Why I will (probably) be a movie pirate

OK, here's the scoop. I'm really looking forward to The Avengers. I mean, highlight of the summer movie season, willing to go to a theater for it-level. Which I don't normally do. I watched the two Iron Man movies, and they were a blast. But I hadn't been big on the Marvel franchise in general. But now that Avengers looks so butt-kicking, I decided I need to watch the other three films in the canon over the next few weeks.

I watched Thor in late March and really liked it. So now that leaves me with the second Hulk film (the first one was pre-modern Marvel canon), and Captain America. After I watched Thor, I flipped through iTunes and thought about renting Captain America right then and there. But not having any idea when I could watch it, I decided to hold off on the rental until I knew I'd be able to watch it. This was going to be the weekend.

So yesterday I check the rental, and it's now out of rental window and only available for purchase. Sorry, not going to happen. Here's the problem to me. I don't want to own a digital copy of Captain America forever and ever. I'd really like to watch it, and I have no problem paying $4-$5 for the privilege of doing so. $20 for a forever copy, though, not gonna happen. So the oddities of the studio licensing systems (it's not iTunes' fault) are trying to push me to find an illegal source for the movie so I can watch it before I go to a theater to see the next film in the series. How does this help the movie studios?

Look, it should just be simple. You open a movie in the theater. It runs however long it runs. It then goes into a short window when you can buy it on disk or digital - about a month or so at most - and that way you can monetize the folks who either want to own it or can't wait to rent it. Then you go rental (digital and disc), and then a month or so after that you let Netflix and the other "free" streaming services have it. Plus then the TV channels can get it. Simple, effective, maximizes revenue, and as a result should cut down piracy.

Hollywood, I'd like to pay you to see Captain America this weekend. You don't seem to want my money, though.

iPad (3)

So I have a Nuevo iPad in my home. Nice device. Here, after about 2 weeks, is my initial take on it:

• The feel is essentially identical. Even though it weighs a little bit more, I haven't really noticed.
• The new Retina screen? Amazing. Today, I worked on an iPad 3 and a original iPad side-by-side while doing a customer upgrade. I started on the new one. When I then went to the old one, it seemed blurry and fuzzy by comparison. Two weeks ago, that display looked state-of-the-art. That says it all in that area.
• I haven't been on LTE that much. The signal is kinda weak anywhere in Salem but the downtown. I was using it Monday night at a School Committee meeting, though, and it is just as fast as advertised. A few days prior I was at another school for a meeting with it, in a pocket of known bad reception. All I could get there, a half-mile away from where I had great LTE, was a weak 3G signal at best. YMMV.
• Yep, it runs a wee bit warmer in the back. You can feel it, though barely - it hasn't been warm enough to cause any discomfort. I've played games for at most about a half-hour at a stretch so far. Might warm up more if I played longer, but indications are not so much.
• Battery life is about the same. But charging time is longer. I'm kind of a battery anxiety kind of guy, so I worry about that. Charging time is longer. As a result, I leave it plugged in whenever I'm not using it, pretty much.
• Related - you could leave your iPad connected to a regular iPhone power brick before and it would charge OK so long as the screen was off. Not so much now with the new model.
• The extra 512MB of RAM really helps, especially when swapping apps or tabbing web pages. Way less reloading/relaunching.

In all, a great device. If you have an iPad 1, you likely want one of these. If you have a 2, it's iffy (if you read a lot on it, that's the tiebreaker). If you don't have a tablet and want one, getting anything other than a Nuevo iPad is just trying to make a political point.

Now that I've had a look-see

So "The New iPad"is upon us. Last night's blog post talked about what I got right - an essential part of punditry! Today, I'll talk a little bit about What It All Means (the other ingredient). This will be brief, since nobody pays me directly for this stuff and I have work to do today. But I think it'll get the point across.

First of all - there are already a host of stories out there about how this is an "underwhelming" upgrade. Ignore them. It's mostly page view trolling. Realistically, Apple isn't going to go crazy with spec upgrades in a single year. Why? They don't have to. What Apple is doing as the dominant player is setting the bar. In order to get any traction, competing makers have to meet or exceed the specs of the iPad while undercutting the costs.

Virtually none of them can do that. The Nook and Kindle Fire are competitive, but in a market that Apple is choosing not to play in directly. Apple's way of attacking that market is by keeping the iPad 2 and slashing the price - the iPad 2 is very competitive with the older generation hardware that the 7-inch tablets are mainly built with. So the new iPad model is mainly targeted at tablets that don't exist yet. Just like the iPad 2 was a year ago.

First-mover advantage for Apple lets them skate to where the puck is going, and then already be heading elsewhere by the time the other players arrive. (I know that's a little tortured, but it's early and I haven't had coffee yet - bear with me)

Besides this, is it a compelling upgrade? Well, I think so. If you are a new buyer Apple has the best screen anywhere, 4G capability, and the best ecosystem. They also have the best prices in the 9-inch category. If you have an original iPad this is enormously faster and has a great screen, at lighter weight. If you have an iPad 2 the new model is faster and brings the new screen to the party. Is it evolutionary? Of course it is. But when you get it mostly right the first time you don't have to do a ton from year to year. Just keep it out in front.

In terms of features, we have the added horsepower, the drastically improved screen, more RAM, and Nuance dictation built-in. I'd say that gets us by for now.

One other thing worth noting - Each iPad is basically good for 2 media events per year. One for the hardware, and one for the next version of the software. And the media event for the software won't be until June. This iPad ships with iOS 5.1, an incremental upgrade to last years' iOS 5. And a host of new/improved apps. That's enough for now on the topic. More after I have one in my hands a week from now!

(lastly, for those following my other career - I'm not worried about iPads for the city, because I've already got my own... I'm just worried about the software suite.)

How did I do?

Time to check my predictions from the iPad into today...

- Retina Display: Yep. Nailed it. That was easy.

- More RAM: Not sure until they get into users' hands. But I say 1GB still.

- Form factor: No change. Minor thickened increase, less than 1mm. I'm pretty sure all the old cases will fit.

- A6: I give myself a 50%. The A5X does have 4 cores for graphics, but 2 for processing. Probably up clocked a little, too.

- LTE: I thought they'd hold off when I published this, but a week later I decided I was wrong and they would. Glad that worked out, but I still count it as a miss.

- Better cameras: Nailed it on the rear camera. May have been wrong on the front, we'll see when they ship.

- Storage: Right again. No 128GB model.

- Siri: No Siri (nailed that), but we get dictation. That's a nice feature add.

- Pricing: Got that one right. Got the iPad 2 staying behind with a price cut, too.

That's 6.5 right, 1.5 wrong, and 1 TBD. Could lose another half-point if the front camera is identical. I'd say that was pretty good - punditry, here I come!

The future of journalism?

There have been a few stories recently about AOL's Patch "hyperlocal" news websites. Well, I've browsed a few (well, more than a few) Patch sites, and read the coverage of them. I've also been an active poster in the past on our own Salem Patch, and in both my public life and private life I interact with most of the Salem Patch employees and contributors. So I'm a little biased. But here's my take:
Patch, in general, is a neat concept and long-term I think it's the future of mainstream media. There will always be room for regional and national newspapers. But most people have online access nowadays, and mostly they care about what's happening in their town - and their neighborhood. Patch is their USA Today, a site that uses the same basic formula to handle all but the edge cases of information that neighborhood people want to know. What were the police doing across the street yesterday? Who is moving into that store with the paper on the windows? Why did the restaurant close all of a sudden? What's going on in town this weekend?

Those are the questions that most people want answered, and Patch is for them. Are there exceptions? Yes - of course! Salem's Patch mixes that sort of coverage with very good feature writing, good political coverage, and most importantly an editor who has been on the job for a couple of years and has developed local connections and become part of the city's fabric. She has managed to assemble a good team of contributors and as a result Salem Patch has kind of stepped into a middle ground between your typical event calendar and a local newspaper. Sure the Salem News has more resources overall and they can work a more traditional story. They have influence because of that, and they are a pretty good local paper. Where Salem Patch differentiates themselves is speed and versatility.

I'll sum this up with an anecdote from a local event last night (because I was there). Cafe Polonia and Coffee Time Bake Shop teamed up to host a paczki-eating contest to benefit the Boys & Girls Club. Great event, great cause, and everyone had fun. The Salem News sent a photographer, who arrived just as the last contestant was finishing. He got some pictures, took down names, and was gone after a few minutes. It'll make a nice photo feature in the paper, and he did a good job - but he missed the spirit of the event.

Patch's editor, though, was there the whole time. She captured it on video, did interviews (full disclosure: I was one of the interviewees), wrote a story, and had it posted online with a well-edited video by 6AM this morning. And when it was over, she tried her first paczki with everyone there and pronounced it delicious.

That, folks, is hyperlocal journalism at its best. And if that turns out to be where Patch goes, they'll do just fine as a business.

iPad prediction time

It's that time of year again - the iPad 3 is on the way, probably being assembled by workers all over China as I type this. Many details have leaked, though Apple's been known to do misdirection more than a few times (anybody remember the teardrop iPhone 5 cases from last summer?). But as of right now, here's what I can tell you is certain about the iPad 3, what I think is likely, and what I think is bogus:

- Retina Display (2048*1536): Done. Book it. I think they hoped to get it in for the iPad 2 but couldn't get sufficient yields in time to ramp up production. We've seen enough samples in the wild of the screen that it's a done deal.

- More RAM: Yep, also certain. The iPad 3 will have 1GB of RAM, double what the iPad 2 has. Why am I sure? Higher resolution needs bigger framebuffers. To support that with 512GB would cost too much from a performance standpoint.

- Form factor: It'll be basically the same. Why mess with a good thing? If Apple ever goes into a smaller form factor, I think it would be likelier that they'd introduce a 5" iPod Touch than a 7" iPad. Don't dilute the iPad brand in small cheap devices.

- A6 (quad-core) processor: Good chance. Either that or a faster version of the current A5. Not sure which we'll see, though. Prototype logic boards were recently spotted marked "A5X" (indicating a souped-up A5), but I think that may be misdirection.

- LTE (4G) support: I don't think so. Could be surprised. I'm pretty sure that if it were fall right now you'd see it, but 3G is widespread enough and proven enough that Apple has no problem letting the market continue to develop for 4G. Right now, there's not enough of a 4G footprint to make it truly compelling.

- Better cameras: Yep, coming for sure. I think a 720P HD camera in front for FaceTime, and maybe a 5MP camera in back. They don't need the photo capabilities of the iPhone, but there will be improvement.

- Storage: Probably the same capacities as before (16, 32, 64). Maybe a 128GB model that blurs the lines with laptops.

- Siri: I'm not sure about that one. I think they won't, if only because Siri is really a feature for an always-on connection - and on the iPad your Internet connection is optional, unlike with a cellphone.

- Pricing: No changes. They may keep the 16GB iPad 2 around for 6 months or so at a cheaper price ($349?) to suck most of the oxygen out of the cheap 7" tablet market. If they can afford to do that and still make money, they likely will.

The only pricing wildcard is if they do a 128GB version at the top end. Then we might see them go like this:

$349 (or maybe $399); iPad 2 Wifi, 16GB

$499: iPad 3 32GB (add $100 or the traditional $130 for 3G on each iPad 3 model)

$599: iPad 3 64GB

$699: iPad 3 128GB

Follow that up with a 5" iPod Touch 32GB for $299 in the fall, and you've effectively bracketed the whole market.

As for iOS 5.1, I'm restricted from prognosticating on that one because I am running it and remain under NDA. The Mac rumor sites are doing a good enough job of that for me, anyways. But I can say that I'm looking forward to the GM being posted, based on what I've seen from it so far.

To sum up, I think on March 7th a lot of people will be grabbing their credit cards. iPad 2 sales numbers were just a warmup for this one.

Stepping into the political minefield for fun

Random politically charged comment of the day: Reasonable people can disagree as to whether President Obama has done a good job or not. I happen to think that he's done a decent job, not a great one - but he did far better in my view than his opponent in 2008 would have and will do better than any of the remaining candidates to replace him.

That all said, I read far too many comments on the Salem News and other sites that aren't doing it strictly for the lulz (like Fark does). And my point is this: If you call Obama a Marxist (or a Socialist), you've demonstrated two things conclusively to me - one is that you've got virtually no understanding of either politics or economics, and two is that you've already lost the argument at that point. It's pretty much like the Godwin's Law of modern political debate. Sure, I disagree with the Republicans. I can call them right-wing and be accurate. And I even make fun of them. But I don't try and tar them with an extreme rhetorical brush, because I actually understand what those remarks entail.

And yes, some people on the Democratic side use similar rhetoric to the Tea Partier types on the message boards. By the way, they're wrong too. More of them seem to understand basic economics, though.

I know what's different now.

I wasn't quite as crushed this time after seeing a Super Bowl loss. Can't stand the Giants nowadays - even though I grew up with them - but I think I understand what happened to the Patriots this year, and the last couple of trips as well.

The Patriots became a great team when everyone was a role player. Linebackers played tight end, linemen were fullbacks, and Tom Brady was a great game manager QB, who never made mistakes and never tried to do too much.

Around 2006, that started to change. Indy took the lead in the horse race with a superstar QB, and the Patriots responded by putting all their eggs in the offensive basket. Sometime around then, Tom Brady became TB12 - the best QB on the planet. He started trying to do it all, and to be the guy who ran the team. And it works to a point - but when you get to the biggest games it's hard to win that way.

Two weeks ago, TB12 played a horrible game. The Patriots were able to overcome it and win anyway. Tonight, TB12 was better - but he still made the mistakes that killed them in the end. Tom Brady didn't throw home run balls for interceptions. He didn't take safeties on his first dropback. TB12 does that sometimes, and always at the worst time when he does.

The Patriots are still an excellent team that have kept a high standard for over a decade. Amazing in this era. But if they are going to win another Super Bowl, they need more Tom Brady and less TB12.

MBTA service cuts - the dance begins

So the MBTA, crippled by the additional debt assigned to it from the Big Dig, is now proposing significant service cuts as a partial solution to their chronic deficits. Public transit serves a public good, yet it is almost never profitable on its own. Should a public service be run like a business? Thousands of people depend on the MBTA for access to jobs and shopping, many more use it for tourism. What would be the impact to Boston if day trippers couldn't take the train into the city?

This is an ancient kabuki in government services. Drastic cuts are proposed, something happens to prevent it. The MBTA has made some strides over the last few years in curbing expenses. They still have capital costs that are high, given all the obligations the state has placed on them. Here in Salem they're obligated to build a garage facility (and there's another one going up in Beverly), but due to their financial issues the Salem garage is being chopped from 800-900 spaces to around 500 - barely more than the parking lot it replaces. Hingham got a $50 million tunnel because residents were so opposed to a grade crossing - that money would have built the entire garage here.

There's also a legal agreement to expand the Green Line into Somerville, and plenty of other obligations. The money's not there to fund it. So what's the solution?

My take is this (and I proposed something similar back in my pre-politician days): Currently we have a portion of sales tax revenue dedicated to the MBTA. It's obviously not enough. We also have a decaying road system, and only small sections of roadway that are tolled (the Tobin Bridge and Mass. Pike/harbor tunnels are the only tolled roads in Massachusetts - Route 93 isn't tolled at all). We have increasing road usage, so to me the obvious choice is to freeze tolls where they are (I think tolls are discriminatory - why should some roads be tolled and others not at all?), and increase gas taxes by an appropriate amount to compensate. Compared to some of the other states in the area (CT, NY, ME), we have one of the lower gas taxes around. They've been at current levels for a long time. I'd support raising gas taxes in Massachusetts by at least 15-20 cents per gallon, with the revenue split between the highway system and the MBTA. Gas taxes are a far more fair revenue raiser than tolls - the more you use the roads the more gas you consume.

This also gives you a further incentive to drive more economical cars as well - the less gas you use the lower your costs are. And a 20 cent raise would generate (based on numbers I looked up from last year) approximately $50 million per month - or $600 million dollars per year. That goes a long way towards solving the MBTA's woes and helping to repair our crumbling highway infrastructure. If we can also begin the process of eliminating tolls, so much the better.

Two weeks down

Swearing-in was in January 2nd. Pretty cool, and well-documented online via my Facebook account, Salem Patch, and all sorts of other sources. Won't go much further with that. We've had a couple of meetings and votes, mainly routing things. I've got a few constituent issues I'm working on now as well (and had one issue out of my ward that I got called about by an out-of-town landlord who didn't know what ward her building was in).

Business-wise, we're pretty busy right now, though things are now quieting down a little bit. From early December through now has been insane, so the respite is nice for a couple of days. We are also signing up new accounts at a decent clip. All good.

Mainly right now I'm just taking advantage of a quiet weekend to try and clean out my home office better - there's a lot of excess stuff in there right now and I'd really like to get it tidied up. Got an old computer to get moved as well. The effort remains ongoing.