How did they make cardboard feel like leather? (And why?)

prince_of_persia08_le360boxart_160wChristmas is officially over, and this year my video game collection increased in size by one game: Prince of Persia (Limited Edition) for the XBOX 360. My initial assessment: great game, cool visual style, engaging gameplay, nice re-imagining of the series. I look forward to playing it more.

One thing I do not look forward to more of is touching the box. The Limited Edition version of the game comes packaged in a special outer box, which is designed to look like an antique leather-bound book. Artistically it is very well-done, but what is profoundly disturbing about it is the feel of it. There is some sort of coating on the cardboard that makes it feel eerily like real, well-worn leather. But not exactly. It mostly just feels like there’s some kind of weird fuzzy/sticky/highly unnatural (and probably toxic) film smeared all over the box. Yuck.

Luckily, inside the box is a regular plastic game case (featuring the standard cover art), which is what I’ll be keeping on the shelf. And I’ll store the cardboard box away in a secure location where it cannot contaminate my life further.

An open letter to Microsoft Word users (i.e. everyone)

Steve BallmerI am currently in the midst of developing a website for a client (great client, by the way), featuring a WYSIWYG text editor (TinyMCE) within its CMS. At some point along the way, I looked at the source code of some of the HTML that the client had inserted into the database via TinyMCE. With dismay, I noticed the likes of the following amongst the “actual” content:

<p><!–[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning /> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas /> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables /> <w:SnapToGridInCell /> <w:WrapTextWithPunct /> <w:UseAsianBreakRules /> <w:DontGrowAutofit /> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]–><!–[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState=”false” LatentStyleCount=”156″> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]–> <!–[if gte mso 10]> <mce:style><! /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:”Table Normal”; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:””; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} –> <!–[endif]–></p>

Ugh. For those keeping score at home, that would be more than a kilobyte of… well… absolutely nothing on a web page. Oh, except some browsers will turn it into a couple of extra, unwanted blank lines thanks to the paragraph tags wrapping it all.

The sad thing about all of this is that I am no longer even at a point where I look at that and say “What the hell is this?” I know exactly what the hell it is. It’s code generated by Microsoft Office for some inscrutable, presumably nefarious purpose. It seems to have no effect whatsoever on the presentation of the content on the page in any known browser or application that I’ve bothered to investigate. But whenever you copy-and-paste content out of a Microsoft Office application like Word and into a web-based text editor, or if you use Word’s “Save as Web Page” feature, the resulting HTML consists of significantly more of this bloat than of the content itself.

Aghast — or, at least, I would be aghast if I weren’t so numb to all of this now, after more than a decade of confronting it — I began crafting an email to the client, in my ongoing quest to reduce dependence upon Microsoft applications, one user at a time. But then I decided the client didn’t need my admonitions (although I don’t rule out the possibility that he’s reading this); the whole world does.

I was all set to copy and paste that draft email into this post. Unfortunately, although I had copied it to the clipboard, I didn’t paste it before going off and copy-pasting of the Microsoft garbage code above, and I also didn’t save it as a draft in Mail. Once again Microsoft seems to have the upper hand. Balllllmerrrrrrr!!!!!

The upshot of all of it, though, was simply that Microsoft Word generates copious quantities of garbage HTML and includes it in what gets put into the clipboard when you copy-paste content from a Word document into other applications (such as a WYSIWYG text editor box in a CMS). Most of the time there’s no visible effect from this garbage code (other than the fact that it increases page load times slightly by virtue of being more data to download), but there’s no way to know for sure that it’s not going to break a page in some browser, either now or at some point in the future when browsers adhere more strictly to XHTML DOCTYPE specifications. Plus, it’s just pointless garbage Microsoft is making me look at when I view source. I object to it on principle.

Then again, who am I to challenge the Goliath of software?

Top 5 Albums of 2008: The Contenders

The contenders in Cover FlowOne of the few traditions around here (predating this even being a “blog,” or at least me acknowledging that’s what it is) is my annual “Top 5 Albums” list. I’ve been doing it every year since 2004. I’m still pondering the choices for this year, but I thought I’d give you a little advance insight by listing all of the possible contenders, i.e. all of the albums released in 2008 that I own so far. (I’m hoping for a couple more for Christmas that may end up making the amended list.) A very haphazard restriction on “the best,” but: a) these lists are always subjective anyway, b) I’m not going to bother buying albums I wouldn’t like, and that’s about the only way I’d end up hearing them, and c) I don’t care what you think. Write your own damn blog. (There, that showed you! Wait, come back!)

Here, then, are the contenders. I am resisting the temtation to “monetize” this list by linking all of the titles to the download pages on Amazon or iTunes with my affiliate links. (OK, I’m just too lazy to do it right now.) Some are in more serious contention than others. The five that are the current favorites (in the polling I’ve conducted inside my brain) are in bold.

  • R.E.M.: Accelerate
  • The Decemberists: Always the Bridesmaid: Vols. 1-3
  • The Mars Volta: The Bedlam in Goliath
  • The Killers: Day & Age
  • Metallica: Death Magnetic
  • My Morning Jacket: Evil Urges
  • John Legend: Evolver
  • Fleet Foxes: Fleet Foxes
  • Bryan Scary and the Shredding Tears: Flight of the Knife
  • Nine Inch Nails: Ghosts I-IV
  • Snow Patrol: A Hundred Million Suns
  • Steven Wilson: Insurgentes
  • Fujiya & Miyagi: Lightbulbs
  • Beck: Modern Guilt
  • Death Cab for Cutie: Narrow Stairs
  • Keane: Perfect Symmetry
  • Joe Satriani: Professor Satchafunkilus and the Musterion of Rock
  • Ani DiFranco: Red Letter Year
  • Ra Ra Riot: The Rhumb Line
  • M83: Saturdays = Youth
  • Elbow: The Seldom Seen Kid
  • of Montreal: Skeletal Lamping
  • Nine Inch Nails: The Slip
  • Rush: Snakes & Arrows Live
  • Foxboro Hottubs: Stop Drop and Roll!!!
  • Coldplay: Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends
  • Ben Folds: Way to Normal
  • Weezer: Weezer (Red Album)

Whew, that’s quite a list. And it doesn’t even include the large number of independent recordings I acquired via the RPM Challenge, the Very Us Artists, Sidedown Audio, and various other places. Special acknowledgment goes out in particular to Revolution Void for what probably is my favorite album of the year overall. But ultimately I decided to suckle at the corporate teat for at least one more year with this list and only consider signed artists. I’ll probably produce another parallel list of the best unsigned/independent recordings I heard this year. And of course I’ll stack the list with my own music.

A few fun numbers from this year’s contenders list:

28: albums in the list

18: artists I had heard of before 2008

13: artists I already owned music from before 2008

14: purchased on CD

3 2/3: purchased on iTunes*

10 1/3: purchased on Amazon MP3*

2: downloaded directly from artist

2: downloaded directly from artist, artist being Nine Inch Nails

* I bought volumes 1 and 3 of Always the Bridesmaid on iTunes and volume 2 on Amazon, only because Amazon didn’t yet have volumes 1 and 3 on the days I tried to buy them. Booo!

Why does this seem like a joke?

FruuppIt was bound to happen eventually, and now it has. Tonight I finally joined Twitter (follow me!). One of my first acts as a Twit (?) was to become a follower of some people I have already been following in more traditional fashions — if blogs and podcasts can be considered “traditional.” And those would be: gruber of Daring Fireball, and scottsimpson, lonelysandwich and hotdogsladies of You Look Nice Today.

I am already a little scared of the power of Twitter. It feels like I’m injecting other people’s thoughts directly into my brain, especially if you are foolish enough to delve into the public timeline. Truly frightening. And a stark reminder that, obscure though you may be, what you do on Twitter is public.

And now then, on to what I’m actually writing about. This tweet from scottsimpson brought to my attention (or to my recollection, as I think I had heard of them before) an obscure early ’70s Irish, as he puts it, “‘hengeprog” rock band named Fruupp.

The unofficial fan site seems suspiciously like an elaborately conceived parody: Spinal Tap, now with more Stonehenge. For a while I was convinced the band had never really existed, until I heard some rare live recordings (warning, it’s MySpace) and found their jaw-droppingly high-priced import CDs on Amazon. So it appears they are were real, after all! Intrigued, I am. (Sorry, been watchin’ a lot of Star Wars lately with the kids.) But not at those prices.

And now, as I drift off into dreamland, I ponder my ability to convey future thoughts within the constraints of 140 characters.