[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIxToZmJwdI&] -B
Samsung Steals
Apple is suing Samsung. Say they stole form and design for their phones after they saw the iPhone. Apple says,
Rather than innovate and develop its own technology and a unique Samsung style for its smartphone products and computer tablets, Samsung chose to copy Apple's technology, user interface and innovative style in these infringing products,
The base information is a compelling argument for Apple. Samsung says they're going to strike back.
Apple is one of our key buyers of semiconductors and display panels. However, we have no choice but respond strongly this time,
We shall see. Team Apple, but you're not surprised.
-B
Goodbye Music Industry?
About a year ago, Mashable posted the Infographic below. I'll explain what it is, then you can have a look at it. It outlines how digital music has affected the music industry's profit models. With the advent of streaming services becoming more and more prevalent in our worlds and lives, you can quickly see how many times an artist has to have their song aired on a streaming service to make minimum wage ($1160 a month).
However, it is a bit of a loaded graphic because EVERYONE knows that artists don't make their money from album sales, they make it from touring and getting other artists to sing their songs (royalties is where the money is).
Another point to throw out as well: is the invention of home recording software making it easier and easier for artists to create their own work and sell it? Are independent artists able to market themselves like record companies can market? Can streaming music services like Pandora, Spotify, Rdio, and Mog help do some of marketing for an independent artist? You can probably answer all of these yourself. You will probably notice that these answers don't really correspond or get along with each other.
I think the bottom line is this: while record companies have been getting rich off of artists' talent for years because they were willing to risk the capital up front, they have been unable to continue on that profit path because the original Napster and other P2P networks came through and made it incredibly easy to steal (I have argued before that this might be because the record companies failed to innovate). Trying to find a way to fix this, companies that didn't care about the profitability of the record companies (like iTunes by Apple) came through and figured out a way to do this digital download stuff legally.
Record companies lost out. Because of that, artists lost out. And because those responsible for the content creation have let others innovate for them, they've lost even more.
Friends, it is time for the music industry to innovate with new models THAT THEY CONTROL of profit gain so that they can be sustainable. If this doesn't happen soon, the whole industry might close up shop.
See graphic below.
It's Your World, I Just Live In It...
"You're asking me to undo 75 years of instinct in a moment! That is not easy!" [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdkqULZ2onA&]
Yeah, this is more fun than writing a paper.
-B
The New Music Business
Mashable posted the above graph earlier today outlining what would have happened if peer-to-peer file sharing services such as Napster, Morpheus, LimeWire, Vuze, etc had never existed. Given the above chart, the support seems to be in the music industry's favor.
They claim a loss of $55 billion since the inception of Napster. They are suing LimeWire right now for a loss of income (and thus a decline of the business model) and if guilty, LimeWire is going to owe Sony and Warner in the billions of dollars. Billions, with a "B" as Kevin O'Leary says.
This story reminds me of when Bon Jovi blamed Steve Jobs as having single-handedly killed the music industry. If anything (given the chart above), Steve Jobs helped give the industry a fighting chance.
To me, this brings up several questions regarding the role of technological innovation in the production of content.
Are the file sharing companies responsible for the dying business model? Or is the music industry's refusal to move forward, with thoughts and progression technologically, to blame?
I'm not quite sure of the answer here. There is no doubt in my mind that the file sharing services have hurt the industry, but digital music was becoming more relevant with the iPod and all of a sudden carrying your entire CD collection around with you (having to switch cds in and out) seemed impractical. The music companies were against this entire process because it placed music files into places where they could not only be shared (no one has ever borrowed someone else's cd right?) but edited, morphed, and uploaded to sites like YouTube.
It made the music...interactive.
Napster (and those like it) created a sense in America that you didn't have to pay for content. iTunes has successfully changed that. But, they neglected the idea of an album to do it.
So, in a sense, Steve Jobs did ruin the music business (because the entire industry was based upon selling $15 cds that people bought to hear 2 or three songs).
Or, if you are me, you see it as progress of technology blowing open a lucrative business model that was based off selling things to people that they didn't want, and then jacking up the price.
It would be as if the grocery store told you you could only buy the good bananas if you bought a group of them (of which only two were really enticing) and they charged you $15 for the group. If people could find a way to get the bananas one at a time, they would (even if it meant stealing). Either that or the banana business would go downhill.
And, that, is why bananas are sold by what you choose, by the weight. You only pay for what you like.
If the music industry would wake up to this reality, their business model would change and again be able to afford to stay in business and grow. I love the music industry, so I hope they do.
Sometimes things change. You must change with it or it will redefine you. And then you die.
-B
How to Waste $1,199
Acer thought they'd be creative. Because when I decide to carry a laptop sized device, I really hope it doesn't have a physical keyboard.
There is just nothing else out there that gives me the same flexibility.
I'll give them that the two screens idea has potential. But not at that size, with that operating system, with no tactile controls, with that weight, and that battery life (3 hours...if you are extremely lucky and don't use it at all).
Sounds to me like a winning product.
Good try fellas, just not quite there yet.
Got $1,200? I've got a better idea for you.
-B
Charlie and The Apple Factory
Quality work done by College Humor. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSaqKalBnHE&]
The point, though, makes me think: what is it that defines a product? While the video is meant as humor, and probably nothing else, it strikes me that many in the world think like this.
They write off people like me as "fanboys" and "obsessed" and "brainwashed." I thought the clip with Bill Gates was perhaps the funniest part, but was simply untrue. They don't make the same stuff Apple does. Because if they did, the market would react to their stuff in the way the market is beginning to react to Apple's iOS devices. Microsoft didn't sell Zunes. But it wasn't because the Zunes sucked (alot of people liked the software) but they didn't buy them because the ecosystem of a music store, app store, and iTunes integration simply wasn't there. Zunes have progressed since, but not enough. Microsoft has dropped the product line. The product was more than the...product. Though Apple shows their iPods off more, that doesn't mean they are the same as Microsoft's products.
I suppose that Apple pays attention to showmanship more than other companies do, in fact I submit that THAT is what separates Apple from the rest. I view it as a consistent attempt to create a better product and display it in a way that counts. However, showmanship can be seen right through by the general public if the product itself sucks. In fact, the press would probably laugh at you. This happens to Apple from time to time with products that aren't as well put together as others, but it happens rarely.
On the other hand, many other companies are attempting to improve their showmanship and style in order to compete with a growing Apple market. Their products will have to, at some point, stand for themselves. I think it will only be at that point that it will start to challenge Apple's emotional ties and energy.
As I stood in line for iPad 2, it occurred to me: there is only ONE company in the world that can make that many people wait in lines for that long several times a year...Apple. Try to name another one.
In the end, though Wonka was eccentric and the factory was crazy, they still made the best candy in the world. If they didn't, Charlie wouldn't have wanted any part in it. In order to make it funny and make their "point", College Humor had to focus on the eccentric aspect. If they hadn't, you'd have seen right through it and realized that the metaphor was almost completely parallel. (And that's a good thing)
What showmanship.
-B
UPDATE: Can't watch it? Blame YouTube. And watch it here.
Stop Motion iPad
One can only begin to imagine the amount of hours used to put this together. The attention to detail is top notch.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AB3caO7Acc&]
Thanks to my friend Taylor for the find.
-B
Why I Like Apple
A lot of people ask me why I like Apple so much. They ask constantly. I often have trouble thinking of everything.
I like their commitment to product excellency. I like their commitment to product simplicity. I like the fact that they focus on different things than other tech companies. I like their story. I like their unique and innovative approach. I like their leadership, especially Steve Jobs. I like their understanding for people, in real situations and places. I like their commitment to the environment. I like their simplicity in general. I like their products. I like them.
This new ad for the iPad 2, titled "We Believe," kind of sums all of this up, I think.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyEpaPEbjzI&]
-B
What If There Is No New iPhone?
Before that, usually, Apple has an event near the end of March that announces the new iOS (previously, iPhone OS) that the phones and later iPod touches will run on. Last year, Apple held an event in January to announce the iPad and then the iPad released around this time of year. They announced iOS 4 on April 8th last year.
This allows for a few things:
- The new iPhone to be released in June with the new iOS installed on it.
- Developers can test their apps with the new iOS prior to its release (it usually spends a few months in beta).
This week, Apple announced WWDC 2011. It sold out in something like 10 hours. Each ticket cost $1,599.
They have 5,000 of them. And they sold out in 10 hours. Last year it took 8 days. The year before it took a month. (Anyone here seeing a trend?)
Here's the thing though, most reports are saying that there will be no new iPhone at it.
Their tag line, "Join us for a preview of the future of iOS and Mac OS X."
A preview? Could this mean that there will not be a late March/Early April event highlighting the new iOS? Very possible. In fact, many bloggers and analysts are saying that they are hearing "Yes." They're saying that Apple has skirted around saying that there will be no new hardware at WWDC.
Some have said that maybe these rumors are flying so that Apple can really surprise. I say, no. The new phone (almost undoubtedly) would have to be running the new iOS. In order for that to happen, all those apps on the App Store would need to be tested and approved through the process. In order for that to happen, iOS 5 (the presumed name of the new one) would have to be in beta for a few months. The only way there is going to be a new phone at WWDC this year is if it runs iOS 4. Doubtful? Very.
This raises a question, who might buy a new iPhone this summer and how will they feel about doing so? The latter can be combined with the former to become easier to manage and be broken down into sections or categories:
- Verizon iPhone customer: You just bought your iPhone 4. You love it. You waited forever for Verizon to carry it. You don't want it to be "the old model" come June. (Nevermind that if you buy an Android phone today, it is completely feasible and highly possible that it will be the "old model" in a few weeks. You can't predict Android releases, you can't predict how many phones and what features they might all have.)
- AT&T iPhone 4 late customer: You own an iPhone 4 on AT&T and have for a few months. The darned Apple store employees didn't tell you that there might be a new phone (as they shouldn't) and you bought it not knowing. If a new phone comes out, you'll feel like the Verizon iPhone customer.
- AT&T iPhone 4 early customer: You're on top of this news. You bought your iPhone on release day and have pretty much decided that if AT&T will let you, you'll buy a new phone every year just so you can have the new one at all times (This is me). You will buy a new one if a new one releases, but you'll be a little disappointed if there is no new phone (This is not necessarily me.
- AT&T iPhone 3G or 3GS customer: Let's be honest. You saw that the older model phone was cheaper. So, you bought it. Not a bad idea (all iPhones are great), but now you're behind and your phone doesn't have some of the features as your friend's phone. The worst part is, you signed a contract with Satan (AT&T) and now you're stuck (especially if you're not the primary line on your contract) with an extended contract and a phone that is becoming less and less relevant because it was "old" when you bought it. You'd get an iPhone 4 if you could, but your friends said to hold out and wait for the new one. If a new one releases this summer, you'll spend the extra money over the iPhone 4 (presumably to become the cheaper model) and get the iPhone 5. If a new one doesn't release this summer, you're going to be straight up pissed.
- Other Cellular customer: You're on T-Mobile or Sprint (Or US Cellular or that other thing that Chandler has that only covers Mississippi) and while your carrier doesn't have the iPhone, you're happy with your phone (most likely some sort of Android phone). If there is a new iPhone this summer, you'll be intrigued to see what it can do, but you probably won't switch. It costs too much money monthly and you'd have to get out of your current contract. If you couldn't stand your current phone, you'd think about it...but as long as you don't hate it, you're wiling to wait it out to see if the iPhone might come to your carrier.
So, what if there is no new iPhone at WWDC this year? If you're one of the first 3, you'll be ok. You might be a little disappointed, but let's be honest...your iPhone isn't anywhere near outdated. If, though, you're ready for a new phone, this might hack you off a bit. If you're from category 5, you'll be ok.
So, having covered that...let's explore one more side of things.
If Apple doesn't release a new phone in June, that means that their one and only phone will be competing against phones coming out now. The iPhone 4 will be more than a year old. In the cell phone market, that seems like ages.
But - if you compare the iPhone 4, feature by feature, to almost every other phone on the market, it still remains EXTREMELY competitive. It, still-after being out for 10 months (remember, this is an eternity), has the highest resolution screen, biggest selection of apps, one of the best cameras, best video chat software (does Android's Skype even have video yet? And by the way, FaceTime is easily the easiest to use software...none of the other apps even come close), one of the best battery lives, and most definitely the best music integration software available.
So, in ten months, the iPhone 4 remains competitive. Extremely. Is it the best phone on the market now? While some of the Android phones beat it out on things like 4G, Voice Control, Bigger displays, and faster processors...the iPhone still serves as a better experience, for most customers. It's not perfect, but it's pretty dang close. I obviously have a somewhat biased opinion, but I think it is still in the top two or three best phones on the market And it is almost a year old.
So, what if there is no new iPhone? For you category 4 folk, it might suck. But for the industry, there is still a way to go to catch up with the iPhone.
I hope there is a new phone. Apple's creations always blow my mind. They change the industry also.
My wallet, on the other hand, hopes they wait a little longer.
Do you want a new phone? Do you want the new iPhone?
-B
Obama's Got an iPad
"Jorge, I'm the President of the United States...you think I gotta borrow someone else's computer?" [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-WC2TgWwrE]
Ha. In fairness, there was a huge deal made of Obama's blackberry back when he was elected.
I can see the dangers of having a personal communications device when you are the President.
But, the world is changing and yes, Presidents will need to have their own iPads.
I wonder what his favorite app is.
UPDATE: YouTube's integration sucks with some videos. You can watch it here.
-B
iPad For Seniors
David Worthington at "Technologizer" interviewed his mother, 60 years old, on what it was like to use the iPad--her first computer ever. You can read the entire article here. A fascinating read to be sure.
As John Gruber wrote, "if you don't think this kind of perspective matter, you're nuts."
I have often wondered if tablet computers will replace computers for most of the world. I have documented before how I use the iPad for 90% of my day to day activities. (This probably explains why people see me with the new iPad and think it is a waste. They see it as getting a new toy. I see it as getting this iPad so that I don't have to buy a new computer. It is, for me, a new tool.)
For senior citizens, ones that primarily email and play games all day, this is a serious proposition. You can easily play on the iPad while watching your Soap Operas. Big plus.
It is not perfect though.
When I think about my dad's mother, the one I think about using one of these the most, I'm not sure it would work perfectly for her. She has committed to a group of games that she has played for years and she would not like losing her points, money, or whatever she has inside of each of those games in order to move to App Store games. In addition, a lot of her games are online and in Flash. That really isn't available on any tablet in full from yet.
But there is another problem, a fundamental one for someone like this. To use the device, you have to hold it. You can rest it in your lap (as I am doing now to type on it), or you can sit it up on a desk, but interacting with the device still requires a decent amount of dexterity and strength, something many senior citizens simply don't have.
There are also soooooooo many good parts.
The icons are big. The install of apps is easy. Everything, for the most part, seems to make sense. FAR more sense than ANY typical computer, or computing platform. You don't have to move a mouse. It has direct input. The keyboard comes up only when you need it. The screen is clear, it is travel-able.
If you read David's post, you'll understand some of the great parts about it.
I really do believe this to be the future. I encourage you to come along for the ride.
-B
The Future of Television
Today Netflix announced that they will be delivering an exclusive television series to Netflix subscribers in 2012. And, even better, it is not some no-name TV show. It's going to be called "House of Cards" and will feature Kevin Spacey as a lead actor. Guess who is the executive producer too? David Fincher. The show will be available to any device that can stream Netflix. Presumably, at a given time every week.
So, let's get this straight: you'll be watching a first run episode that no one has ever seen (so in a sense, live) from any device anywhere. It's like HBO, without having to go through a cable provider. And available to you when you're on vacation.
My point: isn't this exactly what television in 2011 should be like? I think we are becoming one step closer to getting rid of cable providers.
I've been thinking for awhile about how far we are away from completely Internet based TV. Even as it is now, I watch shows the day after with Hulu for the iPad hooked up to the TV via HDMI. I use the Apple TV to stream podcasts and YouTube to the television. We use Netflix to watch movies if we have a free night (don't remember when the last time that was...), also via Apple TV and the Wii. I use the MLB app for the iPad and Apple TV to watch any Major League Baseball game whenever. As of late too, I've been using the March Madness app for the iPad connected to the TV to watch tournament games that we don't get via cable. The NBA also has this functionality.
Brilliant. Completely brilliant.
I might add as well that because we don't have HD programming here, the quality is better via Apple TV and the iPad than it is via our cable provider.
I rarely use our TiVo anymore.
It is, and will continue to be, easier to break off from the cable provider.
As I see it, the only real issue (other than HBO shows and shows like Mad Men...none of which I watch) with this model is ESPN. Major League Baseball is going straight to their customers. You subscribe by the month and can watch any game whenever you want, get a radio feed whenever you want, AND watch a broadcast from either team's home commentators whenever you want. In an area like we live in with no teams close by, this is an absolute must for a baseball fan.
If ESPN sold their programming through a subscription to their customers, wouldn't you buy it? Then you could use any device whenever (including those hooked up to your television) you want to watch ESPN. I have a feeling if this became competitive (rather than monopolistic companies that are the only ones who serve your area controlling your programming, etc) it would drive the prices down. It would cut out the middle man between the channel that offers the programming and the consumer.
That model is always a better model. I'd much rather subscribe to NBC, CBS, ABC (or even better...specific shows) directly than pay a cable provider a ton of money each month for a bunch of crap that I don't watch.
I only hope the channels and producers see this. Huge opportunities are ahead of us.
This happened in music with iTunes and later Amazon. The customer of the labels was not the retailer, as they often thought...it was the listener. This has happened more or less in news publications since its conception. This needs to happen in movies (although the movie theater experience inherently means this may be impossible) and I definitely think it is about to happen in TV.
Congrats Netflix, I'm going to give "House of Cards" a try.
-B
iPad 2 - The Thoughts
So, it's about time I get around to this. I've held off in posting this as I got mine on launch day and my parents have spent the last week waiting in long lines, just to be let down. Until today...when they had the luck of the Irish. So, how is the iPad 2?
I think I can break it down into a few different categories: Speed, Cameras, Software, and Thinness. And then...there's demand.
Speed. Is the iPad 2 really faster? The iPad 2 is faster than the original iPad. Apple claims it is about twice as fast, with 9x faster graphics. I'm not sure about the graphics, but they do seem to be faster. I imagine as apps continue coming out the graphics will really start to shine. When they take advantage of it, it'll be great. As far as the CPU speed...yes, yes, yes. Everything is faster on the iPad 2. Apps open and load faster, Safari is faster (thanks to iOS 4.3), and things don't hang like they used to. The original iPad is not slow, by any means, but there is a noticeable difference between it and the iPad 2.
Cameras. How are the cameras? Well, the iPad 2 has cameras. When Steve introduced it, he announced them as "video cameras" and didn't say anything else about them. When the iPhone 4 was announced, he made a huge deal about the quality of the camera. Take a hint from those facts, the cameras on the iPad are not quality. That's why he didn't talk much about them, that why he didn't display photos that had actually been taken on the device. The cameras are about the same as you seen on the current iPod Touch. Which means the rear camera is a little less than a megapixel. People will not be using it to take photos. Unless they are in a jam. I, unsurprisingly, don't think this is a negative aspect. Taking pictures with the iPad is a bit awkward. If you mix this fact with the idea that they need to keep costs down, this move makes total sense. If you want to use it for images, Apple sells a camera connection kit where you can plug in your camera and use the iPad to share the images.
Software How is iOS 4.3 and apps? iOS 4.3 is not too different from the 4.2.1 running on current original iPads. It has some nice updates to AirPlay and the good news is that if you have an original iPad, you get iOS 4.3 too. So what are you waiting for? Plug it in and update it! But...the apps...are unreal. Specifically GarageBand and iMovie. iMovie will only run on the new iPad and GarageBand will run on both, although much better on iPad 2. I own a lot of music apps for the iPad. A lot of them. GarageBand easily blows them all out of the water. It is diverse, it is well designed, and it is fast. You can record up to 8 tracks, whether midi or audio, and control and edit them with swipes of the finger. This is easily one of the best things Apple has done in awhile. iMovie is great too. It is not quite as powerful as the desktop version and doesn't hold a candle to FinalCut Pro, but for editing together vacation clips on the go, it works pretty well. It is not very customizable but works flawlessly. You can publish to all kinds of things right from the app as well. Here is an example of something I made of launch day: [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ooud8Ppxto&] Anyone can edit movies now. That fact alone is VERY cool.
Thinness Does it really matter? The quick answer is no. The original iPad is pretty thin already, and still thinner than all the competition out there. But the iPad 2 is still thinner...with the same battery life. The iPad 2 is thinner than my iPhone 4. And, honestly, I don't see how it could get any thinner. It feels better in the hand than the original iPad, especially if you have a case on your original. The iPad is not really any lighter (although it is a little bit) but it feels lighter because of the thinness. It is a significant difference (although it wouldn't require someone upgrading their old iPad). I didn't consider how much this matters, but it does. On my music stand at church, this takes up a lot less room.
Demand. Do people want these? YES. I arrived to the Apple store for iPad 2 on launch day at 2pm. I knew they would start selling them at 5pm. I was a bit confused about how long the line was at first, but I was probably about 95 people back in line. I was worried if they would have enough. My parents went back to the mall in Florida every day since then. Today, they got one, or two. Apple really has 18 different versions of the iPad 2, and because of that, supply was low...especially if you were looking for a certain version. The sold 10 million original iPads last year. I suspect they sold at least 2 million iPads, maybe more in the last week. Every Apple store is out country wide and the online store now says you'll have to wait more than a month for delivery. More than a month.
It's a great device. If you're new to iPad, it is worth buying if you don't mind the short live $100 premium over last year's model. (If you want last year's model, look fast when they're gone, they're gone.)
I suspect that Apple might be ready for you to buy too.
With the exception of RIM's playbook, I don't see any competition for it anytime soon. Seriously. They are way ahead.
Do you have one? Do you want one? Please share!
-B
iPad 2
The iPad 2 is releasing today in stores. I'm going early to wait in line in Raleigh. I'm planning on buying the 32GB black Wifi-only version. Lots of reviews have been favorable of it. Even Walt of the Wall Street Journal tried to find stuff wrong with it in order to play down the hype...but he was unsuccessful.
After we got back to Raleigh last night, I played with GarageBand for a little bit. I own a lot of music apps for the iPad but this was definitely the most responsive app I've ever used. And the design of it was just brilliant.
Maybe I'll make a little video on iMovie and share.
I can't wait.
-B
"Passion"ate Music in The Church
I've been enjoying my time off thus far. I've watched television, listened to music, and made Allie breakfast this morning. Good start to the break, This morning I started watching some of the videos from my Digital All Access Pass that I bought from Passion 2011. In the middle of the second one, I started having some thoughts about what was actually occurring. I was watching a worship session, watching others worship to new music that they had just learned. It seemed strange, possibly for one of the first times, that I was watching others worship God. A little weird right? Many readers might take this opportunity to move to the next logical step. The step might be that this is entertainment instead of worship and it's just wrong by principle(and hence why I am watching it and feeling strange) but hear me clearly: they are wrong, uninformed, and overly critical.
I immediately jumped to the conclusion that I was in a place where their feelings made sense. But something felt odd to me still, so I went to YouTube. You know what I found? A whole bunch of videos, posted online, of people worshipping in traditional settings. To traditional hymns. To an organ, sometimes a choir, and whole bunch of awful sounding tones. I mean, really, a lot of it was bad. Very bad.
So I thought, if the contemporary music model is so "wrong" because it allows itself very easily to be recorded and placed in a position where someone might watch it later for, perhaps, entertainment value, why in the world are these churches recording these hymns? There is almost nothing about it that is pleasing to the ear. The camera angles are such that you can rarely see anything of consequence. Why put this on YouTube?
As I struggled with this question, I considered different things: maybe they're trying to advertise their church. Maybe they're trying to pay homage to the old hymns. Maybe they just discovered that you can put things on YouTube and so they decided to try it. Any of these could be right.
But one significant difference stuck out: energy. The Passion videos had energy. I could feel it sitting here on the couch. The traditional videos didn't.
When I lead others in worship, and I tend to do a lot of that, I can tell by the middle of the first song whether or not the energy of the room is anything that can be worked with. I very much believe that though the Spirit is always present, sometimes it manifests itself in ways that are easier seen than other times.
As I sit in Goodson Chapel for worship during the day at Duke, sometimes I feel it, and sometimes I don't.
Over the past four years or so I have tried to experiment in ways that will make my methods of leading more effective. The ways I interact with the musicians, the way transitions are planned, the way the text of songs interacts with other parts of the service, all of this matters.
And I think that is where the contemporary music movement has hit a nail on the head. They discovered a way to be effective. Many of the songs are still used in appropriate times in worship. Many of the songs resemble good musicianship in the layout, form, and overall direction. And because they used a style of music that allows people to really move to and feel within themselves, they reached an inner part of the body and spirit that truly sings. Good music, no matter what the style, does this...but simplistic forms tend to resonate with our inner souls more.
There is a reason that slave songs sounded the way they did.
There is a reason that today's African American Gospel music borrows many themes and styles from old slave songs.
My argument is that I see the contemporary music movement doing and borrowing the same things. That's why, in the mostly-Caucasian world, it tends to invoke more energy in the room. When you hear a worship leader say, "I felt like they were really getting into it." I think this is the principle they are referring to.
Like it or not, in 2011, the traditional services and traditional worship styles of old do not carry the energy. Some may say this can't be true, and I might agree that this is a sad reality, but it is nonetheless a reality. At least I see it like this.
Keeping this in mind, my ultimate question is this: if the Spirit is always present and presumably the Spirit doesn't care what style of music is played, why does it manifest itself inside of this type of music more? How much of that depends on the musicianship of those leading? Do others experience the Spirit in different ways? If yes(most likely), does that manifest itself in ways that speak loudly (and tangibly)?
How do we know?
-B
Google is Changing Our Lives...
...and scaring the s*&^ out of us. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_eVE6KQ4Jg]
That car drives itself. Yeah.
-B
Consumer Reports Only Ruins...Themselves
Consumer Reports reviews lots of products. They create a list of "recommended" ones, and a rate each product based on functionality, how well it works, how must it costs, and other things. When the iPhone 4 released, they were the ones who brought the most attention to the antenna situation. They said they "couldn't recommend the phone." To note, they gave it a very high rating. It became a big media frenzy and Apple explained, in detail, how they [Apple] viewed the situation and gave everyone a free case for their phone. Consumer Reports still, after all that, didn't give the phone a "recommended" stamp of approval.
Then a few weeks ago, the Verizon iPhone released. Consumer Reports came out with another review of the unit. Still, they were intentional to not give the phone a "recommended rating."
Many speculate that they only do this because they are losing respect for their reviews to many of the gadget blogging sites and this is a way to get page views and readers. Some say they are doing it because they are sticking it to the man. (How much has our world changed now that Apple is "the man"?)
I say they are doing it because they forgot to go to journalism school.
Shouldn't product reviews be mostly unbiased?
Whatever the case, they ought to fire their writers, editorial, and leadership because I haven't seen droves of iPhone customers returning their phones.
Instead, you know what I see? Droves of iPhone customers evangelizing about the product.
How persistent can they be? They're a bunch of idiots.
-B
What Every Student Needs...Dropbox
In light of my previous post, it occurred to me how much of an evangelist I have become for Dropbox and how many other students risk too many of their valuable files to one hard drive.
Let's review one thing: your computer has a hard drive and that hard drive will fail.
I don't care if you have a Mac or a PC, most computers run off of a hard drive and those are made of moving parts and moving parts break. With the move to Solid State Drives (think of how the iPod touch has memory, it's all internal flash memory--like your USB drive) imminent, this may be less of a problem, but one thing will always remain...you HAVE to back your stuff up.
If you aren't backing up regularly, shame on you. You'll get what you deserve in time.
However, if you are a student (or any human with important files) you need Dropbox.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFb0NaeRmdg&]
For real, you need Dropbox. Its syncing capabilities are unreal.
Think of this, if you put your files on it, you can access them from wherever there is Internet, from any device. And...if your computer dies, your iPad dies, your android phone dies, your iPhone dies, and you've obviously had the worst day of your life...you STILL have your files, because they are stored in the cloud.
I remember telling a friend at FSC that she needed to have a folder on her computer of every class she'd ever taken and every note and paper from each class in each respective folder.
You need to do that. Then, you need to keep that folder as your Dropbox folder. Copy and paste it once and always save your stuff there from here on out.
Do it. Now. It is free for 2GB. Do it.
I like it so much, I've considered trying to pay for enough space for my entire iTunes library.
If you don't back up your computer, at least do this. To lose your stuff is to lose your life and memories.
-B
My Proposition for the Future of Higher Education
Ok, not really. To say that I might have something that would significantly change the outlook of higher education is a strong statement.
But, I think I'm on to...something.
Here is my situation: I, as most people know, own an iPad. I didn't know how I would use it at first, but Allison and I are already figuring out how we are going to buy the next iPad as well so that both of us can have one.
Here's why:
In grad school (definitely in divinity school and higher education, probably in most others as well) you do a lot of reading and writing. Most of this reading is not done from traditional books, but rather from online PDF documents that have been scanned in by someone who works in the copy room. The typical practice is this: a few days before you are to have read an article, you go to your computer, download the PDF onto your computer, send it to print and print it out. Then you can read it, highlight it, etc. The process is great, students are responsible for the printing instead of teachers carrying loads of paper into class, and everything is online for easy access should someone lose a document etc. It also keeps the cost of physical books that a student might have to buy to a minimum. Most of these articles are from random sources or reference materials that cost way too much to ask a poor grad student to have to buy.
However, I see three fundamental issues: 1) Copyright. 2) Significant waste of paper(this has been a reality of the world for a long time). 3) The digital world only benefits us to access it, not to actually interact with it.
But, the iPad has changed all (except for the Copyright idea, that still seems to be an issue) that for me. (To prove my point, the Divinity School changed the main printer in the library and it took me three weeks--literally--to notice the change)
Here's what I do now:
1) Check the syllabus for the next assignment.
2) Log onto Blackboard from my iPad and find the revenant PDFs.
3) Click the files.
4) Tell the files to open in "Goodreader" (a fantastic PDFs reader app $.99)
5) Read the files, draw on them, write, mark, etc.*
6) Sync your folder of PDFs with Dropbox or MobileMe.
7) Take the iPad to class.
*Thanks to Goodreader's ability to markup PDFs AND save them to the PDFs files, I can highlight (if it recognizes text), underline by drawing with my finger, draw shapes around text, leave comments in text boxes that minimize and maximize as I tell them to. When this file syncs with my Dropbox account, I have an annotated PDF file wherever I go on whatever device I am using at the time. How cool is that?
Reading the files is much preferable for me on the iPad, because I can zoom in on text and actually read the files ALMOST as if they were a book. I can't tell you how many times I have seen student print out the files really small because the library computers' default printing was screwed up or because they were trying to save paper. I, on the other hand, don't have to remember to print and can zoom in on text that is hard to read.
It's not a perfect experience, yet. Depending on how large the scanned file was, each page takes a second to render each page. This isn't the end of the world, but can be annoying when someone is quickly referencing a page number.
So here is my proposition: Add $500 to the bill for each student (in higher education pricing, it doesn't hold a candle to other costs and seems to be a worthwhile investment) and deliver all reading assignments via an iPad. Duke has a history of doing this with its undergrads with iPods (and the use of iTunes U) and later MacBooks. Obviously, the additional fee might be optional, but I would imagine it would be easier to sway people.
Just a thought, but I think...a good one.
-B
PS- Yes, I did type this whole thing on my iPad and despite a few typographical errors, it was an enjoyable experience.