To the last, Dos Equis, I grapple with thee...

Dos Equis has this truly amusing series of commercials out. They center around a man who is essentially a cross between Jay Peterman from Seinfeld and Ricardo Montalban ("Khaaaaaaaaaaan!" Sorry, couldn't help myself).

He is billed "The Most Interesting Man in the World." He usually has at least two (young enough to be his granddaughter) babes at his table, and a much younger and -we can safely assume- much less-sophisticated younger guy who, while resenting grandpa for squashing his prospects, can't help admiring and wanting to be the craggy ol' codger.

The tagline?

"I don't always drink beer. But when I do, I prefer Dos Equis."

Well, now. Let's just say the name of the beer is very appropriate: The first four letters of the second word are, obviously, E-Q-U-I. It is absolutely no coincidence that these are also the first four letters of the word "equine," which means "of, or pertaining to, or resembling a horse." As in "Dos Equis tastes like the drippings of an equine's bladder."

The Most Interesting Man in the World has yet again proven Justin's Beer Advertising Theorem, which states that the quality of a beer is inversely proportional to the quality of its advertising.

Frequent Flyin'

So in the past year, I've had:
-Four Qantas flights
-Four Southwest flights
-Three American Airlines flights
-One Delta flight
-One Jetstar flight.

Based on that, I can guarantee you that the passengers on the Qantas 747 that had a hole blow in its side at 30,000 feet still had a better experience than anyone flying the other airlines mentioned on a routine trip.

Lamenting my lost coffee

I came to a really horrible conclusion a few months ago - that I had to cut back drastically on my coffee drinking.

See, my french press had become my best friend. I was too much of a coffee barfly, to the point where John at Coffee Conspiracy knew what I was going to order before I did.

This is because I absolutely love good coffee (as I love so many good beverages). But it was making me jittery and nuts, and affecting my sleep. So I thought "hey, I gave up cheese and flour tortillas. Why not cut back on the coffee and see what shakes out?"

I throttled back to two coffee beverages a week, down from about 16 ounces daily. Well, it turns out I sleep better and I'm somewhat more calm (hey, I'm still me, after all!). And when I do get a hold of some good coffee, it's even better than it used to be.

Taking Responsibility for Your Words

I rarely see a pointed quote from someone that isn't followed a few hours later with an apology and weaselly, insincere, penitent hand-wringing. The topic doesn't matter: politics, sports, even celebrity nattering. State your opinion at your own risk.

Even if you're fairly on-target.

Let's applaud the exception to the rule - one General Wesley Clark. Given much of the online reaction to his comments about Senator John McCain, I expected his words to be far more inflammatory. But his thoughts echoed my own: Does five years as a prisoner of war qualify a person to be president of the United States? Does commanding a squadron equal military acumen? General Clark's answer was, "eh, not so much."

I'm a bit disappointed at Senator Barack Obama for distancing himself both from General Clark and his comments. I would certainly have awarded him leadership points for saying "General Clark is entitled to his opinions. He didn't make them at my behest, but he is qualified to speak on this topic and he has the same First Amendment rights as any other American."

I would've given Senator McCain the same props for making a similar statement. I'm disappointed that both candidates are playing the same apologist/outrage game.

Speaking of which, I've had many people bring up military experience - or Senator Obama's lack of it. It amazes me that people are making this such a big factor in their votes. No single candidate knows everything about how to form their policies. When considering a candidate, I think it's smart to not just evaluate them, but who they're likely to include in their cabinets. We have cabinets because no single person is an expert in every single aspect of policy making. Think about that awhile.

The Mac Question

Alright, it's finally time to address why I just don't the hip thing and give up PCs for a nice, shiny, sleek, hip Mac.

Here's why:

1. Macs are overpriced. Three years ago, I had my choice of a $700 Compaq and a $1,200 notebook, which was slower and smaller. The Compaq has been dropped on hard surfaces multiple times, and I've even managed to keep viruses at bay.

2. Mac has created a brand image that I loathe. It's trying to be counter-culture, as if owning a Mac is somehow "sticking it to The Man." Well, that's simply like Starbucks (with better stock prices) trying to position itself as an underdog. Right now, Mac's image is Scion-driving hipsters with funny haircuts who like listening to low-fi garage bands. Maybe an alternate brand, complete with a different name, would change this. Of course, Apple-ologists will wave their arms and sputter "But, but, but they did that with the Performa line in the 90s, and it flopped!" Okay, so that was the wrong time. We're now in the post-iPod phase, and Apple needs to try again and get it right. Otherwise, no money and no love from The WordWhacker.

3. I can't stand Mac's Hello, Kitty-ized interface. Too cutesy and graphic. I like Spartan and straightforward. I have to say Linux distros do this really, really well. Not perfectly, but darned close. How hard would it be for Mac to offer a customizable interface?

4. Work on making its operating system work on PCs. Some hackers can do this. I lack the geek-fu to accomplish this, but I would like a stable operating system (with a decent interface, see #3). And I don't want the crapware that comes with so many new PCs. Sell that operating system for $100 and watch Microsoft choke on the pressue.

There you have it.

The Round Ball on My Mind

In my last post, I promised to write about why I don't switch to Apple next. Well, I just feel like talking about soccer instead.

But this won't be about the tasty final between Spain and Germany in the Euro Cup. I'd rather address the United States and the 201o World Cup. The fact is, the team will get to the finals. They'll get to Johannesburg, and then will not go any further than the last 16.

Unless ...

Some changes occur. Manager Bob Bradley - a nice guy, a hard worker. But he is not on the level of top European coaches. Or even some of the South Americans. Look south of the border, where Sven-Goran Eriksson is taking charge of Mexico. That makes them infinitely more threatening to any team they meet. Sven might not have elevated England, but he did quite well with a not-so-hot Manchester City squad. And he will do even better with Mexico.

Now, Bob isn't the real problem. That title belongs to Sunil Gulati, president of the US Soccer Foundation. Every journalist in the United States who says Guus Hiddink, Jose Murinho or Jurgen Klinsmann could solve the US team's problems is wrong. Because Gulati - or rather, Gulati's ego - is what stands between US Soccer and its next step.

The USSF had a chance to hire Klinsi right after the 06 World Cup and his near-triumph with Germany. He lives most of the itme in California. He knows the nuances of Major League Soccer. So, why did he not assume command? Because there is an unspoken directive from Gulati: Thou shalt not overshadow Me. And yes, he would use caps for "Me." And Klinsi is flamboyant, larger than life, high-profile.

Oust Gulati and install a rational president, and many problems will right themselves. Until then, prepare for another early World Cup exit and continued lurking in soccer's shadows.

Back from a Computer-Enforced Layoff

Since my last entry, I've been busy on the computer front. At home, I have two computers: a "frankendesktop" and a Compaq laptop. The frankendesktop was running Windows 2000, which didn't like my high-speed router. And it was hopelessly out of date. Time for a new operating system, I thought.

But rather than meekly shuffling off to plunk down for a full Windows XP install, I decided to stick it to the man: I decided to go Linux.

(A brief interlude for the non-tech geeks: Linux is an open-source operating system. Programmers have greated many different versions suited to different needs. These are called "distributions," or "distros". Popular distros include Ubuntu, Red Hat, PCLinuxOS, Open SUSE and Mandriva. If you have the skills, you can easily hack into these and modify them to your needs. Like Windows and Mac operating systems, they now have graphic user interfaces, so you don't need to communicate in code. Plus, they come with oodles of free and effective software. The more-popular distros are also very stable. You can download most flavors for free.)

Now, everything in that interlude sounds like a computer fool's paradise, does it not? Free. Customizable. Stable. Not Windows.

But there's a rub. A particular distro may hate your computer. Or just your soundcard. Or your video card. Or your ... aw, you get it already, right? I flirted with several of the above. OpenSUSE rejected me like a supermodel shooting down a Tolkien fan hitting on her in Elvish. PCLinuxOS seemed awesome - then I found out it had multiple personality disorder. Ubuntu ... well, we tried a few dates and decided to be friends.

I almost took Mandriva home to meet my parents. The office and graphics suites (AbiWord and GIMP) were terrrific. Mozilla Firefox was okay, but sometimes pooped out for no discernible reason. The audio editor met with mixed results. It would occassionally play a CD without fuss, but the audio editor (a must for anyone who enjoys writing and recording music) was horrible.

So I tried. I ultimately learned a few things. But it looks like it's dutifully back to Windows with me.

In our next episode, I'll answer the question you're certainly asking right now: But Justin, why not a Mac?