2010: Year of the Redesign

Sometimes change is a good thing. I like when computers get faster, when cars get more powerful and more efficient, and when a band I like releases a great new album. Sometimes change is not a good thing, like when a website you visit regularly undergoes a major design change for the worse. This is the situation I have found myself in several times so far this year! In case you haven't noticed, I have a hard time dealing with change.

#1 - YouTube's 2010 Redesign
It all began with YouTube's new site design which launched at the end of March 2010. I feel that YouTube's new look is vastly worse than the previous version in several ways.

My grievances include:
· Video summary moved below player from right-hand side
· Home and History links disappeared
· Subscribe and Upload buttons moved, became colorless and joyless
· Five-star rating system discontinued
· Blatant Facebook ripoff "Like/Dislike" rating system implemented
· User comments no longer displayed in chronological order
· No separator bars between user comments
· Player volume control now horizontal instead of vertical

YouTube before and after the 2010 redesign.

In all honesty, the new YouTube redesign ranks up there with the Edsel, the Arch Deluxe, and New Coke in terms of failures. I'm not the only one who feels this way! Check out the 2,500+ comments on the YouTube Blog that echo my sentiments. The new design is an absolute travesty. Everything familiar has been discarded in favor of a new look that is about as intuitive as a tangled extension cord: where do you even begin?

This is a real shame because I used to love spending hours on YouTube looking up videos about anything and everything. Since their new design launched, I find I am spending less time on there and the time I do spend there is less enjoyable.

#2 - Google's 2010 Redesign
Next, we have the new Google homepage. Google is great at helping me find what I am looking for, but they are slipping when it comes to displaying that information to me. First things first: their logo changed in 2010. The new colors have more of a pastel look and the drop shadow is gone. Instead of looking at a search engine, I feel as though I am looking at a flat, two-dimensional page made for little kids.

Google's 2010 redesign features a subtle new logo.

But wait, it gets worse. The search results page now features a vertical column on the left-hand side of the page. Rather than filtering my search results to show only Images, News, and Videos on top of the search results page, the filter links are now on the left hand side. I don't like this position on the page, I don't like the icons, and I don't like that I cannot collapse the sidebar completely.

Comparison of Google and Bing Results Pages.

Most of all, I hate that the search results sidebar is a blatant rip-off of Bing. While we're on the subject, Google recently introduced a new "feature" that lets users randomize the background image on their homepage in June. Seriously, if I wanted my search engine and results page to look like they were made by idiots, I would just use Bing. Now that both search engines have nearly identical layouts, I'm left with no good alternatives.

#3 - Wikipedia's 2010 Redesign
Finally, let's take a look at the Wikipedia redesign which launched in April 2010. The new default theme is "Vector," which features clean lines and abundant gradients that have a very Microsoft-esque quality about them. The web's most famous peer-edited website is now one of the goofiest looking websites out there.

Wikipedia before and after the redesign.

But the worst offense by far is the relocation of the search box from the left-hand navigation to the top right corner of the page. I never realized how much I use the search box until they moved it! After using Wikipedia regularly for years, I find myself frustrated and angry when I position the mouse cursor on the left hand side and my search box is gone! Arrgh!

They really missed the mark on this one. Articles written by committee seems to be working well for Wikipedia, but design by committee is not.

#4 - NewEgg's 2010 Redesign
NewEgg is the Internet's second-biggest Internet-only retailer after Amazon. They stock a wide variety of consumer electronics, computer parts, gadgets, and even appliances for sale. In 2010 their website underwent a face-lift, and I think the new look is definitely NOT an improvement.

First, the daily deals have been moved off the homepage to their own separate page. Now it takes an extra click to see what's on sale today. Content should get easier to find rather than being buried deeper into the site.

NewEgg's New Look for 2010.

Next, the font size on the product listing pages grew a few sizes. I'm not sure what it is about the font, but it doesn't look right in the context of the page. It's hard to get more specific about it, but I just don't like the way it looks.

Closing Thoughts
If I could communicate one thing to web designers, it would be this: remember that your site's user interface does not belong to you, it belongs to your users! Ask them for feedback, listen to the responses, and for God's sake if it's not broken, don't fix it!!

Let's just hope that craigslist never updates their interface.

I'm not the only one who feels this way:
http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2010/03/new-video-page-launches-for-all-users.html
http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/an_inconvenient_drop_shadow.php
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2010/a-new-look-for-wikipedia/

Automotive Design Disasters

When a car manufacturer decides to introduce a new vehicle, it takes dozens of people and many thousands of hours of work before the first completed vehicle rolls off the assembly line. These people work in teams to design the exterior, the interior, the engine, the chassis, and the suspension down to the finest detail.

Part of the automotive design process includes continuous peer review and design changes to make the vehicle look and operate as perfectly as possible. However, I have to question the designers who put their stamp of approval on the following designs, because these vehicles have to be some of the worst automotive design disasters in recent history!

The 2007-present Scion xB has one glaring design error. Can you spot it? This vehicle has just one reverse lamp, positioned off-center on the left side of the bumper. Would you wear a pair of pants with only one back pocket? Would you listen to a stereo with only one speaker? Absolutely not! So why on earth would you make a car with only one backup light? I suppose this might look good if you are a cyclops or that chick from Futurama.
Holy taillights, Batman! The taillights on this Mitsubishi Lancer Wagon are only slightly shorter than the Sears Tower. Not only will they make other drivers extremely aware of when you're coming to a stop, but if you live near the coast you can park this car up on a cliff and use its towering red lights to direct incoming ships safely to the harbor!

The Nissan Cube is neither hip nor square. It's not a van and it's not a sport-utility vehicle. It's not fast or sporty, nor is it intended for towing or going off road. I'm not really sure what it's purpose is, but this much I do know: it is hideously ugly from every angle!

Nissan aren't the only ones who can make an ugly, box-like vehicle. Take a gander at this Pontiac Aztek crossover! From its double-nostril front end to its plastic-clad sides and depressing roofline, this vehicle is an absolute monster that no doubt incorporates every single idea the design committee came up with. I cannot imagine why they stopped production after just 4 years...

Cadillac may be "The standard of the world" when it comes to luxury, but even the world-famous luxury car maker has had its share of design disasters. Take this Cadillac Seville for example. Its "bustleback" design looks less sophisticated and more like the car got rear-ended in a crash.
Speaking of ugly rear ends, check out the exhaust on this Porsche Boxster! That's right, a single pipe, dead center. Pardon my French, but the design and location of the exhaust pipe on this car looks just like an arsehole. I'm sorry, but there is just no nice way to call this one.
Hey, is that a pipe organ on wheels? Nope, it's just the rear end of a Lexus IS-F. The designers of this sporty sedan went more than a little overboard with the number four. Four doors? Check. Four wheels? Check. Four exhaust tips? "Oh what the hell, let's do that too!" they must have said. This is one design that should have been four-bidden!

A modern car is a complex system of electronic and mechanical systems working together in perfect harmony. In fact everything under the hood is so perfectly set in place that drivers are discouraged from ever knowing what really goes on thanks to the prevalence of plastic engine covers. These pieces of injection-molded junk are used excessively today in an attempt to limit access to your own car and to cover up the fact that today's engines look extremely lame.

The dashboard of the Toyota Echo may be one of the most visually unappealing designs I have ever seen. From its center-mounted instrument cluster to its shapely glove compartment, this thing looks like there was even less thought put into it than the movie "Gigli." How did they not realize how bad this looks?
Whether you're going to the moon or to the grocery store, the dashboard of this Nissan Quest minivan will make every trip and adventure! Its bizarre spaceship-like layout throws decades of intuitive and ergonomic designs out the window in favor of something that looks like a busy-box toy for adults.

Good God Almighty! The mother of all speedometers may be the single biggest thing about the Mini Cooper. The gauge is almost as large as the steering wheel, and is so ridiculously large that even blind people can see it. What an awful, awful design!

Look, I understand that designing cars is hard work - but we're not talking about putting a man on the moon, here. We're talking about shaping steel and glass into pleasing and practical shapes that people can feel good about buying. The majority of automakers have got this down pat - but as we can see here, some of them still need help when it comes to producing cars that are not disasters of design.

I am not the only one who feels this way:
http://blog.cargurus.com/2009/07/17/the-ugliest-cars-of-2009-and-2010
http://www.scottbradford.us/2010/01/12/the-ugliest-cars-of-the-2010-model-year/

What's So Wrong With Sobriety?

Beer. Alcohol. Liquor. Booze. Whatever you call it, partaking in the consumption of spirituous beverages is one of the oldest human traditions. From disciples sharing wine with Jesus to the modern ritual of college beer pong, getting drunk has been a tradition throughout history. But for me, drinking is one activity that doesn't live up to the hype.

I've tried malt liquor, hard liquor, and a variety of mixed drinks. I've tried drinking with friends, by myself, and even in Las Vegas. I've had drinks at weddings, on New Years, and on special occasions. Each time it fell short of my expectations.

I cannot say that I have honestly enjoyed the taste of drinking or the way it made me feel. Drinking alcohol does not make me feel happy or awesome. It does not make me feel young or energetic. It just makes me feel kind of sick and leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It also makes me sleepy.

In fact, alcohol makes it very hard to do the things I enjoy such as thinking and making rational decisions. It makes it harder to speak, to read, and to remember things. Drinking impairs my ability to type and to drive, which are two things I enjoy very much.

I'm not straight edge and I'm not trying to force any kind of beliefs on you, dear reader. Honestly, it doesn't bother me at all that other people enjoy drinking.
All I'm saying is that when I tell other people I don't enjoy drinking, they look at me as if I had just sprouted a third eyeball in the middle of my forehead. They treat me like a social outcast. I often feel alienated from friends, family, and co-workers simply because I don't enjoy drinking.

For whatever reason, drinking is just not fun for me. I have not found anyone else who understands the way I feel, because the only other non-drinkers out there feel very strongly about making a statement as they stand on some very high moral ground about the lifestyle they choose to live.

Some people assume that my dissatisfaction with alcohol is because I haven't found the right drink. These people will try very hard to pressure me into hanging out with them and going drinking. On the rare occasions when I do tag along, I am embarrassed for my friends as they slur their speech and act like fools. It's just not my idea of a good time.

I sometimes wonder if maybe there is something wrong with me. How can I be the only person who doesn't enjoy the celebrated act of intoxication? Everyone from the wino on the street to brilliant inventor and patriot Ben Franklin enjoyed the fermented beverage enough to promote its virtues to others.
So I ask you, what is so wrong with being sober? Why does everyone have to give me such a hard time about it? Is it really so weird that I don't think beer is the greatest invention ever?

I am not the only one who feels this way:
http://iusedtobestraightedge.com
https://web.archive.org/web/20101223084814/http://allphilosophy.com/topic/351
http://ask.metafilter.com/49711/Why-is-drinking-alcohol-not-enjoyable-for-me
YouTube: 80 Percent Of Roommates Got So Drunk Last Night

Celebrity Gossip Magazines are Completely Irrelevant

It seems like there is a magazine for every hobby and interest these days. There are even magazines for people who are interested in the lives of other people. One of the lowest forms of entertainment are the magazines that dish out the latest gossip on Hollywood celebrities and their off-camera lives.

You know them as US Weekly, People, and Life & Style magazine. These weekly rags appear at the checkout of every grocery and convenience store from coast to coast. Co-workers gaze at them during their lunch breaks. Women flip through them as they get their hair or nails done. And yet nothing between the front cover and back cover is of any importance at all!


The idea that anyone would care to read about the everyday lives of actors, singers, and other high profile individuals is lost on me. Celebrities are not more special than ordinary people, and everything they do and say should not be taken as gospel. Being an actor is a job, just like flipping burgers and waiting tables are jobs. Someone has to do it. Celebrities do not deserve special treatment just because they made a record or starred in a film.

The headlines make every article sound like the most monumental news since Moses delivered the 10 Commandments. Check out who's engaged and who's getting divorced! Look at the dress that so-and-so wore to some stupid event! Holy s**t, this is major life-changing news that YOU need to know!! And of course it's always printed in the most eye-catching, bright yellow, 96-point text that makes real layout designers cry.

Guess what, people who star in movies aren't any different from people who assemble widgets for a living. They get married and divorced, they have children, and they shop at the store. They go to the beach and drive cars just like normal people - because that's exactly what they are. They're just regular people and they should be treated as such.

I hate the idea that people fawn over celebrities and everything they do. Wow, look at Britney Spears stopping for coffee at Starbucks! Check out this person who gained or lost weight! Look at her hair, nails, and clothes! SO WHAT?! A high-paying job is no excuse for such ridiculous special treatment.

If you think celebrities are such amazing, gracious, generous super-people, I've got news for you: being directed around a soundstage by someone else for eight months while wearing too much makeup does not make one qualified to give opinions on current news and world events.

Celebrity tabloid magazines don't need to exist. They are nothing but photographs and ads with no real articles or content at all. They are a form of Prolefeed, a term first coined by George Orwell in his novel "Ninteen Eighty-Four." They entertain the most easily-distracted people in society with lots of pretty pictures. They provide drama and excitement to people whose lives are lacking both.

If you think this passes for entertainment of any sort, you're wrong. Celebrity gossip magazines aren't worth the paper they're printed on. They are not even worth complaining about beyond what I have already.

I'm not the only one who feels this way:
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/non_aviation/read.main/1945863/
http://everything2.com/title/celebrities
http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/1736/200905amusingourselvest.png

Why Car Magazines Suck

The Automotive Gossip industry is almost as big and competitive as the Automotive industry itself. On the newsstand you have magazines such as Car and Driver, Road and Track, Motor Trend, and AutoWeek. On the web you have AutoBlog, and Jalopnik. There are no shortage of publications claiming to have the most authentic and most current industry news about the car industry.

For the longest time, I enjoyed keeping up with the news in the automotive industry through magazines and periodicals. After a while though, the magazines all started to sound the same to me.
One problem with car magazines is that the reviewers are always so snobbish about the vehicles they test drive. They expected the Cadillac to be more luxurious or the Mustang to be faster. They complain about the suspension being too stiff or the engine not powerful enough. They gripe about automatic transmissions being slushy or a steering wheel that feels too small.

These automotive pundits have forgotten that the majority of their readers do not get behind the wheel of a high-performance or exotic car every day. Most drivers have very boring cars, and we would be happy to have a vehicle that works without breaking down on us.

For example, the 14-year old economy car that I drive has been nothing but one expensive repair after another during the six years I have owned it. I would gladly take home any new car featured in a magazine, even if the reviewer thinks the leather trim is the wrong color.

After a while, the things that reviewers dislike about cars start to sound petty, insignificant, and downright ridiculous. It's almost as though they approach every vehicle with a magnifying glass rather than looking at the bigger picture, which is this: car manufacturing has come a LONG way over the past few decades. New vehicles are dramatically safer, more comfortable, and more efficient than ever before. There's almost nothing to complain about, so they magnify the smallest quirks in a vehicle to write an article.

What car magazines should focus on is helping people find the right car for their needs. How fun it is to drive, how well it performs in everyday situations, and how much it costs to maintain. These are things that average drivers would like to know before purchasing a new vehicle.

Instead, car magazines love to bombard you with useless facts, like how fast it goes around some fucking racetrack in Germany or how the new Mercedes has 0.006 inches more legroom than the BMW. They blast you with statistics that really aren't that important or relevant to how the vehicle will be driven in the real world.

They claim one car is superior to another because it has six more horsepower or is a fraction of a second faster down the dragstrip. Honestly, I would be happy to have a car with a zero-to-sixty time that's not measured in minutes! The automotive gossip industry is so wrapped up in cramming data down your throat that they've lost touch with the people who truly enjoy the experience of driving.

In spite of all this, the automotive gossip industry stronger than ever. An entire subculture of people now post their thoughts about every new make and model to be announced. Log on to any automotive news forum or message board to find out what Joe from Philadelphia thinks of the newest Kia crossover. Seriously, who gives a crap? These armchair experts probably drive around in a 1992 Toyota Corolla and yet trumpet their opinions about the newest generation of muscle cars like they're the freaking world experts.

As a whole, the automotive gossip industry is full of self-absorbed know-it-alls and "experts" who quote arbitrary facts out of context to try and seem smart. Headlines that are of paramount importance one day are discarded and forgotten the next day. Everyone's looking for the next big thing and living in the "now" with no thought to the past or future. I'm sorry, but car magazines just aren't fun to read anymore.

I'm not the only one who feels this way:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/car-and-driver-road-track-motor-trend-automobile-americas-buff-books-laid-low/
http://autosnob.blogspot.com/2009/10/power-of-preconceptions.html

10 Stereotypes You Meet In College

One of the most eye-opening things about my time in college was the people there. It was quite a shock for me that a school with so many tens of thousands of students could have so many people who look and act the same. There were only about ten varieties of people and thousands of copies of them everywhere! I thought it would be a clever and original idea to start a list of them and their defining characteristics.
Well as it turns out, plenty of other people have already had this same idea. But I went ahead and recorded my observations anyway, because if you currently attend or are planning on attending college, you'll likely run into many of these same people. Don't say I didn't warn you!

1). The Party Guy - This guy thinks of himself as a "beer connoisseur" rather than "alcoholic." He's got the standard red Solo cup in his hand every time you see him. The Party Guy can talk for hours about why Beer X is better than Beer Y, in spite of the fact that any beer that's 75 cents a can is going to taste like piss regardless. When he's sober, he loves to talk about going to the lake and the dirt bike he used to have. He will drop out within the first year to work for his uncle's construction company and to help fund his growing collection of tattoos.

2). The Educrat - This person has made a career out of being a student. They have managed to make it to age 25 without having a real job and have no idea about the real world outside of what they've heard in lecture. They get high grades in challenging subjects like physics and math, yet struggle with simple tasks like bike locks, making coffee, and safe driving. They have been taught what to think, not how to think. Know everything but understand nothing. These people make great Teachers' Assistants.

3). Facebook Girl - She spends the entire lecture staring at her laptop and playing Farm Town. Although she never turns in a single assignment or takes notes, she finishes the semester a full grade above you because she kicks ass at tests. She's kind of hot in a girl-next-door sort of way. She has the shortest shorts and the biggest Macbook.

4). Sorority Girl - This gal is often seen walking around campus with her crew of recently-inducted members of a Sorority. They all sport matching Greek shirts atop their Baby Doll figures. She's not too good with computers but has a cell phone with a full keyboard for rapid-fire text messaging her friends about going out for drinks this weekend. Girls night out whooooo! She has never been seen finishing an entire plate of food.

5). Abercrombie Guy - It's the first day of class and he already knows the instructor on a first-name basis because his older brother had the same class a few years ago. You thought this kind of thing was over once you finished high school, but the reality is that it just gets worse. Abercrombie Guy is on the basketball team and often misses class because of away games. This sucks for you because he's on your team for the semester project and he actually asked you if PowerPoint was "the program with the slides." He spends every lecture playing "Breakout" on his BlackBerry.

6). The Freshman - This recent high school graduate has just started a four year paid vacation courtesy of mom and dad. The Freshman's parents have provided him with a room at the expensive new dorms, the deluxe meal plan, a brand new bike or car, and a new laptop that he got for a graduation present. This guy does not appreciate how good he has it and has the nerve to complain about getting up for a 10am class - and he lives on campus!

7). The Lifetime Achiever - This 47 year old parent of two completed their Associates degree when you were in kindergarten. They joined the rat race and started a family. Now that the nest is empty and they need a bachelor's degree to advance their career, they are back in the classroom. The Lifetime Achiever is equipped for success with their microcassette recorder and rolling backpack. They arrive 15 minutes early to class and constantly interrupt the lecture every five minutes to ask the instructor for clarification or to repeat something. They are very politically informed and take every opportunity to engage the class in discussion - but only if you agree with them.

8). The Phantom Classmate - He wasn't there for the first day of class, but he did make an appearance the first week asking around for an extra copy of the syllabus. Every now and then he misses a couple of weeks worth of lectures. The Phantom Classmate will show up randomly throughout the semester, never bringing more than the clothes on their back. The other students don't even know this person's name. The last you'll ever see them is on the day before an exam, whispering to the instructor about a withdrawal slip.

9). The Average Guy - The Average Guy is often seen shuffling to class in his basketball shorts and flip flops. He is always up to date on the newest movies and professional sports scores. He watches ESPN and listens to modern rock on his iPod. He drinks a little but is not a hardcore party animal like The Party Guy. You can't really figure out what he's into. The Average Guy doesn't seem to have any passion or zest in his life beyond lust for consumer products and brands, but he can talk for hours about which cell phone company has the best service. He passes his courses but doesn't ever absorb anything.

10). The Overachiever - Look no further than the quiet girl in the front row to find the Overachiever among you. This girl is majoring in Biochemistry and minoring in Early Childhood Development at the same time with a 3.5 GPA, but is thinking of switching to Nursing. She's taking 21 credit hours this semester, but only because the enrollment advisor wouldn't let her take more. You can almost see the crushing student loan debts reflected in her thousand yard stare during lecture. Don't bother asking her out for pizza because she's always busy studying. She has no life outside of school and will be filled with regret when she has her Masters degree at 25 and not a single happy memory of the last eight years.

I'm definitely not the only one who feels this way: 
https://web.archive.org/web/20100710051537/http://www.thefifthyear.com/2009/02/the-college-stereotypes/
http://collegecandy.com/2009/08/11/the-10-types-of-freshmen-youll-meet-on-campus/  
http://jamoker.wordpress.com/2006/12/13/a-summary-of-the-people-you-meet-in-college/ 
https://web.archive.org/web/20130805031216/http://www.thesangfroid.com/2009/07/30/the-10-types-of-people-you-meet-in-college/

7 Good Reasons Why LightScribe Sucks

It's hard to believe that it is 2009 and people are still excited about LightScribe technology. For those not familiar with LightScribe, it is a technology that allows you to "Burn, Flip, and Burn" your CD and DVD discs. First you record your information, flip the disc over, and then use the same drive to laser etch your artwork directly on to the disc surface.
In theory this sounds great because you can label your CD and DVD discs without buying another ink cartridge or adhesive label ever again. But after some hands-on testing, I have come up with 7 Good Reasons Why LightScribe Sucks.

7). LightScribe is monochromatic only. This one is a no brainer: you cannot print color photos with a LightScribe drive. A cheap inkjet printer and a package of adhesive CD/DVD labels would produce a far superior result.

6). Another reason why LightScribe sucks is that it is excruciatingly slow. A full disc of artwork can take up to 30 minutes to print! An average inkjet or thermal printer can do a full color disc in about two minutes or less. You do the math.

5). LightScribe cannot print to the center hub. It's true, the center hub of a LightScribe disc contains the information needed to guide the recording laser around the top surface. You'll never get a professional looking CD or DVD disc when you use LightScribe because you'll always see their huge logo branded in the center of the disc.

4). One big downside to LightScribe is that blank CD and DVD discs with LightScribe printable surfaces cost more than regular discs. This may not be a big deal if you buy a small package of 50 discs, but for high volume buyers this can really hit you in the wallet.

3). You need a special drive to record LightScribe artwork. Most desktop and laptop computers and almost all professional recording gear does not come with LightScribe drives. To use this technology, one must upgrade their hardware to something that supports LightScribe.

2). Designing your LightScribe artwork is only slightly easier than building the pyramids of Egypt. Forget about using industry standard design software such as Photoshop, Illustrator, and Quark. You have to use a cumbersome program to create a print file, and then record that to a disc. Good luck getting an engineer to figure this one out, let alone your Grandmother.

1). Finally, LightScribe sucks because the prints just look awful. Even under the best of conditions when using high-resolution artwork and recording at the Best Quality setting, you can still see horizontal bands and gaps in your artwork. It's absolutely not worth the 30 minute wait time for a monochromatic print that looks like a bad photocopy.

LightScribe would have been a cool technology had it had been invented about 10 years ago. Here in 2009 where we have color inkjet printers that print full color artwork directly on CD and DVD discs in just minutes for a few cents per print, LightScribe is simply laughable. It's the equivalent of crossing the sea in a balloon and navigating by compass while the rest of the world uses GPS-equipped jet airplanes. Sure it works, but the alternative is faster, cheaper, more accurate, and all around better at getting the job done. Don't even get me started on Disc t@2 technology!

UPDATE: HP has discontinued support for all LightScribe products in January 2014. The software, burners, and media are no longer supported. I am surprised that it took this long for it to happen!

Nothing Is What It Seems

We are a society of synthetic human beings with our wigs, implants, face lifts, tummy tucks, teeth whitening strips, hair dye, and botox treatments.
We buy consumer products that have photomanipulated pictures on the box (see: Photoshop Disasters).
We read magazines with airbrushed models on the cover.
We watch television commercials that feature people doing outrageous things in impossible situations.
We are entertained by television shows with simulated laugh tracks from nonexistent studio audiences.
We watch movies with the most realistic special effects we've ever seen.
We give awards to actors who rely on stunt doubles and makeup artists to make them what they are.
We pay a premium price for bottled water that is really just filtered municipal water.
We eat pre-packaged foods that are loaded with preservatives, coloring, and sweeteners.
We buy "American" cars like Chevrolets that are actually assembled in Mexico, Canada, and South Korea.
We are discouraged from buying "foreign" cars that are assembled in Ohio, Tennessee, and California.
We drive cars with faux leather, simulated woodgrain, and dual tips off of a single exhaust.
We listen to songs on the radio that were not written by the artists performing them.
We sing along to auto-tuned vocals and cleverly engineered hit singles.
We work jobs we hate to buy shit we don't need (now a major motion picture!)
We elect politicians who give speeches they did not write so they can vote on bills they have not read.
We have cell phone towers "disguised" as 190-foot tall palm trees.
We have brick-patterned wallpaper over the stucco walls at Subway.
We live in stucco castles that have stone facades and imprinted concrete patterns.
We decorate our homes with reproduction art, silk indoor plants, and reproduction art.
We have digital cameras that play pre-recorded sounds to simulate the shutter of a traditional camera.

You never think about this kind of stuff when you are young. But the older I get, the more I realize that nothing is what it appears to be. The truth is that so many things in life are false, phony, rebranded, facetious, artificial, and just plain fake. The world is full of deception, both harmful and harmless. Nothing is what it seems.

Innocence Lost

One of the great things about children is how innocent they are. As a young child, I would have believed just about anything an adult told me. This is why parents get such a kick out of telling a young child about the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and Santa Claus - they know that children will believe them. Children have no reason to believe that something might not really be what it seems.
As I got older, I began to stop believing in the fantasy and start seeing the reality. Growing up is all about absorbing new experiences and new information about how the world really works. The downside of understanding how things really work is that the magic is gone.

Sometimes, I think I was happier before I learned the truth about some things. Each time I learn the truth about something, it's like a little bit of my childlike innocence about the world disappears. The older I get, the more I learn that nothing truly is what it seems.

It wasn't long before I learned that the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and Santa Claus were my parents all along. I was sad to learn that the cartoon characters at Disneyland were really just people in costumes. At some point during my childhood, I learned what pitifully small salaries teachers are paid compared to other professions.

As time went on, I learned that many fast food restaurants do not make food when you order it, but in fact use frozen beef or heat lamps to keep food hot and ready. I learned that almost every pre-packaged or instant food is loaded with preservatives, artificial flavors, and colors to make it brighter or sweeter than it should be. I learned that many of the baked goods for sale at the grocery store are not baked fresh, but are in fact delivered from another bakery in the middle of the night.

Upon entering the workforce, I learned a great deal about how the world of business really works. I learned that many "American" vehicles from Chevrolet and other car makers are actually produced in Mexico or South Korea. I learned that many recalled products such as contaminated toothpaste and pet food not only come from overseas, but that many different brands all come from the same factory. I learned about sweatshops and cheap foreign labor.

The truth is that warranties are always limited and that satisfaction is never guaranteed. I learned that when products on "sale," the MSRP was marked up to give the illusion of savings. I learned about market researchers and focus groups and how they target products and services to specific demographic groups. I learned about greeting card companies, diamond rings, and the greedy origins of their industries.

I learned about the stock market and people who make money on trades while contributing nothing to society. It was shocking to learn that there are people in the world who are actively trying to rip you off through investment schemes, multi-level marketing scams, phishing, identity theft, insurance fraud, telephone solicitation, spamming, and worse. Learning about the despicable things that some people will do for money robs you of more of that childhood innocence.

I lose a little bit of that childhood innocence every time I hear a news story about a respected public figure such as a minister or corporate CEO who gets caught embezzling money. It saddens me when public officials such as judges, politicians, and police officers are found guilty of bribery, or when celebrities are arrested on severe criminal charges. I lose a little bit of innocence every time I hear about a professional athlete or Olympic star who gets caught using performance enhancing drugs or steroids.

There was a day in my life when I discovered that many politicians do not write their own speeches, and that many popular singers and entertainers do not write their own songs. I learned that a singers and bands will alter their image to meet the favor of the public eye.

I learned that some musicians will change their style and their sound in order to land a record deal, fame, and fortune. I learned that many bands sound the way they do because of auto-tuned vocals and some very clever engineering in the studio. I learned that everything on the radio is pre-recorded and edited to sound real (including breathing).

More of my innocence about the world was lost when I learned that TV news anchors aren't actually reading those papers on their desk, but that they read a huge teleprompter off-camera. I learned that actors and actresses look the way they do on camera because they spend hours having makeup applied to alter their appearance. The same applies to almost every modern magazine cover, where models benefit from excessive amounts of airbrushing and photo-manipulation.

I learned that some celebrities are so shallow and vain that they will resort to extreme dieting, liposuction, makeup, plastic surgery, colored contact lenses, teeth whitening, implants, hair dye, and other tricks to appear more attractive than they really are. I learned that these role models create a false image of beauty that their fans aspire to but cannot ever achieve.

The little child I once was has grown up into a skeptical adult, having learned that so many, many things in this world are completely fake. Everything from consumer products to news headlines to television commercials and movies can be manufactured in a laboratory, factory, or studio for the purposes of deceiving me into seeing or believing something that's not real, not possible, or not genuinely there.

When you're young and innocent, you never think that what you're seeing is something artificial and made to deceive you. It just never occurs to children that magazine cover pictures have been altered, that store-bought juice is loaded with coloring, and that there is someone behind the scenes writing today's hit songs.

But the reality of life is that nothing is what it seems. The modern world is so full of replicas, imitations, and synthetics that it's getting harder and harder to tell truth from untruth. Growing up is more than just getting older, it is what happens when you lose your innocence about the world we live in.

What's The Point of Supercars?

Mind blowing performance. Impressive specifications. Sexy styling. Limited production. Some say that supercars are the ultimate driving machines, but I've got a hunch that many of today's top performance automobiles are not being used to their full potential...or even being used at all.
The supercar industry has seen some of its most groundbreaking innovations in recent years, thanks to advances in technology. Everything from crash testing to aerodynamic modeling can now be perfected in the lab using computer modeling and simulations before the first vehicle rolls off the production line.
Not only does this cut down the amount of time required to bring a new vehicle to market, but it has also led to the development of some of the wildest and most unique vehicles ever produced. Computer-aided design allows engineers to explore new concepts and ideas that just were not possible a decade ago.

From paddle-shifters mounted on the steering column to heavy-duty carbon ceramic brakes, modern supercars are dripping with innovation. Carbon fiber body panels stay rigid and strong as advanced traction control systems help channel massive amounts of power to the pavement. Hand-assembled engines pump out huge horsepower at high RPMs and will run for years without needing a rebuild.

Yes, it's safe to say that supercars are some of the most over-engineered vehicles on the road today. A design team at Ferrari or Lamborghini may spend more time perfecting the suspension of one vehicle than it would take for a mass-production automaker to revise its entire lineup. The amount of effort that goes into developing a true road-raping machine is often reflected in its six or seven figure price tag.

But how often do you see supercars like Ferraris and Lamborghinis on the road? When was the last time you saw a Koenigsegg at the corner store or an F430 at the movie theater? Unless you live in South Florida, probably never.

The truth is that in spite of their incredible engineering, supercars do not make good daily drivers. Many exotic car owners also have an ordinary car for driving to the post office and the grocery store. The supercar is kept in the garage most of its life and will be driven perhaps a few hundred miles a year to car shows and around the block on sunny days.

Although a supercar can accelerate to 60 mph in the blink of an eye, its driver must still obey the speed limit. While the limited production makes them highly desirable, it also makes them difficult to get parts for. Because of the expensive price tag, a fender bender or theft would be disastrous.

Supercars also have high maintenance costs including premium fuel, synthetic oil, and special order tires. They gulp fuel and have no room for passengers or cargo. Insurance is expensive and so are speeding tickets. When you get right down to it, supercars are a lot like ordinary cars, only less useful and more expensive.
That's not to say we shouldn't have supercars. It is through the development of such exotic, high-performance vehicles that our regular cars become more advanced. What I am saying is that it's an absolute shame to see the fastest and best engineered vehicles sitting around all the time, being pampered instead of being driven!
It is a shame to see a classic Ferrari on the auction block at Barrett Jackson with 6,000 original miles on the clock. It is a shame to see today's most obsessively engineered vehicles hiding under car covers and being trailered to shows. It's a shame that supercars are priced well out of range of plenty of people who would love to drive them regularly.

What's the point of spending thousands of hours designing and testing a vehicle so it can sit on the grass at Pebble Beach? What is the point of engineering a vehicle that can travel at 250mph, only to have it spend the majority of its life sitting still?

The vehicles that are built to go the fastest are the ones that are driven the least. Rather than be driven and enjoyed as the designers intended, they spend their days covered up in garages, museums, and trailers at car shows. Now, where's the sense in that?

I am not the only one who feels this way:
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=463108

The Slow and Painful Death of the Fax Machine

Every so often, a new technology is invented that completely displaces an existing technology. When a new invention offers such significant improvement over the current technology that it can drive an entire market out of business almost overnight, it is a phenomenon known as a "disruptive technology."

In many cases, the new technology is hailed as a "quantum leap" or "paradigm shift" in the industry. Before the pocket calculator came along, the slide rule was the best we had. Before jet-powered aircraft came along, propeller-powered aircraft were the best we could do. The typewriter was the king of the publishing world for decades before the personal computer came along.

In almost every case, these new technologies provided huge improvements over the existing ones. Businesses and consumers are generally eager to pick up on new technologies that will make their lives easier.

And yet, one technology that should have been disrupted long ago is still around. One slow and inferior communication technology still has not been defeated by its superior rival. It is 2009 and for some strange reason, fax machines are still commonly found in businesses, offices, and homes nationwide!

The death grip that the business world has on fax machines extends far beyond mom and pop businesses and the Luddites of technology. In fact, everyone from small local businesses to Fortune 100 companies still uses fax machines on a daily basis. I just cannot understand this!

Fax machines require a dedicated telephone line. They take forever to scan, compress, and transmit information. Sometimes they have busy signals or cannot go through. The information sent to a fax machine can only be retrieved from one physical location.

Do these people know about email? Do they know that it's possible to send multi-page documents electronically from one computer to another? In fact, email is a superior technology to the facsimile in every way.

Email messages can be retrieved from any computer that's connected to the Internet. With email, it is possible to send larger, high resolution pictures and documents in less time. Although both email and faxes are subject to unsolicited messages ("spam"), email provides the option of setting up filters to automatically delete such messages. Fax machines do not.

It seems to me that the only people who are still using fax machines are the ones who are too dumb to use email. I think fax machines should have been inducted into the Museum of Obsolete Technology long ago.

The Cost of a Good Education

Ask any college student about the rising costs of textbooks, and they'll tell you what a racket the industry has going. A few decades ago, textbooks were used for approximately 3-5 years before a new edition was released. This gave educators time to develop strong ties with the material and design their courses accordingly. Now, it is common for new revisions to come out every year or even every semester.

In many cases, nothing has changed about the book except for the picture on the cover. I often wonder if textbook companies are truly meeting the needs of their customers, or if they are just tacking on bells and whistles in order to justify their price hikes?

It was not that long ago that I got my first textbook that came with a CD-ROM disc. The disc didn't have much on it, just a couple of lectures related to the subject of the book. It didn't add much value to the book itself. In fact, I think most of the textbooks that come with CD-ROMs and DVDs and other "enhanced content" end up staying in the package for the whole semester. The teachers don't assign it and so the kids don't use it. The Macroeconomics book I purchased last semester came with a special insert promoting the "iPod Ready Videos" the publisher now has available on its website. I never looked at them.

I guess the idea of all these multimedia extras are to reach out to students who don't gravitate towards books. Honestly, I cannot imagine that learning about inflation and the production possibilities curve would be any more fun on an iPod than to read from a book. No matter how you present the material, it's the same dull information. The more you produce of one good, the less you can theoretically produce of some other good. That part does not change.

Imagine an alchemist in some medieval kingdom, trying in his workshop to spin lead into gold. While he may succeed in producing something that looks like gold, or feels like gold, at the end of the day it simply cannot be done. No matter what package it comes in, it's still lead. Such is the case with transforming a textbook onto a disc. It might appear different, but if it's the same information then it's no more exciting than a real book.

Perhaps the demand for multimedia teaching is a response to the short attention spans of students these days. After growing up hooked to the TV, video games, and computers, most kids these days have an attention span somewhere between that of a horsefly and a commercial break. Blame the media, blame the parents, blame the schools and the families and even the soft drink companies. After all, you've got to blame somebody, right?

Call me old fashioned, but I don't need any of this new-age garbage. I can listen to a lecture from a real professor and take notes for sixty minutes and it won't kill me. I can read a freaking book and identify the meaning without having an actor explain it to me. Knowledge lies in finding the answers for yourself, and not in having someone tell them to you.

Somehow humanity was able to transfer knowledge from person to person for two millenia before we had iPod-ready video lectures and interactive multimedia junk. I wish textbook manufacturers would cut the crap already and just make good, affordable books. If the web-two-point-oh generation of today can't handle paying attention in lecture for an hour, then that's their problem. Maybe school is just not the place for them. My blood is already boiling; don't even get me started on the ridiculousness of online classes...

Steak: It's What's For Dinner

Maybe I've got too much time on my hands, but I have noticed that there are just too many pansy-ass chain steakhouses trying to pass themselves off as legit these days. Between Outback, Lone Star, Black Angus, and Logan's Roadhouse, the casual-dining steakhouse market is expanding faster than America's waistlines. So what exactly is the problem with these restaurants? Allow me to elaborate:

By making steakhouses more accessible to casual diners, restaurant owners have increased their appeal to new markets and increased profits. On the other hand, they've filled their restaurants with all kinds of gimmicks that I don't want to see in a steakhouse. From side salads to families with little kids, steakhouses are no longer a place for adults to go and enjoy a hearty meal. They have become just as homogenized and cliché as every other fast-food chain out there.

When it comes to beverages, I think a good steakhouse should not even have a wine menu. I don't care if you fancy a glass of Yellow Tail or Shiraz with your top sirloin, go be a sissy at a bar somewhere. Steakhouses should only serve milk, water, lemonade, and beer with meals because soda is for kids and wine is for sissies.

Another thing that bugs me about steakhouses is when they try to act all intimate and fancy. You know, the ones that have an elderly couple holding hands at a candlelight table in the TV commercials. Black Angus, I'm looking at you and your high-backed booths and cloth napkins. The lights are so "romantic" and dim it's like eating in a damn broom closet. Cut that nonsense out! Turn the lights on and get real.

Perhaps the cheesiest steakhouse I've ever been to is Logan's Roadhouse. There's a brand new one by my house and the inside is so over-engineered I thought at first I walked into Chipotle by accident. The new-but-made-to-look-really-old decor does not impress me. I think the designers wanted the inside to look rustic and weathered like a local bar and grill, but it's not fooling me. I can just see the construction crews staining the wood panels to look older than they really are, as if it makes eating there more fun or something.

Every table at Logan's Roadhouse has a dish of peanuts waiting for you, and just to prove how badass you are, you can throw the shells on the floor when you're done. That's right, no napkins or trays for your shells. Come on guys. A real steakhouse like Bill Johnson's Big Apple has sawdust all over the floor. Not only is it a fire hazard, but it's probably in the food, too. That's what I'm talkin' about! I wouldn't have it any other way.

At Logan's, you can choose from no more than six cuts of meat while the rest of the menu has things like salads, seafood, and appetizers. Don't waste your breath trying to tell me that "those menu items are for the people who don't want steak." Ah, news flash, don't go to a steakhouse then!

If you want salad, go to Souper Salad. If you want seafood, go to Red f-ing Lobster. When I am in the mood for steak, I want to visit a restaurant that has a good selection of beef cuts on the menu! I want to choose from Ribeye steaks, T-Bones, Top Sirloin, New York Strip steaks, Porterhouse, and Filet Mignon! Seriously, what else do you want? A kids menu? Forget about it and get them a Happy Meal at McDonald's instead.

Probably the closest thing to a "real" steakhouse is the Miner's Camp restaurant in Apache Junction. The entire building is made of wood that looks weathered because it really is. It's been at the base of the Superstition Mountains for decades. The place looks like a strong breeze might knock it over before your food even arrives. I like that.

The dining experience is also very different from today's corporate-owned steakhouses. Instead of dining in dark, romantic booths, you sit at a long row of picnic benches with other customers. Nobody gets their own table.

The food is served on tin plates and cups which are delightfully noisy. Side dishes such as corn and potatoes come in small, cast-iron cauldrons (for lack of a better word). There's no jukebox playing today's top country music hits or any neon signs for Bud Light.

Although it doesn't have the sawdust or the best tasting food, the Miner's Camp is the realest steakhouse I've ever been to. If you're tired of family-friendly steakhouses that cater to families with small children and play piped-in Muzak while you wait for your cheese sticks to arrive, it's time for a change. Get out and find yourself a good local steakhouse where they take some pride in what they do. You'll be glad you did.

I'm not the only one who feels this way:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTHixb0p4go

Tech Support

I hate the idea of tech support hotlines. I don't like call centers, help desks, or support tickets. I don't like the idea of a person calling a stranger on the phone for help with a very technical problem as anything other than a last resort. Every time I suspect that people can't possibly get any more stupid and helpless, I am proven wrong.

For some reason, callers not only expect an easy answer to their problem, but they believe they are entitled to know the answer. They always think they are so very special and that they deserve to be told what to do. More often than not, they might have arrived at the answer if they had just tried to resolve it themselves.

The people who call tech support hotlines have the wrong attitude about problem solving. They don't even consider that 1) they might already have the answer and 2) they might be able to find the answer on their own. If it doesn't work right out of the box, they automatically assume it is someone else's responsibility to make it work for them. Never mind that the instructions are right there, these callers cannot be bothered to take a look at them.

Think back for a moment to the frontier days of wagon trains, gold rushes, and westward expansion. People during this time were much more adept at solving problems than people of today. Can you imagine if they had tech support hotlines back then? "Um, yeah, my rifle jammed up and there's a band of horse thieves coming this way. What should I do?" Ah, get the hell out of Dodge for starters!

Just the same, if your printer is not printing black ink, wouldn't your first step be to check the black ink cartridge you just installed? Wouldn't you check to make sure it has paper and that it's connected before calling someone for help with a print error? For some people, this is too much of a stretch for their minds. For whatever reason, tech support callers are not imaginative people. They never ask "What if...?" because if they did, they would not need to call.

In the frontier days, if you didn't figure out how to trade for or hunt for food, you would die of hunger. Simple as that. Being able to "figure it out" without being told the answer is a critical skill for survival. If nobody ever showed you the best way to trap food or hunt, then you had better learn real quick because the price for failure of this task was a hungry death.

Back then, people were willing to do something that people today are extremely reluctant to do: figure it out for themselves. Today, there are no consequences for being ignorant and lazy. You won't die if you are unable to set the clock on your DVD player or install your own printer drivers.

It seems like nobody these days can be bothered to sit down and read the directions. They just want to call someone up and tell them the answer. Most of the time on the phone, the technician is reading from a copy of the same manual that shipped with their equipment.

This "cannot be bothered to" mentality has created a problem in modern society: the people who are too stupid to survive do not die. In fact, they always seem to end up inconveniencing the rest of us by driving 35mph in the high-speed lane on the freeway or bringing a full shopping cart through the express checkout lane. These are the people who cannot send email attachments and blame every computer error message on a virus. Please get a fucking clue, guys. It's not that hard and you really can solve your own problems. Just TRY.

The bottom line with tech support is that it's never smart people with broken equipment who call in. It's always the loudest, dumbest, most irrational hotheads with brand new equipment that works fine who decide to pick up the phone.

I'm not the only one who feels this way:
http://notalwaysright.com/
http://blog.crankingwidgets.com/2008/04/21/get-fantastic-tech-support/
http://callcentersurvivor.blogspot.com/

Why I Hate Twitter

One of the most popular social-networking sites of the past few years is Twitter. Members of the site post brief, 140-character long messages known as "tweets" whenever they feel like it. This allows friends and family to keep up with the user's activities throughout the day. Twitter is free to use, explosively popular, and utterly stomach-churning to me.

There are lots of reasons why I hate Twitter, starting with the absolutely awful name. If Twitter is the name of the website, does that mean its members are all "Twits?" Last time I checked, that was a pretty undesirable thing to be called.

The second reason I hate Twitter is the nature of the service that they provide. By posting "tweets," your friends and family can know what you're doing at any moment throughout the day. I guess the telephone, the answering machine, the cell phone, the voicemail box, the text message, the letter, the handwritten note, email, instant messaging, MySpace comments and messages, blogs, and good old fashioned talking to your friends just aren't enough to keep in touch in these modern times! With so many ways to communicate with one another, is one more really necessary?

Third, the type of information that people post on Twitter is so boring, useless, and inane that I cannot believe anyone cares about this stuff. Does my cousin across the country really care that I ate a burrito for lunch today? Is it critical that my friends and co-workers know when I am procrastinating on my homework? Does anyone at all need to know that I got a new pair of shoes or got my car's oil changed this weekend?

The information people post on Twitter is beyond trivial; it has no value to anyone. If I did something truly noteworthy like get engaged, move to a new house, or change careers, I'd let my friends know with a telephone call, email message, or other form of communication mentioned above.

When people make a post such as: "Just got dressed, heading out to work now" it is really not noteworthy. What do you want, praise for accomplishing a simple everyday task? Do you expect a pat on the head for that meager accomplishment, or are you just a whore for attention?

The whole Twitter phenomenon reminds me of the popular catchphrase of the 1990's: TMI, or Too Much Information. In context, the expression is used when someone tells you all the dirty details and it makes you uncomfortable. I certainly don't think strangers on the Internet need to know that I'm heading out to the library to return an overdue book or that I was late to work this morning because I had to clean up a big pile of cat barf on the rug. I hesitate to tell those things even to close personal friends, but apparently some people have no shame (especially when it comes to very personal medical problems).

The fourth reason that Twitter sucks is its 140-character limit. With an email or telephone call, I am free to say as much as I want to, whether it's ten words or ten thousand words. I am free to add pictures, video, and anything else I want to get my message across. The Internet is all about removing boundaries on creative self-expression, unless you're on Twitter in which case you are required to stay in your 140-character corral. After all, you don't want to get too detailed or anything.

Finally, I hate Twitter because it is made for the laziest kind of people. I view Twitter users as people too lazy to place a telephone call, compose an email, or tap out a text message because it takes too much work. For them, Twitter is a quick and easy way to say "Hey world, pay attention to me!" without the effort of picking up a phone, writing a blog, or doing anything creative that takes real effort.

To summarize, Twitter has a terrible name, it is unnecessary in our thoroughly-connected modern society, it is full of useless information, its members have no shame about what they share, and it's the quickest path to becoming an attention whore ever devised. Fuck Twitter.

I am not the only one who feels this way:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18445274/ 
http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1877187,00.html 
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1879169,00.html
http://www.zazzle.com/i_hate_twitter_tshirts-235256829573788183