Garmin nuvi 40LM
I've been wanting a Garmin automotive GPS unit with the LM (lifetime map) update option for a while now and finally went out and bought one. The reason I hadn't until this point is because the units with LM were too expensive until very recently. As of yesterday I now use a new Garmin nüvi 40LM.
The only reason I bought the 40LM was for the lifetime map update option and nothing else. I lost features by switching from a 255W to the 40LM, but the money I save from not having to buy map updates is a very acceptable tradeoff.
There's only one thing I miss from the 255W that the 40LM doesn't do, and that's ecoRoute. Or to be more specific, the "Less Fuel" routing option, which is kind of like the happy medium between "Faster Time" and "Shorter Distance". I won't cry a river over not having that routing option anymore as I was navigating with GPS way before ecoRoute ever came into existence, but yeah I'll miss having the option there. But I'll get over it quickly considering the cool stuff the 40LM does that the 255W doesn't do.
Other than the lack of ecoRoute, the 40LM does everything better than the 255W did. The screen is way more responsive to the touch, the Lane Assist feature (seen above) is very good, and the processor is fast enough in this one where I'm actually comfortable using 3D maps again.
For the longest time I've been using the 2D "Track Up" map view option with Garmins because the 3D view, best described as a helicopter map view, sucked. The processor was just too slow to handle it most of the time and screen draws were slow and choppy. The 40LM is good enough to show smooth animations that make 3D-view good to use.
After all this time, Garmin finally put information on the main map screen that they did like they used to with the big 26xx/27xx/28xx models. Four buttons are at right. The fifth option that you don't see by hitting the down arrow is "Time of Day".
The auto-zoom is also finally done right. Before the map would zoom out too far or too close, but Garmin got it correct with this one.
It's also good that the size of the fonts is bigger pretty much everywhere so you can actually, y'know, read the information from the driver's seated position.
I plan on packing on a lot of miles with the 40LM. It's basic and doesn't have the advanced features, but that doesn't bother me because it's primary purpose is to navigate; it does that spectacularly well.
Reasons why I will never own a "metal" guitar
In the computer world, whenever you see anything labeled "gamer", it's usually junk. You'll pay a high price for whatever the gamer thing is, and then get seriously ticked off when the gamer thing breaks less than 3 years later.
"Metal" guitars are exactly the same thing, if not worse. You pay a premium for what you're told will give you that hard-edged metal sound, only to discover that no matter how much you paid for it, it will bust in less than 3 years because it's junk.
Any time some metal guy blabs that you're "paying for quality" with a high-priced metal guitar is talking completely out of his ass, and I can prove it easily. Almost any Squier Stratocaster or Epiphone Les Paul made 10 years ago still plays fine today, assuming it was maintained properly. The majority of metal guitars made 10 years ago are now in landfills because they are simply not built to last.
Why is it that a "cheap" Squier or Epiphone guitar that sold new for under $200 ten years ago outlasted nearly all the metal guitars that sold for over $1,000? There are several reasons.
Gold-coated crap
Strats and Les Pauls use die cast or plastic tuners and plastic for knobs and switchgear. Many premium "metal" guitar have gold-coated hardware, and that gold-coated crap is well known to start pitting, wearing off and/or flaking very early on.
The cheapest Squier Strat with die cast tuners will outlast any gold-coated tuners on a premium metal guitar, guaranteed.
Tarnishing and rust of the tremolo system and bridge
There's good and bad tarnishing/rust when it comes to electric guitars.
When Strats and Les Pauls tarnish/rust over time, they still play the same, still keep their tune and actually look cool when they get used and abused.
Metal guitars on the other hand have the exact opposite effect. When a Floyd-Rose tremolo system starts to get old where it tarnishes and rusts, it becomes almost unusable. When the locking nut rusts - which they do rather quickly - there is nothing that looks good about that and the tuning starts going completely batty on you.
When the time comes (and it will) where you have to outright replace the entire Floyd-Rose system, there's a few hundred bucks in the toilet right there. Not only does the premium metal guitar cost you a ton of cash now but will again later. Who wants to deal with that crap?
Overcomplicated electronics
Many metal guitars come bundled with electronics that are complicated for the sake of being complicated to justify their high price. Lots of active electronics, sometimes crazy switches and knobs, and "custom designed" pickups that will only work in that guitar.
The more electronics crap that's in an electric guitar, there more there is to break. And when it breaks, it's almost impossible to troubleshoot where the problem actually is.
With simple passive electronics, a guitar's internal wiring can be repaired easily. That's almost never the case with complicated active crap. Once something breaks after 3 or 4 years, if what broke is somewhere on the inside, you basically have to gut the entire guitar just to figure out what went wrong, and that's annoying.
Basic Squier and Epiphone models have traditional passive electronics, and both are easy to work on and repair.
"Doesn't feel right"
This is most notorious thing metal guitars do. One day you pick it up to play it, and something just doesn't feel right. You've been maintaining the guitar as best you can, using the same size strings whenever you do a string change and even kept it in a room where the temperature and humidity is good so no damage can be done - but something is wrong. It just doesn't play the way it used to. For some reason it also sounds different in a bad way.
And you have no idea what the problem is or even how to fix it.
Strats and Les Pauls do not do this. Once either guitar is broken in, it will continue to provide many years of useful playing goodness.
A metal guitar on the other hand won't. Once it starts to do that doesn't-feel-right crap, it will never feel right to you ever again for as long as you own it.
Have you ever known a metal player who owns a few guitars, and happens to have a really expensive one that he used to play all the time but now all of a sudden doesn't? Believe me, he's not "preserving" that guitar. The doesn't-feel-right thing happened and now he can't play it anymore. And because he paid so much for it originally, he doesn't want to sell it even though he never plays the thing.
What causes the doesn't-feel-right factor over time? It could be anything, but it probably has something to do with the neck.
When super-jumbo frets wear down (which a lot of metal guitars have), there is no fix for this other than to re-fret the entire neck, and that's expensive. Guitars that have what's now known as medium-jumbo frets (again, Strats and Les Pauls) don't need re-fretting nearly as often.
Most metal guitars have a neck-through instead of a bolt-on neck, and repairs to a neck-through are next to impossible to get done. It's so expensive that it's actually cheaper just to replace the entire neck, new core and all.
Are premium metal guitars worth their price?
They never have been.
Your best option if you want something "metal" is to purposely buy a lower-cost guitar with a bolt-on neck and no crazy electronics. If you have to have the Floyd Rose tremolo, remember that they are high-maintenance.
What should you buy for a "metal" guitar?
For most metal players it's about the look more than anything else. For sound, just buy a low-cost guitar that has a good neck feel to it, then upgrade the hardware yourself. You'll save a ton of cash and the guitar will last a lot longer.
Here are my recommendations. All these guitars "look metal" and are inexpensive.
Dean Markley Vintage Electric Reissue Strings
These things are awesome. :)
See a video demo of me playing these strings.
soap
I have a thing for 1970s TV sitcoms. I was born in the '70s, but as I got older I just made a beeline to 70s television. For years I couldn't understand why, but I think I've figured it out now somewhat.
When you watch just about any show from that era, it's like going into another world, because for all intents and purposes, it is. And for my guilty pleasure of diving into 1970s TV in this post, we'll take a look at Soap.
The look
Soap looks weird because it was purposely shot on video and not film. This was probably done on purpose to further push along the idea of parodying daytime soap operas of the time, which were some of the first to switch from film to video.
Video technologies of the 1970s were awful. Skin tones no matter the color are nowhere near what they're supposed to look like in real life. Also, everything looks out of focus even though it's in focus. That was the best they could do with the technology back then. It was also very common to see sheens of light and even hot spots in some instances because the sets were lit up like a Christmas tree with super-hot lighting to accommodate for the bad color reproduction of the cameras being used.
The positive to all this awfulness is that it created a look of its own that is decidedly 1970s and belongs to no other era.
Should you decide to watch this show, something you have to bear in mind is that Soap was made at a time when all TVs were tube-type, so of course the show was made to look best on that type of television. Tube-type TVs of the era easily hid imperfections and video editors knew this. When viewing this show on a modern flat-panel or computer monitor, you see the whole frame (remember, on tube-types the outer edge of the frame is cut off) and every single imperfection really sticks out.
"Recorded in front of a live studio audience"
As far as I'm aware, every episode of Soap was recorded in a studio with a real audience, meaning no laugh track and no added-in laugh audio. Every laugh you hear is real.
There are shows that still record in front of an audience today, but nowhere near the same to what shows like Soap were like for two reasons. The first is that if a joke really went well and the audience was roaring with laughter, the actors had to purposely wait until that died down until moving on with the script while at the same time getting the scene done in a way that could be "fit" on television with commercials. And if the joke dropped like a brick, the actors had to speed along to the next joke quicker to keep the flow of the show going.
If that's not pressure, I don't know what is. It's even more difficult than doing a stage play because you're bound by the constricts of TV time.
Different world, way different humor
Soap aired from 1977 to 1981, and there are jokes told in Soap that would greatly offend people today or at bare minimum make them feel very uncomfortable. In the very first episode, you'll hear jokes that are racist, sexist, homophobic and demeaning - but it all magically works because the show was written by the right people and acted by the right actors.
The 1970s was very daring and it was a golden time for television. They did stuff on TV back then they wouldn't dare do now for fear of having their network offices stormed.
Some people just know how to do it right
You may notice that the end title credits for every episode of Soap look exactly the same as The Golden Girls. There's a reason for that. Susan Harris created them both.
Susan had a magic touch for television sitcoms that has not been equaled by many. The woman simply knew how to come up with killer ideas and even more killer jokes. She's simply a force in television, no question about it.
Soap's humor does not translate at all in 2012
I have enough knowledge about 1970s popular culture where I understand the jokes in Soap and know why they're funny. And for some I'll even laugh out loud at them.
However, unless you know 1970s popular culture like I do, or are older than I and lived through it, you won't understand Soap. In fact, you'd probably find most of it pretty boring and/or be distracted by other things easily while watching it. You may think, "I can't believe people used to dress like that!", or "Hey, look! A rotary phone!", or "Why are so many things colored avocado or dark yellow?", etc.
The first episode of Soap aired 13 Sep 1977, which at the time of this writing was 34 years and 5 months ago. In other words, a long frickin' time ago. You have to accommodate for that when watching Soap. No cell phones, no personal computers, no internet, no cable television. Things were really different back then.
Why do I bother watching this stuff?
I like the jokes and the cultural references, but a lot of the reason I watch it is for style. In that sleepy little New England town I grew up in, 1970s style ruled the roost in just about everyone's house all the way up until the mid-1990s. Yes, really.
It was not uncommon at all to go over to a friend's house and find crushed avocado-colored carpet, or in some instances shag carpet. It was not uncommon to see wood everywhere. Varnished wooden shelves, varnished wooden entertainment centers, faux wood-covered clocks, etc. I mean, you saw so much stuff from the 70s all over the place that you'd think everyone bought everything in 1977 and just stopped right there.
It wasn't until the early-to-mid 1990s where everyone upgraded their old stuff. Yeah, it took that long.
People these days throw out stuff every 5 years because everything is made so cheap and breaks sooner. Why do you think there's so much stuff in perfect working order from the late 70s and early 80s on eBay? Because it all still works.
So yeah, the 70s stuff brings back a little bit of how things used to be, without having to buy 700lbs. worth of 1970s crapola to make it happen. Remember, a VCR in the 70s was something like 30 pounds. Yeesh..
20 things i've never done
This is not one of those "list of things to do before I die" type of things, because some of the stuff below I have no interest in doing; see if you can guess which.
- Water-skied
- Gone bungee jumping
- Watched Wayne's World in its entirety (I've only seen clips)
- Learned a polka song
- Used rollerblades (roller skates, yes, rollerblades, no)
- Piloted an aircraft of any kind
- Ridden a unicycle
Played a ukuleleDid this.- Read War & Peace
- Owned a house
- Visited anywhere outside of the United States
- Learned how to say "Where is the bathroom?" in 5 different languages
- Ridden a motorcycle
- Went camping (to the best of my knowledge, I've never done it)
- Bought a comic book
- Wrote a feature-length screenplay
- Gone skydiving
- Rode on a public bus
- Dated a scientist
- Drank whiskey
I actually had to really think hard to come up with 20 things I've never done that weren't outright ridiculous.