Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Delays, Delays
Sorry about the lack of posts, they will continue in about 2 weeks. I have been on a cruise and am writing my first novel. Don't go away and everyone can catch up on past posts. Thanks for the patience!
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Craigslist? Dangerous?
Craigslist has become a popular place for people to list free classifieds and find deals on what they want. It is basically the one to one garage sale site of the internet. Craigslist became popular in 2008 and has continued to be a local marketplace. But, there are a lot of problems with it. First, it has not grown in any way since it's popularity grew, and that just is not how you run a business. If facebook came out when it did and never improved or added features, it would not be anywhere near where it is today, if even used at all. Craigslist also provides no protection from scams and dangerous situations. You can be going to make a trade with someone who is going to rip you off, you can be getting a faulty piece of equipment that you will be stuck with and the person can just take off because it is so anonymous. I would think 90 percent of job offers on craigslist are not legitimate.
Electronics purchases on Craigslist are even more dangerous than purchasing from a pawn shop. At least in that case you know where the pawn shop is and it is a business. If you think you see a great deal on there, beware, it could be a scam or it could be for faulty equipment. I am not trusting someone selling me a 32 inch television set on there for just 100 bucks and not thinking that there may be something wrong with it, it may be stolen, or it may be a trap to get me to show up in a spot with cash in my pocket.
Craigslist could put up to have some kind of mediator, some type of program that can hold the funds electronically and insert once the transaction has completed. There has to be some safeguards, otherwise this popular service should not even be used. Some things to remember when purchasing off a craigslist seller:
1. If the deal sounds too good, there may be a reason, take caution.
2. Always meet in a public place.
3. Bring a friend to the meeting place to ensure safety.
4. Use money orders instead of cash, something that has to be signed once you have your product.
5. Get the sellers information if possible
Hopefully, Craigslist makes some changes, or perhaps another provider can produce these services and give someone a safe and secure way to buy and sell their goods locally. Also, a national classifieds area would be very much appreciated since double listings are not allowed.
Electronics purchases on Craigslist are even more dangerous than purchasing from a pawn shop. At least in that case you know where the pawn shop is and it is a business. If you think you see a great deal on there, beware, it could be a scam or it could be for faulty equipment. I am not trusting someone selling me a 32 inch television set on there for just 100 bucks and not thinking that there may be something wrong with it, it may be stolen, or it may be a trap to get me to show up in a spot with cash in my pocket.
Craigslist could put up to have some kind of mediator, some type of program that can hold the funds electronically and insert once the transaction has completed. There has to be some safeguards, otherwise this popular service should not even be used. Some things to remember when purchasing off a craigslist seller:
1. If the deal sounds too good, there may be a reason, take caution.
2. Always meet in a public place.
3. Bring a friend to the meeting place to ensure safety.
4. Use money orders instead of cash, something that has to be signed once you have your product.
5. Get the sellers information if possible
Hopefully, Craigslist makes some changes, or perhaps another provider can produce these services and give someone a safe and secure way to buy and sell their goods locally. Also, a national classifieds area would be very much appreciated since double listings are not allowed.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
EA Removes Taliban From Medal Of Honor
It has been announced that the Taliban will no longer be a playable side in "Medal of Honor" due to be released on October 12. This was based on pressures from military groups and military families. I can see both sides on this really. I honestly would not want stupid kids at home sitting around playing as the Taliban if the Taliban was involved in the death of someone in my family. I also would not want to see an American fighting as the Taliban if I am fighting the Taliban in Iraq every day or have fought them previously. Totally understand that. It is not funny or supposed to be fun.
On the flip side, it is business and it is about business not about the war. EA is not trying to make people enjoy playing as the Taliban they are trying to provide a different experience that is not available from the competitor. It is their goal and their job to deliver different options. It isn't like they are totally removing them from the game they will be renaming them "opposing force". I just want to know what got them to finally change their mind. The game was being banned from use by military officials and they were recieving hate letters from grieving family members and they still stuck to their stance that the game was something that showed respect to the American soldiers. Either way, Medal of Honor has presold a lot of copies and hopefully the game is what has been promised. Check out some quick footage of the game below!
On the flip side, it is business and it is about business not about the war. EA is not trying to make people enjoy playing as the Taliban they are trying to provide a different experience that is not available from the competitor. It is their goal and their job to deliver different options. It isn't like they are totally removing them from the game they will be renaming them "opposing force". I just want to know what got them to finally change their mind. The game was being banned from use by military officials and they were recieving hate letters from grieving family members and they still stuck to their stance that the game was something that showed respect to the American soldiers. Either way, Medal of Honor has presold a lot of copies and hopefully the game is what has been promised. Check out some quick footage of the game below!
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
TV Tuesday: The Event for 13 or 22?
So far I have watched all three episode of "The Event" and I am really excited about it's potential, but am not so excited about the pace it is moving at. I feel like they have given us too many answers too early and they are going to run out of story, or it is going to get extremely ridiculous. Both would be a problem. The story needs to slow down, and we don't need action every second to keep us happy. We need some emotion as well. The main couple, Sean and Leila, are shown together multiple times on the cruise ship which is all fine, but the best scene between the two was the scene where they first met in the swimming pool. We need more of this, more embellishment, it brings us to care for the characters. Currently, they don't give us enough to really think that Sean and Leila are meant to be together or feel like he needs to go through all of this to save her.
Sophia is kind of a boring character. The scenes of interrogation between her and the president are very repetitive. Is she bad, is she good or is she both? Who cares? I just wanted the actor playing the guy who was going to rat on everyone to actually get to be in more than one or two episodes of a show. I swear he has been in every broadcast show as an extra character. Also, they are trying for the sci fi angle but also wanting it to be believable, which is fine, but don't have planes disappear and then tell me that they are only 1 percent different that humans. Whatever.
The acting will get better and hopefully the show can sustain an audience long enough for the show to find the groove I am hoping it hits. I like the premise and I think it can be really good, but the drop to a 2.4 rating last night is really scary. I remember when Lost came on the air it got a lot of viewers right away although it took half of a season for the actors to really figure out their characters. The Event should be afforded the same opportunity. The other question is, will there be 13 episodes which is what the count currently stands at or will NBC order the additional 9 to make it a full season? Only 13 would allow them to keep the quick pace and maybe prevent overspending from NBC. But, 22 would be more ideal to give the show time to gain a steady audience. I need a replacement for 24 and Lost and I was hoping this would be it, so we'll see what happens.
"The Event" (3 ep.) C+
See Episode 3 below
Sophia is kind of a boring character. The scenes of interrogation between her and the president are very repetitive. Is she bad, is she good or is she both? Who cares? I just wanted the actor playing the guy who was going to rat on everyone to actually get to be in more than one or two episodes of a show. I swear he has been in every broadcast show as an extra character. Also, they are trying for the sci fi angle but also wanting it to be believable, which is fine, but don't have planes disappear and then tell me that they are only 1 percent different that humans. Whatever.
The acting will get better and hopefully the show can sustain an audience long enough for the show to find the groove I am hoping it hits. I like the premise and I think it can be really good, but the drop to a 2.4 rating last night is really scary. I remember when Lost came on the air it got a lot of viewers right away although it took half of a season for the actors to really figure out their characters. The Event should be afforded the same opportunity. The other question is, will there be 13 episodes which is what the count currently stands at or will NBC order the additional 9 to make it a full season? Only 13 would allow them to keep the quick pace and maybe prevent overspending from NBC. But, 22 would be more ideal to give the show time to gain a steady audience. I need a replacement for 24 and Lost and I was hoping this would be it, so we'll see what happens.
"The Event" (3 ep.) C+
See Episode 3 below
Glasses Free 3d Television! Sorry You Bought the Glasses Already!
Forget Japan! Why do they always get the best gadgets before we do? I know they are the kings of technology but whatever! Anyways, now that my rant is over, Toshiba announced the Toshiba Regza 3d TV and brought it to Ceatec where it has reportedly been stealing the show. A lot of people have been complaining and possibly opposed to the 3d television movement due to the fact that you are required to wear ridiculous glasses to do so. Not only do you have to wear the glasses, but usually outside of the free pair that comes with the television you have to purchase multiple extra pairs at high costs usually around $100 or more.
Hopefully, not for long. The Toshiba television was being displayed in a 12 inch, 20 inch, and 56 inch format, but as you probably know, watching TV in 3d is something you want to do on the biggest screen possible. A 12 inch TV in 3d is not going to add very much or make you feel like you are in the movie as is the point of the format. It has been reported that the TV works well, and although there will be improvements before release and it is not going to obviously match up with what you see in the theatre for 13 dollars a ticket, but it definitely works as you can see in the video below. Sitting close to the television makes it better, but that is not usual in most homes, so hopefully improvements continue. This would definitely help the 3d movement in my opinion, because I honestly think the cost is too much, and the glasses are just a ridiculous extra expense and quite uncomfortable. This first edition is going to be really expensive starting out at $2,000 for just the 20 inch. Ouch! Don't expect 3d televisions to be anything close to the norm for at least another 18-24 months, and by the norm I mean mainstream at all. People are still just finally affording LED and LCD flatscreen televisions, now they are supposed to jump to a 3d TV already? It will take time if it does actually even last. What do you guys think about 3d TV? Watch the demo below (it is a little shaky)
Hopefully, not for long. The Toshiba television was being displayed in a 12 inch, 20 inch, and 56 inch format, but as you probably know, watching TV in 3d is something you want to do on the biggest screen possible. A 12 inch TV in 3d is not going to add very much or make you feel like you are in the movie as is the point of the format. It has been reported that the TV works well, and although there will be improvements before release and it is not going to obviously match up with what you see in the theatre for 13 dollars a ticket, but it definitely works as you can see in the video below. Sitting close to the television makes it better, but that is not usual in most homes, so hopefully improvements continue. This would definitely help the 3d movement in my opinion, because I honestly think the cost is too much, and the glasses are just a ridiculous extra expense and quite uncomfortable. This first edition is going to be really expensive starting out at $2,000 for just the 20 inch. Ouch! Don't expect 3d televisions to be anything close to the norm for at least another 18-24 months, and by the norm I mean mainstream at all. People are still just finally affording LED and LCD flatscreen televisions, now they are supposed to jump to a 3d TV already? It will take time if it does actually even last. What do you guys think about 3d TV? Watch the demo below (it is a little shaky)
Monday, October 4, 2010
Movie Monday: Matchstick Men
Every Monday I will be reviewing a movie new or old, must see or must not, direct to dvd or big budget. Check back weekly. Ratings are A-F without the E.
I love Nicolas Cage and I love most of his movies. He does make some bad decisions when it comes to picking projects (Weatherman and World Trade Center are a couple of snoozers that come to mind), but hey the man is in a lot of debt all the time because he has spending problems and he has to be working year round to please his creditors. Anyways, I have seen at least 70 percent of his movies and all of the releases he has put out since 2002. Matchstick Men is a lesser known movie of his that did make 65 million in the box office, but is not mentioned in his greatest hits list. I would beg to differ.
The movie follows a Con Man named Roy Waller (Cage), who meets his long lost daughter that he did not even know he had. Waller struggles with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and it just adds a little bit of a challenge to the role for Cage. The OCD part of the story can get a little annoying, but it adds something and it plays an important role in the movie as you will see. Waller becomes rejuvenated and wants to start a long con with an old friend after meeting his daughter Angela. The events begin to twist and turn from there.
This movie has a really good story and the ending even surprised me a little bit. They set you up to believe something the entire movie and then you find out all you believed may be a con. I really enjoyed Cage in this movie and thought he balanced the OCD without letting it get in the way of the real story, and also Cage is great at playing strange people. Sam Rockwell does a decent job as the friend, Frank, who is Waller's friend. You may recognize him from the recent "Iron Man 2" role. He is not funny like that in this movie. Alison Lohman, who was in the more recent "Drag Me To Hell", does a really good job as the daughter and sells herself as an innocent child. She brings the biggest surprises to the movie and she had me believing that the movie was real.
I really enjoyed this film and I think you would as well, especially if you enjoy a good story and you enjoy surprise endings and a constant situation where you find yourself guessing what will happen next. You can get it here for only $.01 plus shipping. Matchstick Men purchase link Rating: B+
I love Nicolas Cage and I love most of his movies. He does make some bad decisions when it comes to picking projects (Weatherman and World Trade Center are a couple of snoozers that come to mind), but hey the man is in a lot of debt all the time because he has spending problems and he has to be working year round to please his creditors. Anyways, I have seen at least 70 percent of his movies and all of the releases he has put out since 2002. Matchstick Men is a lesser known movie of his that did make 65 million in the box office, but is not mentioned in his greatest hits list. I would beg to differ.
The movie follows a Con Man named Roy Waller (Cage), who meets his long lost daughter that he did not even know he had. Waller struggles with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and it just adds a little bit of a challenge to the role for Cage. The OCD part of the story can get a little annoying, but it adds something and it plays an important role in the movie as you will see. Waller becomes rejuvenated and wants to start a long con with an old friend after meeting his daughter Angela. The events begin to twist and turn from there.
This movie has a really good story and the ending even surprised me a little bit. They set you up to believe something the entire movie and then you find out all you believed may be a con. I really enjoyed Cage in this movie and thought he balanced the OCD without letting it get in the way of the real story, and also Cage is great at playing strange people. Sam Rockwell does a decent job as the friend, Frank, who is Waller's friend. You may recognize him from the recent "Iron Man 2" role. He is not funny like that in this movie. Alison Lohman, who was in the more recent "Drag Me To Hell", does a really good job as the daughter and sells herself as an innocent child. She brings the biggest surprises to the movie and she had me believing that the movie was real.
I really enjoyed this film and I think you would as well, especially if you enjoy a good story and you enjoy surprise endings and a constant situation where you find yourself guessing what will happen next. You can get it here for only $.01 plus shipping. Matchstick Men purchase link Rating: B+
Lawsuits, Lawsuits, and More Lawsuits!
A lawsuit Armageddon appears to be brewing between consumer electronic companies such as Nokia suing Apple, Apple suing HTC and countless others all over patent infringements on certain smart phone projects. Is there a real point to all of this? These companies all copy certain features off each other, they have to, to stay in the realm of competition with the each other. Each company has things they do better than the other, and certain features have become standard. If one company was to have patents on multiple features that are considered industry standard, then they would dominate sales and a monopolistic issue would most likely form.
What these become are a big waste of money. They take years to settle if they ever even get settled. Plus, everyone has moved on to something new and more exciting by the time the dust settles on the lawsuits. I could not find a lot of information on how much is exactly paid out on particular suits. Apple just was ordered to pay $208 million to a company called Mirror Worlds who had a patent out on how documents are displayed on a computer screen and Apple's Cover Flow technology was also supposedly an infringement. Is Apple really writing out a check for $208 million tonight. I doubt it. I will find out more information on how this works and share my findings in the near future.
The customer once again is hurt in this situation. I realize some companies that are on a downward spiral file lawsuits just trying to get anything they can when their company is failing, but many of these are just greed lawsuits, wanting a larger piece of the market share or sometimes even disguised motives. Some have speculated that Apple is currently suing HTC hoping to protect the IPad by scaring off potential tablet computer competition in the future. Their hope may be to prevent companies from looking at Apple products, and then creating a similar product with a few improvements or new features. This happens in every industry all the time. Research and Development is more critical than ever and Apple is afraid that being the first ones to come out with a particular product they may suffer from other companies making improvements. Ugh, is all I usually have to say about Apple, but in this case I do have to see their side. If they are the first one's to put out a useful product in a particular market and invest to take the chance on it, then they should have a time period of protection. They are paying to see if there is going to be a market and if there is, then it becomes flooded with alternate options after it seems to be safe. I think Apple has had that time period, and this is the true point of a patent, but I think picking at every piece of the product and trying to protect everything is a little too much.
What these become are a big waste of money. They take years to settle if they ever even get settled. Plus, everyone has moved on to something new and more exciting by the time the dust settles on the lawsuits. I could not find a lot of information on how much is exactly paid out on particular suits. Apple just was ordered to pay $208 million to a company called Mirror Worlds who had a patent out on how documents are displayed on a computer screen and Apple's Cover Flow technology was also supposedly an infringement. Is Apple really writing out a check for $208 million tonight. I doubt it. I will find out more information on how this works and share my findings in the near future.
The customer once again is hurt in this situation. I realize some companies that are on a downward spiral file lawsuits just trying to get anything they can when their company is failing, but many of these are just greed lawsuits, wanting a larger piece of the market share or sometimes even disguised motives. Some have speculated that Apple is currently suing HTC hoping to protect the IPad by scaring off potential tablet computer competition in the future. Their hope may be to prevent companies from looking at Apple products, and then creating a similar product with a few improvements or new features. This happens in every industry all the time. Research and Development is more critical than ever and Apple is afraid that being the first ones to come out with a particular product they may suffer from other companies making improvements. Ugh, is all I usually have to say about Apple, but in this case I do have to see their side. If they are the first one's to put out a useful product in a particular market and invest to take the chance on it, then they should have a time period of protection. They are paying to see if there is going to be a market and if there is, then it becomes flooded with alternate options after it seems to be safe. I think Apple has had that time period, and this is the true point of a patent, but I think picking at every piece of the product and trying to protect everything is a little too much.
Comments Please
Don't be afraid to leave comments for me and tell me how you feel about these or any other subjects having to do with technology, consumer electronics, or media. In the first week of this blogs existence I have had 300 unique viewers and zero comments! I want to know what you think!
Saturday, October 2, 2010
The Case Against Cable. Or For?
There have been a lot of bloggers out there who have been making the case against cable or satellite tv, whichever you prefer, and a lot of households seem to be in agreeance. The first loss (albeit only 167,000 consumers) in pay tv consumers in recent was the most recent quarter. According to an In-Stat report, the main outlet hemmoraging customers is cable, as Satellite and Verizon's Fios is growing every month. Even with the skewed marketing research and the difficulty to tell how many consumers are actually cutting their pay tv subscriptions out, it might seem like a genius plan to cut your subscriptions with all the other sources out there to get your favorite shows. Especially when broadcast sites are offering some shows for free the day after they air, and if that fails you can pay for the shows you want to watch in several ways for only $.99-$1.99 an episode on Amazon on Demand and ITunes, just to name a couple. Why pay fifty to even one hundred dollars on a TV subscription in your home when you have options, plus the economy is lightening your wallet enough as it is. Why continue to fork money over to the unreliable Comcast or Time Warner, or even DishTV?
Sports would be my first answer. So many much like myself can't give up the sports. You really want to come home on Monday nights after work and not be able to watch Monday Night Football all winter. Winter is gloomy, and weekdays without the NFL are sad, and I need that Monday to get me through the week. Yes, most games are on broadcast television, but it is only regional games. I shell out a lot of money to get the Minnesota Vikings and Cincinnati Bengal games in Tennessee, in HD. Plus, baseball games are rarely ever on network television and you are only going to the get the Yankees, Braves, Red Sox, and maybe Angels in nationally televised games. NBA is in the same boat. The playoffs is really the only NBA you need to watch all year, but still even to catch any games during the regular season, you need TNT and ESPN. I don't know anything about Nascar, but I know Nascar takes up a whole ESPN channel on a too often regular basis, and that is supposedly the most watched "sport" in America. Soccer fans definitely would never see any soccer without ESPN or Fox Sports, plus there are many extra channels offered that show European Leagues. I spent a year in Italy and Germany playing basketball, and they made it very clear to me there that Soccer is Europe and Europe is Soccer, so I guess those matches would interest hardcore American fans. NHL is hardly shown at all, but if you love hockey you can get the extra NHL subscription only offered on cable and Directv. I can go on and on about sports, but they are important to me and I couldn't imagine not having a plethora of games at my disposal at any given time. The internet doesn't offer really much of any reasonable options that make sense at this time. Nobody better mention XM Radio as a replacement. I am sucked into that too, and it is good to listen to on the way to work and on long trips only, don't expect me to be in my car listening to a huge game.
The other question that needs to be asked is how heavy of a user are you if sports aren't important enough for you to have a pay TV subscription? If you only watch one or two shows, or less then it is probably no big deal. You can get these shows online, purchase them off numerous sources for a small fee, or wait for the DVD. If you watch reality television, beware, you might not only need a cable box or satellite dish, you may also need a DVR, because these shows are usually not available online and usually don't sell DVD sets. Of course, if you can catch every episode don't worry about that either. There are a lot of reality TV shows that you would enjoy if that is what interests you on almost every cable channel. My girlfriend prefers shows on E!, Discovery Health, and A&E. She rarely watches them on time, but with a DVR recording it every time it airs, she has a constant choice of 3-5 unwatched episodes of each when she does make time to watch. I am a heavy user. I enjoy television and have multiple shows I watch and try to keep up with. If you are like me, pay television is much cheaper than the alternate sources that are available. I have 7-8 shows that I DVR, plus I use On Demand for movies, and I have netflix on top of that. With just the shows that I DVR it would cost me around $300-$320 a year to watch all of the seasons on other sources. Plus, I would not have any sports and my bill only runs at $54.99 (not including NFL Sunday Ticket). This means I pay around $700 a year for television, but that television is completely on my terms. Basic cable is only $17.99 from Comcast and from $32.99 with Time Warner, so there are very affordable solutions available. Plus, with the fierce competition out there, prices continue to drop.
The last thing you need to consider is equipment. This most likely won't be the case for anyone reading my technology blog, but surprisingly enough, many households still do not have a digital and/or flatscreen TV. Many homes don't have a computer and many don't have high speed internet, or internet at all. If you have a standard TV you can still have a digital cable box, DVR, and On Demand, it just won't be in high definition. You won't be able to hook up your computer to a standard definition TV to watch shows you download, because in most cases watching television shows on your computer is not ideal. Also, if you don't have a fairly high speed internet connection and a computer, preferably a laptop with a sizable RAM, then you will have difficulty downloading shows. I do have these things, but that is what I like, many households don't feel the same way. It is a personal decision, but you have to decide what your needs are and what is important for your viewing pleasure. Just don't be so quick to jump on the "cutting the cord" bandwagon, when there are so many deals out there and so much programming you may be missing.
Sports would be my first answer. So many much like myself can't give up the sports. You really want to come home on Monday nights after work and not be able to watch Monday Night Football all winter. Winter is gloomy, and weekdays without the NFL are sad, and I need that Monday to get me through the week. Yes, most games are on broadcast television, but it is only regional games. I shell out a lot of money to get the Minnesota Vikings and Cincinnati Bengal games in Tennessee, in HD. Plus, baseball games are rarely ever on network television and you are only going to the get the Yankees, Braves, Red Sox, and maybe Angels in nationally televised games. NBA is in the same boat. The playoffs is really the only NBA you need to watch all year, but still even to catch any games during the regular season, you need TNT and ESPN. I don't know anything about Nascar, but I know Nascar takes up a whole ESPN channel on a too often regular basis, and that is supposedly the most watched "sport" in America. Soccer fans definitely would never see any soccer without ESPN or Fox Sports, plus there are many extra channels offered that show European Leagues. I spent a year in Italy and Germany playing basketball, and they made it very clear to me there that Soccer is Europe and Europe is Soccer, so I guess those matches would interest hardcore American fans. NHL is hardly shown at all, but if you love hockey you can get the extra NHL subscription only offered on cable and Directv. I can go on and on about sports, but they are important to me and I couldn't imagine not having a plethora of games at my disposal at any given time. The internet doesn't offer really much of any reasonable options that make sense at this time. Nobody better mention XM Radio as a replacement. I am sucked into that too, and it is good to listen to on the way to work and on long trips only, don't expect me to be in my car listening to a huge game.
The other question that needs to be asked is how heavy of a user are you if sports aren't important enough for you to have a pay TV subscription? If you only watch one or two shows, or less then it is probably no big deal. You can get these shows online, purchase them off numerous sources for a small fee, or wait for the DVD. If you watch reality television, beware, you might not only need a cable box or satellite dish, you may also need a DVR, because these shows are usually not available online and usually don't sell DVD sets. Of course, if you can catch every episode don't worry about that either. There are a lot of reality TV shows that you would enjoy if that is what interests you on almost every cable channel. My girlfriend prefers shows on E!, Discovery Health, and A&E. She rarely watches them on time, but with a DVR recording it every time it airs, she has a constant choice of 3-5 unwatched episodes of each when she does make time to watch. I am a heavy user. I enjoy television and have multiple shows I watch and try to keep up with. If you are like me, pay television is much cheaper than the alternate sources that are available. I have 7-8 shows that I DVR, plus I use On Demand for movies, and I have netflix on top of that. With just the shows that I DVR it would cost me around $300-$320 a year to watch all of the seasons on other sources. Plus, I would not have any sports and my bill only runs at $54.99 (not including NFL Sunday Ticket). This means I pay around $700 a year for television, but that television is completely on my terms. Basic cable is only $17.99 from Comcast and from $32.99 with Time Warner, so there are very affordable solutions available. Plus, with the fierce competition out there, prices continue to drop.
The last thing you need to consider is equipment. This most likely won't be the case for anyone reading my technology blog, but surprisingly enough, many households still do not have a digital and/or flatscreen TV. Many homes don't have a computer and many don't have high speed internet, or internet at all. If you have a standard TV you can still have a digital cable box, DVR, and On Demand, it just won't be in high definition. You won't be able to hook up your computer to a standard definition TV to watch shows you download, because in most cases watching television shows on your computer is not ideal. Also, if you don't have a fairly high speed internet connection and a computer, preferably a laptop with a sizable RAM, then you will have difficulty downloading shows. I do have these things, but that is what I like, many households don't feel the same way. It is a personal decision, but you have to decide what your needs are and what is important for your viewing pleasure. Just don't be so quick to jump on the "cutting the cord" bandwagon, when there are so many deals out there and so much programming you may be missing.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Star Wars in 3D.. Sounds Like a Better Idea than it Is..
3d movies have been all the craze lately. Everyone is trying to put their movie out on 3d just to make a couple extra bucks per viewer. Now, George Lucas wants to do the same and take a grab at some more of the loyal Star Wars fan's money. Is this really the right thing to do and is a 3d version going to somehow improve or enhance the Star Wars experience. I personally have seen all the original six movies, but am not one that gets too excited about them. Nonetheless, I still think you have to see the first three in it's original form, it was filmed that way and that is the way it was meant to be seen. We don't need a remake, it is fine!
Official Announcement at StarWars.com
I think a lot of production companies that feel they don't have a great story or a great movie on their hands, go for the 3d format just for the promotion. If it is being shown in 3d people for some reason perceive it as better or more exciting. Outside of Avatar, it really is not very important and it even ruins some movies such as Clash of the Titans (which didn't need help). I think the format will be a format for the kids more than adults in the long term. It is more of a fad and companies like Sony (who I adore) are throwing a lot of money into it hoping it becomes the new medium of entertainment and unlike with Bluray I think they will be wrong. A movie is still a movie and we don't have to be in it, and if you want to be go be an actor. Live your own life.
Purchase Star War DVDs at low prices on Amazon
Anyways, planning to release one movie a year for six years starting in 2012 would take this plan all the way through 2017. That is a long time for the 3d fad to have to hold up if it doesn't in fact become the standard medium for movies. Also, who says how great Star Wars will even be in 3d? It could detract in quality. You can't tell me it's going to be easy to make a quality 3d movie out of footage that old. Also, I love the BluRay format, but movies made prior to the 1980's seem to not necessarily improve that much from their DVD remade versions. Obviously VHS was a big drop off from DVD, but BluRay for movies that old, doesn't improve the film so drastically to make it worth a 3rd go round in buying it. I have had a few movies on all three. One of them is Omega Man. Honestly, the Omega Man from DVD is almost as good as the BluRay and only certain parts of the movie seem to be reworked. I have heard the same about the Rocky movies that I reviewed on Monday, although I have not seen the BluRay editions of that saga.
I hope Star Wars will be great on 3d, but I hope so for the fans not George Lucas. He has made enough money off the movies he should be giving tickets for free as a tribute to the faithful fans who have been around 35 years. If it is not though, of course you can get it on BluRay and try it that way when it releases next year. Check below for the trailer that began it all!
Official Announcement at StarWars.com
I think a lot of production companies that feel they don't have a great story or a great movie on their hands, go for the 3d format just for the promotion. If it is being shown in 3d people for some reason perceive it as better or more exciting. Outside of Avatar, it really is not very important and it even ruins some movies such as Clash of the Titans (which didn't need help). I think the format will be a format for the kids more than adults in the long term. It is more of a fad and companies like Sony (who I adore) are throwing a lot of money into it hoping it becomes the new medium of entertainment and unlike with Bluray I think they will be wrong. A movie is still a movie and we don't have to be in it, and if you want to be go be an actor. Live your own life.
Purchase Star War DVDs at low prices on Amazon
Anyways, planning to release one movie a year for six years starting in 2012 would take this plan all the way through 2017. That is a long time for the 3d fad to have to hold up if it doesn't in fact become the standard medium for movies. Also, who says how great Star Wars will even be in 3d? It could detract in quality. You can't tell me it's going to be easy to make a quality 3d movie out of footage that old. Also, I love the BluRay format, but movies made prior to the 1980's seem to not necessarily improve that much from their DVD remade versions. Obviously VHS was a big drop off from DVD, but BluRay for movies that old, doesn't improve the film so drastically to make it worth a 3rd go round in buying it. I have had a few movies on all three. One of them is Omega Man. Honestly, the Omega Man from DVD is almost as good as the BluRay and only certain parts of the movie seem to be reworked. I have heard the same about the Rocky movies that I reviewed on Monday, although I have not seen the BluRay editions of that saga.
I hope Star Wars will be great on 3d, but I hope so for the fans not George Lucas. He has made enough money off the movies he should be giving tickets for free as a tribute to the faithful fans who have been around 35 years. If it is not though, of course you can get it on BluRay and try it that way when it releases next year. Check below for the trailer that began it all!
Surprised?! People Upset about Senate's Bill to Stop Piracy
The technology sector got a surprise late last week when it was found that a Senate Committee was preparing to fast track a bill that will give the Department of Justice the power to detect and put a stop to illegal file sharing and counterfeiting otherwise known as piracy. Piracy has become a large part of the entertainment business. Yes, there are still millions of copies of DVDs, CDs, and video games sold every week, as well as multiple legal music and video files over the internet, but there is just as many copies being pirated on a daily basis. For example, Rally Master Pro for the IPhone claimed 95% of the downloaded versions of the game were pirated copies. That is unreal, and many other developers and movie producers are hit with the same issues.
Consumers obviously have reasons why they like to pirate movies or games. First of all, they don't know if they are going to really like it and some may go actually purchase the real version after testing it on a pirated version. This is why more and more gaming companies allow demos to be dispersed. Movies don't have the same luxury and are far easier to reproduce. Movies also are more frequently released and there are more subpar products being released as well. This means more people are going to pirate movies because they don't want to pay the high release day price of $20 in most cases. Of course, there is Redbox, but people seem too lazy to even go do that anymore.
I agree that the price of consumer electronics is extremely overpriced when it comes to media. Ten dollars to see a movie in the theatre is just way too much, especially when they tack on 3 more dollars for a 3d picture. But, going to see a movie is part of the experience, and in owning the movie you are supporting the people who made the movie possible and also funding their future productions. I don't pirate anything and I don't condone it. I don't want a limited choice when it comes to media. I want there to be a lot of movies to choose from on a Friday night and I want their to be a lot of musical artists for me to pick a favorite out of as well as multiple challenges to complete on my Playstation 3. The only way for it to stay this way is for people to stop pirating media. Rent it if you don't want to buy it and if you don't want to pay $1 to rent it you don't really care too much to be wasting your time watching it or playing it in the first place.
Many are afraid this bill will start censoring the internet and not really just protect copyrights. They also are afraid it is denying us some of our current amendments that equal our freedom. This is a little farfetched and if you are going to tell me that pirating is ok because Eminem is still making millions that is not acceptable either. Eminem is the top, well second person to get paid on a CD. The label is first, then Eminem, and so on. There is a lot of people and employees that are affected by this even if the top dog is still getting his share. All the way down to the people working in factories that distribute money, it is important for us to pay for the services that are provided.
I doubt this bill will actually get fast tracked and pirating has been a "top" priority with several political groups for a long time now and nothing ever seems to really change. Actually pirating is probably way worse today than it was in the times of Napster and Bearshare. It would be almost impossible to regulate and control everything without turning off the internet I will concur on that with the people raising a red flag at the bill. I think it just comes down to honesty and people in our country wanting everything free or looking for the easy way and really if everyone worked for and earned what they get we would be in a lot better situation.
Consumers obviously have reasons why they like to pirate movies or games. First of all, they don't know if they are going to really like it and some may go actually purchase the real version after testing it on a pirated version. This is why more and more gaming companies allow demos to be dispersed. Movies don't have the same luxury and are far easier to reproduce. Movies also are more frequently released and there are more subpar products being released as well. This means more people are going to pirate movies because they don't want to pay the high release day price of $20 in most cases. Of course, there is Redbox, but people seem too lazy to even go do that anymore.
I agree that the price of consumer electronics is extremely overpriced when it comes to media. Ten dollars to see a movie in the theatre is just way too much, especially when they tack on 3 more dollars for a 3d picture. But, going to see a movie is part of the experience, and in owning the movie you are supporting the people who made the movie possible and also funding their future productions. I don't pirate anything and I don't condone it. I don't want a limited choice when it comes to media. I want there to be a lot of movies to choose from on a Friday night and I want their to be a lot of musical artists for me to pick a favorite out of as well as multiple challenges to complete on my Playstation 3. The only way for it to stay this way is for people to stop pirating media. Rent it if you don't want to buy it and if you don't want to pay $1 to rent it you don't really care too much to be wasting your time watching it or playing it in the first place.
Many are afraid this bill will start censoring the internet and not really just protect copyrights. They also are afraid it is denying us some of our current amendments that equal our freedom. This is a little farfetched and if you are going to tell me that pirating is ok because Eminem is still making millions that is not acceptable either. Eminem is the top, well second person to get paid on a CD. The label is first, then Eminem, and so on. There is a lot of people and employees that are affected by this even if the top dog is still getting his share. All the way down to the people working in factories that distribute money, it is important for us to pay for the services that are provided.
I doubt this bill will actually get fast tracked and pirating has been a "top" priority with several political groups for a long time now and nothing ever seems to really change. Actually pirating is probably way worse today than it was in the times of Napster and Bearshare. It would be almost impossible to regulate and control everything without turning off the internet I will concur on that with the people raising a red flag at the bill. I think it just comes down to honesty and people in our country wanting everything free or looking for the easy way and really if everyone worked for and earned what they get we would be in a lot better situation.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Release the DVD, Give Me Catch Up Time
There are a lot of TV shows that I watch, as I am sure most of you do as well. But, most of us are only going to try a few new shows every year. Also, some shows might not sound that intriguing but then become so popular we have to give it a shot. Obviously, there are ways to catch up on certain shows now with the Hulu's and the recent episodes available on broadcast sites, but what if you miss an entire season. What if you start in the 3rd or 4th season of a show and want to catch up in the offseason?
For example, I started watching 24 in the fourth season of its existence. After a couple of episodes, I decided that I needed to see the initial seasons before going further with season four. I went and bought one at a time and went through the seasons pretty quickly and decided I would get the fourth season of 24 on DVD as well and pick up with the TV again in the 5th. One problem. The 5th season premiered before the release of the 4th season DVD! How could this be?! So, from then on I only watched 24 on DVD and never watched it unfold on TV.
Fast forward to this year. I am a season behind on Bones and the season has began and will be three or four episodes into the new one before the 5th season will be released on DVD. I was overseas last year and unable to view season five. I know this is not a show that you HAVE to see in order, but there are little side stories and I don't want to be that far behind on them and be watching the current season. Surely there are others that feel the same way. The season ended back in May what is the hold up in offering these seasons. Plus decent DVD sales do not keep a show on the air, the networks need people watching the shows on time. They could gain viewers in the middle of a series' life if they got the DVD's out and on sale with enough time for the consumer to watch them and be ready for the future season! Is this really that hard to think of? I know some series, like Glee try to do this and the network tries harder early in the season's life thinking it can still attract viewers but they could do the same with other shows and it would not hurt at all. Let me know how you feel and if this has been a problem for you!
For example, I started watching 24 in the fourth season of its existence. After a couple of episodes, I decided that I needed to see the initial seasons before going further with season four. I went and bought one at a time and went through the seasons pretty quickly and decided I would get the fourth season of 24 on DVD as well and pick up with the TV again in the 5th. One problem. The 5th season premiered before the release of the 4th season DVD! How could this be?! So, from then on I only watched 24 on DVD and never watched it unfold on TV.
Fast forward to this year. I am a season behind on Bones and the season has began and will be three or four episodes into the new one before the 5th season will be released on DVD. I was overseas last year and unable to view season five. I know this is not a show that you HAVE to see in order, but there are little side stories and I don't want to be that far behind on them and be watching the current season. Surely there are others that feel the same way. The season ended back in May what is the hold up in offering these seasons. Plus decent DVD sales do not keep a show on the air, the networks need people watching the shows on time. They could gain viewers in the middle of a series' life if they got the DVD's out and on sale with enough time for the consumer to watch them and be ready for the future season! Is this really that hard to think of? I know some series, like Glee try to do this and the network tries harder early in the season's life thinking it can still attract viewers but they could do the same with other shows and it would not hurt at all. Let me know how you feel and if this has been a problem for you!
Technopinion Promise
Technopinion will be getting more and more interactive as the days pass. Feel free to click on any Title in any article, or any product or name and you should be taken to further information on that subject. Links to purchase items from Amazon and other sites will be available as well. Thanks so much for viewing and watching Technopinion grow and get better. Thanks
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
TV Tuesday: Best New Series
Every Tuesday I will review a TV Series that has either been released on DVD or is currently airing. The rating system will be A-F minus the E.
This week, with so many new series airing their pilots over the past week and onto this week I decided to talk about which series is the best of these new series. I will take into account multiple things here. The best storyline is important, but also the chances for longevity and the acting will be accounted for here as well.
I actually just got the Directv DVR so I was able to take in a lot more new shows than I am on a normal premiere week. I have yet to see No Ordinary Family which airs tonight and also Law and Order: Los Angeles which I am excited about due to the fact Skeet Ulrich is returning to TV as a headliner for the first time since Jericho.
The Event had me real excited. First, Lost was my favorite show. Second, 24 was my second favorite show. Both of those shows ended last year unfortunately and that has left me real anxious for a replacement. The Event claimed to be a mix of these two along with some additional spice. Sounds awesome, right? Well, not so much. It has some exciting moments in the pilot, but I don't think the story is very interesting so far. Also, the fact they are actually using the name "The Event" in the script is very lame to me. I am hoping it will turn around, but NBC had a history of not being able to keep viewers and making bad series decisions so I am very skeptical in terms of how long this show will even stay on the air.
Lonestar was a show I actually enjoyed. It was a little quirky and tried too hard at times, but I was super surprised it faired THAT terribly. I mean 3 million viewers with a House lead-in? I know House is on it's downturn but still that is a poor showing for a premiere, and I believe it has been cancelled as reported on TVbythenumbers.com, so I won't waste time explaining it. I think the best new show is going to end up being Hawaii Five-O. It has a great cast of actors. Daniel Dae Kim fits in perfectly and was also on 24 and Lost so I like him a lot. Scott Caan has been funny since Varsity Blues and was the best on the premiere. I am not sold on Alex O'Loughlin at this time and his series continually fail like Moonlight and Three Rivers, but he may be saved in this instance by others and the spotlight is not soley on him. I think it has humor, action and balance, but I also think it has a story that you can follow week to week but also step in and enjoy any time giving it a great chance for longevity. It also airs on CBS which churns out high viewership programming year after year. I give the Show a B for now, but definitely has potential for an A as the season unfolds.
Also to check out: Blue Bloods, Detroit 1-8-7, and Mike and Molly
Recent Episode of the new hit series "No Ordinary Family" below
This week, with so many new series airing their pilots over the past week and onto this week I decided to talk about which series is the best of these new series. I will take into account multiple things here. The best storyline is important, but also the chances for longevity and the acting will be accounted for here as well.
I actually just got the Directv DVR so I was able to take in a lot more new shows than I am on a normal premiere week. I have yet to see No Ordinary Family which airs tonight and also Law and Order: Los Angeles which I am excited about due to the fact Skeet Ulrich is returning to TV as a headliner for the first time since Jericho.
The Event had me real excited. First, Lost was my favorite show. Second, 24 was my second favorite show. Both of those shows ended last year unfortunately and that has left me real anxious for a replacement. The Event claimed to be a mix of these two along with some additional spice. Sounds awesome, right? Well, not so much. It has some exciting moments in the pilot, but I don't think the story is very interesting so far. Also, the fact they are actually using the name "The Event" in the script is very lame to me. I am hoping it will turn around, but NBC had a history of not being able to keep viewers and making bad series decisions so I am very skeptical in terms of how long this show will even stay on the air.
Lonestar was a show I actually enjoyed. It was a little quirky and tried too hard at times, but I was super surprised it faired THAT terribly. I mean 3 million viewers with a House lead-in? I know House is on it's downturn but still that is a poor showing for a premiere, and I believe it has been cancelled as reported on TVbythenumbers.com, so I won't waste time explaining it. I think the best new show is going to end up being Hawaii Five-O. It has a great cast of actors. Daniel Dae Kim fits in perfectly and was also on 24 and Lost so I like him a lot. Scott Caan has been funny since Varsity Blues and was the best on the premiere. I am not sold on Alex O'Loughlin at this time and his series continually fail like Moonlight and Three Rivers, but he may be saved in this instance by others and the spotlight is not soley on him. I think it has humor, action and balance, but I also think it has a story that you can follow week to week but also step in and enjoy any time giving it a great chance for longevity. It also airs on CBS which churns out high viewership programming year after year. I give the Show a B for now, but definitely has potential for an A as the season unfolds.
Also to check out: Blue Bloods, Detroit 1-8-7, and Mike and Molly
Recent Episode of the new hit series "No Ordinary Family" below
Amazon Kindle Online Opens Today
Amazon Kindle unveiled their Kindle on the Web service today and I got to say, aren't they kind of behind on that. You have always been able to acces purchased books from the Barnes and Noble service online and basically any ebook service available to date. I guess they want to make it a social atmosphere where you can send samples of books to friends and others. I think everything is social enough, are people really going to get excited to trade ideas on what book to read next? Also, who really sits on their computer and reads a book that way? That is just uncomfortable.
I understand the usefulness of the Kindle if you want to avoid going out to the store to buy books, if you're trying to save shelf space, or if you just think it is a cool thing to have. Obviously, other ebook readers have been released and the prices have fallen substantially. Still, the books cost for the supplier is drastically cut when sold as an ebook, while the price to the consumer has not fallen much if at all. This is not acceptable! Now I am going to buy full books on my computer? That I also may be able to use on my Android mobile, Kindle, or IPad, but really how many places do I need one book, it is a book for goodness sake! It is not music that I am going to be able to listen to in my car on the way to work, or at home in the shower, it is a book. Most people I know and in history are usually reading actual books in their spare time or at night before bed, not at work or while running errands.
I have seen some comments on various sources where consumers are saying well offer the books in more places and more people will buy it. I guess this is true, but really who does not have an outlet to buy these ebooks if they really want to do so? If someone is that behind in their home technologically speaking, they are probably just fine with books. If you have a computer, but no Kindle, no Ipod, no data phone, and so on then you most likely are just fine with print books. I mean what do you expect people to do if they buy these on the computer and don't want to sit there on the computer, print them out? This is a questionable move by Amazon, and it should have happened right away instead of them sitting back and trying to increase sales of their Kindle device because I don't think those sales would have been affected. I also don't think they should try and act like this is a big deal or act like this is some big favor for the consumer. I am anxious to see if this flops or actually does become popular. If it does become popular, then people are spreading themselves real thin between Facebook and Twitter as it is, and now we need a social network for books?
I understand the usefulness of the Kindle if you want to avoid going out to the store to buy books, if you're trying to save shelf space, or if you just think it is a cool thing to have. Obviously, other ebook readers have been released and the prices have fallen substantially. Still, the books cost for the supplier is drastically cut when sold as an ebook, while the price to the consumer has not fallen much if at all. This is not acceptable! Now I am going to buy full books on my computer? That I also may be able to use on my Android mobile, Kindle, or IPad, but really how many places do I need one book, it is a book for goodness sake! It is not music that I am going to be able to listen to in my car on the way to work, or at home in the shower, it is a book. Most people I know and in history are usually reading actual books in their spare time or at night before bed, not at work or while running errands.
I have seen some comments on various sources where consumers are saying well offer the books in more places and more people will buy it. I guess this is true, but really who does not have an outlet to buy these ebooks if they really want to do so? If someone is that behind in their home technologically speaking, they are probably just fine with books. If you have a computer, but no Kindle, no Ipod, no data phone, and so on then you most likely are just fine with print books. I mean what do you expect people to do if they buy these on the computer and don't want to sit there on the computer, print them out? This is a questionable move by Amazon, and it should have happened right away instead of them sitting back and trying to increase sales of their Kindle device because I don't think those sales would have been affected. I also don't think they should try and act like this is a big deal or act like this is some big favor for the consumer. I am anxious to see if this flops or actually does become popular. If it does become popular, then people are spreading themselves real thin between Facebook and Twitter as it is, and now we need a social network for books?
Monday, September 27, 2010
Movie Monday: Rating the Rocky Saga
Every Monday I will be reviewing a movie new or old, must see or must not, direct to dvd or big budget. Check back weekly. Ratings are A-F without the E.
This week I am going to rate the Rocky movies in order of least to best. This is Sylvester Stallone's defining saga in my opinion and a lot better than the Rambo saga. The stories are heartwarming, exciting and fun especially well done for the time period. Let me know your feelings on the movies that have just kept on rolling through the times. Rocky Complete Set on Sale Also Click on Any of the Titles to view the movie on Amazon.
6. Rocky V
This is the popular choice and "worst" Rocky movie. I would have to agree. Plain and simple, there is no fight, at least in a ring, with Rocky and the antagonist. That is just not Rocky and I don't know what Stallone was thinking trying to close out his well liked series with a street fight. The movie moves slow in many other ways as well and the whole relationship issue and story revolving his son which also returns in number six in a more reasonable way is just boring. Watching these movies for the first time well before there was a number six I was very excited for the conclusion of the series and left as disappointed as I could possibly be. Rating D-
5. Rocky II
This might be an unpopular choice. This movie did signify the first time that Rocky wins a fight after losing by decision in the original Rocky. It also contains one of the most seen sequences in time with Rocky and Apollo falling to the mat at the same time. This movie also contains one of the most drawn out and boring coma sequences of all time with Adrian. Adrian can get annoying in general. The movie feels a lot like the original Rocky with him fighting Apollo again. Rating B
4. Rocky III
Rocky III refreshed the series in my opinion. It brought in an electric Mr. T who actually played the role of his life as Clubber Lang. I also like that there was two fights plus a wrestling match in this movie. The return of Apollo in a more personable role was a great idea and the death of Mickey was a disappointment, but most likely necessary. (The actor also died in real life shortly after filming). It is nice to see Rocky with a little money and a little more class after becoming the Champion of the World. There is also a little drawn out sequence in this movie as well where Rocky seems "scared" of Clubber or doesn't think he has what it takes, but it is nothing like the coma sequence with Adrian. Rating A-
3. Rocky Balboa (VI)
This was a great movie considering how many years it had been since the previous Rocky installment. When I heard that this was going to happen for sure I was very excited but also hesitant at what would really be possible with Stallone at his age, and also feared another Rocky V type installment. All my fears were squashed rather quickly. It was modern but didn't take away from the Rocky feel. The fact that the fight is so realistic really added something for me here despite Stallone's age. The relationship with the son was kind of lame once again, but a little better this time and made a lot more sense than in Rocky V. This is the Rocky movie that is my generation version of Rocky so I really liked this one. Rating A-
2. Rocky IV
Rocky IV was close to number one here. There is a lot that happens in this movie and I can guarantee this is the best fourth movie or third sequel to a movie ever. Dolph Lundgren makes his appearance as the massive Russian who actually murders Apollo Creed in a match. That is a little corny I will admit, but Apollo's death in that match surprised me more than almost anything in any other movie I have seen. Apollo also returns to the ring in the fight which was something I think I was ready for after a movie off with him in that capacity. Rocky then has the second best fighting sequence of the series and wins of course. I really like the training ensemble in this movie and Pauly is at his best. Also, Adrian is not around so much and I am happy with that as well. Rating A
1. Rocky
Rocky was the beginning of something special. The camera work was perfect for the grim reality they were portraying for Rocky Balboa's life. Apollo Creed was a great character to face off being the complete and polar opposite of Rocky. I love how they had Rocky knock him down on his first connected punch showing how powerful he was. The underdog story had been done before and has been done millions of time since, but I think this is one of the best available, even after so many years. If you have never seen this movie, don't wait, you need to jump on this immediately. The whole series is available on dvd at a very good price, but is also available now on BluRay at a wonderful price as well. Rating A+
This week I am going to rate the Rocky movies in order of least to best. This is Sylvester Stallone's defining saga in my opinion and a lot better than the Rambo saga. The stories are heartwarming, exciting and fun especially well done for the time period. Let me know your feelings on the movies that have just kept on rolling through the times. Rocky Complete Set on Sale Also Click on Any of the Titles to view the movie on Amazon.
6. Rocky V
This is the popular choice and "worst" Rocky movie. I would have to agree. Plain and simple, there is no fight, at least in a ring, with Rocky and the antagonist. That is just not Rocky and I don't know what Stallone was thinking trying to close out his well liked series with a street fight. The movie moves slow in many other ways as well and the whole relationship issue and story revolving his son which also returns in number six in a more reasonable way is just boring. Watching these movies for the first time well before there was a number six I was very excited for the conclusion of the series and left as disappointed as I could possibly be. Rating D-
5. Rocky II
This might be an unpopular choice. This movie did signify the first time that Rocky wins a fight after losing by decision in the original Rocky. It also contains one of the most seen sequences in time with Rocky and Apollo falling to the mat at the same time. This movie also contains one of the most drawn out and boring coma sequences of all time with Adrian. Adrian can get annoying in general. The movie feels a lot like the original Rocky with him fighting Apollo again. Rating B
4. Rocky III
Rocky III refreshed the series in my opinion. It brought in an electric Mr. T who actually played the role of his life as Clubber Lang. I also like that there was two fights plus a wrestling match in this movie. The return of Apollo in a more personable role was a great idea and the death of Mickey was a disappointment, but most likely necessary. (The actor also died in real life shortly after filming). It is nice to see Rocky with a little money and a little more class after becoming the Champion of the World. There is also a little drawn out sequence in this movie as well where Rocky seems "scared" of Clubber or doesn't think he has what it takes, but it is nothing like the coma sequence with Adrian. Rating A-
3. Rocky Balboa (VI)
This was a great movie considering how many years it had been since the previous Rocky installment. When I heard that this was going to happen for sure I was very excited but also hesitant at what would really be possible with Stallone at his age, and also feared another Rocky V type installment. All my fears were squashed rather quickly. It was modern but didn't take away from the Rocky feel. The fact that the fight is so realistic really added something for me here despite Stallone's age. The relationship with the son was kind of lame once again, but a little better this time and made a lot more sense than in Rocky V. This is the Rocky movie that is my generation version of Rocky so I really liked this one. Rating A-
2. Rocky IV
Rocky IV was close to number one here. There is a lot that happens in this movie and I can guarantee this is the best fourth movie or third sequel to a movie ever. Dolph Lundgren makes his appearance as the massive Russian who actually murders Apollo Creed in a match. That is a little corny I will admit, but Apollo's death in that match surprised me more than almost anything in any other movie I have seen. Apollo also returns to the ring in the fight which was something I think I was ready for after a movie off with him in that capacity. Rocky then has the second best fighting sequence of the series and wins of course. I really like the training ensemble in this movie and Pauly is at his best. Also, Adrian is not around so much and I am happy with that as well. Rating A
1. Rocky
Rocky was the beginning of something special. The camera work was perfect for the grim reality they were portraying for Rocky Balboa's life. Apollo Creed was a great character to face off being the complete and polar opposite of Rocky. I love how they had Rocky knock him down on his first connected punch showing how powerful he was. The underdog story had been done before and has been done millions of time since, but I think this is one of the best available, even after so many years. If you have never seen this movie, don't wait, you need to jump on this immediately. The whole series is available on dvd at a very good price, but is also available now on BluRay at a wonderful price as well. Rating A+
Gamestop.. Please Stop Destroying Small Game Developers
I love video games. Millions of people around the world do. Video games allow me to play out a scenario usually as exciting or more exciting than a movie and leaves me to make the decisions. Who would not enjoy that? I have shopped at Gamestop for many years due to their selection and generally good prices. I have bought used games in the past, but not in a long time. This is because in the way the current market is set up, used game sales are destroying the industry.
There is nothing wrong with selling used video games. A video game is an experience that in most cases you will be done with after completing the challenge once or maybe twice at most. You should be able to get a little compensation back on these games as the new game price is $50-60 on release day. Also, someone else can be enjoying a game that would otherwise be sitting on your shelf collecting dust. The problem is, Gamestop is making a killing off of used game sales, and the developers are suffering. Laid off employees, smaller project budgets and bankruptcies are only hurting the gamer. I truly believe Gamestop is hurting the gamer. Think about it. Most new games an average person with gaming experience can finish in about 1-2 weeks. If they bought the game on release day, they can turn around and sell it back to Gamestop for around $20-$24. Gamestop puts it back on the shelf for $54! Even if they put it at a lower point like they do with some games, a price point of $45 is still a $20-25 profit.
If you look at Gamestop's financial report, you notice that only about 22-26% of their sales are from used games, 40-45% for new games, and 17-20% for hardware. You think well used games are not a huge part of the market. The profit report tells a different story. Almost 50% of Gamestop's profits came from used game sales, while only 24-28% of profits come from new games and hardware. The gaming companies do not get any of this money to use towards future products and the salaries of their employees.
You might think ok? Screw the gaming companies they make millions right! Not necessarily. Yes, Electronic Arts and Activision come out with huge games that sell millions of copies and bring in hundreds of millions of dollars into their bank accounts. These are not the companies that need it, I understand that, but some smaller gaming companies need a piece of the used market to stay afloat. Don't tell me that everyone who buys a game used would not buy it new or that they would only buy it for the low price. They do that because the option is available to them and the used game market severely eats into the new game market. It is not like used versions of the game are not available for a month after the game is released. They are available the next day in most cases. I have a friend that buys games and put them up used on ebay the day he purchases them and knows he will have 7 days to beat the game before it is sold. The creator of APB, a brand new game with a pretty interesting idea is already going into bankruptcy. Their game was just released. These are examples of problems with our industry.
We don't want to get left with only big budget games, and left with so few choices, but that is what we are headed towards. Game developers are made to look like the bad guys by placing online fees if you buy a game used and so forth. They are just trying to recoup the millions it takes to make a quality game on a high tech system such as the Playstation 3 or the Xbox 360. Plus, don't think running you on their online servers is free. It is very expensive to run the amount of servers necessary to let all of you out there play their games online, all at once. Why do you think Demon Souls is going offline? And that game is predicated off being able to use other people to beat that substantial challenge. My brother got that game used and complained that it would be going offline and he has not yet beat it. I told him to blame himself.
Gamestop and others that are now starting to delve into the used game market need to wake up and understand what they are doing as they are hurting themselves as well. With less of a market for used video games they are lowering their sales potential and profits as well. They can afford to send a piece of the used game profits over to the developers, and if they don't someone else will. That company that makes that the plunge to give back I am sure will be well rewarded. A business could trade a percentage of used game profits for a day early release day, no online fees for used games, or free dlc for their customers. Everyone could be happy in an industry worth billions. So, why are they not?
There is nothing wrong with selling used video games. A video game is an experience that in most cases you will be done with after completing the challenge once or maybe twice at most. You should be able to get a little compensation back on these games as the new game price is $50-60 on release day. Also, someone else can be enjoying a game that would otherwise be sitting on your shelf collecting dust. The problem is, Gamestop is making a killing off of used game sales, and the developers are suffering. Laid off employees, smaller project budgets and bankruptcies are only hurting the gamer. I truly believe Gamestop is hurting the gamer. Think about it. Most new games an average person with gaming experience can finish in about 1-2 weeks. If they bought the game on release day, they can turn around and sell it back to Gamestop for around $20-$24. Gamestop puts it back on the shelf for $54! Even if they put it at a lower point like they do with some games, a price point of $45 is still a $20-25 profit.
If you look at Gamestop's financial report, you notice that only about 22-26% of their sales are from used games, 40-45% for new games, and 17-20% for hardware. You think well used games are not a huge part of the market. The profit report tells a different story. Almost 50% of Gamestop's profits came from used game sales, while only 24-28% of profits come from new games and hardware. The gaming companies do not get any of this money to use towards future products and the salaries of their employees.
You might think ok? Screw the gaming companies they make millions right! Not necessarily. Yes, Electronic Arts and Activision come out with huge games that sell millions of copies and bring in hundreds of millions of dollars into their bank accounts. These are not the companies that need it, I understand that, but some smaller gaming companies need a piece of the used market to stay afloat. Don't tell me that everyone who buys a game used would not buy it new or that they would only buy it for the low price. They do that because the option is available to them and the used game market severely eats into the new game market. It is not like used versions of the game are not available for a month after the game is released. They are available the next day in most cases. I have a friend that buys games and put them up used on ebay the day he purchases them and knows he will have 7 days to beat the game before it is sold. The creator of APB, a brand new game with a pretty interesting idea is already going into bankruptcy. Their game was just released. These are examples of problems with our industry.
We don't want to get left with only big budget games, and left with so few choices, but that is what we are headed towards. Game developers are made to look like the bad guys by placing online fees if you buy a game used and so forth. They are just trying to recoup the millions it takes to make a quality game on a high tech system such as the Playstation 3 or the Xbox 360. Plus, don't think running you on their online servers is free. It is very expensive to run the amount of servers necessary to let all of you out there play their games online, all at once. Why do you think Demon Souls is going offline? And that game is predicated off being able to use other people to beat that substantial challenge. My brother got that game used and complained that it would be going offline and he has not yet beat it. I told him to blame himself.
Gamestop and others that are now starting to delve into the used game market need to wake up and understand what they are doing as they are hurting themselves as well. With less of a market for used video games they are lowering their sales potential and profits as well. They can afford to send a piece of the used game profits over to the developers, and if they don't someone else will. That company that makes that the plunge to give back I am sure will be well rewarded. A business could trade a percentage of used game profits for a day early release day, no online fees for used games, or free dlc for their customers. Everyone could be happy in an industry worth billions. So, why are they not?
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Steve Jobs and the Nightmare That is Apple
Hey Technology World,
I was thinking to myself before posting this that if I disgraced Steve Jobs, would I find myself tied up somewhere tomorrow morning in some kind of situation including multiple forms of torture. Then, I remembered that I don't matter and Steve Jobs could care less about what I or anyone else says. The man may truly believe that he is God. Jobs does not seem to think he needs anybody or any customer. The fact that there is a website dedicated to rude emails he has sent to customers over the years is a sign that this man has a problem. Steve Jobs Email Example Is this the attitude necessary for entrepreneurial success?
A major problem in our society is the way people of power are allowed to act. They believe they are entitled to whatever they want no matter who or what it affects. I am a sports fanatic and have to see this with the best of the best in that world. Obviously, this is another subject matter. Steve Jobs is a genius. Genius when it comes to investing in the right products and services. Did Steve Jobs create the IPod? Did he create the IPhone? Or is he surrounded by a lot of really smart people? If that is not making enough sense let me ask this in a more straightforward manner. If Steve Jobs was the only employee over there at Apple, would these products even exist? He sure seems to act as if this were the case. Have you ever heard him give anyone else credit for the company's success? Doubt it.
The number one thing I learned at every job I ever worked at, every business or marketing class I ever took in high school or college was that the customer is always right. You don't intimidate customers, or treat them like they are stupid. You also don't make promises you cannot keep. Now, of course the customer is wrong plenty of the time, but you want them to keep using your products and you don't want them to tell everyone they know that your business treats well paying customers poorly. Steve Jobs has done all of the above! When news broke that the IPhone 4 was having dropped call issues, it should have been pretty obvious to Apple customers that Steve Jobs was not going to come out and apologize. No, he was going to make excuses, or tell you that you, the customer is wrong. He does not want your opinion, and he does not feel that he needs your business.
Why are we buying this man's products? Shouldn't we be banning together to take our business to someone that appreciates it? Apple does create highly advanced and easy to use products, but they also want to own every bit of you. You have to have separate programs that are only compatible with their operating systems, and you have to pay for every bit of everything you are getting out of Apple. If you want to tell me that Macbooks don't get viruses or run more smoothly you have not tried a current PC from Hewlett Packard, Sony, or Toshiba. The cheapest Macbook Pro goes for about $1200 and has a tiny screen at 13 inches, reasonable but unspectacular 250gb of memory and a 10 hour battery life. You can get a PC with similar features for around $500 and probably with a larger screen. And the viruses? Take care of your computer and protect it with the correct internet security suite and you will not have to worry about any of that. I have a Toshiba laptop that I use currently that has it all and it cost me around $600.
ITunes is a tremendous rip off. Why are you all out there buying every song for $.99? No, I am not condoning using pirating music programs like Limewire. I would never use those because I actually want my favorite artists to continue to make music. But, there is respectable and legitimate ways to get all the music you could want for a flat rate. It is called subscription music services. Zune is the subscription offering that I have chosen, but there is others like the new Napster and Rhapsody. Check Out Zune's Offering They offer all of the music available on ITunes, and at an equal to or better quality. You lose either way with ITunes. Either you don't get all the music you want because it costs too much to have everything, or you are way overspending to have all the music you want. I have about 6000 songs on my Zune HD. On ITunes, with discounts and full album prices my library would have cost me anywhere from $4200 at the cheapest to a straight $6000. I have had a subscription with Zune for 19 months. That means I have paid $285 in that time period for music. Unlimited music. I add more on a weekly basis and the minute the music is out it is available with no dropoff in access or service. I could pay the 15 dollar subscription fee and never pay $6000 for music. Plus, I have two other users on my username that get unlimited music as well. That is really only $5 per user per month.
Review of Zune HD vs. IPod Touch
The last thing I want to touch on is the Apple store. These places are another example of how much control Apple wants to have over it's products. You can't get support for any product except at these stores in most cases. But, you also need an appointment to get any help at all there. Really? My girlfriend had an IPhone that was not working at all. They kept telling her the screen is the problem, but when they said they fixed it, the fix would not last. She was in the Apple store 4-5 times and was continually turned away and told to come back when she had an appointment. So, she was left without a working phone for days at a time because she needed an appointment. That is just unnacceptable in this day and age. Plus, at my local Apple retail store "appointments" are not so readily available. There are multiple horror stories of how these Apple Stores are run from my circle of friends, which means there is probably a whole lot more of them out there. Look at the first two tips they leave on their Apple Retail store site for example. Glad they can be so kind as to tell me when I should come in to their store to buy their products from them.
Please think twice before buying products from this egomaniac, and don't just blindly buy everything they put out there (especially the IPad) just because it is popular. You don't need and IPhone when there is multiple Android phones available and you don't need a Macbook Pro when there is stronger PCs available at 1/3 of the price. You definitely don't need a larger IPhone that they are calling the IPad. There is not even multi-tasking and it's lowest price point is $500 dollars? Wow. I am signing out, but if anyone wants information on other alternatives that are available I can make it available to you. Let me know how you feel about Steve Jobs below. Also check out this video of Steve Jobs denying a wheelchair user an autograph at an Apple Store grand opening.
I was thinking to myself before posting this that if I disgraced Steve Jobs, would I find myself tied up somewhere tomorrow morning in some kind of situation including multiple forms of torture. Then, I remembered that I don't matter and Steve Jobs could care less about what I or anyone else says. The man may truly believe that he is God. Jobs does not seem to think he needs anybody or any customer. The fact that there is a website dedicated to rude emails he has sent to customers over the years is a sign that this man has a problem. Steve Jobs Email Example Is this the attitude necessary for entrepreneurial success?
A major problem in our society is the way people of power are allowed to act. They believe they are entitled to whatever they want no matter who or what it affects. I am a sports fanatic and have to see this with the best of the best in that world. Obviously, this is another subject matter. Steve Jobs is a genius. Genius when it comes to investing in the right products and services. Did Steve Jobs create the IPod? Did he create the IPhone? Or is he surrounded by a lot of really smart people? If that is not making enough sense let me ask this in a more straightforward manner. If Steve Jobs was the only employee over there at Apple, would these products even exist? He sure seems to act as if this were the case. Have you ever heard him give anyone else credit for the company's success? Doubt it.
The number one thing I learned at every job I ever worked at, every business or marketing class I ever took in high school or college was that the customer is always right. You don't intimidate customers, or treat them like they are stupid. You also don't make promises you cannot keep. Now, of course the customer is wrong plenty of the time, but you want them to keep using your products and you don't want them to tell everyone they know that your business treats well paying customers poorly. Steve Jobs has done all of the above! When news broke that the IPhone 4 was having dropped call issues, it should have been pretty obvious to Apple customers that Steve Jobs was not going to come out and apologize. No, he was going to make excuses, or tell you that you, the customer is wrong. He does not want your opinion, and he does not feel that he needs your business.
Why are we buying this man's products? Shouldn't we be banning together to take our business to someone that appreciates it? Apple does create highly advanced and easy to use products, but they also want to own every bit of you. You have to have separate programs that are only compatible with their operating systems, and you have to pay for every bit of everything you are getting out of Apple. If you want to tell me that Macbooks don't get viruses or run more smoothly you have not tried a current PC from Hewlett Packard, Sony, or Toshiba. The cheapest Macbook Pro goes for about $1200 and has a tiny screen at 13 inches, reasonable but unspectacular 250gb of memory and a 10 hour battery life. You can get a PC with similar features for around $500 and probably with a larger screen. And the viruses? Take care of your computer and protect it with the correct internet security suite and you will not have to worry about any of that. I have a Toshiba laptop that I use currently that has it all and it cost me around $600.
ITunes is a tremendous rip off. Why are you all out there buying every song for $.99? No, I am not condoning using pirating music programs like Limewire. I would never use those because I actually want my favorite artists to continue to make music. But, there is respectable and legitimate ways to get all the music you could want for a flat rate. It is called subscription music services. Zune is the subscription offering that I have chosen, but there is others like the new Napster and Rhapsody. Check Out Zune's Offering They offer all of the music available on ITunes, and at an equal to or better quality. You lose either way with ITunes. Either you don't get all the music you want because it costs too much to have everything, or you are way overspending to have all the music you want. I have about 6000 songs on my Zune HD. On ITunes, with discounts and full album prices my library would have cost me anywhere from $4200 at the cheapest to a straight $6000. I have had a subscription with Zune for 19 months. That means I have paid $285 in that time period for music. Unlimited music. I add more on a weekly basis and the minute the music is out it is available with no dropoff in access or service. I could pay the 15 dollar subscription fee and never pay $6000 for music. Plus, I have two other users on my username that get unlimited music as well. That is really only $5 per user per month.
Review of Zune HD vs. IPod Touch
The last thing I want to touch on is the Apple store. These places are another example of how much control Apple wants to have over it's products. You can't get support for any product except at these stores in most cases. But, you also need an appointment to get any help at all there. Really? My girlfriend had an IPhone that was not working at all. They kept telling her the screen is the problem, but when they said they fixed it, the fix would not last. She was in the Apple store 4-5 times and was continually turned away and told to come back when she had an appointment. So, she was left without a working phone for days at a time because she needed an appointment. That is just unnacceptable in this day and age. Plus, at my local Apple retail store "appointments" are not so readily available. There are multiple horror stories of how these Apple Stores are run from my circle of friends, which means there is probably a whole lot more of them out there. Look at the first two tips they leave on their Apple Retail store site for example. Glad they can be so kind as to tell me when I should come in to their store to buy their products from them.
- Tip 1. Shop early. Shop late. The store tends to be busiest in the middle of the day. Shopping early in the morning or late in the evening helps you avoid the crowds.
- Tip 2. Make an appointment. Test-drive new products and learn all about them by making a Personal Shopping appointment.
Please think twice before buying products from this egomaniac, and don't just blindly buy everything they put out there (especially the IPad) just because it is popular. You don't need and IPhone when there is multiple Android phones available and you don't need a Macbook Pro when there is stronger PCs available at 1/3 of the price. You definitely don't need a larger IPhone that they are calling the IPad. There is not even multi-tasking and it's lowest price point is $500 dollars? Wow. I am signing out, but if anyone wants information on other alternatives that are available I can make it available to you. Let me know how you feel about Steve Jobs below. Also check out this video of Steve Jobs denying a wheelchair user an autograph at an Apple Store grand opening.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)