It’s a great testament to the power of the Apple marketing machine that iTunes is the most popular digital music service, even among PC users. I have been using Napster for two or three years now and In terms of bang for the buck, iTunes doesn’t even come close.

It’s about renting your music vs. buying it. iTunes charges 99 cents per track for music downloads. Once you have downloaded the music, you may burn it to a CD or transfer it to your iPod or up to 3 other computers. Napster to Go (Named for the infamous Napster P2P system, though not closely related) charges a flat rate of $14.95 per month for unlimited downloads. If you download more than a dozen songs a month, well, do the math.

What’s the catch? First of all, it won’t work with your iPod. There are a lot of compatible mp3 players out there (You even get a free one when you sign up for a 1 year membership). When you download a track, it is rented with a 30 day license. These licenses are renewed on your PC every time you connect to Napster. You have to connect your mp3 player to your machine at least once a month to renew the portable licensing. Also, it will not work on a Mac and does not do movies.

Despite these limitations, the Napster system is still the best. Let’s say for example’s sake, that I downloaded 100 songs last month, they were downloaded practically instantly, and have been on my iRiver ever since. The cost? about $15. On iTunes, I would have paid $100. This is what I pay for 6+ months of Napster service, in which time I will have accumulated 600 or more songs. Remember you can always buy the songs too if you want to keep them forever. Think of it like iTunes but with an additional unlimited music rental option.

When I hear a new song I like on the radio, I download the entire album, legally, for what feels like free. If I really like the album and want to burn a CD of it, it’s 99 cents a track. But who uses CDs anymore?

Of course if you steal your music, the point is moot.

This video has been making its way around the tubes.
It’s the most surreal thing I’ve ever seen. Dick Cheney in 1994, explaining why invading Iraq would be a bad idea.

Did he really just use the word “quagmire”?

I’m not sure how long this has been going on, but CNN.com now has a satire article on their front page every day.
I love The Onion, but I don’t think their fake news belongs on a legitimate news site, even if it is marked as “Satire”.

Is this worse than the other stuff that passes for news (Lindsay, Paris) these days?

Check out this video. It is a very artistic and informative video on the history of the web, and what role it is beginning to play in our society as it evolves. The world wide web is really a machine that is learning from everybody who uses it.

Thanks to the Daily Slurp for featuring me among their sites for August 11th. The Daily Slurp feed is aggregated by Most Inspired. The two sites brought me a good number of hits on Saturday.

I’m sitting at home glued to the TV right now. As you have probably heard, there was a major bridge collapse in downtown Minneapolis this evening. As I write this there is no news on fatalities. It’s such a bizarre feeling having something like this happen so close to home. I drove over this very bridge just this morning, and have been on it many days at 6:05 pm.
It took me an hour to get a hold of Laura because the cell-phone lines were all jammed up, fortunately she is fine. I’m kind of in shock right now, but here is at least a message to everyone out there that Laura and I are ok.

UPDATE: This is not the bridge I thought it was, I rarely drive over this one. They say it will be at least 2 years before the bridge reopens, this will make a major impact on the twin cities for a long time. Here is a link describing the bridge construction and how it’s “non-redundant” construction may have lead to the collapse: http://www.visi.com/~jweeks/bridges/pages/ms16.html.

I’ve noticed that different people watch movies in different ways, and with different attitudes. In the spirit of oversimplification, here are some handy stereotypes I came up with:

The Tourist
Just along for the ride. The tourist views a movie with little in the way of preconceived notions or expectations, and takes the movie as it comes. The tourist is rarely disappointed in a movie, but at the same time never gets the same emotional experience from a really good movie as other types.

The Cynic
Looking for imperfections at every moment, the cynic is very hard to please. The irony of the cynic is in his ability to overlook fictionalizations in the big picture while picking out unrealistic details with extreme precision. The cynic is most pleased with a movie that has no holes.

The Detective
This is a person who’s main goal is to guess what will happen next. The detective looks for significance behind every line of dialog and every turn of plot. The detective’s favorite movie is one that is not easy to solve.

I suppose that most people are some combination of these types. I myself tend to be a tourist. I’m just coming to the realization now though, that to get the most out of watching a movie, I should adjust my attitude going into it for whatever type of movie it is. For Transformers I should be a tourist; for The Bourne Ultimatum I should be a detective; and for whatever the Wayans brothers do next, I should be a cynic.

Do you adjust your attitude going into a movie based on what kind of movie it’s going to be? Also, What are some other movie watching attitudes and what does a person’s movie watching style say about their life living style?