What’s driving the decision: The time of year? The location? The amount of time? The cost?
In this case, the timing is known: late October, about 2 weeks.
Where to go that time of year? What is the weather like around the globe? Raining in the South East, Hot along the West coast, Dry to the South, Cold in the far South..
What do we want to do? Should this be adventurous? relaxing?
And so the research begins. The flight searches: can we use miles? are there cheap flights anywhere?
A trip to Get Lost. Browsing options: itineraries, hotels, cities, countries, regions
This is the fun part.
But it’s also frustrating. Too many choices, not enough known.
For years I used to ponder the Apple ad campaign “Think Different.”
The thing about it was, what I would ponder, was their use of grammar.
Apple, through this campaign, was telling the world that users of Macintosh were different from the rest – they were unique thinkers. This campaign was filled with images of rebels – from Martin Luther King Junior to John Lennon to Albert Einstein.
But the thing was, their use of ‘different’ and not ‘differently.’ By saying “Think different,” Apple was using an adjective, not an adverb. In other words, they were telling you WHAT to think, not HOW.
Of course I appreciate that “Think Different” sounds better than “Think Differently.” The latter just doesn’t roll off the tongue quite as satisfyingly. And I imagine that was the driving force behind the decision. I have to give Apple credit that they were smart enough to have realized the grammatical implications of their word choice. And I do believe that they consciously decided to go with their choice because of the strength of the phrase, not the literal translation.
But I also think that Think Different fits better with my view of the company. I believe that they see it as part of their role to tell their customers what to do & what to think – that they know what’s best for their customers.
As much as I think that Apple makes some of the best computer systems out there, I think they apply too much of a heavy-hand on how their components can be used – and I don’t understand the reasoning. The reality is, most customers are only comfortable downloading approved applications and most people are not interested in hacking their Apple TVs or installing OSX on different hardware. To go after this minority of customers is a distraction keeping them from producing even better systems. But I truly believe they can’t help themselves. They are too used to telling their customers WHAT to do, and, WHAT to think.
It’s been a little while since I posted anything here. At first, it was because my attention was focused elsewhere. Then, I started to appreciate the break.
Back in May, armed with a relatively new 50mm lens, I brought my camera with me every day of the month, making a point of taking photos around town during my daily walks to and from work or while taking the dog out for a hike. This exercise culminated with a rather warm Sunday Carnaval celebration, just around the corner from my house.
Alongside all of this, I had a new project at work that required a lot of my attention. It was in the early phases of a new initiative that required a lot of creative thinking and I found that I didn’t have a lot of that energy left walking out of work.
So it was in June when I decided to do nothing with those images, and not post to this site. I focused all of my creative energy on work.
Sometime last month, I wrapped my head around the items at work and started putting some energy towards processing the images from May. Towards the end of the July I took the camera out for the first time to take some photos of the now shuttered Transbay Terminal here in San Francisco.
And today I’m back writing here.
I’ll get around to uploading photos from May sometime, but I’m currently spending time going through some of the photos from Africa and South America, looking to make some black & white images.
The next few months promise to be pretty busy, in a good way. I should have a few things to post.
But I did appreciate the break, and the perspective it provided.
As a rule, I’m really interested in the creative process. This is true in many of the photography podcasts that I listen to and the photo blogs that I read. I’ve written before about the 33 1/3 series of books (which analyze classic albums from throughout the years) and in addition to these I’ve also enjoyed documentaries about the making of albums like The Dark Side of the Moon or Nirvana’s Nevermind. In each of these, as in A Simple Twist of Fate, the author (or filmmaker) examines aspects of the creative process as the artist(s) struggled to put together their work.
One thing that I find is that by really analyzing the work one gains a much greater appreciation for the components that make up the whole. These are all albums that I’ve liked over the years but my appreciation grows
when I really take the time to understand more about the work. Looking at each of the minute decisions that were made (
and the reasons behind them – sometimes very consciously and sometimes not) you apprecia
te how each of these small decisions add up to create a greater whole.
In this case, the reader also gains an understanding of Dylan as an artist – and all of his idiosyncrasies that come into play. In this case there’s definitely a visionary and a vision that are filled out by some very talented musicians and producers. For any Dylan fans, I highly recommend this book.
If Dylan’s not your thing, I still recommend the 33 1/3 series .
I came across this article the other day from the New York Times. In it, the author makes the case that the Open Web is a bit like a city: disorganized, dirty in places, unsafe in others; and that the application-based environments of the iPhone and the iPad is more like a suburban neighborhood with its safe and clean streets.
Something about this really resonated with me. For the same reason that I live in the city I like the idea of having more open access to my computing experience. I appreciate the Apple for its focus on design and the experience but, as I’ve written several times in the past, I’m not a fan of their heavy handed control. In the same way, I like living in the city, where all walks of life are around and every day you can experience something new as opposed to the quiet suburban lifestyle where the experience is more controlled.
While I think the new iPhone (and its operating system) offer some compelling new features, I’m looking forward to this summer when I’ll be able to ditch my AT&T contract without penalty and switch to a more open platform like Google’s Android system. Don’t get me wrong – I’m also not a fan of allowing Google to have access to having so much of my information but for the time being their system is more compelling to me than Apple.
I’ve been seeing a lot of ads for Prop. 16 lately and it reminds me just how screwed up California can be.
I used to be a big fan of California’s propositions. I thought that it was a way to get the people more directly involved in government and elections.
I was young and innocent.
Image via Wikipedia
The propositions have long been a way for interest groups to circumvent the legislature and use the uneducated masses to vote on items that they don’t understand. And they’re just getting worse.
I’m not trying to be harsh on the masses. When I say uneducated, I’m referring to their awareness of the propositions and their content. Most people just don’t spend any time to understand what it is they’re voting for (or against).
Prop 16 is a great example of this. The “Taxpayers’ Right To Vote” proposition. Who doesn’t like the right to vote? Why, on the face of it, of course taxpayers should have the right to vote. But that of course is the problem. Most people won’t look past the simple description of the ballot measure.
What this proposition is really about is whether California governments should get into ‘public power.’ (I don’t want to trouble with debating the merits or detriments of public power – that’s a separate topic.) Because what this proposition says, if it passes, is that, should the government be truly interested in getting into public power, they’ll first need a 2/3 majority vote by the public to approve such a move. And think about that – 2/3 majority is just about impossible. Just ask someone trying to pass national healthcare or a California budget. And these were passed by legislatives. It’s hard to imagine the general public voting 2/3 for anything.
So basically, all one needs to do to change the law is to get a proposition passed (with a simple majority, by the way) that calls for future votes to require a 2/3 majority vote. In doing so, you lock in your own view and make it near impossible for any future changes. And how does one do that? Just throw a bunch of money behind it. PG&E has already supported this measure with over $30 million (while opponents have raised about $50,000).
More and more I’ve become a fan of a constitutional congress for the state. Of course that process has the potential to be filled with missteps and problems but we’re getting to the point where almost anything would be better than what we have today.
.
