Alright, it's 8/8/08, and since I only seem to post anything on strange dates, I thought this would be a good time to whine a little. Firstly, IE7, the beastly nice looking but-ohmygodwhydoesitfreezeupsomuch web browser extraordinare. I only use it if Firefox is just full up with tabs and I need to look up something quickly (if that doesn't make sense, you don't power browse). It sucks. Really sucks. Now, that's just my opinion, but come on, if it chokes on five tabs when Firefox handles, uh, well let's just say I can't count them all (I'm too lazy to clean them up), then “sucks” is a reasonable conclusion.

Secondly, well, just forums. Forum advice, mainly. And those awful verification images on the search features. 'nuff said.

Good day!

--Leif

Happy Leap Day, only once every, uh, four years. Yep. Monumental. Quite amazing.

--Leif

Happy New Year. Another solar cycle shelved into the annals of history, until the sands of time wipe even the memory of it completely out of existence. But while some will wait anxiously for that day to come, and others are saddened by its seemingly swift passing, let us all remember that today, the 1st of January, not only means the possibility of a fresh start and new hope, but also another year in which to make terrible psychologically scarring mistakes. So be careful out there!

Too dour? OK, forget that last part, it'll be good practice for next new year's day.

--Leif

The 314th day of the year, what else?

--Leif

Okay, so I wrote that last entry a month ago. I was busy. But has TV actually “fallen” in the last month? No, not in the quality, which ironically this season actually has some of, but in actual production. Of course I'm referring to the horrifying writer's strike, which threatens to steal from us all that we hold dear. Will disgruntled writers take down the industry, leaving it a moldy carcass, a shell that only bits of Survivor still wiggle in? Surely not, but several shows have already ceased production, including several of my favorites, and 24 has been delayed until it's all resolved. Although at least The View will continue. Phew.

They do write the shows after all. One only sees the producers talk about the shows, and they do direct what happens, but ultimately a script writer ends of drafting it, and without them it's a no go. Although some producers who also write have to be members of the WGA Yes, it's weird. Despite the natural resentment many are bound to have toward these greedy little bastards for shutting down our television season, their demands aren't outrageous. Simply DVD and Internet royalties for the shows they do, right? Mostly, it seems. But any concession for writers comes from producers (technically, the production companies and studios), so as with any business deal it's fraught with necessary compromises which no one wants to make. This threatens both their pocketbooks, writers more than producers, since they're not getting their paychecks, but producers too if this takes a bite out of television ratings permanently. You'd think even some hard concessions would be better than a costly strike, but such is often the way with Union disputes. Strike first, ask questions later, right?

The problem the writers really need to worry about if this isn't taken care of soon, is that the networks will have to retool their schedules to be, well, writer free. That's not good for them or us.

--Leif

The fall television season has now officially started, and a month in things have taken shape. There are several new shows, each receiving its share of advertising push, including Bionic Woman, Chuck, Pushing Daisies, Moonlight, and Journeyman, and with those being genre shows I'm of course interested to see if they pan out.

Firstly, the “much anticipated,” heavily hyped Bionic Woman, remake of the 60's show, now with bigger budget! At first it seemed promising, the ads certainly made it look intriguing, with a dark, slick look about it. Kind of like Dark Angel meets Alias. Although the teaser's voice overs had a tinge of camp, I chalked that up to context. Interestingly, most of the cheesy voice overs used in the ads didn't come off as that bad in the show, but unfortunately they were probably chosen because they were the best dialogue the show had. Alas, the show really does feel like a remake; as if the creators were handed a concept, a few million dollars, and ordered to create a hot new show. It's off-balance, unsure of itself, and rather boggling at times, leaving one wondering what the hell they're doing. Characterizations are weak, sometimes seeming like multiple script writers were contributing, and we ended up with some sort of Frankensteinian mess. Even the action isn't as exciting as it should be, relying as many productions do on quick cuts. It could still come together, if the show creators figure out what they want to do with it, but I doubt it'll last that long. Shows that have it all together from the start often struggle to survive.

Which is the perfect segway into Pushing Daisies, both the critics darling (if one is to believe the promos) and mine, as it is Brian Fuller's new creation. Dead Like Me got two half-seasons, and Wonderfalls only made it for four episodes, but that was on Fox, and in May, so perhaps ABC will be kinder. As for the show itself, it's everything one could hope for. The best description of its style I can come up with is a mesh of Big Fish and Wonderfalls (understandably), while managing to feel fresh and original at the same time (also understandably, since neither were exactly phenomenons), from perishing play dough citizens being terrorized, to quirky and somehow real characters. There are familiar settings to Fuller fans, a pie shop not unlike Der Wafflehouse, a morgue which Ned goes to ask the dead who murdered them, the inevitable comic flashback sequences, and starcrossed romance, which seems too hopeless to not be depressing, but it's not somehow. Long story short, Ned can bring dead back to life, but only for a minute before someone else dies, and if he touches them again back they go to the great beyond. I'm not sure of the popular appeal, but a loyal fanbase is guaranteed. Whether heartbreak is too depends on the former.

--Leif

Apparently the anime distro Geneon USA is going out of business. They used to be Pioneer of course, best known for Serial Experiments Lain, Last Exile, Hellsing, and many others. They'll still exist in Japan of course, but that's little comfort to the fans of the series which are in mid-release. It's unclear what will happen to those properties. I haven't exactly been, uh, part of the market lately, but I was under the impression it was still doing alright. Is this a sign of flagging interest, or is it just Geneon?

Either way it's rather disappointing, as Geneon has in my view been one of the very best.

--Leif

I've just been getting some anti-spyware/adware software, and I'm struck by how invasive they seem to be. I suppose I've been used to the old Ad-aware, which worked simply by scanning your system on demand, but even the new version of that now has a boot-loading service and tray icon for real-time protection. This is necessary for Ad-aware to even start. Are software developers simply obsessed with tray icons and background services?

Anyway, Comodo's malware software seems to taken a similar route and doesn't even perform a scan, but rather just sits there like an active virus monitor. In fact, there's some overlap in what it does and what a normal virus scanner does, advertising trojan and worm protection. I suppose their virus scanner doesn't?

The first time I loaded up SpywareBot, I couldn't get it to load. Apparently it had trouble shutting down one of the other scanners, and took about five minutes to cancel its configure operation. Upon uninstallation of the other two, however, there was no change in its inability to open. A reinstallation solved this issue, and in a few minutes it was scanning away, and found 68 "infections!" All were registry entries, put there by Winamp. See, I didn't realize Winamp was "malware" now. Ha Ha. At least it doesn't need a background service to operate.

So are these spyware scanners more trouble than the software they're supposed to protect you from? Obviously for many people on-access virus scanners are necessary. After all, viruses really can reak havoc, and I do run a scanner, but viruses are celebrating their 25th anniversary, and I've still never gotten (a legitimate) one for it to clean. Does one really need an in-memory scanner for spyware? The most Ad-aware ever found in the years that I used it were cookies and MRU entries. If "malware" is so malicious, it enters virus scanner territory. These seem to be splitting the market, requiring more and more perfunctory applications running in your tray. Not that I have a problem with a monthly scan to ease my mind, but active monitoring and tray icons for anti-spyware is overkill. If someone's getting that much spyware on their computer then they obviously need to reform their internet habits.

--Leif

It's the 13th, and Friday. Yup. That's about it.

I'd like to cite some trivia regarding the origins of this day of superstition, but there doesn't seem to be a concrete, verifiable, and agreed upon explanation. Certainly there are many fine theories, some involving questionable historical references, and others are simply supposition. The number itself seems to have many origins to its infamy, and the day as well, separately, so that it seems Friday the 13th is simply the convergence of two already superstitious things.

I'll also say that paraskevidekatriaphobia is the fear of Friday the 13th. Who knew?

--Leif

We may not have gotten a Grand Slam opportunity with last month's Roland Garros final, but Federer came through at Wimbledon today with a fifth straight title, tying Bjorn Borg for the most consecutive Wimbledon wins (in the open era). Despite the result, however, the match was in stark contrast with the four previous years, where the final was decided in only three or four sets, today's match was a full five setter, fittingly so I think for such a momentous record, especially considering Federer hasn't even had to play a five set match at Wimbledon since he ended Pete Sampras' own effort to win five in a row in 2001.

Not only was the match long—relatively speaking, at 3.75 hours—it was close. Nadal played so well today that it felt like the number one ranked player was the underdog for most of the match, even breaking Federer's serve twice in the fourth, immediately following what must have been a frustrating loss in a tiebreak in the third, and even in the fifth, which Federer won 6-2, Nadal had four break points. A superbly played match, regardless of who you were rooting for.

--Leif