29 Jun 2011

More on Gingerbread and the Droid X

Hot on the heels of yesterday’s rant, I found this article in my news feed this morning. Apparently, it’s not just me; Verizon and Motorola really did push out a defective OS update.

The question now is this: what will they do about it?

28 Jun 2011

The one thing that might drive me to the iPhone

For the past several months, I’ve been a very happy Android user. My Droid X has been, for the most part, everything I could hope for in a phone, and is my constant digital companion. As a heavy user of Google services, it’s been about perfect for me, especially the Google Voice integration; now, I can hardly imagine using a phone that isn’t tightly tied in to GV. I’ve looked at iPhones since getting my Droid, and have been mostly unimpressed. If nothing else, the smaller screen is a disappointment. After using the huge touchscreen on the X, the iPhone looks, well, kind of dinky. I like the tough construction of the X, which makes a case basically unnecessary. I love the fact that I never, ever have to connect it to my computer for anything unless I want to. I love not needing iTunes. I really love the Swype keyboard. I could scarcely imagine a reason to switch to the iPhone.

Then I received an over-the-air upgrade to the latest Android version, 2.3 (Gingerbread).

Gingerbread has been a mixed bag. Some things work a little better; other things, not so much. I like the revamped color scheme, and Google Listen seems to work a bit more smoothly. But there have also been random reboots, loss of signal, and seemingly decreased battery life. And then there is The Problem.

From time to time, for no reason I can detect, the phone will now sometimes hang up immediately after I place a call. At first, I thought I was doing something wrong, but then I realized it was a software issue that requires a reboot to correct. After perusing a few Android board posts, it seems I’m not the only one with this problem. And a problem it is; I don’t want to find myself having to wait through a reboot to make a phone call in an emergency situation. Back in the days of AT&T exclusivity with the iPhone, I heard it jokingly said (referring to AT&T’s notorious network problems) that the inability to make and receive phone calls was actually a feature. As someone who would much rather text or email than make a phone call, I am not entirely unsympathetic to that point of view. But it does point out a problem in the world of Android that simply doesn’t exist in the world of iOS, and it also goes to the heart of why I purchased an Android phone on the Verizon network in the first place.

Taking the first point first, Google faces the same problem with their OS that Microsoft does: they don’t control the hardware on which that software is run. Consequently, there is always the possibility of unexpected glitches when an update is rolled out. Compounding the problem is that due to the open nature of Android, carriers are free to modify the OS as they see fit, which means that carriers become the ones responsible for rolling out OS updates. Additionally, the crapware that the carriers add to the OS can add its own problems, and who’s to say that something in Verizon’s build of Android 2.3 isn’t causing a conflict, and is therefore responsible for the hang-up problem? Contrast this to Apple’s world, where they control both hardware and software, and need only test against a limited number of hardware configurations. It makes it much simpler to push out an update, and to guarantee that it will Simply Work.

As for the second point, I bought a Verizon phone because I need my phone to be a phone. I need to be able to make phone calls. If this wasn’t the case, I would have settled for an AT&T iPhone a few years ago. But because AT&T’s network basically sucks in my area, I went with Verizon and chose an Android phone, having gotten tired of waiting for Apple to make a CDMA version of the iPhone that worked on Verizon’s network. I gladly overlooked the rough edges of Android—battery life, slight delays in touchscreen response, etc.—because of its manifold benefits.

Now that there’s a Verizon iPhone, the equation has changed somewhat. We’ll be buying my wife an iPhone soon, and I’ll be watching her experience very, very closely. I’m not saying that I’m going to ditch the Droid for an iPhone just yet; I still generally like my phone very, very much. But I’m going to be keeping tabs on how often The Problem happens, and if it persists, I’ll be looking at the iPhone with new interest. In the end, a smartphone that balks at making calls is just a handheld computer with a crappy phone attached, and there’s no room in my life for that.

19 Oct 2010

Larry's ballot recommendations for November, 2010

Vote

Here's how I voted on the California ballot propositions (I vote by mail), and my rationale for each:

Prop. 19 (Marijuana legalization)

I voted yes. I'm no fan of marijuana or the drug culture, but it's about time we admitted the war on drugs is an abject failure. Because we did not learn from our own history (i.e., Prohibition) we have repeated the mistakes of the past. As the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s allowed the Mafia to flourish, the prohibition of drugs has allowed the Mexican and Colombian drug cartels to flourish, as well as gangs like the Crips, Bloods, and others. As the Economist has pointed out, we have treated a public health problem as a criminal law problem, which has had the side effect of filling our prisons with drug offenders at a time when the state is in financial crisis. 

It is true that it will not change federal law. Nevertheless, if the experience of medical marijuana is any indication, the federal government will eventually quietly acquiesce. There are also issues with the Tenth Amendment to be resolved. Oh, and did I mention the abject failure of the war on drugs? It's easier for kids to get pot, meth and LSD than it is for them to get beer. This is stupid.

Prohibition doesn't work, period. We should stop banging our heads against the wall. Vote yes. 

Prop. 20 (Congressional redistricting)

I voted yes. This measure transfers authority for Congressional redistricting to the redistricting commission that we voted for in a recent election. It will help reduce gerrymandering and districts designed to ensure the re-election of incumbents. Vote yes.

Prop. 21 (Vehicle License Surcharge)

I voted no. This measure adds an additional $18/year to vehicle license fees in order to fund state parks. We all love state parks, but this is the wrong way to fund them. Vehicle license funds should be used for transportation projects and infrastructure. The right way to fund parks is through general taxation and appropriation of the requisite funds by the state legislature. I refuse to do their job for them, and neither should you. Vote no.

Prop. 22 (Prohibition on borrowing of funds by the state)

I voted no. This measure is an initiative constitutional amendment that prohibits the state from taking or borrowing local funds used for transportation, redevelopment, or local government projects and services even during times of severe financial hardship. I have two problems with this measure: 1) It seems shortsighted to tie the hands of the state in times of crisis, tying the hands of the legislature, and  2) it is a constitutional amendment, of which we already have far too many in California. We need to stop micromanaging the legislature. Stuff like this is what has gotten us into the mess we are in today. Vote no. 

Prop. 23 (Suspends implementation of air pollution control law)

I voted no. This measure would suspend the implementation of AB 32 until such time as the state's unemployment level drops to 5.5% or less for one full year. 

If you're wondering what the hell unemployment has to do with air pollution control, you're not alone. This measure was funded by the companies who would be affected (no surprise there), using the scare tactics of OH MY GOD WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CUT THOUSANDS OF JOBS AND LEAVE CALIFORNIA AND SEND THE STATE INTO A TAILSPIN JUST BEFORE WE CRASH AND BURN OH MY GOD THE HUMANITY. Oh, please.

Also, just as an aside, given our current circumstances it's likely to be a hell of a long time before our unemployment level drops to that level for a sustained period, and in fact historically it has only been that low in California for brief times on a few occasions. 

Like smog? Vote yes. Otherwise, just vote no. 

Prop. 24 (Repeals legislation allowing businesses to lower their tax liability)

I voted yes.  This measure, which in a perfect world would be called the Corporate Welfare Act of 2010, would repeal recently passed legislation that was part of a budget compromise, which allowed businesses to lower their taxes. I'd like to pass a law that lowers my taxes, too. People in hell want ice water. Sorry, but I'm not feeling it. Despite the all the fear, uncertainty and doubt they're sowing, all this does is restore business taxes to the levels they were previously. That's all. Vote yes.

Prop. 25 (Simple majority to pass a budget)

I voted yes. This should have been done a long, long time ago. If this was already law, we would have had a state budget months ago. California is one of the few states that requires a supermajority to pass a budget, and it's one of the reasons for the annual budget circus of IOUs and so on. This measure fixes the problem and brings us into line with other states that only require a simple majority (50% +1) to pass a budget.  I can see no logical reason to oppose this. Vote yes.

Prop. 26 (2/3 vote to approve certain fees)

I voted no. Go back and read what I wrote about Prop. 25. 

OK, got that? Apparently, since the state budgeting process has been so successful over the years (ha!) someone got the brilliant idea to require a two-thirds vote to approve certain fees. No, no, no. Bad idea.

Also, this is a constitutional amendment. Go back and read what I wrote about constitutional amendments in California in my remarks on Prop. 22. Do you have any idea how hard it is to overturn one of these after it's passed? Somebody should go find whoever dreamt this up and force them to spend the next five years listening to Gloria Allred recite the insurance code. Vote no. 

Prop. 27 (Eliminates state redistricting commission)

I voted no. This one gets the 2010 Chutzpah Award. This measure would eliminate the nonpartisan state redistricting commission, and give the job of redistricting back to the Legislature, who have done such a sterling job with it in the past. Bloody hell. Just for good measure, this is also a constitutional amendment. Oy.

Look, if you're happy with gerrymandered districts, noncompetitive elections, and the general way things are going in California, then by all means vote yes. But if you're not happy with all of that--and nobody I know is--why would you give the current crop of Sacramento officials this kind of virtually non-repealable authority? This is a bald-faced attempt at subverting the previously expressed will of the people, and should be stomped on and left to die. Vote no.

* * * 

Afterword on statewide offices

In the races for public office, you can make up your own mind, but as for me, for the first time in my adult life I find myself unable to vote for any Republican. I will simply not be associated with, or cast my vote for, any group, candidate or organization that has even the remotest link to, a partnership with, or which panders to the Tea Party phenomenon, with which I have major and fundamental disagreements on the most basic level. Therefore, I voted a straight Democratic ticket for the first time ever

And that's my take on the election. Happy voting...
7 Sep 2010

A new post on my new blog

I haven't intended to cross-post stuff between my two blogs, but if you're Orthodox you might want to take a peek at my new post over at I, Lazarus. It's called "The Conversion Problem Nobody Tells You About," and I guarantee it's something you're not expecting.

22 Aug 2010

Flivvers!

0822000908

Saw a procession of Model T Fords on the way to church this morning. Apparently the Model T Club was out for a run...

19 Aug 2010

Resistance is futile: Rejoining Facebook

Yes, it's true. After making a somewhat noisy exit from Facebook a while back, and having some uncomplimentary things to say about it, I've signed up again (sorry, S-P!). 

Why? It's complicated, but paradoxically also simple. It's not that I've changed my mind about anything I've said or written--I still think Facebook is the AOL of the 21st century, I still think that Facebook the corporation is fairly untrustworthy, and I still think there are serious privacy concerns. I still think Facebook comes with an awful lot of baggage and cruft that I can live without.

That said, none of that matters. What matters is where the people are. The fact is that the world has increasingly adopted Facebook as a standard communication platform. There are people I want to hear from, photos I want to see, and things I want to share, and it is getting more difficult to do that without being a Facebook member, rather than easier. It's all well and good to say "I have a blog and a Flickr account and a Twitter feed, and people can follow me there," but the reality is that, people being people, they're not going to go to three different places when they can log into one and see everything there. It's not a question of laziness; it's a question of time management, of how much information individuals feel able to manage in the time that they have, and how they can simplify the process of information gathering. I have come around to the opinion that if you want to be a connected global citizen of the 21st century, you need to have a Facebook account, whether you like it or not, in much the same way that a mobile phone has become a necessity. 

I tried to achieve the same thing with Google Buzz, but Google Buzz is a mess. It can't decide whether it wants to be Twitter, your blog, or your Facebook page, and in the end manages to do none of those things very well. Maybe Google will have better luck when it rolls out its rumored Google Me social network, whenever that may be, but in the meantime we have to deal with the world we have, not the one we wish we had. 

And so, rather than be "that guy"--you know, the one who lives in the ramshackle house at the end of the block, insists that OS2/Warp is a superior operating system, refuses to carry a cell phone or get broadband, and drives a rusting Peugeot that sits in the weeds where the lawn used to be--I've chosen to acknowledge that the world won't mold itself to suit me. Except for me and a few other cranky geeks, nobody cares, so I'm back.

However, I'm approaching it a bit differently this time. I'm back with a new philosophy, which is as follows:

1. Privacy is dead. Rather than expect Facebook to protect my privacy, I'm opening everything up wide, and assuming that whatever I post will be public now and forever. That way, I have no worries the next time FB changes its privacy settings, terms of service, or defaults.

2. My friends are my friends, and I reserve the right to choose them. If we're close friends or family, if you're part of my church community, or if you're one of the few I've entrusted with my cell phone number, you're in like Flynn. If you're somebody who dated my brother twenty years ago, or sat three rows behind me in 8th grade social studies in 1979, it's not so automatic. I hope you have a wonderful life, and I'm sure you're a fine human being, but I'm really not here to reminisce about an awkward childhood. I'm here to keep in touch with people I know in real life, who I really care about, and I only have so many minutes in the day to do that. 

That isn't meant to be harsh, just honest. I'm not trying to violate Wheaton's Law, I'm just trying to firewall my time and my personal life in a way that makes sense to me and doesn't create a huge timesuck. I once calculated that since entering elementary school in 1971, I've worked and studied with literally thousands of people--significantly more than a thousand in my restaurant career alone, and that's not counting customers. I have to draw the line somewhere, and I will. Please don't be offended by that.

3. No games, apps, or virtual gifts. No Farmville for me, thank you very much. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's not my thing. 

4. I'm going to make a supreme effort not to get dragged into political stuff. If you think Obama is a Muslim, or Dick Cheney is the devil, or Sarah Palin is the savior (or destroyer) of American civilization, fine. But I'm not getting involved. From where I stand, the American political scene has gone mostly nuts, and I'm taking a step back from it. "Put not your trust in princes, in sons of men, in whom there is no salvation..."

Finally, a word about The Name. I'm participating in Facebook under my baptismal name (no, I'm not going to tell you what it is here, for various reasons, although if you know my Gmail address you know what it is). For some reason, Facebook won't let me add my birth name (Larry) to my profile, so all of you who know me as Larry will just have to get used to seeing the other name instead. Relax--I'm not insisting that anybody call me that, although I'll answer to both, and that's what my church community mostly knows me as. But I'm most emphatically not insisting that family and old friends do likewise--that would just sound weird to everybody. 

Also, using my baptismal name has another advantage. In all candor, there are a few people I'm not terribly eager to be found by, and it will throw them off the scent somewhat. I've set up corresponding accounts on Twitter and the like under my Orthodox name as well, and over time I may very well transition over to them more and more--but that's a subject for another post.

So, to sum up, Facebookers, I'm back. See you there.
10 Aug 2010

Tony Villar and me

Villaraigosa


You'd think the mayor of Los Angeles would have better things to do than follow me around--I mean, aren't there potholes or something he can take care of? And I wouldn't want his TV anchorwoman girlfriend to get jealous...

Still trying to decide whether I should block him or not... :-) 
9 Aug 2010

God bless Pete Seeger

His energy and optimism at age 91 is amazing. He's a national treasure and a living legend, and I couldn't not post this.

Thanks to @morningporch and @simsa0 for the link...
6 Aug 2010

An entertaining trifle

While Posterous is occupied fighting off the latest DDoS attack, go take a look at my new Tumblr site, tumblelarry. It’s where I’ll post whatever I find around the web that I find interesting, funny, or worthwhile—just a variety of quotes, links, photos, and other things that I don’t want to clutter up my main blog with.

Have fun…

4 Aug 2010

Quick note on the Proposition 8 ruling

Here's what I wrote on the subject some months ago, on my "About Me" page. I still stand by today what I wrote then:

Barring significant constitutional changes, I think legalization of gay marriage is likely inevitable. I opposed Proposition 8. I believe that we live in a secular republic whose laws will sometimes contradict religious teachings, and unless we want to live in a theocracy (I don't) we have to accept that.

My personal preference would be for the government to get out of the marriage business altogether, and let churches, mosques, synagogues, temples, etc. decide which marriages to sanction. Perhaps this will spur some kind of change along those lines. We shall see.

Larry Anderson's Space

Hi, I'm Larry--a native Californian, an Orthodox Christian, a history buff, a sci-fi fan, and an unashamed geek. I live in beautiful Ventura, California, and am married to the most beautiful woman in the world (hi, honey!).

Contact Me


Follow iLazarus on Twitter



Ask me a question anonymously




Creative Commons License

Original content on all of my sites is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.