Steamd

Ina Fried of CNET News did a recent interview with Brad Brooks, the corporate vice president for Windows Consumer Product Marketing at Microsoft, in which Brad explains that Mac buyers pay what he calls the ”Apple tax”. According to him, you pay more for a Mac in time and mone than you would a Windows-based PC. Is it me or does this sound a lot like what John McCain has been saying about Barack Obama. “Vote for ‘that one‘ and you’re sure to get higher taxes!”

The Choice Tax

There really is a tax around there for people that are evaluating their choices going into this holiday season and going forward. There’s a choice tax that we talked about, which is, hey, you want to buy a machine that’s other than black, white, or silver, and if you want to get it in multiple different configurations or price points, you’re going to be paying a tax if you go the Apple way.

I’ll admit it and say that Brad’s got a point…to an extent. There are choices when buying a Mac and each of them do allow for some limited configuration options. If you need a laptop then there are three different choices: MacBook, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air. Need a desktop? You have three choices: Mac mini, iMac, and Mac Pro. Each of them are targeted towards different users with different needs. As far as design, yeah, you’re pretty much stuck with whatever Apple designs. But let’s face it, your typical Apple buyer isn’t concerned about what the computer looks like. Apple has already taken care of that by creating something that is simple and elegant. I rarely see anyone knock Apple for their designs. But for those who simply want something different then, yeah, they’ll have to look elsewhere. Apple is about providing a seamless experience; not about providing customers every option under the sun.

The Application Tax

There’s going to be an application tax, which is if you want choice around applications, or if you want the same type of application experience on your Mac versus Windows, you’re going to be purchasing a lot of software. And even at that you’re not going to get the same experience. You’re not going to get things like Microsoft Outlook, you’re not going to get the games that you’re used to playing.

Well, yes and no. Yes, you will likely have to purchase some software to replace versions that are comparable on the Mac. But it’s like that with any operating system. Hell, going from XP to Vista could require a customer to have to purchase software upgrades. What makes the Mac any different?

And, no, you’re not going to get Microsoft Outlook. But what you will get is a set of programs that come default on the operating system that will suffice for most users: Mail, iCal, and Address Book. For most people, these programs do enough to where Outlook isn’t really needed. Now, if you’re on an Exchange server then, yeah, you’re gonna need Office. 

And games? Last I check virtually all of the most popular games are available on the Mac: Spore, World of Warcraft, Call of Duty, The Sims, and many, many more. Not every game is accounted for but, again, most people buying Macs aren’t really buying them to play games.

The Technology Tax

There’s a technology tax–Apple still doesn’t have HDMI, doesn’t have Blu-ray offerings, doesn’t have e-SATA external disk drives that work at twice the speed of FireWire. And so you’ve got all of these things that are truly taxes.

Apple generally doesn’t adopt a technology unless they are sure that it will be standardized. HDMI may be a current standard for televisions, but a standard for computers? Umm, not really. Most people don’t really need HDMI ports on their computers. Blu-ray adoption rates are pretty slow right now and it’s entirely unclear as to whether there’s a market there yet for Blu-ray drives on computers right now, thus the reason why Apple has decided not to adopt it just yet. The same applies for e-SATA. Why spend money providing the technology for something that isn’t a proven standard and/or there isn’t a good market for? Doesn’t make sense.

The Upgrade Tax

You’ve also got an upgrade tax. The only machine, as far as I know, within the Apple lineup that’s actually upgradeable is the Mac Pro, the $2,800 version, which is (more expensive than) just about any PC configuration that you get from any one of our manufacturers.

The average user has no need for the Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is professionals and/or enthusiasts who really need a high-end workstation computer for gaming, audio/video production, 3D animation, graphics, and other resource intensive tasks. Most people will end up spending about the same as they would for any other quality PC depending on their needs. Every Mac allows for memory upgrades and some even allow for hard drive upgrades and potentially processor upgrades. But, let’s face it, the average computer user doesn’t really upgrade their video card, processor, audio card, or any other components. Most use the computer as-is for the life of the computer. They might upgrade the memory once but that’s about it.

The Windows Tax

If people want a Windows experience, then start with a machine that was built for the Windows experience. There’s no question, if you look at it, and go to Apple’s Web site today, their No. 1 selling feature that they’re telling students as to why buy a Mac is because it does run Windows, and that you can get Office when you’re running it in Boot Camp or Parallels. But, then you’re just paying that tax again. You’re paying for an upgrade to Windows, you’re paying for the full version of Office, where you could get all of that at one price, at a price point that with a Blu-ray disk drive you can get with an $800 range from an HP or Sony.

I just went to the Apple site and clicked the Mac link at the top. Although it is mentioned in the Get a Mac FAQ page, I wouldn’t say that Apple is touting it as the main selling feature. Same applies to the Education page for students. Mac’s can run Windows; that’s just a fact. For some people, the only reason they don’t buy a Mac is because they need Windows to run one stinkin’ program. If they already have a Windows license then they don’t need to buy anything else. They can just buy a Mac and install Windows with BootCamp. So, yeah, it’s a selling point but not the only one. Besides that, why the hell would anyone go and buy a Mac, buy a copy of Windows, and buy Office 2007? Why not just buy the Mac and a copy of Office 2008?

The “What am I getting into” Tax

I think the question is, though, do customers really know what they’re getting into? I don’t personally believe that customers really know that a copy of Parallels is going to cost them $80, or that when they really look at what they’re going to have to pay in terms of another $200 for a (full boxed copy of Windows), that they’re going to pay for another $149 for MobileMe to put on there, Internet services, which they can basically get all the same functionality when they have Windows and Windows Live working together.

Yes, customers know exactly what they are getting into when they buy a Mac. In fact, I think Mac users are perhaps some of the most educated computer users out there. Most Mac users don’t really need Windows so the argument about what is needed to run Windows is moot. The ones that do need Windows are well aware of what is required.  

As for MobileMe, most of the software that is needed already comes with a Mac. MobileMe allows you to sync your calendar, contacts, mail and more between your computer, the internet, and your iPhone. And it even works with Outlook. Can Windows Live do that? Can it sync with Windows Calendar and Address Book? How about syncing with Outlook? No? Then what’s the benefit of having Windows Live then?

The “False Security” Tax

That is a fallacy to think that Macs are somehow invulnerable, or impervious to virus, or phishing, or spyware. And we will tell you that based on our own data that you’re 60 percent less likely to get any type of virus…if you’re running Windows Vista versus Windows XP SP2. And also is that things like phishing scams are very real to the average consumer. And when you have Windows Vista running with IE7, we know that that capability together is blocking well over 11 million different phishing attacks a week. You’ve even got, No. 1, service providers like eBay out there on the Internet today that won’t even recommend you using the Safari browser because it is so compromised when it comes to phishing attacks. So there really is a security story here around Windows Vista running in connection with IE7 that really does create safety for our customers.

You’re right in that some Mac users have a false sense of security. But not all of them think that way. Any computer, regardless of the operating system, is vulnerable to viruses and such. But to say that somehow Windows Vista and Internet Explorer 7 are somehow more secure than OS X and Safari is a silly argument. Macs are more secure only in that it’s not as big of a target as Windows-based machines are. There just aren’t any real virus, phishing, and/or spyware threats out there for the Mac. Those that do get these threats usually get them because they did something stupid. Most Mac users are pretty well educated on what to do security wise so most threats aren’t much of a problem.

The “It’s really not about Apple” Tax

The question is, or the argument is, that understanding what the true value is of Windows and the choices that they make every day, really is not about Apple. It’s really about what is Windows, and understanding having customers understand the different things that Windows brings in terms of compatibility and choice to their everyday lives. And we have just not done an effective job of helping tell that story up until the last couple of months.

So the problem is that customers just aren’t as well educated about Windows as they should be? I take that as a back-handed compliment to Apple because, quite frankly, Apple has done a great job in educating their customers about their products. For the most part, Apple’s products speak for themselves as does OS X. So, honestly, as a business helping understand what the true value is of Windows has everything to do with Apple. Till you understand what makes OS X so great and the value it offers customers you’re never going to be able to truly relate to customers on what makes Windows so different.

Put it this way, I used Windows as my primary OS for the better part of ten years, starting with Windows 95 and used every OS that Microsoft has put out all the way up to Windows Vista. I have never been more confused and felt less educated that the time I spent with Vista. By comparison, the sheer experience of OS X was a breath of fresh air. Never once did I feel like I wasn’t able to do something, that Apple wasn’t able to educate me on what I needed to know about their OS.

The “You can’t do that on a Mac” Tax

But there’s also productivity value that you get on Windows Vista that you can’t get on a Mac. You can’t get Outlook, you can’t get Visio, you can’t get Project. And when you do get applications such as that, they’re usually stripped-down versions that don’t have nearly the amount of features, or the usability like the ribbon on Office. Those types of things just don’t come with a Mac. And that you don’t get the best in terms of hardware experiences, you don’t get high-definition playback on Blu-ray DVD on a Mac. You can’t do it, can’t get it, it’s just not there.

Virtually every application available for Windows has something comparable to it on the Mac. And, no, they aren’t stripped-down version, rather they are just more user-friendly and take a different approach to solving the same problem. Can’t use Outlook? Use Entourage instead (which comes with Office 2008). Visio? Use OmniGraffle. Project? Use OmniPlan or Merlin. Is every single feature accounted for? Not necessarily. But, then again, not every feature is needed. Features like the Office ribbon aren’t needed because OS X itself provides an API that allows for very robust user interfaces. These apps are still very, very powerful and do the job. The argument could be made that apps like these allow you to get your work done faster since they’re easier to use.

Seems that Brad’s argument always comes back to the same thing: Macs can’t play Blu-ray. Maybe not now, but someday they will. You mean to tell me that a good computer experience is predicated on the presence of Blu-ray playback? Who cares! So you can’t play Blu-ray movies. So what? Other than the average traveller who likes to play movies on his/her computer, who else really cares about Blu-ray? Again, adoption rates are slow as it is. Why waste money on an unknown market?

What’s interesting about this interview is that not once did Brad mention the word “design” as part of the description of Windows. The keywords I kept seeing were “features”, “choice”, and “experience” to describe what Windows is. The thing that folks like Brad Brooks, Steve Ballmer, and other at Microsoft simply don’t get is that design matters. It matters a lot. And it especially matters in the case of an OS. Design is more than just the sum of a product’s features. It’s not enough to simply have an array of choices if the majority of choices aren’t that good to begin with. And the user experience is entirely dependent on the design of your product. Good design is about communication, solving problems, and relaying the right information to the user. Without good design, all the features and choices in the world will only make your product come crashing down. 

Is there an “Apple Tax”? No, there is not. People buy Macs because they want a good user experience. They want a product that is well designed, speaks to them, and does what it’s supposed to do. As an ex-Windows users, I believe that a “Microsoft Tax” exists a lot more than an “Apple Tax” does simply due to the lack of user experience and design that exists in Vista.

Just like John McCain, Microsoft just keeps on lashing out at Apple with no real argument other than “Apple sucks!” When will they ever learn that a better strategy would be to simply make a better product.

The more and more I look at the differences between Microsoft and Apple, the more I notice how much they mirror politics. I’ve written about this before (The Presidential Election: Mac vs Windows) and the idea that Microsoft is very much like the Republican party still holds water. Take the recent interview Steve Ballmer did for PC Magazine (Steve Ballmer: Microsoft’s ‘Head Coach’). My bullshit detector went off like a bandit and I just kept asking myself, “Am I reading a John McCain interview?” As Obama might say, Ballmer “just doesn’t get it”.

Ballmer was asked if he was concerned that Microsoft could lose some their Windows market share (currently at 90%). Even though PC Magazine already stated that Apple has an 8% market share, he answers with the following:

Today, Apple has much less share than that. They have about 3 percent of the market—a little less than 3 percent of the total market is Mac. We do our job right—not just Microsoft, we and our partners. I mean, because in some senses, the thing that really competes are Windows PCs against Macs. And Windows PCs come in various flavors and sizes and forms and shapes and price points. And some are good and some are less good. I mean, they’re all over the map. But part of the way we have competed successfully with Apple is not just on the quality of our software versus theirs, but the variety of experiences and choice that we and our partners, hardware vendors, device driver vendors, application vendors provide. And I still think choice—choice on price, choice on capability, choice on applications—I think choice is a big deal. And if we do it right, I continue to think we’ll do very, very well. 

Umm…no Steve, Apple has more than just a 3% market share. Apple had a 3% market share two years ago. Where have you been? In fact, since the interview went to press, it has been reported that Apple’s market share will likely reach 10% by the end of the year.

As the Merovingian said in The Matrix, “Choice is an illusion created between those with power and those without”. Don’t get me wrong, choice is a good thing. However, when it comes to PCs, choice is an illusion because you’re still settling for the one thing that separates Microsoft from Apple: the OS! Microsoft isn’t doing it right with Vista. I’m not sure if Steve understands that yet or he’s just using the whole choice thing to bullshit us.

When asked to justify the $150 price tag for Microsoft Office, Steve had this to say:

In the U.S., without tax, that’s the price I’ll quote because in some countries, the retailers mark it up, in some cases there’s value-added tax, so I’ll just say—we have basically a $100 product. And most people will own that product before they would buy a new one for three years. If you tell me that for $33 a year I get a product that is more capable, that actually reads and writes documents that other people create, that is compatible with what I might use at work and, oh by the way, everybody’s got a set of features that they really do use extensively.

Problem is, Steve, Microsoft Office costs more than $150 if you’re not buying the Home & Student version. When you consider that the Standard version alone costs over $239, it’s more like $66 a year for most people. And you wonder why people don’t upgrade more often than three years? Make a better product and lower the price and more people will buy upgrades. It’s that simple, Steve. As it stands though, all you’re doing is gouging customers. Office documents are practically a standard and, as such, many people feel they have no choice but to buy Microsoft Office. So much for the argument of choice, huh!

When asked about how Microsoft relates to younger people, Steve mentioned this in his spiel: 

I think the world of social networking is sort of barely scratched, and certainly if you look at it today and say what is—on a global basis—it’s ironic—but on a global basis, what is the most popular social networking offering? It’s actually MSN Messenger.

MSN Messenger is the corner stone of Microsoft’s social networking? Really? Really? What about Twitter? Facebook? So, IM and MSN Messenger are the lynchpin of social networking throughout the world? Wow, Steve, you’re REALLY out of touch. 

Finally, the topic turns to the Apple’s “I’m a Mac” and Microsoft’s current “I’m a PC” commercials:

I think they need a little bit of correction, and you’ll see us be much more vigorous about stating the case for the PC. The truth of the matter is, this is ironic. The PC outsells the Mac 33 to 1—32 to 1. And despite the fact that we don’t sell PCs, we only sell Windows to people who make PCs. And the attack is actually on the PCs, interestingly enough. You’ll see us defend the PC. We’re going to talk about why—look, PCs are better than Macs. That is not something that can be debated. 32 out of every 33 times, somebody buys a PC instead of a Mac. I’m not saying that there are not some things that people like about Macs, apparently there are. But have you ever seen a cheap Mac? No.

Saying that PCs are better than Macs is debatable, Steve. If it weren’t then Microsoft wouldn’t feel the need to spend $300 million trying to convince people that the whole “I’m a PC” thing is just a stereotype. Seems pretty clear that you and Microsoft view Apple as a threat and with damn good reason: they’re making a better product and it’s selling! Regarding that cheap Mac, what about a Mac mini? Granted, there aren’t any cheap all-in-one Mac’s out there…but what if one came out that was priced around $800? Would you be worried then? Umm, yeah, you would.

You know, they like to act like Macs are lightweight, there are much lighter weight PC notebooks. Macs—do they have the best battery power? Of course they don’t have the best battery power. Macs tend to have nice screens, but can you get nicer screens for a PC? Of course. Do Macs work in business? No, they do not. Can you get Macs made in your own country? Because in some countries, there’s a lot of sort of, you know, what do you call them? Import duties? Taxes? You can’t get Macs made in those countries, they make them basically one place in the world, and therefore they get even more expensive.

Never ceases to amaze me the crap that Ballmer comes up with to try and make Macs look like a shabby deal. Apple doesn’t make that big deal about how lightweight their notebooks are. However, the Macbook Air is about as light as they come. And battery power? Nice screens? Come on. Have you even used a Mac notebook for longer than 10 minutes? And taxes? Come on. You can do better than that.

Macs don’t work in business? Tell that to an enterprise shop that switched to Macs! I run my business on a Mac every day. Just because Steve Ballmer says it doesn’t make it so. Saying Macs don’t work for business is a myth and complete bullshit.

You know, there are so many—you know, can you find Macs in—I’m very sensitive to exactly what mouse I have on my laptop. Can you find a range of choices? Of course you can’t find a range of choices. You know, anyway—can you find the applications you want on the Mac? Well, you don’t really get full Microsoft Office. Everything from Apple is available, there are still tons of business applications and there’s games—anytime somebody does client software—over time they’ll do a Mac client. Maybe nowadays people do the Mac clients mostly to save time, but that’s only on the high-volume applications. So 32 out of 33 times people chose PCs, there must be something better about the PC, and that’s a story that deserves to be told. I think it’s a story of choice.

So, you mean to tell me that the mouse that Steve Ballmer is using right now won’t work on a Mac? I’m willing to bet that that simply isn’t true. I bet the mouse he’s using will work just fine if he plugged it into a Mac.

And you don’t really get a full version of Office? If that’s the case, then who’s fault is that? Oh yeah! Right! It’s Microsoft’s cause they’re the ones that created it in the first place!

And there are quite a few choices of software for the Mac. Pick any problem and I’ll guarantee you there will be at least two or three solutions to pick from. Granted, not everything is mainstream, off-the-shelf software but it doesn’t have to be. The developers who write software for the Mac would rather save the customer money and sell them online rather than charging more for boxed copies.

And yeah, there’s certainly a lot more choices for Windows software but that also means there is a lot of crap software too. More choice does not automatically mean better quality. And just because more people choose to buy a PC doesn’t mean that PCs are somehow better. If that were true then more people would be buying BMW’s and Porsche’s and such. People who care about quality, ease of use, and design buy Macs. For may others who simply don’t care or are too scared to go out of their comfort zone, they buy PCs.

It gets worse when he starts talking about Vista:

…market research says people who own Vista like it. People who don’t own Vista don’t like it as much. It’s interesting, it’s not the people who own it who don’t like it. The survey results are quite clear on this. Vista owners are happy with Vista, people who haven’t owned Vista yet wonder about it because it did get some early press and there were issues that we’ve worked through on compatibility.

Guess what, Steve? I’m a Vista owner and I don’t like it. And I’m not talking about early use here when these so-called “compatibility issues” existed. I ended up deleting the image off my hard drive and likely won’t start using it again till I absolutely have to. Who are the people in this market research? Are they people like me? What kind of users are represented in this research? If it’s anything like the Mohave experiment then your research is flawed. Only two-thirds of all businesses use Vista and there are plenty of people who don’t like Vista even after using it for some time.

When people are new to a product, they generally tend to like the interface of their old product. So the third thing people say is, gosh, I was used to XP, it was familiar to me, I’m not familiar—I think the user interface with Vista is a clear improvement, but I’m sure the publication you write for—if you guys change the front page, people don’t like it at first, right? So it takes some getting used to. But as people own it and use it, they like it. 

While that may be true most of the time, a lot of the changes made to Vista are so obtrusive and annoying that a lot of people aren’t “getting used to it”. People don’t want eye candy. They just want an operating system that is easy to use, easy to find things, and just works. While Vista is an improvement over XP in many areas it’s a failure in many others. Good product design is more than just eye candy. It’s about communication and solving people’s problems in an effective manner.

While Vista works for many people, others find it a hinderance compared to XP. I for one didn’t like the changes to the Control Panel. Compared to XP, it’s confusing and hard to find anything. I don’t like the organization and where Microsoft ultimately decided to put things. It’s a failure in usability because, even though I might get used to it, I still don’t like it and will still find it confusing now and then. And I’m a pretty smart guy. I can usually figure out things, others probably won’t. Other people might not be as observant as me. Your average computer illiterate Joe will likely have a hard time embracing and using the new control panel over the old one in XP. If I find it confusing you can be sure others who are less experienced than me will definitely find it to be confusing.

What I got out of this interview is that he probably hasn’t really sat down and used a Mac for any real length of time. If Ballmer and others at Microsoft were to force themselves to use a Mac for 3 months straight, they just might start to learn what it is that makes Macs such a good product compared to Windows-based PCs. Truth is that Apple is gaining ground because they are making a better product. Better design, better integration with the hardware, and a better overall user experience. If Microsoft could reinvent Windows to reflect a better user experience then they might just be able to turn themselves around. But until Ballmer and company starts using competitor products and starts understanding what makes them great then I don’t see that happening any time soon.

As evidenced in the current Presidential campaigns, leadership trickles down and effects everyone involved. It’s clear that Steve Ballmer doesn’t get it. He seems very out of touch with what’s going on with computer and the internet these days. Just like many Republicans, Ballmer and company tend to cover their ears and eyes and only hear and see what they want. One of these days maybe Ballmer will get it. Then again, maybe he won’t. And probably by that time, Apple will have gained a 20-30% share of the market.

Good luck, Ballmer!  You’re gonna need it!

Ann Coulter is at it again! Man, is this woman running out of things to talk about or what!? All she can do now is bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch. I’m not even going to go into detail about what she wrote because, quite frankly, it’s the usual right-wing, damn near fascist bullshit that I expect from her. It’s a rant without any real substance because there aren’t any hard core facts. The facts are just whatever she makes them out to be. So I’m not even going to waste my time doing a run by run playback of her crap. Instead, I’m going to talk about why she and the rest of the right-wing nut jobs are running scared these days.

Seems to me that Ann and others like her are in panic mode. She and others just like her can see the writing on the wall: McCain’s campaign is over! And how exactly did this happen? Is it because McCain and Palin can’t keep their mouths shut and can’t run a campaign without getting seriously dirty to the point of lying about Obama? Well, that certainly didn’t help but that’s not entirely it.

No, the real reason is that the McCain campaign was poorly managed. The way I see it, management of a campaign starts with the candidate. As such, McCain has no one to blame but himself. The mood and vibe of the campaign starts with him and trickles down to everyone in the campaign. If he’s crabby, lashes out with nasty comments about Obama, and doesn’t want to answer valid questions about the economy and other important issues, what do you think happens to his campaign? Exactly the same thing.

The McCain campaign has wasted money on nasty TV ads that outright lie about Obama. Plus, they built a rather shitty website that says little or nothing about what McCain would really do as President. I know because I have visited the McCain website at least twice a month to see what’s new. You wanna know what’s really interesting? The site has morphed and changed so many times. In fact, the most recent modifications seem to be a desperate attempt to make the site’s design look more like Obama’s site. I guess imitation is the best form of flattery.

And that’s all I can really say about the way McCain is running his campaign. If the guy can’t run his campaign worth a crap how do think he’ll do in the White House? Umm, duh! Sorry, but his style of management doesn’t persuade me to believe that he’s a good leader and is capable of managing the White House in an effective manner.

Now, let’s look at the Obama campaign.

Obama’s TV campaign is far more focused on the issues. Take the most recent ad, a two-minute ad called “Plan for Change” that was release on September 16th and focuses on the most recent economic issues. Although there have been a few questionable ads here and there, the number of ads that cross the line are no where near the level of John McCain’s ads. Yes, Obama’s ads do attack McCain but is mostly what you expect from just about any politician.

The topper though and a direct counterattack for all of the smears from the McCain campaign is a 14 minute documentary called Keating Economics. This was funded by the Obama campaign and appears to be something they kept in their back pocket just waiting to pull out when McCain decided to get nasty. Smart move on Obama’s part. It’s a well put together little piece.Then there’s Obama’s website, a site that hasn’t changed much since day one. The design is rock solid and the content is well organized. Take a look at the Issues section. I’m very impressed by the fact that they offer a really neat PDF called The Blue Print For Change that explains in detail many of Obama’s policies. Every section is very clear and well written, outlining the problem followed by a plan with solutions.   

What’s even more impressive is that the Obama campaign actually came out with their own iPhone app. I about shit a brick when I saw it! What’s even more impressive is that the application is actually pretty good. The design matches his site and it offers some pretty useful features. I especially like the Issues part of the app. Anytime anyone claims that Obama doesn’t have any plans I can whip it out and prove them wrong.  :D

And here is the whopper of all campaign strategies: a 30-minute block of time on CBS and NBC six days before the election! Yep! The Obama campaign’s grassroots funding actually managed to land enough to fund a 30-minute long ad right before the election! 

So where is McCain in all this? Why can’t his campaign be as well managed as Obama’s? The way McCain has managed his campaign just shows that he’s clearly out of touch. I don’t know about you but I would much rather have Obama as the President because, let’s face it, he sure as hell knows more about running and managing a campaign better than McCain. I’ll take that kind of management experience and leadership any day!  :D

A woman get’s a visit from the Secret Service after telling an Obama volunteer that she won’t vote for Obama because she thinks he is a socialist who voted to let little babies die in hospitals? Is this true? Yes, this is a true story.

However, I wouldn’t be quick to blame the Obama campaign. This could just have easily happened to an Obama supporter getting a call from the McCain campaign. It’s clear that the campaign supporter calling this woman screwed up royally. There is always a bad egg here and there no matter what side of the fence you’re on. Don’t blame Obama on this one.

Do you know who you really need to blame? Blame Bush for allowing the Patriot Act to be passed and allowing for this sort of activity to happen in the first place! If you say anything to a campaign supporter over the phone that resembles a death threat, anything at all, no matter what campaign it is, you are subject to investigation. Even blog posts are subject to investigation. Your right to freedom of speech has been tampered with thanks to the Patriot Act and Obama doesn’t have a damn thing to do with it!

The problem is that 89% of the Senators voted in favor the Patriot Act: Biden, Obama, Clinton, McCain, Cornyn, Dodd, Hutchison, Kerry, and more. They all voted ‘Yea’ on the bill. There were only 10 ‘Nays’ and one ‘Not voting’. What they didn’t expect was that parts of the Patriot Act would be abused. What you’re seeing in the story below is the result of this very thing and there’s plenty of blame to go around for it.

Last Saturday night, my wife and I went to see Henry Rollins at the Lakewood Theater in Dallas. As always with his spoken word concerts, Henry was fired up with many humorous and insightful stories. The guy was relentless spending nearly three non-stop hours on stage. Because this one was called the Recountdown Tour, he definitely talked a lot about the current political situation in our country. 

A couple of things really stuck out for me about what Henry said. First, he feels that all wars are avoidable and that “if peace were profitable then there would be no more war“. I completely agree with Henry on this. I think most wars can be avoided by simply sitting down and talking to leaders before any military action takes place.

Second, towards the end of his show, Henry mentioned how much our country has changed just in the last 8 years. In fact, if you look around and really see what’s going on you’ll notice that little bit by little bit our freedoms are slowly being taken away from us. I thought about this and a word came to mind, a word that Henry himself mentioned that describes the phenomenon he was talking about. Now, I’m not going to go into every detail about what Henry said. Instead, I’m going to give you some points to think about that illustrates what Henry said. He didn’t mention all of these but did touch on quite a few.

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism

Ever since 9/11 and even before, many in the U.S. have become preoccupied by the symbols of our nation. Lapel pins, flags, pride in our military with “Support Our Troops” ribbons, catchy phrases like “County First”, all in an effort to show an exuberant amount of patriotism and nationalism for our country. While this is all fine and dandy, none of these are substitutes for real patriotism and nationalism. You can’t judge a person on whether they wear a lapel pin or not. You can only judge them on their actions.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights

The use of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) has led to the current administration to completely ignore our Constitution and international law in an effort to justify certain actions for the sake of national security. Long incarcerations and torture of suspected terrorist detainees and an ignorance of our Constitutionally protected right of privacy have all been the result. The fear they have injected is that if they don’t do this then the terrorists will strike again. However, while other countries have seen some terrorist attacks here and there, not one single terrorist attack has happened on U.S. soil since 9/11. The current administration would have you believe that it’s because of the success they have had in extracting information about terrorist activities from detainees. Sorry, I don’t buy it.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause

If you dig in real deep and listen very carefully to the message that many right-wing personalities spew out, people like Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, and more, you’re notice that they are constantly blaming the countries problems very specific groups of people. You’ll hear them talk about how all Liberals are evil and Godless, labeling some of the actions of certain politicians as socialism and/or communism. You’ll hear them bash gays and the prospect of gay marriage. The word “enemy” is used over and over and over for anyone and everyone that they are completely opposed to. They tend to try and shift the blame and control what people think through the use of relentless misinformation and propaganda. In other words, they lie!

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism

Given the current price tag for the Iraq war has been over $800 billion and rising, it’s pretty clear that the current administration’s idea of diplomacy is an overuse of our military. Bomb first, ask questions later. Doesn’t matter that our country has a growing checklist of problems within our borders nor does it matter whether or not if our country can afford to continue a war, our countries current leaders still insist that military action is necessary and thus the deficit continues to grow. Like Rollins said, war can be avoided. Why does our country always insist that the answer to any problem with another country is war?

5. Rampant sexism

Sexism seems to have risen a bit over the years. If it’s not gays in the military then it’s an opposition to gay marriage. Also, the battle over pro-life vs pro-choice continues to run rampant. Some even say that abortion should be illegal even in cases of rape and incest. 

6. A controlled mass media

Lately, the press has been attacked with some news groups being labeled as having a left-wing bias. In recent years there was even talk about the medias use of anonymous sources and about how bloggers should not be considered part of the media. In the case of the McCain campaign, interviews with the candidates are kept at a minimum if not at all.

7. Obsession with national security

There is no doubt in my mind that the topic of national security has been overused as a tool to convince the American public of certain political actions. This was especially evident after 9/11 with the overuse of the threat level color coding we saw on the news every other day. It’s pretty clear that Bush’s re-election in 2004 was mostly due to his constant pushing of national security. Even McCain is attempting to use national security as a hot topic for his campaign.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together

A week doesn’t go by when I don’t see something that describes Liberals as “godless”. A primary example of this is a book by Ann Coulter entitle (you go it!) “Godless“. Personally, I have seen no other time when talks about the separation of church and state have been greater. Nor have I seen a greater number of people using religion as a means of justifying so many actions that would otherwise be unjustifiable such as calling the act of going to war in Iraq as “God’s will”.

9. Power of corporations protected

Greed and power are extremely good motivators and when these two things are brought to the forefront, corporations are usually the ones that profit from these the most. 

Since war is profitable, it’s only fitting that the Iraq war is highly profitable for corporations like Halliburton, Titan, and others that provide services that would have otherwise been done by our military if the current administration had not have privatized many sectors of our military. Oil companies like ExxonMobil, Chevron, and others also profit from the war. We are told that the war has everything to do with terrorism and yet it seems like it has more to do with protecting our interests, namely oil. 

Corporations also had a hand in the current mortgage and financial crisis in part due to the deregulation of the banking industry. As such, institutions like Enron ran rampant and banking institutions were allowed to merge and take severe risks with people’s money. In the end, the government is forced to bail out the industry and the people who helped create the mess, namely the CEOs and other executives, still profit from it. 

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated

In the past ten years, labor unions have decreased significantly in part because corporations are suppressing the ability for labor unions to exist. Companies like Walmart do everything they can to keep labor unions from forming among their employees. Employees are harassed and eventually fired for bogus reasons should word get out that they are part of a labor union. Lobbyists for many corporations have been lobbying for years to change the rules on overtime pay and the definition of a full-time work week and many other efforts that allow corporations to continue to suppress labor unions.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts

Over the years, I have seen a growing decline in the funding of the arts in schools. Music and art programs have become all but non-existent in some schools around the nation. Even though it has been proven that students who learn something about music and art do better in subject like math the continued funding simply isn’t there for one reason or another.

Instead, we hear a lot of talk about having prayer in schools, the use of the “God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, and the teachings of the theory of evolution being replaced by creationism.

As Henry Rollins pointed out in his show, scientists have been under attack by the right-wing for their views on global warming. The skeptics attack the scientists and make outrageous claims that they are somehow corrupt and just making up everything even though the facts speak for themselves. 

12. Obsession with crime and punishment

Over the years we have seen many abuses of our civil liberties. The death penalty and repeal system is continually talked about and redefined especially in cases involving suspected terrorists. Hundreds ofsuspected terrorists continue to be held at Guantanamo Bay and still await trial. The Patriot Act still continues to live on even though it promotes excessive wiretapping and invades our right to privacy. Then there is the hubris that exists within our current administration in that they continually tried to redefine the powers of the President and Vice President with powers that are not granted to them by the Constitution all in an effort to have unfettered power to punish suspected terrorists even when no proof exists.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption

Lobbyists, tax loopholes, ex-CEOs being appointed to higher political positions, money being secretly exchanged under the table between corporations and political officials. All of these are signs of cronyism and corruption. Enron, Jack Abramoff, Tom DeLay, Scooter Libby, Halliburton, the list goes on and on.

14. Fraudulent elections

The biggest sign of fraudulent elections came in 2000 when the Presidential election was completely hosed up due to the way Florida handled the counting of votes. Thanks to the Supreme Court, no one was able to find out who really won. What also became apparent was that voting machines made by Diebold and others were severely flawed and could have been tampered with. As a result, Ohio and other states were put into question during the 2000 and 2004 elections. Many states have gone back to using paper ballot but even then it’s not clear if the system will work right especially given all the controversy surrounding the “butterfly” ballot in Florida with the 2000 election.

Now, you may look at the 14 points I have listed and commented on here and you may think these are completely overblown. Regardless, I don’t think anyone can deny that each of these exist to some degree. Even then we should be greatly concerned that any of them exist. What was the word that Henry mentioned that all these 14 points have in common?

Fascism.

A gentleman by the name of Lawrence W. Britt wrote an article for Free Inquiry magazine where he laid out fourteen common threads that link patterns of national behavior with abuses of power. The title of the article? “Fascism Anyone?” Yep, we’re talking about the beginnings of our country moving to a more fascist society. Just look at the rise of Hitler and the Nazi party. I mean, really look at it. Also look at the Italian regime of Mussolini. These were authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing systems of government and social organizations. Do you see any similarities and parallels to what is going on today? If so, you should be worried.

One of the other growing concerns is how we are perceived globally. It’s a known fact that there is some disdain towards the government of our country on a global level. Many countries have grown to not like the U.S. for one reason or another. While the reasons are mixed, I think one of them is that they are seeing elements here and there of fascism, of our government becoming more and more of a dictatorship than a fledging democracy. I’m not saying that we have a fascist society; only that we have some of the high level elements that go into creating that environment and I think other countries see that. 

It has been said by some in other countries that if Barack Obama was to be elected President that confidence in the United States would instantly go up by 50%. Why? Because compared to McCain, Obama embodies all the things that most other countries favor: proper diplomacy, less bravado, responsible use of our military, better trade relations, and a firm understand of globalization and the global economy. When you look at it like this then using the current comparisons of “more of the same” versus “change” really does hold a lot of water. Unfortunately for McCain, “more of the same” means embracing the right-wing and potentially embracing the possibility of a continued rise in the elements of fascism. That, my friends, is a dangerous road and one that would most definitely lead to some highly destructive results. You think 9/11 was bad? Think again.

So, how do you keep this from happening? Simple. Get out and vote in the 2008 election! Vote for Barack Obama!

Because of some comments on a recent post I did about Hummers, there are a few things that I think bear repeating, a few things I want to clear up in regards to what my blog is about and what it’s not about.

In another recent post, I talked a bit about the Rage on the Radio (iTunes) story I watched on Bill Moyers Journal. The story includes a report about a man by name of Jim David Adkisson who shot and killed two adults and wounded seven others at a church in Knoxville, Tennessee. The reason? According to reports on both MSNBC and CNN, Adkisson did it because he was frustrated with not being able to find a job, was on the verge of losing his food stamps, and blamed Liberals for it. Since he couldn’t attack any known Liberal political figures, he attacked a church with known Liberal teachings instead. According to his affidavit, Adkisson felt that the Democrats had tied his country’s hands in the war on terror and they had ruined every institution in America with the aid of major media outlets. The question is though: Where did he learn this?

… police found in Adkisson’s apartment, books by popular right-wing talk-radio personalities who berate and denigrate liberals. One of the books police found in Adkisson’s apartment was Michael Savage’s “Liberalism is a Mental Disorder”. In it, Savage calls liberals “the enemy within our country;” “an enemy more dangerous than Hitler”; “traitors” who are “dangerous to your survival” and who “should be placed in a straightjacket”. Like Adkisson, Savage accuses liberals of “[tying] the hands of our military”.

Words hurt. People can get hurt by the things that others say in the media. That includes what bloggers say too. 

For instance, take Michael Savage who wished AIDS on a caller, who hates Muslims, and talks nonsense about gay marriage. Check out the video where he goes completely postal on Liberals.

Then there’s Rush Limbaugh and his description of Operation Chaos, especially the part where he condones the act of violent riots with burning cars and the whole bit.

And, finally, there’s Ann Coulter. Regardless of whether you support Obama or not, when someone insinuates that Obama worships Lucifer and compares his book to Mein Kampf, that’s really stretching it thin. But it doesn’t stop there. She goes on and on in many blog posts and TV appearances spreading hatred for Liberals, about how Liberals are godless and that they are all liars. Hell, she even wrote a book called “Godless”. I’m not even a Liberal and even I find all this offensive.

What these people say can have a dramatic impact on people. Their words have influence and can hurt people. But while I don’t condone this sort of talk, I don’t condone outright banning these people from doing what they do. Our First Amendment rights give us the freedom to say what we want and express ourselves. I would never in a million years ask anyone to forfeit that right. While I don’t agree or condone this sort of talk, I do hope that these people understand that they must be responsible and held accountable for what they say. Words do hurt, people.

Which brings me to the point of my blog. Most readers don’t know me. Most people don’t know what I’m really like. Yeah, you can get an idea based on what I write about on this blog, but even then you’re only getting a very minute chunk of what I’m all about. Chances are that if you met me you might even enjoy a conversation with me. As such, I would ask that anyone reading my blog to not pass any judgement or stereotype on me based on anything I write. I’m far from being the sort of hate monger who writes things that actually motivate people to do bad things.

I tend to rant here and there and try at best to offer something constructive as much as possible. But my rants don’t hurt anybody. I don’t resort to calling people names and using stereotypes and labels. All I’m doing here is voicing my opinion. My blog is after all called Steamd for a reason. Occasionally I will write about things that piss me off. If you don’t like what I write then simply don’t read it. It’s that simple.

In the case of the Hummer post, I formed a broad generalization about Hummer drivers. Yes it’s generalized but in no way, shape, fashion, or form does it motivate anyone from committing an act of vandalism. I made it very clear at the very beginning of this post that I do not condone the act of vandalism on anyone’s vehicle. That includes what the old man did. All I said was that while I do not agree with the act of vandalism, I understand the motivation of what would cause someone to do it. Like I said, I may be generalizing a bit about Hummer drivers.

Just to be clear, here’s the main points I was trying to make in the Hummer post: Being that the average Hummer only gets 10/15 MPG, what part of that generalization isn’t true? How many Hummer owners do you know that actually care about environmental issues and energy conservation? Although it’s a broad generalization, how much of that isn’t true? Do any of them care at all about the environment? Does smog levels bother them? What about alternative fuels? Would Hummer owners like to see a Hummer that gets better gas mileage? Those are the questions I’ve been asking. My opinion is that most don’t care. But that’s just my opinion. It’s not stereotyping. It’s deductive reasoning.

My opinions and what I do on my blog isn’t even remotely close to the kind of media that other bloggers and media personalities are spewing out every day. I don’t spread severe anger and hate. I’m far more constructive and rational in my thoughts. I may get fired up here and there but that’s not hurting anyone. I’d much rather get fired up and express myself rather than let real hate mongers have their way. But that’s just me.

A few days ago, I caught a story about a man who got caught keying a Hummer:

I understand why he did it: because Hummers suck! If I saw a $50,000 Hummer H2 sitting in a high school parking lot, I might considering keying it to. It’s bad enough that the father who owns the car let his kid drive it to school. Even worse is the fact that he installed surveillance cameras because (get this!) his last three Hummers were vandalized. Umm, gee, you think maybe you might consider a different type of vehicle?

Granted, what this man did was wrong. There is simply no justification to damaging someone else’s property just because you don’t approve of it. I would never condone the act of vandalizing a Hummer…but I understand.

So, why all the animosity over the Hummer? Why should anyone be pissed about a car like this? I mean, it is a free country. Anyone can drive any kind of car they want, right? Well, yeah, but let’s face it: when you drive a Hummer, it’s very clear that you don’t give a shit about the environment or energy conservation.

Let’s examine the average Hummer for a second:

According to the GM Fleet and Commercial website, a Hummer H3 gets around 14 MPG in the city and around 18 MPG on the freeway. By comparison, even the most fuel efficient full-size pickup trucks get around 15/20 MPG.

Thanks to federal fuel efficiency regulations, GM is not required to report the fuel efficiency of the Hummer H2 since it’s gross weight is over 8500 lbs. However, owners have reported that they get a whopping average of around 10 MPG in the city! Yep, it’s a gas guzzler!

On top of that, the Hummer H2 has a huge carbon footprint, gushing out an average of 3.4 metric tons of carbon emissions per year. That’s twice what an average sedan spits out!

But the bigger slap in the face is a tax loophole, known as the Hummer Tax Loophole, that allows business owners to get up to a $25,000 tax deduction for buying large SUV’s like the Hummer or the Cadillac Escalade. By comparison, according to the IRS website the highest tax incentive for a hybrid vehicle is around $3,000 for a Ford Escape Hybrid! Pisses you off, doesn’t it. 

Regardless of how high gas prices have skyrocketed, Hummer drivers just keep sucking up all that gas simply because they can afford it. They simply don’t care that so many Americans are having a hard enough time as it is to keep fuel in their tanks. If they did then they would consider trading them in for hybrids and other more fuel efficient vehicles. I’m pretty sure GM could find a way to make the Hummer into a smaller carbon footprint by taking the trade-ins and using them as scrap metal.

So, with all this in mind, it’s no wonder that some people feel the need to key a Hummer. Again, I’m not saying it’s right…but I understand.

A while back, I talked a bit about Microsoft’s efforts to boost their image through a series of upcoming ads featuring Jerry Seinfeld. Well, they came…

And then they went. What happened? Well, if you’re a Seinfeld fan, the commercials are quite humorous here and there. Otherwise, it seems most people found them to be awkward and, quite frankly, they didn’t do a damn thing to boost Microsoft’s image.

So, where does Microsoft go from here with the rest of their $300 ad budget? 

Now they’re aiming to redefine what “I’m a PC” really means with a new series of ads that attack Apple’s own ad campaign head-on:

And, here’s another version:

So, what’s the problem with this? Why will this campaign ultimately fail? As John Gruber of Daring Fireball pointed out, the characters in the Apple commercials are just computers personified. They don’t actually represent real computer users:

They’re not dressed as computers, they’re dressed as people. It’s postmodernism taken to a very silly and profoundly unserious commercial end.

Microsoft would have you believe that Apple is trying to put a stereotype on the average PC user. The reality is that Apple isn’t trying to stereotype the average PC user…just the average PC. And there in lies the problem with Microsoft’s campaign, that they still haven’t talked about the very thing that is causing all their problems to begin with: their product.

Seriously, do any of these commercials really make you feel that their products are any better? Do they? Do any of these ads make you feel like Windows is indeed better than the Mac OS? No? Why not? Because they don’t want to talk about Windows, that’s why. There’s nothing to talk about.

Just like the Seinfeld ads, there is absolutely no mention of Windows at all. Nothing. They don’t even talk about the very issue that is at the core of Microsoft’s problems, the fact that people are losing faith in Windows due to the abysmal reaction to Windows Vista. But rather than dealing with it, they’d much rather tell people that the problem isn’t with their product. No, the problem is you, the customer! It’s all in your head and it’s Apple’s fault because they put a stereotype in your mind!

Is it me or do you get a feeling like they’re just placating the viewer like a McCain/Palin ad? Strange how these things parallel. Wonder what a “Hello, I’m a Democrat.” “And I’m a Republican.” commercial would sound like? Hmm…

More “I’m a Mac” political parodies on YouTube!  :)

It’s been a while since I last did a blog post. Much has happened and a lot has been gelling in my mind. There’s been a lot on the political front, so much that I felt I should take the time to draw it all in, research everything, and write a highly constructive entry rather than just regurgitating my initial gut reaction. That’s pretty much what I’ve been aiming to do with every new blog post I write. Granted, I can’t get away with avoiding any emotional reactions but I can at least stay as constructive as I possibly can and not ignore the facts. Lots of writing to come, but for now let’s talk about something I’ve been thinking about this week:

I regularly watch Bill Moyers Journal on PBS. Bill Moyers is among some of the greatest journalists of our time. His factual, non-biased approach usually leads to some highly thought-provoking pieces that reveal many answers and often lead to more questions. I had the privilege of meeting Bill back when I was in school. It was around the time when his book, Genesis: A Living Conversation, came out. I told him that I looked forward to reading it, for which he replied, “Please do…and when you’re done, let other read it and talk about it with them”. He encourages others to engage in conversation about many of the topics he reports about. That one little take-away says a lot about the man and as such I gained a lot of respect for him. Since it was a book signing, I asked him to sign his book for me. He signed it as “For Jeff - a kindred spirit. Bill Moyers”. 

Last week, I watched an excellent story on Bill Moyers Journal entitled Rage on the Radio. I highly encourage everyone to watch the video and/or read the transcript of the program (the video is also available on iTunes). The program details the nature of “Shock Jock” media and what kind of message that personalities like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Michael Savage are spreading. The message it seems is one filled with lies, hatred and intolerance.

Due to our First Amendment rights, I would never encourage any program to be forced off the air. However, I would ask that personalities that do engage in conversations of hatred and intolerance think about their message, the lies, and the consequences of them. There are consequences, a fact that we can not ignore, some of which even lead to hate crimes.

Case point, one of the talking points in Bill’s piece was about a man by name of Jim David Adkisson who shot and killed two adults and wounded seven others at a church in Knoxville, Tennessee?  The reason? According to reports on both MSNBC and CNN, Adkisson did it because he was frustrated with not being able to find a job, was on the verge of losing his food stamps, and blamed Liberals for it. Since he couldn’t attack any known Liberal political figures, he attacked a church with known Liberal teachings instead. According to his affidavit, Adkisson felt that the Democrats had tied his country’s hands in the war on terror and they had ruined every institution in America with the aid of major media outlets. The question is though: Where did he learn this?

… police found in Adkisson’s apartment, books by popular right-wing talk-radio personalities who berate and denigrate liberals. One of the books police found in Adkisson’s apartment was Michael Savage’s “Liberalism is a Mental Disorder”. In it, Savage calls liberals “the enemy within our country;” “an enemy more dangerous than Hitler”; “traitors” who are “dangerous to your survival” and who “should be placed in a straightjacket”. Like Adkisson, Savage accuses liberals of “[tying] the hands of our military”.

Now, I’ve talked about Ann Coulter a number of times on my blog. A couple of days ago, Ann posted a new blog post called Obama: Lucifer Is My Homeboy.  Like many other posts made by Coulter, the title alone is controversial and hateful enough. Now, I’m not going to go into too much detail here, rather I would encourage readers to read it and decide for themselves.

In her post, Ann talks about how a nutty Al Gore inverted a Christian parable into something nearly satanic, about Democrats attacking Sarah Palin for being a Christian, while comparing Obama to Jesus Christ, and about what the Pledge of Allegiance is really all about and what all this ”under God” stuff really means. In a nutshell, she is saying that if you are a Democrat and/or a Liberal then you are not a true Christian. Doesn’t matter that Barack Obama is a devout Christian. Doesn’t matter that his running mate, Joe Biden, is a devote Catholic. Nor does it matter that no one in the Obama campaign, not one person, has attacked Sarah Palin on her religious beliefs. Doesn’t matter. All that matters is that she and others hate all Liberals no matter what. So, basically, if you are Liberal, don’t have a pro-life stance, and don’t believe in God the same way she and other right-wing neo-Conservatives do then you are the devil incarnate and you will be hated and scorned. So I guess love your enemy and turn the other cheek doesn’t mean anything to Ann and her devote followers. If this isn’t a message of hate and intolerance then I don’t know what is.

For all intents and purposes, Ann Coulter is inline with Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, and other right-wing extremists in her message. As such, she is just as responsible for the actions of Jim David Adkisson as Michael Savage. Although it wasn’t Michael Savage or Ann Coulter that pulled the trigger, their words have power and those words encouraged Adkisson and many others to think a certain way.

Back in April, Ann compared one of Barack Obama’s books to Mein Kampf.  The irony is that by this association she inadvertently associated herself with Hitler. Why? Think about it. Hitler spread a message of hate and intolerance by singling out Jews, calling them “traitors”, deeming them as dangerous to the country and suggested that they all be locked up. What do you think that Ann and other right-wing whack jobs have been talking about? That Liberals are to be hated, that they are dangerous and are bad for the country.

Folks, this kind of message is poisonous and just bad news all over. For anyone to presume that their religion is more correct and that everyone else is wrong is bad enough. But to go even further and deliberately denounce a group of people based on their political beliefs with a message of sheer hatred and intolerance, that’s just madness. Jesus Christ was about love and tolerance, not hatred, intolerance and lies. This kind of message is a distortion of what it means to be a true Christian. True Christians don’t lie. True Christians don’t hate. And true Christians are tolerant of others that may not share their beliefs.

So I challenge Ann Coulter with this question: What would you say and how would you defend your message to the people whose lives were change by Jim David Adkisson, a man who listened to others like you who have a similar message?

Yesterday, I finally had my fill of Windows Vista and gave it the one-fingered salute by hitting the delete key. I’ve never seen more problems in succession with any other operating system. Just wasn’t worth the hassle. A little bit of background on the issue.

I’m a Mac user and have been for nearly a year now. But I’m also a web developer and still need to use Windows to test sites with Internet Explorer. As such, I use Parallels Desktop to run Windows in a virtualized environment. Upside of this is that I can run both the Mac OS and Windows without having to reboot. I run a copy of Windows XP to test a variety of browsers in Windows as well as my ComicBase comic book database software since there is no Mac equivalent. I was also running a copy of Vista so that I could test both Firefox 3.0 and the latest Internet Explorer 8 beta.

Even before yesterday, I had problems running Vista right on my Mac. By comparison to XP, Vista runs like a dog in Parallels. It’s slow, sluggish, and takes forever to start. Granted, I’m on a Mac mini with 2 gigs of RAM so Vista doesn’t stand a chance of running quite as well anyways. But XP runs quite well and is quite snappy. I just don’t see why Vista couldn’t be the same.

First problem I encountered yesterday was a lovely message telling me that my copy of Vista was “not genuine”:

I know damn well that my copy of Vista is “genuine” because I have a CD that Microsoft themselves sent me in the mail. So I clicked the link, which opened up a page in Internet Explorer, and let it update the Windows Genuine Advantage software and activate Windows. Even now, I have no clue as to why this popped up in the first place. Didn’t make any significant changes to Windows or nothing. Just popped up out of the blue.

Next, I figured I’d go ahead and check for updates since I don’t keep Vista running long enough to allow it to update itself. So off I go into the control panel. Seems like every time I visit the new control panel I have to pause and wonder why it’s a confusing mess. I mean, compared to XP, I feel like I can’t find anything. After that, I end up spotting what I wanted and double-click it.

With Vista, Microsoft no longer uses the Windows Update website. If you try and visit the Windows Update site in Vista all it does is automatically open the Windows Update applet from the control panel. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing but it would be nice to have a choice.

One this is for certain though: updates take forever to complete in Vista! It took a while to get a list of the updates required. I’m not talking about just a few minutes here. I’m talking like more than five minutes. I mean, what is it doing that requires that much time just to get a list of updates for my machine? By comparison both my Mac and Linux are lightning fast when it comes to looking up available updates.

Once I do get a list of updates, apply them takes even longer. In this case, there were about 17 updates totaling about 100 megs. The download of the updates didn’t take long but apply them certainly did. Now, I understand that updates can take a bit to apply on any operating system. But the time it takes on Vista is ridiculous. I’ve always had a problem with the way patches and updates are applied in Windows. They even take too much time in XP and almost nearly require a reboot every time. So I let Vista finish the updates and reboot my virtual machine.

Upon rebooting, I was greeted with and black screen with white letters telling me that Vista could not boot due to a missing file and that I would have to use my Vista DVD to repair the installation. Sigh. Lovely. Another 15 to 20 minutes wasted. So I boot in with my DVD, repair the thing, and it slowly boots onto the desktop again.

At first, I didn’t see anything but a black screen with some text in the bottom-left that indicated that my copy of Vista was “non-genuine”. “Not that again!”, I thought. I was completely locked out so…I shut down the virtual machine and restarted it.

This time I got it to boot onto the desktop and, guess what? Another “not genuine” message! Isn’t that lovely! This time it wouldn’t even let me do anything till I validate and re-activate Vista:

Uh oh! Run to the hills! The Vista police are coming to take you away because you might be a victim of software counterfeiting! The Vista terrorists have struck again!

At this point I just threw up my hands and said, “That’s it!” I immediately shut down Vista and deleted the image off my computer. After all, I don’t really need Vista to test Firefox 3.0 and Internet Explorer 8. Another image of Windows XP will do just fine for that task. 

I mean, really…does it have to be this hard and difficult to keep Vista running smoothly? I didn’t even use it that often but when I did it was like pulling teeth with each use. As to when I might use Vista again for testing, I have no idea. That day may not come until it’s absolutely, positively necessary. Until then though I’ll keep using XP for as long as I have to. 

So Microsoft gets an official one-fingered salute for giving me such a bloated piece of crap. Have a nice day.