We have our Ross Perot!

NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg has apparently switched his political affiliation from Republican to unaffiliated, leading to speculation that he's considering a run for the Presidency in 2008 as an independent. I gotta say I love the idea of Bloomberg entering the race. The possibilities are endless and intriguing! How about Bloomberg vs. Guiliani vs. Hillary? I'd vote for Bloomberg in that match up. Bill Bradley for veep? Or how about Ron Paul? Or, crazy but I think it might grow on me: John Edwards. I could even see a Bloomberg candidacy relegate the Republicans to a third place finish - now that would shake up the political landscape!

I like Bloomberg. I think he's done a better job as mayor than Guiliani. He's liberal on social issues and the environment, fiscally conservative and supports stem cell research. He has enough money to finance his own campaign so I don't think he'll be in any one's pocket. Best of all, he's clearly not a Perot-style wacko. I think he's credible and could do well, and that being the case he represents an opportunity to demonstrate that there is an alternative to our current corrupt two party system.

Maybe things are starting to get interesting...

My thoughts on Apple's iPhone

A lot of the tech websites I frequently read are in a state of frenzy in anticipation of the June 29 release of Apple's first cellphone, the iPhone (glancing over the main page at CNet News just now there are at least seven links to iPhone related information). According to Apple's website, the "iPhone combines three amazing products — a revolutionary mobile phone, a widescreen iPod with touch controls, and a breakthrough Internet communications device". It sounds great but at this point I really don't see how the product can possibly live up to the hype.

I won't be buying an iPhone. It seems like a pretty neat little gadget, but as with all things Apple it has a couple of fatal flaws. First of all, it's just way too expensive, with two versions expected to sell at $499 and $599 with a two year service contract. This always seems to be the case with Apple products. I considered buying a Mac laptop about a year ago. At the time, Mac had just made the switch to Intel processors and the rumor (which proved to be true) was that you could run Windows as well as the Mac OS. I have a lot of Windows software that I wasn't willing to give up but this seemed to solve that problem. I would have liked to try out the iLife suite - I checked out Apple's site and the software seemed cool. Would it have replaced Photoshop or Cubase (for music production)? Probably not. But it might have served a purpose when I was more interested in ease of use than power. And the video production software would have been about as good as what I use or slightly better, but I don't play with video much. Apple does offer Final Cut, for me the only significant Apple exclusive, but the price is prohibitive for my needs.

What ultimately killed the purchase was that very same processor switch - it allowed me to much more easily compare the hardware and what I found was that the Macbook Pro was seriously lacking. I was able to configure a significantly more powerful PC laptop for $1000 less. At the time the Macbook only offered a single-layer DVD burner - I got a double-layer burner. I also got an additional twenty gigs on my hard-drive, faster processor and much better graphics and sound cards. Both laptops are roughly the same size and weight. I added an updated display and a bigger battery. There really wasn't any room for debate - in every regard the hardware ate the Mac's lunch. The difference, really, is the software. On a laptop I don't see that as significant. I've been running XP Pro for something like five years now - it's effective, it's stable and it's infinitely more versatile than the Mac OS, particularly if you know what you're doing. The ability to run OS X alongside it simply wasn't worth the money.

On a phone I can see how Apple's approach might be more desirable. Apple tightly controls their hardware design, making it more difficult for people who aren't particularly computer savvy to screw things up. On the iPhone, Apple is limiting third-party developers to writing applets for Safari, the web browser. OS X also has an excellent, easy to use interface, and from what I've seen the mobile version of OS X that will run on the iPhone is stunning. The iPhone won't have as many features as Windows Mobile smart phones but I have no doubt it's ease of use will be fantastic.

While the iPhone does have a nice set of features many of them suffer when you take a look at the details. The iPhone is available in 4- and 8-gigabyte versions. I just don't see this replacing my three year old twenty gigabyte iPod, which is almost full. Granted, my iPod doesn't play video, but even so do I really want to watch video on a 3 inch screen? Putting video on it would also mean a lot less space for my music.

I have similar misgivings about the phone as an Internet device. I like the email interface and Google maps. As a web browser, again, the screen is just too small. Even on Apple's website the page they've chosen to display is unreadable (other than one headline, which I liked: "Democrats take control of Congress"). The maps would also be much more useful if they included GPS like a lot of other cellphones. The unit has no physical keyboard - it's got a touchscreen keyboard. I suspect this will work for typing with an index finger but not using two thumbs. I can probably live with that although it's does seem like they went for flash over real ingenuity. I do like the widgets.

Of course, the iPhone is also a phone! Ironically, this is probably the thing that irritates me the most. Aside from shelling out the purchase price you're stuck in a contract with Cingular/AT&T, my current service provider until my contract ends (and I am free). These guys aren't cheap when it comes to data plans and in order to get the most out of the iPhone you will need a heavy-duty data plan. Yes, the iPhone has Wi-Fi, which would be great for Internet access in my home (and necessary, since I have to roam the house searching for a "sweet spot" to get cell phone service). But my experience searching for free Wi-Fi in the area with my laptop indicates it's limited at best. One cool feature: if the iPhone does find Wi-Fi access it will automatically switch to that.

Finally, the battery is supposedly not replaceable by the user. However, Apple is reporting amazing battery life. That's great, but if you can't replace the battery yourself (should it fail) without voiding the warranty I think that's a huge negative.

So here's what I'd like to see: first of all, lose the "phone", unless you can get Cingular/AT&T to offer a reasonable unlimited data plan (or in my case, some other provider that can actually "provide"). Add storage space - forty gigs would be nice, eighty gigs even better. Add GPS for the maps with voice navigation. Maybe give it a larger screen (but not too large - I really don't need to watch video if it makes the device significantly less portable, and I'm okay just browsing pages designed for mobile devices). Thumb typing would be nice - maybe an add-on bluetooth keyboard (I suspect someone will come out with something like this). I'm guessing that a lot of the technology developed for the iPhone will make it into the next generation of the iPod and I'm excited about that.

DOSBox and Doom 2

I downloaded DOSBox version 0.7 last night. DOSBox is an opensource MS-DOS emulator that runs on Windows and other platforms. Basically that means you can run your old DOS programs in Windows XP even though XP has (very) limited MS-DOS support. Basically, what that means is you can run old DOS games in Windows, because I really can't think of that many DOS programs that haven't been replaced with better Windows versions. DOSBox does not offer all the functionality of MS-DOS but it does get the job done. You can run applications windowed or full-screen. It also lets you mount directories, partitions and CD/DVD drives. You can also speed up or slow down the emulator to try and make your old software run smoothly.

I created a directory on my c: drive called DOS and mounted it by typing "mount c c:\dos" (an earlier, uninformed attempt to mount the drive proved to be messy and ineffective). I then fired up a game of Doom 2, which for some reason I had been dying to play since I started listening to that Alice In Chains album. I really wanted to hear Alice In Chains midi! Everything worked as I remembered it although the joystick was a little buggy, enough so that I switched to keyboard control (my joystick is a newer Logitech USB pad with, I think, a bit too much going on for Doom to handle - I'll have to play around with it a bit).

Playing Doom 2 really took me back. Games today seem so disposable - I don't play as much as I used to but even when I do I never log the kind of hours and replayability I got out of Doom 2, or a lot of the games I played back then. I played Doom over and over, beating it countless times, exploring every nook and cranny of the maps. I played it for years - playing again last night was like going back to visit an old neighborhood (other than the fact that I was killing all of the neighbors).

I'm kind of on a classic game "kick" now, thanks to DOSBox. Ah, nostalgia! If anyone wants to hook up for a Doom deathmatch let me know...

You can download DOSBox here:
http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/download.php?main=1

There's a FAQ here:
http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php

As far as finding your own copy of Doom 2, you're on your own. I think you can still buy it from Id. I keep my copy carefully preserved in a vault, where it will remain for eternity, lovingly tended, that I might never go wanting for it's sweet, sweet gratification...

David Sleaze, The Punk Magician

You have no idea how much digging I had to do to find this. The best I could come up with was a video of a television broadcast someone shot with a camcorder. Aside from a little wobble in the beginning and less than stellar quality it does the job. This is a character comedian Greg Travis used to do in his standup act. I should mention the language is a bit harsh...

It's Alive

Wickedly old school, this one... I first listened to this album just out of high school, maybe current at the time but it felt like a classic already. The friend who gave it to me told me it was an import, not available in the US. I believed him, for a very long time, until I came across it recently at Borders, for nine dollars and ninety-nine cents.

If you don't like the Ramones, you don't like punk rock. If ever there were a litmus test for a genre, this is it. The Ramones defined the American punk rock movement, and anything that came afterwards was a pale imitation, not necessarily lacking but not living up. This is part of the canon, and if you can't see that you should just hang it up and devote your life to Brittany Spears worship.

It's Alive is a live album, as you might have gathered, opening with an inspired version of "Rockaway Beach". The beauty of this album is that it focuses on the bands strengths - heavy guitar, catchy songs, and absolutely nothing else. There are 28 songs on the disc, most less than two minutes long. There's very little excessive banter between songs. For the most part they just finish and plow into the next tune. This is particularly effective during the jaunt between "Sheena Is A Punk Rocker", "Havana Affair" and "Commando", or between "Pinhead", "Do You Wanna Dance", "Chainsaw" and "Today Your Love, Tomorrow The World". There is no break between these songs, other than Dee Dee's shouted "1-2-3-4" - they simply roll from each to the next. The result is about as heavy as you could ever ask for, all within the confines of the "simple is better" format. It's sheer musical energy encountering zero resistance. These excursions abound on this album and the above examples are just some of my favorites.

"Sometimes simple is better". My buddy Keith, a chef, and I sometimes say this to each other, regarding food. The Ramones prove it's true for music as well. These are very simple songs, but, continuing the food metaphor, it's how they are presented that counts. The guitar is hot in the mix, way up front but restrained just enough so as not to drown out the rest of the band. Three chord riffs (and by chord, I mean two-note power chord, harmonically ambiguous) dominate, producing catchy sing-along songs. The vocals are by no means technically skillful yet loaded with charm. The bass never strays from the guitars root and I don't think there is a single drum fill. Somehow it all manages to hit you with the emotional equivalent of a sledgehammer to the face.

The album was recorded on December 31, 1977. It includes songs from their first three albums, Ramones, Leave Home, and Rocket To Russia. At one time I had all of the Ramones albums on cassette, but so far my transition to CD (and iPod) has been limited to All The Stuff, Volumes 1&2, comprising their first four albums, and It's Alive. It's enough, I think - they managed to create an enduring legacy in a very short time on the basis of that work. It's extraordinarily honest music, whereas the later stuff showed more willingness to compromise in an attempt to achieve commercial success.

Sadly, The Ramones are gone forever, with the deaths of Joey, Johnny and Dee Dee shortly after the "end of the century". But if you're looking for an introduction or just a rocking example of the band at it's finest you won't find a better option than It's Alive.

Why the world needs Superman

Warning: this article probably contains some spoilers. If you haven't seen the movie but are planning on watching it read with caution...

I caught Superman Returns on cable the other night. I've never been a big fan of Superman and wasn't expecting much but I ended up being very pleasantly surprised.

The film takes place after the events of the second Christopher Reeve film. As the story begins no one has seen or heard from Superman in quite some time. He left (apparently quite abruptly) five years earlier in search of his home planet of Krypton, an ultimately fruitless endeavor. A lot has changed in his absence. Lois Lane has a child and a "prolonged engagement" to be married. His arch-nemesis, Lex Luther, has appealed his jail sentence and been released. Neither one is very happy with the man of steel.

In the first major action sequence Superman attempts to rescue Lois Lane and her fellow passengers on a jumbo jet plummeting to earth. He tries to steady the plane by grabbing the wing, only to have it rip from the fuselage. As he races to catch up the other wing tears free and he flies right through it. He gets to the front of the plane and tries to slow it descent. The scene switches to a professional baseball game, as spectators and players notice the jet plunging towards the field. At the last minute Superman manages to bring the jet to a stop, setting it down on the field. There is a moment of stunned silence and then the crowd erupts. If you are a sports fan you know that sound - it reminded me of Aaron Boone's eleventh inning home run in the seventh game of the 2003 ALCS. It is the shared sound of tens of thousands of people reacting instinctively to the absolutely incredible, and it rang so true that in that moment this movie had me hooked.

Brandon Routh does a great job both as Superman and Clark Kent, admirably filling the enormous shoes of the late, great Christopher Reeves. Kate Bosworth is an excellent Lois Lane. My favorite performance was by the always enjoyable Kevin Spacey. His portrayal of Lex Luther is sublime - you constantly sense a seething psychosis bubbling underneath the cool, brilliant exterior.

The special effects are very well done as is the set design, which gives the movie a vintage feel. The love triangle subplot (perhaps "love square" is a more adequate description, as there is some initial doubt regarding the paternity of Lois' son) is believable and satisfying, as is it's somewhat ambiguous resolution. Although for the most part the movie treats the material seriously when they do try to inject a little humor the results generally made me chuckle.

What I found most interesting was the mythical subtext, the idea of Superman as a sort of Christ-like figure. It's clearly there, although you can easily ignore it and still enjoy the movie. In one scene, as Superman soars through the clouds, we hear his father's voice: "They can be a great people Kal-El. They wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you, my only son". In another scene, floating above the city with Lois Lane, Superman tells her to listen, and asks if she hears anything. She tells him she doesn't, to which he replies "I hear everything. You wrote that the world doesn't need a savior, but every day I hear people crying for one".

The imagery is there as well. There's Lex Luther stabbing the weakened and beaten Superman with a jagged piece of kryptonite. Later, when Superman saves the planet, and billions of lives, his "burden" is literally portrayed, as well as the sacrifice he makes in the process, illustrated by shards of deadly kryptonite, reminiscent of thorns. After successfully completing the task, he falls back to earth, seemingly unconscious, arms spread wide. The crucifixion allusion is hard to miss.

This is just a comic book superhero, right? Certainly Superman is lacking in historical tradition. At the same time he is an iconic figure of American culture in the age of mass media. He is a symbol of strength and selflessness, freedom and justice, ideals which we profess to hold dear. In some sense he represents America at it's finest, an America we all want to believe exists, using his power to make the world a better place while asking for nothing in return. As an American citizen concerned with my country's current standing in the world community it was refreshing to watch a film that focused on this and allowed me to forget for a moment the message being sent by our current leadership's foreign policy. And although I am not at all religious I found the movie uplifting for the simple fact that it presented a hero who is unambiguously good. You can dismiss that if you like, but personally I think that sort of sneering sense of sophistication is one of the reasons people have been listening to the politicians who say "they hate us for our freedom".

Rethinking Paris Hilton

I was in Quiznos today and the guy standing in front of me in line had a copy of the New York Post with the Paris Hilton story on the back page. The guy behind the counter picked it up and started making fun of her and we all had a laugh at her expense. I don't really know the details but she's going to jail for some reason. I expect her next album will be gangsta rap...

It occurs to me that she really is low-budget soap opera in the sense that we don't incur any marketing/production costs. We simply have to set her loose with nominal provisions (a bottle of Jagermeister and a box of condoms would probably suffice) and let the paparazzi document the results. I realize people get angry because she's a celebrity with no talent and she says a lot of stupid things. I'm beginning to think we should look upon Paris as a one-woman Dynasty or 90210. We don't have to pay for sets, or other actors, or any of the expenses associated with producing a weekly hour-long pile of crap television series.

We could probably even brainwash her (it wouldn't take much soap) to the point where we can turn this into something like The Truman Show. We hire some writers, or better yet just let people submit story ideas to a website, then we orchestrate a series of pitfalls that Paris must overcome. It's all caught on hidden camera (because believe me - it will be much funnier if she's not in on the joke) and beamed to a satellite channel that we've blocked on her cable box (just put it on a channel number higher than she can count). An added bonus is she's got plenty of dumb friends to provide spin-off material.

Just a thought. She's got all that money and you know she's going to blow it on something stupid anyways. Why not let society benefit as a result?

I love this guy!

Ron Paul - he won't back off, and he's right. Doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell, but...

Rethinking Al Gore

I'm beginning to wonder if a reassessment of my opinion of Al Gore is in order. I'm basing this partly on his recent appearance on The Daily Show but mainly on a profile in The New York Times Magazine.

I'm willing to put aside all of the commentary about whether he's a hypocrite because his home apparently consumes a lot of electricity. It is apparent he is passionate about this cause because he championed it years ago and was labeled a crackpot by many for doing so. He's also probably done more than any other individual on the planet to increase public awareness. So I think he's earned a few carbon credits...

The Gore I saw on television was very different from the Gore I remembered from the 2000 campaign. Maybe this was a result of the success of An Inconvenient Truth, but whatever the reason he seems more off the cuff, more willing to speak his mind rather than politically appease. He even, apparently, has a sense of humor, something which I had heard rumors of but never experienced first hand.

I like the thesis of his new book, The Assault on Reason, which the Times article described as "a learned screed on the demise of public discourse and the "meritocracy of ideas"". I'll reserve judgement on the book until I've actually read it, and I will should he choose to run. And I think he should run, at the very least as an attempt to add some intellectual honesty to the debate. The profile of Hillary Clinton in this weeks magazine was so rife with tortured rationalizations I put it down in disgust. Ron Paul nearly being shouted off the stage at the Republican debate was equally disheartening. Imagine a Giuliani vs. Clinton race for the presidency - imagine what spewing that level of bullshit would do to the environment...

I'm not saying I'd actually vote for Al Gore. That decision won't be made for a long time. I do think he can provide a much needed spark - can you imagine how much soul-searching the guy must have gone through after throwing away the presidency in 2000 by trying to play it safe? By all accounts he is, at the very least, a thoughtful, intelligent man. How would you feel if your failure put Bush in the White House, paving the way for all the misery that followed?

Personally, I think America is ready for some truth, and I think Al Gore is ready to speak some. I also think he would mop the floor with any of the Republican hopefuls. So c'mon Al - please, why not make this thing interesting?

Spore

I've been a fan of Will Wright and Maxis since SimAnt. Although I never really got into The Sims I have owned and loved every version of SimCity. I'm really excited about his new project, Spore, a sort of "galaxy simulator". You start with a simple microorganism and evolve biologically and technologically to sentient life and interstellar travel. It looks like an incredible learning/creative endeavor.

The release date apparently won't be any time in the near future but I found this video a while back that will give you some idea of what to expect. This is Will Wright explaining some of the game's features: