I drive a Lexus. It doesn't have a huge premium on it, and I bought mine after being disenchanted with the huge premium BMW is now demanding for their 3 series. Prior this car, I've been a lifelong BMW driver. I'm a hard rock guitarist, a photographer, a writer. I date exotic dancers, I like video games, and I hate the suburbs. I don't need hair plugs, and I don't need viagra, and I certainly don't need misapplied car owner stereotypes.
I wonder how they plan on implementing this. Unless Lexus is planning on streaming these ads into the car using something like an OnStar service, it seems their only route is to bombard owners with a year's worth of pre-made content via the nav computer upgrades Lexus charges like $300+ for.
The iMac is like a notebook computer though. You can't really fault a laptop for having no upgrade path and no ability to play the next generation of games.
I'd love to see the iMac turned into a gaming rig. Something which retains the sleek all-in-one form factor, but which comes with an easily user-accessible port for switching out graphics cards. But given the side of gaming graphics cards today, is that even feasible?
On one hand, it's a bit like humanitarian groups buying ad space asking for us to step up and do something about Darfur; but on another hand, it's nothing like humanitarian groups doing this because in the case of Israel, there are a couple of extra qualifiers:
1) Israel has an ongoing decisive victory against anti-Israeli groups. Look at the death tolls, the squeeze that Israel maintains on the occupied territories both economically and militarily, the mounting UN criticism against Israel, the charges of human rights violations by the Israeli state, etc.
2) These ads are asking for the involvement by American citizens, not the government. In a manner of speaking, these ads are asking that we help Israel fight this one alongside them.
3) It is often noted that our government is in the pocket of the Israeli lobby. Candidates for federal office in this country feel a special need to show public solidarity with pro-Israeli and Jewish groups in a way they don't feel with Greek, Russian, Persian, or African American groups. Israel features prominently in so many discussions in American politics. Some people, perhaps many, might be offended that we feel this mandatory responsibility to Israel that we don't feel to other nations.
This all just a stab in the dark here. Would the OP be equally offended if pro-Palestinian groups advertised their side? Actually, I wonder how Americans in general would react to a spot ads by Palestinian groups.
What do you think about the iMac? It's Apple's product of choice for consumers who need more than the Mini, but less than the Mac Pro. Of course, it suffers from the similar limitations as the Mini. Hardware upgrades are a pain in the ass, though they are possible -- potentially messy, but possible.
I too would like to see a mini-tower, but the only two components I find myself wanting to upgrade are video capture cards, video cards, and hard drives. I'd love to see something in the form factor of a PowerPC G4 Cube, though necessarily taller.
Notice, I'm talking about NRA stereotypes here: people who regularly hunt and have some kind of survival instinct. I'm talking about people who lack proper training.
I meant that I'm not talking about the NRA stereotype.
Umm, where the hell do you live? There's several regions of this country where your just as likely to be called a traitor if you aren't ashamed of the President.
I didn't say there are no places in the US where people still believe being patriotic means putting your country before your government, but you do recognize that at least perceptually, to be patriotic now is defined conventionally as being loyal and somewhat unquestioning to the government, right?
Because most sane people who aren't party hacks realize that each election isn't determining the fate of humanity?
I was talking about the very same pundits and politicians who in one breath screaming the end is nigh and then in the next giggle and laugh and act like it's all in good fun. One of the last SNL sketches on the VP debate comes to mind. The guy portraying Joe Biden says something to the effect of, "John McCain is my best friend. I love him. If I were to be stranded on an island with anyone, it would be him. I get a twinkle in my eye whenever he walks into the room... but he is a fucking maniac who bites the heads off puppies and pisses into people's Honda civics!" I'm paraphrasing here. And these last two election cycles were nothing like previous ones in recent times. You could argue they have much in common with the Reagan/Carter campaign.
What are you basing this on? Most of the citizens I know with guns are better shots than the local police -- which admittedly isn't saying much, but I'd like to know what you are basing these assumptions on. I'm basing this on the commonality of accidental shootings. But if you want to back me into a corner, I'll say it: gun ownership does not imply gun expertise and vice versa. Merely owning a gun and taking it out to a range will not guarantee these people are particularly capable of using it in defense against a human being. Notice, I'm talking about NRA stereotypes here: people who regularly hunt and have some kind of survival instinct. I'm talking about people who lack proper training.
Protect you from what?
Protect me from the existential threat that gun ownership in America is supposed to help me against. You know what I'm talking about, whether it's the old King George/Russians/Chinese crossing the ocean argument or the conventional home intruder argument. Yes, I noticed that armed store owners in LA were relatively safer.
Just to remind you, I agree with responsible gun ownership. I just take issue with the fantasy behind the notion that an armed civilian populace will protect us in the even that the government turns tyrannical. We have guns. A growing number of people appear to believe this government is tyrannical. A growing number of people now believe that there is at least one shadow government of political movement which transcends party lines influencing the government (i.e., the neo-conservative movement). The government has told us to watch our neighbors and turned people in we think are suspicious. Where exactly is the armed resistance then? My point is, gun ownership or not, we're going to stay home and watch cable TV no matter what... unless they take that away from us.
I wasn't thinking about Waco -- a bit earlier actually, I want to say Ruby Ridge. But I agree with you about BD; it seems like they just wanted to be left alone. And that did go down as a tragic blunder on the side of the government, but even that is an illustration of a realistic outcome even where the armed civilians aren't fighting back.
I'm a gun ownership supporter, and I agree with you philosophically, but I have to say this.
You don't seriously think a pack of armed citizens could actually stop the government from tyrannically taking away its rights do you? We've seen how successful "militia" groups have been when put face to face with ATF. If we're to believe the 9/11 stories, at least one plane load of Americans citizens didn't even have the guts to unite and take down hijackers armed with sporks and box cutters.
And look at our rights being taken away now... many citizens protested, but most just bitched and moaned and carried on with their lives with absolutely no willingness to go through the hell that protestors do. And if you haven't noticed, this generation by and large defines patriotism as being loyal to the government and going along with whatever it commands. You can't even say you're ashamed of your president without the public lashing out against you and branding you a traitor.
In the last two election cycles, we watched citizens, pundits, and politicians each call the "other guy" a dangerous lunatic with dangerous connections whose dangerously wrong ideas will bring about the end of life on our continent and perhaps the world. And in the next breath, these same people screaming that the end was nigh, made low-brow jokes about those candidates. If each election determines the fate of humanity, why do we still laugh and sing, and act as if it's business as usual?
I think the reality is that if things should ever come to Nazi Germany here in the US, the vast majority of Americans will shit their pants and hope that by buying a new iPod or pledging allegiance to a favorite cable news company, they will be left alone.
And when the tanks and stormtroopers move into suburbia, of those Americans who do own guns, more than half of them will shoot their loved ones in the faces, blow out their TVs, accidentally kill a neighbor, or take out a street lamp. Maybe one or two partisans will actually hit the broadside of a large armored vehicle or defend a street for a few hours. But maybe, just maybe, the ordinary citizens that comprise our military will refuse to take those tanks into suburbia too.
Sorry, my basic rifle marksmanship training came courtesy of the Army; I don't think I'd trust any armed civilian militia to protect me. The armed citizenry of the 18th century had something the armed citizenry of the 21st lacks: a sense of duty to the higher cause of Liberty and a real, qualified distrust of our leaders rather than manufactured political angst.
I understand this isn't you're suggestion and people are almost attacking you for the message... but I don't know, a flat ended knife? I've fairly strong. I'm pretty sure I can drive a flat ended knife into another man in one very easy go... like butter... delicious fattening butter.
Then those doctors have never prepared a meal more complicated than a microwave dinner. I have several different kinds of knives, and I use them properly. Pointed knives have a useful, necessary function as a proper chef's knife.
What's the criminal punishment in the UK for a teenager who is found carrying a knife, incidentally?
BBC America has carried both programs in the US where I am, and here it's all branded as being BBC America as opposed to Sky or Channel 4, at least as I can remember. Just checked my DVDs to be sure, and Hex was indeed BBC.
Will it be a variety show? K-9 interviews a few celebrities, and once in a while, Tom Baker shows up to prank call random people and talk about the TARDIS?
Is there any indication that this is a general theme in BBC programming? I watch a lot of BBC programs, much of it though is older programs like "Keeping up Appearances", "My Family", "Footballers' Wives", Spooks (MI-5), etc." I'm seeing a lot of youth oriented programs like Hex and Skins, but BBC doesn't seem to me like it's following CW in America. Look at Footballer's Wives for instance, it has Joan Collins.
I began with Baker too during the syndicated episodes that followed in the late '70s. And I've been a Sarah Jane nut all my life; but I really like Tennant a lot. I think he might be my favorite. Don't know about him being the best, but almost certainly my favorite. Very quirky and comical, and at times, you can see a hint of madness in his eyes. I like my Time Lords to walk a thin line.
Perhaps they only seem more outgoing and fun because they share your interest in renaissance fairs, Babylon 5, and Dungeons & Dragons campaigns set beyond the Forgotten Realms?
I kid, I kid! *ducks*
I've generally found that it's the extroverted non-geeks who seem to have the hardest time making decisions and agreeing on stuff. Consider Congress.
Playing Devil's advocate here; there's one possible reason: to create buzz. Look at some of the more creative viral marketing strategies used in television and fashion. If Microsoft intentionally leaked Windows 7, then they did it in order to generate buzz for what they are confident will be a well-received product. They didn't do it in order to field test the OS. Microsoft has beta testers, after all.
The Internet is ripe with so-called "tech journalists" who will demo pirated copies of Windows 7, write about how great it is; and that will cause mainstream media in an effort to get the scoop to report the same thing. Eventually consumers are being sold on the idea that there is a positive future for Windows. No reason to go Macintosh.
That said, intentionally leaking Windows 7, not even beta, undercuts Vista. If Windows 7 beta *is* that good, consumers might reasonably hold off on Vista upgrades and wait for W7. Suddenly Microsoft is relying on the profits from W7 to help pay for the losses over Vista. Seems way to risky. And barring any evidence of this, it's a non-story.
Why not? It's not like career software pirates are known for their exceptional taste. They'll run any zero-day operating system upload they can get their hands just so they can call themselves 'leet.
This does seem to be the question. It seems to me that if you're going to profile passengers, then logically, you must focus on candidates who are most likely to be Islamic terrorists. This means focusing on passengers who are most likely Muslim. While this may no longer be politically incorrect in America, it is still culturally traumatic. Moreover, the logic behind it breaks down immediately once you begin practicing the policy. There are caucasian people of middle-class background who are Muslim, and there are arabic-speaking people of middle-eastern background who are Christians. There are people who look like our favorite stereotypes for scary insane foreigners (Sikhs for example) who are neither middle-eastern nor Muslim.
We could do a white list of sorts by greenlighting people who are 99.9% mostly likely not Islamic terrorists: young children of any heritage, the very elderly, Christian clergy, members of Federal government, etc. But then in doing so we are unequally applying a policy. So as a compromise we get a half-assed policy designed to harass enough senators, pregnant mothers, toddlers, and senile elderly so that passengers of middle-eastern/southeast asian/muslim/sikh backgrounds can't whine too loudly about profiling.
I never even considered using IE 3, except to download Netscape. That was the rule back then. I'm sure I'm not the only person who held on to Netscape 3 until after after IE 5 came out. I think Netscape Communicator was the result of Netscape Constellation right? I remember being excited at that at least.
No. Obviously they have to be good businessmen, and that entails being motivated by profit. They would be irresponsible not too, but I'm talking about the motivations that drive their personalities. Everyone who's known Bill Gates since his teen years knows about how intensely competitive Bill is. He loves to win. If the objective of the game is money, then his goal is to obtain the most. If the objective is just being dominant in a particular segment, even at a loss, then Bill will pursue that. As for Steve Jobs, from the very beginning of Apple, he was motivated by a desire to overthrow IBM and HP. It went beyond mere enthusiasm. It was evangelism. And, of course, I fell in love with like many other Apple diehards.
Yeah, it's sad that he's not going to do those keynotes anymore. I hope it's not for the reasons the rumor mill has been churning out because his keynotes are always something I look forward to.
Okay, I read your technical gripes as a statement on Windows innovation slowing down to a crawl while other OSen are going 64-bit, OS plurality (for lack of a better phrase), etc.
I certainly agree with you that Microsoft has a problem of having too many differentiated products lines in the Windows family. Too much product, too much confusion, and too much cost due to redundancies associated with supporting the products (evangelism + after sales support).
I'd like to see Windows return to just a two server and workstation models for its PC market. And I'd even entertain the idea of a la carte features.
Slashdot Mirror
I drive a Lexus. It doesn't have a huge premium on it, and I bought mine after being disenchanted with the huge premium BMW is now demanding for their 3 series. Prior this car, I've been a lifelong BMW driver. I'm a hard rock guitarist, a photographer, a writer. I date exotic dancers, I like video games, and I hate the suburbs. I don't need hair plugs, and I don't need viagra, and I certainly don't need misapplied car owner stereotypes.
I wonder how they plan on implementing this. Unless Lexus is planning on streaming these ads into the car using something like an OnStar service, it seems their only route is to bombard owners with a year's worth of pre-made content via the nav computer upgrades Lexus charges like $300+ for.
The iMac is like a notebook computer though. You can't really fault a laptop for having no upgrade path and no ability to play the next generation of games.
I'd love to see the iMac turned into a gaming rig. Something which retains the sleek all-in-one form factor, but which comes with an easily user-accessible port for switching out graphics cards. But given the side of gaming graphics cards today, is that even feasible?
On one hand, it's a bit like humanitarian groups buying ad space asking for us to step up and do something about Darfur; but on another hand, it's nothing like humanitarian groups doing this because in the case of Israel, there are a couple of extra qualifiers:
1) Israel has an ongoing decisive victory against anti-Israeli groups. Look at the death tolls, the squeeze that Israel maintains on the occupied territories both economically and militarily, the mounting UN criticism against Israel, the charges of human rights violations by the Israeli state, etc.
2) These ads are asking for the involvement by American citizens, not the government. In a manner of speaking, these ads are asking that we help Israel fight this one alongside them.
3) It is often noted that our government is in the pocket of the Israeli lobby. Candidates for federal office in this country feel a special need to show public solidarity with pro-Israeli and Jewish groups in a way they don't feel with Greek, Russian, Persian, or African American groups. Israel features prominently in so many discussions in American politics. Some people, perhaps many, might be offended that we feel this mandatory responsibility to Israel that we don't feel to other nations.
This all just a stab in the dark here. Would the OP be equally offended if pro-Palestinian groups advertised their side? Actually, I wonder how Americans in general would react to a spot ads by Palestinian groups.
What do you think about the iMac? It's Apple's product of choice for consumers who need more than the Mini, but less than the Mac Pro. Of course, it suffers from the similar limitations as the Mini. Hardware upgrades are a pain in the ass, though they are possible -- potentially messy, but possible.
I too would like to see a mini-tower, but the only two components I find myself wanting to upgrade are video capture cards, video cards, and hard drives. I'd love to see something in the form factor of a PowerPC G4 Cube, though necessarily taller.
Er sorry...
Notice, I'm talking about NRA stereotypes here: people who regularly hunt and have some kind of survival instinct. I'm talking about people who lack proper training.
I meant that I'm not talking about the NRA stereotype.
Umm, where the hell do you live? There's several regions of this country where your just as likely to be called a traitor if you aren't ashamed of the President.
I didn't say there are no places in the US where people still believe being patriotic means putting your country before your government, but you do recognize that at least perceptually, to be patriotic now is defined conventionally as being loyal and somewhat unquestioning to the government, right?
Because most sane people who aren't party hacks realize that each election isn't determining the fate of humanity?
I was talking about the very same pundits and politicians who in one breath screaming the end is nigh and then in the next giggle and laugh and act like it's all in good fun. One of the last SNL sketches on the VP debate comes to mind. The guy portraying Joe Biden says something to the effect of, "John McCain is my best friend. I love him. If I were to be stranded on an island with anyone, it would be him. I get a twinkle in my eye whenever he walks into the room... but he is a fucking maniac who bites the heads off puppies and pisses into people's Honda civics!" I'm paraphrasing here. And these last two election cycles were nothing like previous ones in recent times. You could argue they have much in common with the Reagan/Carter campaign.
What are you basing this on? Most of the citizens I know with guns are better shots than the local police -- which admittedly isn't saying much, but I'd like to know what you are basing these assumptions on. I'm basing this on the commonality of accidental shootings. But if you want to back me into a corner, I'll say it: gun ownership does not imply gun expertise and vice versa. Merely owning a gun and taking it out to a range will not guarantee these people are particularly capable of using it in defense against a human being. Notice, I'm talking about NRA stereotypes here: people who regularly hunt and have some kind of survival instinct. I'm talking about people who lack proper training.
Protect you from what?
Protect me from the existential threat that gun ownership in America is supposed to help me against. You know what I'm talking about, whether it's the old King George/Russians/Chinese crossing the ocean argument or the conventional home intruder argument. Yes, I noticed that armed store owners in LA were relatively safer.
Just to remind you, I agree with responsible gun ownership. I just take issue with the fantasy behind the notion that an armed civilian populace will protect us in the even that the government turns tyrannical. We have guns. A growing number of people appear to believe this government is tyrannical. A growing number of people now believe that there is at least one shadow government of political movement which transcends party lines influencing the government (i.e., the neo-conservative movement). The government has told us to watch our neighbors and turned people in we think are suspicious. Where exactly is the armed resistance then? My point is, gun ownership or not, we're going to stay home and watch cable TV no matter what... unless they take that away from us.
I wasn't thinking about Waco -- a bit earlier actually, I want to say Ruby Ridge. But I agree with you about BD; it seems like they just wanted to be left alone. And that did go down as a tragic blunder on the side of the government, but even that is an illustration of a realistic outcome even where the armed civilians aren't fighting back.
I'm a gun ownership supporter, and I agree with you philosophically, but I have to say this.
You don't seriously think a pack of armed citizens could actually stop the government from tyrannically taking away its rights do you? We've seen how successful "militia" groups have been when put face to face with ATF. If we're to believe the 9/11 stories, at least one plane load of Americans citizens didn't even have the guts to unite and take down hijackers armed with sporks and box cutters.
And look at our rights being taken away now... many citizens protested, but most just bitched and moaned and carried on with their lives with absolutely no willingness to go through the hell that protestors do. And if you haven't noticed, this generation by and large defines patriotism as being loyal to the government and going along with whatever it commands. You can't even say you're ashamed of your president without the public lashing out against you and branding you a traitor.
In the last two election cycles, we watched citizens, pundits, and politicians each call the "other guy" a dangerous lunatic with dangerous connections whose dangerously wrong ideas will bring about the end of life on our continent and perhaps the world. And in the next breath, these same people screaming that the end was nigh, made low-brow jokes about those candidates. If each election determines the fate of humanity, why do we still laugh and sing, and act as if it's business as usual?
I think the reality is that if things should ever come to Nazi Germany here in the US, the vast majority of Americans will shit their pants and hope that by buying a new iPod or pledging allegiance to a favorite cable news company, they will be left alone.
And when the tanks and stormtroopers move into suburbia, of those Americans who do own guns, more than half of them will shoot their loved ones in the faces, blow out their TVs, accidentally kill a neighbor, or take out a street lamp. Maybe one or two partisans will actually hit the broadside of a large armored vehicle or defend a street for a few hours. But maybe, just maybe, the ordinary citizens that comprise our military will refuse to take those tanks into suburbia too.
Sorry, my basic rifle marksmanship training came courtesy of the Army; I don't think I'd trust any armed civilian militia to protect me. The armed citizenry of the 18th century had something the armed citizenry of the 21st lacks: a sense of duty to the higher cause of Liberty and a real, qualified distrust of our leaders rather than manufactured political angst.
I understand this isn't you're suggestion and people are almost attacking you for the message... but I don't know, a flat ended knife? I've fairly strong. I'm pretty sure I can drive a flat ended knife into another man in one very easy go... like butter... delicious fattening butter.
That wasn't creepy much was it?
Then those doctors have never prepared a meal more complicated than a microwave dinner. I have several different kinds of knives, and I use them properly. Pointed knives have a useful, necessary function as a proper chef's knife.
What's the criminal punishment in the UK for a teenager who is found carrying a knife, incidentally?
BBC America has carried both programs in the US where I am, and here it's all branded as being BBC America as opposed to Sky or Channel 4, at least as I can remember. Just checked my DVDs to be sure, and Hex was indeed BBC.
*sigh*
So once again DJ Jazzy Jeff is left being only able to afford microwave popcorn for dinner because Will won't get him into television?
That's just silly. The Fresh Prince can't possibly play the Doctor. Everybody knows he's busy being Mr. Miyagi for the new Karate Kid!
I'd personally go for Jenny Agutter myself, but with long hair again and not the chop she had when she was in Spooks. Any fans?
I've noticed this too. It is kinda odd. I suppose Torchwood fills a gap left by X Files, maybe. I'm surprised that Hex didn't catch on in the US.
As for Batman. I don't know. I always thought that Val Kilmer and George Clooney not being Batman was self-explanatory. :D
Will it be a variety show? K-9 interviews a few celebrities, and once in a while, Tom Baker shows up to prank call random people and talk about the TARDIS?
Is there any indication that this is a general theme in BBC programming? I watch a lot of BBC programs, much of it though is older programs like "Keeping up Appearances", "My Family", "Footballers' Wives", Spooks (MI-5), etc." I'm seeing a lot of youth oriented programs like Hex and Skins, but BBC doesn't seem to me like it's following CW in America. Look at Footballer's Wives for instance, it has Joan Collins.
I began with Baker too during the syndicated episodes that followed in the late '70s. And I've been a Sarah Jane nut all my life; but I really like Tennant a lot. I think he might be my favorite. Don't know about him being the best, but almost certainly my favorite. Very quirky and comical, and at times, you can see a hint of madness in his eyes. I like my Time Lords to walk a thin line.
Perhaps they only seem more outgoing and fun because they share your interest in renaissance fairs, Babylon 5, and Dungeons & Dragons campaigns set beyond the Forgotten Realms?
I kid, I kid! *ducks*
I've generally found that it's the extroverted non-geeks who seem to have the hardest time making decisions and agreeing on stuff. Consider Congress.
Playing Devil's advocate here; there's one possible reason: to create buzz. Look at some of the more creative viral marketing strategies used in television and fashion. If Microsoft intentionally leaked Windows 7, then they did it in order to generate buzz for what they are confident will be a well-received product. They didn't do it in order to field test the OS. Microsoft has beta testers, after all.
The Internet is ripe with so-called "tech journalists" who will demo pirated copies of Windows 7, write about how great it is; and that will cause mainstream media in an effort to get the scoop to report the same thing. Eventually consumers are being sold on the idea that there is a positive future for Windows. No reason to go Macintosh.
That said, intentionally leaking Windows 7, not even beta, undercuts Vista. If Windows 7 beta *is* that good, consumers might reasonably hold off on Vista upgrades and wait for W7. Suddenly Microsoft is relying on the profits from W7 to help pay for the losses over Vista. Seems way to risky. And barring any evidence of this, it's a non-story.
Why not? It's not like career software pirates are known for their exceptional taste. They'll run any zero-day operating system upload they can get their hands just so they can call themselves 'leet.
This does seem to be the question. It seems to me that if you're going to profile passengers, then logically, you must focus on candidates who are most likely to be Islamic terrorists. This means focusing on passengers who are most likely Muslim. While this may no longer be politically incorrect in America, it is still culturally traumatic. Moreover, the logic behind it breaks down immediately once you begin practicing the policy. There are caucasian people of middle-class background who are Muslim, and there are arabic-speaking people of middle-eastern background who are Christians. There are people who look like our favorite stereotypes for scary insane foreigners (Sikhs for example) who are neither middle-eastern nor Muslim.
We could do a white list of sorts by greenlighting people who are 99.9% mostly likely not Islamic terrorists: young children of any heritage, the very elderly, Christian clergy, members of Federal government, etc. But then in doing so we are unequally applying a policy. So as a compromise we get a half-assed policy designed to harass enough senators, pregnant mothers, toddlers, and senile elderly so that passengers of middle-eastern/southeast asian/muslim/sikh backgrounds can't whine too loudly about profiling.
I never even considered using IE 3, except to download Netscape. That was the rule back then. I'm sure I'm not the only person who held on to Netscape 3 until after after IE 5 came out. I think Netscape Communicator was the result of Netscape Constellation right? I remember being excited at that at least.
No. Obviously they have to be good businessmen, and that entails being motivated by profit. They would be irresponsible not too, but I'm talking about the motivations that drive their personalities. Everyone who's known Bill Gates since his teen years knows about how intensely competitive Bill is. He loves to win. If the objective of the game is money, then his goal is to obtain the most. If the objective is just being dominant in a particular segment, even at a loss, then Bill will pursue that. As for Steve Jobs, from the very beginning of Apple, he was motivated by a desire to overthrow IBM and HP. It went beyond mere enthusiasm. It was evangelism. And, of course, I fell in love with like many other Apple diehards.
Yeah, it's sad that he's not going to do those keynotes anymore. I hope it's not for the reasons the rumor mill has been churning out because his keynotes are always something I look forward to.
Okay, I read your technical gripes as a statement on Windows innovation slowing down to a crawl while other OSen are going 64-bit, OS plurality (for lack of a better phrase), etc.
I certainly agree with you that Microsoft has a problem of having too many differentiated products lines in the Windows family. Too much product, too much confusion, and too much cost due to redundancies associated with supporting the products (evangelism + after sales support).
I'd like to see Windows return to just a two server and workstation models for its PC market. And I'd even entertain the idea of a la carte features.