lunaru | weblog | thoughts

Unless you’ve been hibernating under a rock for the past month or so, you’ve probably heard about the utterly insane performance by Kobe Bryant against the Toronto Rapters on Jan 22 - almost exactly one month ago. Scoring 81 points and leading the Lakers back from a third quarter deficit of 18 points, Kobe launched himself into the annals of sports history overnight. Soon enough, sports fans around the country (and perhaps the world) began debating whether Kobe’s 81 points at 6′6″ in the modern era was a comparably more impressible performance than the NBA 100 point record still held by Wilt Chamberlain (7′1″) from the 1960’s.

However, even more impressive than Kobe’s 81 is the fact that less than 48 hours later, the performance in its entirety was available for download from the Google Video Store (http://video.google.com) for $3.99. Take a moment to wrap your head around that thought. What if such a service existed when Wilt dropped his 100? What if such a service were provided back in 1998 when Jordan hit “the shot” against Utah in one of basketball’s most memorable moments? This technological step brings validity to a point I made in one of my October entries talking about the “long tail” of media. To sum up the ideas from that entry, our culture, encompassing literature, music, and multimedia of all sorts, is growing at such an incredible rate that cataloguing all of the data is a very real and prevalent challenge for us. It was reassuring to see that Kobe’s performance, along with almost every NBA game since the start of the service, is available on-demand for the world to enjoy, albeit at a slight cost. This is one small step in accomplishing the holy grail of human culture: a library of media comprehensive enough to store the ever evolving story of the human race.

While Chamberlain’s historic night in Hershey, Pennsylvania is relegated to forever live in the fogs of myth, survived only by the famous picture of Wilt holding a makeshift score card reading “100″, Kobe’s night is blessed by our technological advancements as to be forever encased in 1’s and 0’s, perfectly preserved for all those who wish to access it. Most importantly, the footage, the data itself, is not bound to some unknown archive; rather, it is widely available to anyone who wishes to get their hands on it. The next time someone comes along and shatters records, we won’t have to wonder about how it compares to the mysterious past - it’s there anytime you wish to recall it. January 22, 2006 won’t have to go into history as yet another foggy memory.

Believe it or not, there is a still a large percentage of people out there who are computer illiterate in the United States. Of course, nothing needs to be said about the world in general — we are far away from a completely digital world. However, I believe the problem of “computer illiteracy” is really a misconception and there are alternative angles to view the issue. The problem really is: Why should it be something so hard to learn in the first place?

Why should learning to use a computer be a challenge? Why is there even a question of illiteracy? Computers are not math equations, they’re not languages — they’re tools, and as such, shouldn’t even require the label of “literacy.” They shouldn’t require some specific intelligent insight to operate. From the invention of the mouse to the abstraction of files and folders to dawn of the web, there had always been a general trend of turning that PhD made microprocessor into a device suitable for your everyday American. Maybe its just my impatience, but I feel that this trend has faltered and stumbled a bit in recent years.

This is where I feel Apple has really stepped up the game lately. From the use of huge visual icons to smooth interface features coordinated into the “aqua” interface, the Mac OS clearly outshines Microsoft’s OS in the “newbie” factor. It’s just so easy to start clicking away with that mono-button mouse that the otherwise computer illiterate population is beginning to understand: I shouldn’t have to bend over backwards to use a computer, it should beg to be used by me. Intuitive and smart, the entire Apple package of hardware and software appeals to the average person. This begs the question: Are we witnessing the start of a new age in computing?

Pundits have given this user-friendly approach to selling chips trend names like “Home Media Computing” inferring the computer’s rightful place as a media device alongside your TV (or HDTV if you’re cool), your VCR (or DVR if you’re cool), your PlayStation (or your XBox 360 if you’re, once again, cool), and your Audio System (read: iPod). Basically, from this point of view, your computer should really be no harder to figure out than your remote control. To me, there is really no fault in that idea. If there are still people out there who can’t figure out what a scroll bar does, why should we burden the general public with atrociously complex interfaces?

This blog entry has so far been littered with rhetorical questions, but really, these are fair questions to ask. I guess I’ve taken a long path to get to the point: Apple’s hardware will continue to fly off the shelves as long as they are as simply to use as they are now. Because of how they are able to integrate powerful functionality with a fresh-n-clean look, they will be able to get the market share that corresponds to the segment of America that doesn’t believe in needing “literacy” to operate a mouse. Also, Apple’s new partnership with Intel, a household brand name if there ever was one in the high tech industry, will certainly bolster sales and allow Macs to slowly creep up in market share.

I’ve mentioned Microsoft’s OS of course, and I suppose this is where I really want to end up. My concern is whether or not Vista can one-up Macintosh. Will we see an OS that is powerful under the hood with a polished clear-coat finish? Or will this just be another complicated bore along the veins of Win95, 98, and XP? The good news is: from what I’ve seen of Office 12, every indication tells me that Microsoft is aware of the need to make power as transparent as possible. I suppose that’s good news considering the first leap a “computer illiterate” person makes into the world of computers is usually with Windows.