Apple unveiled two new pieces of electronic crackrock today: new flat panel displays, and the next release of OS X: Tiger.
Now you may ask yourself, does anyone need a 30-inch widescreen computer display? Well, nobody needs a 30-inch widescreen computer display…
Tiger has some features I’m looking forward to, even though they seem to be Apple’s answer to existing third-party software.
Spotlight will surely eliminate the need for Quicksilver or Launchbar.
But what’s more, Dashboard seems to be a complete rip-off of Konfabulator. The people behind Konfab, have already posted their complaint right on their front page, and it’s no wonder. While I’m not surprised they’re unhappy, in the end this is good for me, the user, because I’ve always thought that Konfabulator yields a lot of untapped potential, and having it as a native part of the operating system will hopefully inspire lots of cool widgets.
I’m also looking forward to the new version of Safari with built-in RSS support. Hopefully this will be available to download long before Tiger is for sale.
I can’t wait to watch the keynote address once it’s online to watch Steve Jobs show it all off with his usual turtlenecked smugness.
I’m a firm believer in questioning authority. Be it your parents, your boss, or your government that’s in charge, you know deep down you’re smarter than them, don’t you?
And what better time to celebrate the questioning of authority than today! First, it is election day here in Canada and, save for any hanging chads, we’ll have a new Prime Minister at the end of the day. Secondly, the results are in, and with a mere 868 theatres showing it, Fahrenheit 9/11 is tops at the box office.
Here’s my favourite “questioning authority” story (alright it’s a bit design-nerdy, but still...):
I once innocently pointed out to an art director, “Oh you used ‘inch marks’ here instead of proper quotes...” This was met with, “What do you mean?”
I explained that by default when you type an apostrophe or quote on your keyboard, the characters you normally get on screen are foot and inch marks.
“Oh, I guess not all fonts have those then,” she countered. Once again I calmly explained that yes, the fonts she uses do contain proper quotes, and it’s simply a matter of knowing how to use them in the software.
“Well,” she dismissed, “I just thought they changed it so you didn’t have to use them, to make it easier.”
That’s right, I thought. The ubiquitous ‘they’. Some secret council of font-makers decided that both the elegance and practical functionality of an important typographical character were no longer needed in this modern bustling world. I don’t expect the average schmo to know the difference, but this was someone that I was working underneath, someone I was supposed to learn from. This was someone who, supposedly with an education in design, had no idea that there was a difference between a straight up-n-down measurement mark, and a cute curly-cue quote mark.
I went back to my desk in shock, deciding to leave the lesson on em- and en-dashes for another time.
I wanted to have an art director I could learn from, someone I could respect, someone I could feel mentored by, but instead I had someone to whom I felt I needed to explain the difference between blue and green.
So rise up, boys and girls!
Tell your parents, “No! I will not go blind if I keep doing it!”
Tell your teacher, “No! I will not abandon the use of the serial comma!”
Tell your boss, “No! I will not come in on time”
Tell your art director, “No! I will not make the logo any bigger, thank-you very much!”
Tell your government, “Yes! I will marry my lesbian partner with my top off while smoking marijuana on the way to have an abortion at the government-run free clinic!”
The graphic above is included on the stats page of my portfolio site, illustrating the breakdown of search queries that brought people there. My very being has been deconstructed into statistical data resulting in the world’s most boring yin-yang.
How very zen.
Toronto’s blogging golden boy Cory Doctorow, self-professed renaissance geek, gives a very entertaining speech about DRM (digital rights management) to a group of Microsoft researchers.
It’s a lengthy read, but it’s very worthwhile if you’re even remotely interested in the crazy ever-changing world of intellectual property, copyright, and the technology that has capitalism shaking in its money-making boots.
Mr. Doctorow skillfully explains things with great clarity and humour, and if this is indicative of his writing style, I may have to check out some of his fiction. (Any recommendations?)
I just finished a few illustrations for a quick project at work. I didn’t have a lot of time to do them, and I’m a bit disappointed in how they turned out. But I do like this one:
Wordcraft is a group of linguaphiles who are embarking on an ambitious project: rewriting the Oxford English Dictionary… as limericks.
Consider this beautifully clever example:
We wed young and then hit the skids
After doing what good sense forbids.
We couldn’t have guessed it,
Though its name should suggest it:
Adultery is not meant for kids.
I’m already addicted. Methinks I need to sign up and contribute… it looks like a whole mess of nerdy fun. (via Languagehat)
To make up for the dripping saccharine of the previous post, here’s a little one I forgot about.
“So, uh… you know The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly? I always thought it was just this great old country song, but it turns out that it’s from this wicked movie...”
Then the guy proceeded to belt out the song for everyone in earshot (as well as one can belt out whistling and nasally wah-wah-wahhhs).
“The moon’s following us, daddy!”
(apologies to those who expect something more cynical in the Overheard category, but this was just too darn cute.)
I would like to recommend that celebrities not be able to name their offspring. I suggest some type of independently-run committee to spare our Hollywood stars the embarrassment of looking like total asshats, and to prevent the years of therapy the poorly-named babies will no doubt have to endure thanks to their touched-in-the-head parents.
First Gwenyth and Chris named their poor kid Apple. Now it’s reported that Courtney Cox Arquette and David Arquette’s recent addition to the world population is going to be named Coco.
Coco? Is that some weird shorthand for COurtney COx?
In any event, this is the perfect opportunity to introduce you to one of my favourite websites of all time: Baby’s Named a Bad, Bad Thing: A Primer on Parent Cruelty. Its author explains:
Some parents are just plain crazy. But few are as crazy as many soon-to-be parents, who, wrapped up in the fear and anticipation, the social status and expectations, go just plain mad. Mad as march hares with swollen ankles and morning sickness.
Imagine the crew of Mystery Science Theatre tackling various online baby name message boards, and you’ve got an idea of the site.
The way I see it, there are three types of bad baby names.
Oh, and if one more parent names their child Dakota, I’m naming my first born Saskatchewan.
More on Ray Charles. In what could very well be the most miscast role since Halle Berry as Catwoman, guess who’s playing Ray Charles in an upcoming biopic…
Master thespian Jamie “Booty Call” Foxx.
I’m sure it will be a very touching tribute. Next I hope to see Pauly Shore as Bob Dylan. Or maybe Carrot Top as John Lennon.
I’m sorry, Ray.
I don’t know what kind of tactics the Liberal party is using these days to lure voters, but when I arrived home last night, a woman had left this message on my answering machine:
“Hello, this is a message for John-John. John-John, I am calling on behalf of your local Liberal representative...”
John-John? I’m sorry, Tony. Cute nick-names will get you nowhere. My vote still goes to Olivia.
Check it out… Apple just released AirPort Express. It’s like a miniature hub that plugs into any electrical outlet.
The kicker though, is that it has audio output to allow you to stream your iTunes music anywhere in the house.
Damn you Apple for creating something so tempting. Damn you to hell!
There’s a new interview with book designer Chip Kidd over at the Onion A.V. Club. It’s a decent read, with lots of comics-talk, including his explanation of his fascination with Batman and how he has struggled to legitimize it (and legitimizing comics as a whole). He also talks a bit about Charles Schulz and he’s asked if he was a Peanuts fan before working on The Art of Charles M. Schulz. He says:
The thing that I came to realize was that Schulz is the great unifier. Here’s the one cartoonist that pretty much everybody can agree on. Here’s the cartoonist that’s beloved by both Dan Clowes and my mother. I can’t think of anybody else that could fit that description. It’s edgy and neurotic in a timeless way, and it’s heartwarming and sweet to other people--to the greater global population, I guess you would say. There’s just some great common denominator. After doing this book, I don’t think I encountered anybody who said to me, “Oh, I never got Peanuts,” or “I wasn’t into it.”
This is pretty much true, except I have met people who complain to me, “I just don’t think it’s funny.” These are the people who fail to understand that just because it’s on the comics page, Peanuts isn’t something you read to laugh at—it’s something you read to relate to.
I fell in love with Peanuts because of the heartbreak, the anxiety, the failure, and the sadness. But for the record—it does make me laugh. The two characters who never fail to crack me up are Sally and Rerun. It has something to do with their naive confidence and determination—the fact they’re oblivious to how ridiculous they are.
One of my favourite strips was from Schulz’s last years. Rerun was getting in trouble in preschool for creating underground comics in art class. Forced to describe his work to the off-screen principal, Rerun explains, “...and this is Tarzan beating up Mickey Mouse.”
“...We’re gonna ride the boogie.”
--Michael Jackson, Rock With You