I just had to post on the Emmy nominees to point out a few, LOST-related nods. I’m hoping that the Emmy voters (who are they anyway) do what the Oscars did for Return of the King, where since the series is over, they will shower LOST with Emmys to show their appreciation for what the show has done to our culture (and prime time for that matter). 

Outstanding Art Direction For A Single-Camera Series: Ab Aeterno

“Ab Aeterno” is pitted against Glee (should not stand a chance), Modern Family’s “Moon Landing” (which I must say was hilarious, but not on par), Heroes “Brave New World” (is that show still on?), and HBO’s “True Blood” (I think this is the only one that might give LOST a run for its money).   

Outstanding Directing for a Drama Series: Jack Bender

This nominee was for Jack Bender’s work on “The End.” Just like the Oscars gave a nod to Peter Jackson with Return of the King, the Emmys should give a nod to Jack Bender. I hope we haven’t seen the last of him. 

Outstanding Music Composition For A Series (Original Dramatic Score)

Whom else but Michael Giacchino deserves an Emmy for his compositions? When he gets his Emmy (he must receive one), it will truly be a nod to his body of LOST work, seeing as the Emmy will be for “The End” and Giacchino weaved all of the beloved LOST musical themes so deftly in that episode. 

Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama Series

As much of a LOSTie as I am, I want to point out that I’m not so into LOST that I’m blind to other talent out there, and just to prove it, I’m going to concede that I’m not sure if Matthew Fox will pull this one off. If he does, it’s got to be for his two (count them: two) great man cry scenes (on the beach after his realization that Jin and Sun died, and with his father at the church). He has his work cut out for him though because he’s going against the Dexter guy as well as Hugh Laurie (House). I still think he most probably will, and if he does it’s more because of the fact that it’s the last chance to award Emmys for LOST. 

Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series

The Emmys are standing in between Scylla and Charybdis here. Like Sophie’s choice, the Emmys must decide between the two best actors on television…IN HISTORY! Michael Emerson as Ben or Terry O’Quinn as The Man in Black posing as Locke (or Faux Locke or just Flocke). I hate to even consider choosing between the two. I think if I had to make a choice (let’s say a gun was pointed to my head), then I would have to go for Michael Emerson (but just barely). I hope Terry will forgive me if he reads this. 

Terry’s strength is his range (from confident hunter and gatherer Locke to cowering unsteady Locke who just lost his faith in the island to the duplicitous “it was all their fault that I killed everyone in the temple” Flocke). Michael Emerson’s strength is in the nuance and the subtle details. Only a rare handful of actors could ever pull off a character like Ben. If you aren’t sure, just rewatch the episode in season 2 (The Whole Truth) when “Henry” tells the LOSTies that if he were an other, he would have led the LOSTies to a secluded place where they would be ambushed by his people so they could trade the LOSTies for him. He says it with such a cat and mouse type toying that you cannot tell if that’s his real plan or he’s just messing with them (and it’s all played with such subtlety). 

Outstanding Writing for a Drama Series

Is there any doubt who deserves the Emmy. If they could award an Oscar, they should do it for the writing of LOST as well (who cares if it was made for television, it’s better than many movies).

Outstanding Guest Actress In A Drama Series

Elizabeth Mitchell as Juliet in “The End” got the nomination here. I don’t think I watched any of her rivals in the list of nominees. It’s lucky she got nominated seeing as she only made a few minor appearances in the rest of the season. She has always done a great job, so I’m not surprised, but I might not be too shocked if she doesn’t get the award. 

Outstanding Drama Series

No question in my mind. Emmy people, you know what to do. 

Outstanding Special Class Programs

This one goes to the Mysteries of the Universe – The Dharma Initiative, and I have to say that it should get it because of its inventiveness. If you ever saw In Search Of… (hosted by Leonard Nimoy), then you know exactly where the inspiration came from. What a great way to extend the “mythology” of LOST! I loved it. 

Other Nominations

Let’s just say they should all go to LOST: 

• Outstanding Sound Editing For A Series
• Outstanding Sound Mixing For A Comedy Or Drama Series (One Hour)

There are many angry folk out there who are complaining about tonight’s LOST episode: Across the Sea. Much of the chatter seems to be saying things like “it looks like the writers never planned this from the beginning,” or “they’re just making stuff up because the fans figured out the island was Purgatory, so the writers changed it to try to throw off the fan base.”

I’m not so livid. I actually kind of liked the episode, but I do think the way they answered who the “Adam and Eve” were from the cave in season one was a bad call. They basically recycled the scenes where Jack and Kate are looking at the bodies and Locke comes in and says the island has its own “Adam and Eve.”

This was clearly an attempt to pander to the more casual LOST viewer.  If fans can at least stick through to the final season then either a) they will already remember that scene or b) be used to “unsolved” mysteries. I guess I’m mostly upset about it because the thing that drew me to the show was that they never seemed to have a problem with making us figure things out on our own. Heck, it wasn’t until the final two seasons that they revealed the nature of the smoke monster.

I guess we just have to realize that this is a TV show, not a movie, not the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. I think I can live with that, and my response to those who continue to complain is…

Whatever happened, happened. Deal with it!

Well, sonny, you think you have it bad. I remember when we used to use keyboards and mice with our computers…and we liked it!

Jobs is at it again: picking on poor Adobe Flash. In his “Thoughts on Flash” essay, he writes…

Flash was created during the PC era – for PCs and mice. Flash is a successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards – all areas where Flash falls short.

Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind.

Keyboards and Mice are An Endangered Species

Did you notice what he said? “the mobile era is about…touch interfaces.” As much as I hate to admit it, the iPhone was the first device to successfully break users of the keyboard/mouse paradigm. He makes it even more distasteful to admit, as I write this with my relic of a human-computer interface called a keyboard.

The fact that Jobs, the captain of the i-device revolution, claims all non-touch devices to be in the past (guilt by association), drives one more nail into the old-school interface coffin (i.e. mice and keyboards).

And now, riding on Apple’s coattails are a cadre of touch devices: the droid, Palm devices, and just about every new phone on your mobile plan (at least the ones where you have to pay a nominal fee). This is not to mention all future devices that will build off of the touch concept.

Someone Has to Pay

Humor me on my tangent here, but I must get my own Apple digs in. In his
“Thoughts on Flash,” Jobs slams Adobe for being proprietary and pats himself on the back for Apple’s “open standards.” It’s true; Flash is proprietary, and authors of most Flash aps must use a pricey development tool.

What he doesn’t mention is that Adobe Flash aps are cross-platform and ubiquitous across the web. He also fails to mention that the AIR SDK (also known as Flex: the underlying technology of Flash) is free.

The irony is that the Apple platform is a closed system. Yes, for developers, the standards are open for the developers, but the platform (the part that costs users a bundle) are strictly Apple. Someone has to pay somewhere.

Speaking of paying…

What Does that iPhone 3G Cost Anyway?

A new iPhone 3G with 8GB of storage sells for $199. That’s a savings of $200 over the old iPhone, and the new model comes with 3G data service and built-in GPS, among other features.

The least-expensive service plan for the iPhone 3G costs $70 per month. That includes 450 voice minutes and unlimited data. The plan with 900 voice minutes is now $90 per month and the option that includes 1,350 voice minutes has climbed to $110 per month.

And none of these plans include text messaging: A text plan that includes 200 messages per month will cost you $5. If you don’t opt for a text plan, you’ll be charged 20 cents per text message.

And the answer is…drumroll please…$1999 for two years (you need to sign a 2-year contract), and that is for the cheapskate who pays for the least-expensive service plan (with 200 text messages a month).

If I were to give Apple a report card, I would have to check the box that says, “doesn’t play well with others” after their decision not to support Flash content with its iPad.

The controversy has been developing over the past few months, and just a week ago, they took another step to close the door on Adobe Flash CS5.

John Gruber of Daring Fireball pointed out the change in the new iPhone Software Developer Kit license for iPhone OS 4. This provision was added: “Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool [cough--Flash] are prohibited).”

Notice how they sneaked the little example in the parenthetical at the end? At least they are open to developers in C and C++ and JavaScript (go figure).

I do give Apple credit to the way they spanked all other mobile devices with their iTouch and iPhone. They sent everyone reeling with their killer ap (and killer ap it is). I admire that. I don’t want to downplay the effect they had on innovation. They completely changed the way we interact with technology, and the savvy they showed through their marketing of iPhone aps took everyone by storm.

That being said, their decision to not support Flash is one of a series of moves to monopolize personal technology that smells a lot like Microsoft in the 90s (remember what Internet Explorer did to Netscape?).

I know what’s going on here. Apple knows that the only technology that comes close to competing with their new slick animations and aps is Flash. They also know that Flash is ubiquitous. If they want market domination, they need to take out their competitors. I know what you’re thinking:

“wait a minute, Flash is proprietary technology, and the authoring tools are egregiously expensive.”

That’s true, but the Flash “aps” (i.e. Shockwave files) are found in virtually every corner of the free and open internet. You don’t need AT&T, an iPad, iTouch, or iPhone, and there’s no additional monthly charge to access Flash content. Not only that, but now the core SDK (aka Flex) is open-source and free, and there are open tools to compile ActionScript now (Flash Develop 3).

I first smelled something fishy with iTunes and their m4a format. I was happy to buy all those songs on iTunes; that is until I tried playing them off of my cell phone, and I realized that it wouldn’t play that format. I either had to pay for an application that would convert the songs to mp3s or worse, I had to burn them on a CD and then rip them to mp3s, or worse still fork over a wad of cash to buy an iPod.

After my previous post comparing Word Press to DNN to Drupal, I realized there would be Joomla folks out there crying foul, and as well they should.

Why compare Drupal and DNN yet leave out poor Joomla? 

My reason seemed good enough; after all, I had no experience with Joomla, as opposed to hours upon hours of work with the other tools; however, that was no excuse. If you look at trends, you cannot ignore the data: since 2005, Joomla has surpassed Drupal in popularity.

So, if according to the trends, Joomla is the CMS of choice for most websites, how could I leave it out? Not only that, but if Joomla is so popular, why have I not worked with it yet? And that last question is what’s been bugging me for the past few days, and it has led me to my latest project: The Drupal v. Joomla Challenge.

The Challenge

The challenge is to put Joomla and Drupal in a head to head competition of content management systems (CMS) in ‘a no holds barred’ smack-down fight. I have the perfect opportunity to test the two out: I’ve been commissioned to research which CMS platform is the best for my client’s needs.

I’ve been the webmaster for a not-for profit organization for some time now, and we have decided it’s time to increase the power and functionality of the site (it’s currently a static website, and I’m the only webmaster). I’ve been given the task to research what system we should go to, and if you ask me, the best way to research is by doing.

Over the next few days, I’ll create 2 separate sites: one using Drupal and the other using Joomla. I’ll include the same content and general functionality, and I’ll compare each experience and take notes on the process. I’ll begin with the out of box set-up: I’ll compare the features, code, administration tools, and ease of use in getting content posted.

Next, I’ll explore the themes and modules created for each CMS. I’ll look at the variety, ease of implementation, functionality, and code they produce.

I’ll then see if I can create the functionality I’m aiming for, and I’ll be taking notes on the process, and of course, see if it’s even possible.

Finally, I will make an assessment of the overall experience and choose the winner.

The Criteria

We need a way to compare the two. I have decided to look at the following criteria:

Functionality: Our website highlights a number of programs, classes, and clubs around the entire state, and we want the user to be able to easily find exactly what they are looking for by filtering content by location or cost or some other factor. We therefore need a flexible, yet powerful CMS, and the specs for our needs will be a good test of the overall system.

Ease of Use: I want to know how well each one works out of the box, how easy it is to add modules and themes, how easy it is to customize (both layout and features), and how easy it is to administer users.

Standards Compliance: the site I’m working on is tied in to education, and so compliance with w3 standards will be important from an accessibility standpoint. Of course, I hate tag soup anyway, so I’m always interested in how clean the code is. I want to know how easy it is to produce table-less xhtml code, and so I’ll be specifically looking at how many errors the two systems produce and how easy it is to fix those errors.

I’ll be posting my experience over the course of the next few days (or possibly weeks). Stay tuned…

I’ve been working with drupal testing out it’s power, and I have to say, the more I work with CMSs like drupal or DNN (dot net nuke), the more amazed I am with Word Press and how much easier it is to create and customize sites.

First and foremost, Word Press is open-source, so are a myriad of modules and themes that go with it. Not so with DNN. Even though it bills itself as open-source, pretty much every developer charges for their modules and skins (WP’s version of themes). Drupal is also open-sourced, so it’s a tie in this area.

Secondly, Word Press, or at least the theme I’ve chosen is standards-compliant. It uses <div>s and not tables for layout. DNN almost exclusively uses table-driven layouts (ugh!). I’m not a fan of tables, mainly because nothing appears in a table until the entire table has loaded. With <div>s and CSS-driven layouts, the HTML will load even if the CSS has not loaded. Just like with the previous note, however, Drupal is pretty much the same as Word Press.

Third, Word Press works out of the box with minimal set-up. DNN works fairly well this way, until you want a theme that isn’t provided, and then, if you want a table-less setup, you might as well clear your calendar for the rest of the day or two, unless of course, you want to spend some money and just pay for a CSS-driven layout (they range from $40 – $125). Drupal, because of its power as a CMS, requires much more set-up. I’m fine with that because it allows me to charge more for setting up someone with a site, but there’s a huge learning curve involved, and you have to understand what taxonomy is and what it has to do with developing a site.

Fourth, customizing Word Press is a breeze, provided you are comfortable with php. Modules are easy to add as long as you are comfortable unzipping files and working your way around folder structures (note: don’t use a cpanel type program to upload modules, it will take you an eternity, you absolutely must work with an ftp program, which does feel ‘old school’ but it’s a must). Themes are even easier to customize (provided you are handy with html and css).

The trick to themes, however, is php include files. They are very simple to work with. Basically, your page is made up of sections or modules, and each one is a separate PHP file. You just need to familiarize yourself with the 4-6 files to see how they all work together (e.g. main index, side bar, header, etc.). Think of each php file as a division (like a div tag) on your master page. If you want to tweak your theme, you just have to concern yourself with the html tags on the php (leave the php code alone), and work on the CSS. In fact, in many cases, you can leave the php files alone and simply work on the CSS. The best part is that the entire CSS is accessible to work on directly. This is clearly NOT the case with DNN.

In DNN you are forced to work on skins and containers. For some reason, the developers decided to separate half of the layout into skins and the other half of the layout into containers. The skins are made by adjusting both the html and CSS for main divisions, headers, etc. However, if you want to decorate the various CSS decorations around individual page divisions (like image boxes, side bars, etc.), you need to work on the containers separately. I won’t even mention how controls come into play. The worst part is that to develop a skin &/or container, you need to compress your files into a zip file, upload it, unpack it, and then see if it works the way you intended. If it doesn’t, you need to work on the files, zip them, upload, unpack, & test. Rinse & repeat until it works. Note: I’m leaving out technical details that are also required, but I think you get the point.

Drupal is great, and I suppose it’s goofy to even try to compare a CMS to a blogging software; there is barely a comparison. The only reason why I’m comparing it to Word Press is that I wish customizing Drupal were as easy as customizing Word Press. It’s not nearly as intuitive, but I suppose you get what you pay for (in time and development). Drupal is more complex, but that leads to a more robust and powerful tool. DNN might make the same argument, but since it barely supports standards-compliant sites, and that with a hefty added cost, it’s not friendly to browsers, users, or developers.

Okay, astronomers, you’ve had your fun. We’ve all had our good laugh. Hardy har har!

Now, it’s time to bring Pluto back. We can and must restore it to a full-fledged planet with all the rights and privileges that come with planet status.

Did we drop Saturn because of its rings or density? Did we just relegate Uranus’s rank as a gaseous giant because of it’s odd rotational axis and potentially embarrassing pronunciation? No.

So Pluto has it’s eccentric orbit and doesn’t “sweep” enough debris from it’s orbit. Can you sweep enough debris from your orbit? I think not. So maybe Eris is larger than Pluto. Pluto still has multiple moons. Earth can’t say that.

And so, IAU, enough is enough, bring our beloved Pluto back. The joke is over.

If you’re going to call Thanksgiving, “Turkey Day,” you might as well call Christmas, “Tree Day” (or “Highly Decorated Tree Day”). For that matter, you might as well call Easter, “Colorful Egg Day” and Independence Day, “Firecracker Day.” Then, we should call Halloween, “Pumpkin Day” and Veterans’ Day, well, Veterans’ Day.

If it’s all about the main course, let’s create some new holidays. How about Pizza Day, Chicken Day, and Pot Roast Day? 

A student of mine posted the poem and link on my school’s moodle, and I had to pass this on to any of my readers (all two of you; thanks mom and wife!). It shows the dangers of relying too heavily on technology to do our work.

Spell Checker

I halve a spelling checker,
It came with my pea see.
It plainly marks four my revue
Mistakes I dew knot sea.

Eye strike a key and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait aweigh.

As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the era rite
Its rarely ever wrong.

I’ve scent this massage threw it,
And I’m shore your pleased too no
Its letter prefect in every weigh;
My checker tolled me sew.

George Orwell might have been a few decades off on the wrong continent, and he may have missed a few other things, but he might have got the Big Brother part right with Google.

In a paper by Google researcher, Bill N. Schilit, and some other computer scientists, have suggested creating activity recognition systems. According to the paper,

In general, activity recognition systems unobtrusively observe the behavior of people and characteristics of their environments, and, when necessary, take actions in response — ideally with little explicit user direction.

The big question remains, what will they do with the information? What might someone else do with the information? They even suggested they could remind people in their homes not to eat too much or be on the computer so long.

How long before Google will be watching you?