Disqus - Latest Comments for jcieplinski

Re: Apple sues Samsung for copying their iPhone and iPad

jcieplinski — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 15:29:23 -0000

Exactly. Microsoft is doing a better and better job of copying Apple, even in business processes, as Google and Adobe are mastering the old Microsoft methods.

Re: Apple sues Samsung for copying their iPhone and iPad

jcieplinski — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 12:09:24 -0000

Unfortunately, due to the American legal system, Apple really has no choice but to defend itself against this sort of copying, as petty as some of it may seem. If you don't take every single company who kind of sort of copies you to court, you lose your right to sue other companies that really do steal your ideas outright.

Having said that, what Samsung is doing with its tablets is actually closer to outright theft than petty copying, anyway. And while I'm sort of torn about Apple taking a PR hit to go after them, I personally can't see the benefit of this copying to Samsung, either. It's obviously not working to increase sales, confusing people about whether or not something is an iPad. You'd think that having a distinctive product would be a better idea. The anti-iPad. That strategy certainly worked for the Droid.

But when you're in a rush to push to market in a year a product that Apple took more than half a decade to develop, you don't have much choice, I guess, but to copy whatever you can from the iPad. Innovation takes too long.

A smarter company would be willing to wait, take its time, and come out with an "iPad Killer" four or five years from now. That's what Apple did, after all, when Microsoft released its first tablet.

But try selling your board of directors on that.

Re: Magic Mouse Battery Life: 6 Weeks. Not Good.

jcieplinski — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:23:03 -0000

Yeah, that is annoying about Apple. They'll never admit to a problem unless they really have to.

A firmware fix could improve the situation, I guess. But I won't hold my breath for it. Rechargeables do sound like a good option, especially since I will soon have two Magic Mice of my own (work and home), plus my girlfriend's two (work and home). That's a lot of batteries to replace every six weeks.

Re: Magic Mouse Battery Life: 6 Weeks. Not Good.

jcieplinski — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:51:00 -0000

I'm in the same boat as you. My second set of batteries is now down to 38% already. And I'm pretty good about turning my mouse off when I'm not using it. That touch surface must really eat batteries more than the average mouse.

It's a problem, but honestly, I like the Magic Mouse so much more than any other mouse I've tried that I can't get all that upset about it. Especially once I installed MagicPrefs. The gestures are just too good to pass up.

Re: Slight Buzz From Google Buzz

jcieplinski — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:58:26 -0000

Yeah. I know. It's almost unfair to compare anything to Tweetie 2. I really think Tweetie 2 is the best app on the iPhone, bar none. Even better than all the built-in Apple apps, in many ways.

Re: Slight Buzz From Google Buzz

jcieplinski — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 12:25:56 -0000

I'm not 100% certain a native iPhone app will be necessary for this. Google Reader seems to work just fine without a native app.

You may be right, though. I can't imagine using Twitter in a browser. I don't even use Twitter in a browser on my Mac anymore, let alone my iPhone.

I noticed Buzz was suddenly added to my Google Reader Safari page on the iPhone yesterday. I only played with it for about two seconds, but it seemed to work okay. This is one of those services that simply won't work without an internet connection, so doing it in the browser might not be a terrible limitation. I'll need to experiment with it a bit more.

Google voice, on the other hand, is really hampered by being a web-app. Having to be connected to the web just to hear my voicemails, or to make a call is a big problem, especially in San Francisco.

Re: The iPad: “iPod Pro” For Consuming, Not “MacBook Mini” For Creating

jcieplinski — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 15:39:48 -0000

I think it's a little more complicated than that, though I do agree with you mostly that for now, the iPad leans more towards consumption than creation. But the demo of iWork, I believe, shows that the iPad has the POTENTIAL to be a good content creation platform. We're just all going to have to rethink our approach to UI a bit.

I think in a year or two, there will be enough serious apps on the iPad to make creation more feasible. And, depending on that spread of new creation-oriented apps, we may see iPads with more creator-friendly features.

Eventually, I can see the touch-screen interface taking over a large part of the computing market, or at least merging into the current mouse and keyboard approach. The lines will blur eventually.

And in the meantime, it's good for Apple that most users are far more consumption-oriented than creation-oriented.

Re: Initial iPad Thoughts

jcieplinski — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:41:06 -0000

Well, the good news is that not only is there a keyboard accessory, but it will also work with standard bluetooth keyboards. So in a real pinch, I can hook up my aluminum wireless keyboard and type away when I really have long batches of text to write. And the slip case they make for it can be propped up at an angle, making it easier to read while typing. I'm sure third parties will come to the rescue for those sorts of things, too.

But I'm optimistic about the software keyboard, as well. It really only works when you're sitting down, but that's no different from a laptop, I guess. I was hoping for some way to type while standing; even in portrait mode, I think that would be awkward with your thumbs. Hard to say.

Re: Initial iPad Thoughts

jcieplinski — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:14:23 -0000

My biggest disappointment is that the OS is just the iPhone OS. I expected them to take advantage of the screen and multitouch a bit more in the main interface.

But then after I thought about it, it occurred to me that this IS just the iPhone interface. 3.2 is not out for iPhone yet, but by guess is that when the next version of the iPhone OS comes out for iPhone, it will look like the iPad exactly. In other words, Apple will only have to develop one main user interface, saving time and money. This also makes the iPad instantly easy to use for anyone who has used an iPhone or iPod touch. Still, I don't like the compromise. The built-in apps demonstrate that this machine has much more potential than that. I hope eventually Apple gives the iPad more of its own features in this area. I, too, would love to see multiple apps opened in some sort of windowing mode, rather than one app taking up the whole screen for no reason.

The thing that got me to want to buy this immediately was iWork. Not iWork itself, which is very cool. But watching exactly how much more advanced that software is than anything currently on the iPhone. 3rd party developers are going to have a field day with this thing, and the result will be much more powerful apps in the future. Ones that will put the iPad closer to the MacBook than the iPhone.

My question: will a developer be able to make an iPhone version and a different, more powerful iPad version of the same app, and the user only has to buy it once? I know iPhone apps run on iPad, but more powerful iPad apps that won't run on iPhone can be made. It would be cool if you can have a watered down version of the same app on your iPhone with your purchase.

For me, I currently use a laptop as my only machine. iPad makes me think that getting an iMac at home and an iPad for the road might be a better choice. For a few hundred dollars more, I get a much better machine at home for my most powerful uses (mostly music creation these days) and enough power in the portable machine to get by quite well. I haven't done serious graphic development in a coffee house in quite a while.

My only question is whether or not to pay the extra money for the 3G version. I don't like the idea of spending another $30 a month on anything. And AT&T in San Francisco is almost the equivalent of no connectivity beyond WiFi hotspots, anyway. Still, with no contract, it would be nice to have the option to buy a month of 3G when I think I might need it, and cancel it whenever I think I won't. Is that worth $130, though? Plus, I'd have to wait an extra month to get it. That's a tough one.

Re: Despite A Competitive Future, I Really Hope Netflix Succeeds

jcieplinski — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 21:09:40 -0000

I dropped my Netflix account a while ago, only because I haven't had nearly as much time as I used to to watch movies. But I still think it's a great service. One of the few truly brilliant ideas of the first dotcom bubble.

I hope they figure out a way to keep it going, too.

Re: iSlate, iTablet, or iPad?

jcieplinski — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:30:26 -0000

iPad is far too similar to iPod to be good for branding. Confuses people. I agree with many who feel it's time to drop the whole "i" thing already.

I'd cite AppleTV as an example of an Apple consumer product that doesn't have an 'i', but then again, they wanted to call that one iTV before "EyeTV" from Elgato made that impossible.

Some have said going back to iBook would be a good thing. Personally, I think not. First off, this thing won't be "book" like at all. It's a flat piece, not a folding computer. The reason PowerBook and iBook worked was because they were book-like devices, in a sense.

If you're going to go back to an old defunct brand name, why not call it Newton again? Though, technically, the OS was called Newton, while the device was called MessagePad, which doesn't work. They could bring back eMate, the other Newton device that came out just before Jobs killed the platform. That would certainly sound better than iSlate.

I really hope they come up with something completely new that no one else has guessed yet. But like you said, I'm buying one no matter what they call it, so I guess it doesn't really matter all that much.

Re: Mac Mini TV Wrangling Reminds Me How UI Matters More While Specs Matter Less

jcieplinski — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 12:05:01 -0000

I tried Flex with the mini myself, but it only took a week or so to go back to my AppleTV. Just getting all my content into Flex properly would have been such a massive undertaking, it simply wasn't worth it.

I completely agree that it's all about the UI. My girlfriend's mother figured out how to rent a movie on my AppleTV in minutes. She still doesn't know how to watch an episode of the Daily Show I taped last night on my EyeTV on the mini.

I continue to believe that the only thing AppleTV is missing is content. If you could rent or buy any movie you want, not just Apple's limited selection, and you could pay some sort of fair monthly subscription for the five or so TV shows you actually want to watch, Netflix and Blockbuster, Comcast and all the other cable companies would all be doomed.

Which is why that hasn't happened, I suppose.

Re: More Tablet Speculation: WiFi, Price, MacBook Instead?

jcieplinski — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 11:09:44 -0000

Yeah. I have to think that Apple will put it out there for under $1000. Maybe that's wishful thinking, but anything that is less than a full-blown laptop (which this thing will be, no matter how much whiz-bang it has) needs to cost less than a full-blown laptop. Otherwise, it really is a niche machine for people with money to burn.

Apple can always charge a premium over what other people charge for things, and the tablet will be more than any one item it gets compared to (netbook, Kindle, other Android Tablets), but all those things it will get compared to are selling in the $200-$300 range. For $1000, you can get four Kindles. It's just a little too much of a premium. I have to think that the WSJ, which has had a lousy track record lately, is pulling numbers out of its butt as usual on this one.

The iPhone is competitively priced with other phones. The iPod has been reasonably priced for a long time now. I have to think that using their own custom PA Semi chips and their negotiating strength for Flash RAM prices, Apple can keep unit costs down enough. Plus, maybe they'll figure out a way to subsidize it other than through AT&T. Maybe MobileMe will gain some killer new features that coincide with the tablet, and the yearly subscription to that can help them offset the tablet's price tag? So $800 for non-MobileMe members, $600 for subscribers? Who knows? They do have that mysterious new server farm in South Carolina.

Price is the one area I'd be most cautious about predicting. Apple can literally change the pricing two days before the announcement, if they want to.

Re: Webomatica’s Best iPhone Apps Of 2009

jcieplinski — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 13:38:25 -0000

BeejiveIM. Saves me from spending money on unlimited text messages.

Instapaper. Great for reading web articles in Muni tunnels.

Tweetie 2. Probably the best iPhone app, period.

Dropbox. Companion to the desktop software, which is going to help me ditch my laptop for a desktop sometime next year.

N.O.V.A. Certainly the best FPS on the iPhone yet.

GoodReader. Great for long PDFs, like software manuals, etc.

GuitarToolkit. So great to have a tuner/metronome/chord guide with me at all times.

Deliveries from JuneCloud. Great companion to the Dashboard widget. Something I'd always wished I'd had on my Treo years ago.

MoonPhase. I'm not THAT into astrology, but the moon is fascinating.

FlightTrack Pro, by Mobiata. Really great if you use TripIt in conjunction with it. One of those apps I only use a few times a year, but those few times make it so worth it.

CoasterCounter. Wins my prize for the app that fills a niche no one else seems to have thought of. Being the only iPhone app of its kind is a rare thing. (Disclosure: two friends of mine made this app, and I helped out with some of the icons/graphics.)

Plus literally dozens of apps I've tried and loved based on your reviews. It's no wonder I can't even consider any other phone platform at this point. Way too much invested in the App Store economy.

Re: Apple Tablet: iPhone OS vs. OS X Matters Less and Less

jcieplinski — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 12:02:24 -0000

The Tablet will run OS X, just like the iPhone does. Apple only has one core OS. What you're talking about here is the user interface, which, if you think about the form factor of a tablet, can't be either the Mac's or the iPhone's. You can't manipulate right clicks and tiny dock icons with your fingers, and you can't have a 10-inch screen filled with Tweetie 2. Neither scenario makes any sense.

This is why Microsoft tablets have always failed to gain any momentum. All Microsoft did was slap a touch screen onto Windows. Which doesn't work at all. If Apple wants to succeed with this thing, it needs to make the tablet BASED on OS X, so that there's a commonality of function, and so that developers can learn to code for it easily, but it also needs to give the tablet its own unique UI, to accommodate the bigger screen, bigger battery, and potentially more powerful chipset.

The end result will probably be closer to an iPod touch than a MacBook, but I fully expect it to have some Mac-like functionality. Like multitasking of 3rd Party apps. Perhaps basic editing of office documents. In other words, the software will be more powerful than an iPhone. It will use the app store, of course, and maybe even be able to run iPhone apps in a smaller window, or something. (Speaking of which, it will probably get some sort of windowing interface, unlike the iPhone.) But it will also get its own apps, which is where the crossover into netbook functionality comes in.

So, no, you won't be able to run Handbrake on it. (Don't see why you'd need to do that without a DVD drive and on the go, anyway.) Or Photoshop. (Can you imagine trying to tap on a flyout menu with your fingertips?) Though I suspect eventually Adobe, or a smaller competitor like Pixelmator, will end up with its own tablet app to do some basic photo editing. Something that can open PSDs and make some adjustments. (The iPhone already has a really weak version of Photoshop.)

The bottom line is that you'll have to buy new software for it, but that software will be cheap, and it will give you most of the functions you want in a portable computer, unless you're a super power user who can't live without Final Cut Pro on the plane. In which case, you'll fortunately have the option of still carrying a 17-inch MacBook Pro.

The tablet doesn't need to replace the laptop for those of us who want a Mac on the go. What the tablet needs to do is get the remaining people who have never had a laptop but have always wanted some computing functionality when away from home. Or people like me, who realize now that a laptop has always been a compromise as a primary computer, and who are considering going back to a full desktop for the power stuff, while still having an inexpensive way of doing some computing on the go beyond what the iPhone can do.

Re: iSlate, iGuide… Prepare For Blood Curdling

jcieplinski — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 11:43:50 -0000

I remember thinking that iPhone was too unimaginative. But I got used to it, and it sort of has a okay sound to it now.

I still hate MacBook Pro. So awkward compared to PowerBook. And don't get me started on MobileMe.

I don't think Apple has had a good name for anything since iPod. iPod is the only "i" name I've ever liked.

I'd love to see them break the "i" trend completely and come up with something completely fresh. Then again, I'd also like Apple to change the startup sound every couple of years, like they used to. The marketers won't let either happen, though.

Whatever they call it, I'm starting to get really psyched about it. Depending on how powerful this thing really is, I may just switch from laptop/iPhone to iMac/tablet/iPhone. Can't believe I'm considering not owning a laptop for the first time since '96.

Re: Why Apple’s App Store Is So Important

jcieplinski — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:06:16 -0000

I think you're right on the money with this. One of the reasons that Google doesn't really care if the iPhone succeeds is that Apple doesn't really compete with Google in the advertising space. But Apple's entire "no-ads, walled garden for pay" system may in fact be a direct competitor to the Google "free in the browser with ads" way of life. The two companies can work together now to defeat a common enemy (Microsoft), but in the long run, they will both probably compete more and more with each other.

Apps in browsers always feel like a compromise to me, which is why buying the $2.99 iPhone app makes sense over the free web-based version. But that's me. I don't watch commercials on TV, either. I'd much rather pay on a per-show, per-episode or season basis than get a Cable subscription.

Perhaps there are enough of both kinds of consumers to keep both companies happy.

Re: Google Chrome OS: I Don’t Get It

jcieplinski — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:05:43 -0000

I absolutely agree with you. Chrome OS is definitely not meant for me, either.

Google's obsession with the browser goes back to the company's founding, and it makes sense, when you consider that Google's only profit center is advertising on the web. But assuming that everyone wants to spend all of his or her time in the browser is ludicrous to me.

I don't even use GMail in the browser. I greatly prefer a dedicated mail application. Google Docs is a cool idea, in theory, and it's fine for the occasional document I want to share, but 999 times out of 1000, I'm far happier in Pages or Numbers.

To me, a web app always requires some form of compromise over a dedicated application. No matter how good HTML 5 is, any app in the browser is no match for a real app. As far as I'm concerned, it's a completely unnecessary compromise. Because my Mac can do both just fine.

The only "app" in the browser that makes sense to me is an RSS reader. Since I'm clicking on links to articles that are on the web anyway, it makes sense to do that right within the browser. I search for things. I read my feeds. I get maps and directions. That's about it.

So, like you said, what's the point of a computer that's even less powerful than my iPhone? I, too, already feel like my iPhone is better than any netbook would be. It's more than powerful enough for my email and 24/7 communications needs, and it fits into my jeans pocket.

I think with Chrome OS Google is trying to put just one more nail into the coffin of Microsoft. MS's strategy with Windows 7 is to push the price of netbooks upward, because they're getting killed by having to offer XP for practically nothing on netbooks now to compete with Linux. They're hoping the lure of Windows 7 will be enough to get people to stop being cheapskates all of a sudden.

If Google can generate enough buzz around Chrome OS and keep prices of netbooks down by outselling Microsoft, Microsoft doesn't stand a chance of maintaining its market share, even in the least profitable market of computing. (They've already lost the high-profit market to Apple.)

And why does Google care so much about killing Microsoft, while they seem to have little problem with Apple? In a word, Bing.

Apple doesn't have a search engine. They make no money in online advertising, and don't seem to have any plans to in the future. But Microsoft is hellbent on owning everything Google does. Office Live, Bing—they even had their own YouTube wannabe site that they had to shut down eventually.

If you ask me, if Microsoft were to replace that default bing search field in IE with Google, as it is in Safari and Firefox, Google would drop Chrome OS tomorrow. But that's not going to happen.

So Chrome makes sense in that regard, I guess. But the thing I don't get is why they don't just use Android for that purpose. Android is flexible enough to be run on a netbook. There are already a few netbook/tablet computers coming that run Android. Why not push that angle, so that you can present one unified OS, still give it away for free so MS can't compete, still push browsing and search to drive in profits, give your users access to all those great Android apps, give the Android developers a larger market to sell to, and help win the handheld war while you're winning the netbook war?

Seems like Google has a really disjointed strategy right now. Unless there's some secret method to this madness that will be revealed at a later date, I don't think it makes much sense. It could be that Google is simply scared that it only knows how to make money via ads in browsers. And thus, the only way to thrive is to drive everyone to the browser for absolutely everything. In which case, the long-term strategy would be to migrate Android over to Chrome OS for phones, as well. But that's a hard sell.

Re: Google Phone? Apps Have Me Locked To The iPhone

jcieplinski — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:44:12 -0000

I think Apple learned from Microsoft the power of locking users in with applications. I couldn't agree with you more; no matter how much of a pain AT&T may have been over the last year, leaving the iPhone platform is simply unthinkable.

"There's an app for that." Apple knew a long time ago where to focus the marketing.

And if Google's phone is anything like the Droid, I'm not interested, anyway. Google doesn't exactly have a reputation for good design. Google's UI design is not their strong suit. They're a company of PhD geeks and engineers. They don't have the marketing sense to design a phone on the level of the iPhone, as far as form and function are concerned. Not to mention that they have no experience in hardware design whatsoever.

This is all assuming that the rumors are even true. I actually think it would be a terrible move for Google. What did developing their own hardware ever do for Microsoft? Remember, the Zune didn't kill the iPod. It killed all the other non-iPods. Would a Google phone kill the iPhone, or just kill all the other Android phones? It's a crappy way to treat your partners.

Re: Mad Men: Shut The Door. Have A Seat.

jcieplinski — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:01:38 -0000

That's a great point about father figures. Hadn't thought of that.

I'd love to see more office, less home life in the next season. No reason why Betty needs so much screen time.

I also think Trudy is going to be a more interesting character moving forward. I think the fact that she fully supported Pete through the failed promotion and his big risk jumping ship with Don has made their marriage stronger. Pete's finally starting to appreciate her.

Weiner has done a heck of a job setting up for the next season. He's basically put himself in an excellent negotiating position with AMC. They can't let the show go now or get someone else to produce it.

Maintaining that level of interest and quality can't be easy. Almost no one else manages to do it. I think the real trick is knowing when you've said all you can say, and ending the show gracefully at the right time. Clearly, this show isn't over yet. I keep asking myself where they can possibly go next, but this time Weiner has already answered that question.

Viet Nam, the assassinations of MLK, Bobby Kennedy, the hippy movement, Civil Rights—we still have a lot more 60s to explore. I'm assuming that Joan's husband will be killed in Viet Nam. That much seems obvious. And that marriage doesn't work, anyway. (Amazing how many bad matchups this show has. Seems like Bert Cooper has the right idea being single.)

Re: Mad Men: Shut The Door. Have A Seat.

jcieplinski — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:51:01 -0000

Best season finale so far. Amazing, how Weiner managed to put all the pieces back together in a way that I should have seen coming but didn't.

At the end of the day, no one wants to watch a show about Don Draper the loser who lets everyone bulldoze him all the time. When the time came, Don remembered himself. He took back the power, harnessed his keen ability to sway people in a particular direction, and took a huge risk. The difference this time is that he's learned the value of other people. He knows he can't take on the world alone. While he may have lost his wife (good riddance. She was getting severely annoying, anyway) he gained very valuable assets in Peggy and Pete, who have both learned a lot about negotiating from Don. He can't take them for granted anymore, but he doesn't have to. They will work tirelessly for the good of the new company, now that they have a real stake in it.

I can't see Betty's tryst with this politician lasting long. It's just not that interesting, from a plot perspective. And seeing Don as a weekend dad, taking the kids to the park, sounds really boring, too. My only hope is that Betty comes running back to Don, and he rejects her. Then just write her off the show. If they get back together again, then Betty has to do something more interesting than yell at Sally and complain about her life being so unfulfilling. She has to grow up sometime and take a real interest in something other than horseback riding.

The fact of the matter is that Don is finally in a position to be in a good relationship. He's learning to value relationships, despite Roger's accusation to the contrary. So instead of Betty, the trophy wife who he married to complete the suburban businessman facade, he can find himself a Rachel Menken. Someone who can challenge him. Someone he can respect.

That scene in the bedroom was so powerful, when Don calls Betty a "whore." This isn't hypocrisy on Don's part. He's slept around, but he's never sold himself the way Betty has. He's betrayed Betty, but he hasn't betrayed himself.

She can talk all she wants about her reasons for leaving Don. It has nothing whatsoever to do with his infidelity. She knew about that last season. It's not because of the secret identity, either. If she had a problem with secrets she wouldn't have married a guy who had told her nothing about his past. It's about trading in Don for something she sees as better. It's complete selfishness.

I really would like to see Sal make a comeback, but Lucky Strike is Sterling Cooper Draper Price's ace client. Unless that guy dies, or something, Weiner's going to have to do some serious writing to make that work. I'd also like to know the fates of Cosgrove and Paul Kinsey. Are they finished? Will we see some competition from the rival firms, or will Don try to recruit them? The possibilities are endless.

After an entire season of things falling apart, Weiner has managed to bring us right back to where the show started. Only different. Season 4 makes total sense now, whereas it didn't look too promising just a few episodes ago. I can't believe we have to wait until next August to see what happens next. And I can't believe I'm looking forward to it already.

Re: iPhone Replaces Newspapers; Magazines Next

jcieplinski — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 13:42:48 -0000

I'm guessing this is exactly why Apple execs have been rumored to be in talks with major publishers of magazines and newspapers. Print publishing is facing a similar situation to the music industry a few years back, with fewer an fewer people buying physical copies of their product.

Rather than close shop altogether, they might be tempted to try a new business model with the iTunes store and a new tablet device/iPhone/iPod Touch for distribution.

The tablet will be so much more than a magazine and newspaper reader, I'm sure. But if Apple does with the tablet what it did with the iPod, and somehow makes it worth paying for all this content instead of getting it for free on web sites, then we really could see the death of dead tree publishing in a few years. At least for periodicals. Books will live longer in physical form, but I can't see magazines and newspapers holding out much longer.

The only question remaining is how will Apple structure this deal? Will they offer free subscriptions with ads, and pro paid versions without? Will larger print establishments still be forced to downsize to a much smaller operation?

I have no doubt many magazines will still close shop or consolidate. And many of the great journalists out there will simply go rogue and start their own blogs, which they could easily live off of, since they won't have to pay for all the overhead of a major newspaper or magazine.

Either way, I don't think there will suddenly be a shortage of great writing out there. But you will see fewer and fewer newspapers and magazines in dentists' offices and public transportation.

Re: Mad Men: The Gypsy And The Hobo

jcieplinski — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:43:25 -0000

That's exactly what I see. Peggy becoming the Don Draper to Duck's Roger Sterling. Adding in Sal would be a very good move. I was hoping he wasn't written off the show permanently.

I also don't think it's Betty's fault that Don cheats. But Don's secrets about his past made it impossible for him to bond with anyone. Now that the secret is out, he stands to lose more by leaving Betty than by staying with her. Whether or not she is strong enough to move on without him is another matter. I don't give her that much credit. She's no Rachel Menken.

I agree that Don's persona won't blend well with the new freedoms of the 60s. But that's the beauty of his character. It's easy to forget that the counterculture in America was the minority throughout the 60s. There were a lot more Don Drapers than Paul Kinseys. And yet the freedom was what caught the attention. It dominated the press. It changed the country, even if the country wasn't ready.

I think a character like Don is always able to adapt to the times in which he lives. And, because he's the ultimate pitch man, he'll be able to cut through the crap of the hippy movement the same way he saw through the beatniks in season 1. He has his faults, but we admire his keen knowledge of human nature and his innate talent for getting the most out of any situation. So I vote for an epiphany over continued emasculation. Weak male characters surrounded by smarter women are all too trendy nowadays. I'll take Don Draper or Tony Soprano over Ray Romano any day.

Re: Mad Men: The Gypsy And The Hobo

jcieplinski — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:52:11 -0000

Nah. Don already ran away in season 2. No need to repeat that plot line.

I have to disagree with you about Betty. I didn't see her as standing firm to learn the truth. I saw her as once again the selfish, self-righteous child who confronted Don without giving a thought to her own fault in the situation. She completely disrespected Don's privacy by snooping into his things, and then she immediately assumed the worst instead of giving Don a chance to explain his past to her. The pictures of his family in the box should have given her a clue that there was more to the story than just an affair and a past marriage.

And it's not like Betty has been completely faithful to Don over the past three seasons, anyway. I'm not saying she doesn't have a right to be upset, but most people would at least be slightly embarrassed at how they came about the information; Betty doesn't even conceive of the possibility that she's done anything wrong.

As far as the future goes, if anything, I think now that the truth about Don is finally out, the two of them will likely become closer than they ever have been. The real reason Don has never felt loyal to Betty, or his company, or anyone, is that he's been carrying around this secret for so long. You can't be close to people who don't know who you are. Now that the big burden is off his shoulders, and now that Betty knows something about him that very few other people know, they can finally be more intimate.

This is why Don immediately ends the affair with Suzanne. After all, he hasn't been "caught" in this affair. So there's no reason to end it completely, unless he suddenly realizes that staying with Betty is inevitable now.

Just as Burt Cooper's knowledge of Don's secret forced Don's hand into signing a contract, Betty's knowledge forces his hand into finally taking his marriage seriously.

So season three has been mostly about Don losing the considerable power he's enjoyed over everyone in his life thus far. He no longer lives life completely on his own terms. It's interesting to watch Don in a vulnerable state; I just hope he doesn't remain completely emasculated for too long.

Meanwhile, I really hope Weiner doesn't just drop the whole Duck Phillips thing. I think Peggy needs to quit Sterling Cooper if her character is to move forward. Campbell is the more obvious person to leave, but he won't, because that's too obvious.

Joan's husband will die in Viet Nam, but that probably won't happen until midway through season 4. She'll come back to Sterling Cooper in some higher capacity, also in season 4.

The Kennedy Assassination, on the day of Sterling's daughter's wedding, has to play some part in the finale. What effect that will have is hard to say. I'm looking forward to it.

Re: How Long Should A Computer Last, Anyhow?

jcieplinski — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:05:21 -0000

Sure, your old computers from twenty years ago lasted longer, but they weren't laptops. Laptops endure a lot more torture than desktop machines, even if you do baby them. All that heat compressed into such a small area is bound to take its toll.

I'm holding on to my current MacBook Pro past the one-year mark for the first time in a long time. While it will suck if it dies on me now that it's out of warranty, I have to agree with you that I wouldn't be too upset about it. Sure, it cost me over two grand, but I make my living with my computers, so it's paid for itself several times over already.

I've known people who keep their laptops for five years or more with no problems. I've known others who end up with bad logic boards after a year. It seems to be the luck of the draw, in many cases.

The reason you hear more about Apple computers failing than you used to is that Apple is selling a lot more computers these days. More customers = more issues. No way of getting around that.

I have yet to buy an iPod or an iPhone (and I've bought a LOT of them) that didn't need to be replaced under warranty at least once. Again, mobile devices are definitely more prone to failure.