Disney's Magical Innovations

John Gruber posted this video earlier on Daring Fireball today. Believe me, it is worth your precious time. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdHTlUGN1zw]

I am constantly amazed by the incredible amounts of ingenuity and time that go into animation. I am more amazed day by day by how much Disney has led the animation industry with technological innovations since its inception. I suppose that Gruber's comment sums it up the best:

Using technology to tell better stories, and make better movies. He’d have loved Pixar.

The amount of technology that Walt Disney had employed in his company since the beginning to make the products (both the films and theme parks) better had passed many many others. There are not many companies in the world that have such artistic and technological approaches woven together to create not only great products that sell, but also pieces of art.

The only other company that I think compares to the Walt Disney company in these regards is Apple. They have lots of things in common with each other: a different outlook on how the current marketplace could be changed by innovation, company held secrets (they wouldn't have been able to afford the land for Walt Disney World any other way), expensive prices, well thought-out market strategies and plans, very few huge mistakes (Michael Eisner had to be one of the biggest), and well-intentioned and marvelous leadership.

There is one more thing though: Magic.

All of the technological innovations that each company employ go to one thing: to make the way that the user interacts with the content magical.  With Disney it was making a seemingly 2D artistic rendering come alive by seeming...real. When Disney set out to create their theme parks, they wanted the guests to feel as if they were ACTUALLY IN some sort of fantasy land. It work so well that others copied it.

With Apple it is making communicating, interacting, and accomplishing work with a seemingly difficult computer as easy as possible. They introduced an entire new way of computing so that the personal computer could change the way people interacted with everyday life. They did it again with the iPhone. And again with the iPad. This, also, worked so well that others copied it.

There's a bit of magic inside of both of these companies.

My only concern is that Disney's outline since Walt's departure may be foreshadowing the outline of Apple after Steve's departure. We all know how Walt left his company. We all know what happened next to Disney.  I don't want that to be the way that Steve leaves Apple.

-B

The New Apple Campus

Yesterday, the day after his WWDC presentation in San Francisco, Steve Jobs went before the city council in Cupertino to present the plans for their new campus, not too far from the current one. The whole presentation is below. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtuz5OmOh_M&]

The council only asked for two things, really: Free wifi and an Apple Store.

Steve had two responses: "We pay taxes, and the city should provide free wifi" and "We're not sure the traffic is here for an Apple store."

Steve knows his stuff, has his opinions, and isn't afraid to speak the truth.

But how about the campus? Awesome, right?

-B

The Padfone is Magical

I thought about posting this last week but decided against it because most of my commentary wasn't, as they say, "appropriate". Asus unveiled their new Padfone. And when I say unveil, I mean...unveil.

You HAVE to watch to understand.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_profilepage&v=sqjoRMHyYQc]

Jobs gets laughed at for calling the iPad "magical". This takes that to a whole new level.

All in all, the Padfone is an interesting idea (although I'm not sure Asus is the only one who has thought of this, ever heard of the Motorola Atrix?) but I doubt I'd really be interested.  We shall see whether it sells or not.

-B

Why Are Churches Segregated?

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGRevimPiQI&] "There's black churches and there's white churches, and that's racism."

Is it? Is it tradition? Is it heritage? Is it comfort?

Also, is it good or bad?

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61QmJDz6tJg&]

-B

The New Windows

I suppose we ought to get something straight: Microsoft is coming back. (If only we could keep them from taking 8.5 billion dollars and throwing it into the trash)

Today, they talked about their new version of Windows: Windows 8 (code name, not final product name). If you care, and you should, take a look at this video:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p92QfWOw88I&]

It is nice work through and through. Finally, they have a consistent graphic design paradigm, an interesting view of apps and how they function, and a well designed user interface for how a person might navigate all of these things. It appears that you'll be able to run the new touch enabled Windows on a laptop or tablet device and the user interface is much like the new Windows Phone interface on the new phones. Finally, they're doing something different, relatively clever, and they're innovating.

Apple will announce how they intend to take their app and OS concepts on the iPad back to Mac OSX next week. They gave a preview a few months back, but next week we should see more of a final product. As an example, they're incorporating the organization of apps like they do on iOS, on the Mac platform. I haven't used the new Mac OS (Lion) but initial reports on the betas speak highly of it.

What seems strange to me, both in Apple's offering and even in this new Windows offering is the distinction of user interaction. It is my current belief that the mouse and keyboard aren't going anywhere soon. It is also my belief that gesture interactions with an operating system are great on mobile devices, but feel odd with a mouse and a computer. I think Apple thought this too, as they have designed the Magic Trackpad which brings some of their gestures of a MacBook Pro to the iMac and Mac Pro series. But still, it's not great. You can only do so much without touching the screen.

[It is also worth noting that Apple discussed touch-enabled desktop machines (think iMacs with touch screens) and spoke about how they demo well and look cool, but extended use fatigues a user's arm, etc. No one wants to lift their hand to interact with a screen all day long, especially to do things like typing, etc.]

It seems as if Microsoft is going to use the same Windows OS on the tablets as they do on their traditional computers. The user interface will have a lot to do with the phone interface, but seems to be designed to be different. This is remarkably different than Apple's approach: they took the phone software and blew it up to tablet size. Because the Mac still requires a different input method, they're taking the traditional approach for the future of that operating system.

It'll be interesting to see how each pans out.

Whatever the case, Microsoft is back, and it is so good to see.

Now, to get rid of Ballmer...

UPDATE: When watching the Microsoft people explain it at the All Things D conference today, Walt Mossberg asked a great question. If you watch the video above, you'll see that apps like Microsoft Office (which have kept Microsoft afloat when Windows went downhill) still run in the old Windows 7 interface. You effectively leave one interface to enter the other. Mossberg asked why they didn't redesign the app to work in the new interface. The lady's response: "We don't think people should have to leave what they love just to change to a touch interface"

She's wrong. You do have to. You may not think it is perfect, but touch interfaces use different size buttons, different menu systems and other things. Having the old user interface for this new Windows is a cop out. Apple's system is better. Everything is redesigned and reworked for each screen size AND interaction method.

Perhaps they're coming back, but they need some help.

UPDATE 2: My favorite Apple commentator makes the same argument about how this isn't a great response to the iPad. You can read it here.

-B

PS22 - True Colors

They're at it again. Cyndi Lauper's best song. While not my favorite arrangement (and it is hard to tell what part are where due to the volume of other harmonies), the kids still do a nice job with it.

This is one of those songs that works so well for things like this too: great, gorgeous pop harmonies with a positive message.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUiPArKFafo&]

It is clear, too, that the kids are close to their teacher. Every time I see a new clip, I always think of my friend Andrew and when they did his song. Cool kids for sure.

-B

1966 Predicts the iPhone

A video published in 1966 that not only predicts, but demonstrates what the computer world will be like in 1999. They were darn close, they just didn't think big enough. The part they missed: by ten years later(meaning 2009), people would be able to do it on a device that fit in the palm of their hand, and easily in their pocket. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC5sbdvnvQM&]

It occurs to me that they didn't see the "computer" as something that would mold and shape and change, but rather as some sort of static device that did a few key tasks. And, if that statement is true, why would the first thing they picked to demonstrate be home shopping? Interesting choice to say the least. People were doing that on television before they were doing it on a computer.

It must have been hard to conceive of the idea of the open Internet in those days. Sure, networked computers were thought of (how else would this have worked?) but the idea of an open Internet where anyone can set up anything and display it for the world to see must have been hard to conceive of. It wasn't just a few things here and there, it was literally everything...online. The system of the Internet is obviously what made this possible, and has made so many other things possible as well.

The question is, what is the NEXT system? What it is that we can't conceive of now that will completely change how we go about our daily activities and routines? How do companies think outside of the box enough to stay ahead of competition and innovate their way to success?

My guess: artificial intelligence. The race is on.

I'll give the first company to bring it fully to markets everywhere a dollar.

Then I'll run for the hills because...our hubris will be our undoing.

-B

Schubert's "Wohin?" (Performed with an iPad)

I generally go for creative uses of technology with music. Especially when they include an iPad. Words cannot describe or encompass all of the things wrong with this, however.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5C9iIKCtVCA&]

-B

Father Reginald Foster

This guy is awesome. Fast forward this to 3:32. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcNdteJNyO4&feature=youtube_gdata_player]

Here is another one about his Latin passion.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inQ6CWx7V2c&feature=youtube_gdata_player]

I feel like the Church needs more of him.

-B

"Obama Thinks Jesus Is Nuts."

Bill Maher talks about how  he is a non-Christian, just like most Christians. Beware of the foul language, it is Bill Maher.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giVXvveef8Y]

While his rhetoric makes logical sense, I think he is targeting the part of the Christian body that won't watch his show and might never agree with him.  The "hippy" Christians already agree with him and...probably aren't watching his show either.

His point about Obama I thought was most interesting, as Obama has to be a politician first and foremost, probably above his faith.  He has to get Scripture to his phone every morning so that the Right will continue to tolerate him while he also has to go after America's enemies...because, well, he is the President.

But really, who is Bill Maher to talk about accountability of Christians?

Oh, yeah, that's right...this isn't accountability, it is just more of his campaign against faith.

-B

Thanks to Chad Holtz for sharing.

Apple is Evil (or, The New iMac)

It's never a boring day in Cupertino. Last week(ish?) Apple released a new model of their popular (yet waning in popularity) desktop PC, iMac.

If you aren't familiar with iMac, shame on you.  It's an all-in-one desktop PC that currently comes in two sizes: 21.5 inch widescreen or 27 inch widescreen.  You can order them online at apple.com or buy one in store and customize all kinds of things on it (though, I imagine that most people just buy the standard option).

In their latest release (which didn't even make the front page of apple.com--that was reserved for the elusive iPhone 4 in white) they upgraded the speed of the processors, the quality of the "FaceTime" camera, and a few other things here and there.  Like many of their computer products, they didn't overhaul much of it, just a gradual upgrade.  If you are considering an Apple product, the time right around when it gets upgraded is ALWAYS the best time to buy.

However, they evidently altered something else inside this iMac that wasn't advertised. Since the report first came out, the blogosphere has been on high alert.

Turns out, that the startup hard drive inside of the iMac has a bit of proprietary firmware installed on it.  This firmware communicates to the fans about how hot the hard drive is running. So, if one were to replace the startup drive with another drive (not Apple -branded) their iMac, once put back together, the computer will fail the Apple Hardware Test. In short, Apple disables your iMac. You can read a little more about it here, and while this explanation leaves ALOT out, the general effect remains the same.

Evil, right?

Not so fast.

OWC (a company that sells unauthorized replacement parts for Macs) wrote on their blog about the issue and railed against Apple's closed-door policy when it comes to things like this.  Something of less significance  happened with the iPhone 4 screws a ways back and iFixIt (a company much like OWC) filmed a YouTube video against it. You can see MJ from iFixIt's take here. (The video is called "Apple's Diabolical Plan to Screw Your iPhone")

Apple commentators like John Gruber and Marco Arment have commented about this.  Both seem to be on Apple's side.  John says that a user knows that this is an all-in-one device and that the convenience of using and buying a machine like this comes with tradeoffs. Marco basically said the same thing. (I think John read Marco's piece first)

I think the answer lies in support.

If you buy an iMac and take it home, it will work beautifully. But, if something does go wrong (they're not perfect) you can take it back to an Apple Store (or call online) and get it fixed or replaced for free. (When was the last time you got your Windows PC fixed at a Toshiba store?) As long as you've backed up your stuff (if you're not backing up, shame on you), you're good to go.

But, if you decide that you'll install your own hard drive once you get home, it's not an easy task to take apart an iMac.  The process is documented by iFixIt here and it involves removing the glass display with suction cups, unscrewing countless screws, not getting any dust in the machine, not shocking yourself or the computer, and putting it all back together. Now that my warranty has run out, I've taken my MacBook Pro apart twice and I can tell you I don't think I'd ever attempt to take that glass off without breaking it. I'd rather be trained by the people who built it first.

The problem with support is that if you do something wrong, and then try to take it back to Apple, they have to deal with it. Not only will they know that you took it apart, but they can't be sure of what you did to it.

The same thing happened with the batteries in the iPhone and new MacBooks. They built them in because they had some major advantages when it came to battery life and slim design. If they know that you haven't tampered with it, they can fix it much easier.

I think it comes down to this: Apple wants to fix your product.  They want you to be happy. And I would be willing to bet that they are willing to sacrifice the 10% of hackers in order to make a pleasing and seamless experience for the other 90%.

I think Marco and John are right, it's a tradeoff. If you don't want that experience, Apple probably doesn't need your sale.

I don't, in any way, think that makes them evil.

-B

The Gospel of GaGa

This morning, I watched Lady GaGa's Monster Ball Tour on HBO. I missed it the first time around and thought quickly enough to TiVo it for the second time.  Thank God HBO shows specials like MTV shows reality shows. If you are a fan of creative use of costumes, lighting, dancing, video, and curse words...you'll enjoy the show.  It is well done.

I feel like my feelings toward her "Judas," however, are more real than I might have expected.

As far as I can tell, GaGa exists for one purpose: to let everyone know that they should be who they are (and be proud of it) because God made them who they are and it's ok to be who you are because people told her she was nothing and then she went and became a star, and Superstardom should be the key to all good things so people should want to be like her and follow her.

Throughout the show (in which she constantly encourages the audience in regards to the aforementioned point of her existence), other than GaGa, one figure remains constant on stage.  It's a shirtless, long-haired electric guitar player who she readily refers to as Jesus, Jesus Christ, or Jesus Christo. To be fair, he kind of looks like what we typically think Jesus looked like (throwing away the notion that Jesus might have looked a lot like Osama bin Laden). In fact, at first I thought that that was why she called him Jesus.

But...it seemed to move from being a joke to being real.

I've heard many people discuss whether or not GaGa's message of "love all" is really the message of the Gospel or not.  I've heard people advocate that GaGa is spreading her own Gospel. I've expressed before how much I think the sexuality of her performances and videos depletes the value of her message.

I think one thing is clear: I think GaGa senses a sense of calling to be the voice for those who have been afraid to be themselves in this world.  I think she feels a need to speak up for those who have felt "oppressed." I think she thinks she is spreading the Gospel (however we are to define that word).

The problem for me, though, still lies in her follow through.

Everyone should appreciate who they are and who God made them to be: awesome.  People who feel attracted to members of the same sex should be able to live lives that aren't based in hiding those feelings: great. People should want to make something of themselves, especially when they've been told over and over that they will never be anything: fantastic.

But, why the crotch grabs? Why the F words? Why the suggestive nudity?  Why the mocking of religious attire and practice?

There's no doubt in my mind that Lady GaGa is extremely talented.  If it's not in her singing, then her dancing, If not in her dancing, then in her writing.  If not in her writing, then in her work ethic.  If not in her work ethic, then in her creativity.  If not in her creativity, then in her sense of "call."

She's got what it takes to make it.

But she's one of those rare artists that come along and gains rare stardom...and tries to use that fame and voice to speak a message. So her potential is not just for fame, her potential is for change. Imagine a world in which this potential is used in a proper way!

If her message were based in love and life, she'd have something. But it isn't.

She wants to be a voice for those disrespected by culture...but she cares more about those people following her than the purpose of the message. It's a fake-out, to the highest degree.

She has a voice that many in the church wish they had.  She even speaks some of the same language that they'd like to. But she's doing it in the wrong way. The potential for change is lost, ruined, and destroyed. Instead...she doesn't influence culture in the way that the Gospel is supposed to. She influences culture in the way that she wants to.

And because of that, I'd ask her to stop calling that guitar player, "Jesus."

-B

She's good, but she used to be better. Just watch:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NM51qOpwcIM]

Still In Love With Judas

Gaga released her Judas Video (or at least the first one). It won't embed, but you can watch it here.

I've now watched it four times. Admittedly, I still don't really get it. Some of the online sources claim that she is playing Mary Magdalene. If she is, I'm not quite sure which Gospel she is reading.

I now think that her purpose in the video/song is to have an honest approach to being involved/in love with sin and evil while trying to follow the proper way. I get that, although I don't really.

Most interesting, the end of the video. I'm interpreting it as a statement about what society does to someone who is in love with evil. Strange representation of it, but I do think it is a strong statement.

I think, maybe, that if I saw Judas as the root of all evil, I'd understand the whole world and their stance on this song and the history of Jesus in a different way. But, I don't. I see Judas as a human being who made a mistake (but a mistake they may not have been in his control, because of it's foretelling in the prophets).

I think the world has equated Judas with evil, and GaGa is continuing this effort. In fact, she begins from this premise.

The problem for me is that the history of Christianity's relationship to Judaism (and especially events like the Holocaust) is sometimes attributed to Judas and his betrayal of Jesus. That outlook does nothing but tear down our world and the relations that people of other faiths have with each other.

For that reason, I choose not view Judas as the source of evil within the Passion narrative...and I think that adds to my inability to fully understand GaGa's "message." Stay tuned, this could get interesting.

-B