I used to be more of a gadget freak - getting the first and latest version. To some degree, that's toned down, but I like being current. This list is built on time used and importance.
1. Apple PowerBook G4
2. RIM Blackberry
3. Apple iPod Photo (60 GB)
4. Tivo DVR (Series 1)
5. iHome
6. Apple Airport Base Station
7. Belkin TuneCast FM Transmitter
8. Apple iSight
9. Apple Airport Express
10. Exilim Digital Camera
January 30, 2006
Exxon: Record Earnings of $10 Billion
Rising gas prices affect all of us, drivers or non-drivers alike, and in the last few years, we've seen the average price per gallon rise from below $1.50 a gallon in 2002 to nearly double that in 2005, and about $2.50 plus a gallon today. Just this morning, I filled up for $2.57 at Chevron - a fairly average price for the Bay Area.
We've been led to believe that the meteoric price increases are due to several factors - cleaner gas initiatives, Middle East regional strife, scarcity of oil wells in North America, refineries under repair, the War on Iraq, and Hurricane Katrina. But simple economics tells us that there are really two ways that price increases can be sustained in a large economy - the first being that the cost of goods is increasing at the supplier level, which forces them to raise costs in turn to sustain gross margins, or second, that a scarcity of suppliers, through monopoly, collude to uniformly raise costs.
This morning, Exxon reported a quarterly profit of $10.7 billion. On the year, the company's profit (not revenue, mind you) was more than $36 billion dollars, bigger than the economies of 125 of the 184 countries ranked by the World Bank, and a world record for any company in history - period. Does this tell you that the company is simply keeping profit margins in line with rising costs, as mentioned above, or is something rotten in Denmark?
If you believe the company's spin, they'll say that the record revenues will "fuel" investment in the future, and that this is good for all, but do you buy it, and if not, what do you think should be done? Is this just capitalism, and we should be happy that the market has worked?
Related Links:
Exxon profits shoot up 42pc to world record of $36bn
Exxon Profits Up, Valdez Anger Lingers
Exxon profits lead to PR blitz
We've been led to believe that the meteoric price increases are due to several factors - cleaner gas initiatives, Middle East regional strife, scarcity of oil wells in North America, refineries under repair, the War on Iraq, and Hurricane Katrina. But simple economics tells us that there are really two ways that price increases can be sustained in a large economy - the first being that the cost of goods is increasing at the supplier level, which forces them to raise costs in turn to sustain gross margins, or second, that a scarcity of suppliers, through monopoly, collude to uniformly raise costs.
This morning, Exxon reported a quarterly profit of $10.7 billion. On the year, the company's profit (not revenue, mind you) was more than $36 billion dollars, bigger than the economies of 125 of the 184 countries ranked by the World Bank, and a world record for any company in history - period. Does this tell you that the company is simply keeping profit margins in line with rising costs, as mentioned above, or is something rotten in Denmark?
If you believe the company's spin, they'll say that the record revenues will "fuel" investment in the future, and that this is good for all, but do you buy it, and if not, what do you think should be done? Is this just capitalism, and we should be happy that the market has worked?
Related Links:
Exxon profits shoot up 42pc to world record of $36bn
Exxon Profits Up, Valdez Anger Lingers
Exxon profits lead to PR blitz
January 29, 2006
Seven of Nine and The Click Five
Site referrals can often deliver good insight into what a visitor is looking for, and how they happened to stumble upon your place in the World Wide Web. But they can often be confusing rather than helpful, as well - especially when a visitor is looking for something that either was never mentioned on your site, or through some odd coincidence, has seen a rise through the search engines - presenting a false positive.
The latter has certainly been the case with louisgray.com. As you already know, this last year, I started authoring a weekly comic strip for Athletics Nation, called "The ANtics", highlighting the A's players, and trying to deliver a new form of amusement, while leveraging some fantastic software. After amassing about ten or so of these episodes, I created a dedicated page on the site as a comics archive, and listed them out from one through ten and beyond. But my simple writing out of these numbers has done wonders for pushing louisgray.com forward in Google's image hierarchy - for terms that have nothing to do with the site.
For example - "Seven of Nine", from Star Trek: Voyager... there is an immense following on the Web of folks looking for her picture (I don't even want to know why) from around the world. My site statistics from SiteMeter show visitors looking for seven of nine from The Netherlands, Virginia and Seattle, Washington, just for starters. I'm sure they're very disappointed to see I am not a Trekkie - or ever will be. Another example is the band "The Click Five". The combination of the word five, and a simple "Click Here" message has similarly promoted the ANtics comics through Google's image directory - and I have NO IDEA what those guys play, so again, the wrong place - but again, I have visitors from Denmark, Baltimore, Maryland, and The Netherlands (again), looking for news on the band.
You can see the offending Google image results here: (Seven Of Nine) and (The Click Five). Very amusing.
The latter has certainly been the case with louisgray.com. As you already know, this last year, I started authoring a weekly comic strip for Athletics Nation, called "The ANtics", highlighting the A's players, and trying to deliver a new form of amusement, while leveraging some fantastic software. After amassing about ten or so of these episodes, I created a dedicated page on the site as a comics archive, and listed them out from one through ten and beyond. But my simple writing out of these numbers has done wonders for pushing louisgray.com forward in Google's image hierarchy - for terms that have nothing to do with the site.
For example - "Seven of Nine", from Star Trek: Voyager... there is an immense following on the Web of folks looking for her picture (I don't even want to know why) from around the world. My site statistics from SiteMeter show visitors looking for seven of nine from The Netherlands, Virginia and Seattle, Washington, just for starters. I'm sure they're very disappointed to see I am not a Trekkie - or ever will be. Another example is the band "The Click Five". The combination of the word five, and a simple "Click Here" message has similarly promoted the ANtics comics through Google's image directory - and I have NO IDEA what those guys play, so again, the wrong place - but again, I have visitors from Denmark, Baltimore, Maryland, and The Netherlands (again), looking for news on the band.
You can see the offending Google image results here: (Seven Of Nine) and (The Click Five). Very amusing.
January 28, 2006
Asypta: Simple, Yet Pointless
Nearly six years ago now, while working at 3Cube, we were putting together collateral and Web page templates for a new product roll-out, and as is common, one of the tasks was to create faux persons and companies, as placeholders. Rather than go with the standard "John Smith" from "ABC Company" or "Acme Inc.", I tried to dress it up with more real sounding names, while staying generic. I believe "Linda Johnson" from GoodFiles Inc. was one of the chief participants in our FAQs...
During one of these meetings, I presented an example which included a company by the name of "Asypta". It didn't mean anything, but it sure sounded good, especially at a time when companies would rebrand themselves, or spin off subsidiaries with neat-sounding names that added no real value. For some reason, I got all sorts of questions about "Asypta". It sounded real enough that my colleagues wanted to know if I had an in on the ground floor of a top-secret pre-IPO start-up or something... but I kept using the example and sounding mysterious.
I stumbled on the idea of "Asypta" as companies often can be found with an A at the beginning, consonant, vowel, consonant, A. Think about how many you can name... for example... Avaya, Asigra, Altera, Atipa, Asera, Altria, Ariba, Aceva, Acterna, Acteva, Adexa, Azanda... and I'm sure there are many more. At one point in 2001, I had registered the domain name Asypta.com, with the dual intent of acting as if it were a fake company, or secondly, to "grade" company names by their "Asypta factor". Ariba would be a 10 on the scale. Avaya another 10. Something like Alhambra... not so much. Asypta eventually came to stand for "A simple, yet pointless, technical acronym." It's worth noting that almost none of these Asypta companies explain their corporate name on the Web site. Simple, yet pointless.
During one of these meetings, I presented an example which included a company by the name of "Asypta". It didn't mean anything, but it sure sounded good, especially at a time when companies would rebrand themselves, or spin off subsidiaries with neat-sounding names that added no real value. For some reason, I got all sorts of questions about "Asypta". It sounded real enough that my colleagues wanted to know if I had an in on the ground floor of a top-secret pre-IPO start-up or something... but I kept using the example and sounding mysterious.
I stumbled on the idea of "Asypta" as companies often can be found with an A at the beginning, consonant, vowel, consonant, A. Think about how many you can name... for example... Avaya, Asigra, Altera, Atipa, Asera, Altria, Ariba, Aceva, Acterna, Acteva, Adexa, Azanda... and I'm sure there are many more. At one point in 2001, I had registered the domain name Asypta.com, with the dual intent of acting as if it were a fake company, or secondly, to "grade" company names by their "Asypta factor". Ariba would be a 10 on the scale. Avaya another 10. Something like Alhambra... not so much. Asypta eventually came to stand for "A simple, yet pointless, technical acronym." It's worth noting that almost none of these Asypta companies explain their corporate name on the Web site. Simple, yet pointless.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)