An article I came across today in the WSJ has me really steamed.  Apparently, President Obama has nothing better to do than to fly out west to hold fundraisers and show support for Democrat Senators Michael Bennet and Harry Reid.

Now, this gets me steamed for two reasons – first of all, these trips take the President away from what he should be concertinaing on – fixing our economy, improving our international relations, working with the Intelligence and Defense communities to make our nation safer and more secure, and maybe taking another crack at a Universal Health Care proposal that could attract more of a bi-partisan interest.  After all, he technically works for us, the American people, and I can say that as his boss, I certainly do not approve of these extra-curricular activities.

Secondly, and this is probably something that irritates me more is the massive cost of flying the President out to the West Coast on his nice big jet, not the mention the cost of all of the extra security and other personnel that goes into a Presidential visit.  In this time of massively growing deficits, why the heck does the President need to spend taxpayer money to prop up the flagging campaigns of Senators who are behind in the polls largely because their constituents are obviously not too pleased with them?  What should happen is that either the campaigns of these embattled Senators or the Democratic National Committee should be charged the full cost of the President’s visit.  If you want to have the President come out and support you, fine – but you, rather than the taxpayers should have to foot the bill for the visit.  Really – is that such an unreasonable thing to ask?

Now in fairness, while this diatribe is largely directed at President Obama, he is far from the only person to whom these concerns apply.  Republican and Democrat presidents have long done exactly what President Obama is doing this week.  That said, it does not make it right and we should change the rules to prevent it from happening in the future.  Politicians whether they are local, state, or federal, should not be permitted to use public funds for personal purposes.  I’m not sure how we change the rules given the fact that the body who could most easily enact the change, Congress, is one of the largest beneficiaries of this largesse, but as citizens we need to start looking at more of these types of things and asking questions.

Let me know what you think.

Jim

Well, the moment is past and Apple has introduced its new iPad to the world.  There were few surprises, but generally they were good ones.  With pundits forecasting prices in the range of $750 – $1,000, the iPad’s starting price of $499 was unexpected (even if few people will actually buy the really low end version).  Furthermore, the unlimited data plan of $30 a month is half what I predicted yesterday and the option of a $15 250 mb/month download plan for people like me who would only be occasional users of 3G service was even sweeter.  The one major unpleasant surprise was the fact that the iPad remains tied to AT&T and with the ridiculously low 3G prices that Apple obviously dictated, my guess is that Verizon support is probably a good way off.

Unfortunately, this means that AT&T already overburdened data network is going to get smacked even harder making the decision to purchase a wi-fi only version of the Gen 1 device an easier one.

What is instructive is how so many blogs and others have come out discussing the shortcomings of the device.  Expectations were lofty no doubt, but from where I sit, the iPad pretty much hits its target.  For discussion purposes, let’s have a look at objections raised by Crave, a CNET gadget blog.  They cited five shortcomings of the iPad, most of which I think are a bit ridiculous.  Let’s look at them:

The iPad isn’t wide screen – I have to admit that after reading this twice, I still don’t understand what the author is getting at.  I think he is complaining about the lack of true HD proportions in the iPad.  If so, then all I can say is whether this is 720p or 1080p, it is still a friggin’ 10 inch screen.  You are not, repeat, not, going to really be able to appreciate a High Def picture on such a small screen.

Video Output is only 480p If you plug this into your TV, you are only going to be able to stream at 480p, not 720p or 1080p.  Okay, granted, but really, these days, I have dedicated media streaming devices plugged into my televisions that are capable of streaming anything I want in high def.  The iPad for me (like the iPod and Zune) is strictly a portable playback device.  I have no interest in plugging it into my TV, so I have no problem with Apple leaving this feature out.

No GPS – Granted, there is Cellphone-assisted GPS in the 3G model, but you need a 3G subscription to use it.  This is a shortcoming that I will agree is a shame as this would have been a dynamite device for navigation applications.  A second gen device might have it, but Apple does not have any history of using straight GPS chips – it’s iPhone also uses 3G assisted GPS, so it might also be a feature many years away.

No USB Ports – Not sure if I really care here.  The iPad has a dock connector like the Ipod and Iphone models do.  The CNet writer bemoans that he cannot plug  his digital camera in to download pictures.  Well, with 16/32/64 GB of memory total, I’m not sure how much I want to be downloading pictures directly into the limited memory of the iPad.  I think that Jobs did mention some sort of interface for cameras being in the works, but we’ll have to see on this.

No Camera -  This is probably the only objection that I really agree with. The form factor of this device would have made it a perfect as a personal videoconferencing terminal, so having a camera in the bezel would have been nice.  Perhaps this might be a Gen 2 feature.

Beyond objections like the aforementioned one, it’s instructive to see the various comparisons floating around the net, specifically the ones that compare the Amazon Kindle to the Apple iPad.  These concerns are kind of silly because at the end of the day, you are comparing Apples (no pun intended) to Oranges.  The Kindle is a single purpose device that does its job very well.  The Apple is a multi-purpose one that does a reasonably good job as an ebook reader, but also does a whole lot more.  To understand how things will fare, one needs to look back at the early days of the cell phones and PDAs.  For a while people carried two devices, however once converged phone/PDAs came out, the specialized devices started to fall by the wayside.  These early converged devices were not as good at phone and PDA functions as the single purpose devices were, but people preferred a single multi-purpose unit to two single purpose ones.  I think the same will happen here.  Unless the kindle becomes very cheap (sub-$100 price point),  ultimately, it will be supplanted by the iPad.

Interestingly, if Amazon is smart (and I’m sure they are), they will quickly develop a version of their Kindle reader software that is optimized for the larger form factor of the iPad (rather than simply pixel doubling the iPhone version).  This will give Amazon a continuing revenue model in the form of e-books which after all is where they make their money.  The Kindle is simply a means to an end as Amazon is a content, not a device company.

In summary, I suggest that we look at the iPad simply as a large screen version of the iPod Touch.  Granted, it’s twice as expensive as the iPod touch, but it can do a lot more.  From this perspective, this looks to be a product that is going to be a very good seller for Apple.  I just wish I didn’t have to wait 2 months to get one.

We are now a scant few hours from Apple’s big show in San Francisco where they plan to release their next big thing.  Most of the rumoring centers around a tablet device, which while Apple has neither confirmed nor denied, is a pretty sure bet to be released.

Why?  Well, simple market dynamics.  The Tablet device has been the buzz for many weeks now and the financial markets have come to a certain level of expectation with respect to Apple releasing such a device.  If Apple doesn’t announce a Tablet today, it would be disastrous for its stock price, at least in the short term.

There are also rumors swirling that Verizon is somehow involved in the announcement – either Apple will officially end exclusivity with AT&T and offer the iPhone on Verizon and/or the new tablet will use Verizon’s network for its cell phone data services.

Assuming that some or all of this comes to fruition, it probably bears a little forethought before anyone starts to throw money Steve’s way.  First of all is the cost.  The tablet is expected to run between $750 to $1,000, which is not an inconsequential amount of money.  Secondly, data services are not going to be free.  If Verizon follows a similar model to its other pure data services, you are potentially looking at another $60 a month in data subscription fees.  Verizon (or another cell carrier) may offer a subsidy to purchasers to bring down the device cost, but we don’t know yet.  We also don’t know if the tablet will be available in standalone mode without a cell phone plan subscription.  Where I live and would do most of my stuff on a tablet device, I have better WiFi access than I do cell phone service, so I would rather not pay for something I won’t (or can’t) use.

A second consideration is that Gen 1 Apple products are not that great.  Look back at the original iPod.  The first generation device released in October 2001 only worked with Apple Mac computers and required a firewire interface on the computer – something that was not too prevalent in non-Mac computers at the time.  It was not until July 2002 when the second generation device was released that Windows functionality was added.  Even then it was a kludge as a third party product, Musicmatch was needed for PCs.  The third generation iPod released in April of 2003 finally dropped the Musicmatch requirement and supported syncing by USB.  In all, it took roughly 18 months from the initial release date to the point where it became a product that was widely attractive.

Let’s look next at Apple’s move to the Intel Processor.  The first systems that were announced used the Core Duo processor that was replaced by the more powerful Core 2 Duo barely a year later.  Furthermore, some of this first generation notebook series had heat problems -in one particular instance, it was the Macbook Pros that were found to have too much thermal paste on the processor causing them to overheat.  Other Macs had fan problems.  All of these issues were worked out in Gen 2 and Gen 3 Macs and now Apple offers a solid range of computers.

How about the iPhone?  Announced a little more than three years ago, Apple has shipped three versions of the product in a little more than 2 years.  If Apple continues on its release schedule, we could potentially expect a new model this summer.  The first generation iPhone was a dog – sure it was cool and had some great features, but it lacked support for the number one email service used in enterprises (Exchange), used a slow second generation wireless radio even as other manufacturers shipped 3G devices, didn’t support copy and paste making things like entering in a WPA key for wireless access extremely painful, and didn’t (and still doesn’t) offer the ability to tether it to a PC for use as a wireless modem (which most other smartphones do).  Today, however, with its 3GS Apple dominates the worldwide cell phone market.

The point I’m trying to make is that Apple does indeed make cool products, but as I’ve illustrated in three examples of some of their most popular products, they don’t seem to get a new device right initially.  It is usually a Gen 2 product released 6 months to a year later where things really start to shine.

So, as you watch Steve’s presentation today, consider these thoughts before whipping out that credit card.  eBay is littered with low priced Gen 1 Apple devices – with good reason – no one wants them anymore.

By now, most people are familiar with the latest spat between Google and the government of China.  So that we are all on the same page, let’s establish a few facts:

• Despite protests of having an “open” Internet, the Chinese government actively censors information it finds unpleasant (1989 Tienanmen Square protests for example) and requires all search providers to do the same
• In 2006, Google agreed to the government’s censorship restrictions causing an unbelievable amount of hand wringing in the free speech community about how Google had violated it’s “Do No Evil” credo
• Google recently discovered that they along with several other companies had been the target of aggressive hacking that originated within China.  One of the targets was the Gmail accounts of Chinese dissidents
• No one with half a brain believes that the Chinese government is innocent.  They are actively hacking companies worldwide despite protestations to the contrary
• Google has expressed concern about the hacking to the Chinese government and suggested that they no longer wish the censor their results.  They are prepared to exit business in China if necessary.
• Google is clearly hoping that its threat to exit the country puts pressure on the Chinese government from the people who do not want to see Google leave.  They are banking on the fact that the Chinese government will not want to risk angering their people with one more restriction such that they have a general insurrection on their hands
• Google currently is the number 2 search provider in China with approximately 1/3 of the market.  The leader is Chinese company Baidu with more than 60% of the market according to this BBC article
• The Chinese search market is currently valued at about $1 billion, making Google’s piece worth about $330 million.

Okay, with the facts of the case out of the way, let’s dive in for a moment.

First of all, despite the chorus of approval from the free speech folks, Google’s primary reason for its proposed elimination of the search results filtering is that its really irritated by the Chinese Government’s attempts to hack it.  The announcement that it no longer wishes to censor is not made because it truly believes in an unfettered Internet, but rather because it needs to hit the Chinese government where it hurts.  So, no, Google’s not suddenly turned into a good guy here.

Secondly, let’s look at it from the government’s perspective.  Like it or not, the Chinese government sets rules for how companies need to behave inside their borders.  In the case of China, let’s face it, we are dealing with an evil, totalitarian regime here whose rules include censorship of information that is not politically convenient.  This  makes it very easy for the rest of the world to condemn those rules and applaud a company like Google for standing up.  Seen a different way though, the Chinese government has the right to impose whatever rules or restrictions it sees fit.  After all, it is the county’s government, and when a powerful multinational company like Google decides to stand up, it causes concern.  At the end of the day, we really don’t want powerful corporate interests openly pushing governments around.  Granted it happens all the time today behind closed doors, but at least everyone has to be somewhat circumspect.  If companies could openly challenge governments with impunity, things could get very bad, very quickly.

Let’s consider an alternate scenario and go back in time a few years to when the Feds went after Microsoft for its really nasty monopolistic practices.  And make no mistakes here – Microsoft was wielding its monopoly power like a club, crushing competitors and stifling innovation.  Suppose that Microsoft had responded to the Government in a different way?  What if they had cut a deal with the Canadian government, relocated from Seattle to Vancouver (not that long a trip), and told the Feds to go pound sand.

Sure, the Feds could have outlawed the sale of any Microsoft software in the U.S., but given how pervasive their products are, all Microsoft would have had to do would be to cut off all support for their products in the U.S.  They probably could have revoked the Federal government’s software licenses and even placed some code as part of Windows update that would start turning off servers in Government organizations.  The end result would have been a serious disaster.  Obviously Microsoft’s revenues would have taken a severe hit, but things would have been even worse for the U.S. with all support cut off.  While this scenario may make Mac or Linux advocates salivate, the reality is that the transition from Windows to something else would be long, messy, and ultimately would lead to some severe economic problems.  It is even possible, if Microsoft played their cards right, that they could turn voters against the Federal Government and have a whole generation of politicians thrown out on their collective butts for daring to take on Microsoft.

Okay, the scenario that I just painted is highly unlikely, improbable, and in many ways, downright silly,  but it does sit just barely within the realm of possibility because Microsoft was allowed to grow to such an extent that it became very powerful.  The results of the lawsuit, while considerably more mundane than my scenario, back up my point.  Most people agree that Microsoft got a slap on the wrist and while they were forced to abandon certain practices such as making PC manufacturers buy a copy of Windows for every machine sold – whether the customer wanted Windows or not, for all intents and purposes, just about every PC sold today is sold with a copy of Windows because that is what the customer wants.  Yes, I know that some PCs are sold with Linux, but the number of of PCs sold with a non-Microsoft OS as a percentage of all PCs sold is almost too small to even measure.  (Note: I’m using the term PC to refer to non-Mac systems).

Going back to my original point; Google’s action when seen through the eyes of the Chinese government should be very disturbing.  If Google wins this round, it will have set a precedent where one of the most powerful corporations in the world has pushed around one of the most powerful Nation States in the world.  For me, this is a frightening prospect.  While I deplore how the Chinese government treats its citizens, I have to say that in this case, I’m hoping that the Chinese government slaps Google hard and boots them out of the country.

This week, Jim is flying solo with a review of one of Hoyo de Monterrey’s latest releases and the 2009 edition of the William Larue Weller Antique Edition Bourbon Whiskey.

This week’s cigar and libation pairing:

• Hoyo de Monterrey Excalibur Legend
• William Larue Weller 2009 Antique Edition Bourbon Whiskey

So I opened up one of my emails this morning and read about the Nook, Barnes & Noble’s answer to Amazon’s Kindle reading device.  Priced at $259 (the same as the U.S.-only Amazon Kindle), it has gone in a few different directions than Amazon’s devices.

First of all, the thoughts that follow are not a review, but rather outline my thinking based on what I have read about the Nook.  I have not actually seen one in person yet, so all of my analysis is based upon information posted on the official B&N site.  Furthermore, I am a Kindle DX owner, so I am evaluating the Nook based on my experience with the Kindle.

Let’s get the similarities out of the way first.

• The both employ the exact same 6″ e-ink display featuring 16 levels of grayscale
• You can order books and have them delivered over a cellphone network at no additional charge
• Both work only in the U.S. (although for $20 more, Amazon has a model that works worldwide)
• They are essentially the same size, shape, and weight
• They both employ proprietary DRM  to protect books you purchase

Obviously, Barnes and Noble has an uphill battle to dethrone the Amazon Kindle.  While there are other e-reader devices out there (notably from Sony and Foxit), for all intents and purposes, the Nook is the first real challenger to the features and functionality offered by the Kindle.  To essentially beat Amazon at its own game, B&N had to either sell their reader for less than Amazon’s or offer features and functions that Amazon did not have.  Given the fact that we know the manufacturing costs are at least half if not more of the final product for an e-reader and B&N have a fair amount of R&D expense to recapture, choosing a price that is substantially enough below the cost of the Kindle that it would entice people was probably not an option.

So, B&N went the route of adding features in hopes of differentiating themselves enough from the Kindle.  So, let’s look and see what features they have:

• Color Display along the bottom that shows the covers of the books you have – this is how you choose which book/periodical to read
• Touch Screen – this appears to apply to the small color screen only
• Support for 802.11 wireless in addition to cellular network support (wireless only works at B&N stores at launch)
• Expansion slot for MicroSD cards
• Direct support for PDF files (The Kindle 2’s big brother, the Kindle DX offers this)
• The ability to loan out books for up to 14 days
• e-Readers for Apple iPhone, Blackberry, PC, and Mac
• Over a million titles
• 500,000 are free titles

B&N also offers some additional features that are tied to its stores.  Supposedly, you will be able to sit in a B&N store with your Nook and read books for free that will be streamed over B&N’s wireless network.

Now, while at first glance, these features seem attractive, let’s take a closer look at them.

Color Display – Well, since 99% of your time with an e-Reader is going to be reading the actual books, the color display is not much more than eye candy.  It adds weight to the unit (the Nook is 1 oz heavier than the Kindle 2) and sucks battery.

Touch Screen – Since you don’t have a keyboard, you need a touch screen.  It will be interesting to see how the Nook implements book searching on the B&N website.  The Kindle uses the full keyboard on the device which makes searches easy.  Not sure how the B&N device will do it.  If, as it sounds, only the color screen is touch enabled, it’s too small for an onscreen keyboard.

802.11 support – Um?  Okay.  At launch it only works with wireless networks in the B&N store, so unless you are in the book store, the 802.11 radio doesn’t do much for you except suck additional battery life.  Even if they enable it to work elsewhere, how much value will it bring?  Unlike the Kindle, the Nook does not support web surfing, so besides being able to deliver books (which the cellular network is certainly capable of doing), I don’t see much use.

Expansion Slot for MicroSD cards – Nice, but the base memory will hold 1,500 books.  Considering the fact that you have to navigate by the pictures on the touch sensitive screen, I’m not really sure if I want access to more that 1,500 books at a time.  I generally only keep the books I’m actively reading or referencing on my Kindle and it never gets near 1,500.

Loaning out a book – Okay, now this is a nice feature and one that Amazon should have a good look at.  On the flip side, publishers will choose whether or not they will allow a book to be loaned out and for how long.  My guess is that the end result of this will be not that many popular books will allow loaning.

Wide Range of e-Readers – Again another nice plus that Amazon should look at.  While Amazon does have an iPhone app that supports the Kindle format, why not a PC, Mac, and even a Blackberry one?  There would definitely be times when I would not mind being able to read one of my Kindle books on my PC or Blackberry

Over 1,000,000 titles – certainly more than Amazon’s claimed 350,000 titles.  Yet, here’s the thing – they also say that 500,000 are free, so does that really mean that there are only 500,000 titles?  If so, that narrows the gap with the Kindle quite a bit.

As for the Kindle, it still has some features that the Nook lacks;

• Internet Browsing
• Wikipedia access
• Blog subscriptions
• worldwide access (for $20 more than the base Kindle)
• The ability to import Microsoft Word files

The first two are related.  B&N made a conscious decision claiming that they did not include Web Browsing by design because it is subpar on an e-Reader.  Maybe, but it was probably also a cost concession.  Any wireless access costs money and by eliminating the possibility that people might do some web browsing on the Nook, they probably negotiated a better deal with AT&T.  For me, while it is certainly not my primary browser, I have found it convenient from time to time to be able to check my email or pull up a weather map on the Kindle.  Believe it or not, I actually prefer the large monochrome screen of the Kindle for these tasks over the smaller color one on my Blackberry

Blog subscriptions are a nice touch, but certainly not a deal maker or breaker

Worldwide access is nice if you need it, but irrelevant if you don’t

Importing Word files is a nice feature and I have used it from time to time myself.  One note here is that from the B&N comparison list, you might assume that it costs money to convert your Word docs to Kindle format.  In fact, you are only charged if you have the converted file sent to your Kindle wirelessly.  You have the option of having the file converted and emailed to you for free and then you simply download it to the Kindle via USB.

All in all, I’m glad that B&N has entered the E-reader game.  I hope they are reasonably successful.  They have some nice touches that Amazon will have to figure out how to respond to if they want to stay ahead.  On the flip side, if I had to do it all over again, I think I would still go with the Kindle, simply because I find more value in its collection of features.  I also like my larger screen Kindle DX which is something that B&N does not have an answer for.

The one major downside is that we have a new Digital Rights Management (DRM) ecosystem.  In this day and age, I would like to see us moving away from DRM entirely, not creating new ones.  If there is an E-book reader war and someone loses, the people who bought into that system will be the ultimate losers as their material will stay forever locked to the dead platform and not be portable someplace else.

So, I hopped into my car this morning for the 30 minute trek to my office. ( I have mid-terms next week and last week’s big move made me push off studying to this weekend).  Since I have two kids, one wife, and two in-laws back at the house right now, I figured the best thing to do would be to come into the office to study.

Anyway, my wife swiped my iPod on her way to the gym this morning (since she couldn’t find hers), which means I was left without being able to listen to my usual audio book.  Fortunately, a couple of months ago, I took XM Satellite radio up on its promotion offer and got 6 months of service for about $30, which means I had satellite radio as an option.  I was going to listen to the one of the news stations, but when I flipped it on, it was tuned to one of the comedy stations – Laugh USA, which was running a two week all-Monty Python channel.

It was a fun walk down memory lane.  The Pythons got their start on October 5, 1969 – a little over 40 years ago.  Their half-hour BBC show ran for 5 years and the pythons produced 5 movies; the last in 1983.  What’s amazing to me is that the Pythons had stopped producing new material before I even got into college which is where I learned about the group.  As much as anything, I think that the college community remains one of the strongest fans of Monty Python’s work even 40 years later.  What’s also interesting is that much of the material is still pretty funny today.  When you compare it to some of the other British humor of the day such as the Benny Hill show, which has not stood up as well, or even an American humor/variety show such as Hee Haw (which you can’t watch today without cringing), you can really appreciate the genius of the Pythons.  In much the same was as the Beatles has transcended generational divides, Monty Python has as well.

What is also really cool is that while Monty Python produced video programs from it’s seminal Flying Circus to its movies, much of the material translated pretty well to an audio-only format.  For many of the skits, the video is an enhancement, not a necessary element and again an example of the genius of the troupe.

I’d recommend that if you have not had a visit with Monty Python in a while, you rent one of their movies or some episodes of the Flying Circus.  You might be surprised how fresh it still sounds today.  It is also an excellent opportunity to start indoctrinating the next generation in all things Python so that if they go off to school, they can be “in the know” about Monty Python and can enlighten their more ignorant class-mates.

If you have never watched any Monty Python, but want to give it a try, I would suggest Monty Python and the Holy Grail.  It is probably the most easily accessible of all of the Python material and provides so many of the most quoted Python lines.  The Life of Brian is also quite funny, but some people consider it terribly sacrilegious, so if you are a devout Christian that might be easily offended with a send up of the life of Jesus, you might want to pass on this one.  The irony is that the movie is not about Jesus but instead about Brian, a nobody who is mistaken for a Jesus-like figure and winds up in similar straights.  That said, the life parallels might be a bit too close for some folks, so you’ve been warned.

The first python movie, And Now for Something Completely Different is mostly a collection of the best of the short skits from the Flying Circus.  Live at the Hollywood Bowl is also a collection of Flying Circus skits, but performed before a live audience.  The final movie, Monty Python’s Meaning of Life was intended to be a loosely connected series of new skits.  It is considered their darkest movie full of Black Humor.  It is also my least favorite.  I would would still suggest it be part of your Python education, but leave it until a bit later.

I would also leave the original Monty Python’s Flying Circus half hour shows until after you had absorbed some of the movies.  The material is a bit denser and feel a bit more rough.  There are some huge laughs here, but also some real flops.

So, wish that I had been on my game and posted this on October 4th, but in any case, Happy 40th birthday Monty Python!

Jim

Ever tried to find a cigar ring gauge guide?  Sure, there are lots out there, but they all seem to stop at a ring gauge of 54.  I don’t know about you, but 54 tends to be one of the thinner sizes of cigars I usually smoke.  So, rather than complaining, we decided to do something about it and created our own.  Our guide goes from tiny 28 gauge cigars up to the more manly 64 ring size.

The full sized guide is available in PDF format to our Cigar Plus Members in the members section.