Windows: Reboot

More and more, it seems, the people I love are becoming Macheads.

My wife and way-back friend Shawn have been devoted to their Macs for as long as I've known them. My brother converted last year, and has been singing the praises of Steve ever since. He convinced our aunt to nab a Mac when the time came for her to get a new computer. (Which even I agree was probably a great choice for Nancy.) At least one of my new "couple friends" swears by her Mac (there could be more that I don't know about), and I'm pretty sure my siblings-in-law have religion, too.

Meanwhile, I'm still chugging away, more or less happily, on my WinXP notebook.

Some aspects of the Mac platform have their appeal, I have to admit - the attention to detail in the product and OS design, for example - but because I think WinXP is basically a good, stable OS, and because there are a few key aps I use that are tied very closely to the Windows platform, I haven't felt any deep urge to Make The Switch.

That's not to say I'm overly impressed with MS right now. Like many tech folks, my reaction to the latest version of Windows, Vista, was more or less: "They spent how much to develop that? And it took them how long?"

Same thing on my phone. It runs the latest version of Windows Mobile, which hasn't changed significantly in the better part of a decade. It still uses variations on the desktop Windows way of doing things, as though what works well on a full-size device with a keyboard and mouse makes just as much sense on a pocketable computer that doubles as a phone. One of the big markets in add-on software for WinMo devices is the "shell" category, which (just like it sounds) wraps a better user interface around the old system like a protective, decorative shell. If outside developers can create attractive, intuitive, finger-friendly, phone-sensible shells, why can't the Windows Mobile development team, for crying in the beer?

And the indications from Microsoft aren't very favorable for either of these OS flavors to get a major overhaul anytime soon. New versions next year or the year after, yes. But nothing drastic. Nothing revolutionary. Nothing like what's needed.

I've long maintained it's because Microsoft lets itself get too bogged down with legacy support. Each version of Windows gets built on top of the last version - on the upside, there's lots of software and hardware compatibility, so folks aren't necessarily forced to upgrade these items when a new version of Windows comes out. On the downside, each version inherits many (most) of the quirks, bugs, inconsistencies, and design gaffes of the previous Windows, while bringing to the table a modest new mess of stuff, good and bad.

What's needed for Windows to be a truly cutting edge operating system is a complete reboot. No, not the infamous three-finger salute, but a ground-up reimagining of the system, much like the treatment recently given to James Bond, Star Trek and Battlestar Galactica, among others.

Since it's always nice to be affirmed in one's opinions, I present for your consideration this piece in the NY Times tech section making just the case I'm arguing (only probably better, and in fewer words). Considering it's been on the top of the tech section's most e-mailed list for a while now, I'm guessing a lot of people would like to see what Microsoft can do with Windows if it drops the fetters and reboots the franchise, much like Apple did almost a decade ago with OSX.

It would take guts. It would probably unbalance the business user base that floats Microsoft's financial boat. But it would also be the best thing the company could possibly do for its flagship product (and its mobile little sister).

Let's see some vision, guys. Please?

'Cause everything is rent...

I'll admit it - I'm not ready to be a homeowner yet.

I'm not ready financially. Gretchen and I have decades of higher education between us, and that comes with a cost. While she's still in school and we're living apart, buying a house would be crazy. Even once we move in together, it would be a tough sell, financially.

I'm not ready for the responsibility. I don't know how to fix minor plumbing catastrophes. I don't know (or much care) about proper lawn maintenance. I like having my lawn mown by the landlord, and my driveway plowed when the blizzards hit. I like being able to call in my broken water heater, and know that someone is taking care of it... and that it won't mean a hit on my checkbook.

I'm not ready for the commitment. Being tied down to a piece of property scares me. I've seen with one of my friends how hard it can be to move a house for a price you're happy with. With the next several years a big question mark, as my wife and I try to establish a life together for ourselves someplace, it doesn't make sense to be bogged down, even if I could joke about joining the "landed gentry." And with pastors (and possibly professors?) being more mobile than many middle class workers (and with housing still provided by many of our employers), I'm not sure owning a house will make sense down the road, either.

None of which is to rule out buying a house, if Gretchen and decide together that it's the right move for us. But it does make me want to shout a big "AMEN!" to Paul Krugman's recent column in the Times, questioning America's policy of promoting an "ownership society" of owner-occupied housing.

Why is it that my parents, friends, and parishioners are given a huge subsidy for owning their homes (deducting the interest on their mortgages come tax day), but we renters are given nothing but the finger by the IRS? What compelling government interest in home ownership justifies that kind of bias?

As Krugman points out, there are lots of arguments in favor of rental housing over against purchasing a home, particularly in tough economic times, and among workers who need to follow the jobs. He rightly wonders about the president's line of thought, when he utters in a speech: "If you own something, you have a vital stake in the future of our country." Don't renters have just as vital a stake in this country? Are we really only second-class citizens?

For now, both my wife and I rent, brazenly defying (out of necessity or out of choice) the government's preferred mode of living for us. And we, along with a whole lot of others, are paying a hefty price for being renters in an "ownership society." It's hard not to wonder why our government throws such huge amounts of money every year at discourging what is, for us right now, the best choice.

It's public policy, but is it a good policy for the public? Mark me down as unpersuaded.

Cow. Another cow.

Wow. In a scene right out of Twister, the Fargo Forum is reporting sightings of flying cows, sent airborne by exceptionally high storm winds this morning, just north of Valley City. That's maybe half an hour from where I used to live!

(Registration may be required at the Forum's site in order to view the article - sorry.)

Anna Carter Florence on the incredible, unbelievable gospel

The marvelous Anna Carter Florence, Associate Professor of Preaching and Worship at Columbia Theological Seminary, reflects on the good news we preachers have to bring and its astonishing nature, by considering the very first Easter "sermon" and its reception. This is the five-minute version of a lecture she presented at the Festival of Homiletics two weeks ago. Well worth your time!

(Sensitive readers, please note: Anna pulls no punches in her interpretation of the Greek word λῆρος - but the fact that it's coarse language is exactly her point.)

Brought to you by WorkingPreacher, a free and excellent lectionary tool by the folks at my alma mater, Luther Seminary.

Big gain, local pain

This is why it's so hard for government to make the hard choices on any number of challenging issues - the very real, large-scale benefits for the nation as a whole always come at the expense of a particular few on the local level.

GM announced yesterday that it will close four of its plants - including the one just down the road in Janesville - by 2010. Normally I'd be cheering the decision, based as it is in the American consumer's fading interest in the monstrously huge vehicles that have been GM's trade in stock for the last decade. It's a good sign that where personal virtue and concern for the environment aren't enough to affect a change, at long last there are economic incentives and disincentives that seem to be getting the job done.

There's no reason for the vast majority of drivers to be mounting these behemoths for their daily commute. My car (which is really not all that small) regularly vanishes in the parking lot, hidden in the canyons winding between the massive SUVs and pickups. On the freeway between E-ville and Gretchen's, I'm often cut off by vehicles weighing twice what mine does, with a single person in the cabin, working the wheel and the pedals as though he were Dale, Jr. - or maybe Evel Knievel. All the while, burning through irreplaceable fossil fuels at a rate that makes my head spin, and coughing out greenhouse gases like there's no tomorrow (and maybe helping to ensure the aptness of that simile).

It's no secret how I feel about all these large vehicles - unless you're running a farm or have some legitimate need for the hauling capacity they offer, there's really no excuse for them. They should never have become mainstream passenger vehicles in the first place. I couldn't be happier that Americans are abandoning their SUVs and trucks in favor of smaller, more fuel-efficient wheels. As much as I feel the pinch every time I make The Big Drive to see my wife, I fundamentally agree with Thomas Friedman: $4 gas is a good thing for America in the grand scheme of things, if we're only smart enough to use it to our advantage.

So we've got an instance of the market forcing GM's hand, where virtue and common sense had previously been unable to upend the profit motive. Hip, hip, hooray! Right?

Except it's hard to be too cheery about this development, when a lot of good jobs are going to be vanishing from our local market here in about a year. As a pastor, I know how hard it's been for people to find work. It's frustrating to think that there will be a few thousand more suddenly on the market. I wonder how many of them will eventually need to come to me or one of my colleagues, seeking assistance from the churches? How many will we be able to help?

Human sin leads to human pain, and there's been a whole lot of human sin (greed, envy, callousness, pride, lousy stewardship, and so forth) tied up in the Big Vehicle fad, both behind the wheel and behind the corporate desk. Could the plants that are being closed have been shifted over to some other, more sensible product before things got this far? It's a question we'll be left pondering here in southern Wisconsin for a long time.

The benefits of GM's announcement will be broad, and I'm glad for them... but I feel for the workers who are sacrificing their jobs today so that we'll have a cleaner, more fuel-efficient tomorrow.

Dean Kamen is my hero!

Those of you who know me are probably aware of my fascination obsession with the Segway Personal Transporter. I can't walk past one without getting giddy, and I'd dearly love to spend an afternoon someday rolling around Chicago with Gretchen on one of the various Segway tours to be found in the city.

You may or may not be aware that Dean Kamen, the genius inventer-cum-mad scientist behind Segway is much more than a one-hit wonder, and his most amazing inventions are aimed at restoring to the disabled much of what they have lost - mobility, agility, and the small but hugely important intangibles of human life and interaction that can be stolen by a lost limb or a back injury. His IBOT wheelchair, for example, is not only able to negotiate rough terrain and climb stairs... it's able to balance on two wheels, using the same gyroscopic technology that scoots campus security officers around the quad on a Segway, so that the IBOT's user is able to reach counters and cupboards, and even (here's the beautiful part) hold a conversation with another person at eye level.

That's what I love about how Dean's applied technology to medical issues - he seems to understand deep down that as cold and pragmatic as these robotic devices could be, there's something deeply human and humane in the power they have to improve people's lives.

Dean's latest invention, currently making the buzz rounds on the Internets, is an artificial limb he's calling "Luke" (if you're not sure why, ask Jeff or Shawn, or spend a weekend of quality time with the Star Wars trilogy). The video below shows the arm in action. You really just need to watch it.



I geeked out over Dean when the Segway came out. I was in awe of him when I read about IBOT. Now that I've seen "Luke," I've got a new personal hero.