themok on Xanga

Weblog

Wednesday, 28 October 2009

"But take heart! I have overcome the world."

There's a certain peace which completely soothes the soul. I often take time to dream about the future. It's usually filled with images of me in a house, coming home from work in a suit, being met by my family (I know, it is very generic). And there are always smiles. The short excerpt never fails to end with the creases of a smile.

But I can't say that there's been a point in my life where everything has been all smiles. There's ALWAYS something to pout about. Worrying is my nature. Finding constant joy is hindered by my inclination to first seek out the troubles which are brewing in my life. So yes, I am happy, but not wholly like my dreams portray.

I want to believe that my situation is similar to others. We're all generally happy, but experiencing life to the fullest is halted by the little pesky things we have to deal with. So how do we experience full joy in the constant fog of worries?

It's in the title. "But take heart! I have overcome the world." The satisfaction of knowing that a bad test score is not capable of deterring God's plans for me is... soothing, to say the least. For the creator of the universe, I refuse to believe that my future is based on a single 30-minute interview. For the being who is capable of bringing down a tunnel of fire, the belief that my past mistakes have doomed me from ever finding the "right person" is comical. Yet, I admit I still worry, but I think I'm starting to understand drop-by-drop the vastness of God's ability and all-knowing nature.

He's overcome the world, my life is just a simple task.

Friday, 26 June 2009

I didn't think I'd ever be ASKING for more work to do, but that's where I found myself this week at my job. After completing the the tasks no one else wanted or had the time for, I went on to complete other miscellaneous tasks which I finished too quickly... and so I was left with nothing work-related to do. Instead, I spent a day researching the general public's opinion regarding Windows or Mac. Consequently, I wrote a discussion... on the discussion. It's most likely biased, which doesn't mean untrue.

Coke vs. Pepsi
Republican vs. Democrat
Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Toyota vs. Honda
Chipotle vs. Freebirds
Texas A&M vs. UT Austin
Canon vs. Nikon
Democracy vs. Communism…

And most importantly,

Windows Vista VS. Mac OS X

Apples and Oranges? Almost.
One thing you have to keep in mind before I get started is that Windows and Mac are very, very different. From their origins they pursue fairly unlike goals, and so their mindsets and business approaches are unique. Yes, we are still comparing two of the most popular operating systems (apples & apples), but included in this debate we must make references to their broader creators of Microsoft (oranges) and Apple (apples, naturally). Now please take a brief moment and attempt to release all previous opinions of the two operating systems and realize that the choice is going to be based on what the consumer prefers, because undoubtedly both contenders are great systems.

In the beginning, God created…
Adam and Eve, which after many years of procreation lead to the births of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. Two brilliant minds (Gates probably the superior) hard at work in this world's current race to technological success and superiority. Bill was the original. He was the PC. Credit goes to him without any hesitation for being a pathfinder (consider Windows, MS Office, SQL Databases, MS Exchange). Steve, however, was the innovator. Even Bill acclaims the work which Apple has done over the years (consider Mac computers, iPod, and iPhone).

Metadata, the data behind the data.
I threw away my immediate reasons for buying a Mac. Instead, I decided to do searches (mainly using Google) regarding the advantages and disadvantages of both systems. Furthermore, I checked the Microsoft and Apple websites for authentic technical information. Lastly, I did not take mere public opinion for concrete explanations. If someone were to say, "Vista is prone to more viruses" I would ask WHY and WHAT causes this. Similarly, if "Macs have problems with compatibility" was stated, I would again ask WHY and WHAT causes this.

While preparing this debate, I found that there is no definite "disadvantage" or "advantage" – it's a foggy dispute out there, and it doesn't look like the weather will clear anytime soon. So, instead of listing the angels and demons of each system separately, I'm going to take a topic, like "Compatibility", and discuss it regarding the two rivals.

To ensure that I am using pistols and pistols, rather than arrows and cannons, I am comparing VISTA with OS X. Even though a new Windows (Windows 7) and a new Mac (Snow Leopard) are being released soon, I'm going to stick with what we’re currently familiar with.

1. Compatibility
Vista: About 95% of applications, programs, etc. are PC-compatible. We all know what this means. Therefore, we are VERY RARELY faced with the dilemma of a program not being able to run on this sytem. However, certain desired aspects of OS X, such as Expose, Spaces, Quick View, and multi-touch trackpad, cannot be run on a PC (more details later in "User Friendly").

OS X: This is probably the main issue that people have with Macs. Many things just can't be run on a Mac (note: the more common the program, the more likely it will be compatible). However, there is evidence of fast-growing compatibility. The software, hardware, and altogether technological realms of industry have realized the growth of Apple and are creating versions of their current products to suit Macs (rather quickly, too). Trinity University have given their professors the choice of a Mac or PC when issuing computers for work/personal use. We can only assume that Macs therefore are capable of running the necessary applications used by an educational institution. But don't generalize, this is just a specific situation. Furthermore, you can run Windows on a Mac, which solves almost all compatibility issues (more details later in "Deal or No Deal").

2. Security
Vista: Let's face it, PC's get viruses. But WHY? Why not Macs? PC's are used by most businesses, and there are A LOT of businesses. If the majority of the world has a PC, and if I'm an evildoer who wants to crush the happiness which comes with a working OS, then I'll choose to defile the system which affects the greatest number of people, naturally.

OS X: Viruses for Macs DO EXIST. They're real, they breathe, and they're active… just not quite as active as PC's viruses. Now I'll admit I don't know more details on why/how this works, when/if Macs will be massively infected, or how they've been able to stay so virus-clean… but what I do know is that I've never experienced a virus on my Mac, neither have any of the other Mac-users I know… but PC's on the other hand… unfortunately, most of us can recognize a virus from first-hand experience.

3. User-Friendliness
Vista: We've grown up using a PC, and so we're accustomed to how they work, where things are kept, and how to change settings (for the most part). Windows has been known to be business-oriented, more so than a Mac, therefore they focus on a hierarchical organization. You click on one folder to enter another folder, which leads you to another, until you reach your object – this has been the accepted set-up for many years, and its' worked more or less. At the same time, because they are business-oriented, there are many details which the typical user may not need to access, and these options/settings should be left for corporate administrators and such. Much of this redundancy in operations have been removed from XP but some still remains in Vista. I'm referring to Vista's security system which asks the user to "Allow" or "Cancel" after every barely-important to severely-important process. Furthermore, actions such as adding a printer, connecting to the internet, setting up a network, and searching for items can all be very cumbersome.

OS X: Initially, it takes a couple of days to get used to, but after using a Mac, it all comes pretty easy to operate. When I open "Preferences" it shows me all options under one simple menu; there's no folder-after-folder involved. I have used both a PC and Mac, and so I'm quite positive that I am familiar with the user-friendly capabilities of both. I will quickly discuss five components of OS X (all built-in) which greatly affect the user's experience.
Expose: allows the user to quickly see and choose among all of his/her applications which are running. To do this, the user assigns a corner of the screen to activate Expose. Once the pointer is moved to that corner, all running windows and applications are scattered neatly across the screen so you can visually choose the one you're looking for. This eliminates the use of a "Menu Bar" as we see in Windows.
Spaces: with a simple customizable keyboard shortcut, you can switch between up to 6 desktops at once. Basically, you can have 6 screens so your workspace doesn't get cluttered.
Spotlight: I can type in the word, "black" and it will pull up ALL relating documents, applications, programs, definitions, logged conversations, pictures, internet history, bookmarks, and typically ANY information which has the word "black" in it… all under 2 seconds. So no longer do I have to open a folder to find a document or open an application, I can just use Spotlight.
Quicklook: created solely to save RAM, while an item is highlighted, pressing the spacebar activates Quicklook, which gives the user a "quick look" at what is highlighted. This works with all MS Word documents, pictures, PDF files, and even videos. Quicklook gives the user more RAM to work with, and there's no time used in waiting for the actual applications to load, instead you get a quick look with Quicklook.
Multi-Touch Trackpad: This trackpad recognizes 1, 2, 3, and 4 fingers to do certain processes, like zooming in and out, rotating objects, scrolling, navigating forward and backward, and it can also be customized to perform specific actions in applications.
These are only a few of the user-friendly built-in applications which OS X has. I could list more, but you have to use a Mac yourself and become familiar with these and others to understand how Mac simplifies the most common processes while using a computer.

4. System Requirements
Vista: According to their website, Vista requires about 20GB of hard drive space along with 15GB of free space to operate affectively. Both Vista and OS X use roughly 20GB of hard drive space because they're hefty operating systems with built-in applications.

Mac: According to Apple's website, OS X requires approximately 20GB of hard drive space (same as Vista) along with 5-6GB of free space to operate affectively. Therefore, you've got an extra 10GB to work with. Supposedly, the new OS coming out in September 2009 should reduce the hard drive space requirement to 14-15GB compared to the current 20GB.

Like I said earlier, both are great operating systems, but they're also very different. It all depends on what you're looking for, what you're used to, and whether or not you're willing to change and try something different (this goes both ways).

However, for those tip-toeing in both systems, trying to find the better fit, these are my own personal deal-breakers:

Or as Howie Mandel puts it, "Deal or No Deal?"
Vista: Place all the most common existing software, programs, and applications in a box… mix it around… pull one out… and it'll almost always be compatible with your PC. However, be careful of what you choose, downloading & installing PC applications is like a box of chocolates, ya never know which nasty fruity-oozing chocolate you're gonna get (there's always at least one in every box).

OS X: Choose from the same box as mentioned above, but your results won't quite compete with a PC's, YET (note: compatibility must not be such a pressing issue, just take a look at the number of Mac users). Keep in mind, you can always run Windows on your Mac and solve 99.9% of all compatibility issues, so what's to lose?

Saturday, 23 May 2009

The Overrated, Redundant, and Satisfactory/maybe a little more than that.

It's hard to find a movie that you and your friends haven't watched yet. But after five minutes in front of the HEB Redbox, we finally decided on The Wrestler, a film none of us had seen. It was nominated for Oscars, along with worthy movies such as The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, MILK, and Frost/Nixon... so it had to be at least halfway decent. And at the very very very least, it was halfway decent, on the mark.

The acting was award-worthy, but other than that the film was merely... a film. The story was so-so, dialogue was normal/expected, and it wasn't very engaging as a whole. Sorry, Mickey, better luck next year movie.

Saw (the 1st one) was pretty original. Then the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th had their own special stories, gruesome situations, and twists. And then Saw V... well, it was just overkill. I'm pretty sure I yawned at least twice while watching, and I didn't even dream about an ounce of blood that night. Honestly, I haven't watched Saw IV, but I'm sure it really doesn't matter, 'cause the story of these films comes down to this: A crazed man brings his view of justice into the world by torturing and mutilating seemingly deserving people. He gives them an opportunity to escape with barely their lives if only they put their bodies through immense pain, thus learning their life lessons and leaving as a transformed people... then going off to eliminate world hunger, eradicate poverty, demolish crime, save the forests, and prevent global warming.

The break-outs, imprisonments, and exonerations have finally come to an end. Yes, I'm a little sad, but I suppose it was about time. Season 1 was just plain cool. Then 2 and 3 were pretty much the same situations with different geographical places (or prisons). Finally, everything unravelled in Season 4 -- quite abruptly, actually. Anyway, an entertaining show overall. But did he really have to die in the end?!

Thursday, 14 May 2009

Drunk On Movies

Since finals are now officially over, I made my way to the theatre tonight for the 96% rated Star Trek. Directed by J.J. Abrams, the producer/director of ABC's "Lost", I expected it to be a fairly good film -- which it was. But a 96% rating from Rottentomatoes.com? I'm not so sure. I suppose with the great amount of terrible movies on the big screen, when a decent one comes along it immediately receives a 90% + rating. My favorite part was Nyota Uhura's words to Spock before Spock was transported to Nero's ship: "I'll be monitoring your frequency." Those who watched know what I'm talking about. (silent LOL)

And did anyone else see Kumar (from Harold and Kumar) in a short scene? I'm 99% sure he played a cameo for 1.0001 seconds. I looked it up, but couldn't find anything official, other than a "YahooAnswers" thread informally confirming it. Also, Eric Bana plays Nero... I knew he had some Hulk-ish features. Something else I found kinda funny: anyone recognize the dark-colored (African American) man on the panel, the one who congratulated James Kirk with a medal? Yeah, that was Tyler Perry, the same Tyler Perry who created "Tlyer Perry's House of Payne" and other similar shows on TBS. "Very Funny".

Ok, one last thing abut Star Trek, hooray for Sylar on the big-screen! Oh, and one more thing, J.J. Abrams can't seem to loosen his grasp on time travel, the man loves that stuff.

Star Trek ended around 12:30, and it was the last day of school, so I felt like I was obligated to go and watch another movie! I drove to McDonald's, waited in the drive-thru line for about 10 minutes, witnessed a cop pull someone over, payed $1.08 for a large coke with no ice, and intended to rent Role Models at the RedBox. But they didn't have it at the time, so I settled for Doubt instead. I wasn't really in the mood for another drama/non-comedy, being that I've watched Appaloosa, Gran Torino, W., Changeling, Frost/Nixon (excellent movie), Memento, Babel (for the 2nd time), 7 Pounds, and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button all in the course of one week.

Anyhoo, I popped in the movie and started sippin' my Coke... and to my surprise, the film was more engaging than expected. The only reason I rented it was because... 1) it received a 78% rating 2) Philip Seymour Hoffman is decent actor 3) Meryl Streep caught my attention in The Devil Wears Prada (love that movie, btw).

Next up is Milk and Role Models. And for the record, here are my rating predictions for some upcoming movies... Terminator: Salvation (66%), Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen: (52%), and Pixar's UP: (87%).

We'll come back to this, farewell, and stay thirsty my friends.

Tuesday, 28 April 2009

*Check*

In a previous post, I had written a note to myself to invest in a suit. After a year and forty-one days, I proudly pick up my e-pencil and place a check-mark in that empty box. In another couple weeks, fifteen days to be exact, I'll have completed two of the four "best years of my life", namely, college. Since August of 2007, I've managed to reside in three different Texan cities, nearly break two out of a possible two ankles, tread the roads of six foreign countries, capture thousands of moments with thousands of photos, and carry on a sporadic lustful relationship with Whataburger and Taco Cabana -- all the while, keeping my weight between 155 - 160 lbs, which seems to be the only remaining aspect of me from August 2007.