This was a problem in Chicago, and it is a problem near Penn Station too. There is no place normal to eat "downtown." I either have to buy $19 soup, or fast food. Within 3 blocks of my new office, there are the following fast food chains: McDonalds, Burger King, Wendy's, White Castle, Grey's Papaya, Dunkin' Donuts, Subway and Starbucks. There is maybe a Japanese restaurant downstairs, a liquor store across the street and a super expensivo midtown style fresh salad place in the first floor of my building. Honest to god, how hard is it to have a regular deli? Or a falafel place?
So it was in Chicago when I worked downtown near the Lake. There were Au Bon Pains (get it? haha) everywhere, with the $45 sandwhich nonsense, and Popeyes.
Where is the reasonable in between. I am not in a damn airport, I am in Midtown Manhattan, for crying out loud. A little common decency.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Light text on Dark Background
Can we be over this please? It's harder to read. It makes your eyes water. For anything other than titles or very short sections of text, light text on a dark background on a website is ridiculous and painful.
Gmail redesign
First, Why didn't you tell me gmail? Why did I have to learn from Lifehacker that new "features" were coming to gmail? I know you've been in Beta for years (which, also, get over yourself gmail), but still.
I'm generally fine with the buttons on top, but why so square? Why so shiny? Why the new font? Why are the same features now on the top as in the sidebar? I know I can customize this, but if you were going to change the way things work up top, why not add new features instead of merely replicating existing ones that were already on the same page? Why is this necessary?
Perhaps I just hate change. Ask me in a few weeks, maybe I won't even remember what is different.
This does remind me that some people use their gmail differently from how I use my gmail. Some of you, I hear, don't archive anything. Weirdos. I bet this is more useful for you.
I'm generally fine with the buttons on top, but why so square? Why so shiny? Why the new font? Why are the same features now on the top as in the sidebar? I know I can customize this, but if you were going to change the way things work up top, why not add new features instead of merely replicating existing ones that were already on the same page? Why is this necessary?
Perhaps I just hate change. Ask me in a few weeks, maybe I won't even remember what is different.
This does remind me that some people use their gmail differently from how I use my gmail. Some of you, I hear, don't archive anything. Weirdos. I bet this is more useful for you.
Snow Umbrellas
You know what makes me nuts? People who walk around in snowy weather with umbrellas. It's not that much precipitation, kids. It takes up massive amounts of new York sidewalk, which is not that wide to begin with. When it is raining, I will (sort of) abide 1,000,000 umbrellas on the streets. When it snows, wear a hat and deal.
Monday, February 2, 2009
E*Trade/Baby Ads
Terrible. Truly awful. Why is this animatronic robot baby talking like a frat boy? How is this to do with internet stock trading? Why is the baby mean to others? Why does it flirt with other babies? Why does it make me (fondly?) think of that dancing baby on Ally McBeal? Gross. The whole thing is disjointed, bizarre and altogether disconcerting in a way that makes me want to have children less, because I am afraid that my weird robot baby will sit in his high chair and trade internet stocks in an effort to supplement our family income. Ick.
There are a lot of commercials I hate, but having seen this series last night during the Superbowl and at the movie theater the day before, I am fed up.
There are a lot of commercials I hate, but having seen this series last night during the Superbowl and at the movie theater the day before, I am fed up.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
(Hybrid) SUVs
This borders on the non-trivial, but my ire is perhaps disproportionate, so I think the theme holds. Feel free to comment if I'm wrong.
There are precisely two scenarios where owning an SUV is acceptable: you live in an area with rough access (mountains, dirt roads that cross streams, no roads at all) or you simply must tow other things behind your car. And actually, in the second case, I'm not convinced.
There is no rationale--none--for owning an SUV in the city. I'll bet that Dixie's old Jetta station wagon had more trunk space than any mid-sized SUV. As for the behemoth SUVs, there is no excuse. Most people do not need to drive that much stuff around on a regular basis. If you have many kids, then minivan. If you run a business, a van. If, like Dixie, you find yourself hauling heavy things--props, scenery, musical equipment--every day, then an adorable pick-up truck makes a lot of sense.
Furthermore, many people who say they "need" the space claim that because once a year they go on a big road trip or help a friend move. This is an irresponsible way to calculate what type of vehicle you "need". What should go into the calculation is the daily/weekly routine. The exceptions can be efficiently dealt with as they come up.
I know that SUVs were, for a time, cool. This is on the face of it absurd, and luckily we mostly got over that when gas prices went through the roof and people realized that driving enormous and inefficient vehicles was not a smart move. See: collapse of the American car industry.
I'm sure you all know why I am anti-SUV. In a nutshell, I care a little about the environment. As my sister likes to put it, I care enough not to be an asshole, but not so much as to inconvenience all my friends or completely give up on the comforts of modern life. SUVs are absurd by any measure.
However, buying a new car before you need one is also environmentally irresponsible. If you currently own an SUV in good repair, the most responsible thing to do is to keep driving it until it is dead (or sell it to someone who will do the same). The only purpose for a hybrid SUV is to make people feel like they are making a responsible, hip, green choice by buying one.
This is wrong. I am by no means an expert, but my research indicates that hybrid SUVs are less efficient than most normal, non-hybrid, cars. While there are some minor fuel savings when directly compared with station wagons or bigger sedans, those are for the most part offset by manufacturing methods and materials, not to mention driving styles (if you want a screed on that, email me. I don't want to bore everyone).
In the interest of full disclosure, I have an 8-year old Prius. I got it in February 2001 (happy birthday car!) and for the first two years was often stopped at red lights to answer questions about my weird car. Strangers in parking lots wanted to know if I had to plug it in, and whether I was worried about electrocution (no to both). At the time, I was optimistic that by the time I needed a new car, the hybrid would be obsolete. It was, in 2001, so obviously a bridge technology. Oh, how wrong I was. My Prius is showing signs of age, and it is still cutting edge. So while I support hybrid technology, I'm really sad that it is not further on the way toward obsolescence.
Back to hybrid SUVs. My major problem is that unless you belong to the small subset of people for whom driving an SUV is a necessity, a hybrid SUV is still an irresponsible choice of vehicle. Hybrid SUVs represent exactly the time of "green" consumerism that is actually bad for the environment, and come wrapped with a sense of smugness.
So please. If you just want the hybrid label, and think a Prius is ridiculous looking and tiny (true) consider a hybrid Camry. For the three days a year that you need more space, consider a UHaul ($20/day rental) or a clamshell for the top. Or ask Dixie if you can borrow her pick-up truck. It's super cute.
There are precisely two scenarios where owning an SUV is acceptable: you live in an area with rough access (mountains, dirt roads that cross streams, no roads at all) or you simply must tow other things behind your car. And actually, in the second case, I'm not convinced.
There is no rationale--none--for owning an SUV in the city. I'll bet that Dixie's old Jetta station wagon had more trunk space than any mid-sized SUV. As for the behemoth SUVs, there is no excuse. Most people do not need to drive that much stuff around on a regular basis. If you have many kids, then minivan. If you run a business, a van. If, like Dixie, you find yourself hauling heavy things--props, scenery, musical equipment--every day, then an adorable pick-up truck makes a lot of sense.
Furthermore, many people who say they "need" the space claim that because once a year they go on a big road trip or help a friend move. This is an irresponsible way to calculate what type of vehicle you "need". What should go into the calculation is the daily/weekly routine. The exceptions can be efficiently dealt with as they come up.
I know that SUVs were, for a time, cool. This is on the face of it absurd, and luckily we mostly got over that when gas prices went through the roof and people realized that driving enormous and inefficient vehicles was not a smart move. See: collapse of the American car industry.
I'm sure you all know why I am anti-SUV. In a nutshell, I care a little about the environment. As my sister likes to put it, I care enough not to be an asshole, but not so much as to inconvenience all my friends or completely give up on the comforts of modern life. SUVs are absurd by any measure.
However, buying a new car before you need one is also environmentally irresponsible. If you currently own an SUV in good repair, the most responsible thing to do is to keep driving it until it is dead (or sell it to someone who will do the same). The only purpose for a hybrid SUV is to make people feel like they are making a responsible, hip, green choice by buying one.
This is wrong. I am by no means an expert, but my research indicates that hybrid SUVs are less efficient than most normal, non-hybrid, cars. While there are some minor fuel savings when directly compared with station wagons or bigger sedans, those are for the most part offset by manufacturing methods and materials, not to mention driving styles (if you want a screed on that, email me. I don't want to bore everyone).
In the interest of full disclosure, I have an 8-year old Prius. I got it in February 2001 (happy birthday car!) and for the first two years was often stopped at red lights to answer questions about my weird car. Strangers in parking lots wanted to know if I had to plug it in, and whether I was worried about electrocution (no to both). At the time, I was optimistic that by the time I needed a new car, the hybrid would be obsolete. It was, in 2001, so obviously a bridge technology. Oh, how wrong I was. My Prius is showing signs of age, and it is still cutting edge. So while I support hybrid technology, I'm really sad that it is not further on the way toward obsolescence.
Back to hybrid SUVs. My major problem is that unless you belong to the small subset of people for whom driving an SUV is a necessity, a hybrid SUV is still an irresponsible choice of vehicle. Hybrid SUVs represent exactly the time of "green" consumerism that is actually bad for the environment, and come wrapped with a sense of smugness.
So please. If you just want the hybrid label, and think a Prius is ridiculous looking and tiny (true) consider a hybrid Camry. For the three days a year that you need more space, consider a UHaul ($20/day rental) or a clamshell for the top. Or ask Dixie if you can borrow her pick-up truck. It's super cute.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
