This has been a busy week for Hulu bids. Ten days after Bob Iger confirmed that the current Hulu owners (which include Disney, NBC Universal, Fox and a private equity group), Bloomberg reported that Hulu was looking to entice bidders by promising 5 years of content rights to programming from its current owners and a two-year exclusivity deal (with the exception being the networks own websites). In that same article, Bloomberg discussed the number of companies currently in talks to buy Hulu, mentioning Microsoft, Google and Yahoo by name.

Today, the Wall Street Journal adds Apple’s name to the mix. Frankly, of the four, I think Microsoft would actually make the most sense — go with me here, it’s not about Microsoft as a Windows company, it’s Microsoft who owns Xbox 360 and has already discussed its ability to turn that into the set-top box of the future.

Still, I think a Yahoo deal is untennable, I don’t think that Yahoo has the capital to make a good bid. Google, well, Google has a fundamental misunderstanding of content and content ownership. Look at the failures of creating a real Google Music store. Look at how YouTube has flailed with enticing commercial partners, despite having such a large distribution platform. I know we’re all in love with the big G on Google+, but Google fails so hard at the entertainment and set-top box space (Google TV is maybe one of the most shitty products I’ve ever had the displeasure of using, sorry Google, it’s true. It sucks.), it would kill Hulu dead in the water. Not as much as Yahoo would, but still.

But Apple, Apple is interesting. If Apple were to buy Hulu, obviously they would have yet another distribution platform. The thing is, Hulu, and TV Everywhere and subscription streaming as an idea, fundamentally goes against Apple’s approach to content. Apple sells content a la carte, not because it makes money that way (it really doesn’t), but because that content sells devices like the iPhone, iPad and iPod.

In the subscription streaming place, indeed, in the TV Everywhere space, the iPad is the number one most coveted target. Full stop. That’s why Hulu was on the iPad and iPhone first. Same with Netflix. Same with most cable company apps, same with second screen apps. The iPad is having a huge impact on the way consumers watch TV. It’s insane. Moreover, the engagement with the iPad, even with the same services available elsewhere, is higher and better, which makes advertisers love it.

Why then, would Apple need Hulu? They already have a Hulu app in their App Store. Other than as a defensive move, I don’t see why Apple would buy the company. Plus, something tells me that a deal would include a provision that the new owner has to continue to support the growing number of Hulu Plus devices. That’s something Apple doesn’t like doing.

Still, I’d rather see Apple own it than Google, because Apple at least knows how to work with content companies.

What I don’t understand is why we haven’t heard anything from Netflix. Netflix would be the perfect owner. It would increase the library size and get access to previous-day content. Netflix’s biggest hurdle is in fresh content. Hulu’s biggest strength is fresh content. Win/Win.

I just fear that whoever does buy Hulu won’t know how to keep it running well. Hulu has singlehandedly forced the major media conglomerates into the 21st century and to lose it would be a huge step backward.

Edited to Add: Amazon actually is the buyer that makes the most sense and is the buyer I would most like to see. Amazon gets content, Amazon gets making deals, Amazon gets how VOD works. It would be a great way to expand the Amazon Video on Demand model and offer additional incentives for subscribers or Amazon Prime members.

As always, these are my opinions and do not necessarily reflect those of my colleagues or employers.

So the article in question is from Giga Om — a site I like and respect. I truly don’t mean to pick on the author, Colin Gibbs (which of course just means that’s exactly what I’m going to do — sorry Colin — it genuinely isn’t anything personal) — but the entire premise behind the article, titled “Why Apple should Consider a Seven-inch iPad” is just so severely flawed.

The size of the iPad has been a topic of discussion recently because it looks like all of the viable would-be iPad competitors (and by that, I mean products by companies that have actually shipped something before and aren’t embarrassments like the JooJoo or vapor like the Notion Ink Adam, or as I like to call it JooJoo2) are targeting a form factor of seven inches rather than the 9.6 inches of the iPad.

The Samsung Galaxy Tab, the BlackBerry PlayBook and the thing from ViewSonic — not to mention a number of other would-be tablets (including Barnes & Noble’s tablet/e-reader hybrid).

Now this factor in and of itself might not be worthy of reflecting upon in context of the iPad if Steve Jobs hadn’t called-out the seven inch form factor during Apple’s last earnings call and had he not basically eviscerated the choice of going below 10 inches (we’ll let it slide that Steve consistently referred to 9.6 inches as 10-inch). Because Apple has a history of denouncing a product or denying the need for a product — only to show up with said product later — it isn’t shocking that some would question Apple’s secret plans of a seven inch sibling to the iPad.

I think that these people are wrong. As Dan noted on a previous episode of Briefly Awesome — this didn’t sound like Steve bullshit — this sounded like he genuinely hates the idea of a seven inch tablet. He also had data to back up his choice.

But let’s just assume that Apple hadn’t decided to forego the smaller form factor, moving to a smaller size for the iPad — especially at this early stage, would be utterly asinine. Here’s why:

• One of the reasons that all the other manufacturers have to go to the seven inch form factor isn’t one of choice; it’s because Apple has all the 9.6-inch panels (well, IPS panels anyway) locked up.
• The so-called price savings for going for a smaller screen doesn’t matter when the iPad is still kicking its would-be competitors assess price wise. The Galaxy Tab is the same price as an iPad ($30 difference equals same price) unless you buy it with a contract. None of the tablets that have managed to ship are coming in any lower than the iPad, except for the upcoming NOOKcolor which is really more an e-reader with tablet-like features.
• Steve Jobs nailed the problem with the seven inch form factor when he called them “tweeners.” They are too big to be truly portable and too small to be a good tablet.
• The 9.6 inch size really is perfect for reading, for zooming in on objects and for watching video. Go smaller and you end up losing a lot of the pizazz, especially when it comes to magazine apps, games and watching video.
• Seven inches works well for an e-reader, it really doesn’t seem to work well for a tablet.

On that last point, I want to use my mother as an example. I got my mom an iPad 3G for her birthday this August. She loves it. It has only taken me my whole life, but mom finally has a gadget that she loves.

My mom is representative of why the iPad is so revolutionary and why it has shaken up the entire industry. By that I mean, she’s not an early adopter (unless it was as a by-product of having me as a daughter). My mom’s only other Apple product is an unused iPod nano that I got her for Mother’s Day like 3 years ago. She’s not who people thought the target market would be. She rarely gets all that impressed or excited about technology or gadgets.

When my mom saw the iPad, she lit up like a child. Just playing with mine, she very clearly fell in love. I relented and didn’t get her one for Mother’s Day but refused to listen to her protests and got her one for her birthday. She’s constantly talking about how much she loves it. It’s more or less replaced her computer for 80% of what she does.

It turns out, an awful lot of people like my mom got iPad fever. That number is only going to increase now that people can get the iPad for Christmas.

A huge part of the iPad’s appeal IS its size. The critics can claim it’s too big for one handed use or that it can’t go in a jacket pocket. First, that’s so sexist. I fucking hate any argument about a gadget that ends up being all about how men can carry things. The iPhone 4, one of the slimmest smartphones on the market, can fit in my back pocket but really doesn’t work in 95% of my pants. The idea that I could somehow even consider pocketing a DROID X is just laughable.

Likewise, it’s sure cool that guys who where jackets with inside pockets can carry a 7 inch tablet. Guess what — most women can’t. And even if I could — I wouldn’t because there is nothing lamer than a Scott Vest. Nothing.

So let’s just forget this whole “pocketable” concept now — you’re going to need to carry it in a case, pop it in a purse (and incidentally, my iPad does fit in my mid-size handbag just fine) or carry it in some sort of sleeve — seven or 10 inches.

Next, let’s talk about how your fingers work on a device. I have small fingers — so does my mom for that matter. I’d feel cramped on a seven inch tablet. I know my mom would.

Beyond that though, the iPad is also a device that you can use, like a notepad, to show off to other people. The 10 inch form factor works perfectly for that for meetings, for showing an outline, etc. When you go smaller, you lose a lot of that. You turn a multi-user object into something single user. That inherently impacts usability, as well as utility.

Again, I’ll agree that for reading text — seven inches is a good size. I think the Kindle is an excellent size device and I think it is very good for what it does. But even Kindle had to go bigger for the DX to encourage reading newspaper or magazine content.

Reading a magazine on the iPad just feels right. Trying to cram that stuff smaller just means you’d have to pinch zoom on columns and images and lose the flow of what makes the A4 style of the iPad so great.

For composing content too — it’s weird, I can be very effective typing on my iPhone 4. However, I think I’d be less effective on a seven inch device. That’s because you either need to have something that is small enough to be thumbable — like a BlackBerry or iPhone or whatever — or you need to be able to have near full-size keys. This is that tweener aspect in play. You can’t go halfway, go big or go small — your fingers don’t like the middle ground.

So this is all the logical stuff of why from a consumer perspective, the device doesn’t make sense at 7 inches. However, what really made me go “what the fuck are you smoking” was the argument that because of increasing competition, Apple needs to offer a wider range of product and more “variety.”

Dude. Just. Dude. I mean, seriously? Seriously?

First — another screen size would mean yet another target for app developers — something that I doubt many would really appreciate. Juggling iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4 and iPad is one thing — add a second iPad size and yeah, that’s must asking for shitty apps to get made.

Second, this actually assumes that people are going to view 7 inches as an advantage over 10 when it comes to picking a device. As of now, you don’t get a cheaper price for a smaller screen — so what exactly is the point of a trade off? I hardly see a “road warrior” begging and pleading for a seven inch iPad because that 10 inch model is just too big. Again, you can’t stick the seven inch in your pocket so what’s the point?

This also ignores the very real business advantage Apple has over its competitors: Apple has the bigger screen. Why in the hell would they do a smaller screen unit just so they can have one less differentiating feature? It boggles the mind.

Look — maybe someday there will be an actual use case for a non-e-reader seven inch touch device. That day is not today.

However, at long last, I think I’ve managed to put all my thoughts about the iPad and the emerging device class of tablets and media pads into one 900 word post. You can read it in its entirety at Mashable.com. However, I’ll provide an excerpt to try to entice you to care:

What’s different about this new wave of tablet devices is that the intended use cases for the device have evolved into something completely different. These new tablets are not being presented as a replacement for the existing computer but for an ancillary type of platform. The new tablets are also not being primarily targeted at business users, but at home users instead. The usage cases are more tightly defined as well. The new tablet devices are about accessing and consuming web content.

If that sounds eerily familiar, that’s because I totally ripped-off my own writings from this blog back in November, when I both reviewed the 27″ i7 iMac and discussed Google’s Chrome OS. I articulated far more verbosely in that personal blog post the problem I see with netbooks (in terms of being a target for an alternative operating system like Google Chrome) and why I was convinced then, just as I am convinced now, that a new class of device is needed for the original purpose of netbooks to actually take hold.

This is what I wrote a little over two months ago, again, in relation to Chrome OS, but also applicable to the idea of the new wave of tablet computing and media pads as we will know them:

Here’s where netbooks end up causing their owners problems. The netbook has better hardware than the iPhone, but because it has a bigger screen a bigger keyboard (and the screens and keyboards are getting bigger and bigger all the time), people expect it to be faster than it is. Thus, you get people wanting more from the device than it can offer. That’s why netbooks, at least Atom-based netbooks are probably going to disappear sooner rather than later. On the low-end you’ll have ARM and on the higher-end, you’ll just have low-priced, lightweight actual laptops…

Anyway, I think the push for ARM in netbook style computers is going to be met with utter disappointment from consumers — especially if Flash isn’t hardware accelerated when they launch. Since this is Chrome’s target, I think that traditional laptop styled devices are not going to work.

This is what I see: Something like a tablet but with a more defined purpose: like call it a media pad. Something you could use as a remote control, for instance — an eBook reader (that isn’t as good as eInk) and a visual TV guide. Yeah, you can watch online content and surf the web, but it’s designed to sit on your sofa and be like what we use phones for now — but bigger and with the understanding that you need to be online at all times.

In any event, as Chrome OS stands now, it really isn’t useable in any test form, other than for shits and giggles, but the fact that it exists is pretty cool.

I will write one original thing here for my own blog, and that’s about Flash.

The Flash Problem is Overblown

I’m not going to totally get into the whole Flash debate — I think I made a very good case in the first episode of Dan Benjamin’s new show, The Conversation (subscribe now!) and Dan made his own solid case in episode 2.

But just to put it in a tiny bit of perspective, let me give my opinion, mostly as an observer and web-user of what has happened with Flash over the last decade and why what’s happening now shouldn’t surprise anyone, least of all Adobe.

OK, so Macromedia introduces Flash in 1996, according to the Wikipedia, buying it from some guy who wrote the Flash precursor in college for the PenPoint OS and then ported it to Windows and Mac and then sold it to Macromedia, who renamed it Flash. It was used primarily for web animations and effects and navigation and whatnot.

Then in 2002, Flash 6 came with flash video support, which made it easy to do web-video without having to rely on shit like Realplayer or Windows Media or even QuickTime (though as we’ll see, QuickTime’s day would come again). The real power of this type of video really wasn’t exploited until YouTube launched in early 2005. Suddenly, Flash, which had been a dying component, came back and it came back big time.

In essence, video was Flash’s saving grace. When the iPhone debuted without Flash support in June 2007, YouTube worked to convert its videos to H.264, so that they could play on the iPhone. In December of 2007, Adobe added H.264 support to Flash 9. This was a very, very prudent move and it was done because Adobe could see the writing on the wall: Web video was all going to go H.264. Not only is it the best compression standard that’s available in terms of size/performance now, but there is tons of hardware acceleration support and the new crop of consumer cameras records in it natively. If Flash can act as a container for that format, Flash can stave off its extinction in the video space.

Well, HTML5 and continued smartphone adoption patterns is going to finally make content providers question why they are suing a Flash container when they can just display the same video natively, without the container. Forgetting about Mozilla’s refusal to get on the ball here (and really, I’m just going to say this right now — I have no desire to get into any meaningless arguments over “freedom” or the “potential” of Theora with anyone. Do that on your own time. I don’t fucking care and neither does the rest of the rational world. I like the Xiph project, I don’t think Theora, which is based on old-ass technology should become the standard just because toe-jam eaters like Richard Stallman hate anything that doesn’t conform their insane standards. Want something truly “free” to take over — develop something new.), HTML5 has tons of promise because it makes sense to serve the content directly rather to put in a wrapper.

As for sites like Hulu that require Flash now — if they have any brains at all, they will have an iPad application available at launch.

And let’s not forget that the problems of Flash are not limited to the iPad. Fennec, the Firefox Mobile browser that currently runs only on the Nokia N900 — yeah, they had to drop Flash support because it degraded performance too much. The HTC Hero supports Flash, it fucking sucks and is a terrible experience. Flash 10.2, which will FINALLY bring some hardware side optimizations to the platform, making it viable on netbooks, is only for x86 processors. ARM is out. ARM derivatives like the A4 are out. If Flash isn’t optimized to work on the next crop of mobile devices, why are we all shrieking over the fact that rather than offer shitty support, Apple (and other smartphone makers) aren’t supporting Flash?

This is where, if Microsoft were smart, they would start compiling Silverlgiht to run and run well on EVERYTHING. That way if you want a framework (and not just a container for a video player) that can work on multiple devices, you have an option.

But now I’ve written far more than I intended to write. No one said I wasn’t opinionated.

Out.

But this isn’t about politics, and it isn’t about how close something is, it’s about devastation. On a personal front, Grant and I have had kind of a shitty week (nothing wrong with our relationship, just some crappy life stuff) but I can’t help but be reminded how much better we have it than so many others. And not just in terms of material wealth, but in terms of having love and support. My dad works (worked? it is complicated) in residential real estate development. To say that the last 18 — 24 months have been difficult for him is an understatement. I’m consistently amazed with his resolve and positive attitude, in spite of seeing his business and the industry crumble around him. It’s a testament to his character that he has remained able to keep on without so much as a complaint.

I donated $10 to the Red Cross via my cell phone on Wednesday, but I plan to give more. At Mashable, we’ve been covering lots of the Internet-community spurred relief efforts (you can read all of our Haiti coverage here to find places to send money or goods or just volunteer your time in collecting stuff to send over. The situation is so exacerbated by the very logistical hurdles of getting stuff from the Port-au-Prince airports to the people in need. The roads are all fucked up, people are scared and don’t know what to do, the cargo docks are unusable, it’s just really, really messed up.

Speaking of giving more — I love that the Mac community is doing Indie Relief (my Mashable post here). I see this both as a way to support charitable organizations and the indie developer community, so I’ll definitely be taking part in the event on Wednesday. I’m also thinking about making a larger donation to Doctors Without Borders.

I guess my only internal struggle when stuff like this happens, is that I feel really superficial. Even when it comes to helping out, all I can really do is throw money at the problem. I mean, sure that helps, but if I was really about trying to help others, I’d start volunteering or working in impoverished Atlanta neighborhoods. I would just throw money at charity a few times a year, I’d actually try to actively do something.

I don’t really have anything else to day and I have to start work. Help if you can — and maybe you can do more than just lip (and money) service than me.

Out.

In 2006, Roger underwent surgery to remove cancer near his jaw. There ended up being some pretty serious complications and Ebert is no longer able to speak. He’s also unable to eat or drink. But he can write.

Can he ever write.

In my opinion, Roger Ebert is one of the best film critics in history — from both an academic and populist perspective. His reviews and commentary easily best the most revered film journals (and as someone who spent way too many years in college studying film, I honestly have to say, academic film writing can be really, really irritating), yet his coined thumbs-up, thumbs-down approach can bring the film forward for the non-academic film follower.

I have always admired Ebert’s writing and his approach to film criticism. Despite losing the ability to physically speak, Ebert’s voice hasn’t disappeared. If anything, his writing — already a cut above — has become even better. Maybe it’s one of those senses things. Like how your sense of smell and hearing can be elevated if you lose your sight?

I don’t know, the man is incredible. I wasn’t planning on my first Project 52 entry, I had another draft planned. I’ll just publish that tomorrow or Saturday. I read this blog entry of Ebert’s (thanks @highsign) and just had to link to it — but I wanted to also try to say something more.

I dreamed. I was reading Cormac McCarthy’s Suttree, and there’s a passage where the hero, lazing on his river boat on a hot summer day, pulls up a string from the water with a bottle of orange soda attached to it and drinks. I tasted that pop so clearly I can taste it today. Later he’s served a beer in a frosted mug. I don’t drink beer, but the frosted mug evoked for me a long-buried memory of my father and I driving in his old Plymouth to the A&W Root Beer stand (gravel driveways, carhop service, window trays) and his voice saying “…and a five-cent beer for the boy.” The smoke from his Lucky Strike in the car. The heavy summer heat.

But really, read this. What more can you say. What an amazing person (with an amazing family and support system), what an amazing writer.

Read this. The man can’t physically speak (not that computers aren’t great), yet he has said more than some individuals — no matter how loquacious — could in a lifetime. Roger Ebert, you are my hero.

That’s why I’m joining Project 52. I WANT to write more here and more personal writing, ‘Im just so busy with work and because my work IS writing, it’s hard to find the energy to dedicate to my own site.

But it’s important. It’s important because it is a good outlet for me. For nearly seven years, I used my LiveJournal as an outlet for my thoughts and feelings. It became more dormant about five years in, but that journal continues to be an archive of my life in college and it was an important outlet for me to express myself, even for no one reading.

It’s harder for me to write more personal entries now. More people know who I am, which is awesome, but that also means that I feel like I have to restrain or hold back some of my thoughts (which is why I might start a private journal again, that’s just for me). I guess I don’t have to, it’s just a limit of what you want to share. I’ve been pretty arms-length in some regards, but pretty open in others. I really want to just write more about what I’m feeling and thinking and fuck what other people think. Like seriously, fuck it.

I’ll put a big disclaimer that my blog does not reflect the thoughts or opinions of my employer and blah blah blah, but you know, it’s just time to get back to being able to write for myself. Write as catharsis.

So that’s why I’m joining Project 52. Because it’s important for me to write.

Out.

Given that I’m actually able to call writing my career — which is amazing — I’m pretty OK with the fact that my personal blog gets neglected. But that’s why updates are few and far between — because I’m getting to write about technology and movies every day as part of my job.

OK, so since I last posted, a few things have happened in the world of technology, let’s go down the list:

• Apple announced its new product line, including what I have been waiting for: a Quad-Core iMac, and at 27″ wiht an LED IPS screen no less!
• I ordered said 27″ iMac i7, waited 18 days of delivery, was in love and beside myself with excitement — until I tried to hook it up to a second monitor and found out the miniDisplayPort was broken. So my beloved beauty must go back to Apple and they are sending me a replacement. I won’t get the replacement until around the 4th of December because the demand is high (and as I said, they didn’t even ship the machines until a good three and a half weeks after they were announced, for the i5/i7s anyway). Apple is letting me keep the defective one until then, but I won’t be able to be fully comfortable with my new toy for almost two more weeks.
• Google finally unveiled it’s much hyped Chrome OS and the whole technology world has gotten itself into a tizzy over what it is and what it isn’t and what it could be and all kinds of other shit.

So before I talk about Chrome, let me talk about the iMac.

27″ iMac i7 Review, Take One

As I said, I couldn’t help but be like totally, totally disappointed that I have to send my beautiful machine back, especially after waiting for it for so long. I bought the 27″ i7 as a 27th birthday gift to myself and got it just one day after my birthday.

Aside from the miniDisplayPort issue, the machine is amazing. The screen is beyond compare — and the thing is fast. How fast? Let’s just say that coming off of my two-year old BlackBook, I’m simply amazed at how much faster certain tasks are. If a program has been optimized for multi-cores AT ALL, it really shines. For instance, doing screencasts of live web video used to be a laborious process. Like, it would take hours to export the result from either Camtasia or Screenflow. On the i7 it literally flies. It’s amazing. I can’t wait for Adobe to come out with Photoshop CS5 that actually takes advantage of this stuff. Likewise, I can’t wait for more and more apps, especially multimedia apps, to really take advantage of multi-cores, hyperthreading and other awesome stuff.

I opted to install an extra 4 GB of RAM myself in the machine (I paid $60 shipped to get the RAM from Newegg, whereas it would have been another $200 or so if I got Apple to do it) and I have to say, the installation process couldn’t have been simpler. Before I even turned my Mac on for the first time, I put the new RAM, giving me 8 GB of DDR3-1066 RAM. I’m in heaven.

I got a Magic Mouse a week before I got my new iMac, so I was familiar with that — but I have to say, the combination of the screen and the mouse is really nice. I can’t wait for more gestures to get written into the Magic Mouse. I know that a lot of people I respect have panned the mouse, and the Logitech MX probably is a better pointing device, but the Magic Mouse is sexy, easy to use and feels good in the hand. Plus, I have my Wacom tablet if I need to do any precise, precise stuff anyway.

The alumnium keyboard is the same as what I’ve been using for a year with my MacBook hooked up to an external monitor and it remains a joy to type on.

Sound from the speakers is excellent, though I’m looking at getting a separate set anyway. The machine is amazingly quiet for all of its horsepower. I mean, according to the GeekBench results, this thing is very closer if not better than a base level Mac Pro. So I’ve got a Mac Pro (minus the expandability, yes, but I don’t care about that more than for RAM) inside one of the nicest displays available on the market.

I really can’t say enough about the screen. I know that once I get my working unit I’m going to really be able to see the difference between my $220 HP w2338h and this beauty — which is why that display will be relegated to holding my e-mail, Adium and maybe Campfire. I’ll leave the big screen for everything else.

As for why I need two screens when 27″ is so big? It’s not so much for size, but because I like to segment and separate some of my tools. I like having my mail up at all times, but I don’t want to have to battle with it and other windows. On my old setup, my MacBook screen simply served as a place for Mail.app to live. Because the smaller display will now be 23.5″ and 1920x1080, I can put a lot more on it and thus leave my beauty for TextMate, Photoshop and web browsers, which are the three programs I have open at almost all times (well that and LittleSnapper).

A lot has been written about the Apple Tax and the value proposition and whatnot, but I think that with the new iMac lineup, even at the 21.5″ level, but especially when you look at the i5 and i7 machines — it’s hard to argue that you aren’t getting your money’s worth.

Yes, I paid $2600 for my computer ($2660 with RAM), but I’m getting something that I couldn’t get anywhere else, and at Dell, two separate pieces, with a monitor that isn’t as good, would cost me MORE money.

I’m in front of a computer for at least 8 hours a day (10 is more accurate), having something fast, reliable and with a great, great screen really makes the difference, I just wish there was a Blu-ray option already. I hate that I can’t use this to watch my growing Blu-ray collection. But that’s OK, I have the amazing LG BD 390 Network Blu-ray Disc Player for that! Seriously, if you are looking for a Blu-ray player this Christmas and you don’t have a PS3 (or don’t want one), this is the one to get. It has Wireless-N, Netflix, VUDU and YouTube support (I think Pandora is coming soon), can connect to your PC or Mac or NAS setup to stream media and has great, great quality. $260 for what is almost a complete home entertainment hub.

I’ll do something more in-depth after I get the final iMac in and I transfer everything over officially (I’m in this weird limbo space now where about 90% of my files and docs are transferred, as well as my most-used apps, but most of my media files are still on other drives and I haven’t installed all my programs. When I figured out the first day I actually was going to use this thing for work that the DisplayPort didn’t work, I kind of stopped doing the big transfer. I mean, I have to do this again anyway so why bother?

And here’s my unboxing gallery. Forgive the quality, I couldn’t find my digital camera and so I had to use my iPhone which is just not good with my office’s lighting.

Chrome OS Thoughts

This should probably just be a separate blog post, but I really just wanted to discuss in a non-Mashable setting some of my thoughts on Chrome OS. The day it was announced, I quickly got my geek on and compiled the source image (which first required having to download and install the latest Ubuntu and run that in VMWare Fusion 3), which wasn’t difficult, but was long and laborious.

Then I had to create the VMWare image — figure out how to get the file from my VM to my desktop (not as simple as you’d think — I ended up just DropBoxing it which was faster) and then created a new VM from that image.

After playing with it a bit, I did like 5 screencasts, and sadly, this was the best take — despite my umming, uhs and actual technical problems. Whatever, I was on a deadline. I will say my ass-busting paid off because we had a hands-on first look at least 6 hours before any other major site (or minor site that I could find). I also got to flex my geek muscles (hey, compiling the kernel and building the image wasn’t difficult, but come on, that’s still totally geeky!), which is always nice.

So my first thoughts, which I shared on Twitter, was how disappointed I was that what we saw in Google’s demo wasn’t what the source was. It’s not that that isn’t completely and totally typical, but it just makes even contemplating developing anything for Chrome OS hard if you can’t even get a true baseline of how stuff works.

But the bottom line is this, everyone calls this a big threat to the desktop as we know it and representative of a big paradigm shift and blah blah blah, and you know, in another 10 years, that might be true — hell in 5 we might be closer to fruition, but as it stands right now, I can see Chrome OS succeeding, but where it will succeed will be in a completely separate and new class of device.

Gruber made a comment about how Chrome might be considered as a bicycle that replaces that second, rarely used car — and you know, that would be a very Larry Ellison way of looking at stuff — and maybe someday that will be true. However, right now, I don’t see it as a bicycle replacing a car — I don’t think it’s robust enough to be a bike. I think it’s a VESPA you get to tool around in but that you don’t ever seriously consider using for more than just certain things. It isn’t going to give you the flexibility of a bike, in terms of where you can take it (subways, winding trails, various terrains) or give you the exercise benefits, but it is a fun excursion and can often get you someplace faster than a car or a bike could depending on where you are and what you are trying to get to.

For the foreseeable future, I don’t think I see Chrome OS as something — that at least as it exists now and as it will exist according to Google’s demo — as something that even netbook owners — and netbook owners are used to making lots of compromises for perceived price/weight/convenience advantages — would be willing to compromise and use with any frequency.

This is why:

First, while Chrome OS and Android are often compared and conflated (and maybe eventually they will even morph into the same product), they are very different. Android, while deeply flawed (and I say that as someone who was a strong advocate and wants it to succeed if only to offer Apple real competition in the mobile space) in many of the ways it is executed, is still a fully robust platform. I may not like the default UI decisions, I may think the decision to basically take JIT, do something in the compiler so that it isn’t JIT by the legal definition, is stupid because I think Java is what is really limiting a lot of the development ideas and innovations and I might question the already splintering market of sub-Android brands, but Android is a platform.

Right now, Chrome is not a platform, it’s a thin client built into a Linux kernel. It has the potential to do web multimedia extremely well — especially with Flash and Silverlight both getting more into utilizing GPU and hardware acceleration — and the web in general very well, but despite our reliance on the web, the web still isn’t everything we do with computing. Don’t get me wrong, I could not survive without some sort of Internet access. I mean, I could literally, but I couldn’t work and most of my communication methods would be severely limited.

That said, I’m writing this entry in Mars Edit, not in WordPress’s window, because I both don’t like and don’t trust WordPress not to crash on me. I write my Mashable and AMC posts in TextMate (and Mashable uses WordPress, but the different linking and other stuff I like to do works better in TextMate, whereas I prefer Mars Edit for my personal writing) for the same reasons — and because I get added functionality that just isn’t available in a web-based text editor yet. Maybe someday, but not today. I do all of my graphics work, even light stuff, in Photoshop. I edit my photos in Aperture or LightRoom. Granted, I’m not the average user, but I would still rather my mother use iPhoto than Picasa or Picnik.

Google actually talked about stability and security as a perk when it comes to Chrome, but as I said on Twitter, in the more than two years that I have used Mac OS X full-time, I can count on one hand the number of times I have actually LOST data when it wasn’t my own fault (like when I’ve deleted my iTunes library not once, but twice — or when I’ve incorrectly closed a window without saving). However, I can’t even count how many times I’ve had web browsers, be it Firefox, Safari, Camino, Opera, Internet Explorer or even Google Chrome crash on me and take everything I was working on with it.

Firefox is often the nastiest culprit for that one — though that’s on the Mac, on the PC Firefox is much more stable — but even Safari pre 10.6.2 was pretty crash-happy too. Even Chrome, which is designed to like kill one window not the whole browser, often doesn’t do that — at least in my tests. So if I’m going to rely on anything to keep my data for me after a crash, it’s not going to be a web browser. Sorry.

Then there’s the issue of speed. Chrome is going to be fast because a) there’s almost nothing to it and b) they are going to require it to use SSD drives in the beginning. Now that’s smart, but that’s only part of what defines speed for users.

It’s pretty much accepted that the iPhone 3GS is one of the fastest smartphones on the market. The N900 may or may not be faster, the Droid is about the same speed, though the iPhone loads web pages faster when the network isn’t a defining factor. The iPhone 3GS is no slouch in the speed department, but even on WiFi, loading web pages can sometimes take a bit of time. This doesn’t bother me because I understand that my phone is not going to be as fast as my computer. The smaller size of the screen and the compact nature make it totally easy to rationalize and justify differences in speed.

Here’s where netbooks end up causing their owners problems. The netbook has better hardware than the iPhone, but because it has a bigger screen a bigger keyboard (and the screens and keyboards are getting bigger and bigger all the time), people expect it to be faster than it is. Thus, you get people wanting more from the device than it can offer. That’s why netbooks, at least Atom-based netbooks are probably going to disappear sooner rather than later. On the low-end you’ll have ARM and on the higher-end, you’ll just have low-priced, lightweight actual laptops. Grant has an Acer that has a Core Solo and can take up to 4 GB of RAM, that thing is great — and was only a little bit more (we’re talking under $100) more than a netbook. And it came with Windows 7 Home Premium!

Anyway, I think the push for ARM in netbook style computers is going to be met with utter disappointment from consumers — especially if Flash isn’t hardware accelerated when they launch. Since this is Chrome’s target, I think that traditional laptop styled devices are not going to work.

This is what I see: Something like a tablet but with a more defined purpose: like call it a media pad. Something you could use as a remote control, for instance — an eBook reader (that isn’t as good as eInk) and a visual TV guide. Yeah, you can watch online content and surf the web, but it’s designed to sit on your sofa and be like what we use phones for now — but bigger and with the understanding that you need to be online at all times.

In any event, as Chrome OS stands now, it really isn’t useable in any test form, other than for shits and giggles, but the fact that it exists is pretty cool.

And yes — at long last, the mammoth blog entry comes to a close.

I’m out!

I loved by time at both TUAW and Download Squad and will always be grateful for the experience, the people that I met (most importantly, Grant), and the opportunities that have come my way as a result of my time with WIN.

So for two weeks now I’ve been at Mashable and I’m just so excited and overjoyed to be part of such a cool team. Sharon, Adam O., Jenn, Ben, Barb, Stan, Adam H., Tamar, Frederick, Brett, Josh and of course, Pete are all AWESOME. And I’m not lying. Hand linking all those Twitter accounts was a pain in the ass.

So I’m writing full-time at Mashable, doing The Flickcast and doing another project that I desperately want to discuss but must continue to keep silent about (it’s awesome, it’s movie related and it’s tons of fun). Here’s the important thing: I’m at the point in my life where I can actually say that I’m a full-time working writer.

The fact that I can say this at 26 is really, really amazing. Two years ago, when I was finishing school and trying to kind of decide what to do next, my end-goal (in the back of my mind) was to be able to carve a career for myself writing about technology or film or popular culture.

That isn’t to say that I wouldn’t love the opportunity to sell a screenplay or work on a television show (or hell, become the megalomaniacal studio boss that I’ve always fantasized about being — I really am only half-joking when I say I want to be Rupert Murdoch without all the evil — a Christina Media Empire would be freaking awesome), but realistically, in my heart of hearts, what I want to do — what I’m good at doing — is writing about the latest news, reviewing products and services and sharing my love of film, pop culture and technology with anyone willing to take the time and read my stuff.

I’m truly blessed that in two years, that has now started to become a reality.

Today is Labor Day in the US, and I have the day off. I’m upgrading our remaining Macs to Snow Leopard (life is busy and it hasn’t been easy to find time to do that sort of stuff) and just enjoying knowing that I have a great job and great people to work with tomorrow.

Not only am I lucky enough to get to do what I love, I have the most amazing, most supportive and most loving partner a girl could ask for. Somebody pinch me and tell me I’m not dreaming!

Out!

Essentially, a little girl, dying of a rare form of cancer, really wanted to see Pixar’s “Up.” Sadly, she was too sick to get to the theater when it was released. So her mom cold called Pixar, Disney, whoever, and managed to reach someone who sent a REAL PERSON to their door, with the movie, some toys, etc. and allowed the family and the little girl to watch the film together. A few hours later, she passed away.

If you haven’t seen the film, I won’t go into too many spoilers, other than to say, it is the very essence of life, death, hope and rebirth. It’s a beautiful, beautiful film and while some might find its subject matter a bit macabre for a last wish (especially since the trailer really didn’t make it out to be what it is), I think it’s perfect.

The fact that this little girl hung on, just so she could see her last movie — a movie she had wanted to see — and the fact that Pixar sent someone to the girl’s house with the movie, so she could watch it, perfectly encapsulates why movies are so important.

Throughout my life, but especially in college, I’ve often had conversations with people who just don’t understand why I’m so passionate about film. The importance of film is easier to argue than the importance of television (in that, the academic study of film is so parallel to the academic study of literature, whereas the basis for television study often depends on the sociological aspects of television, rather than the textual content of the shows themselves), but I know many, many people who undermine or dismiss its significance. I truly believe that film can have a transformative effect greater than any other medium.

I saw “Up” last week with Grant and Nik Fletcher, who visited with us for a few days before going to The Big Nerd Ranch. The UK doesn’t get “Up” until October, so Grant and I waited to see the film until Nik arrived.

It was worth the wait. The film is perhaps the most “adult” Pixar film to date (though WALL-E is certainly close), on so many levels. I’m sure kids love it, but it is truly an example of a film made for adults. It is wonderful.

After hearing Matt rail against it on The Flickcast, and hearing from others that it was depressing, I was slightly nervous it might break the streak of “awesome.” Of course, I was wrong. For the tenth time, I sat in a theater and watched a Pixar film on the big screen. For the tenth time, I walked away overjoyed. This time, I also had tears in my eyes.

To be sure, “Up” is a tear-jerker, but it is also immensely beautiful and powerful. I saw the film two days after what would have been my grandparents 64th wedding anniversary, and the day after the third anniversary of my grandfather’s death. I was reminded so much of my grandparents in the film — especially seeing Carl adjust to life without his beloved Ellie. When my grandmother died in January 2005, my grandfather was by her side the entire time. For the majority of the few days leading up to her passing, I was with him. Sitting next to him as he held her hand. It was heartwrenching, yet beautiful. Seeing someone say goodbye to his wife of nearly 60 years. Seeing real love as it exists at the very end of life.

“Up” captured that kind of love. It encapsulated what it is like to witness that kind of love.

The movies matter because they have the ability to take the most personal and difficult of experiences — losing a loved one (or even watching someone lose a loved one) — and put it on screen for the lessons and the feelings of that experience to be absorbed by everyone in the theater. Movies are larger than life, but the power is that they can bring the real emotions from life, to a much bigger place.

I’m rambling at this point and losing my coherency. Regardless, I can’t think of a more perfect film for that family to watch together. I hope little Colby enjoyed it.

Call it what it is: You’re willingly accepting a license that will result in the developer earning almost no money.

Therefore, you’re not really supporting these developers: you’re telling them that you don’t value their work enough to pay full price, but you’re going to use their software anyway.

Their compliance with the MacHeist deal is irrelevant.

Most software is an incredibly good deal, especially the applications that you use every day or as part of your business. For example, given that I make all of my living by using TextMate, and it was developed entirely by Allan Odgaard over (probably) thousands of hours, it would be ridiculous for me to haggle its €39 price. Why seek discounts on something that you want to support and that you believe is already a great value?

I refuse to purchase MacHeist for the same reason I respectfully decline license discounts or App Store freebie coupon-codes from other developers (that I occasionally receive because of my roles in Tumblr and Instapaper):

I believe in supporting software developers by paying full price for their applications.

MacHeist supports MacHeist’s staff extremely well, but it’s not a way to support its applications’ developers.

I buy a LOT of Mac software. A metric shitload. Almost always at full price. People assume that because I write for TUAW, I’m getting tons of stuff for free. That’s just not true. We go out of our way not to accept full licenses of stuff unless we can either give it away afterwards or it is a NFR and we need it to test all the features. Almost everything we review (for OS X apps anyway, it’s more complicated with iPhone apps since there are now promo codes), we buy.

So as someone who buys lots and lots of software, I don’t really appreciate the guilt-trip that because a developer or software company decides to take part in a bundle, me buying that bundle somehow means I don’t support developers.

I won’t lie; there are plenty of apps that I get with bundles that I either never use, ever, or won’t pay to upgrade to the next version. But there are plenty I’ll pay for — even if they don’t offer upgrade pricing. 1Password, for instance, which I got from MacHeist or MacUpdate last year, will totally get the entire amount of money from me whenever the time comes. It’s just too valuable to me. The same goes for CSSEdit, RapidWeaver, and any other number of apps I find myself using day in and day out.

At this point, especially with MacHeist, developers know what they are getting into. If they choose to offer a product through MH, they have their reasons. If Realmac, a company and a community I have lots of respect for (and Nik Fletcher is like my brother, seriously), don’t want my business if I happen to get something of theirs through a bundle, I trust they won’t offer it in a bundle to begin with.

Panic, who makes some of my favorite Mac software, doesn’t do bundles. I did, however, save $10 when I bought Coda because I also bought Transmit. I saved 10% on TextMate because I bought it as a student. Should I not have taken advantage of those discounts? Does that make me unethical or unsupportive of software developers? Of course not!

So why does buying something in a bundle make me a bad person? I respect Macro’s unyielding support for developers, but I prefer to live in a world where I’m less pious and don’t have to walk around with a stick up my ass.