Google has had a spotty track record in the past with creating widely accepted applications. Google search, big hit. Google Calendar, big hit for those who use it. Blogger, big hit for those who blog. Gmail, big hit. Google Documents, super awesome, useful and free, but not so big hit. Google Reader, big hit is certain groups. Google news, big hit. Google Chrome, not much market share, but big hit with those who use it. Want to see just how much Google REALLY has, click here.
There is a pattern here, if you USE the applications, you'll like them. But not many people use them overall. They are useful, if often stark. Function over fashion has always been Google's way. Their tools are powerful, flexible, but overlooked for the flashier, expensive, advertised applications. If fact, most people don't even know that most Google applications exist.
One brilliant thing Google has done is run with their "cloud" idea. Computing in the cloud is in a nutshell a new and different way of looking at the web and computer applications. The idea is that computers, phones, tablets, whatever are really just portals to access the cloud. What you DO on them doesn't really exist on the device itself, but out in the "cloud" (internet). What that means is you start something on your computer, get up and pick up where you left off on your phone, continue working on it on your tablet on the bus, then switch to your work computer without missing a beat. Then on lunch you stop by your friends house and jump on his computer and all your stuff is right there for you. Just like it was on your computer, phone, tablet, and work computer. The only thing you need is a device and a internet connection. Since your stuff exist in the cloud not on the device, no matter where you are or what device your using all your stuff is there, and it's all the same on every device. And if you drop your phone in the toilet, or your computer gets stolen, lost or damaged you lose nothing. That's computing in the cloud.
And that's been Google's whole business model pretty much. But so far the idea has been adopted by only a small part of the market. Android has helped move their market share up some, and more people are starting to take advantage of Google services, mostly because of integration with android. Or because of increased gmail useage due to Android. Gmail is a good launching point for discovering other Google services. And that brings me to my topic of the day. Why Google+ might just take over the world!
One advantage of G+ (Google+) for a die hard Google fan like myself is the integration with many of the things I already use. It sync's up with my Android much better then Facebook, and if you download the G+ android app it also auto uploads any picture or video you take instantly in the background (if you set it up to do so). It doesn't share them, just uploads them to a private folder inside G+. So later if I want to share a picture I've taken all I have to do is go to the instant upload folder in G+ and share it. I don't have to upload it because it's already there, plus if I lose my phone or something happens all my pictures and videos are backed up. Until it's shared the only person who can see them are me, and I choose what to share on a picture to picture basis. I'm sure you can make is so it shares everything... but I can see how that could get awkward in certain situations.
I also like the ideas of circles. Sure, you can do the same thing with Facebook and list, but G+ makes the idea a base for the whole platform, instead of a clunky addon idea or afterthought. You can't even share or start seeing post till you've set up circles. Of course some people will share everything with everyone all the time, like they do on Facebook. But there are things I would like my friends to know that maybe I don't want the boss to see. Or things I want friends to see, but the family may be better off not seeing. G+ makes it a part of everything you post to choose who see's what. It's a good idea. Plus you can add people to any number of your circles, so those family members who also might fit in the friends circle can see what your friends see, but mom can't. But if you want to share something with just the family, they can see that too, but the friends who aren't family can't. Very powerful.
But if people ever really start using G+, and that will be the big test for Google with this, it's got the potential to become the center of most peoples online experience, in a way Facebook could never match. Why? Not because of G+ itself, but because of Google's HUGE library of applications that do just about everything you can think of. If G+ takes off, they will start doing what they do best, and integrate everything together. It would take a healthy market share to really get the ball rolling, but I could see a day where your whole internet experience could be through G+. You could do all you could ever want to do, and never really leave it. And the whole experience would be a unified, seamless flow.
I don't know really if that would be a good thing, or a bad thing. But either way we might be finding out soon enough. Now we'll just see what the people have to say about it, and they will vote with their usage or non-usage. But it took 7 years to get grandma on Facebook, how long will it take to get her to switch???? And the question is, why should she and many other people bother? And who wants to go through years of trying to show them how to use something new again!! LOL.... I'm interested to see how Google fares up against the the seemingly impossible to unseat Facebook..... but if it manages to win the king-of-the-socialnetwork-hill contest, then it might just take over the world.....
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Monday, January 17, 2011
Is Green the new Greed?
All in all no one can deny our American society, or at least the last 100-150 years or so, has been one motivated mainly by greed. Ever since the Railroads/Bankers (Robber Baron's) and Big Oil came into being, the government has been mostly supported by and governed for corporate America. If you want to try and deny that please read our own history and see the power these companies had/have/do wield/wielded at a Local, State, and even Federal level up to this day.
But you see, this isn't necessarily a BAD thing, you just have to get your mind around how to use this to our advantage as a disenfranchised American citizen. We all, as a society, have the most powerful weapon ever made to date, and we can use it to get our wishes granted. No it's not a gun, it's not the Vote....it's the almighty dollar. Where it goes the corporations follow, and then the money hungry congress and other elected officials are never far behind. We have the power to lead them all around by the nose, we can make them beg and do tricks. I bet we could even make them roll over, that's what the power the dollar has over those types.
So why is that such a good thing? Because if we want a better world we can accomplish it much better by pointing our dollars in the right direction, much more so then even by our votes. Because the lobbiest control our government much more profoundly then our votes do. Why did we not have electric cars and 100 MPG fifty years ago? Because that wasn't where the money was going. Do you think Big Oil wanted those things to be available?? Heck no. And don't even try and say they just didn't have the technology! You will never be able to convince me the atomic bomb, and nuclear power, and going to the moon was simpler then an electric car or really good MPG. It's just not where the money was funneled. Big Oil wanted low MPG, and fossil fulled cars. And they had the money and lined the right pockets (we elected many of them, or their sons, or other oil people to run our country, so DUH!).
But thing are changing, I think the internet has much to do with that. Ideas can't be contained or limited nearly like they used to be. We can't be lead around by the nose or herded like sheep nearly as easily as we could Fifty years ago. Some still act like a mindless flock, but many people are waking up and thinking for themselves, and we are lucking out that money is not the underlaying factor of existence for many of the new generation, unlike is has been for the last several. But even so, Corporations will be corporations. And government will continue to be business, and the dollar will continue to point our way into the future, so lets point the right way!
So when I say Green is the new Greed, what I mean is the reasons we are seeing the Prius, the Volt, and solar and wind power, is because people are starting to buy into them, and so the people who can are following the dollars and making the stuff. In short, those that CAN now ARE because there is money there now. Money is the carrot, and it works oh so much better then the whip. Legislation is the whip, and it only works if all else fails. But as long as we apply the dollars correctly then we control our own destiny and our own fate.
BUY GREEN PEOPLE, I know that word has lost some of it's meaning, and it's hard to tell what's really "green" and what's just marketing mumbo jumbo, but I'm not talking about the stuff at Wal-mart. I don't mean green TV's or Green clothes or Green cleaning supplies. I mean green cars, green power. Once we get away from fossil fuels for power, every electric device will be green anyway. But do try and buy stuff made with green power! That encourages more and more companies to use it, and the more it's used the more dollars....and we known where that leads!
But we have to be SMART people. Let's take Sun Chips (Frito-lay, owned by Pepsi) for example. They use solar power to make their chips! WOOT!!! And recently they came out with a bio-degradable plant based bag!!! WOOT WOOT!!! But then people started complaining.....why???? BECAUSE THE BAGS RUSTLED TOO LOUD!!! WTH people???????????????????? So they have stopped making the bag for all their lines but one...... because the bag rustled a bit louder then the normal bag........ EXCUSE ME!!!!!!!!!!! REALLY PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!! But they had to do what they had to do to keep in business, so they went back to non-biodegradable bags just like everyone else. They had to follow the dollar, and in this case the dollar was very dumb and stupid.... makes me wanna slap some people. HARD!!!! This was one of the best things done by a major company in years for changing the way our throw-away society impacts...well.... just about everything. And we stomped it down....because the bag was a tad bit loud???? We have to STOP that type of stupid behavior.... So what if it was loud..... it was GREAT FOR THE PLANET you numskulls!!!!!!! That trumps a bit of noise by a huge margin. ARRRRGGGGGGG!!!!!! Get's my goat!!!!!
And if this project had gone well, and money had been given for it, not taken away, Frito-lay, owned by Pepsico would have listened. And as we know that's a lot of power for good right there. They no longer own Taco Bell, KFC, Long John Silvers, Pizza Hut, and A&W. (spun off to what became YUM!, that owns them all now) but they still have lots of power and influence through lifetime exclusive rights agreements with all those YUM! companies except A&W. So what did the public tell Pepsi??? That we would much rather have quite bags than save the planet. And we told this to one of the largest and most powerful end user goods makers in the world.
So anyway, all I'm saying is let the greed do it's thing, and use it to change the word. Just try and point you dollars at the right things, and put up with loud bags if needed.
But you see, this isn't necessarily a BAD thing, you just have to get your mind around how to use this to our advantage as a disenfranchised American citizen. We all, as a society, have the most powerful weapon ever made to date, and we can use it to get our wishes granted. No it's not a gun, it's not the Vote....it's the almighty dollar. Where it goes the corporations follow, and then the money hungry congress and other elected officials are never far behind. We have the power to lead them all around by the nose, we can make them beg and do tricks. I bet we could even make them roll over, that's what the power the dollar has over those types.
So why is that such a good thing? Because if we want a better world we can accomplish it much better by pointing our dollars in the right direction, much more so then even by our votes. Because the lobbiest control our government much more profoundly then our votes do. Why did we not have electric cars and 100 MPG fifty years ago? Because that wasn't where the money was going. Do you think Big Oil wanted those things to be available?? Heck no. And don't even try and say they just didn't have the technology! You will never be able to convince me the atomic bomb, and nuclear power, and going to the moon was simpler then an electric car or really good MPG. It's just not where the money was funneled. Big Oil wanted low MPG, and fossil fulled cars. And they had the money and lined the right pockets (we elected many of them, or their sons, or other oil people to run our country, so DUH!).
But thing are changing, I think the internet has much to do with that. Ideas can't be contained or limited nearly like they used to be. We can't be lead around by the nose or herded like sheep nearly as easily as we could Fifty years ago. Some still act like a mindless flock, but many people are waking up and thinking for themselves, and we are lucking out that money is not the underlaying factor of existence for many of the new generation, unlike is has been for the last several. But even so, Corporations will be corporations. And government will continue to be business, and the dollar will continue to point our way into the future, so lets point the right way!
So when I say Green is the new Greed, what I mean is the reasons we are seeing the Prius, the Volt, and solar and wind power, is because people are starting to buy into them, and so the people who can are following the dollars and making the stuff. In short, those that CAN now ARE because there is money there now. Money is the carrot, and it works oh so much better then the whip. Legislation is the whip, and it only works if all else fails. But as long as we apply the dollars correctly then we control our own destiny and our own fate.
BUY GREEN PEOPLE, I know that word has lost some of it's meaning, and it's hard to tell what's really "green" and what's just marketing mumbo jumbo, but I'm not talking about the stuff at Wal-mart. I don't mean green TV's or Green clothes or Green cleaning supplies. I mean green cars, green power. Once we get away from fossil fuels for power, every electric device will be green anyway. But do try and buy stuff made with green power! That encourages more and more companies to use it, and the more it's used the more dollars....and we known where that leads!
But we have to be SMART people. Let's take Sun Chips (Frito-lay, owned by Pepsi) for example. They use solar power to make their chips! WOOT!!! And recently they came out with a bio-degradable plant based bag!!! WOOT WOOT!!! But then people started complaining.....why???? BECAUSE THE BAGS RUSTLED TOO LOUD!!! WTH people???????????????????? So they have stopped making the bag for all their lines but one...... because the bag rustled a bit louder then the normal bag........ EXCUSE ME!!!!!!!!!!! REALLY PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!! But they had to do what they had to do to keep in business, so they went back to non-biodegradable bags just like everyone else. They had to follow the dollar, and in this case the dollar was very dumb and stupid.... makes me wanna slap some people. HARD!!!! This was one of the best things done by a major company in years for changing the way our throw-away society impacts...well.... just about everything. And we stomped it down....because the bag was a tad bit loud???? We have to STOP that type of stupid behavior.... So what if it was loud..... it was GREAT FOR THE PLANET you numskulls!!!!!!! That trumps a bit of noise by a huge margin. ARRRRGGGGGGG!!!!!! Get's my goat!!!!!
And if this project had gone well, and money had been given for it, not taken away, Frito-lay, owned by Pepsico would have listened. And as we know that's a lot of power for good right there. They no longer own Taco Bell, KFC, Long John Silvers, Pizza Hut, and A&W. (spun off to what became YUM!, that owns them all now) but they still have lots of power and influence through lifetime exclusive rights agreements with all those YUM! companies except A&W. So what did the public tell Pepsi??? That we would much rather have quite bags than save the planet. And we told this to one of the largest and most powerful end user goods makers in the world.
So anyway, all I'm saying is let the greed do it's thing, and use it to change the word. Just try and point you dollars at the right things, and put up with loud bags if needed.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Torchwood vs. Doctor Who... Or maybe not quite verses...but...
Ok, so I'm a new Doctor Who junkie. I thought Doctor Who was a Bond villain until less then a year ago. Now I've seen every single episode of the "revived" series (2005-present) and I am starting on the 1963-1989 original series too. What do you call Doctor Who's fans anyway?? Star Trek Fans are Trekkies... so are they Whoies?
Anyway, so I just finally have seen every single episode of the "new" series, up to and including season 5, season 6 is just getting ready to start. But since I've spent at least 3-4 nights a week for the last 8 months watching Doctor Who, I have this hole in my late night TV schedule to fill...
So why not fill it with Torchwood I thought.... It is a Doctor Who spin off, and I liked Jack in Doctor Who, so what the heck! Turns out it wasn't a bad idea, Torchwood it pretty good, but this ISN'T your Doctor Who Capitan Jack Harkness. Well, it IS, same actor, same creator and all that. But this Jack seems much Darker.... Rose making him immortal and living for so many years now has changed him it seems, at least within the story.
But Torchwood is just a whole lot darker, sexier, and dirtier then the current Doctor Who's. Here in the US where Doctor Who is mostly considered G, with some slight PG-13 thrown in, Torchwood is SOLID PG-13, and bits, if not cut out, would get it a possible R. And it's not just that Jack's bi-sexual nature is explored here, where it was just hinted at in Doctor Who, but Gwen and Owen, well, mainly Owen, really spice up the tension... Where Doctor Who hints, Torchwood almost goes so far as to SHOW!! LOL
Well, this is not a complete write up by any means, I've only seen about 5 episodes of Season 3 of Torchwood, but once I've seen them all I'll come back and write more. Just putting some of my initial thoughts down, and if anyone happens to come across this and is a Doctor Who fan that is looking for something else British to watch, now you know a bit about Torchwood!!!
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Motorola Droid: The M does it again!
Motorola started it all, and for years it was pretty much THE name in cell phones...
Then everyone started making them, Motorola fell a bit behind and got lost in the shuffle. But then along came a Droid, and it all changed. The Motorola Droid was born.
I'm not going to review the phone per say, there are about 100,000 reviews of this phone out there. And it's now an older phone, so pretty much I'm just posting up about what I think of the phone in general. The first thing about this phone is it's quite large. It's not for those that like smaller phones, and not being a flip phone it's not the greatest purse phone either. That large screen is just begging to be scratched or broke in a loose bag or even a pocket with change or keys.
That's a good lead in to talk about the screen. In a word....wow! It's stunning. I'm sure there are better screens, but to be honest, I don't think it could matter much. Video, pictures, and everything else is as good as any computer monitor or TV I've seen. My only complaint might be the touch screen, it's.... different. You can't calibrate it, and it seems to me the screen is a bit off. It can be tricky sometimes, it often selects the item before and after the one you want. It can be annoying sometimes, but it's not terrible. It's also a little difficult to judge the correct pressure to use then working with the touch screen. Often it takes a bit more pressure then I think it should, even after 5 months using the phone.
The Android market is awesome, and pretty much every app works well with the Droid. The great thing about the Android market is that just about everything you could ever want ,you can find for free, or for just a couple of bucks at the worse. I have hundreds of apps currently, I think about 180-190 or so. I would say about the only down fall is once you get about 4-5 months into using the phone, you've got all the most popular apps... then it's just a bit of a hunt to find interesting new apps.
If your not a fan of charging your phone, or you want to use it for long periods of time and you can't have it plugged in....then this isn't the phone for you. I'm lucky to get a 10 hours without a charge. Even if not used, like overnight, still lucky to get 12 hours. Course if you turn off auto sync and GPS and what not I'm sure it would last much longer, but why have all the toys turned off? Many apps use the GPS and it's just much easier to leave it on. And auto sync? Once again, why turn it off? So I don't get great battery life, but to be honest it doesn't bother me. It's a small price to pay.
The sound is pretty good on both the external speaker and the headphone jacks. Android doesn't give you much adjustably built in, but the stock sound is pretty darn decent. The built in players are OK, but there are many, many players to meet pretty much any need in you could image. Video is good as long as the source is good. The camera is pretty decent, video is better then average. I would have liked a bit better camera, but I'm not gonna complain too much, does it's job.
It does reset from time to time. The keyboards are a bit iffy. The portrait keyboard is far to small, however the landscape one is ok. The slide out keyboard is really not bad at all, but now that I've gotten used to the auto-correct and complete I can't use the slider as well. Most of those features are parts of android, so not just specific to the Droid, but the slide out keyboard is. It's not perfect, but it's nice if you use it enough to get used to it.
All in all I really like the phone, the call quality is ok, but you don't get a smart phone for calling, calling is an after thought. It an do some really amazing things, but I just want to cover the phone in a general way, not a specific review like the hundreds you can find everywhere.
Monday, November 22, 2010
TopGear on History Channel, about time!
I caught the first TopGear show last night and it was pretty good. I think it might take awhile for the guys to hit their stride, but it's nice to see they are trying to get this show started on our side of the pond. It's been on the BBC since 1977!
The first episode pits a Dodge Viper up against a Cobra Attack Helicopter. The object? Take a 10 mile drive and try not to get blown up by the Cobra! 3 missile locks and you were out (used the army war game system). The Viper lost on the 3rd lock at 160 MPH on the runway at the finish. Pretty amazing stuff really.
The second part was just putting a top of the line Viper through their test track they will use for the rest of the show. They have a "masked driver" just called The Sting that drives all the cars on the test track. You never see his face and never hear his voice. I've read that is because they don't always use the same guy, but the concept is it's always the same guy to keep the test consistent. So if he's hidden, who's to know?? LOL
Buzz Aldrin came on the show, they talked a bit about his cars. And he test drove the POS they have for the stars to drive around the track. That was kinda cool.
Then they pitted 3 Lamborghini's against each other. The idea was to see how fast each could go through the standing mile. Came in at 173, 175, 180. Those were pretty cool.
Oh, and Tanner on the show??? He's a professional stunt driver. He is also a World Renowned Drift Racer (he did the Drifting stunts in Tokyo Drift for example). Why is that cool? Well, because the stuff he does is F'n AWESOME!!!! And this isn't a movie, he's doing this in real time, with real cars, and no camera tricks or CGI. Pretty wild to watch.
It's not gonna win any Emmy's, but it was fun!
TopGear website
Cobra Attack Helicopter
Lamborghini
Viper
Buzz the Space Cadet
The first episode pits a Dodge Viper up against a Cobra Attack Helicopter. The object? Take a 10 mile drive and try not to get blown up by the Cobra! 3 missile locks and you were out (used the army war game system). The Viper lost on the 3rd lock at 160 MPH on the runway at the finish. Pretty amazing stuff really.
The second part was just putting a top of the line Viper through their test track they will use for the rest of the show. They have a "masked driver" just called The Sting that drives all the cars on the test track. You never see his face and never hear his voice. I've read that is because they don't always use the same guy, but the concept is it's always the same guy to keep the test consistent. So if he's hidden, who's to know?? LOL
Buzz Aldrin came on the show, they talked a bit about his cars. And he test drove the POS they have for the stars to drive around the track. That was kinda cool.
Then they pitted 3 Lamborghini's against each other. The idea was to see how fast each could go through the standing mile. Came in at 173, 175, 180. Those were pretty cool.
Oh, and Tanner on the show??? He's a professional stunt driver. He is also a World Renowned Drift Racer (he did the Drifting stunts in Tokyo Drift for example). Why is that cool? Well, because the stuff he does is F'n AWESOME!!!! And this isn't a movie, he's doing this in real time, with real cars, and no camera tricks or CGI. Pretty wild to watch.
It's not gonna win any Emmy's, but it was fun!
TopGear website
Cobra Attack Helicopter
Lamborghini
Viper
Buzz the Space Cadet
Monday, November 15, 2010
Movie Night: AVATAR
So I was watching Avatar again last night. Me and the wife had gone and seen it 3D when it first came out, but to be honest I had walked away feeling I had missed some stuff. In the theater I had distractions, like going to the bathroom (it is almost 3 hours long), getting condiments, dealing with the glasses themselves. As a side point 3D glasses and regular glasses don't mix well, it's very hard to get comfortable with them both on.
Well, we were looking for something to watch before bed and I notice it's on HBO, and I have HBO OnDemand, so I decided to watch it without distractions, and in 2D. And I have to say it was better the 2nd time around. I could pay a bit more attention to the story without all the distractions on and off the screen. You have to admit it might be one of the most beautiful and breathtaking movies of all time. The day scenes are great, but the night ones are amazing, simply amazing. Some of the creatures look a bit fake at night, but if you want to be a purest, they are alien anyway so who's to say what they should look like "real". We know of course they are CG, but when you are creating a alien race, only the imagination of the creator can be used to judge if it was captured correctly or not!
The only real complaint I have about the whole movie is his legs. I just couldn't help but think that the fact he couldn't walk took away from the story as a whole, instead of adding to it. I understand it was most likely a carrot at the start, to get him to take his brothers place. But money would have served as well. The story didn't need the carrot of Jake being able to walk again in an Avatar to get him there. In my world the overall story would have been better served if he had hated the Avatar at first, instead of loving it because it gave him legs.
Then of course you have the scene where the Colonel offers Jake his legs back right now as a reward for his info, all he has to do is go back home. So this may be the only part of the movie where the legs really make sense as a plot device.This is before he knows it's possible to transfer from one body to the other. And it's also before he has gone to the point of no return with the Colonel and the company. Before he declared for the Na'vi so to say. This scene was somewhat watered down by the fact he wasn't yet choosing legs or the Na'vi. At this point the legs where waiting on him at home, but he decided to stay and try to help relocate the Na'vi peacefully. So his choice right now was legs now, or put it off a couple of weeks and help the people with whom he had lived the last 3 months. He's not choosing sides, all this scene has done is let the audience know he DOES have legs at home waiting. It would have held more power if we knew at this moment Jake was choosing the Na'vi over his new human legs.
However I guess it does serve the purpose of showing that his decisions in the end had nothing to do with the fact he had legs in his Avatar, because he could have walked away (or rolled away in this case) and had legs in his human body as well, But it does reinforce the fact the whole bum legs thing could have been left out altogether. Cause it brings into question if he really loved this world and it's people, or he just loved the fact he could run and jump and move around on his own again. Humans at least, in situations like that, can project their love for one thing on to other things involved in it. It's called projected emotions or transference. So it brings into question all of his reasons, and even his loves. But then again maybe that's also Cameron's intent (he's was the director and creator if you didn't know). Maybe he did that on purpose, just to make those that waded this deep question Jake's motives also. Not like we don't all know there will be at least 2-3 more of these moves, this story is far from done. I could see it going Starwars big, super space opera epic kinda big. If only he can capture the kind of story like he did with this first one.
Now I've had my go at the legs thing, so lets look at the story overall. Did it seem familiar??? It should, there have been hundreds of stories with the same basic plot. Why do we see it so often? Because it's based on true events that American School children grow up hearing about all their lives. It's the story of exactly what we did to the Native Americans starting back in the late 1600's to now. We wanted their land, so we moved them if we could and killed them if we couldn't. In the end we gave them the left over land we didn't want. It wasn't the first time humans had done that, it has been happening all the way back to the oldest reaches of our racial memory, there have always been people who thought themselves stronger and better then others, and wanted what the others had. Often land. So the were moved or killed, whatever was easier.
And the story of Avatar is the same, we come to other world, there are people there, abet alien people. We want what they have, in this case it's something UNDER the land, but it's the same idea. And we go about taking it. If not by reason then by force. The only problem is, we have nothing they want, we have no carrot to entice them with. They are a happy people who want for nothing, everything is provided for them by their world. And in this story at least, the big problem is not only are we destroying the world that takes care of them (on a small scale), but the "mother load" of what we want is directly under their "home tree", or the "building" where all of this tribe involved in the story live.
Now, from the story, tribes number small, about 200 or so natives I would think. I take this from when Jake said he had gathered 15 Tribes, or about 2000 Na'vi. That would be 134 per tribe exactly, but I'm guessing not everyone came. Someone has to stay home and keep things safe, then you have the kids, I didn't see any kids fighting. Then there are those too old to fight. So let's say 200 total in a tribe. I would have to think everyone else who could would have came, it was to stop us from ending their entire way of life.
And lets look at that way of life for a moment. Amazing really. I can't help but think if our world had been more like theirs we would have ended up much the same! They have a connection to their world we simply don't. They CAN talk to animals, and trees, and the world itself. Their world is a big, huge, organic super computer. A big brain if you will. Everything living thing on the world is part of this computer network. In fact when someone dies their memories and a undetermined part of them is "saved" into the computer. In this way they can "talk" with their ancestors. Nothing ever really dies then, just the shell dies, all the electrical stuff inside (brains, soul, whatever) is passed into the computer. This computer network in the movie is named Eywa (tree of life), and is more or less seen as a pagan god by the humans there. But the tree itself, and locations it seems in other places as well, are where the Na'vi can "inerface" with Eywa. Here they can pray, and sometimes it seems Eywa answers. They can also "hear" their ancestors here. But it doesn't seem they can talk with them like they did when alive. It's more abstract then that. The people themselves are gone, it's more a memory of them that is alive. My guess is you can access some of their memories maybe, but not THEM so to say.
The Na'vi themselves don't have a "direct" link all the time with Eywa it seems. Like with everything else they link with, including each other it seems, they link with something much like a "tail" that is wrapped in their hair. At the end of this long braid of hair is a thing that can link with other creatures and plants in their world. Like a permanent biological Eithernet or USB cord. Both females and males have it, but it seems to be involved in more then just linking. In the movie Grace says "Don't play with those too much or you'll go blind". But they link them with animals, and the Tree of Life as well as each other when they "mate" so it seems it is not just a function of reproduction. From the clues the movie gives, I'd say it's used during mating, so it can be sexual, but just so the pair can be more intimate then what we can do. The Link is just used to "bond". Maybe with them you don't have to ask what your partner likes, you would KNOW!! Weird thought huh? Feeling what they are feeling as you feel what they are doing to you also. I bet our population would soar!!
But just can't imagine they would stick their reproductive junk into all their animals and the tree of life too, but I guess only Cameron knows for sure. But if I was guessing, the reproduction happens with other equipment else where, but may need or not need this "link". Also of note, when they were "escorting" Jake under force, they held the knife against this "hair tail cord" thingie and not his throat. I would say cutting it kills the Na'vi.
Another aspect of the movie that isn't talked about directly is the size of the natives, and pretty much everything else. In this movie humans are small fry, shrimp. About half as tall as the Na'vi. We are dwarfed by the scale of this world. It never mentioned if it's a much larger world or not, but the Colonel says at one point that it is low G, so if it's got lower G then earth, it might allow and encourage larger growth. It also explains how even though they are much bigger, they can survive falls from heights by breaking their falls with leaves. However the way people and objects move in the movie it doesn't seem to be much less then earth gravity. Nothing like the moon at least. I wonder if you could be at .5 G if it would be noticeable? The moon is about .166 G and Mars is about .33 G. So if a planet was .5 G would we move noticeably different? Interesting thoughts.
How about the science? Well, at least here they didn't break the rules too much. We can't cryo freeze anyone yet, and we can't build people from DNA yet either, but we are close enough to say that's very attainable by 2154, when the movie takes place. Also they state it takes 6 years to reach Alpha Centauri when thismovie takes place. In in real life Alpha Centauri is the closest star system to us. (It's a Trinary star system it's thought, but we can only see two. The third is found in the math. At worst it's a binary system) And it's only about 4 light years way. (4.37 in fact) so the 5 year 9 month travel time is doable since it's not faster then light and we don't currently know how to go faster then light.
So unless my math is wrong, they would have only been traveling about 76% the speed of light. Still fast at 141,000 Miles Per Second, or 8.4 million Miles Per Minute, or 509 million miles per hour....but it is POSSIBLE, since the comic speed limit SEEMS to be about 670 million miles per hour. (I did all the math on 186,000 MPS, where the real speed of light is 185,282) In 140 years I see this as possible but there is more too it then it seems.
First of all, you can't go from 0 to 141,000 MPS instantly, or even close to instantly unless you want to kill everyone on board, and destroy the ship, so that means at some point to make the 5 year 9 month target the ship must travel faster then 76% the speed of light to make up for acceleration time and deceleration time. And at those kinds of speeds a pebble could destroy a ship, so that would have to be dealt with. I suppose if it was big enough, and the hull thick, enough unless it was something big it might be OK. In Star Trek that big ol' dish on the front of the Enterprise was a deflector dish, and it's design was exactly this, to deflect the small space junk to keep it from destroying the ship. If we could ever do shields like in Star Trek and Starwars that would be another idea.
As a side note, depending on just how fast we COULD go, and how close we COULD come to light speed, the travelers themselves wouldn't lose much time, at least not compared to us. Time slows down for those traveling close to light speed. So what might seem a year to them could seem 12 to us. So lets say the trip is 6 years there and back. And they stay a year. So that 13 years. But they may only age say 4 years the whole trip. Depends on how fast they were going, right at light speed they may not age at all. Course the move doesn't say if it was 5 years 9 months THEIR TIME or OUR TIME. So it could have taken 20 years, but they only aged 5 years 9 months. So who knows. They know the time distortion affects of close to light travel (or any travel), and it works out it seem to be about 1:1300, or one year at 99% light speed is like 1300 years on earth. Or, if a person left earth, traveled at 99% the speed of light for one year and returned to earth, they would have aged 1 year, but 1300 years would have passed on earth....crazy right. It get's even more crazy, but we won't go there today!
So what is really going on with Pandora....who's time frame did the 5 years 9 months pass in? Yeah, it's gets crazy.
The best solution, travel faster then light....LOL
Well, this had gotten long enough, I have more to day but got things to do. But I wanted to share a least some of my thought with you all!
Avatar - Wikipedia
James Cameron
Well, we were looking for something to watch before bed and I notice it's on HBO, and I have HBO OnDemand, so I decided to watch it without distractions, and in 2D. And I have to say it was better the 2nd time around. I could pay a bit more attention to the story without all the distractions on and off the screen. You have to admit it might be one of the most beautiful and breathtaking movies of all time. The day scenes are great, but the night ones are amazing, simply amazing. Some of the creatures look a bit fake at night, but if you want to be a purest, they are alien anyway so who's to say what they should look like "real". We know of course they are CG, but when you are creating a alien race, only the imagination of the creator can be used to judge if it was captured correctly or not!
The only real complaint I have about the whole movie is his legs. I just couldn't help but think that the fact he couldn't walk took away from the story as a whole, instead of adding to it. I understand it was most likely a carrot at the start, to get him to take his brothers place. But money would have served as well. The story didn't need the carrot of Jake being able to walk again in an Avatar to get him there. In my world the overall story would have been better served if he had hated the Avatar at first, instead of loving it because it gave him legs.
Then of course you have the scene where the Colonel offers Jake his legs back right now as a reward for his info, all he has to do is go back home. So this may be the only part of the movie where the legs really make sense as a plot device.This is before he knows it's possible to transfer from one body to the other. And it's also before he has gone to the point of no return with the Colonel and the company. Before he declared for the Na'vi so to say. This scene was somewhat watered down by the fact he wasn't yet choosing legs or the Na'vi. At this point the legs where waiting on him at home, but he decided to stay and try to help relocate the Na'vi peacefully. So his choice right now was legs now, or put it off a couple of weeks and help the people with whom he had lived the last 3 months. He's not choosing sides, all this scene has done is let the audience know he DOES have legs at home waiting. It would have held more power if we knew at this moment Jake was choosing the Na'vi over his new human legs.
However I guess it does serve the purpose of showing that his decisions in the end had nothing to do with the fact he had legs in his Avatar, because he could have walked away (or rolled away in this case) and had legs in his human body as well, But it does reinforce the fact the whole bum legs thing could have been left out altogether. Cause it brings into question if he really loved this world and it's people, or he just loved the fact he could run and jump and move around on his own again. Humans at least, in situations like that, can project their love for one thing on to other things involved in it. It's called projected emotions or transference. So it brings into question all of his reasons, and even his loves. But then again maybe that's also Cameron's intent (he's was the director and creator if you didn't know). Maybe he did that on purpose, just to make those that waded this deep question Jake's motives also. Not like we don't all know there will be at least 2-3 more of these moves, this story is far from done. I could see it going Starwars big, super space opera epic kinda big. If only he can capture the kind of story like he did with this first one.
Now I've had my go at the legs thing, so lets look at the story overall. Did it seem familiar??? It should, there have been hundreds of stories with the same basic plot. Why do we see it so often? Because it's based on true events that American School children grow up hearing about all their lives. It's the story of exactly what we did to the Native Americans starting back in the late 1600's to now. We wanted their land, so we moved them if we could and killed them if we couldn't. In the end we gave them the left over land we didn't want. It wasn't the first time humans had done that, it has been happening all the way back to the oldest reaches of our racial memory, there have always been people who thought themselves stronger and better then others, and wanted what the others had. Often land. So the were moved or killed, whatever was easier.
And the story of Avatar is the same, we come to other world, there are people there, abet alien people. We want what they have, in this case it's something UNDER the land, but it's the same idea. And we go about taking it. If not by reason then by force. The only problem is, we have nothing they want, we have no carrot to entice them with. They are a happy people who want for nothing, everything is provided for them by their world. And in this story at least, the big problem is not only are we destroying the world that takes care of them (on a small scale), but the "mother load" of what we want is directly under their "home tree", or the "building" where all of this tribe involved in the story live.
Now, from the story, tribes number small, about 200 or so natives I would think. I take this from when Jake said he had gathered 15 Tribes, or about 2000 Na'vi. That would be 134 per tribe exactly, but I'm guessing not everyone came. Someone has to stay home and keep things safe, then you have the kids, I didn't see any kids fighting. Then there are those too old to fight. So let's say 200 total in a tribe. I would have to think everyone else who could would have came, it was to stop us from ending their entire way of life.
And lets look at that way of life for a moment. Amazing really. I can't help but think if our world had been more like theirs we would have ended up much the same! They have a connection to their world we simply don't. They CAN talk to animals, and trees, and the world itself. Their world is a big, huge, organic super computer. A big brain if you will. Everything living thing on the world is part of this computer network. In fact when someone dies their memories and a undetermined part of them is "saved" into the computer. In this way they can "talk" with their ancestors. Nothing ever really dies then, just the shell dies, all the electrical stuff inside (brains, soul, whatever) is passed into the computer. This computer network in the movie is named Eywa (tree of life), and is more or less seen as a pagan god by the humans there. But the tree itself, and locations it seems in other places as well, are where the Na'vi can "inerface" with Eywa. Here they can pray, and sometimes it seems Eywa answers. They can also "hear" their ancestors here. But it doesn't seem they can talk with them like they did when alive. It's more abstract then that. The people themselves are gone, it's more a memory of them that is alive. My guess is you can access some of their memories maybe, but not THEM so to say.
The Na'vi themselves don't have a "direct" link all the time with Eywa it seems. Like with everything else they link with, including each other it seems, they link with something much like a "tail" that is wrapped in their hair. At the end of this long braid of hair is a thing that can link with other creatures and plants in their world. Like a permanent biological Eithernet or USB cord. Both females and males have it, but it seems to be involved in more then just linking. In the movie Grace says "Don't play with those too much or you'll go blind". But they link them with animals, and the Tree of Life as well as each other when they "mate" so it seems it is not just a function of reproduction. From the clues the movie gives, I'd say it's used during mating, so it can be sexual, but just so the pair can be more intimate then what we can do. The Link is just used to "bond". Maybe with them you don't have to ask what your partner likes, you would KNOW!! Weird thought huh? Feeling what they are feeling as you feel what they are doing to you also. I bet our population would soar!!
But just can't imagine they would stick their reproductive junk into all their animals and the tree of life too, but I guess only Cameron knows for sure. But if I was guessing, the reproduction happens with other equipment else where, but may need or not need this "link". Also of note, when they were "escorting" Jake under force, they held the knife against this "hair tail cord" thingie and not his throat. I would say cutting it kills the Na'vi.
Another aspect of the movie that isn't talked about directly is the size of the natives, and pretty much everything else. In this movie humans are small fry, shrimp. About half as tall as the Na'vi. We are dwarfed by the scale of this world. It never mentioned if it's a much larger world or not, but the Colonel says at one point that it is low G, so if it's got lower G then earth, it might allow and encourage larger growth. It also explains how even though they are much bigger, they can survive falls from heights by breaking their falls with leaves. However the way people and objects move in the movie it doesn't seem to be much less then earth gravity. Nothing like the moon at least. I wonder if you could be at .5 G if it would be noticeable? The moon is about .166 G and Mars is about .33 G. So if a planet was .5 G would we move noticeably different? Interesting thoughts.
How about the science? Well, at least here they didn't break the rules too much. We can't cryo freeze anyone yet, and we can't build people from DNA yet either, but we are close enough to say that's very attainable by 2154, when the movie takes place. Also they state it takes 6 years to reach Alpha Centauri when thismovie takes place. In in real life Alpha Centauri is the closest star system to us. (It's a Trinary star system it's thought, but we can only see two. The third is found in the math. At worst it's a binary system) And it's only about 4 light years way. (4.37 in fact) so the 5 year 9 month travel time is doable since it's not faster then light and we don't currently know how to go faster then light.
So unless my math is wrong, they would have only been traveling about 76% the speed of light. Still fast at 141,000 Miles Per Second, or 8.4 million Miles Per Minute, or 509 million miles per hour....but it is POSSIBLE, since the comic speed limit SEEMS to be about 670 million miles per hour. (I did all the math on 186,000 MPS, where the real speed of light is 185,282) In 140 years I see this as possible but there is more too it then it seems.
First of all, you can't go from 0 to 141,000 MPS instantly, or even close to instantly unless you want to kill everyone on board, and destroy the ship, so that means at some point to make the 5 year 9 month target the ship must travel faster then 76% the speed of light to make up for acceleration time and deceleration time. And at those kinds of speeds a pebble could destroy a ship, so that would have to be dealt with. I suppose if it was big enough, and the hull thick, enough unless it was something big it might be OK. In Star Trek that big ol' dish on the front of the Enterprise was a deflector dish, and it's design was exactly this, to deflect the small space junk to keep it from destroying the ship. If we could ever do shields like in Star Trek and Starwars that would be another idea.
As a side note, depending on just how fast we COULD go, and how close we COULD come to light speed, the travelers themselves wouldn't lose much time, at least not compared to us. Time slows down for those traveling close to light speed. So what might seem a year to them could seem 12 to us. So lets say the trip is 6 years there and back. And they stay a year. So that 13 years. But they may only age say 4 years the whole trip. Depends on how fast they were going, right at light speed they may not age at all. Course the move doesn't say if it was 5 years 9 months THEIR TIME or OUR TIME. So it could have taken 20 years, but they only aged 5 years 9 months. So who knows. They know the time distortion affects of close to light travel (or any travel), and it works out it seem to be about 1:1300, or one year at 99% light speed is like 1300 years on earth. Or, if a person left earth, traveled at 99% the speed of light for one year and returned to earth, they would have aged 1 year, but 1300 years would have passed on earth....crazy right. It get's even more crazy, but we won't go there today!
So what is really going on with Pandora....who's time frame did the 5 years 9 months pass in? Yeah, it's gets crazy.
The best solution, travel faster then light....LOL
Well, this had gotten long enough, I have more to day but got things to do. But I wanted to share a least some of my thought with you all!
Avatar - Wikipedia
James Cameron
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Kubuntu: A OS Love Story.
Ubuntu is a Linux based operating system. The word Ubuntu means "Humanity". A variation of Ubuntu, that uses a graphical user interface called KDE, is Kubuntu. It means "Towards Humanity". I don't have much experience with other operating systems besides Windows and Kubuntu, but I love me some Kubuntu.
My Linux experience started mostly as a product of my own curiosity. I wanted to see what all the fuss was about. After some Google searches I discovered there were several different favors of Linux to choose from, and one of the "most popular" or most used was Ubuntu. So I downloaded that, it uses an interface called Gnome. I played with it a bit, then downloaded Kubuntu that uses KDE in place of Gnome. Same core OS, just different interface. I liked it better, it was a really breathtaking interface, so stuck with it. Still love the way it looks and how it works.
KDE, it's said, originally stood for Kool Desktop Environment. However as time moved on the project pretty much dropped the idea that KDE itself any longer stood for anything, and now it's considered the name of the project itself, standing on it's own and no longer an acronym. What a Desktop Environment does, in a nutshell, is unify the user experience. It's the place all the visual user interface stuff happens. With windows it's the desktop as a whole, and all the different aspects like the Start menu, task bar, windows, and notification area down by the clock. With later versions of windows it also includes any desktop widgets.
The KDE Environment is visually related closely to Windows by default, in fact you can set it up to look almost exactly like your favorite version of windows. The advantages? You can also change it to look nothing like anything anyone has ever seen, and it's free verses $100+ for any version of windows. It also allows about a thousand ways to make it much more cool then windows ever was. If you like custom options, you got em. You can change all sorts of ways windows act and look. The entire environment is alive with possibility. And it just plain looks really good. You can easily set up multiple desktops and switch to them in inventive ways. Pretty much if you can dream it, and got some time, you can do it.
The core OS is still Ubuntu, that is based off of Debian, that is based off UNIX if you go back far enough. There are other distributions out there, such as RedHat, Mandriva, Slackware, and SUSE just to name a few. Mostly it's a matter of taste, and in some cases the computer you run it on. Some distro's run only on "top of the line" systems, some others can run on almost nothing (Puppy, Lubuntu).
The best part of Linux and all it's flavors??? It's FREE!!!! There are some distro's where you can pay and get support, but for all intents and purposes it's 100% free. And that's surprising really. There are corporations involved in some or most of the distro's, but mostly they serve in an over-site role, mainly to keep a common focus and to keep things moving towards certain goals.
Linux gains more market share every year. I'm not sure if that's because it's becoming more user friendly, or because the average user has become more computer savvy. I can't lie and say in general it's just as easy to setup and run as Windows in most cases, but it's not much harder. Mostly it's the little things you have to work on, and that happens with windows sometimes too. But because hardware manufactures are much more likely to spend their time and money on drivers for Windows then they are for Linux often it takes more time for new hardware to become stable on Linux distro's. Often the hardware mfg's. don't even bother with drivers, but instead let the developers of the different lines of Linux write their own.
So you could say Linux's biggest problem is that it's not big enough. That is changing slowly, and Linux is becoming more main stream. The Linux hard core fans might not like that, but it's good for the community in general. The more people who use it, the more people who will get involved with it. And the more people who become involved the more people who will work on developing it. Better for all.
Some interesting facts:
Android phones run on a version of Linux developed by Google for phones.
It's estimated the cost to code most versions of Linux today would be in the ballpark 13 or 14 billion. That's just the cost to code it, not including research, testing, etc. Just the base system itself, just the OS, would cost about 1 billion. Linux was written pretty much by volunteers, so the true cost was much closer to 0.
Market share of Linux is more or less holding at %1, but Linux use is growing because the overall USE of computers is growing.
Seem small? MacOS is only at about 5%
Kubuntu Website
My Linux experience started mostly as a product of my own curiosity. I wanted to see what all the fuss was about. After some Google searches I discovered there were several different favors of Linux to choose from, and one of the "most popular" or most used was Ubuntu. So I downloaded that, it uses an interface called Gnome. I played with it a bit, then downloaded Kubuntu that uses KDE in place of Gnome. Same core OS, just different interface. I liked it better, it was a really breathtaking interface, so stuck with it. Still love the way it looks and how it works.
KDE, it's said, originally stood for Kool Desktop Environment. However as time moved on the project pretty much dropped the idea that KDE itself any longer stood for anything, and now it's considered the name of the project itself, standing on it's own and no longer an acronym. What a Desktop Environment does, in a nutshell, is unify the user experience. It's the place all the visual user interface stuff happens. With windows it's the desktop as a whole, and all the different aspects like the Start menu, task bar, windows, and notification area down by the clock. With later versions of windows it also includes any desktop widgets.
The KDE Environment is visually related closely to Windows by default, in fact you can set it up to look almost exactly like your favorite version of windows. The advantages? You can also change it to look nothing like anything anyone has ever seen, and it's free verses $100+ for any version of windows. It also allows about a thousand ways to make it much more cool then windows ever was. If you like custom options, you got em. You can change all sorts of ways windows act and look. The entire environment is alive with possibility. And it just plain looks really good. You can easily set up multiple desktops and switch to them in inventive ways. Pretty much if you can dream it, and got some time, you can do it.
The core OS is still Ubuntu, that is based off of Debian, that is based off UNIX if you go back far enough. There are other distributions out there, such as RedHat, Mandriva, Slackware, and SUSE just to name a few. Mostly it's a matter of taste, and in some cases the computer you run it on. Some distro's run only on "top of the line" systems, some others can run on almost nothing (Puppy, Lubuntu).
The best part of Linux and all it's flavors??? It's FREE!!!! There are some distro's where you can pay and get support, but for all intents and purposes it's 100% free. And that's surprising really. There are corporations involved in some or most of the distro's, but mostly they serve in an over-site role, mainly to keep a common focus and to keep things moving towards certain goals.
Linux gains more market share every year. I'm not sure if that's because it's becoming more user friendly, or because the average user has become more computer savvy. I can't lie and say in general it's just as easy to setup and run as Windows in most cases, but it's not much harder. Mostly it's the little things you have to work on, and that happens with windows sometimes too. But because hardware manufactures are much more likely to spend their time and money on drivers for Windows then they are for Linux often it takes more time for new hardware to become stable on Linux distro's. Often the hardware mfg's. don't even bother with drivers, but instead let the developers of the different lines of Linux write their own.
So you could say Linux's biggest problem is that it's not big enough. That is changing slowly, and Linux is becoming more main stream. The Linux hard core fans might not like that, but it's good for the community in general. The more people who use it, the more people who will get involved with it. And the more people who become involved the more people who will work on developing it. Better for all.
Some interesting facts:
Android phones run on a version of Linux developed by Google for phones.
It's estimated the cost to code most versions of Linux today would be in the ballpark 13 or 14 billion. That's just the cost to code it, not including research, testing, etc. Just the base system itself, just the OS, would cost about 1 billion. Linux was written pretty much by volunteers, so the true cost was much closer to 0.
Market share of Linux is more or less holding at %1, but Linux use is growing because the overall USE of computers is growing.
Seem small? MacOS is only at about 5%
Kubuntu Website
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Late Night Host Main Event!! Rumble Under the Stars!!
It's just never been the same since Johnny left. Oh Johnny how we miss you. The whole late night dog and pony show was created by Johnny Carson, and no one has ever been able to fill his shoes. I remember the last few years of The Tonight Show well, and Joan Rivers was a much better guest host then Jay, but I guess it was still too 1950's then to have a permanent female host. Jay couldn't even hold a candle to Johnny, no one could.
It's a testament to Johnny that he's the only host I've ever seen to HAVE guest host.... The Tonight Show was a machine that had to go on with or without its regular host. In it's day if you were going to become someone you had to do The Tonight Show. Johnny Carson would make or break you. Today if a host needs to be away they just play reruns. Could you imagine Conan guest hosting Letterman?? LOL Think not. I think most host today would be afraid to have a guest host, what if they got better ratings? But Johnny never had to worry about that, no one was going to TAKE the reigns until he GAVE them up.
So look what we have today, Jay and Conan drama. Letterman and his Heir apparent Craig Ferguson. Conan now on TBS with George Lopez. Then there's the other players like Jimmy Kimmel, Jimmy Fallon,Jon Stewart, and Carson Daly. All doing what only Johnny Carson used to do. None with his power, but Jay and Letterman coming out on top of the heap.
I really don't have much love for Jay Leno, you can't hardly make me watch his show. I never liked him even when he guest hosted the Tonight Show, just can't watch his show at all. I liked Conan back in the day ok, when he still had Andy on the show, I found it really, really stupid, but I could watch it. For most of my adult life I really enjoyed David Letterman. However I've started to not enjoy his show in the last few years. I don't know if I've gotten older or he has, but he just doesn't entertain me quite like he used too.
Now George Lopez I've always enjoyed, but like most late show host he did great when he was a comic and had all year to write one hour worth of material. But now having to do 15 minutes a night, 5 days a week, even with writers...Well, he has his moments, but he suffers out there. I do like his interviews, but he seems a little awkward with his guest still. I do like his set, and he draws good guest and good acts.
Conan, well, he's Conan. I have watched his new show, and it's pretty good. I will say TBS has really opened up the purse strings on Conan and Lopez tonight. They have the best sets of all the Hosts, and really do draw some good guest. TBS, owned by Warner Bros. has a lot to do with that I'm sure. On his first show back on later night, over on TBS, he did play with the band (guest band) and he ROCKED. He plays a really good guitar and can sing..who knew? Conan and Lopez seem to be seeing (at least to the public) their two hour block as a late night "power hour". They talk about each other and promote each other. Even do bits together. That's pretty cool. Lopez seems a little star stuck by Conan really, like he knows he's the new guy. But I think it comes off pretty well.
Now my man Craig Ferguson, now HE'S the man. I really do think he's the best of the lot. His monologue isn't just jokes, it's a whole physical/mental/silly comedy act, with a little naughty dirty edge. He ad libs everything, doesn't seem to believe in Q cards or scripting anything. His guest often complain because he rips up the "guest cards" and doesn't follow any plan on the interviews. He flies totally by the seat of his pants and it shows. You can even tell his monologue isn't scripted, he just goes out with a general idea and runs with it. He brings out he dirty worst in his guest. I recently say an actress on his show and she was pretty naughty and a little slutty on his show. The next night she was on Lopez and seemed like a innocent little church girl. Almost seemed like a different actress, she even acted and talked different. It was kind of weird. He cusses like crazy (it's bleeped of course) and so do his guest. His show is just down right real and funny. I think we see the real people on his show. He brings out the real in people....LOL
Of interest, Craig seem heir apparent to take over The Late Show when Dave turns in his desk. Most of the other shows don't have someone working in the wings for the spot. And you got to admit I'm not sure Dave has that many seasons left. He seems to be winding down.
John Stewart is considered a late night host, but for whatever reason I don't really see his show like the others. It's more a skit then a show to me. But he has a good following and I do enjoy him when I watch. He kind of breaks the mold, his show to me is more like a comedy news shows. It's a little TOO political/news orientated to classify as a true late night show to me. But he's is funny!
So, who are the top dogs? Lets go to the numbers...
Currently Dave and Jay have been duking it out, pretty much running neck and neck since he's been back. But Jay has been dropping viewers lately and for the first time at the end of October Dave beat him. Of the "after" shows Craig really comes out on top, beating or tying his competition most of the time. Overall his 1.8 mil total viewers edge out all others, but that isn't always the "target" ages advertisers want. Be even there he pretty much ties it up. Jon Stewart also fits in this mix viewer wise, falling just a tad short. Colbert trails everyone with about 1.2 mil viewers.
Lopez is trailing the established shows, but is still doing well. His show has brought much needed life into TBS's late night viewership. And with him and Conan together it's going to be something for the others to contend with. The landscape of late night is changing with Comedy Central and now TBS in the fray.
Mostly likely the changes will harm Dave the most, Letterman views have a better chance of switching to Conan's show the Leno views do, Dave and Conan have more in common. But you never really know, sometimes there is just no accounting for taste! LOL
Leno's Tonight Show
Dave's Late Show
Craig's Late Late Show
Conan
Lopez Tonight
Jimmy Kimmel
Jimmy Fallon
Last Call with Carson Daly
Jon Stewart's Daily Show
Colbert
Location : Address not available
It's a testament to Johnny that he's the only host I've ever seen to HAVE guest host.... The Tonight Show was a machine that had to go on with or without its regular host. In it's day if you were going to become someone you had to do The Tonight Show. Johnny Carson would make or break you. Today if a host needs to be away they just play reruns. Could you imagine Conan guest hosting Letterman?? LOL Think not. I think most host today would be afraid to have a guest host, what if they got better ratings? But Johnny never had to worry about that, no one was going to TAKE the reigns until he GAVE them up.
So look what we have today, Jay and Conan drama. Letterman and his Heir apparent Craig Ferguson. Conan now on TBS with George Lopez. Then there's the other players like Jimmy Kimmel, Jimmy Fallon,Jon Stewart, and Carson Daly. All doing what only Johnny Carson used to do. None with his power, but Jay and Letterman coming out on top of the heap.
I really don't have much love for Jay Leno, you can't hardly make me watch his show. I never liked him even when he guest hosted the Tonight Show, just can't watch his show at all. I liked Conan back in the day ok, when he still had Andy on the show, I found it really, really stupid, but I could watch it. For most of my adult life I really enjoyed David Letterman. However I've started to not enjoy his show in the last few years. I don't know if I've gotten older or he has, but he just doesn't entertain me quite like he used too.
Now George Lopez I've always enjoyed, but like most late show host he did great when he was a comic and had all year to write one hour worth of material. But now having to do 15 minutes a night, 5 days a week, even with writers...Well, he has his moments, but he suffers out there. I do like his interviews, but he seems a little awkward with his guest still. I do like his set, and he draws good guest and good acts.
Conan, well, he's Conan. I have watched his new show, and it's pretty good. I will say TBS has really opened up the purse strings on Conan and Lopez tonight. They have the best sets of all the Hosts, and really do draw some good guest. TBS, owned by Warner Bros. has a lot to do with that I'm sure. On his first show back on later night, over on TBS, he did play with the band (guest band) and he ROCKED. He plays a really good guitar and can sing..who knew? Conan and Lopez seem to be seeing (at least to the public) their two hour block as a late night "power hour". They talk about each other and promote each other. Even do bits together. That's pretty cool. Lopez seems a little star stuck by Conan really, like he knows he's the new guy. But I think it comes off pretty well.
Now my man Craig Ferguson, now HE'S the man. I really do think he's the best of the lot. His monologue isn't just jokes, it's a whole physical/mental/silly comedy act, with a little naughty dirty edge. He ad libs everything, doesn't seem to believe in Q cards or scripting anything. His guest often complain because he rips up the "guest cards" and doesn't follow any plan on the interviews. He flies totally by the seat of his pants and it shows. You can even tell his monologue isn't scripted, he just goes out with a general idea and runs with it. He brings out he dirty worst in his guest. I recently say an actress on his show and she was pretty naughty and a little slutty on his show. The next night she was on Lopez and seemed like a innocent little church girl. Almost seemed like a different actress, she even acted and talked different. It was kind of weird. He cusses like crazy (it's bleeped of course) and so do his guest. His show is just down right real and funny. I think we see the real people on his show. He brings out the real in people....LOL
Of interest, Craig seem heir apparent to take over The Late Show when Dave turns in his desk. Most of the other shows don't have someone working in the wings for the spot. And you got to admit I'm not sure Dave has that many seasons left. He seems to be winding down.
John Stewart is considered a late night host, but for whatever reason I don't really see his show like the others. It's more a skit then a show to me. But he has a good following and I do enjoy him when I watch. He kind of breaks the mold, his show to me is more like a comedy news shows. It's a little TOO political/news orientated to classify as a true late night show to me. But he's is funny!
So, who are the top dogs? Lets go to the numbers...
Currently Dave and Jay have been duking it out, pretty much running neck and neck since he's been back. But Jay has been dropping viewers lately and for the first time at the end of October Dave beat him. Of the "after" shows Craig really comes out on top, beating or tying his competition most of the time. Overall his 1.8 mil total viewers edge out all others, but that isn't always the "target" ages advertisers want. Be even there he pretty much ties it up. Jon Stewart also fits in this mix viewer wise, falling just a tad short. Colbert trails everyone with about 1.2 mil viewers.
Lopez is trailing the established shows, but is still doing well. His show has brought much needed life into TBS's late night viewership. And with him and Conan together it's going to be something for the others to contend with. The landscape of late night is changing with Comedy Central and now TBS in the fray.
Mostly likely the changes will harm Dave the most, Letterman views have a better chance of switching to Conan's show the Leno views do, Dave and Conan have more in common. But you never really know, sometimes there is just no accounting for taste! LOL
Leno's Tonight Show
Dave's Late Show
Craig's Late Late Show
Conan
Lopez Tonight
Jimmy Kimmel
Jimmy Fallon
Last Call with Carson Daly
Jon Stewart's Daily Show
Colbert
Location : Address not available
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)