Review: Halsey Street

Halsey Street by Naima Coster
My rating: 3 of 5 stars



View all my reviews

300: Rise of an Empire review

First off: spoilers. Not that there is much to the story that you wouldn't already know...but still. I might as well mention it. As you can tell, I don't write very much on this blog. I take a very laid back approach, and write when I want to. This is one of those times.

The original 300 movie was, in my humble opinion, excellent. It combined storytelling with combat, even if the numbers were skewed a bit (more in the army than just 300 Spartans, Xerxes army was probably around 300k and not over a million...that kind of thing), it got the idea of the story right. That is: very few Spartans and Greeks stood against an overwhelming majority and allowed for Greece to rally. Eventually turning the tide against the Persians. All well and good, history has been supported by worse data. Enter 300: Rise of an Empire.

If you want to read the Wikipedia articles on these battles, click here. If you don't want to read the entire thing, just start with the Second Persian invasion of Greece. So here we go.

1. Actual history: Marathon. No, Darius did not die. In fact, after the battle Darius went back home to raise another army to do what he just failed to do. However, the Egyptians revolted and this caused an indefinite suspension of the invasion. Darius later dies and Xerxes comes to power. During this time, Artemisia of Caria was princess (and later queen) of Halicarnassus (not even close to Athens or Sparta as invasions go) after her husband dies, also had a grandson. She was held in high regard by Xerxes, telling him not to go against the Greeks on the ocean (which he ignored, to his peril). She also convinced him to abandon the campaign to his generals after the loss of Salamis. She wound up in Ephesus to take care of Xerxes illegitimate sons and her lands were well off because of it. End of story.
   
   In the movie: Themistocles kills Darius at Marathon and "angers" Xerxes...but Xerxes is a wimp and so has to be motivated to go crazy by the supreme naval commander crazy girl named Artemisia who apparently had a grudge match with ALL of Greece because of her family being killed by some no name hoplites. Not the badass princess of actual history, but a sob story. Didn't happen, and not even a liberal analysis could say that this was close to accuracy.
2. Actual history: A random battle. I have no idea. I'm assuming this is part of the battles of Artemisium. Western style circle of ships, Greeks and Persians were essentially equal in losses, however the Greeks were much smaller in number and so losses hurt more. There were a multi-national force of over 270 in the actual battle.
   
   In the movie: depicts 50 ships against 1000. I think the studio is pushing this whole "lopsided odds fighting for the future of humanity and freedom and democracy against tyranny" thing too far. We are all aware that Greece had slaves as well, right?
3. Complimentary sex scene: God help me, don't get me started. No, Artemisia did not have faux-passionate pounding sex with Themistocles. Didn't happen. In fact, Artemisia wasn't even the commander of the Persian navy. She was a leader of 5 ships. That's it. What a horrible, disgusting, awkward transitions scene. I mean, 300 had a sex scene, but Spartan abs-master (you know him as King Leonidas) was fairly certain this was the last time he was going to see his awesome wife, and so had last time sex. Makes sense. But grudge match girl, commander of the Persian navy, invites naval commander of Athens to bone, and doesn't kill him? She just spent the first half of the movie randomly killing...well...everyone. She didn't take this opportunity to off the Athenian general (whom the entire Athenian naval strategy was hinged) and break the moral of the Greeks? Mmk.
4. Actual history: Athens burns. You see, Atheniens weren't idiots. They knew that the retreat from Artemisium and the loss of Thermopylae meant that Attica (Athens was located here)was undefended. They evacuated to Salamis to avoid major loss. There was a small contingent who held out in the Acropolis, but they were defeated. Athens was razed.
   
   In the movie: Athens just...burns. Random people getting murdered, Xerxes dropping a head ceremoniously...blah. Because no one knows that a 300 thousand man army led by a king with a piss match against Greeks was coming for Athens after Thermopylae falls. Thanks Obama.
5. Actual history: Battle of Salamis. You know what? At this point I'm not going to even explain it. Suffice to say that Themistocles whooped ass with around 378 multinational ships against over 1200 Persian ships. Allies that they knew were there from the start of the battle. Because real men don't just run into battle with nothing to fight with, no matter how awesome the cause, thinking that even though no one is there to fight, there's a slight chance that they'll come at the last second to make this whole thing worth while. Oh, and Artemisia lives.
   
   In the movie: No. I won't even spoil it for you. Actually I will. THEY HAD 4 SHIPS. OH, and a horse. Yes. A horse riding across the ocean. Sparta saves the day. Who saw that coming?

So there you have it. Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 41%, which I say is a tad high...but I'm also a harsh critic in this regard. I personally feel it's a waste of Redbox funds, but that's just me as well. 

Tablets finally have had their run?

I recently came across an article that was labeled with the infectious title:

Our Love Affair With the Tablet Is Over

 At first, I was curious. Surely, after a mere four year run tablets were not on the out. After reading the article, linked here, I had some significant misgivings. I feel as if the article, from a technical standpoint, could be proven true in the future. From a personal standpoint, and the fact that I reside on a campus, the article seemed to take some serious standpoints too far. For example:

The first issue I had was cellular vs. wi-fi. He states:

As phone apps improved in terms of quality and speed, users abandoned their tablets for the device in their pocket that could access the Web anywhere and anytime from Wi-Fi or cellular connections.

As a phone and tablet user myself, I find that I use both almost equally. Second, combining wifi and cellular connections seems presumptuous. Wi-Fi isn't everywhere or available anytime. I hate watching videos on my phone without a Wi-Fi connection because it eats up my valuable data limit. The larger screen real estate on a tablet allows me to watch YouTube, Hulu, Netflix, Vevo all on full HD. Why go to my phone? If I have Wi-Fi, I have my tablet. That simple. Granted, some restaurants have Wi-Fi these days, so if I were out to lunch I won't necessarily bring my tablet along. The point remains, if I can use my tablet I would rather do so. Not only is it easier on the eyes, fingers and typing in general (mine has an attached keyboard dock), but even now apps optimized for tablets are simply great looking. Which brings me to my next point.

The writer said:

Based on the momentum of the phone, Netflix decided to merge the tablet and phone UIs.

I find this akin to stating that our love affair with PC's are out because it is now considered standard business practice to have mobile optimized pages. Just because one is used, doesn't mean the other isn't. With the emerging tablet market, only four years in, they are becoming household items. It isn't out the question to see either ten inch or seven inch models around the house. Combining phone and tablet UI's isn't unprecedented, indeed it would seem like the logical next step.

Bringing it back to the cellular connection, the writer stated:

Conversely, only 12 percent of tablets have cellular connections, instantly making them non-mobile devices.

I believe this is because of design issues, but much like the iPod without a data connection...it hasn't gone anywhere. The iPod is still being readily developed. It still sold even though the brand new iPhone C was quickly reduced in production. A device far older than the newest iPhone is still being produced and it has no cellular connection. Where the niche remains, the companies produce. One would think that should cellular connection be an issue, Apple would have eliminated the newest iPod. Not only do they have the iPod, they have four versions of the device with no cellular connection. Obviously these are not tablet devices, they they do share the characteristic of not having a cellular connection. Non-mobile devices are limited, granted. They need a Wi-Fi to fully operate. In the end though, data intensive apps should be used on Wi-Fi. It's logical, as many mobile plans limit data. So, data intensive is negated through Wi-Fi, larger screen real estate to play with, often real keyboards to type...tablets are not only convenient they are more useful when Wi-Fi is around.

Finally, size. This has always been a point of contention for any company, as Samsung has demonstrated. A rule hasn't been established on what is the "best" size. The Nexus 4 is perfect in my mind, but someone else may want something smaller. The Note is well known as the "phablet" as the article mentioned. Personally, this is huge. It doesn't fit comfortably in the pocket, so maybe that's why Samsung came out with the Watch. Either way, anywhere between four to five inches seems to be the zone. Any larger and you're in tablet territory, any smaller and you're dealing with fonts being too small to see, assuming the phone may not have the processing power to display it correctly. I see size as the most fluid of concepts in this article, since it's really left to opinion.

In the end, this article may be right from possibly an enterprise point of view. Then again, maybe not. iPads are being used in schools, can be appropriated toward certain restrictions and are easier to play with concerning apps. Android is trying to make headway into this market, so it remains to be seen what will happen there. It isn't the Samsung Galaxy S[insert number here] that they are marketing to businesses and schools though. It's the tablets, whether it's the 8 or 10 inch versions.

Hopefully, tablets can be seen not as going away, but changing the way they are used. They aren't just for personal use.

Apple vs. Google: Maps edition

Hey there!

We all know about the rivalry between Apple and Google when the mobile market is concerned. One of the biggest changes in recent history was the change from the Google maps engine to Apple's own version. Not only was this the biggest change Apple made to their operating system in quite some time, it was poorly conceived and even more poorly launched. You see, the issue was not so much that Apple was launching a competitive maps to Google, it was that Apple had no mapping software that could even compare with Google's tried and true system. Street view, 3D buildings, directions, bike paths, subways...you name it, it was part of Google's system. This means, of course, that Apple would have to rely on third party information to then sync into it's own app. This...hasn't worked well. In fact:

it's still happening today. So when a CEO issues a letter of apology, especially from a company like Apple...well, you can't say much for the launch can you? So, bear in mind that while Apple does in fact have a map service...it's ill used.After all...if you can't trust the icon...

Drives you off a bypass...

Doesn't drive you off a bypass!

That isn't to say that it's horrible all the time. Meh. I'll start with the visuals, we'll go from there.

3D Imagery comparison
Both Google and Apple boast 3D views of major areas such as New York City. Depending on your preference, "pretty" may be an important issue for you. Otherwise, why would you buy an iPad? BAM.

Kidding.

So here we have Apple maps of ground zero in New York:

Pretty right? I like it. Nice and sharp. It's not perfect, obviously. This is straight from the Apple Maps icon. I mention this because Google Maps and Google Earth are separate applications, although getting to Google Earth from Google Maps is a simple menu press away. Even so, it's combined in Apple Maps. So there's that.

Moving on to Google Maps, let's look at the same image...

Bleh. Quite horrible actually. This is with the cache at it's largest, and after a bit of time to let the ram catch up. I'm truly disappointed here. All is not lost though, as Google and Apple are actually quite close when set at a more reasonable level.

Just viewing the bay for both of them, top is Apple, bottom is Google.

As you can see they are much closer in resolution. There are both 3D, roughly the same viewing angle. I will point out that Apple, being integrated with the maps features and not a separate app as Google Earth is, has the destinations such as food, gas, transportation...etc. However, Google Maps has the same thing, save the 3D buildings aren't represented in the same way. 

Here, I would like to point out a few things. If comparing the features now, rather than the visuals, Google doesn't display as much information but more relevant info. For example, both Google and Apple Maps show traffic, but Apple shows traffic only on the Battery Park Tunnel leading into FDR. On both applications, the buildings in the 3D shadow mode disappear and the map becomes flat to show more places of interest when you zoom out.
Apple shows many restaurants, where as Google only shows what has been searched for or what are even more visited. I'm not sure of the criteria here and why things are shown versus others. Finally, did you notice the red wreck icon on this image? At the time, Apple didn't have it. Not only does Google Maps do traffic, it can also report wrecks and direct you accordingly. Both apps have road closure info, though...so you're not totally in the dark.

My verdict: Apple has the appeal of a great looking app that has an "all-in-one" feature. 3D buildings, many places of interest. However, as linked above...it has had its issues with directions in the past. A friend of mine used Apple Maps to find a location that was unknown location locally and it led her to an entirely different city. Google didn't have that problem, found the location quickly. I wish Google had more locations of interest, but since it is a search giant after all...once you search for restaurants it will lead you to more relevant results.

Final thoughts: Apple for the visuals and lots of info. Google for the more relevant info with visuals on a lower bar. Comments below! Gimme feedback! Oh, and Google Hangouts vs. iMessage/FaceTime next!

Wormholes

I wrote this in passing one day when I was bored. It's based on the game called +EVE Online . It's a bit of fiction, and I wish I had submitted it when they recently had a contest for fan fiction. Oh well. Without further ado: "Wormholes".

The engineer who modified my pod couldn’t understand why I wanted audio specifically designed for music. A “waste of time, effort and your concentration”, he said. Heh, engineers. They may have the smarts to design every weapon system we capsuleers have available...but it’s all nuts and bolts up there. Efficiency, speed and product quality. Any loss of this triumvirate and a engineer breaks down. They don’t understand though. High security space is noisy; our HUD displays a constant chatter of local talk, low sec is threateningly quiet...almost an unease in the air, no matter where you are. Null sec space is almost as bad as protected high sec...alliance chatter, corporation chatter, intel chatter, you name it and people are talking. Talking, talking talking. Ship this, pilot that. This system, ship type blah blah blah. Every once and awhile, capsuleers need to get away. Sometimes, we pod pilots become the nuts and bolts we fly.

I think sometimes that the covert ops frigates designed for scanning down locations in space were designed by someone other than the technical engineers. When you look at them, they seem to absorb the darkness around them. As if they wrap themselves in the dark to calm the raging soul of a combat pilot. They're small, almost invisible even without the cloaks that make them so useful. These aren’t the hard, battle ready frigates that swarm the known and unknown depths of space...they're the information. The quiet calm in the innumerable conflicts that span constellations and regions of space.

So leaving my combat ships that are so loud, even when not moving, my custom designed pod is loaded into my frigate-class covert ops ship Anathema and I undock, allowing the initial momentum of the station flinging me into space to drift. Intel and alliance chatter still graces what my HUD calls "local"; that is: the pilots in the region or the solar system I'm currently in. I glance briefly at my starmap, and out of the 5000 systems I choose one at random. My onboard computer Aura informs me my warpdrive was active and I shoot away from the station. The gate fires and I jump, repeating the process until I arrive at my destination. Warping to a planet, its mass looms before me ever turning, ever silent. There have been “loud” planets before. The ultra rare shattered planet are in very few systems caused such an uproar that many now fear them as omens of the future. As many times as I have seen death, I know now nothing can portend the future. I launch my probes, infinitesimally small in comparison to the gas giant, and they float there waiting for orders.

A few minutes later I’ve found one. My probes have located the final frontier, and the quietest place in the EVE cluster. The pulsing wormhole is larger than my ship, but only known by the distortion of space around it. I order my ship through, and Aura informs me the wormhole has sucked my ship through to undocumented space. At first, my HUD informs me it can’t connect to the subspace network. This was obvious, as I could be an incalculable distance or I could be next door to known space. Essentially, I was both. I didn’t care; the majesty of the wormhole and the sudden and absolute quiet forces one to consider things greater than themselves. I close what was left of my functioning chat windows...truly quiet. We capsuleers don’t land on planets...but I imagine there are species there. Living their quiet lives, absorbed into their own conflicts and problems...their planet is all they know and it’s their biggest problem they know. I realize their “wormhole” would be space itself, if only for the inability to define space. It makes one think...how often do greater species jump into our EVE cluster and marvel at our inability to see outside our defined limits. That we escape death by machine, when they have found a way to simply ignore death altogether. Somehow, I feel as if these wormholes hold the answer to our issues, our cares and our woes. They twist the very fabric of space time and manipulate ships within their influence. If they're capable of supplanting the well established laws of space and time, would not those manipulations stretch to those who dwell within, possibly extending life or even eliminating death altogether?

All is quiet as I warp to a local planet. My scan probes are deployed again, and I use them to search the system. These systems are quiet, but they are not empty. Broadcasts can still be sent in wormholes, and this is often dangerous. Even aside from that, there are the system "sleepers". Drones from a forgotten race, still functioning perfectly, and some say more dangerous than they were originally designed. So dangerous in fact, our Tech 3 strategic cruisers come from their shattered remains. Not only are these ships dangerous, they are able to be modified to fit most any purpose. I have one of these ships, and I almost yearn to allow the sins of the son to punish it's father. Billions of ISK go into these ships though, and indeed so much skill is required to pilot them that to have the ship destroyed whilst piloting it can actually cause your knowledge of flying it to severely decline. I tend to believe this is caused by the unique physique of a pod pilot and what we're flying.

Today though is a mission of exploration. I have no intent of even firing the single rocket launcher attached, let alone the demigod power of my strategic cruiser. Still silent and cloaked, I simply use my ships onboard scanner.. I find my query, and the ship uploads its location to my HUD. Just as silently, my ship engages the warp drive. I exit the warp tunnel 100 kilometres from them, those quiet drones. If you turn up the audio when near them...you can hear them quietly murmuring to each other. I haven't a clue what they're saying, but it must be important...for what could one say after an eternity of existence? They’re slowly orbiting a local station, protecting it as they have for time immemorial.

It's unnerving, almost. Looking at them, armed to teeth as it were, encircling their station constantly scanning for any threat. My paranoia starts to take over, accented by the fact that I'm a pod pilot. Paranoia is what we do. In spite of this, I silently command my ship to play some of the classical music I found. The one chosen was of particular interest to me...all I got from the archives was that it was called "Moonlight Sonata". It was mystical, and at it's end I would leave these creatures in peace.

For the moment though, today...this pod pilot would just watch and meditate. The silence of space combined with the haunt of this sonata put in me in a reverie. I don't know how much time passed...but it did, or so I assume; did that concept matter here? Eventually, that ever-present voice in the back of my mind told me it was time go. I was young again. These ancient creatures showed me the meaning of age and silent guns, and no longer would I be fooled to think that my fate was consigned to war making and noise. I would one day be at peace, and although it would take war to achieve such a goal...I would see silence rule the guns of our age. Was it possible?

My ship had bookmarked the location in space where the wormhole was. As I warped to the destination, the thought leapt in my mind: why not stay? Why not just crash land on a planet, engage the emergency pod evacuation and build a life? For the longest moment I've ever experienced, I considered it. As I commanded the ship to jump back into known space, I was curious if someday I would regret not turning around. The noise returned as I reactivated my chat and my compatriots contacted me for a fleet that was forming. The guns were not yet silent, and I put aside the foolish notions of the wormhole. Would I return though, and possibly make it a one way trip?

Evernote and Moleskine Review

The Apple Store in my hometown had a sale (believe it!) on the new Moleskine/Evernote notebooks. Since I had an iPod Touch anyway, I figured I could test it out. These are initial concerns with the product, so it may grow on me.

First impressions:
It's Moleskine. They're the best of the best, and I have at least three different notebooks I use. This one has a design on the front, which is normal for Moleskine, such as the journal for books. Either way, the purpose of the notebook was not the fact that it was from a particular brand, but what it was supposed to do. That being said, a little backstory.

The Backstory:
So I'm a gadget whore. I'll admit it, and I don't care to tell it to anyone. Smartphone, tablets, and all the little nooks and crannies they can exist in my life are just plain awesome. I use them everywhere, all the time. School is included obviously, and Evernote with that. See where this is going? Recently, the Evernote app on my tablet has started crashing, and while I like Evernote and they are most likely working on it, losing a whole set of notes unexpectedly can be devastating. So in response, I started to write my notes on paper and transferring them to Evernote later. This added benefit, while an extra step, can be better in the end because I am transcribing my notes to Evernote, repeating them and forcing myself to study in a fashion. Not my go-to for study methods, but it's there. Anyway, we have come now to Moleskine/Evernote notebook.

Review:
First off, the idea is there. However, Livescribe has been doing this for a while now. Their pens are excellent, I've used the first generation of them. The application of this version of moving from physical paper to Evernote should have, in my opinion, been implemented better. Basically, this notebook feels like a notebook sponsored by Evernote, not something implemented to actually make the transfer of physical notes to Evernote easier.
This is a comparison of a 5MP iPod Touch vs. a 8MP Nexus 4:

From my point of view, the 8MP looks better. It's obvious that it would look better, but Evernote advertises that these notebooks are designed for the page camera app. In other words, why buy the moleskine at all? Why not just have a phone with a nice camera on it and upload a pad of paper to Evernote that way?

Anther complaint, based on my experience with Livescribe, is they have now come out with wireless on their pens. If the notebooks (not the initial investment of the pen) cost cheaper than the Moleskine, wouldn't it be financially prudent to just buy the pen and then the three pack notebooks?






I'm not against them completely. I see their application, although when it comes to usage it seems they are underwhelming...just not impressed with this at all. I recommend an investment into Livescribe if you require paper notes (possibly due to a strict professor or boss).

Eve's rebirth (aka Retribution)

This is a new time for +EVE Online . As of late, I've been suffering from Eve apathy. This common mind set occurs quite often, even more when you play more often. However, there is a subtle difference I have found with Eve vs. other leading MMO's such as World of Warcraft (the one I'm familiar with) or Guild Wars (played but less familiar with) or Star Wars (wating for F2P, then I'll be familiar...er). These MMO's rely on content to propel their subscription base. So for WoW, it was expansion packs. The trend went something like this: [New X-pac]>SUPER Excited, play play play get gear play more. Get to the final boss, marvel in it's TOTALLY AWESOME final battle (even some storyline sweetness), get more gear. Sounds good right? After the umpteenth time, and you have to wait a week because you didn't get that last piece of gear again. And again. And again. The redundancy of expansion packs are like caffine. Works for the short term, causes worse circumstances over the long term. It's how they do it, indeed the only way they can.

CCP (makers of Eve) have somehow managed to avoid this cyclical process. To be sure: expansions matter. They ramp up resubs, they increase player turnout for day to day activity etc etc. However, I know there is an expansion coming in December, and yet...I don't care. At least, I don't care in the same way that I would if Blizzard were to announce a expansion pack to Mists of Pandaria. My point being: CCP avoids the whole rigmarole of large game changing (might I add expensive) expansions and just focuses on the game itself. I find it refreshing. More to the point: here is why I'm excited for Retribution. 

They have changed the roles of the ships. You see, Eve used to be about straight up training plans geared toward specific ship types. So you would be a capital ship pilot, logistics, mining...etc. These roles would then be fulfilled in required ships. So if you were taking out a fleet, you would choose a certain ship and stick with it (obviously the best one, so you don't get rolled). The other ships would fall to the wayside. The Omen is a good example. It's a glass cannon, and really couldn't be fitted with anything that would do significant amounts of damage, or be able to take significant amounts of damage before fireballing. A counter-example to this would be the Stabber. Even CCP said of the Stabber:

The Stabber is the quintessential Attack Cruiser with a huge speed advantage over other Cruisers. We are keeping its speed intact and adding a projectile weapon falloff bonus to extend its skirmish range.

So, obviously a fleet commander (FC) would take a cruiser roam with Stabbers, not Omen's. CCP is attempting to change this by readjusting fitting requirements and slots. Same with the horrible Coercer. Quite possibly the worst ship in the game. One mid slot allows you to fit either a scrambler or a prop mod. Le sigh...
Good news though! CCP is adding a new round of destroyers. They are also changing the original ones as well. The changes aren't game breaking (few are), but they make them just a little more appealing. Suffice to say, if I hear a fleet is on a frigate roam, I'm grabbing that brand-spanking new Dragoon or Algos (Amarr and Gallente respectively).

All in all, I'm very excited for the changes coming to Eve. I have recently come out of the lull I experienced recently and activity is ramping back up. Who knows what awesome combat will come out of the new designs. Suffice to say, I'm still glad it will always be the same Eve: from the ground up a great game.

Transformer Infinity

Hey there!

 I just got my new +ASUS  Transformer Infinity (also known as TF700). This is my official opinion of it, from a basic user perspective. Bear in mind, I have no reason for you to buy this so I'm going to be honest as I can. Also bear in mind (in a bit of pure disclosure here), I'm a Googleite. I use it for everything, Google is interwoven throughout my online identity. That being said, I don't care to throw them under the bus if they 'eff something up.

 I have owned a Transformer tablet for quite some time (over 2 years...I think). It was known as the TF101, obviously the first generation of this series. It was a fabulous tablet, but in the end the launcher started crashing almost every time I turned on the screen. I'm not sure why...but things break down naturally and I assume I had a bug or glitch. Either way, when Jelly Bean was announced and subsequently released, there was no evidence that Jelly Bean was going to be released to the TF101. In the tech world (at least mine) this is indicative that your piece of hardware is on that first line of being outdated. This in no way means your tablet, should you own one of these series, is suddenly garbage ready. It just means certain functionality such as "Google Now" will not be available. Also, this doesn't mean that the TF101 will not be updated, it just is left behind because Asus has three other tablets (TF201, 301 and 700, not sure what happened to 400-600..) that it is messing with. They of course want you to buy the newer ones, they have to make money somehow, so that means they're going to prefer newer updates.
I digress.
 The TF101 was an excellent piece of hardware. I used it for school heavily: taking notes, writing papers, and playing games. It isn't a complete replacement for a laptop. It is an excellent sit in though. The tablet is lighter, more focused and generally better performing than laptops in terms of completing tasks. As I said, laptops are definitely more robust and better able to complete higher level applications (graphic intensive video games, heavy media presentations, full functionality clients such as Microsoft Word), the tablet computing industry offers a lighter alternative to working on a laptop.
 The Infinity is indeed an upgrade in terms of hardware. That being said, the true indicator of whether or not an upgrade is or is not necessary is whether you can tell a difference with that hardware in comparison to the TF101. Keep in mind, it's Android and Asus. Same manufacturer and same operating system. In other words, there will be no software difference in most applications.

 First, the screen. It is one of the major advertising points for Asus. It is indeed full HD resolution, and movies (my first being The Avengers) look crisp and clear. This is important for me, but I will say that while I can see a difference in some places (such as HD Avengers), other places like YouTube I can't tell a big difference. The screen is indeed nice overall, but unless you are a heavy media person and your eyes have become accustomed to slight differences (my parents still can't tell a difference between 480 and 720 on a TV...), you probably will not take full advantage of the screen. On a side note, games are excellent to see and watch/play, but that is also due to the upgraded processor.

 Second, functionality. I didn't have a keyboard for the first transformer, so I felt that I needed to do so here, to get the full experience. This is why I feel that the Infinity can replace a laptop for day to day stuff. It provides a mouse, touchpad and usb/microSD. All of this allows you to do what you need to do, and should the need arise for a more robust option, go to your desktop at home. Of course, using Google's services everything will be synced anyway, so it will be a matter of just opening up whatever you had open. In the end, while the keyboard is technically a moot point because it's available to both series, it has enriched my experience with the Infinity greatly. I haven't run into any programs that don't like the keyboard, save one. Wolfram Alpha seem to not work with it. However, I didn't try any troubleshooting...so it was probably an easy fix. Asus also had the genius idea of making the keyboard a fully functioning battery charger. So if your keyboard has full juice and your tablet is sucking fumes, dock it up and you'll be charged for another few hours. Good stuff, considering this is not the case for the iPad.

 Third: media. Pictures do indeed take well. I highly enjoy the now standard 8 MP camera. The TF101 has a 5 MP, but the Infinity is moving to replace my smartphone completely. Which means my Samsung Galaxy S2 has a 8 MP camera, I'd like the same on my tablet. It was another reason to upgrade, aside from the fact that I don't have to worry about charges anymore. Yipee! As it stands, my phone mysteriously disappeared...so this provides another reason to upgrade. I don't have to worry about getting a new phone. The idea is I combine the elements of the smartphone with the size of the tablet. Et Viola! Infinity.

A few small problems I have had so far:
1. Some programs don't like the keyboard. YouTube, for example, if you click on too many videos on the side bar will suddenly cause your keyboard not to work...strange bug really. I press the "b" key and it just goes down. Thought it turned into a WASD deal...but nope. Just "B". Huh.
2. Screen protector and keyboard. This is minor, and a tad insignificant with coupled with the keyboard. Basically, the keyboard is fitted to the tablet right? So if you do what I do, that is get a screen protector...it can cause your screen protector to bubble. Like I said, it's small and rather insignificant. It's there though, for you to judge. Keep in mind that I still use it with a keyboard and screen protector. The bubbling is just what happens and I'm not bothered by it, but others might be.

 This last issue is in testing at the moment: When I gave my girlfriend my old TF101 to use, she tried using the native Google Talk app to do a video conference with me. I'm on my work wireless and she's on her apartment wireless...and for some reason the sound was garbled. She's done video chat with me before on that tablet back when I owned it from her laptop and nothing was wrong. I'm curious as to what caused the garbling...Any help from what random person reads this would be appreciated. No big deal, as it's most definitely a bug and I'll figure it out eventually.

 So there you have it. The Asus Transformer Infinity. Overall a better tablet than my old TF101, but I can't speak for the rest of the tablet industry, since I haven't had a chance to test them. I'm particularly interested in the Nexus 7 and the New iPad (not the iPad 3 mind you -_-)...It would be nice to get a comparison of Apple's leading tablet (not including the 7 in. model that is supposed to be announced soon) vs. Google's tablet. Anything with the Android Operating system is pretty much the same, so a 7 inch Android device such as a Nexus would allow me to experience a smaller version of the Android for reading and movies on the go. The Apple iPad I'm interested in for scholastic purposes as well. iTunes U, since I'm in college now, would be of particular interest to me. I mention these two only because it will give you a good idea of what else is out there. There are a myriad of tablets really on the Android side that I haven't mentioned, and there are tech blogs out there that are much better organized and better funded to provide you a hands on comparison of them. I hope this helped!

PS-Sorry for the wall of text. I'm not a pro blogger you know. 

Obama and his voice

Alright. This is my first post about elections/Presidents/politics in the real world. I've seen quite a few Google+ comments about Obama, few of which are actually constructive. It scares me, honestly, to see the state of our political knowledge. I'm not implying that I know more than anyone else. In fact, I'm just as concerned about my political knowledge. However, I'm taking an economy 101 course to fill my course schedule and my instructor mentioned a term known as "rational ignorance". Essentially, it means that people tend to ignore things like politics because they don't have any actual investment. As in, they can't affect (directly) the world they are looking at, and so choose to ignore it. Douglas Adams classified this as an SEP (Somebody Else's Problem). Either way, I tend to believe that all this political stuff is fascinating, but when it comes down to the bones of the matter, all of this fighting and bickering and nonsense is just...tiring.

The inspiration of this post came from this particular video that was posted on YouTube. Take a quick peek, it'll put everything in context. So, I first saw this on Google+ and thought it was pretty cool. I'll be honest guys, I'm not a complete Obama fan. Hell, I'm not a complete Bush fan. See the rational ignorance thing connecting here? No? Alright, I'll put it this way: I like any candidate as long as they support my interests, and I don't have any interests. I mean, sure...school funding is great, taxes being low, wars ending etc. Once again though, it's just tiring. I want a job, stable home and all that. Which means that when I go through life, no matter who thinks they are the next leader of the free world because they finally screamed louder (lookin at you Gingrich). I operate in my personal life because Obama isn't going to give me money, nor anyone else. I'm aware of issues, I look at them rationally and I decide whether or not to participate dependent on whether I can affect the issue. If not, why stress?

That being said: Obama singing the blues for 20 seconds instead of constantly pouring over world issues is not going to affect the country or world in any foreseeable way. I don't know what grinds me more: the comments made like these or the fact that these people honestly thought that Obama singing here actually caused the world to burn more. Incoming rant, with caps and language. Skip if you must.

Rant:

I am fucking tired of these STUPID gorillas putting up quotes like "zomg obummer is singing?! i'm so glad he's partying hardcore while the world burns and gas goes to $6 a gallon!"  It's that bullshit right there which fucking PROVES that you are a complete moron. You're the person I walk down the street and see staring at a woman just a little too long. My GOD I'm sick and tired of the tirades that go on about how Romney is such a fucking angel, no no it's Ron Paul, no Gingrich and his 3 wives and babyface is the answer. All these fucking nitwits just keep fucking blathering about how Obama this, Obama that, Gingrich is a loser, no it's Romney who is the traitor. Screw this shit. I'm done. I'm going to look at these sons'o'bitches with my own fucking goggles from now on; Fox News, CBS, MSNBC  be damned. Finally, to fucking HELL with all these commenters on G+ or any other forum. Every one of your all's shit stinks, and I'm tired of smelling it.

Yet, in all that...there is a glimmer of hope. Comments (like below) are being said, and that means I'm not doomed to Glenn Beck fanaticism for the rest of my life. You can't tell whether he's Republican or Democrat, and that's a good thing.

 The problem with representative Democracy is that it is fallacious. Everyone gets the exact same vote, regardless of their ignorance. Obama takes office, does what anyone who cares to look at a history book KNOWS to be what is needed, and then, as expected, things get better. At the rate expected, no less. Of course there isn't really a way to spin that, if you hated Obama to start with, so what do you do? You lie. You spread lies. You repeat lies. May not even know that they are lies, if you just except everything anyone tells you, that supports what you had already decided to believe. Fact is, if you hate Obama, then you don't have the first clue what he has done while in office, what the alternatives to what he has done in office have historically meant, or both. You are what is wrong with this nation.

 Let the man sing, after all...he's just a man.

Why EVE Online just..works.

I've been playing EVE for a little over 2 years. It is the only game I have consistently played during this time (I have a Guild Wars account, played World of Warcraft for a while, Star Wars is cool...Aion wasn't really.). I started wondering why I like EVE so much. Why it appeals to me, and why it could appeal to you.

First on the list are the spaceships. There are other space based game's, like Star Trek, out there. This isn't to say that EVE does ships in the most effective manner possible, but the delivery of the spaceship experience is what is important. The most important part of the spaceships is the design. Devlopers know that you can't just make ships that look like every Star Wars/Trek franchise. They have to be totally unique to aspire to that personal experience.

What you see here are two simple instances of space ship combat. The top image is the bottom part of a ship known as the Harbinger. Bottom image is the Armegeddon (quite a few of them). Cool right? That's nothing. These are personal mission running screenshots. Sure, the design of the ships is cool, flying around doin spaceshipey type shooting stuff. Feast your eyes, potential eggers, on a shot from EVE's website...

Oh my. High Definition glory. Screenshots like this make me happy. Do you know why? Because you're seeing a huge fleet of simply massive ships. Notice the scale, also. You have Battleship class on the right side, then you have Titan class ships on the left. Suffice to say (and probably needless...), those Titan class ships are huge. They dwarf Battleships like a Blue Whale dwarfs a Swordfish. It's almost inspiring really, to see these ships arrayed in such a manner. I'll let you know why in a few moments. Sticking with design for the moment though: The Amarrian Titan in that picture does indeed resemble a giant buttplug. No worries, everyone is aware of this. Probably the reason it's the biggest Amarrian ship by leaps and bounds. Who would want to fly around a ship that reminds everyone of a tampon? I would, dammit. Tampon my ship up, because a Titan on the field means business. Anyway, every ship (of a different name, obviously) in that fleet looks different. Sure, they have common traits, but only ships of similar races. The point remains, you can't pick out a ship in that fleet and say: "Oh, yeah...I've seen that in [insert game here]."

The second item that makes EVE so unique is the until recently avatar-less play style. EVE has had races in EVE, and you could pick your face and features etc...but avatars as a first person were non-existent. We didn't (read: don't) need them, because according to in game canon our mode of transportation/fighting/whatever was all ship based. That, and we're called eggers or pod pilots or Capsuleers for a reason. We, for a lack of better words, didn't need bodies. Our bodies are our ships. This is changing of course, both with the expansion titled Incarna. This expansion allowed us to operate in our human bodies. It's largely useless, simply because everything can be done either in a body or just as easily in a ship. Of course, CCP is slated to add functionality to the Incarna expansion. This is especially true with the upcoming release of Dust 514. Interaction etc. Again, in a sense of irony, the video's show interaction more importantly coming from that dreadnought class ship than from the cat talking to the squad leader...but whatever. I'm excited for D514, since I'm a fan of first-person shooters in general. Back to the point, EVE is still a largely avatar-less game. We pilots don't need them. One could call our ships our avatar, but since you can go from ship to ship...I don't consider this a valid definition. An avatar is something you create and attach too as...well..you. This wasn't possible until recently. Therefore, EVE has been (and always will be) built around ships and defeats the purpose of avatars. I like that.

My final point in what has become a wall of text, is roles within EVE. In traditional MMO's, you create your avatar and at that same time you also choose your role. This role defines the game for you. Unless you create a new avatar, you'll be stuck in the limited roles that your character is designed to play. In World of Warcraft, a druid can tank, heal and dps. It's a jack-of-all-trades type class. A priest on the other hand, can only heal/shield and dps. A Paladin is like the druid, but a Warlock is not. They can only dps. So, if you're lucky enough to choose a hybrid class like the Paladin or Druid, you have some options. Unfortunately, being a hybrid class means you are not exceptional at any one thing. Whereas a Hunter, Rogue, Warlock, Mage, can all do exceptional dps. Then again, they can only fill one roll. I'm rambling, and I'm sure you see my point. No matter how you slice the pie (and this is true for most, if not all, MMO's) you have to make sacrifices. Not so, in EVE. Read on.

In EVE there are no defined roles in what you CAN do, but what you are capable of doing at that time. In essence, one can fly a "healing" ship, say a Guardian...and just as easily fly a Drake; a heavy tanking ship. The only sacrifice is time. No switching characters, leveling new characters or having to mess with those abominations called alts. One can be a fast and pestering frigate and then switch to a heavy dpsing Battlecruiser. It is advantageous to have alts of course. One of the most famous characters in the game named Chribba has more than 10 alts. None of which he pays for. Why? Because he wants to mine in all 4 racial Titans at a time. In this case two, but you can see my point.

It's a choice, and in Chribba's case he can't mine in two Titans at once, so he made two alts to fly them. So you choose what you want to do, and move from there. The race selection is irrelevant if only for looks. So right now, for example I'm training for freighters. Doesn't take long since I'm already along in training...but I am a combat pilot for Amarrian ships through and through. The fact (assuming I can afford it) that I can haul just as easily fly my industrial command ship known as an Orca (supports smaller mining ships etc.) as I can a freighter to a battleship is just awesome. Further, it's not that I can just get these ships into space, it's that I can fly every role I train for effectively. I'm not diminished in any way. I have an industry alt, because I want to be able to mine with the alt and use my main character's Orca ability. Woot!

This became somewhat of a long post...but it hopefully communicates that EVE is certainly worth a try, and will be enjoyed by those who enjoy spaceships. It's designed with the player in mind, and I only scratched the surface. For example, every single part of those ships that were in every screenshot (save the second one, those are NPC's) were built entirely by players, and sold on the market or in their own Alliance/corp construction stations. My mind is mildly blown when I look at that third screenshot with all those ships, and to think that they all were built by players. Every one. That's alot of dough.

Get into EVE Online, get past that learning curve, and rule a universe.

The SOPA/PIPA Blackout

As anyone has probably figured out, America's internet protested against the bills known as SOPA and PIPA today. They protested not by "occupying" anywhere, but by actually affecting places that would be hardest hit by these bills.

As you can see, sites (usually affecting only the United States, such as Wikipedia) are redirecting traffic to your local representatives and the like to remove support for SOPA and PIPA. By all accounts, it's working.
Alright, so enough with the acronyms. What does this all mean?

There are of course plenty of video's out that explain what these two bills contain. I like this one from Fight for the future:

Essentially, what you're looking at here is the ability to remove sites that are deemed "copyright-able" and then remove them. This could be potentially devastating, if only because of the greed that tends to run rampant among those with the power to do what they want. There are already bills that help to protect against piracy, and you can see how effective those have been. The point being, if these bills were to pass, the freedom to post what you want when you want, without regard to who was singing in the background etc, would be greatly diminished. 

I'm not the most effective avenue for conveying how dangerous this can be, I'll admit. I would highly recommend dropping by 'website 

Google+ Search Your World

Oh dear.
Ohhhh dear.

Beetches be crazay.

So, Google has decided to release integration of their Google+ network into search results. Twitter has put up a complaint, despite not renewing their agreement last year with Google to allow real time feeds of Twitter in their search engine. Honestly, Twitter is the biggest whiner thus far, and seems to be the only one at the moment. So let's start with them. It won't take long.

"Hey Twitter!"
"Hey Google."
"Bad day?"
"Just tired of not being the center of attention anymore. I mean...we're small, cute and convenient. What more do you need?"
"Well, your Twitter hits are that much more with us putting them right on the front page of searches! Speaking of which, it's time to renew our little agreement. It seems there are some changes, but nothing game breaking."
"Nah."
"Um...what?"
"We're working with Yahoo! and Microsoft and others now."
"You realize we're moving forward with Google+ right? It's going to be integrated into search...?"
"Yep. Thanks though!"
"If you say so...I mean...meh, never mind. See you in January!"
"What?"
"Nothing."

So not only did Twitter give the middle finger to Google in July of 2011, they are now complaining 6 months later about doing exactly what was told was going to happen. It's almost as if Twitter was calling Google's bluff. This is from that same article linked above:

Our vision is to have google.com/realtime include Google+ information along with other realtime data from a variety of sources.

This was said a long time ago. Why is Twitter putting up a hissy fit now? I'll tell you why: Google actually did it. Twitter's entire structure is based on relevance. If people don't tweet, Twitter dies. Slowly, but it will MySpace itself away into the ether. I personally like the idea of a social profile integrated into my search results.

Let me clarify though: I don't want just Google+. I loved Google RealTime Search when it was active, because when I used it I remember the time when the Samsung Galaxy S was expecting the Android update 2.2 and I set a RealTime search for T-Mobile's network (Froyo took a while...TOTALLY ironic though: I tweeted about it. lol!) Anyway, the tweets were showing up and blogs were posting about the update that I wanted and things worked wonderfully.

I can see, however, the problem that Twitter has with Google's results. If Google does indeed favor it's search results over the most relevant information (i.e. Mark Zuckerburg's profile on Google+ which has exactly zero posts rather than other more...usable information) then they are indeed violating their intent as a search engine. If they include all results, have a small area for social results then I can see how that would be pretty cool. Having results from Google+, Facebook, Path etc would seriously enhance my results. If my cousin, who lived in Germany for 12 years on an American base knew about German beer's and I Google Bitburg, his posts about Germany or Bitburg or beer would show up. It shouldn't matter what social network. That would be sweet. Personal information (ratings, recommendations, Genius etc.) is something that is reliable information because we trust the source. That's what Google is going for here. They aren't necessarily trying to push their results (although they have gotten hit for it in the past), they could be conceivably trying to get more accurate results. Fine by me.

Notice, speaking of the "Blue", that Facebook as remained conspicuously silent from this hissy fit. I think it's because of Microsoft's Bing and Facebook results already being paired. No one has said anything, and things have been smooth sailing. It's possible that Bing's market share, which is abysmal in comparison to Google's is small enough that no one cares. I mean, does anyone find it strange that Facebook goes with Bing and Twitter doesn't renew it's agreement with Google? One would think, economically, that these social networks (which again rely totally on exposure) would get the best deals they can with the biggest search engines out there. That includes Google. Yet, for all the exposure and search results that would..well..result from an agreement, the two biggest social networks on the planet (aside from the rising star of Google+) have decided not to use Google. Some have stated that a Google/Facebook/Twitter agreement would give Google an unfair "top down" view of those social networks data. This is fair to say, and possibly an agreement between the companies can be reached to alleviate those woes.

Personally Twitter has just possibly figured out that they got screwed, and it's like my sister choosing the bigger half and realizing that it was hollow on the inside. Twitter has always had a rocky history, and they've been close to failing before. Innovation and design have saved them multiple times, and now that they've realized that they made a bad decision...it seems petty to be screaming about it now.

Official Google Blog: Search, plus Your World

Official Google Blog: Search, plus Your World: Google Search has always been about finding the best results for you. Sometimes that means results from the public web, but sometimes it mea...

Holly day!

Christmas was great. I didn't even get anything spectacular, just exactly what I wanted. Cheap lottery tickets, the Skyrim game guide and like $50. My kind of Christmas. So I'm posting so that I get in the habit, because among my New Years resolutions that are actually achievable, one is to post something at least once a week about relevant topics. While this isn't technically a relevant topic...it'll have to do for now.

So, Iran is getting a beating internationally. The link is from CNN's blog, and while I'm not one to endorse one news agency or another, it seemed the plain Jane type of deal regarding the video. If you don't take the time to actually look at the video, it's basically Iran stating that America needs to stay out of the Straight of Hormuz (36 mile wide choke point in which 1/3 of the worlds oil is transported through). Personally, Iran is bluffing. There would be no reason to exercise military operations in a critical choke point of the transport of oil unless you feel as if certain world imposed sanctions would actually affect you. I mean, I'm sure that Iran deserves respect, and I respect that. They are a sovereign nation, and all that this encompasses...which also makes them responsible for what they say and do.

Fluffing up (I imagine a peacock or blow-fish. Get it? Do ya?) is part of politics. Everyone does it. Rarely does a country go this far though, as to affect oil. They're taking a resource that America relies on heavily and claiming they have the resources to hold that choke point. Even if we go international, every allied country on the planet that uses oil would have a part in this. If we limit the scope to just an Iranian-American conflict...America has the technology and the manpower to simply roll Iran. As I stated before, Iran is a power in it's region to be sure, but just like Iraq called the Gulf War the "mother of all wars" (in which a coalition of over 27 nations established themselves against Iraq), Iran would be alone in their conflict. You can't affect a world resource and expect to be backed up by even the most extreme of governments. Even Iraq was abandoned by the Arab League during the conflict. What's more: Egypt, Afghanistan, Libya, Tunisia...these are all nations that have had recent revolutions in the most violent of ways. So this begs the question: Is Iran fluffing up just to vicariously oppress their citizens from starting similar revolutions?

I remember the 2009-2010 election riots in Iran. There was another riot in 2011. Iran is a hotbed of activity, and when the Egyptian dictator was forced to step down, and Gaddafi was eventually killed...it shows that no government is immune to change. Iran needs to be careful here. If Iran starts to focus on international affairs and their people realize that Iran isn't impervious to all harm, it could spell trouble eventually.

In summary:
Iran is foolish to threaten anything, and this is just another one of their games. They can't possibly be naive enough to think they can engage in any protracted war with America, even after our recent pullout from (of all places) Iraq. This wouldn't be a war over territory either. It would be a simple smash and grab from Iran. We wouldn't even have to declare anything. We could march in, clear the way and back out. Simple enough, right?
Message to Iran: easy does it guys. Ma always told me to use my words, not my fists. She also told me that if you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got. So obviously, if Iran keeps this path of nuclear arming (whether through power or weapons) and then "exercise" in a choke point of oil transport: this will get you sanctions; and possibly a military response...not an exercise.

Star Wars: The Old Republic

Star Wars: The Old Republic was released on Tuesday, but since I'm a special guy I've been able to play since the 13th.

Well, that is to say that every special person who purchased Collector's or Digital Deluxe editions did too...but I'm still special. So there.

Anyway, Star Wars. Some of you may be wondering whether or not to purchase it due to other MMO's that may already be on your plate, or just because you've never actually been into the MMO buisness. Whatever the case, Star Wars: The Old Republic (swtor) may be something worth looking into. 

Every MMO out there starts with the basics. Your avatar. SWtoR isn't any different. You begin by picking your allegiance either to the Republic or Sith Empire. There are four basic classes to choose. You have the Jedi Knight or Consular, Trooper and Smuggler on the Republic side. The Sith side had the same basic classes (attributes associated to each class) but different names and skills. The Sith Warrior and Inquisitor, Bounty Hunter and Imperial Agent. All of this of course can be found here and here. 

So, now down to the dirty little details of the game. I mean, any of the stuff I explain to you can really be found with minimal research on the swtor.com site or on the forums of the same site. So why should you play this game, aside from being able to follow in the footsteps of Han and Luke Skywalker (rather, they're following in YOUR footsteps, am I right)? 

1. Jedi!

One word: Lightsaber. Force stuff is fun, obviously. But every MMO has a magic class, and all those magic classes can manipulate whatever ether is existent in that universe to burn/maim/crush/freeze or otherwise injure your foes. So my mind just simply translates the Force powers as such. However, that distinctive sound of a lightsaber, the way it "fiwissh" when you draw it...ahhh. I'll tell you, I'm not even that huge a Star Wars fan. I mean, I like the series and all, didn't enjoy the first episode as much...but either way, I haven't read the books or anything. So I'm a basic Star Wars fan. My point being, even as surface level as I am with the Star Wars franchise, that sound of lightsabers always gets me in the mood of the Star Wars type. Either way, I went with the Jedi Consular, which turns into the Jedi Shadow. I have a double bladed lightsaber (similar to Darth Maul) and I love it. I want to create a Jedi Knight though and go the route of the Guardian. We'll see. 

2. Companions!

Swotor was based on off a couple of games that Bioware created a while back. These were Knights of the Old Republic 1 and 2. I personally loved these games, and wished they had done more (which they did in the end). One feature that I particularly liked was the crew that you gained as you advanced through the game. Bioware didn't lose this concept in their online version. They call them companions, and you have the option to have them accompany you throughout your adventures. I love the companion system, and it makes the game interesting while in the middle of questing. You can have one at a time with you, but you can send other companions you have (hanging out in your ship you obtain later) to do crafting. I find this to be quite nice, considering I HATE grinding professions of any type. Either way, very few (if any) have a constant companion system. They vary in class/race/type so you can pick and choose particular companions for certain situations.

3. Space Battles!

Finally, the space combat system is very cool. It's linear, meaning you can't just fly where ever you want. I also am not aware of any PvP combat options, but other than those two caveats the space missions are awesome. Each one comes with different objectives, and as you get higher in level you do more difficult missions (obviously). You can upgrade your ship to take on harder missions. Good stuff, although not much to report here. 

Bad stuff:

There are always problems with MMO's at launch. No matter how good the launch itself, there will be bugs or whatever else that plague games constantly. There are graphical glitches, but none of these are even close to the gamebreaking status. Some missions the mobs are bugged, but there are always workarounds that can be employed until they patch the game (which is obviously happening quite frequently). Either way, the only thing that I've noticed thus far has been these problems, but I haven't faced end-game content (few have) so I don't know how class balance stands...yet.

Conclusion

Get the game if you like Star Wars. Heck, get the game if you want to redeem your experience in Star Wars Galaxies. It's good, and I've cancelled my former MMO (EVE Online) for the moment to see if this is worth it. It is so far, that isn't to say I won't play any other MMO, but this one is right down my alley. Good stuff. 

Walls

I was thinking about walls today. Actually, I was thinking how Gondor could have better defended Minas Tirith and was thinking about the walls in that fashion. Something like that...yeah.

So ANYway. Walls. Hadrian's Wall is one of the most famous Roman monuments. It separated the civilized world from the "barbarians". It was the most heavily fortified border in the Roman empire. Big deal, right? Here it is for your viewing pleasure:

Boom! Hells YEAH. Go Romans! Beating down barbarians in their Legions and just chillaxing behind their awesome wall. 

Then I'm all like: wait. Didn't the Chinese build a wall? Turns out they did. 220 years BC. As in, 300 years before the Romans. Not that big of a deal, must be more of a dirt mound than Europe's first castles right? I mean it can't be that much better because...

What the hell? Not only did they romp Roman's wall, they built it in rocky, mountainous territory. 300 years before Rome was known throughout the world, China's all like: "Yeah...we did that." They did, and better. Four men could stand side by side on that thing and teach each other how to dougie. 

I'm just saying, China kicks ass sometimes too. Rock on China, with your awesome wall. Rock on. 

Currents

So we all know I'm a Google fanboy. Well, I happen to appreciate the other sides of technology like..um..what's that fruit company we all think about sometimes?

Anyway, apps are great on smartphones these days. Google has released a new app called Google Currents.
Basically, this app is like Google Reader online (or in app form if you so desire). Currents basically syncs things just like an RSS feed, save they make the interface really nice. Lovely no?

On the surface it's the common Google style (white, spacious and the classic Google logo) and you scroll through your interests. I have to say, I'm digging the whole spacious look. However, I also use a popular app called Pulse. I have to say, Pulse is more "cluttered", but I also like the mosaic type interface. Google seems to be going the route of that fruit company, by using space in a modern type style that emphasizes efficiency over look. Other than that, I like the interface as it presents my news.

Google Currents also sync's automatically (assuming settings are good for it) so that when you're not connected you can still browse the latest topics. Pretty nifty.

After some use, I'm into it. It's not revolutionary of course, but it's Google. Almost like you gotta use the rest of their products if you use only one. Ha. Finally, I saw this picture (and found more awesome ones) on the selfsame Currents and I thought it was just down right cool, especially since I was part of an early release of a particular game that used similar weapons....

Google v. Everyone

So I've decided to somewhat restart my blog. I say somewhat because I'm doing that half hearted key turn. You know, where your car kinda kicks back at you...as if to say: "Start me or don't, but don't make me spark my plug again." (lol)
ANYway: This is my first post again. Whatever, as Jay-Z said: "You not feelin me? Fine, costs you nothin pay me no mind."

My original post was going to be "Google vs. Facebook". I realized how cliche this sounded, as everyone and their dog thinks Google is trying to take down Facebook through Google+. This is false, as Google doesn't need to take Facebook on. Facebook has less of a product base then Google does. Even more so today, since Google has Chrome OS and Android under its belt. These are actual Google products that are being used in the market today. Facebook on the other hand...well...isn't. My point being, I don't have to compare market advantages or numbers in most cases because it's like arguing apples and oranges. Sure, they have similar ideas or intellectual property. That doesn't mean they are direct competitors.

I think of it like this:

It really frustrates me that the writing isn't bigger. I'm lazy though so...didn't do it again. The left says Facebook, the right Google. The middle is us. Viola! Good picture. Moving on:

They aren't direct competitors you see. They just feed off each other. Ad revenue is high in both. Facebook has double the population of the US (and then some) and Google is...well...Google. I mean, you don't go around saying: "Yeah, I can't find this *insert destination here*, will someone Bing it?" or "I don't know what *insert search query here* is, someone Yahoo! it." Nope, you Google it. It's a household name. Boom. You want to update your status? Facebook. You want to find whatever? You Google it.

So now that I've established that I'm actually a Google fan boy but Facebook is cool too, I'm going to drop some reasons why I think Google may catch a few people (that is...FB, Apple, Twitter etc.) off guard.

1. The +1
This was the copycat to the Facebook "Like". It was a good idea, and Google recognized that. The difference being that there isn't an annoying share window that pops up. It's just boop! shared publicly. It doesn't show up in your feed though. This is key. Why? Because that means your feed isn't dominated by your shared links. They can find that somewhere else. You can share links of course, but that +1 just succinctly adds your approval to a particular page. Done. Sneaky Mr. Anderson...very sneaky. Honestly, I don't think the full value of the +1 (and even the "Like") has been fully realized yet. Social networking has a huge advertising ability. These little buttons just go to show that it's only the beginning. However, with Google being the integrated search engine it is and the fact that it's just integrating itself in our phones, web browsers, soon to be TV's etc..just goes to show that it has just started. That little +1 has been added not only to websites, but Marketplace (books, music, apps, movies). This tied into a little social networking platform we'll talk on later.

2. Media (Music, Movies and YouTube)
One of the smartest business decisions of Google was the acquisition of YouTube. It's one of the most visited sites in the world. It hosts too many videos to comprehend. Google added a Movie marketplace to YouTube, did you know that? The Android Marketplace has movies too...seeing a trend? There are many reasons why YouTube isn't as publicly known as the Marketplace, but that isn't the point for this particular discussion. Facebook's recent attempt at renting movies. Lovely yes? It does exist, especially trying to find that little link...OH there it is. Last but not least we have music. Ho boy. Let's just say: An article by Mashable did well in summarizing the three major services currently available. I know that there are more minor services out there. However, these three are specific to storage of music. Here's my thing: iTunes charges. The only reason it can survive is the sheer size of iTunes as it stands. Google? Free up to 25,000 songs. Google also has HTML5, catering to Apples fortunetelling and enabling iPod Touch/iPhone users to access the selfsame music service. Can I access my iTunes collection from an Android device? Nope. Granted, it requires an internet connection...but this is a cloud service. Of course it requires an Internet connection. Jeez. For the record, I'm intentionally ignoring Amazon's cloud service. Read the Mashable article if you want a true comparison. Of course, tied into a little social networking platform I'm getting to.

3. Apps/Android
Finally, there is Android and subsequently apps. Android as everyone knows is Apples biggest competitor, and recently revealed to have Jobs eternal hatred. Thermonuclear is a tad harsh in my opinion...but also it's TOTALLY last decade. Come on Steve. We had cell phones in Kirk's days of Star Trek and all you can think of to take down Android is nukes? What about a iRobot thing? That was just cool. I just hope Siri doesn't get any ideas. So instead of Steve saying:

"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs said. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this."

 He could have been like:

"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 BEELION in the bank, to right this wrong," Jobs said. "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to STAB THAT OPERATING SYSTEM WITH NANITES."

See? That so kicks ass. I'm just saying: if John Connor had some nanites Skynet wouldn't have stood a chance. You know this. I digress...


Android is going to get a "universal" update soon, termed Ice Cream Sandwich 4.0. It's the attempt to homogenize all the different versions of Android out there. We have some devices still running 2.2 (known as Froyo) and 2.3 (known as Gingerbread). Alphabetical deserts. How cute. Honeycomb 3.0 is for tablet devices (a market Apple still easily dominates). The point to all this is: see how many versions we have out there? One advantage of Apple at the moment is the ability to update their phones at the same time, due to identical hardware. Up until recently it was just by hooking up to iTunes, but Apple released this brand new, never before seen over the air updates! Oh wait...Android has been doing that for a while now...anyway, Android is quickly becoming the easy alternative to iOS, and some say on the way to becoming the standard. I don't believe that is true. If there is one thing Apple does right, and that is interface. Let alone Mac, people love that interface. I know I do, and I'm using an Android device. I have an iPod touch, and the access to the app store is lovely. Either way, Android is moving up and will eventually plateau, but the question is where. All this, tied into a social networking platform I've yet to describe.

4. Google+
Launched without fanfare, which I take as a nod to Facebook's origins. Invite only at first (even Gmail used to be), Google+ ballooned to 10 million users in a very short time. Currently estimates are around 18 million users. Of course, this is paltry compared to the 800 million users of Facebook. Curious note though: 75% of Facebook's users are outside the United States. Huh. Another curious note: It took 2 years for Facebook to reach the same amount of users that Google+ reached in 1/3 of that time. Of course, Facebook had limited exposure...but that begs the question why only 25% of Facebook's population is in the US...I dunno.
Anyway, Google+ is growing. Maybe it will plateau, but I doubt it will ever really stop. Integration is just too much. Speaking of integration: All those services that are mentioned above? All are somehow integrated into Google+. Not necessarily into the main feed, assuming your circles are what they are, but your +1's that you share publicly are there, the movies that you care to share are there. Oh, and Google Music allows sharing of music for a one time full listen to your circles, and samples after that. Yummy. Google+ just started, and integration is at it's infancy. This means that party is just getting started.

It's a really exciting time for us consumers of the electronics. Developments, changes and progress are the way of the world of technology. We users, that is: you me and that dude over there texting while walking about to get hit by the girl texting while driving, are the devourers of that technology. As much money as these companies make...they are always balanced by our satisfaction. If we don't like it, we don't buy it. If we don't like it, we write about it (free speech +1<---lol get it?) and we crucify it. Just look at Myspace, or Yahoo! or any other number of companies that have either been way ahead of the curve or desperately behind it. Companies understand that, at least for the moment.

I'm a Google fan boy, I admit it. That does not mean that I utterly abhor all other technologies out there. I appreciate what each type of technology can do. iPad's have their niche, Android tablets have theirs so on and so forth. Facebook is the single strongest social networking platform. I use it, and will continue to use it. I love Google Music, but I have iTunes and will continue to use my iPod Touch. Although, those usages may drop due to Google stuff coming out, but I'm not going to write off anyone just yet. That's the beauty of it: it's anybody's game.