this is a hypothetical after all--and the President still vetoes it, Congress has that handy two-thirds majority thingy from the Constitution. Like net "neutrality" legislation, I think the line-item veto is a mountain that's actually a molehill. We have more important areas to concentrate on, like keeping those who wish to kill us outside of our borders.