Thursday, December 27, 2012

Reconsidering Windows 8 as More Than Windows Dressing


Well, recently I found that the video to which this article below refers to be extremely worth the viewing—so don’t let the length hold you back.  I really like the process development and design concept explanation (and real-time, engaging Windows 8 multi-media), which shows that MS was/is not just following the Apple zeitgeist, but was clearly aware that the whole interaction model of (most) personal computing needed to move to a touch/multi-touch orientation. I mean, it’s not like MS didn’t develop in sometimes challenging ways since the early Windows GUI. But I see the W8 change to be really as transformative as the original mouse-based GUI that really came into its own in W95. Heck: I remember thinking, when I first starting see the mouse, “why stop and grab a mouse when you can just keep typing line and paragraph commands?”  What I didn’t see! And I found myself thinking quite recently the same type of thing (“why stop and grab the screen?”). I hope can keep my mind more open to “touch” as more than just a gimmick for anything but a dedicated mobile device.


It also refers to a great “history of the windows GUI” blog post by the presenter which is a great “tour of Italy” of MS’s GUI design development.

My own personal takeways (since you didn’t ask!...my blog-mail prognostication run amuck):
  1. I more greatly admire MS for realizing not too much after the fact (in mid 2009 prior to the iPad coming out, though rumored) that there was a real sea change going  on, or there needed to be, and MS had better completely rethink their OS GUI in keeping with the times, and
  2.  I “get” Windows 8 a lot better, and will definitely make something like that our next “device” purchase. I can see the “tablet on the table” (or Surface RT or similar device) being the device of daily use far more so than this PC box-on-the-desk that I’m using now. And I see the elegance of “touch” for the vast majority of what most folks actually “do” or want to do” when they grab a device and need to do something.
  3.  Now, write on book on it, or a long email like this? Probably not. But most everything else? Sure, why not?
  4. W8 will HAVE to gain developer attention merely because it IS the new worldwide version of Microsoft’s OS line, and all new PCs will come with it pre-loaded (except for enterprise use, where it will likely be optional for some time to come). Since most computer users get their new computers this way, W8 will gain traction by default, if not by “choice” per se.
  5.  I can see how, even with a non-touch screen PC-box-on-desk setup, W8 has ease-of-use advantages that I think I would grow to like far more than I had imagined (just like the mouse)
  6.  I can imagine my company still using W7 for quite some team, but eventually find a time and place to make W8 (or maybe W9 by then) the form factor of choice. Note: We JUST moved to Win7 and Office 2010 for goodness sake!
  7. The presenter in the video didn’t have anything particularly disparaging to say about Apple, but I think he makes the point that Apple wasn't and isn't the only visionary on the planet, and MS and Apple aren’t in an exclusive club of two on that either.
Overall, I’m warming to W8, or at least to the new reality that the traditional PC is almost a thing of the past…or at least for most folks’ needs and desires nowadays.

One last note: at our friends’ house for Christmas, my friend’s wife had her first iPad on the table with us while we were playing a game, and she said that she hardly ever walks over to her PC anymore. She wasn’t that keen to having an iPad at first (hubby already had one for work of course), but now I don’t think she can see ever not having one. And THIS, together with the video above, has really pushed me over the edge into “embracing touch” (pun incidental), and I guess we’ll just have to see where this leads me….budget and other priorities (and such) notwithstanding.

Friday, April 15, 2011

Which Thief Are You?

(Luke 23:39-43)

When pondering the Cross and that Good Friday scene, did you ever pause to wonder why God allowed His Son to be publically displayed not alone (for greater attention perhaps?) but with two others...common criminals? Do you think it was an accident, or could there have been some design--a plan? I don't pretend to know the answer unequivocally, so just consider it a question that can be asked, and an answer in search of meaning.

On that day,  it says,  that "one of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him, saying, 'Aren’t you the Messiah? Save yourself and us!'. But, said, the other, 'Don’t you fear God,'...since you are under the same sentence? We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.'"

So, a portrait of two men whose lives were about to end. And two men faced with a choice for their last day on earth. And that choice is the choice of EVERY man or woman, and is the choice that will ultimately seal our destiny.

It's easy to understand how the one man could spit out insults. After all, he was about to die, and certainly if Jesus were truly the Messiah, he could save both of them this agonizing death. But he didn't appear interested in saving anyone that day, least of all himself, and this galled the man, and he was left in the end only with insults and derision--the natural consequences of the choices that led him there that day.

The other man was just as guilty as the first, and in just as much pain. But he chose "wisely" and, despite what appeared to be a man hanging there in weakness and defeat, he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom."

"Your kingdom"? What a surprising statement! What person there that day could have said as much? Even His own disciples had to be in some doubt. But somehow this man saw more, and made the good choice that sealed his fate, and to whom Jesus turned and said, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”

So, which thief are you? Where have you cast your lot? What have you done with the Man hung for you?

To me, this is the choice of every man, of every one who stands at the foot of the Cross...or, rather, who hangs on either side of the Man who knew no sin. You see, we cannot just be onlookers. No, God took care of that.We are not just part of the crowd.

We cannot walk away from our own mortality. We will all face death one day; and, in facing it, will live in eternity with one of the two choices made that day. Do we doubt and curse, or hope beyond hope in the one who, though not saving himself, could still save us?

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Curing the Seven Year Itch

After seven years of scratching the same itch, I finally got the balm that did it. What, pray tell, am I referring to? Well, it's a NEW computer by golly! Yes, due to a slight thaw in my domestic budget freeze, and to issues that were really getting out of hand with my aging home computer, I finally took the plunge and bought a very decent HP desktop complete with Windows 7 Home Premium. With my HP employee discount (okay, only 10% but it's something), and a "quick ship" (preconfigured) discount, it was only $564 plus tax. See the details here (public prices only). It was $100 less than the same model at my local Office Depot.

Am I happy? Are you kidding? Honestly, just about anything new would have been a noticable improvement, but this one is "pretty darn good" and, given my tendency to let things itch, it will have to do for about another 5 to 7 years. So, I couldn't go with too much "yesterday" in the technology.

Now, moving from Windows XP after so long to Windows 7 was obviously a case of "how do I do what I knew how to do?"--just like when I moved up to XP from Windows 98. Had I not had a little experience overseeing a Windows Vista computer at my church, I'd have been more lost. Still, I'm finding that there's a LOT under the hood in Vista/7, and ultimately it's a good move.

Now, what is there I could still want? Well, from everything I've heard, Windows is VERY noticably faster when you use a solid state hard drive (aka SSD). So, while I'm very happy with my snappy new PC (pretty hard not to notice the difference given the comparision), another $100 in a year or so will probably put me into an SSD. But of course the price point is much higher per GB of storage ($3/GB vs. 20-30 cents/GB for a regular drive). But my plan is to replace only the BOOT drive with SSD technology and use my existing 1 TB (!) drive for my Documents (etc). So, 80GB is just fine. Sure, this isn't quite the performance boost of a pure SSD system, but I got a budget you know! So, that's my next step. What about yours?

Monday, September 27, 2010

Glenn Beck's marriage mistake

I think this guys makes a lot of sense on the topic. Worth considering at least (without weighing in on your stance regarding Mr. Beck...who is a Mormon let's not forget).

Please read on at http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=1185840
Timothy

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Obama invites confusion about his faith

I found this article well thought out. Funny, but my first thought after reading this was that Obama is not unlike a lots of folks in America: dabbled in a little bit of many things, but ultimately came up with nothing of substance. I doubt he's any more faithful a Christian than he is (purportedly) a Muslim. And he's probably trying to please both sides by being purposefuly vague or of little substance in his practice. Of course the middle of the road is generally an unsafe place to drive, so no wonder he's getting side-swiped from both directions.


Sourcelink: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=1134060

Timothy

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obama invites confusion about his faith

Dr. Paul Kengor - Guest Columnist - 8/24/2010 10:35:00 AM

The recent poll by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life is generating much discussion over its provocative finding that an increasing number of Americans (nearly one in five) believe that President Obama is a Muslim. The survey was completed before Obama's recent comments endorsing the construction of a mosque near Ground Zero.

While this no doubt is a fascinating development, consuming most media coverage of the poll, and unprecedented in presidential history, the figure of greater interest to me — and not surprising — is the percentage of Americans unsure about whether Obama is a Christian, or, more generally, about his faith at all.

"[T]he proportion saying [Obama] is a Christian has declined," reports Pew. "More than a year and a half into his presidency, a plurality of the public says they do not know what religion Obama follows." Pew added: "Only about one-third of adults (34 percent) say Obama is a Christian, down sharply from 48 percent in 2009. Fully 43 percent say they do not know what Obama's religion is."

This confusion is not confined to Republicans. Pew notes: "fewer Democrats today say he is a Christian (down nine points since 2009)."

The numbers among Democrats are telling. Indeed, it's easy for Obama defenders to lash out at this data as allegedly reflective of narrow-minded anti-Obama conservatives. In truth, there is confusion about what Obama believes because, in fact, there is — rightly so — confusion about what Obama believes.

Uncertainty builds

I say this as someone who studies faith and politics, and who has written books on the faith of Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, and Hillary Clinton — books that hit upon the faith of just about every president.

For the record, in one of those books — the 2007 one on Hillary Clinton, who I described as a "lifelong, committed Christian" — I wrote briefly about an emerging political dynamo named Barack Obama. "Obama is a Christian," I reportedly confidently, seeing no reason to say otherwise.

As November 2008 approached, I wrote similar things, though acknowledging the growing uncertainty about Obama's beliefs. I recall speaking at a church near Pittsburgh where one liberal couple practically jumped out of their seats when I dared mention a June 2008 Newsweek poll that found 12 percent of Americans believed Obama is a Muslim.

Those perceptions, already evident then, have only intensified. And for those Obama supporters enraged by this, please try to understand the legitimate confusion, including for someone like myself who carefully studies these things:

Generally, when it comes to faith, Americans accept whatever self-designation offered by a president, especially as his background leaves little doubt. President Jimmy Carter called himself a "born-again" Baptist from Plains, Ga., which the record easily supported. President Woodrow Wilson referred to himself as a Presbyterian in the "Reformed" tradition, and a mere cursory examination revealed precisely that.

Sometimes, we dig deeper. My experience in the case of Ronald Reagan is especially relevant now, as I'm being cited by liberals who point to Reagan's infrequent church attendance as support for their insistence that Obama's infrequent church attendance doesn't mean he lacks faith. (Ironically, in the 1980s, it was liberals who questioned whether the president was really a Christian.) That comparison, however, is misplaced, for reasons that underscore the questions about Obama. Consider:

Reagan attended church his entire life, from the First Christian Church on S. Hennepin Avenue in Dixon, Ill., in the 1920s, to churches in Iowa in the 1930s, to varying churches in California from the 1940s through the 1970s, and again after his presidency. As a new president, he immediately began attending the National Presbyterian Church, present for all but one or two services prior to when he was shot by John Hinckley. I interviewed the pastor of that church, the Rev. Louis Evans, at length, plus other witnesses. Reagan's attendance declined only after the assassination attempt. He cited security reasons, and the record supported his explanation. Beyond that, Reagan's personal life, family background, writings, speeches, and much more, revealed a deep, pervasive Christian faith throughout his entire life.

The Record

For President Obama, a similar evidentiary record does not exist. Unlike Reagan, Obama was not raised by an intensely pious mother, nor was there an extremely influential pastor in his adolescent years. As noted by an excellent Newsweek piece during the campaign, Obama was reared by a "Christian-turned-secular mother" — herself a product of "two lapsed Christian" parents — and was the son of a "Muslim-turned-atheist African father" and a stepfather with a "unique brand of Islam."

As Obama himself candidly admits, he meandered his way through Islam, Buddhism, Catholicism, Protestantism, asceticism, with, along the way, smatterings of Augustine, Graham Greene, and Nietzsche, just for starters.

Amazingly, the only Christian church to which Obama could have been considered a consistent member was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church. And if we are to believe the disclaimers of Obama and his supporters, he rarely attended Wright's services, and even more rarely listened or paid attention.

Likewise, Michelle and the girls have not attended church regularly, if ever. Newsweek reported a remarkable fact for a major presidential candidate who would win the presidency: "Obama is a little spiritually rootless again."

Our Puzzling President

All of this, from rare church attendance to the lack of other conventional displays of faith, has persisted well into Obama's presidency. Think about the oddity of this one fact alone: The current president has neither a church, nor, to my knowledge, even a denomination. When I'm asked questions about his faith, by sincere people not looking to attack, I sincerely can't give a good answer. It's a problem I didn't have with any of the Bushes, the Clintons, Reagan, Carter, and on and on.

In short, and I don't mean this to be disparaging, with Barack Obama we are witnessing the most unconventional faith profile of a president in arguably 200 years. The assessment we're getting from a curious public is not a crass misperception by a bunch of intolerants, but, rather, natural puzzlement.

Of course, it shouldn't be difficult to rectify misperceptions. Throughout American history, presidents have been asked about their faith and sat for lengthy interviews sharing their thinking, explaining precisely what they believe. Why doesn't Obama simply do the same? This isn't rocket science.

Will some people still not believe him? Of course. But Obama's problem isn't a tiny fringe that believes he faces Mecca to pray five times a day, but an increasingly large number of Americans that aren't sure what he believes. Until he makes that clearer, confusion will understandably reign.

Paul Kengor is professor of political science and executive director of the Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. His books include "God and Ronald Reagan," "God and George W. Bush," and "God and Hillary Clinton." This column, which first appeared in USA Today, is printed with permission.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

You Call this Health Insurance?

Yes, you know you're in an ecomomic "recovery" when they kick you when you're just getting up again.

Take Anthem/Wellpoint's plans to "up yours" on their premiums for hard-working self-employed Californians by up to 39% effective March 1st. (LA Times story here.)

UPDATE (5/4/10): Looks like Anthem is completely pulling the plug on the rate increases (at least as announced: I would still expect one in the future, though "smaller"). See below from: http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-04-30/bay-area/20876824_1_rate-hikes-rate-application-medical-inflation-trends. Of course getting LOTS of heat does tend to make a company think twice about what they were "doing". Now I'm not a big fan of extensive government involvement in what is essentially a private insurance arrangement. However, the relative monopolopy and impunity of coverage here sometimes only responds to a big stick; and also the pending national healthcare changes (for good or ill) at least kept one increase from my hard-working friend's doorstep (for now: he says he's always waiting for the other shoe to drop, and I can't blame him for his cynicism.). So, the beat goes on.

This was not unnoticed by the Secretary of the Dept of Health and Human Services,and she put out a very strong letter to Anthem on Monday, which you can read if you want:  http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2010pres/02/20100208c.html.

She does indicate that the State of CA is "investigating this matter" (see LA Times story link above for more on this), and while I don't know what authority the State has, it's at least heartening that someone with clout (her and the State) aren't taking this lying down. But it's probably at best just delaying the inevitable.

Want a real life "affected" story? Take my friend Mark and his family. They are self-employed contributors to the greater good of humanity (and a little bit for themselves) and they of course have to privately contract for their healthcare. No clout, and yes your health history counts (against you). Did this affect them? Yep. They now get to pay $310 more then they already did (making it nearly $1200 a month for this healthy family of four). Wow. He says the money's just not there, so they'll have to try other options: but more than likely, he'll just have to switch to a higher-deductible plan and basically have "insurance that doesn't feel like insurance" (remember when "I'm insured" meant that you could expect to owe little or nothing on your care?).

And how about me and my house? Oh yes, I work for a large multi-national firm. We have clout. But we want "cheaper is better" (for the investors). So, I get to pay $90 more a month this year for worse coverage than I had last year (e.g. per person deductible is $1500 and family deductible is $4500). And when I did my taxes, I spent (after my premiums) $2500 on my medical care last year (not enough to qualify as a deduction, but it hurt...and they want to raise the minimum percentage even more I'm told).  And I can't keep my family doctor, because my only "choice" of health plans isn't one his practice can stomach. So, let see: more cost, can't keep my doctor.  Do ya think we need health insurance reform? Do you think it's likely to come from current legislation? (That's not for me to answer.)

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Gayly Described

In an excellent article, "Gay Rights: Don't Ask, Don't Think", Frank Turek really gets to the issue of "what you are" (a person) vs. "what you do" (behavior). And how we keep enshrining behaviors as if they were innate and inalienble "rights of being".

Read the article and let me know what you think.