That said, why continue to fight a battle for the mainstream that the mass majority of consumers could care less about? Without proper commercial software and a steady stream of hardware driver support, the linux battle has been uphill and continues to be uphill.
But there is a light at the end of the tunnel for linux. That light is called mobile devices.

What makes mobile devices different? Well for starters, they are all-in-one systems. This means that the end user doesn’t need to mess around with driver issues and complications. It also means the end user is willing to accept simplified software that does specific tasks rather than huge pieces of killer software for extensive work. At least right now anyway.

What constitutes a mobile device? Well, that’s a pretty generic term, but the focus of this article is really on the two hottest types of mobile devices currently sweeping the consumer electronics space right now, smart phones and tablet computers.

Linux has already made begun to make its mark in the smart phone market with Android and Web OS. What makes linux shine on smart phones is the “new market” that has emerged for them. There was no precedence in place for smart phones, unlike desktop operating systems. When linux entered the desktop market it needed to play catch-up with the existing desktop OSes that came before. Namely Windows and Mac OS. For nearly two decades Linux has been playing catch-up with both of these operating systems. But in the smart phone market there has been little to catch up to. The Apple iPhone having a two year advantage is a small enough gap that linux could easily step in and make ground. The same will be true for the emerging tablet market.

Tablet computers have been around for a long time. The problem however is that up until now they’ve mostly remained a niche market, much like linux itself. The reason is because they’ve usually been nothing more then large expensive touch screen convertible laptops running full desktop operating systems. The Apple iPad however, is changing that idea.

The rumors and speculation surrounding the Apple iPad before and during its announcement really put tablet computers back into the public’s focus. It doesn’t hurt that more powerful and larger touch screen smart phones began emerging around this same time. All of it has really helped to give everyone a better idea of what a tablet computer could be.

The introduction of the Apple iPad has been both a blessing and a disappointment to many people. There are many who see the elegance in its simplicity. But there are many others who have found complaints in its lack of (insert missing feature here).

Really we should all be very happy for the introduction of the iPad. At the very least it brings the re-imagining of tablet computing into the consumers focus. Let me give you an example. A couple of years ago when they were building a new Ikea in my local area a news crew interviewed other local furniture stores and asked them what they thought about this Ikea opening up. I think the news reporter thought there were asking a question which would result in a response filled with dread and dismay. However the response they got was anything but. In fact one of the representatives from a local furniture store responded very positively saying (and I paraphrase) “We’re really happy to see them here, because it gets people excited about furniture again. So while they may walk into an Ikea to check it out and see what they offer, they may very well decide that they’d rather spend a little more money and get something nicer from us or one of the other local furniture stores.”

I think the furniture store representative hit the nail on the head with that comment. I also think that comment can easily apply to tablets. The Apple iPad will get people thinking about tablet computers in a new way. But many will walk away from the Apple store not entirely pleased with what the iPad has to offer. As a result they’ll be looking for an alternative that suits them better. It’s a win win situation for everyone offering a similar tablet on the market.

So how can linux enter this game? Well, it already has. Many companies are already looking to include Android as the base OS for some iPad competition. But I think that linux can do better.

Android is a great operating system. At its core it’s wonderful and scalable. That said, the basic Android interface leaves much to be desired. Honestly I can say the same thing about the iPad as well. The iPad is nothing but a scaled up iPhone interface. While Apple has built some great custom applications that take advantage of the larger screen real estate, they haven’t done much to the interface itself. This is precisely where linux can make its mark.
The company HTC has done a great job in re-skinning the Android interface on smart phones. They gave it a nice glossy finish and wonderful widgets that rest on the home screens. The same needs to happen for tablets. But it needs to go beyond that.

Based on a lot of comments regarding the iPad and those who are disappointed in it, many people (myself included) were really looking for a desktop OS that was re-skinned and re-imagined for the tablet. In other words, what people really want is all the power and functionality of a desktop OS with the fit and finish a simplified multi-touch GUI (graphic user interface).

Lets try to imagine what that could be for a minute. But to do that we need to step outside the convention of a desktop operating system as we know it. We need to forget about the idea of a desktop filled with icons and files buried inside folders, buried inside folders and so on. We need to ask ourselves; can grandma use this?
The great thing about multi-touch screens is that they represent a paradigm shift in how we interact with computers. Up until recently we forgot that. It took the iPhone and now the iPad to really show us that it’s not just the hardware that needs to change, it’s the way we interact with the software that also needs to change. Surprisingly this is something we’ve known for a while now. Not all touch screen computers have been unsuccessful. ATM machines and touch screen kiosks have been around for a while and served us very well. But in both of those situations we’ve used software built with large buttons and graphic elements. They’ve also given us little arm strain (gorilla arm) because of our short time using them.

Do to our experience with ATM’s and kiosks we know that touch screens really aren’t great for desktop computing. In fact they really aren’t great for any computer in which a screen stands up vertically in front of us. This includes laptops. That said, touch screens are wonderful and they are revolutionary. They really do allow you to interact in ways you could never do with a mouse and keyboard. But they need the proper medium to exist and be useful. That medium is a tablet. Something that lays in your lap or on the table in front of you and allows your hands to fall upon it rather than outward toward it, hanging in the air.

So now that we have the tablet and we have the multi-touch screen, what changes? For starters we need the interface to be at our finger tips rather than at the tip of our mouse cursor. This means larger buttons or at the very least buttons that can act like they are larger. it also means taking all the strange icons typically found in the tool bars of programs like Microsoft Word and making them larger and hiding them behind a layer or a larger menu button. I realize this breaks conventions and adds steps. However when it comes to a touch screen device you really need to clean up the interface considerably and that might mean taking a few steps back in the speed in which you can get things done. Hopefully that can be made up for in the WAY you get things done.

In short, what we need are good alternatives. We need companies who are now focusing on desktop linux solutions to change their focus and take advantage of the blooming tablet market. They need to rethink the folders and icons approach to computers and consider widgets and methods for multitasking full screen touch applications. We also need them partner up with hardware manufacturers to provide simple solutions. Gone are the days of installing any OS on any devices and playing with it for hours to make it work. I think Apple, Sony, Nintendo and even Microsoft have shown us that people want solutions that just work out of the box. We have enough complication in our lives. We want to get past the technical complication and get to whatever it is we need to do. The computer needs to be the tool to get the task done, not the task itself.

As a gadget geek and an indie filmmaker you’d think I’d be all over blu-ray. When DVD first came out in 1997 it was only a year later before I owned my first player and soon after my second player. I was all up DVD’s ass from the beginning, as soon as I could afford it. But the differences between DVD and VHS at the time were huge. My family had owned a VHS player since the early to mid-80’s so I grew up from age 7 or 8 with the ability to pop in a tape and watch movies. My dad was all about VHS. He loved buying used movies from the local video store. As a result my parents created quite a collection of movies. In fact looking back I never anytime even considered my dad being a gadget geek in a slightest. But as I’m writing this it’s dawning on me that in fact if he had a shred of gadget geekery in him, it was for buying movies on VHS.

I up grew watching movies on VHS. If I had any complaints about it there were few. Those included having to rewind the tape (Be Kind Rewind) and the tracking issues with older tapes. Also the rare chance a tape might snap and break. But actually VHS overall wasn’t bad. Since day one we could record TV shows and movies to tape. When you think about it, this is a feature that the vast majority of DVD players still lack today. Which doesn’t seem nearly as odd as it should. I mean yeah set-top DVD recorders do exist and are out there. But even as of this writing a brand new set-top DVD recorder will still run you over a $100 at a store. Contrast that with $30 or $40 DVD players which are all too common these days. The format has been out for 13 years. 13 years! You’d think by now that every DVD player would also be a DVD recorder. But apparently that was never very important to people. Hence the reason it probably isn’t as common.

To be fair though, other recording technologies did grow up around DVD. Digital Video Recorders (DVR’s) like Tivo for instance. A feature that most digital cable boxes come with these days. Plus not to mention the biggest of them all, computers. The ability for people to download TV shows and even watch them online directly.
Plus lets not forget that with DVD came the release of entire seasons of TV shows in DVD box sets. Something you rarely if ever saw on VHS. Speaking of that, lets talk about some of the things that made DVD so great compared to VHS before we move on to blu-ray.

When I bought my first DVD player it was like day and night in comparison to VHS. Not only was it four times the picture resolution of VHS, but it was also better then CD quality audio. By the time DVD was released we had all been used to CD’s and buying our music that way. CD’s had really taken off in the mainstream by the early 1990’s, so we were all used to the size and type of disc. We were also used to the superior audio quality and the ability to skip tracks and not have to rewind tapes. Something I’m sure vinyl enthusiasts were excited to see again.
So it was only a matter of time before we were all expecting to be able to purchase movies on a disc format with similar features and the same size.

With the release of DVD came those features and more. Not only could we skip chapters and avoid rewinding, but we were also treated to menus, special features, subtitles that could be turned on and off, as well as multiple languages and a couple other features that never really took off (bookmarking and multiple angles). Plus the superior video and audio quality I previously mentioned. But best of all DVD (digital versatile disc) was indeed versatile. It could be played in a computer, on a set-top box or in a portable DVD player. Even in a DVD player for your car. DVD’s were also used for software outside of video playback and eventually as a popular data disc format for burning files too. It was also cheap and easy. I remember years ago being in the grocery store and buying a box of cereal that had a Muppets movie DVD inside. Actually strapped to the front of the cereal box. How cool is that! You would have never seen that with VHS. But probably what made DVD really great over VHS from a movies collectors point of view was the fact that it was digital. So there wasn’t any worry about wearing out the movie with more playbacks like there had been with VHS.

Looking at all of that you can see just how revolutionary DVD was over VHS.

However like I mentioned earlier, during the lifetime of DVD other technologies had emerged along side of it. The ability to download movies off the internet and even the ability to steam TV shows and movies off of websites came about. Even the emergence of HD video content being streamed or downloaded online.

The biggest difference with online content versus DVD is that you don’t often get any of the bonus features you get on DVD. You also don’t get the ability to physically own the movie with the box and all the artwork which can be stored on a shelf. So it doesn’t have nearly the fit and finish a DVD would have. Not to mention the fact the files could be accidentally deleted or become corrupted with data or drive errors.
However the benefit is that you can quickly and easy find what you’re looking for if it’s available. So if you get the urge to see a certain movie or TV show in the middle of the night, you can download it in your pajamas without having to find a 24 hour Walmart and hope that they have it on DVD.

There is a also a certain bit of ease of use that comes with having all your movies and video on your computer. In fact it may sound incredibly lazy, but I’ve found myself just bored and randomly opening movies on my computer and watching them starting at my favorite scenes. If I would have had to go to my shelf and pull the DVD out and put the disc in and wait for it to load up and get to the menu and then skip chapters to that scene, I would have never done it. I just wouldn’t have gone through the effort.

With more movies being increasingly available to purchase online, even in high definition, one wonders what role blu-ray plays in this new world. Afterall blu-ray is modeled after the old world. The idea of physically going to a store and buying a movie on a physical disc. Then having to store all those movies on a shelf which just takes up increasingly precious shelf real-estate in our increasingly material world. With the whole green (environmental) movement in full swing, one wonders whether the idea of buying digital content on a physical medium is nothing but an exercise in waste. I mean afterall why continue to release digital entertainment on physical discs when the internet is clearly the environment in which digital entertainment should be passed to and from.

What we seem to lack is one standard clear cut digital format for this type of thing. Sure we have a multitude of digital video and audio formats out there. But we don’t have one high quality digital file format that can be easily played on a variety of hardware and passed through the internet. This is where cloud computing is essentially going. The idea of keeping all your media on the internet and then being able to access that from anywhere.

Imagine a car stereo that wirelessly connects to the internet and your own personal music collection. You can easily get to every song or every video you own from your dashboard mounted radio. Then you walk in your house and turn on your TV and get to all your movies and home videos there. You go out for a run and take your cell phone with you and from it you can get to all your music. All of it. Not just what you decided to bring with you. Then you get home again and sit down at your computer and it’s all right there. The portability of digital is really where it’s future lies. Portable beyond a disc you carry with you. But the idea that you can get to your media using all manner of devices where ever you are, even if you forgot to bring your own portable device with you.

There are a lot of people that know this future is coming. It may only be a couple of years away. We’re already seeing it right now, it just hasn’t been made as easy to use. All the ducks aren’t completely lined up yet.
But because of this there are people who are skeptical of jumping onto the blu-ray bandwagon. I would be one of those people.

To be honest, I think blu-ray is really cool. The gadget geek and filmmaker inside me does in fact love it. But up until recently I wasn’t sure the format was ever going to really take off. I was sure it was going to end up being nothing more then laserdisc was in the age of VHS. An uppity expensive format for videophiles who wanted the best of the best and were willing to pay a premium for it.
So you can bet I have been pretty surprised to see just how much blu-ray is actually taking off. Walking though an average retail store like a Target or Walmart these days has been an interesting experience. It seems like in the past 3-6 months blu-ray has just exploded all over the place. These stores now have at least one whole aisle dedicated to blu-ray movies. Then there are all the set-top players and end-caps with players and LCD tv’s showing off blu-ray movies. Even the movies themselves have dropped to reasonable prices. I noticed that one of my favorite movies “Stargate” can now be had on blu-ray for $10. That’s what I paid for the special edition version on DVD the second time I bought it.

The prices will definitely drive more people to buy into blu-ray. But as for myself I’m still holding back. Blu-ray doesn’t really offer a whole lot over DVD. It’s not the dramatic difference DVD was to VHS. Blu-ray is high definition, which is it’s biggest selling point. It also has better audio. But honestly you really can’t get much better than DVD audio. DVD audio as it is, is beyond human hearing. The only other features blu-ray offers are better menus and special features you can pop up while watching the movie. Some movies and most players these days even feature the ability to connect to the internet for extra material. Honestly though, I can’t see that actually taking off. The discs themselves already hold so much there really isn’t much of a need for them to connect to the internet to get more stuff. Plus I question how long content producers will continue to develop new free content for blu-ray movies that are 5+ years old. If anything this will eventually get used for advertising.

But beyond that stuff blu-ray doesn’t really offer anything all that compelling. To even fully take advantage of it you need a high definition TV. Granted most TV’s sold these days are HD LCD TV’s. But for people like myself who don’t own one, there is no reason to run out and buy a player for a TV I don’t own. DVD gave us the ability to take full advantage of the TV’s we already owned. Blu-ray requires us to go out and buy new TV’s to take full advantage of the blu-ray disc. Big difference in cost there.

Now it may sound odd to you being that I am a video professional and I shoot and edit HD video all day long, but I really don’t see a huge difference between SD (standard definition) and HD. Even a quality, well shot DVD (like any Hollywood movie) can look great on a big screen LCD TV at the proper viewing distance. With cheap up-scaling DVD players in abundance, blu-ray is even less tempting. The added resolution and the cooler menus just aren’t enough to push me over the edge yet. Plus I really don’t buy movies very often anymore. I pretty much stopped buying movies on DVD a couple of years ago. I’d rather rent or download. Call me cheap, but the idea of spending $15-20 on a movie I’ll probably watch once or twice in 5-10 years is overkill. It’s too much. Especially when I can rent it for a $1 or possibly catch it online for free when I do feel like watching it. Plus the idea of rebuying all my 200+ DVD’s on blu-ray just doesn’t make me all giddy inside.

So if HD isn’t enough, is there anything that might eventually get me to jump on the blu-ray bandwagon? Yes actually there is. We call it 3D. If there is one feature that blu-ray is going to have that will truly set it apart, it’s going to be Blu-ray 3D.

For decades and decades 3D has been considered a gimmick. Even today many people consider it a cheap gimmick used by movie studios as a way to get peoples butts back into theaters. Beyond that many people are not satisfied with having to wear 3D glasses and the slightly jarring experience that it offers. But after seeing Avatar in the theater you can consider me a 3D enthusiast. Upon seeing that movie in 3D I realized that 3D really is the future of movies. For the first time in decades 3D might actually stick around permanently rather then just being a passing fad that comes and goes once a decade. Even with the bellyaching that some people have with it, no one can debate that it’s getting better and better. Gone are the red and blue glasses and the expensive hard to shoot 3D celluloid film cameras. Now it’s all digital 3D with advancing 3D digital camera technology and 3D digital projectors. This year we will begin to see 3D capable LCD TV’s and the blu-ray association has finalized the blu-ray 3D specification. That means that this year we will begin seeing blu-ray movies released in Blu-ray 3d format. A format that is compatible with these new 3D LCD TV’s.

Sure it means you’ll need to buy a new big screen 3D LCD TV. Which has got to suck for those of you who already own a big screen LCD TV. But for myself it just means the first LCD TV I buy will be 3D enabled.

This, along with lowering blu-ray prices may very well be enough to get me on the blu-ray bandwagon. That is until movies start being offered online in 3D. But I think that unlike 2D, 3D is something that really needs to be experienced in front of a big screen. Whether that be a movie theater or a big screen home theater. So until I can easily get 3D movies online that I can quickly and easily watch on a big screen home theater setup, blu-ray just might have a chance of sticking around longer then I initially expected.

For the first couple years into my twenties my folks would still get me one or two big gifts. For instance one year I got a nice pair of computer speakers. Another year I got the Adobe Photoshop (upgrade) box. But all of that ended a good seven or eight years ago. Things are different now and have been for many years. Now I have my own son who is five years old who I in turn try to get some nice things for. It’s all about passing it down the line.

Today if I want something nice for myself, I have to get it for myself. Christmas with my family is all about what you can find on the cheap. Since we’re buying for so many. We’re talking ten to fifteen dollar gifts. Not too bad. But it’s been pretty difficult trying to figure out what ask for and what to get other people in that price range. Honestly there aren’t a ton of things I’d really like for around that amount of coin. So my list was pretty short.

Just for shits and giggles I decided I would write up a Christmas list for myself. Things I’d love to see under the tree with my name on it if my family and I were well-to-do. This is more for my own record then anything. Something I can look back on years from now and see what it was I wanted.

• HTC Hero for Sprint ($100 on two year contract - $70 unlimited data, txt & internet and unlimited mobile to mobile calling each month)
• Canon 7D - DSLR that can do HD 1080p video at 24fps ($1700 for the camera body only)
• Nice component-style Turntable - like a Technics or similar for use with a stereo receiver and loud speakers.
• A nice pair of loudspeakers - floor standing - Polk Audio or Klipsch
• A house - just a nice 1200-1400sq ft 3-bedroom ranch with a finished basement, a fenced in yard and a fireplace in a decent neighborhood.
• A newer car - something within the last five years that works well and gets good gas mileage - Toyota Corolla, Subaru, Honda Accord, Saab
• A Macbook Pro - 15″ unibody with Nvidia 9400M+9600M graphics in it.
• 42″ 1080P HD LCD TV - whatever, I’m not that picky
• Xbox 360 with a 120GB hard drive and Fable II - More for my son and girlfriend then myself, but I’d still play Fable II here and there
• Any and all debts paid off
• My own successful small business that I enjoy working at
• Peace, love and harmony among myself and those I know and love

Yeah I know some of those don’t fit under the tree. That’s probably also not a complete list, but it’s what was on my mind.

That’s the problem with government isn’t it? It’s capable of both helping and hurting and something the opinion on which is which, can vary.

As far as smoking is concerned, I can understand the position of many nonsmokers. Especially when it comes to restaurants. Why should the nonsmoker be subjected to smoke of other patrons while trying to enjoy their meal? It’s not cheap to eat out and that could certainly ruin your experience. Even when I was a smoker I could clearly see that the nonsmoking and smoking section of most restaurants were often not very segregated. Often times separated only by a few feet without any solid barrier between the two. So to assume that drifting smoke isn’t going to find it’s way into the nonsmoking section is just silly.

But perhaps there was another way about it. Restaurants already have certain health standards they have to abide by. Laws could have been put into place regulating “smoking rooms” in the back of restaurants that are blocked by solid walls, double doors and the addition of smoke eater machines inside those rooms. Regulation is at least the better alternative to an all out ban. It would have represented balance and choice.

Another alternative could have been a regulation that stated your business either had to be an all smoking establishment or an all nonsmoking establishment. Thereby giving the business owner the choice and letting the free market determine which businesses succeed. Something tells me there is room for both.

But it’s not really about tolerance is it? The truth is some nonsmokers just hate smoking and would probably love to see it outlawed. They see it as a ridiculous act which only harms people. Beyond that they make bold statements like “why should I have to inadvertently pay your health bills through my higher insurance fees and taxes?” Smokers meanwhile retort by saying things such as “We live in a free country, we should be allowed to do what we want with our own bodies and if I enjoy smoking then I shouldn’t be told I can’t.”

It is a hard call. None of us are here forever. Our goal is not to arrive unbeaten and unbruised into the grave. I’ve heard many a smoker make comments like “it may cut ten years off the end of my life, but those are the worst ten years anyway.” There is some logic in that. It’s not like we go on living forever if we just eat healthy, work out and don’t smoke. We’re all going to grow old and die one way or the other. Whether it’s breaking a hip and slowly losing your health or slowly dying of lung cancer or having a heart attack and going quickly. So until science can find a way to extend our lives to the point where we can live healthy and happy in a 24 year olds body for hundreds of years, we’re going to hit that point where death is upon us. But even then I could smoke for 20 years and get hit by a car. Wouldn’t have really mattered how long I smoked then, would it? To a smoker their quality of life is enjoying it. Being free to do as they wish. Exploiting the various sins of man to their satisfaction.

On the other hand nonsmokers take the approach that they want to feel better, breath better and not stink of smoke. That’s how they want to live their lives.

The question is, should one side really dictate how the other should live?

Personally I like to take a middle ground approach. While I believe that smokers should be free to smoke I think they need to take more responsibility with it. They should have the decency and concern not to smoke around kids and other nonsmokers. Or at the very least ask the nonsmokers if they mind and not take offense if they say they do. Smokers should also stick to areas that are smoke friendly, including bars which are all smoking.

On the flip side, nonsmokers shouldn’t put themselves in situations where they have cause to complain.

But then so much of this isn’t really a choice anymore is it? Because the government here in Michigan has just banned the practice in most public places. So I guess this is a victory for some and a show of intolerance for others.

Of course there is a third option. E-cigarettes. These are a better solution for everyone. So long as smokers can handle the slight change of texture and nonsmokers can get over their hatred of anything that remotely resembles a cigarette.

Usually this saying is applied to people. Generally the saying is true. But I think more then anything, the real message behind the saying is not “don’t prejudge people” but instead “take the time to get to know them after you’ve prejudged them”.

We all judge people. It’s human nature. First impressions are key indicators in a whole range of situations, whether it be a job interview or a first date.

I like to add to this saying “… but you can get a pretty good idea what it’s about.”

The reality is you can tell a lot about a person from their exterior. The way they dress, the way they carry themselves, the way they talk, the things they do, the way their body is shaped, their hair style and so on.
We try to tell ourselves that inner beauty is the most important thing. But inner beauty is a relative thing. Just like qualities such as “nice” or “mean” are pretty relative at best. I could say “he’s fat but he’s a nice guy”. Well what’s nice to me might not be nice to you. For all I know you could have a personality clash with him. Just like you could think he’s mean and I think he’s sarcastic and funny. However neither of use can disagree that he’s fat. That in itself shows a certain insight into his personality and how well he takes care of himself, what his diet might be like and how often he works out. These are visual indicators of certain aspects of his personality. It’s perfectly fine for us to judge him on that aspect of his personality. What’s not ok is to judge him as a whole on just that one single aspect.

Let me give you an example. I’m not a big fan of tattoos. When I see someone with tattoos I judge them. I know right off the bat that their sense of style is different then my own. The more tattoos they have, the further their sense of style is from my own. I like things clean and simple. Now does this mean they are bad people or that I’m not going to enjoy their company and conversation? Not at all. But will I go out of my way to try and meet them? Probably not. The important thing is that if I’m in a situation to meet them, I don’t go out of my way to let my prejudice stand in the way of getting to know them better.

While I can’t judge a book by it’s cover, it has to grab my attention to even give it a chance. It’s one thing to just not take interest because what you see doesn’t interest you, it’s another thing to let that initial judgment take precedence over everything.

Now there are people who will do the reverse and go out of their way to meet people who they might otherwise feel they would clash with. Nothing wrong with that. But those same people have to understand that if the rest of us don’t do like they do, it’s not because we aren’t open. It’s more because we’ve spent some time on this earth and have tuned ourselves to understand that generally our stereotypes are true. Stereotypes do exist for a reason. They are based on common observations over time. The important thing is, once again, not to let our stereotypes stop us from diving deeper. As well as certainly not to use those stereotypes as a means for hate.

The one thing that’s great about humanity is our capacity for change. We are capable of adapting our perspectives over time based on new information. It’s when we stop ourselves from adapting, that’s when the real danger sets in.

First: What is a Bi-Sexual?
– A bi-sexual is a person (male or female) that finds both the opposite and the same sex attractive to the point that they would be willing to engage in sexual activity with either gender.

Second: What is not Bi-Sexual behavior
– A male or female who is sexually attracted to the opposite sex but finds certain people of the same sex attractive or admirable for particular physical attributes. As an example, a guy who thinks another guy who works out has a good body, or a girl who sees another girl and compliments her nice butt. If there is no attraction or desire to be physical with them, then you aren’t bi-sexual.

Third: Common misunderstandings about Bi-Sexuals
1. Bi-sexuals are attracted to both men and women equality.
– No. This isn’t always the case. While it is true of some, bi-sexuality is a fluid thing that can change from time to time as well as have it’s preference in a particular sex. As an example, a bisexual might be mostly attracted to women, but have times where they are more attracted to men then women. But those times may be fewer and further between.

2. Bi-sexuals are sluts.
– Some of them may be, but that is no different then any straight or gay, girl or guy being a slut. That comes down to the individual. If you look at the reality of it though, most bi-sexuals are just like anyone else. They will get into a committed relationship if they like the person enough. They may alternate between the genders with their relationships or they may prefer one gender for sexual encounters only and the other for relationships.

3. Bi-sexuals are just closet homosexuals.
– Once again this may be true of some people, that they use bi-sexuality as a stepping stone to homosexuality. But a true bi-sexual is someone who is defined by their taste in both genders sexually. They enjoy the merits of both genders, perhaps not equality, but they do. There is no defining line, there is only personal preference at a given time. To assume that someone can only be straight or only be gay, is narrow minded.

Fourth: Why bi-sexuals are often mistreated or misrepresented.
– I’ve had conversations with a few bi-sexual people. What we’ve discovered is that female bi-sexual’s are treasured as gold in our western society, especially among swingers groups and by men straight men who are hoping to spice up their sex life. It’s many a males dream to have a threesome with two lovely women, so finding two bi-sexual women to share an experience like that is equal to finding a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.
Women in general have a tendency to be more open sexually/emotionally then men are. Some scientific tests have been done that exclaim that the true nature of a female is bi-sexual, but doesn’t come to that conclusion very often with males. The result is society has accepted female bi-sexuality fairly well as both men and women are accepting of it. A bi-sexual female can have sexual encounters with another female without being labeled as a closet lesbian, or they can have sexual encounters with a male and be accepted as it is.
However when it comes to male bi-sexuality the tide often turns. Other straight and gay men look at bi-sexual males as closet homosexuals who just haven’t come out yet. If a male says he has some attraction to cock he is immediately labeled “gay” both by other males and surprisingly often by many females as well. It’s difficult to understand where the females negative reaction comes from, but often women don’t want to date bi-sexual men, they don’t feel it would enhance their sex life at all the way men view bi-sexual women, just that it would confuse things and then they have two genders to worry about their man cheating on them with. They also worry that the man they are with might decide that one day he is gay and there goes the relationship. But this is not true of all women. And this is certainly not true of a genuine bi-sexual.

It is sad that is is already the year 2008 and we are just now getting to these issues. I think a lot of headway has been made into the acceptance of gay rights and gay people in general. But unfortunately bi-sexual people are not generally included and often misunderstood. I hope this article has cleared a few things up for some people. Bi-sexual people are probably some of the most interesting people out there because of their diversity and openness to the human form, both male and female.

If we are going to build a new and better world we have to accept all forms of sexuality.

That said, about six months to a year ago I took a vow not to get too personal on the internet anymore. Which translates to “don’t talk shit about anyone online anymore, journal or not, if someone else can read it, don’t write it”. But I went a little too far and scared myself away from writing about anything personal. So I decided I would start again, this time without getting too in depth about things and just talking about feelings in general. I started a new category on this website called “personal” and I’m going to fill it with entries about my feelings and life situations.

So here I am. Roxics.com reborn.

So, we know the rich use Macs. So would I if I was that wealthy. But the equivalent mac to my $1300 PC was $4000.

I agree with Nick. Macs are a little more pricey. I started building PC’s back in 1998. I’ve owned a few macs here and there through the years, mostly older imacs I bought used which I never spent much time with because they were many years older then my PC, so they were mostly toys to play with and not machines to do anything serious on. A few months ago I bought a macbook and it has become my main machine ever since.

Getting used to the mac OS took me about two weeks. It’s different and can be really frustrating at times until you condition yourself to start working a certain way. Once you do however, it can be a very pleasant experience. My impression of mac os compared to windows is similar to how I would describe an artist to an accountant. An accountant has all his papers organized and lined up, all his numbers in order and usually maintains a clean work area. An artist however has a system of chaos and mess but knows (generally speaking) where everything is at. Windows is a lot like that accountant, and mac more like that artist. Once you figure this out and accept this, working with a mac becomes a lot easier. But you have to be someone who is comfortable with messes. On mac os you open windows and stand them on top of each other, they are all different sizes and in different places and with the push of a button they all spread out in front of you so you can jump back and forth between them. You can sort of work like this on windows if you want, but not very well and it’s not the most efficient way to use that OS. On a mac, it’s really the only way to use it.

So getting back to the point of cost. Generally I agree with Nick. If you are looking for a lot of power on a mac you are going to spend a lot of money. PC’s are a lot like Christianity, there is a lot of variety out there and it is easy to find something that might fit your specific beliefs. You can take the things you don’t like and do like and interchange the pieces. It’s easy and readily available. But at the core they are all the same. Apple computers are a totally different religion. They exist unto themselves. You either buy into it all or you don’t. There are no substitutions. I know that is a horrible analogy but work with me.

When you buy a mac you’re buying more then just the hardware, you are buying the entire experience of being a mac user. You can’t come into the apple world looking for the same things you look for buying a windows box. It’s not about raw power or low prices, it’s about experience and paying a little bit more for something a little bit nicer. We all know you can walk into Walmart and buy a suit. It looks decent and costs a hell of a lot less. For most people this is a perfectly decent choice. But for others, maybe they want a different experience. Maybe they want a suit that is a little finer made with a little more attention to details. It may still be made of the same fabrics the walmart suit is made out of, but there was a little more care taken to it’s design and the service you get from the tailor selling you the suit. You are going to pay a little more, maybe even a lot more depending on the suit, but maybe it’s worth it to you. You’ve been buying walmart suits your whole life and now you want to splurge a little on something nicer.

Let me give you an example. I lost my “duckhead” for my macbooks power supply. The duckhead is the little electrical outlet prong that snaps into the power brick to use when you take it with you, versus the long cord that you might use otherwise. So I took my macbook into the apple store hoping to buy a replacement. The tech behind the counter told me they are a little difficult to get and took one off of a spare power brick she had, handed it to me and said “have a nice day”. No money was exchanged, no arguing or fuss was had, she simply gave me a new one. I have never had an experience like that with any other computer manufacturer ever.

Let me give you another experience I had. I bought an iphone from an AT&T store, I noticed the screen was a little darker then others. I walked into an apple store, told the guy behind the counter and he said he was sorry but he didn’t have any 4GB iphones left he could replace mine with, he said he could send me to another store that might have one. Instead I asked if I could pay the extra $100 and upgrade to the 8GB model instead. No problem. I handed him my $100 and he handed me a brand new 8GB iphone. Remember I didn’t even buy the phone at an apple store, I bought it at an AT&T store. I didn’t even have my receipt on me. But they didn’t ask any questions, just took the phone and exchanged it for me. If he had a 4GB replacement I would have walked out of there without any cash out of my pocket, but it was my own choice to ask for the upgrade and they did it without any problems whatsoever.
A friend of mine walked into an apple store with his malfunctioning ipod 6 months after he bought it, when they said they couldn’t fix it they handed him a brand new one. Also not bought from an apple store originally and without a receipt.

This level of customer service is part of the experience you pay for as a mac user. Sure you’re computer might cost a little more up front, but when you factor in the customer service you get, the viruses you won’t have to deal with, the user experience of the os in general, it really begins to show that you are getting what you pay for.

One of the reasons I switched to a mac was because after ten years of building and buying PC’s I just got frustrated and said “I don’t have time for this anymore, I just want a computer that works”. I’m a pretty computer literate person, I work for a tech company doing high definition video editing and sometimes web design. I put my machines through some of the toughest tasks one can ask of their computer and I know how to rip them apart and reassemble them when they break down. But I do this kind of stuff at work all the time and just decided that at home I didn’t want to deal with it anymore. I just wanted to be able to come home, get on my machine and do what I want to do. So far my macbook has allowed me that. And if it costs a little more, so be it.

Now all of that said, I don’t want to give PC’s too bad of a name. I’ll be honest, there are things I dislike about my mac. No computer is perfect. I know why I bought a mac and generally I’ve been happy with it. Overall I can’t complain. But I will admit the very thing that mac so nice, it’s closed system, is also one of the things that really aggravates me about it.
One of the reasons mac work so well is because Apple makes all the hardware and the OS. Yeah some of the programs do crash from time to time, but a simple force quit lets the program crash gracefully without anything else being affected. Only one time has my macbook frozen up to where I had to do a hard reboot and it was because I pulled an SD card out of a card reader without ejecting it first. In windows this is no problem, in mac os, you better eject that thing or you’re going to pay hell for it. This is really my first bitch about mac os, it needs to learn to gracefully allow external drives to be pulled without halting the whole system or requiring an eject.

Back to what I was saying. The closed ecosystem of the mac is what makes it work so well, but in turn this closed system is also what frustrates me sometimes. You’re only given so many hardware choices as a result and if you want anything that resembles your PC tower, you better be looking to dish out at least $2300 bucks. I’m not happy with my macbook having integrated graphics instead of dedicated graphics, but unless I want to spend an extra $900 for a macbook pro, I really have no choice. Meanwhile a couple people I know just bought new HP laptops with dedicated graphics cards in them for… take a guess… $900 (for the whole laptop). Which leaves me feeling cheated that an $1100 macbook can’t have dedicated graphics but a $900 HP can. So there is a certain level of envy that exists in me. That is until I remember that overall my experience with my machine is great, no matter what hardware seems to be in it, it just works. Had I bought one of their HP laptops I’d still be stuck trying to figure out an easy way to burn a video DVD without having to open three different programs to do it. On my macbook I can go from recording video of me in front of my computer to a DVD disc in a matter of only a few mouse strokes.

There is definitely a price to be paid when being a mac user, often it’s not having the latest and greatest hardware at the lowest price. But in turn, I have a stable machine, that is virus free, easy to use and with great customer support. So it really all comes down to what you value the most. And really it’s different for different people. There was a time it was worth more to me to build my own PC’s and trouble shoot them every six months then spend more for a mac, now things are the reverse. I don’t really believe one way is better then the other. It’s really just a matter of preference and if you’re a gamer or not. I’m not really.

A list of famous mac users.
copied from: http://www3.bc.sympatico.ca/greenacres/macusers.htm

Actors/Actresses/Directors/Producers:

Tim Allen, actor

Harry Anderson, actor

Dan Aykroyd, actor

Lauren Bacall, actress

Valerie Bertinelli, actress

Katheryn Bigelow, director “Strange Days”

Sandra Bullock, actress

Drew Carey, actor

Marc Caro, director Delicatessen la citE des enfants perdus

Doug Chang, Lucas Films graphic artist “Forrest Gump, “Star Wars”

Lee Chemel, TV Director

Art Clokey, creator of Gumby

Dabney Coleman, actor

Stephen Collins, actor Star Trek movie, Jumpin Jack Flash

Kevin Costner, actor

Tom Cruise, actor/producer “Mission Impossible”

Geena Davis, actress

Danny DeVito, actor/director

Barry Diller show-biz/entertainment-biz biggie

Richard Donner, director/producer “Free Willy” and “Lethal Weapon”

Clint Eastwood, actor, and his accountant too

Sally Field, actress

Wendy Finerman, producer “Forrest Gump”

Harrison Ford, actor

Jodie Foster, actress

Mel Gibson and family, actor

Tom Hanks, actor

Renny Harlin, director/producer “Friday the 13th”, “Cutthroat Island”

Mariel Hemingway, actress

Buck Henry, writer/director,actor “To Die For”

Dustin Hoffman, actor

Samuel L. Jackson, actor

Steven Charles Jaffe, director “Strange Days”

Ann Jillian, actress

Nicole Kidman, actress

John Laroquette, actor

Spike Lee, director/writer/actor “Do The Right Thing”, “Malcolm X”

Rush Limbaugh, radio and tv personality

George Lucas, director/producer “Star Wars”, “Indiana Jones”

Marlee Matlin, actress

Alyssa Milano, actress

Robert Morton, producer

Dennis Muren, head special effects huncho, ILM

Geoff Murphy, director “Freejack” and “Under Siege II”

Conan O’Brien, TV personality

Rosie O’Donnell, actress/comedian

Mike Okuda (Scenic Arts director - Star Trek, TNG, DS9, and Voyager)

Sydney Pollack, director including “The Way We Were” and “The Firm”

Maury Povich, TV talk show host/personality

Jerry Seinfeld, actor/comedian

Joel Schumacher, director/producer, “Batman Forever”

Andrew Shue, actor

Sinbad, actor/comedian

John Singleton, writer/director “Boyz in the Hood”, “Higher Learning”

Wesley Snipes, actor

Sly Stallone, actor

Darren Star, creator “90210″ and “Melrose Place”

Oliver Stone, director/producer “Scarface”,”JFK”, “Nixon”

Sharon Stone, actress

John Tesh, actor

Irwin Winkler, director/producer “Good Fellas” and “The Net”

Robert Zemeckis, director “Forrest Gump” and “Back to the Future”

Musicians:

Bryan Adams, singer/musician

“Aerosmith”, group

Tori Amos, singer

Laurie Anderson, musician

“The Beastie Boys”, group

Bjork, singer

Bono, singer/musician U2

George Clinton, President Clinton’s brother and musician

Sheryl Crow, Grammy award-winning singer

Thomas Dolby, musician

Front 242, music group

Peter Gabriel, musician

Jerry Garcia, musician

Mickey Gilley, singer (country western)

Dave Gilmour singer/musician

Amy Grant, singer (gospel/pop/ac)

Grateful Dead, music group

Arlo Guthrie, musician

Jan Hammer, musician/composer famous Miami Vice Soundtrack

Herbie Hancock, musician

Ben Heppner, opera singer

Ice T, singer-rapper

Joe Jackson, musician

Michael Jackson (rumored, not confirmed)

Howard Jones, musician

John Paul Jones, musician formerly bassist w/Led Zeppelin

Quincy Jones, musician/producer

Stanley Jordan, musician

B.B. King, musician

Cyndi Lauper, singer

Cole Lloyd, musician

Courtney Love, singer Hole

Madonna, singer

Mannheim Steamroller, music group

MC Solaar, musician/rap

Meredith Monk, vocalist

New Order, music group

Prince (or the artist formerly known as)

Lou Rawls, singer

Trent Reznor, musician - Nine Inch Nails

Rolling Stones, music group

Jeff Rona, composer (Chicago Hope TV soundtrack, author)

Todd Rundgren, musician

Buffy Sainte-Marie, musician

Joe Satriani, musician

Paul Schaffer, musician

Jason Scheff, bass player/lead singer for Chicago

SEAL, musician

Gene Simmons, musician - KISS

Simply Red, music group

John Tesh, musician

Rabin Trevor, guitarist - YES

Eddie VanHalen, musician

Neil Young, musician

Hans Zimmer, THE Hollywood composer “The Lion King”, “Beverly Hills Cop”,etc…

Authors/Writers/Publishers/Poets:

Douglas Adams, Writer

Scott Adams, Cartoonist

Marty Basch, Writer

Gerry Callahan, senior writer Sports Illustrated

Tom Clancy, writer

Douglas Cooper, novelist

Richard Dawkins, biologist/author

Barbara De Angelis, author “The Love Doctor”

Roger Ebert, film critic

Malcolm Forbes, Jr., publisher

William Gibson, writer

David Guterson, author “Snow Falling on Cedars”

J.C. Herz, writer Playboy, Wired, plus books

Douglas Hofstadter, former Scientific American columnist and author

D Knowledge, poet

G. Gordon Liddy, colunmnist

John McTiernan, writer

Steve Perry, author “Shadows of the Empire”

Mario Puzzo, author The Godfather series

John Singleton, writer/director “Boyz in the Hood”, “Higher Learning”

Bruce Sterling, writer

Martha Stewart, publisher/editor “Living”

Bob Thave, cartoonist “Frank and Ernest”

Others:

Troy Aikman, Quarterback Dallas Cowboys

Buzz Aldrin, astronaut

Shoukei Arai, House of Representatives, Japan

Robert Ballard

Paul Baran, early internet pioneer

Bill Berner, Athletic Director University of Nebraska - Lincoln

Philippe Decoufle choregraphed Olympic Game opening in Albertville

Roy Disney, Disney Family

Michael Eisner, CEO Disney Corp.

Larry Ellison, Chairman, CEO and Founder Oracle Corp.

Kinky Friedman

Dr. Roger Guillemin, M.D., Ph.D, Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology

Vaclav Havel, Czech President

Colin Hunter Virology Laboratories,Univ. of Maryland at Baltimore

Paul MacCready inventor, flying wing Pathfinder

Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Nobel Laureate

Elizabeth Mason

Irene Mecchi

Edgar Morin, French philosopher, sociologist, science theoretician

Sandis Ozolinsh, Defenseman Colorado Avalanche

Fidel V. Ramos, President of the Republic of the Philippines

Ann Richards, former Texas Governor, politician

Greg Roach

Wayne A. Root

Stephen Sprouse, designer

Debi Thomas, ice skater

Isacc Tigret, founder the Hard Rock Cafe and House of Blues

Osel Hita Torres, Tibetan lama

Happy Walters

Kristi Yamaguchi, Olympic Gold Medal ice skater

Boris Yeltsin’s, Russian President

I myself went for the $10 2xCD special.