ThinkSecret.com: 13.3-inch iBook, Mac OS X 10.4.4, Plaxo for Mac

I’m not worried about the iBook and OS X will make sure that 10.4.4 gets sucked down when it sees fit, but the news that Plaxo is getting ready for its first release of a Mac client is interesting.

I have two independent contact systems. I’ve got my work (Outlook) and Thunderbird clients (windows at work to read home email and the home Windows PC) configured to use it. It is great but there’s far too much out of your control. I like the fact that my Powerbook (against which I sync my Palm and phone) is independent of that system. So Plaxo tells me something’s changed and I decide whether I’m interested in the information.

The other week I edited my Plaxo card and removed an email address. Suddenly one Plaxo contact found that his Outlook client had forgotten completely about that email address. I hadn’t deleted the address or disavowed it, I’d just edited my card. It’s a little disquietening when Big Brother acts like that.

Not to mention the number of duplicates and such that Plaxo creates. It’s a great system, but I don’t want to have to rely on it. I rely on my Palm/Powerbook being up to the minute – Plaxo’s not going to get its fingers on them.

read more | digg story

Advertisements

OS X looky-likey

With Flyakite you can make your XP session look like OS X.

Why wouldn’t you just do the decent thing, buy a Mac and get the real thing?

Laws and the individual

Blogging has to be the 21st century equivalent of the drunk tramp yabbering away to himself, can of Super Strength in hand and a beard that would make Santa jealous.

You can quickly turn into this ranting freakshow who makes no sense. Fortunately I can tend toward that in real life too. Today’s topic? Petty illegality.

On my walk home, I walk over the river, via a road bridge with a footpath on each side. On these footpaths are several signs saying no cycling. They’re both on the start of each side and painted on the pavement surface – yet there are a number of numbskulls who just cannot get it through their head that that really does mean them too. More generally, any pavement cycling annoys me, but it’s just that this particular place irks me more.

This annoys me on several levels so I will almost always tell them so. It’s not because I’m anti-cyclist – far from it, I cycle more than most and would cycle to work if it was far enough away to merit getting sweaty in the mornings. It’s actually because I’m pro-cyclist that I hate seeing people cycling badly – I know that bad cycling is likely to wind up drivers, making life more dangerous the rest of us.

It is also because it is so needless. That particular road-bridge isn’t dangerous, in the years I’ve been using it, I don’t think that I’ve ever seen a single accident of any description on it, let alone car-bike interactions. By claiming the road is dangerous all the pavement cyclist is doing is shifting the threat – they feel threatened by the car, so they themselves threaten the pedestrian.

And they wonder why pedestrians don’t like sharing the pavement?

There are many laws which don’t make a whole load of sense. A lot of the anti-terror legislation, many taxes, licensing law restrictions. But of all of them, traffic laws are not there: cycling on pavements, driving while on the mobile, speeding in built up areas. There are all solid reasons for them.

It’s all in the name of predictability. All you lot are weird and I’ve no idea what you’re about to do next. At least when you’re behind the wheel of the car or in charge of a bike and obeying the traffic laws I’ve a fighting chance of being able to better predict your behaviour.

But then you go and do something unpredictable, out of control – and illegal. I couldn’t care less that you’re breaking the law, but it’s very annoying that you’re endangering me by not being predictable and controlled.