No iPhone for me

It hasn't even crossed my mind yet to get an iPhone.

It doesn't help my chances of getting an iPhone that I have a phone contract to which I'm beholden for another 18 months, and I feel I'm getting decent service. And, of course, my phone was free with my contract. The phone is the LG Chocolate, which also stores music and takes pictures. And the phone sucks, in no small part because it ALSO has a faux-touch screen capability that goes off when you stick the phone in your pocket. It likes to call whomever was the last person I intentionally dialed, a feature I can't find when I actually want it, of course. I suspect Jason gets a call at 8:00 most mornings when I'm putting keys and phone in my pocket.

I keep looking at the touch screen of the iPhone, and it's a real turn off. I ponder how scuffed the screen was on my iPod (I couldn't keep it in the protective sleeve and take it running in my arm band, so I quit using the sleeve). And how messy it looked with fingerprints all over it. I look at the iPhone and I just imagine a grease-smeared box which will keep calling Jason every time I put the damn thing in my pocket, if it will even fit. The Chocolate fits in the change pocket of my jeans. It doesn't seem the iPhone will fit in that pocket, which means at some point that glistening surface will come in contact with my keys, and that will be that.

I'm intrigued with the varying capabilities of the iPhone, but, honestly, do I really need to see the skateboarding dog YouTube video while I'm standing in line at the grocery? (That's sort of what they're pitching in the commercials for the iPhone). If I want to check e-mail, I can get the Motorola Q for a few bucks on my existing plan, or surf the web from a Treo. All without the awkwardness of tiny touchscreen buttons.

Yes, I prefer rubber buttons. There's nothing more frustrating than poking at a touchscreen that's decided it no longer wants to recognize your electrical field.


the only time you'll see the damn thing without thumb prints all over it

iPhone is contractually bound to use AT&T as their carrier until 2012. Not my current carrier, and so I would necessarily have to change services to a service not of my choosing for five years (most likely six as contracts usually run in two year cycles.)

Also, with the luck I've had with my iPod, I don't like the idea of losing all of my music, phone numbers and videos of skateboarding dogs should the thing decide to take the silicon-dirt-nap.

I know its totally un-hip not to salivate at the iPhone, but there's nothing in my lifestyle that makes me think that I need one. I have a free phone. I'll continue to get free phones with a series of upgraded features. Heck, in 18 months I can probably expect for my mobile provider to carry a competing product. Hopefully one lacking a touch screen interface.

Right now I get the feeling the Apple-Zombies have bought into Jobs' hype hook, line and sinker when a cost benefit analysis offers no real benefits. I was a bit appalled to hear a report last night about how plans of action are being circulated by Apple-geeks to contact the BBB, etc... with false claims regarding their cell-phone carriers so they can wrongfully be released from their contracts (hint, Apple geeks: by telling NPR's Marketplace this was your plan, you just screwed every person with a legitimate complaint out of any hope of being released from their contract for the next year).

The iPhone is sleek looking, but in that EPCOT "in the future we'll all use video-phones" sort of way. I'm just not seeing the value in this doo-hickey.




POST EDIT: I had mis-spelled Treo as "Trio". This is what happens when one does not do their research and hasn't thought too much about PDA's in a year.

I also mis-identified the carrier as Sprint. This was horribly wrong. The carrier is AT&T/ Cingular. I have no experience with AT&T or Cingular, but I have been known to get grouchy about Sprint.

I shall include my original rant, anyway, as I sort of think Sprint's customer service stinks:

Further, I have nothing nice to say about Sprint mobile service, who dealt me a list of offenses between 2000 and 2001 (including the now unheard of practice of "slamming"), and whose call center staff has the single worst customer service I've ever experienced, including dropping calls after an hour, not correcting charges after literally a dozen tries, refusing to believe I couldn't get coverage at my house in Chandler and turning off my phone on the day I was moving out of Austin thanks to their screwed up charges, which wound up with me having to pay the charges just to reinstate service so I could find my damn moving van.

POST POST

On the touch-screen front... while I foresee an ocean of blue-screened gaming tables in Vegas, I can actually get my head around the practical usage for the new Microsoft touch table.

That's not to say that consumer apps will make sense quite yet, unless you're Batman, but I can visualize a couple dozen educational uses, advertising, gaming, menu's at restaurants and all kinds of Blade Runner/ Diamond Age good stuff.

Some Links

1) To nobody's surprise, there shall be a toyline associated with the upcoming Transformers movie. I will not buy any of these toys as I like to keep my Transformers classic. Here is "Barricade" from the upcoming film, in toy form.

Thanks to Jamie for the link.


2) Maxim magazine (the magazine for guys too chicken to ask for the magazines behind the counter at 7-11) has rated the top ten comic "babes".

I do not know who did their rankings, but I guarantee you, any real fanboys' rankings would shake out much differently. Not that we keep a laminated list of our favorite comic leading ladies in our pocket, but if we did... you know, the list would be different.

There's really no arguing this one without going into some deep, dark places I really don't want to explore.

Thanks to Randy "This Doesn't Seem Weird to Me" T. for the link.


3) Jim D. sends along this link from "Ask" about Superman's costume. Specifically, why does Superman wear his underwear outside of his clothes? The person who answers rambles a bit, but then fails to answer the question.

The answer is that Shuster designed the costume based upon a recognizable symbol for strength in 1938, the circus strongman, who often would wear a leotard with some sort of briefs over the top (for reasons which should be fairly obvious). In the first issues of Action Comics, Superman also wore circus-style lace-up boots, and the cape appears to have been added as a bit of flourish and after-thought.

This isn't really any different from why Dracula is dressed as a carnival magician in the movie Dracula from 1933 (Do you really think nobility ever dressed in big capes with pointy collars?) or why Bettie Boop has an enormous head (Flappers' heads were believed to grow to gigantic size due to their consumption of bathtub gin and cheap Canadian whiskey*).

Why does Superman still wear his drawers outside his tights? Because a single blue outfit with red boots looks silly. Also, he needs a pocket for his wallet.

4) As Jim D. was heard to remark "It would be a far, far better thing to go to that amusement park than I have ever done before." Coming Soon: Dickens Land!


5) CNN finally proves itself a reliable news source.

According to CNN, somebody in Serbia discovered a compound with the same chemical properties as Kryptonite...

CNN's not-so-in-depth report which focuses on the many types of Kryptonite. God bless you Mort Weisinger.

Uhm. I'm a pretty big Superman nerd, and I have NO idea what they're talking about... There was a mention in Superman III of the chemical make-up of Kryptonite, and again in Superman Returns (on a label at the museum where Lex obtained his Kryptonite).

But, honestly, the whole point of Kryptonite was that it was composed of elements which were formed in the destruction of Krypton... and thusly could not be duplicated, per se, on Earth...

Well, CNN is owned by Time Warner, as is Superman and DC Comics, so this reporting must all be accurate.


6) Say it ain't so, Cap! (link courtesy JimD)

7) And... this. Which makes me both ashamed and jealous.









Plus a reminder that the original is still the best.









*this is a lie.

Flying Solo

I've been back since Monday as Jamie gets some tests run. Looks like I'll drive back to Houston on Thursday and then drive back to Austin late Friday night. My folks do this kind of trans-290 driving all the time, but I don't particularly care for it. That Stephen King audio book is going to come in real handy.

Yesterday I totally lost track of time as I puttered around the house. At this point I just expect to lose track of time for the first 36 hours or so when I'm left to my own devices.

Last night involved grabbing some pizzas and heading over to Mandy's to catch some Boston Legal (which I realized I had seen before, but had forgotten). Then home for wild night which I planned to spend blogging and watching some Adventures of Superman episodes to wrap up the series. What I forgot was that I needed to catch up on some sleep as I'd not slept much Monday night/Tuesday morning. I made it through two Superman episodes and then toddled off to bed at 11:45, which may be the earliest I've checked out for the day in over a month.

Lucy is clearly missing Jamie and Mel, Jeff is unreadable, and I'm trying to figure out what to do with myself for the next 24 hours.

At least it's sunny and warm. Shorts wearing weather. So beware my milky-white legs as they make their first appearance of the year.

As is my want, I made a detour through Toys R' Us yesterday. The mega-toy store, which was all but the Mecca of toy-lovin' kids has fallen on some hard times since the big box stores got serious about the toy business. The action figure section at your local Wal-Mart or Target is significantly better stocked than Toys R' Us, and short of a few lines Toys R' Us seems to have picked up which otherwise would only be found at comic shops and specialty merchants, their selection has dwindled to near nothing. It's kind of sad.

Toys 'R Us almost went out of business a few years ago, but some crafty Germans swooped in and bought the company right out of bankruptcy, so at least they didn't close their doors. Then Toys 'R Us parted ways with Amazon.com...

Anyway, this is all a long, long way of mentioning that the Spider-Man 3 movie tie-in toys are out. Every time a comic-related movie is coming out, I gawk at the toys, and within a short while am able to ascertain the plot of the movie by looking at what toys and tie-ins are on the shelf. I actually figured out the plot to Superman Returns by looking at the toys about two months before the movie was released.

Not this time. Spidey 3 has incorporated a multitude of Spidey villains into the toy line that may or may not be in the movie. And if I hadn't made a pretty specific promise to Jamie that "I'm only buying DC toys from now on" about a year ago, and then a "only Superman toys" rule this year, I might have gone bonkers grabbing The Lizard and other items from the shelf.

There is one item I want, for oddly practically reasons. There's a Spider-Man 3 "bug vaccuum" that is handheld and could easily solve my problem of being unable to get at bugs in corners.

So, yeah, I'll probably be breaking my "no Spidey toys" rule.

Edward James Olmos Toy

Okay. It's actually a BSG toy. But that doesn't mean it's not totally awesome.



and for Randy and Reed...

what's up with the painted on boobs?