Hm. I'm a Little Perturbed…

I know that I always rip on the poor saps who have to use ALL Microsoft products for just about everything (MS Windows, MS Word, MS PowerPoint, MS CanOpener, MS ShoeMatcher, etc) but, I just looked at my Application Switcher, and I noticed something that kind of surprised me.

I have exactly 7 applications currently open: 2 of which are MS (Entourage and IE5), 2 of which are Adobe (Photoshop and GoLive), and 2 of which are Independently developed (Napster and Audion). The last one is the Finder, which doesn’t really count, I guess. So a full third of my non-OS apps are MS, and another full third are Adobe. I can’t believe that I rely this heavily on basically 2 software developers. Wow. I’d download Netscape and use it exclusively for both email and browsing, effectively getting rid of my MS product usage.. Oh, wait. I just remembered that relying on pre-beta software is a BAD idea, possibly worse than relying on MS.

Entourage Is Pretty Nice

I just… er.. acquired a copy of Office:Mac (MS Office 2001), and I must say… Entourage is pretty nice, although I’m kind of confused about something: You know how in the OSX-native ‘Mail’ app, when you type in a mail address, it remembers that address forever, without it being added to your address book? Well Entourage does the same thing. Here’s what confuses me: it even suggests to me addresses that I typed into Outlook 5, which I imported into Entourage. So if Outlook 5 was saving all those addresses, then how come it didn’t have that same functionality? Oh, well. No big deal, I guess.

Right now, I’m either moving to Entourage and IE5 for my internet needs, or Netscape 6 for all of them (including FTP, which it has a kind of neat way of handling.. check it out, you’ll see). On one hand, I have a couple semi-stable products to depend on, albeit developed by MS, or one quasi-stable app to depend on, but by doing so, I support open-source and a non-MS browser/email client. Honestly, I’m liking this ‘Orbit’ theme for Netscape right now. I’ll let you know.

AT&T Can Bite My Shiny Ass

Okay. Very rarely do I really get this pissed. Maybe it’s punishment for not paying my bill on time, but AT&T has totally fucked up their digital cable interface. Instead of the bland, colorful (but usable) interface that I had before, there is now a gradient-laced, piece of shit staring me in the face, complete with a giant, useless TVGuide logo. I used to be able to read the names of the shows as I scrolled through them on-screen, but now, there’s a giant yellow line that surrounds the title. It’s barely legible, let alone from a distance.

And that’s not even the worst part.

There are ads. Yup. Advertisements. For movies playing on PayPerView, for mattresses, you name it, they come up on the panel that shows up in front of shows when I browse, and in the ‘Menu’ section. I am soooo canceling this service. I pay 60 bucks a month for not only cable, but to be served advertisments in my own home. They don’t make enough money from subscriptions? They have to generate revenue via ads INSIDE the interface now? Whatever. I’m getting a satellite dish.

Responses…

I find it interesting that I’ve been contaced more times today by readers than I ever have in the past. Not that the number is high, but apparently I’ve been writing about some touchy subjects. Let me just reiterate that I am not in any way attempting to be a news outlet on my own. I just like to get my opinions out. I enjoy criticism and responses, but keep in mind I’m just like you; consider this site as more or less a weblog. If you have a difference of opinion, or a comment to make, please always feel free to contact me. Just bear all of this in mind.

re: My Post Earlier About Gays on TV

I just wanted to make a slight addition to my earlier post about homosexual characters on TV not being played by gay actors themselves. I have been informed that the actor who plays ‘Jack’ on ‘Will & Grace’ is ‘definitely gay.’ So maybe that’s a good start.

Yet Another Reason to Hate Jakob

From Wired:
‘If you are going to go and buy something on a new website, you will fail. If you go to a new website, you will not be able to use it.’

He’s telling me that NO ONE HAS EVER PURCHASED ANYTHING FROM THE INTERNET, EVER? (I understand that he’s referring to the ‘average user,’ but still. My mother has purchased things online, and she only owns an iMac.. :>) Can someone please explain to me why he is perpetually referred to as a ‘guru?’ He’s got about as much guru in him as David Siegel. And Peter Catapano over at Wired even referred to the whole Nielsen Group as ‘a collective of forward-thinking tech experts.’ Forward thinking? You’re kidding me, right? I mean, these guys are designing (excuse me, they don’t even ACTUALLY DESIGN, they just preach about it) for a web that existed 5 or 6 years ago.

Nielsen believes the industry’s refusal to heed the calls of usability proponents directly affected the steep Internet market drop.

Now this might be true. Let me just reiterate that what this sentence seems to mean by ‘the industry’ is the people making the decisions, not the people developing the internet. But this….
Many of the recently dead dot-coms, he said — especially in e-commerce — made the fundamental mistake of drawing users to their sites with expensive promotions, then losing them forever with ineffective design or subpar services. And sub-par services are the designer’s fault? It takes a self-appointed ‘guru’ to say that companies fail because people don’t like how they do things?

Or maybe they weren’t shitty sites to begin with, but were endlessly tweaked by the client or the management until the design resembled nothing like what the designer had originally designed. How many times have I heard ‘We need a banner ad here… here, here, here and how about one here’ from a client? It’s never the designer’s idea to put a banner ad on the page.. I can see it now.. ‘You know what would really make my design …. pop? A ‘Punch-The-Monkey-And-Win-Twenty-Bucks’ ad right about… here.’ He seems to think that we could give a shit about the user, when actually the reverse is true. We strive to do excellent design for the user to be interested in. Because if they don’t like the way a site looks they won’t even stay for 10 seconds to find out how it works.

Those who are ready to see the light and mend their ways can download a series of reports for a fee from the Nielsen Group website. The reports contain the group’s 222 rules for usability improvement. For a fee? Are you kidding me? Rules? See the light? I can’t even begin to start telling you much that sentence makes my blood boil.

‘We can forgive a man for making a useful thing, as long as he does not admire it. The only excuse for making a useless thing is that one admires it intensely.’
— Oscar Wilde

Hack Mac

Check this shit out. I have no idea what it’s supposed to mean, but it’s kinda funny. EB found it in Jalouse, a French fashion magazine. BTW, that says ‘Think weapon’ where it got cut off. There was a fake Nike ad on the back of it.

Instead of Election Coverage…

Instead of election coverage, like every one else (I voted for Nader), I thought that I might explore something that’s been on my mind for a little while, and has very little to do with politics.

Here’s my question: How come TV executives think that we (the TV-watching audience) can deal with and enjoy characters on television who are gay, but that we can’t take it if the actual actors themselves are gay?

Let me explain what I mean. I got in the car yesterday, and on the radio happened to be an ad for the new show in which John Goodman is playing a 40-something gay man. His ‘dad’ was saying something about being in the gay bar to the effect of “I’m in a box of fruit-loops!” And that really bothered me. Not because it was a relatively bland gay-bashing remark, but because I instantly remembered when Ellen’s show was violently yanked off the air a couple years ago, primarily because she herself was gay (not her ‘ficticious’ character). I then thought of ‘Will and Grace,’ and their own version of gay-stereotyping, which has apparently made that show pretty popular. I just don’t get why gay CHARACTERS are okay, but actually homosexual ACTORS are not.

I think the conclusion I came to is that it’s easier for the mass TV-watching audience, as well as the executives deciding what goes on the air, can deal with parodies and abstractions and false gay people on TV, but simply are horrified to find that the real person on their television (or next to them on a bus, or on the street) is actually really gay. It’s just really disappointing to me, because a lot of people view this trend of having shows about gay people is a good thing for the gay community, but in actuality, it’s setting the movement back years. Because these people acting gay aren’t, and they’re just mostly poked fun at. I thought the Archie Bunker-style ‘it’s not really offensive because the character is so obviously out of date that it doesn’t matter’ type of humor was done with. And actually, this whole thing works word for word with black people as well.. only the person playing a black person has to actually be black. It just seems like gay people are still not really accepted, but laughable gay characters are, which is not good.

I don’t know. I’m just really frustrated by the whole thing.

At Least One Person On The Nader Campaign Uses A Mac

From SU:
Looking at the headers of Nader’s “Election Eve Message” reveals it came from MS Outlook Express 5.02 for Mac.

Right on, baby. Right on.

This might be rather sad, but it just solidified my vote for Nader. You just know Al and G-Dub have their faithful Dells by their side.

This Election

I know that we at Alternate.org tend to shy away from political issues (not just on the site, but in real life, too), but I implore you all to vote with your conscience; don’t just settle for a republican or democrat simply because you’re a registered member of the party. If you want to vote for Nader, or Browne, or even Buchanan, then please do so. This year probably won’t be when a third party wins, but next election, who knows? It could start us on the path to a less fucked-up Washington.