Looking back on Da Coww Farm... one decade later

Today, as we approach the 10th anniversary of Da Coww Farm's demise in late Spring 2000, I think it's important that we look back and reflect.  Those of you that remember DCF will enjoy the look back down memory lane, and those of you that had never heard of DCF may find what's ahead interesting (or more likely... not at all).  DCF was shot down in a blaze of glory during its prime, leaving nothing but apologies where a vibrant and innovative site had once stood.

While some mistakes were made and poor choices made, the fact remains that DCF was truly, in every sense of the tired phrase, ahead of its time.  Today, let's reflect on the legacy that Da Coww Farm left behind in both positive and negative fashion.

Before we can truly remember DCF, I think it's important to set the scene.  Let's hop in the DeLorean kids, and travel back to 1999.  

In the summer of 1999... Star Wars: Episode I was tearing up the box office, the Sega Dreamcast hadn't yet arrived stateside (the PS2 hadn't even been announced yet!), Bill Clinton was still the president, I was entering my sophomore year at Washington High School, and my brother and his friends were entering 8th grade at Franklin Middle School.  TCI was in the process of rolling out the @Home cable modem service across Cedar Rapids, DVD had yet to really gain mainstream acceptance (VHS was still popular!), and the Carmike Wynnsong 12 was the newest theater in town.

Are you feeling like you're back in 1999 yet?  Windows XP had yet to be introduced, Mac OS X had yet to be introduced, and the iPod was over two years away from being announced.  Cell phones wouldn't even have COLOR SCREENS for another 3 years.  The RoughRiders had yet to play their first game in Cedar Rapids.  New Veterans Memorial Stadium in CR was three years away from opening.  You get the idea.

So now that we're officially in the 1999 frame of mind, let me answer the question that some of you may be wondering: what the heck is (or was) Da Coww Farm?  The answer to that is simply put in today's lingo -- Da Coww Farm was a blog.  Maybe one of the first blogs run by anyone in the city of Cedar Rapids.  I even referenced this in the tagline for this very blog -- "back before anyone knew what a blog was, I was writing one."  (My contribution to DCF was mostly as an advisory role, but I did contribute posts occasionally under a few aliases)

In those days, blogs were called E/N pages, which stood for "Everything/Nothing".  These pages were about everything, and they were about nothing.  While today blogs often focus on certain topics or themes, the first blogs were about almost anything the author(s) found interesting or worthy of sharing with their readership.  Some blogs are still like this today (like this one!)

So how was DCF truly born?  Zach and his friends were always talented writers who loved technology and humor and loved playing to an audience.  I don't remember the exact order of events that led to DCF being created, but I do remember a few key components of its creation.

First off, the inspiration for starting an E/N page was derived almost exclusively from a web developer at Blizzard Entertainment named Geoff Frazier.  Mr. Frazier had run his own E/N page for several months prior to DCF being started.  He'd rant, give opinions, review movies, and post interesting links.  In fact, a lot of the fonts and colors at DCF were quite similar to the format that he had been using.  We found it clean and very readable, so we didn't want to mess with a good thing.

The name of the page came from my brother's screen name at the time -- CowwTipper.  The feeling was that a lot of folks from outside this state viewed Iowans as those who tipped over cows to have a good time.  The screen name CowTipper was taken, so the extra 'W' was added, which of course was carried over to the website's name.

Zach and his closest friend, Nick, were the two original writers on Da Coww Farm.  They wrote reviews of recent movies they'd seen, ragged on pointless ESPN shows like HorseWorld -- a show dedicated to (what else?) horse racing, and shared favorite links.  The page was updated multiple times daily, and grew to have a very dedicated readership.

Later, Nick and Zach would bring in their friends Carl and Chad to contribute to the page as well.  Carl brought a different viewpoint to the table, while Chad brought comedy.  They also brought in a friend named Whitney to write a gossip page.  At the page's peak, there were more unique visitors daily than the entire 8th grade at their school.  The page's appeal had grown well beyond just their peer group in a quick fashion.

While sometimes the page would take a tone toward subjects that perhaps 8th graders shouldn't be publicly broadcasting or using curse words more often than necessary... overall it was refreshing to see young kids valuing written content and producing their own.  Particularly given the atmosphere at the time toward distrust and skepticism on the Internet by adults.  Most adults still didn't "understand this Internet thing" and felt like if you posted your name on the Internet that evil Praetorian hackers were going to steal your identity like Sandra Bullock in The Net.

Heck, the concept and acceptance of a blog even among Internet types was non-existant.  Despite a complete lack of understanding and support, these four guys built a page with compelling content that attracted a wide range of readers.

Their downfall came when they started to abuse their newfound media outlet for teasing others.  As mentioned earlier, they had brought in Whitney to write a gossip column on occasion.  When those gossip updates slowed, they looked to other ways to keep the gossip coming.  We developed a form for people to submit gossip anonymously.  The anonymous gossip would be posted with sarcastic responses from the contributors, often times mean or hurtful things.

These guys had acted beyond their years and ahead of the times in so many ways with this page, but in the end, they showed their actual age.  Bashing other kids on the Internet was a pretty low move, and they paid the price.

The school got involved, and all of the boys were called to the principal's office one fateful day in the Spring of 2000.  Parents were called, apologies were demanded and written.  Here's how Da Coww Farm looked after the apologies were posted:

DCF Apologizes

I also think it's bullshit (cursing absolutely necessary) that the school got involved in this.  None of these guys had ANYTHING to do with the site during the school day.  They did not view the site, update the site, or touch the site from school.  They didn't talk about school, threaten the school, or otherwise bring it up in any way, shape, or form.  So where the school got off talking to parents about something their kids were doing FROM HOME that didn't involve the school was beyond me.

I'm not saying what they were doing was right (making fun of other kids), but if a parent was concerned, they should've called my parents and dealt with it outside of school.  If two kids got together at a non-school sponsored event and one kid teased another, would the parents still call up the school?  I'd hope not, but I guess I can't say for sure.

While it's true that posting insults about others was not their finest hour, I feel like it's important that we recognize and honor the authors of DCF for blazing the path for others to follow.  Social media is a hot buzzword today, and Zach, Carl, Nick, and Chad *WERE* social media for their peer group a decade ago.

It's a shame that the Internet Archive was unable to save a copy of DCF during its heyday.  We don't have any of the original posts that graced DCF, but we do have the memories.

About a year after the shut down of DCF, we attempted to re-launch DCF.  The re-launch never really took off, but you can view those posts here:  DCF in mid-2001

DCF also spawned several spin-off blogs, the most successful of which was Big Boy Productions, a blog that boasted contributors spanning 3 different grade levels at our high school.  Big Boy Productions would've never come into existence if it weren't for DCF.

Finally, the last blog to follow up Big Boy Productions was The Job Squad, a short-lived blog.

DCF left a long legacy after its untimely demise.  However, today, I come not to denigrate DCF for its demise, but to praise DCF for its innovation, forward-thinking, and for standing out.

Thanks to Zach, Nick, Carl, and Chad for having the guts to put their thoughts, feelings, and ideas on the Internet long before it became the thing to do.  You guys were truly pioneers and it was an absolute pleasure to be part of the DCF team.

Newsflash: the iPhone won't be the best-selling smartphone

My cousin just linked this article on Facebook, and I read it and felt it deserved a response:
Android Or iPhone? Wrong Question

The gist of the article is that Google's Android strategy is obviously the best and they're going to dominate the Smartphone market and make Microsoft-y pools of money that Sergei Brin, Larry Page, and Eric Schmidt can all dive into Scrooge McDuck style.

It's a good article, but I think it makes a mostly obvious point. I don't know if I've ever heard it argued (intelligently) that Apple is trying to sell the most phones -- or even that they will -- they're just trying to sell the best (in their opinion) phones. To trot out a very tired car analogy (but still a good one), BMW or Mercedes-Benz aren't trying to sell the most cars -- they leave that to Toyota or GM. They're trying to sell the best cars in the portion of the market in which they compete. No one is going to write an article declaring that -- gasp -- BMW doesn't have a strategy to sell the most sedans and play it off like it's news or surprising. Yet, here we are, with an article declaring it as surprising that Apple's strategy isn't going to sell the most smartphones.

For some reason, people can wrap their heads around this strategy in nearly every product category, but can't when it comes to Apple. To understand how ludicrous it can be, let's stay with the car analogy for a second. Let's say a financial analyst who follows the auto industry declares that, "Mercedes-Benz needs to release an under $10,000 sub-compact car or else they're going to get killed by Kia and Chevy -- who both make sub-compact cars for under $10,000."

Can you even comprehend the concept of a 98 horsepower Mercedes-Benz sub-compact car to compete with the Chevy Aveo? Of course not! It's insane to even consider. It would destroy the value of the Mercedes-Benz brand. Let's be honest here -- some folks buy a Benz for the sole purpose of being able to say that they drive one -- for the prestige. How likely do you think they will be to buy another Benz in the future if someone can get one for less than $10k? Not very. BMW and Lexus would be ecstatic if that were to ever happen.

Yet, analysts were coming out of the wazoo saying that Apple needed to release a netbook. A piece of plastic-y shit with a cramped keyboard, junk screen, and slow processor is going to convince people that Apple is the way to go? Uh, no. Apple refused to release a netbook, and analysts declared that they were going to get killed in the market by netbooks.

Instead, Apple has had their BEST-EVER financials in EVERY quarter since then, steadily increasing their market share. Those analysts sure had it right!

Yet, here are we again with someone declaring that Apple's not going to dominate the smartphone market, as though it's news. Well, color me surprised, because I never thought -- nor hoped -- that Apple would be the number one smartphone maker.


The only product category I can think of where Apple is the clear-cut market leader is the MP3 player market. That's less a function of Apple running a different strategy to become the market leader, and more because the competition was so absolutely inept when it came to making an easy-to-use, attractive, and functional product that Apple was ceded that market almost by default. Apple didn't do anything different with the iPod versus any other market they competed in, the market just reacted differently. The iPod has never been the cheapest, but the experience was far superior. When the market was in a growth state, the iPod / iTunes / iTunes Store ecosystem was light years beyond anything else available. Competition has caught up now, but it's too late -- the iPod and iTunes are well-known brands, everyone knows how to use iTunes, plus many folks have bought songs from the iTunes Store and are locked in.


The competition is MUCH stronger in the smartphone market, with two strong competitors in Google and Palm -- with Palm taking an Apple-like approach (integration), and Google taking a Microsoft-like approach (leave the hardware to others). Apple will never dominate the smartphone market like they do the MP3 player market, and I think they're very aware of that fact. The competition is too strong, and they have a limited addressable audience with the AT&T exclusive deal (which I expect will stay in place well into the future). Whether or not Apple sells the most smartphones seems to be somewhat irrelevant -- it's not their strategy to begin with. Their financials sure seem to be doing okay in spite of this fact.

Why the obsession with best-selling, anyway?

If best-selling was equivalent to best...

... Microsoft Windows is the best OS

... the Toyota Camry is the best car

... Wal-Mart is the best place to shop

... Avatar is the best movie ever made (and Titanic is the second best)

... Cable TV is better than Satellite TV

... the Ford F-150 has been the best truck every year for the past 30+ years

... Applebee's is the best restaurant ever

... McDonald's hamburgers are the best hamburgers ever

and so on and so on.

Look, if Android wants to be the best-selling smartphone platform, go right ahead.

I'll keep using my iPhone, even if it's not the best-selling and most popular.

I'll keep using my Mac, even if it's not the best-selling and most popular.

I'll keep watching my DirecTV, even if more people have Mediacom cable around here.

I'll keep watching IndyCar racing, even if more people watch NASCAR.

I'll keep going to local restuarants, even if Applebee's has a full parking lot every night.

I'll keep cheering for the Cyclones, even if more people in this state cheer for the Hawkeyes.

Growing up, The Bruce said something to me that has stuck with me:

"What's popular isn't always right, and what's right isn't always popular."

Ain't that the truth.

Who dat?

Just had to say it:  Go Colts.  :)

Thoughts on the iPad

Ever since the iPad was introduced on Wednesday, I've been chewing on it.  I've digested all the media I could find on the topic: I watched the keynote presentation, read the blogs, and checked out Apple's site.  I'm usually able to quickly make a decision on Apple products' prospects, but with the iPad, I'm still not sure.

While everyone remembers the blockbuster introduction of the iPhone, it's amazing how quickly we forget about Apple products that were universally panned by geniuses on the Internet, only to go on to become absolute sensations.

• The original iMac was largely criticized because it did not have a floppy drive, and dropped legacy ports like ADB (Apple Desktop Bus).  However, people wanted a simple, all-in-one computer that was attractive and easy to set up.  The iMac was an overnight success and saved Apple from bankruptcy.
• The original iPod was criticized because it was Mac only and cost more money for less storage than other MP3 players.  They sold like crazy and changed the entire music industry forever.  People were willing to trade storage capacity for an attractive, sleek product that was easy to use.  The other devices were nowhere near as easy to sync or use as the iPod.
• The iPod nano was introduced during the height of the success of the iPod mini.  Again, the smartypants on the Internet declared that people wouldn't pay the same amount of money for less storage.  The iPod nano quickly made people forget all about the iPod mini and became the best selling iPod of all time.  Sex sells and the sleek nano was much more attractive than the chubby mini -- and the flash storage as opposed to a mechanical hard drive was a great sell for runners and athletes.
• Heck, even the iPhone was panned for being too expensive, for lacking features like cut and paste, corporate email, and 3rd party applications.  The list of people predicting the iPhone would bomb is a mile and a half long. Today, Apple sells more mobile devices than any other company on the planet.  The iPhone is being used or piloted in 70 of the Fortune 100 largest corporations.  The iPhone App Store now boasts over 140,000 apps and over 3 billion downloads.  Somehow, all the Internet wiseguys had it wrong yet again.

Apple's track record, even since Steve Jobs' return is not perfect.  There have been some products that simply weren't successful like the iPod hi-fi or the PowerMac G4 Cube.  The problem with these products were either that they didn't improve on existing products (iPod hi-fi) or they didn't provide value for their cost (PowerMac G4 Cube).  The Cube was one of the most beautiful computers ever designed, but it just didn't provide enough power to justify the cost.  To this day, the Cube is proudly on display at the Smithsonian for being such a great design.  That doesn't change the fact that it didn't sell.

Looking at the track record in the past, it sure looks like Internet know-it-alls are rarely an accurate indicator of a new Apple product's success.  Will the iPad succeed in spite of the pundits or will they be right?  I can't predict the future, but I sure as heck wouldn't bet against Apple -- and I sure as heck wouldn't listen to what all the self-proclaimed Internet gurus or media pundits have to say either.  Those same pundits were saying Apple would price the device at $999, or that an IPS screen wouldn't last longer than 3 hours on a full charge (you can watch VIDEO for up to 10 hours straight on this thing).

Why do people pan, complain, and grouse about products that have consistently ended up being successful anyway?  I have a few theories.

For those who watch Apple's stock (AAPL) on a regular basis, there's an old mantra that says, "Buy on the rumor.  Sell before the announcement."  Swing on over to your favorite financial site if you don't believe me -- sure enough, Apple's stock peaked the day before the announcement and subsequently lost quite a bit of value after Wednesday.

The simple fact of that matter is that no product can ever live up to all the rumors and speculation that the Internet pumps out when it comes to Apple.  Before Apple announced the iPad, how much had they said about the product?  Zero.  Nothing.  Nada.  Not one word was ever released from Apple regarding the iPad until the day they announced it.

When people find out that the iPad is "missing" feature x, they incorrect assume that Apple "removed" it or "left it out".  Given that we have no ability to learn about the development process or the prototypes Apple creates, we don't know if that feature was ever planned for the product or not.  This doesn't stop folks from feeling a tremendous amount of disappointment that the iPad doesn't really contain a rumored feature.  Then they label the announcement a "disappointment", and Wall Street seems to react similarly. It's actually kind of ridiculous if you realize that America's financial system has an ebb and flow based on what is reported on MacRumors.com, but it does.

The rumors may not live up to expectations, but that's only a small part of the issue.  I think another part of the problem is that people can't see the future staring them in the face.  They can't get it.  They can't grasp it.  Just like people screaming bloody murder over a floppy drive!  In 2010, it seems absolutely absurd.  We really got that worked up over floppy drives?  Really?  Yes, people declared the iMac would fail because it didn't have a floppy drive.  That seems humorous today.

There's a third issue in play here too -- enthusiasts in almost any market have a hard time relating to and understanding people who aren't similarly enthusiastic about something.  This is true of almost anything -- home theater, automobiles, computers, even food.

• Food snobs can't understand why some people want meat and potatoes for every meal.
• Automobile snobs can't understand why anyone would want to drive an automatic transmission.
• Home Theater snobs can't understand why people think DVD looks "good enough" or worse, people who buy "full screen" DVDs.
• Mac snobs can't understand why people still buy PCs.
• People who build their own computers can't believe someone would buy a computer from ANY manufacturer.
• And so on...

Computer enthusiasts are declaring the iPad a dud because it doesn't meet their desires for complexity and customization.  The problem is that customization in some cases leads to complexity.

For example, when my mom used to have a Windows PC, she managed her photos through the file system by hand.  She created folders for different events, and dragged and dropped the photos into the appropriate place.  When she wanted to find a particular photo, she had to go through the PC's filesystem to locate the photo she wanted.  She could only search by the event title she had given or the filename of the image.  That's it -- and that's assuming there wasn't a single photo that wasn't categorized incorrectly.

She switched a Mac over a year ago now and uses iPhoto.  If I asked her where her photos live today on her Mac, she'd say, "They're in iPhoto."  She doesn't need to worry about where in a directory structure her photos are physically located on the Mac.  If she did care to find out, she'd find the iPhoto Library package is located in her photos directory.  The iPhoto Library package appears to the casual user as a single file, and that's all they need to care about.  Where are the photos?  They're in your iPhoto Library.

Now of course, it is possible to open up the iPhoto Library and find the individual JPEG files inside of it, but there's no point to doing this.  You see, with iPhoto, an entire layer of abstraction is removed from the user.  Instead, if you want to find photos on iPhoto, you look at them in much more natural ways:

• Who's in the photo?  (Faces)
• Where was the photo taken?  (Places)
• When was the photo taken?  (Events)

Some people have a hard time with this because they say, "Well, what if I need to find the individual JPEG file because I need to do something with it?"  Like what?

• Use it in iDVD, iMovie, or iWeb -- these programs support the iLife media chooser and you can just select the photo from the way your photos are arranged in iPhoto.  Again, the file system is abstracted away from the user.
• Upload it to Flickr/Facebook/MobileMe -- this functionality is built in to iPhoto, so you still don't need to see the original files to upload them to most popular photo sharing websites

If you really want to export the files, you still can and deal with them that way.  However, as much as possible, Apple has attempted to strip away levels of complexity from photo management on your Mac.  By doing this, it has because an entirely more natural way of thinking about and working with your photos -- by looking for them by Who/Where/When instead of "Florida Vacation 034.jpg".

iPhoto is certainly not perfect for all circumstances -- it's buggy, it's slow, and there are some situations in which you just need to export the files to JPEG to work with them.  However, I think the majority of the time, the tradeoff of complexity for ease-of-use is worthwhile.

What does all this have to do with the iPad?

The iPad represents a paradigm shift in computer design where more and more of the arcane intricacies of using a computer are being abstracted away.  This makes things simpler, but with a loss of customization.  John Gruber of DaringFireball.net used an excellent analogy where he compared it to a manual and automatic transmission.

For automobile enthusiasts who still want to have complete and direct control of the vehicle, including gear selection, the manual transmission is great.

For most people that just want to drive the car, and are willing to make some trade-offs like slightly decreased fuel economy, and less control over gear selection -- an automatic transmission abstracts away a level of complexity and makes the car more accessible and easier to use.

I think that's a great analogy with one exception -- the automatic transmission is more mechanically complicated and more difficult to repair and fix than a manual transmission.  Compared to a device like an iPhone or iPad that removes levels of complexity like a file system -- it actually makes the system more reliable, easier to maintain, and easier to fix.

I can think of several people who own iPhones who can barely use a computer, but are absolutely great with the iPhone -- downloading apps, sending pictures, emails, texting, and much more without ANY issues.  I am usually the go-to tech guy to ask questions about things, but I can honestly say I've never gotten a question about the iPhone, even by the most technologically challenged people -- with the exception being, "What are some good apps?"

That's what is going to be so great about the iPad -- where are your iWork documents?  They're in Pages.  They're in Keynote.  They're in Numbers.  You don't have to worry about where in the iPad's filesystem the documents are -- they're just there.

This isn't a perfect situation for everyone -- some people just want to be able to deal with things like this on an intricate level.  They want to see the filesystem.  They want to know what processes are running.  They want to be able to multitask (and I still suspect that's coming).

These are the same people who want to know what kind of hardware is in their computer because they selected every piece by hand.  Or the same people who want to drive a manual transmission because they like to control the car.  That's fine -- it's not like these options are going away.  There will always be an enthusiast market for things.  There will always be manual transmission cars.  There will always be self-built PCs.

The manual transmission was once the dominant kind of car, and now it's a small minority.  So too will this come to pass with computers.  The ability to deal with intricate stuff is going to go away, and systems like the iPad and the iPhone are the future.  Even the Mac as we know it today does not represent the future of computing.

Wow, that was a lot of ideology wasn't it?

In the end, the folks who will be buying this product will buy it if they like the functionality and the feel of the device, and those who feel it's too limited, won't.  I suspect that much like the iPod, and the iMac, the noisy minority who won't buy the product will be over-shadowed by the silent majority who will snap these things up.

I'm going to reserve judgment on the iPad until I have one in my hands.  I am able to separate rumor from reality, I'm able to see the future of computing, and I'm able to realize that enthusiasts in any market are a noisy minority.  I think the product can be a success now and into the future.

Make no mistake, it's not like this is the one and only iPad that Apple will ever release.  Apple has shown a propensity for slow but sure evolution of their products over time.  The iPhone OS and the iPhone hardware have received incremental updates every year in June / July and have eliminated most of the major nitpicks leveled against the iPhone when it was first introduced.  A device that was wholly inappropriate for corporate email upon first release is now being used in over 70% of the top 100 largest companies.

It will be this way with the iPad in the future.  Both the hardware itself, as well as the iPhone OS software will continue to be updated and grown over time.  Even if the device isn't exactly how Apple wants it today, it will be improved over time.  This isn't a product that Apple is releasing on a whim or just to dip a toe in the water -- this is the product that Apple thinks represents the future.

New features and functionality will come when they're ready, and not a second before.  Apple held off on releasing Cut & Paste for the iPhone OS until they had it JUST right, and now they have arguably the best implementation on any smartphone.  

I think Apple really needs to rename the iPhone OS to iPad OS.  It helps fuel the perception that the iPad is just an large iPhone / iPod touch given that it's running iPhone OS.  I think when you really sit down and think about it -- the iPad is the device Apple has been building toward all along.  Think about it!

Do you really think Apple spent all that time developing what is arguably the most sophisticated, advanced, stable, and secure mobile Operating System on the planet to just put it in a phone and an iPod?  Or that they developed one of the most easy-to-use and fully-featured Software Development Kits  around just for a phone?

A great example is the Twitter client called Tweetie.  Tweetie is without question, hands-down, the best Twitter application on the iPhone.  Tweetie has a great interface, great features, and is just a pleasure to use.

Tweetie is also available for the Mac OS, where it's also an excellent app.  However, Tweetie for the Mac is nowhere near as feature-filled or polished, or even as up-to-date as the iPhone app.  The iPhone app for Tweetie is light years beyond the Mac application.

That's just one example -- I could think of several other applications where the same is true in a heartbeat.  Many iPhone applications are better than their Mac equivalents!  That right there is why I'm so excited for the iPad.  I can't even comprehend how amazing a Tweetie app for iPad will be.  Developers are already making great apps for the iPhone, and I can't even imagine what great things they'll be able to do with a much faster CPU and bigger screen.

Sometimes when I'm sitting on the couch at night watching TV, I'll pull out my iPhone, check a few tweets, and read a few webpages.  I don't pull out my MacBook Pro because it's just more convenient to check a few quick things on the iPhone.  It's more intimate and quick.  That's a scenario where I can easily envision myself grabbing the iPad, reading a few tweets and browsing a few webpages -- very similar to what I do on my iPhone now, but with an even more enjoyable experience.

I love Safari on my iPhone, and if Safari on the iPad lives up to what I think it could be -- that right there will be a killer app.  It's just a very intimate and enjoyable experience using MobileSafari on the iPhone.  With more screen real estate and a faster CPU... it should be amazing.

I think Apple gets it -- they have to provide an experience that is better than what you can get on the smartphone or on the laptop.  If they deliver on that promise, I have no doubt the iPad will become a success.

Keep in mind that the original iPhone was not the one that became a sensation -- it was the iPhone 3G that made it huge.  The original iPod wasn't the huge hit either.  It wasn't until the 3rd and 4th generation iPods that things really started rolling.

Apple knows how to build a foundation for a product and build on it.  The iPhone and iPod are absolute juggernauts now, but you would never have known it for the original products in either product line.  It took until the 2nd or 3rd iterations until those products made it huge.  The same may or may not be true with the iPad, but it's something to keep in mind.

The iPad train is coming, and it will change the way we see computers, long-term.  I'd bet on it.

Not all gamblers are degenerates

A couple of folks have either tweeted at me or commented on my Pro Bowl posting saying that gambling isn't a bad thing and I give it a bad name.  I never meant to give gambling a bad name or suggest that I think it's this horribly evil thing.  Betting and gambling are fun, and I see absolutely no problem with it.

When I was talking about degenerate gamblers, I'm specifically talking about those who take it too far.  Not all gamblers are degenerates, in fact, most do it just fine and in moderation.

It would be horribly hypocritical of me to criticize gamblers when I won the Iowa State round of the College Poker Championship a few years ago or turned $20 into over $1000 playing Hold 'Em on the Internet, also many years ago.

When I say a degenerate gambler, I mean the guy who bets on the coin toss at the Super Bowl.  That's the guy who also is putting down $100 on the AFC winning tomorrow.  That's a degenerate.

The NFL Pro Bowl

I was listening to ESPN Radio on my way to work after lunch this afternoon, and Erik Kuselias was filling in on The Herd.  I rarely find myself agreeing with Mr. Kuselias and today was no exception.  I feel like he tries even harder than Colin Cowherd to say outrageous things in order to get people to call in, email, text, whatever.


What he said today seemed pretty normal, but came off as absolutely outrageous to me.  You want to know what he said?  Are you ready for this?  Really?


Mr. Kuselias said, and I quote, "I enjoy the Pro Bowl."  Not even joking.


I have never, ever, ever, in my entire lifetime met a normal person with could say with a straight face that they like the Pro Bowl.


There are only two people who like the Pro Bowl:

1. Degenerate Gamblers
2. Degenerate Football Addicts

I'm not saying someone who likes football and watches it quite a bit.  I'm talking about degenerates with five wall-mounted LCDs for the sole purpose of watching multiple games at once on DirecTV's Sunday Ticket.  I'm talking about the guy who sits at Buffalo Wild Wings from the start of the pre-game show until Sunday Night Football is over.  The guy who actually laughs along with the hearty fake laughter on FOX's NFL Sunday.  That guy likes the Pro Bowl (and he probably bets on it too).

There is only one good all-star game in all of professional sports, and that's the mid-summer classic, the Major League Baseball All-Star Game.

Why is baseball's game the best?

Players play hard on both sides of the ball.  I watched Pedro Martinez throw arguably the best innings of his entire career in the 1999 game.  He was throwing against the best hitters in the entire game, and he made them look downright silly.  Pedro was throwing his best stuff.  He wasn't holding anything back.  Diving catches?  Leaping grabs to save home runs?  Killer defense?  Every year in the all-star game.

Of course, hitters are trying to win the game too.  They're bunting, they're swinging for the fences, they're hitting sacrifice flies, they're taking pitches.  It all comes down to effort, and I can't think of many examples where I'd question someone's effort or motivation in an all-star game.

There's pride for your league.  Baseball has the unique advantage in that players still want to win for their league.  Both leagues want to prove they play the best brand of baseball.  Interleague play has done nothing to diminish league pride -- if anything, it's increased it!

Something's on the line.  The game was great before home-field advantage in the World Series got put on the line, and now it's even better.  The American League has won EVERY year since this rule was put into effect, and yet, the game is still dramatic, heart-stopping, and enjoyable.  The outcome has been in doubt until the bitter end almost every time, but do you think anyone has failed to watch because "the AL is gonna dominate"?  Not so much.

What about the NHL All-Star Game?

If you include this season, and go back to the 5 prior seasons... the NHL All-Star Game has been held 3 out of 6 years.  Any game that is so easily pushed aside is a joke.  Can you believe that?  Because of the lockout, and the subsequent Olympic year (and this year being an Olympic year too), there hasn't been an All-Star Game HALF the time in the last six seasons.

There's no defense, no checking, and no fights.  They've tried many different formats over the years, but have returned to the East versus West format.  Doesn't that instill a huge burst of pride to play for a geography?  Not so much. 

Get this: in the 1992 NHL All-Star Game, there was not a SINGLE penalty called.  I can't even make this stuff up!  

Clearly, the NHL All-Star Game is a joke.  A huge joke.

The NBA All-Star Game isn't so bad, right?

There's one big problem with the NBA's All-Star Game.  The problem?  All-Star Saturday Night is better than the game itself.

What would you rather watch?  The Slam Dunk Contest and the Three Point Shootout?  Or a 150-130 game matching the East versus the West in a race to chuck up uncontested shots and run up and down the court?

I never miss an NBA All-Star Saturday... it's hugely entertaining.  I love the entire event.  I pass on the game itself.  Basketball needs physical defense and contested shots.  It needs fouls, emotion, and tension.  The All-Star game has none of that.

What are the issues with the Pro Bowl?

The Pro Bowl has a lot of the same issues that plague the NHL and NBA all-star games.  There are two issues that no matter what ideas the NFL comes up with will never change:

• There is no pride in playing for the AFC versus the NFC
• No one tackles hard, no one plays defense hard, and the rules force you to play base defense only (no blitzing)

There are some issues that could be changed:

• The game is meaningless
• Several of the elite players in the NFL will not participate and they aren't injured

First off, I think the move away from Hawai'i was a good move.  The Pro Bowl had a wonderful tradition in Hawai'i, but that wonderful tradition was of people not caring about it.     Whether you like the change in time and in venue or not, it has accomplished one thing: people are actually talking about the Pro Bowl.  That's a dramatic change from when most folks thought it was a professional grade toilet cleaner.

The change of venue is good because it makes the game more accessible, and the game will likely be played in front of bigger crowds than at Aloha Stadium.  A bigger crowd helps make events seem more exciting, even if it's a bunch of guys trying to make 60 minutes go by as fast as possible and to avoid hitting each other as much as possible.

The change of time is a really good idea, too.  Football season is something that progressively builds in excitement.  You start with some foreplay (NFL Preseason), then college football starts, with the NFL a week later.  You go through the regular season, and then it's college bowl season.  No sooner does the college bowl season finish then the NFL Playoffs start.  The action builds throughout the playoffs until you reach the climax of the Super Bowl.  And after you've climaxed, there's a refractory period until you're interested in more football again.  Having the Pro Bowl right after the Super Bowl without a refractory period is like... you get the idea.

Putting the Pro Bowl before the Super Bowl is great.  It makes the Pro Bowl part of the build-up to the Super Bowl and makes the Super Bowl the rightful end of all things football.  That's the way things ought to be.

So the timing is better, but it still stinks.  A Pro Bowl without Peyton Manning or Drew Brees?  You mean to tell me that two of the best quarterbacks in the NFL this year won't play a snap in the Pro Bowl and they AREN'T hurt?  That's ridiculous.

The Pro Bowl needs to be moved to shortly after the halfway point of the regular season.  I can even tell you the perfect day to play it.  The Pro Bowl should be played on Thanksgiving Thursday.  I don't see how you can get more perfect than that.  Lose one week of the preseason, move the start of the season back to Labor Day weekend, and take a week off for the Pro Bowl.

For anyone worried about playing a meaningless game on Thanksgiving, the NFL already does this every year on Thanksgiving when the Detroit Lions play.

I even know a way to make the game somewhat meaningful.  The conference that wins the Pro Bowl automatically wins the Super Bowl coin flip to start the game.  This isn't a huge deal by any means, but it's something.

When you're looking at a situation like the Pro Bowl, you have to ignore the things you can't change and work on the things you can change.

Players will never tackle hard.  Defense will never be tenacious.  Offensive sets and plays will be simplistic.  No one wants to get hurt or hurt someone.  No one has time to learn a whole new playbook.

There isn't a lot of conference pride in the NFL, but putting something as simple as the Super Bowl coinflip on the line would be something -- anything -- to play for.  Unless the AFC and NFC start playing intra-conference games a lot less often, and play by different rules, there just isn't going to be that much to differentiate the two.

I think the change of venue and the change of time were a positive step in the right direction for the Pro Bowl.  Move the game to the middle of the season, let all the best players play, put something on the line, and put it in front of a captive audience, and you'd have a product that could be so much more than it is today.

As it is, I certainly won't be watching the Pro Bowl.  This isn't a rare problem, because I won't watch the NBA or NHL All-Star Games either.  I commend Commissioner Goodell to be willing to change the status quo, but there's quite a ways to go.

I'm back, yet again, yet again...

I realize that I have a tendancy to start new blog pages, write in them for a few weeks, and then forget about them.  It happens.  For whatever reason, I've felt a strong desire to start writing again.  I like to write, and Twitter is a fun way to share quick thoughts.  However, I want to write more.  I want to go more in-depth.  So I find myself here yet again.

I've got all these opinions on things, and I'm absolutely CERTAIN that random strangers (as well as my friends) on the Internet have a burning desire to read what I have to say!  Okay, maybe that's a load of crap, but hey, even if no one reads this, I'll probably enjoy writing it.



With that said, let me set expectations for what you'll find here.  I'm an unabashed Apple enthusiast in every sense of the word, and I don't mean the fruit.  My Mac and iPhone provide me with a tremendous amount of satisfaction and utility, and I am not reticent to share my love with the world.  I try to be fair and point out when Apple hasn't met or exceeded expectations, but I do end up giving them the benefit of the doubt more often than not.  That's just how I am.


I'm also an Iowa State University alum, and I bleed cardinal and gold.  My years at Iowa State were without question, the best of my entire life.  I could not be more proud of my school and Cyclone athletics.


Beyond just ISU Cyclone athletics, I'm a fan of sports in general.  I love watching football, baseball, college basketball, hockey, and the Izod IndyCar Series, too.  So, you'll see posts on almost any of those topics, too.


My last point to make in this introduction -- I am a full-time IT professional, but my thoughts on here don't represent those of my employer in any way, shape, or form.  This is a sanctuary for being away from work, and will treat it as such.


Welcome to The Brew Pub!  I hope to make you laugh sometimes, but more importantly, I hope to make you think.