Macs vs. The Rest

Right now I'm watching Phil Schiller's keynote speech at the 2009 Macworld tradeshow- a keynote that was dominated by Steve Jobs in the past. I think Phil's doing a great job. This thought lead me to thinking about what it means to be Apple or Mac-like, because obviously there is more going on than Steve Jobs' showmanship.

And I believe that a good starting point is with the following, which I just tweeted:

Mac vs. PC boiled down to essentials: Mac is basically user-based, PC is basically Microsoft-based. Or a-ton-of-vendors based. Period.

In other words, the Mac represents an attempt to provide a computer that "works" for all of us, without regard to legacy issues such as the technical legacy imposed by the DOS/Windows/Microsoft way of doing things.

Boeing's Dreamliner (the 787)

Originally supposed to enter service last year, the Dreamliner has yet to make its first test flight. When all is said and done, assuming no more delays, it seems like this airplane will be around two years late.

That said, 2009 is shaping up to be a big year for the 787. First-flight later this year, and the first plane pulled out of the hangar for the first time (besides a rush-job photo-op back in 2007) just a few days ago.


Dreamliner One Line Move from Liz Matzelle on Vimeo.

"Lighthouse"

A very nice short film, link courtesy Michael Landow.

The Israeli/Palestinian crisis

This is really tough for me. I'm Jewish and was raised to believe that Israel was a miracle that could do no wrong.

Obviously, the reality is more complex.

But to me, the bottom line is this: if you believe that Israel has a right to exist- as I do- then you must accept that fact that a) a lot of people in that region, and around the world, do not believe in that right, and b) a lot of the motives, policies, and actions of those in the area are geared toward the destruction of Israel.

The issue is not one-sided, of course. The above-mentioned facts notwithstanding, the Israeli treatment of occupied Palestinians has been asymmetric, heavy-handed, and contrary in spirit to the very essence of what Israel means to me as a Jew, and to what it means to be a Jew.

The current situation- the occupations, the settlements, etc.- is not viable, and in many ways is the result of the flawed history of Israel's creation.

We need true leadership from both sides in order to move forward. The Middle East neighborhood needs to genuinely accept Israel's right to exist. The Palestinians need their own state. Israel needs to abandon settlements not on their own land (whatever that means) and pull back to their "real" (again, whatever that means) borders.

Then, and only then, can we have conditions where we can maybe begin to move forward.

The looming end of Bush

We've still got 20 days to go, but now that it's 2009, the departure of George W. Bush feels a little more imminent.

Bob Herbert does a nice job summarizing the catastrophe of the past eight years of the American presidency.

Happy 2009

I think 2009 is going to be a year of dramatic change for a lot of us. Cheers to the notion that we can embrace that change and use it to better ourselves.

The Story of Stuff

Kudos to my colleague Ryan Greene for passing this along.

I can't think of a better, more meaningful way to close out 2008. And given what's going on in the world, thinking like this needs to be top of mind in 2009.

The Story of Stuff.

Every saga has a beginning...

I mark this. Mark it well, from the end of college.

I was so excited when I first saw this clip.

Sadly, it was all downhill from here...

The story of a boy, a girl, and a universe

Here.

Tolerance

Rick Warren on the mind again.

So the core issue seems to be, how do we reduce intolerance?

Do we not tolerate those who are intolerant?

Or do we tolerate them in the hope of being able to have meaningful
and transformative dialogue with them?

I would argue that to not tolerate the intolerant is to behave
essentially as they do.

It is harder to tolerate someone who you think is hateful, but if your
real goal is progress- and not just a continued fight- then that's the
kind of hard work that separates the true leaders from the demagogues.

Time to see "Joe Versus the Volcano" again

Clip courtesy Keith Harmeyer.

Rick Warren and incest

Here's one of the infamous interviews:



To be clear, I am for full equality for all consenting adults, regardless of orientation.

But here's the thing. Can anyone tell me why, if it should be legal for two consenting homosexuals to get married, it should be illegal for two consenting relatives to get married?

I am not equating homosexuality with any sort of perceived sin or evil associated with incest. But the question is, if you're truly in favor of equal rights for gay people, could you be intellectually and morally consistent by opposing consentual, adult, incestuous relationships?

Any reasons I can think of to oppose that sort of consentual incestual relationship could also be used to oppose gay relationships.

So with that said, I suppose that if I'm for gay marriage, I'm also for pretty much every other type of conceivable consentual marriage.

How could you distinguish?

I think that's the point that Rick Warren was trying to make. For him, he doesn't want to make that change. For me, I guess I'm okay with it.

Thoughts?

Rick Warren redux

I'm fascinated by the debate this issue has inspired.

I got into a bit of it myself with Dave Winer in the comments to this post of his (my screen name is solomaniac).

At the end of the day, I think Melissa Etheridge and Andrew Sullivan (who himself has cited her inspiration on the issue) have both put it closest to how I feel about it.

Star Trek III poster

Look familiar?

Rick Warren

I do not support intolerance or the kinds of divisive social policies that Rick Warren and many like-minded people believe in. But to criticize Obama for inviting Warren to participate in the inauguration is to fall victim to old-line thinking and a lack of imagination.

The bottom line is that Warren and the millions who follow him exist. They are Americans, and they are a powerful part of what America will be in 2009.

Many other people might not like that very much, but it's the simple and honest truth.

To argue in favor of silencing or shunning those people is to argue in favor of actions that are inherently one-sided.

By embracing Warren, Obama is signaling that he appreciates the reality that those people exist.

They exist as Americans with their own opinions, but just as importantly, they exist as people who will be part of the coming debates on issues like gay marriage and don't ask/don't tell.

Better to signal a surprising and inclusive acceptance of them as part of America right off the bat, rather than starting things off with a polarizing gesture.

Obama's actions in the years to come will speak to his ability to further social progress. But I think the Rick Warren choice shows that he's prepared to tackle these issues in a manner that's more thorough and ambitious than most people can imagine.

Classic

This is a repeat, but I can't watch this without tears of laughter streaming down my face, from the very beginning.

"Mission: Impossible III"

Came out in 2006. I saw it and thought it was okay.

Now, things are a little more complex. For starters, due in equal measure to "Cloverfield" and "Lost", I have become a J.J. Abrams fan. There may be other factors, but my first-hand- and newfound- appreciation for Abrams is what caused me to revisit this film.

There are two moments that stand out.

The first is toward the beginning of the film, roughly 25 minutes in, when Keri Russell's character (spoiler alert) dies from a micro bomb implanted in her brain. The way they pull that off is cool.

But the second, and even better, moment, comes much later, when Tom Cruises' character storms a Chinese office building to steal a high-tech weapon. A lot of screen time is dedicated to the setup of this scene, including setting the stage for Cruise's character to jump across thousands of feet of empty air to land on the roof of the building he intends to infiltrate.

Needless to say, he does so. But the genius follows.

Cruise survives the acrobatic setup, and then the action transfers to the folks on the ground, on Cruises' team, as they nervously await word from him.

Tom says he'll be out "in five minutes", but several more than that transpire and the folks on the ground get nervous. More than five minutes pass. They exchange nervous banter while waiting.

Finally, Cruise's voice crackles over their walkie-talkies, announcing his success in retrieving his goal but his failure at meeting his exit point.

From there, traditional action ensues as he smashes out of a window and parachutes to the ground. But the best part has passed. A whole sequence has transpired: Tom Cruise battling his way toward his prize within a highly fortified enemy compound. Crazy stunts have surely unfolded, but we see none of them. Everything has been left to the imagination- perhaps the greatest action sequence of all time- and the fact that it's been left to the imagination is what makes MI:III a standout action film.

"Gonna Die"

That's the name of one of the chapters from the iTunes version of "The Strangers".

This is a disturbing and upsetting movie.

I found the original trailer alluring and, unfortunately, I've been drawn toward this film ever since.

When all is said and done, I'd say that "The Strangers" achieves a degree of torment that was most likely its goal. I give it that credit.

St. Maarten videos

Here are a few (though not all) of the videos I took at Sunset Beach, Maho Bay, St. Maarten. I shot these on a Kodak Zi6, at 720p, 60fps- though the clips below are not HD and are very low-res. To see them in much higher resolution, click on a clip to open it on YouTube, then click on the "watch in HD" link on the bottom right of the video.

American Airlines 757 landing (shot from the bar):



US Airways 757 landing (shot from the beach):



Air France A340 landing (shot from the beach):



Corsair 747 landing (shot from the bar):



American Airlines 757 takeoff (shot from the beach):