So I thought that the news on the Caprica front was that there was nothing new before getting close to the Jan 22 television premiere (I’ve already seen it on DVD, of course).  Not so.

Several new gems have slipped under my radar.  First is my favourite in a series of print ads that are being tested and were subsequently leaked:

What I specifically like about this one is the allusion to the Fall of Man as described in the Bible (refresher:  Humanity, in it’s self-defeating quest for knowledge, commits the only sin possible: taking a fruit (usually portrayed as an apple but it really doesn’t matter) from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (which sounds snappier in Hebrew) after being tricked by the fallen angel Lucifer (aka Satan) who says that it will make them gods in their own right.  This wakes humanity up, allowing them to know what is good but also the potential for evil and permanently corrupts humanity.).  The allusion is an excellent one that I didn’t catch before and I really think that this poster really best reflects that and takes aim at a story that is so embedded in Western consciousness that even if one hasn’t heard it before one understands its significance.

Sorry about going all Eng-Lit geek on you

(more here)

There are also two new promos on Youtube.  Though at first glance they may look similar to previous ones they both have some engaging new content, which I won’t go into for spoiler’s sakes.

And for good measure, a commercial worth watching.

I’m hoping the CBC or CTV or some mainstream network will air it since I don’t have and probably can’t shell out for SPACE, Canada’s answer to SciFi.  It does, of course, comply with CRTC “Canadian Content” regulations (made in Canada starring mostly Canadians) and it would help networks fill that valuable 70% CanCon quotient…  Just sayin’

Just when you think that Microsoft shoveling money into a hole was the lowest that Microsoft’s marketing department could go, think again.

Here’s their new “Get the Facts” campaign, where the “Facts” only resemble “Facts” in Stalinist Russia.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/internet-explorer/get-the-facts/browser-comparison.aspx

Okey dokey then.  Seriously?

Let’s do a step-by-step rebuttle, shall we?

Security:  Bunk.  Let’s “Get the Facts” from ArsTechnica.  Chrome is the last one standing, undefeated because of its sandboxing feature.  Safari4 fell first, then IE8, then Firefox3.whatever.  The number for IE exploits is significantly higher and they go much longer without being fixed.

Privacy:  Microsoft forgot to mention that Google Chrome and Firefox both have very good privacy features.  Infact, Chrome was first.

Ease-of-use:  This is purely subjective, but I’ll say that Chrome has that one down pat because of its simplicity and integration with search (which can be changed, not just Google).

Web Standards:  This is the thing that comedy is made of.  Honestly…  Chrome and Firefox 3.5 still both beat IE.  There’s a reason that web developers don’t use IE.  Because we spend as much time making things work in IE that work in good browsers as we do creating the codebase.

Developer Tools:  I’d say Open Sourcitude is a very big developer tool.  So are these things called extensions, which are huge in Firefox and coming for Chrome.  Of course it wins?  Because IE has worked sooooo well in the past.  And it only works, of course, on Microsoft operating systems.

Reliability:  Sure, IE *might* have both, but it also needs to use it more.  Chrome was the one that came up with multithreaded browsing, and Firefox 3.5 has both.  Even if IE has both, Chrome and Firefox still need them less.

Customizability:  It’s a tie?  IE doesn’t have themes.  Or Extensions.  And those “features” that you have to install extensions for in Firefox:  that’s the point.  Because it makes Firefox faster.  Add to that the fact that Firefox 3.5 beats IE8 feature-to-feature, and this is completely ridiculous.  And if all those features are “built in”, it’s not customizable.  Gotcha.

Compatibility:  There’s two ways to look at this – one is that it’s only compatible because Microsoft threw standards to the wind and *they’re* the ones that force developers to engage in coding voodoo.  The other is that it’s junk because modern sites are all developed for Firefox as well, and I’ve never seen problems with Chrome.  The only one that really has compatibility issues is Opera, which is because it’s so strict.

Manageability:  There are tools to manage Firefox at an enterprise scale, they just aren’t built in.  Because most people don’t need them.  That makes the browser slow.  And I’d doubt how well they work…

Performance:  This is junk.  Now, I can’t seem to find the benchmarks, but in benchmarks comparing Firefox 3.5 Beta, Google Chrome 2, Safari 4, Opera9.6 and IE8, IE8 was the loser.  It’s not a tie.  IE is significantly slower than the others.

They got away with this by running the “stable” versions of Chrome and Firefox.  That’s because IE is much much newer than these.  However, the latest testing releases of Chrome and Firefox, both very stable, blow IE away.

Microsoft:  How many people are you trying to offend by lying to your customers?  This is desperate and not befitting of a company that does make some good software (Office2007 fan here).  But you are playing dirty.  And still losing.  IE is the only browser that is actually, actively *hated*.  Think about that and how you’re contributing to that.  And stop trying to explain the existence of IE by lying about it:  build a better browser.

Microsoft’s marketing department has reached new lows.

I mean, really new lows.

You had best read it for yourself from Microsoft Australia.  You wouldn’t believe me if I told you.

http://www.microsoft.com/australia/ie8/competition/

Yes, Microsoft has decided to “hide” $10,000 on a website and post clues, but only people who download and use their Internet Explorer 8 browser will be able to participate.

Anyone thinking of the money hole right now?

Is this desperate?  Is this pathetic?  Is this pathetically desperate?  Check check and check.  Microsoft would, of course, be the only browser maker to actually shovel money at their browser.  I mean, Google is supposedly taking the unorthodox step of advertising its browser on TV, but that’s completely different from throwing money to anyone who will catch it.

But wait:  there’s more!

Let’s look at the ad copy (which is, in true Microsoft web-standards-adherence fashion, an image):

“We’ve buried $10,00 on the internet and if you’re the first one to find it you get to keep it.”

The hook

“But you’ll never find it using that browser.  (So get rid of it, or get lost.)”

The line

“If you want a serious shot at the ten grand, upgrade your browser to Windows Internet Explorer 8 now.  Then follow @tengrand_IE8 on Twitter for daily clues that point you to the buried loot”
The sinker.

Excuse me, upgrade my browser?  The only upgrading I’m doing is to Firefox 3.5.  How can you call it an upgrade with undeniably worse security, significantly slower, and iffy-at-best standards adherence?

To quote @dpogue: …”oh my! I… didn’t think Microsoft was capable of stooping *that* low o.o”

Neither did I. I mean, I knew Microsoft always won at the web browser/OS game of limbo (limbo limbo limbo! How low can you go?!?) but I never thought they’d actually throw money at people.

Besides, it’s not enough. I’d need at least $100,000 CAD to make me switch (for the record, the prize is about $9,000 CAD or $8,000 USD)

Even better:  at the bottom, it says “It’s not as stupid as it sounds”.  Yes, yes it is.  At least that crossed the mind of someone at Microsoft.  Otherwise I’d have serious doubts as to the future of Humanity.  The ironic part is that there will be the inevitable Firefox extension that will allow Open Source fans to participate.

So the discussion in Media English recently has been the interest of public vs private.  In case Mr. Hardy is reading this, continue and then tear me up in the comments or class (depending on which suits you ) for others, just comment on fallacies or other such things.

First off, the first aim of all companies is not – as is taught in ME – to make money.  This may be true at a corporate level, but in Small/Medium-Sized Businesses the aim is to provide a living for the owners and employees.  These places – like my employer – put things above money, like loyalty to their customers and employees.  They will not fleece you to make a profit.  Another great example perhaps is Canonical, makers of Ubuntu Linux.  Sure, they get their money from giving enterprise-level tech support to Ubuntu-using businesses but they market to the normal desktop user.  I have never paid a cent to Canonical for any of its products yet have made use of the Ubuntu OS and all it’s advantages and features (there’s no special Enterprise edition) for free.  In some businesses there is a genuine commitment to the greater good.  I’ll take another one with Crossover, who makes the commercial derivative of WINE (the Linux/Mac app that allows many Windows programs to be run under those OSes).  They borrow from Free software as is their right and feed their improvements back into the Free software ecosystem.  When I asked questions they gave me a discount.  They don’t include DRM on their software even though they might lose from piracy because they believe it is wrong.

This is not to say that there are not companies that are only out to make money – surely there are – but to say that not *all* companies are like that.  Similarly, not every company has a sinister motive when doing anything – from sponsoring schools to (as some would have one believe) breathing. Continue reading