Skip to content

Surf.

There’s been a lot of bad air between Google and Apple, the two future dictators of the world, particularly since Google brought out details of their new phone, which got Steve Jobs all scared. “Make no mistake they want to kill the iPhone.” He said as his mouth foamed and he stroked his knuckles while rocking in a darkened corner. Probably not, but paranoia swelled through what resembled a modern day Harfleur speech, promising that he would not allow Google space in the market, forgetting that competition is what makes capitalism worthwhile. He’s a spoilt child under the assumption that he owns that particular corner of Currys, asserting that, “We did not enter the search business,” implying that Google have broken some sort of unspoken war treaty, and now must be punished and crushed by the wrath of Apple. And his latest war machine prepared to be launched: … a big iPhone. That you can’t call people on. He’s a techno-racist to the point that he’s called Adobe lazy, and blamed Flash for the reason Mac’s sometimes crash. He hates them so much that his iPeriod doesn’t support them, like a ‘whites only’ inn.

Meanwhile, Google has been engaging a war of their own on Internet Explorer, which they want to see pretty much dead. It’s created the revolutionary and eagerly anticipated emailing system Google Wave that will destroy Outlook and MSN, and it’s made so brilliantly that Internet Explorer doesn’t have the capability to cope with it. But, this isn’t a new war. For a few months Google has been attacking IE, particularly with its Google Chrome Frame download which pretty much takes IE and kicks it until it’s a competent web browser.

To this, Bill Gates got scared and insisted that the Frame made everything dangerous and more susceptible to hackings or whatever, probably also while rocking in a corner and stroking his hands, which would not be surprising given how Gates started out in the business, credited for being the first arsehole to charge people for code and programs. Just remember, in the early days, it took a bunch of lawyers to stop Gates from becoming a market dictator.

Really, both Gates and Jobs are simply military politicians, Heads of State’s with armies, up against the agile guerrilla militia of Google. Here’s a test to show you what I mean; Microsoft has Bill Gates, Apple has Steve Jobs, what is Google’s equivalent? I would bet a lot of money that a lot of people wouldn’t have a clue.

And now, Google has just launched the Google Extensions; brilliant little add-ons, carefully named Extensions instead of, hmm, Apps, that allow you to customise your browsing experience. One brilliant one is a twitter API called Chrome Bird that adds a simple little blue bird to your perfectly simple Chrome Browser toolbar, and turns red when you have a new unread tweet, and instantly shows you that tweet if it’s @ addressed to you. You can also have translating extensions, Google Map extensions, even extensions that will wipe each internet page you visit clean of all ads. Some of them hideaway and some of them sit quietly on the tool bar, but none of them really intrude on Google’s minimalistic and calming environment.

My main problem with IE has always been that it’s too busy with too many toolbars and too many boxes that you don’t need. The Google extensions allow you to download what you need, and only clutter your screen as much as you allow them to. Some of them aren’t even completely necessary. I have an extension called ‘Lights Out’ which, when I watch a video, at a press of a button, allows me to dim the rest of the page, except for the playing video, which is nothing more than a nice touch. Chrome Bird isn’t even ‘necessary’. Google was and is so efficient that I could type ‘t’ in the search/address bar, hit enter, and I’m at my twitter feed. Chrome Bird just makes it more … distracting, in a nice way. It gives you a reason to procrastinate a little, and really that’s what we want, we don’t care about being efficient. Given the choice, people will pick a muffin over a calculator, and happily munch away while trying balance their cheque book on sticky chocolaty fingers.

Of course, I haven’t used the Google phone, and the Google OS sounds intriguing, but I haven’t much of a clue of what it’ll involve. However, everything Google does always sounds so much more interesting and honest than Apple’s new things for the anally fixated that must stroke everything, or Grandpa Microsoft’s further attempts to be one of the cool kids. Plus, Google change their logo on holidays. Awesome, huh?

PnL.x

Crystal.

Due to an argument on BBC Question Time over climate change, I felt the cross compulsion to explain; snow is not an argument against global warming. Listen carefully – as the world warms up, the ice caps melt, this fresh and still rather cold water flows out into the seas, shutting down various ocean currents, one being the gulf stream which is the UK’s main barer of heat. That is how it works, just is. Because it’s getting colder doesn’t mean that global warming isn’t occurring, it means it is.

Richard Bacon had to explain to Stephen Baldwin the other day (heard here) that evolution does not explain we are decedents of monkeys, rather that we have a common ancestor. He then mentions humans originated from Africa, which sends Stephen on a right mind fuck, apparently.

Another thing worth noting is that clouds are a collection of frozen water droplets, and not candy floss. Furthermore, stars are suns in other solar systems and galaxies, not lost souls or dead people; cows are killed to make ham; 3 plus 4 is 7; and dragons do not exist.

Hope that helps everyone.

PnL.x

iPeriod.

It’ll be all over your front page in the morning. In a few months, adverts of man’s hand fondling it will flood onto the TV screen. In a year, you won’t be able to walk into a Pret a Mange in Central London without knocking some pinstriped persons purchase of the impossibly slight screen. It’s here, and it’s going to change the world. Maybe. It’s going to do what its cousin did for music, and what its inbred older brother did for phones, and what its father did for long sleeve, collarless, black t-shirts tucked into jeans. Maybe.

There’s no denying that it’s rather cleaver and that newspapers need to figure out how to use it to their advantage before they are trampled by the speeding stampede of crazy apple fan boys as they storm toward the white wash walls of the apple store. It even looks like it’s from the future; a sheet thin hub that connects you straight into the infrastructure that makes life worthwhile and possible – the internet.

However, there is one mistake, which is unfortunate, but was avoidable. All of this fantabulous technology which verges on witch-craft is, in the flick of a key stroke, dashed thanks to its unfortunate and unofficial name. iTampon.

Really, apple lucked out with iPod, being both brilliantly descriptive of the product, but also very clear and unambiguous. The iPhone was obvious. The iPad however, could have been almost anything else.

‘iPortal’ was my initial thought, seeing as it follows the rule of ‘P’. Although it does have two syllables. ‘iSlate’ would corrected this, however it doesn’t begin with ‘P’. Oh the dilemma! I can imagine the heated debates over the issue now, fists banging birch tables in the glass and white office, debating over what on earth to call this invention. And to land on iPad is a mistake that someone, somewhere, will be very annoyed with.

In the first few moments before the press release, twitter buzzed with trending topics such as iSlate and iTablet. It was then announced and iPad became an extremely popular hashtag, mostly thanks to retweeted @mashable posts. And then, low and behold, as the conference closed, as the word spread, and as people questioned the name, the telepathically and internationally agreed upon deliberate misnomer was ascribed and shot straight to the second spot of the trends.

And so, I now implore you, please, prepare for the onslaught. Not only will tomorrow find you burdened with the over bearing face of Steve Jobs on every paper, but you will also find yourself stuffed like a turkey with iTampon related jokes. Something crude about absorbency, I don’t know, but people will have their favourite and people must share, maybe they’ll even have one they made themselves. Beware; they are coming, with drum rolls and symbol clashes cued to ring round your brain. Oh joy.

PnL.x

Epiphany.

So I was eating live bunnies and burning money (or whatever it is you think I would normally do) after writing my last post, when it dawned on me: a shrinking ray would solve everyone’s problems. First off, if we shrunk everyone and everything, we would have more space, and as much of it as we liked if we fitted a little dial on the ray to determine which size to shrink us to. This would mean that over population of the world would no longer be a problem, not to mention the benefits it would have for our energy consumption, as we would need significantly less fuel to power all of our tiny things. We could also diversify the world, build up more colonies, more countries, which would mean more holidays. Even better, we could rejuvenate a large portion of the free space and rebuild rainforests. I mean, a huge sky scraper could be a city – a big city – so the rest of the space can be healed. One felled tree would be enough for an entire populations miniature sized books and recourses to last for ages.

There are a few draw backs. We would need to shrink every single animal, including the insects, to avoid being trampled by a huge puppy, or engaging in wars with beetles. But they are technicalities. We could figure all that out while we’re big.

This realisation has really made me question why scientists are putting so much energy and research into creating efficient solar panels and complicated things with waves and the wind. Surely a shrinking ray is far easier…

PnL.x

Close.

So the clean shaven guy walks in to the mechanics, and the mechanic says something about whatever, and tells him to come round the back. Round the back are these massive Gillett razors on pillars. The mechanic man says something like, “Oh yeah, this is the problem, the blades are old.” And the guy nods and says something inane. Then the mechanic says, “When this little strip turns white, you should think about getting it replaced.” And the guy nods, and sighs, and realisation descends upon him and the Gillett using audience. The one thing that hasn’t be established is how the hell you’re meant to shave your face with something you could easier straddle than hold. It would be like trying to trace Van Gough with a motorbike. (I once tried to trace Van Gough when I was a kid thinking people would think it was amazing, failing to realise that most people were pretty aware of his paintings.)

The next shot is of the clean shaven man shaving (paradox alert!) with a normal size Gillett razor while the Gillett logo spins and more visual effects happen. So … he now has a normal sized one? This means, presumably, obviously, that they have created a shrinking ray and built a miniature Mechanic’s garage for Gillett razors. Surely the shrinking ray is much larger news?

Maybe I just don’t get adverts.

Pnl.x