Friday, July 22, 2011
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Friday, March 26, 2010
*Raises hand* I'll admit it.
Yes, I understand that technology costs money, but in today's world, technology isn't that expensive. It amazes me to learn that people are using outdated software, hardare, and networks.
Case in point: When I first started working at my new job, I didn't even have my own computer to start with. I shared with a guy from Sales who was mainly in the field. That was actually a fairly up-to-date computer. But when I was finally given my computer, I had to work with Office 2000, Outlook 2000, and just outdated tech. It was annoying especially since my laptop and internet at home is tons better.
It's almost as if company's are afraid to upgrade because either too much might change or things might get confusing, or a myriad of other reasons/excuses.
In my mind, it is more efficient for a company to be running on good technology. Now, don't get me wrong. I wouldn't expect every company to be running the top-of-the-line equipment for their network. But, it is in their best interest to be current.
Another issue with technology at work is the network. How many of you get annoyed when you try to download something you need, or maybe a different web browser and you get blocked by a pop-up that says something about needing Admin privileges?
I get annoyed.
I understand the concept behind requiring Admin approval for downloads, but it's not that practical. Most people today understand about malicious software and are for the most part careful when downloading.
It just makes it more appealing to work when you know you can "customize" your work environment without destroying your outdated computer/software or repeatedly calling IT for help.
Friday, March 19, 2010
About two months ago, I started playing World of Warcraft.
In the end, maybe you missed that one achieve, or didn't win the Need roll for an item you've been killing yourself to obtain, but you had fun doing it and enjoyed the people you were with and maybe made a couple new friends.
That's always a win in my book.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Obviously, we are unable to go back in time and change the past. But the fascination is how the past affects the future in ways we could never imagine--for better or worse.
Case in point, today I was thinking about my really good friend back in Montana and was reminiscing about how we had met. Then I made a crazy discovery. Are you ready for a story?
*settles down in his comfy armchair*
Some of you have heard part of this story before, but for those who have not, here we go. It was April of 2008 and I was all set to graduate from college in a couple weeks. Several friends and I had just gone to the spring play the college had put on and we wanted to head out to a restaurant to eat. Only four of us ended up going, and we headed off to Chili's. My three friends got something to eat, but I really didn't have enough money for a full meal, so I just got water. But then, as I was flipping randomly through the drinks menu because I was rather bored, a drink caught my eye, so I ordered it (and yes, I was 21). Now, understand, I went to a Christian college and all alcoholic drinking was prohibited as long as you were enrolled at the college (that meant, no matter if you were on campus or off campus, you would still get in trouble). My friends were a little uncomfortable, but I knew they wouldn't say anything. However, I did not factor in that sitting a couple booths behind us was another group from my school. One of the kids saw what I had ordered and called up the deans. To cut down the story, I ended up getting kicked out.
(Now, before you get all riled up about this, please understand that age didn't matter over the rules of the college. All that is in the past and I graduated the following year with honors, so no hard feelings. The story is told for background purposes.)
Anyway, after I got kicked out, I of course had to head back home. After a few days at home, my parents suggested I get a couple jobs so I could raise the money I needed to pay for my final semester. So I went back to KFC (I had worked there during highschool, and during college Christmas breaks) and then got a night job working as a delivery driver at Pizza Hut. While working at Pizza Hut, I met this girl that was just simply amazing and we ended up becoming very good friends both at work and outside of work and have stayed close to this day.
Now you're probably thinking, 'Ok, get to the point already.'
My point: If I had not made that ridiculous decision to buy that alcoholic drink at Chili's back in college, resulting in my expulsion, I would have most likely never worked at Pizza Hut and would have most likely never met this girl who became a very close friend and a light in my life. It is truly amazing how something that started out as a terrible decision ended with a friendship to last a lifetime. (Yay for alcohol? =P)
So, although we can not predict the future, we can control our present choices. And the cool part is, we have no idea where those choices will lead us.
Life is crazy, huh?
Thursday, November 5, 2009
And that leads me to today's blog of annoyance:
Tuesday's gubernatorial races, the media craze surrounding them, and the references made to President Obama.
For those of you who have no connection to the outside world, or don't know what "gubernatorial" means (heh, heh, it sure is fun to say/type though!), there were two governor races voted on this past Tuesday -- one in New Jersey and one in Virginia. The main talking points were the tight race in NJ, which has had a Democratic governor for a long time, and the huge lead the Republican candidate in Virginia had -- a state that had gone to Obama in the 2008 election.
Now, President Obama did some campaigning for both the Democratic incumbents -- and rightly so, being a Democrat. Obviously you want as many of your party in influential positions throughout the nation as you can get. But even with his strong backing, both states went to the Republicans (an almost unheard of event in NJ!).
Now, much of the media, especially FoxNews (and now a collective cringe), jumped on this outcome as possibly a hit against the president's policies and questioning if this was a hint of the 2010 Senate/House races.
**Ok, I want to interject here that I watch FoxNews alongside CNN and I also read the NYTimes and the Wall Street Journal. Just want to make clear there is no bias or anything here. Pure opinion.**
Now, here is where I get annoyed. The media keeps trying to tie in the outcome of these gubernatorial races with President Obama's policies. They keep asking the question, "Is this an indication of the voters turning back from supporting Obama as a result of some of the policies he is suggesting?" (More or less the standard question). Well, first off, these are STATE races based on STATE issues. It is my firm belief that Obama's policies had little to do with the way the voting went in NJ and Virginia, especially NJ.
In NJ, it was more or less a choice between the lesser of two evils. And after the whole corruption scandal recently, the voters decided on a change, even though the margin of victory wasn't huge.
In Virginia, a long-standing "purple" state, voters decided to go with a Republican governor again after not being satisfied with the job done by the Democratic incumbent. No real surprise here, in my opinion.
The crux of this annoyance is how the media kept harping on how the outcomes of the state elections reflected a snub on President Obama. In my opinion, voters were more concerned about the issues in their respective states at this point in time -- jobs, taxes, etc. Yes, Obama has been working on national issues concerning this, but at this point in time, the voters were focused on state issues -- what was going on right at home.
So, it is just annoying to me to read and listen to the news constantly questioning the president on issues on the state level!
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Anyway, I know what you are thinking. 'What kind of title is THAT?' Well, it's a title that I tried to make witty and humerous without taking up the maximum title space. But I'm not here to write about the title. I'm writing about what the title means. So, let's begin...
This blog could be used against several TV shows, but I'm focusing on one in particular, mainly because I'm a fan of the parent show. I'm sure many of you have either seen or at least heard of this show:
Whoa! What is this? NCIS goes to Los Angeles? Is that comparable to CSI going to Miami? I digress...
Anyway, after falling in love with the regular NCIS, I figured this new show would be pretty engaging, exciting, humerous, and everything you would expect from the parent show. Um...not so much. Sad to say, after two episodes, NCIS:LA as failed to really catch my attention. The premiere was lackluster at best, and the ensuing episode was just as bland.
Reason 1: Everyone is exactly the same, and what I mean by that is, there may be diversity in roles of the actors, but their characters', well, characteristics, are almost identical. There is not much interaction between the characters. They just seem to know everything about everyone and just take down bad guys. In contrast to the original NCIS, there is no "computer nerd", no "male chauvinist", no "can't-stop-thinking-of-girls guy", and no "goth forensic scientist", to name a few. NCIS:LA's characters just lack diversity in this way which causes a lack of true interaction between them. For those of you who have seen this show, maybe you differ in opinion, but this is what I think.
Reason 2: Did I miss something? Are these people undercover? They must be because none of them own a badge. Oh, and they have the worst crime scene investigation techniques ever. As of yet, I haven't seen the use of rubber gloves in a crime scene area or when combing through a suspect's house. Where is the professionality?! They just tell people they're NCIS and everyone just believes them! Hello!
Reason 3: If you ever thought NCIS was predictable (which I personally don't), then you'll be able to figure out the ending (whodunit) of NCIS:LA in the first two minutes. Ok, maybe I'm exaggerating a bit, but still, the show is pretty straightforward in its approach. Unfortunately, there are not many twists and turns yet. Granted only two episodes have concluded, but still, usually the premiere is meant to lure the viewer into watching more of the series. NCIS:LA did not really accomplish that goal, at least in my eyes.
Just because the original show was amazing does not mean the spinoff of it will be just as amazing. (There can be a lot of relation to this on the movie side of things). I'm not saying it shouldn't be done, but when you're pitting the spinoff against its parent show, please make sure it's at least as good if not better. (Especially if they air back-to-back on the same network on the same night!)
Now, I understand this show is just starting out, so I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt. Maybe it will get better and better as the show continues -- one can only hope. And for those of you out there who have seen it and liked it, that is completely fine. I'm more or less just pointing out several issues I've had with the show so far.
So, here's to hoping that this TV show spinoff turns things around and really becomes the blockbuster show people think it will be.
(Please comment below! Thanks)