LG Nexus 4 and Google Play Store

My current mobile (HTC S620 Excalibur) is a little over six years old, and has served its purpose satisfactorily.  Unfortunately, some of the buttons on the key pad are getting sticky, and the battery is losing its charge.  As a consequence, I've been looking around for a new smart phone. I've actually been looking around for a long while now, but any mobiles that both caught my interest and met my criteria were way too expensive with no contract.

Anywhoo,  although I'm by no means an 'early adopter' of new gadgets and technologies, when the LG Nexus 4 was announced, its price point and early previews were such that I fairly quickly decided this would be my next mobile and that I'd purchase one as soon as it was released.  Which brings me to today's irritation with Google and Google Play on-line store.

Irritation #1:  Google didn't announce what time on the 13th November the Nexus 4 would be available for sale.  Midnight?  Nine am? PST or EST? This lack of information told me Google doesn't think my time is valuable, and they couldn't care less if they waste it.

Irritation #2:  Either Google is incompetent at selling physical items and running on-line stores, or Google purposely 'under-stocked' the Nexus 4 so they could generate 'sold-out in 20 minutes' headlines and drive up demand.  I find it difficult to think Google incompetent.  Though Irritation #3 may suggest otherwise....

Irritation #3:  The fact that I managed to get past the 'input credit card information/billing-shipping address stage' of checkout, on three different occasions, only each time to end up with an error message and the purchase failing to complete, was extremely aggravating.  I can understand a site slowing down and such due to high traffic (though I thought Google would have been better prepared), but once the item is in the shopping cart, and you've entered all the information requested, and then you get an error!?  Frustrating.

Irritation #4:  Despite providing my e-mail address to be notified when the Nexus 4 was available, to date I never received any such e-mail.  What was the point of signing up?  Maybe they used the number of people who signed up as a way to gauge demand... but apparently not (see #2).  On the other-hand, from my point-of-view, as the Nexus 4 was never truly available, perhaps I should have waited for a notification e-mail and, if I had, I wouldn't have wasted my time.  So... shame on me?

Irritation #5:  This last is not really Google's fault, but I had to mention it here.  The fact that while the Nexus 4 was sold-out on the Play Store, units were quickly being advertised on-line (at a significant mark-up) on sites like E-bay -- this bothered me.  I don't begrudge anyone trying to make a quick profit legally.  If someone is willing to pay those inflated prices more power to them.  I just hope that in turn no one begrudges the fact that I sincerely hope the number of people who are willing to pay inflated prices (instead of waiting for Google to re-stock, or moving on to a different mobile) are few and far between.

Whew.  This post turned out longer than I thought it would be.  So... what now?  For myself it's now a simple matter of waiting to see which occurs first:  whether Google can make available for purchase (by me!) a Nexus 4, or another mobile is released that meets my criteria and price.

Filling Up with Gas

As in gasoline.  For automobiles, not what happens when someone eats too many beans, or gorges on probiotic foods without first working up to it.

Anywhoo, I may have posted before when I was still south of the 49th parallel that I avoided certain gas stations because of issues with filling up.  Even though the tank was still empty the lever on the gas handle would click repeatedly, making it take forever to fill up, and making it uncertain whether the tank was actually full until I started up the engine.

After moving to the Land of Tim Hortons, I go to a specific gas station that worked great ie. the lever only clicked once and only when the tank was full.  Until this morning, that is.  The R's tank (62.0 L) was almost empty, though the warning light hadn't come on.  What happened?  Well it clicked at 33 L.  Eh?  While that in itself wouldn't have been so bad, ignoring the fact that half-full isn't what I consider even close to full, the issue was that the lever never clicked again -- even after gasoline was spilling out and overflowing down the paint.

Ugh.

I wonder if something is wrong with the R's gas level sensor or something? 

Driving in a Parking Lot

More pet peeves:

1. Drivers swerving off the lane to avoid a speed bump.  It's one thing when the lot is empty, it's another when there are parked cars and pedestrians (like me) in the vicinity.
2. On a related note, drivers driving through a parking lot like it's a completely empty field despite clearly marked lines, parked cars, and pedestrians (like me -- can you guess what motivated me to post, today?).
3. Pedestrians who insist on crossing at high risk locations.  Not just risk for themselves, but for the drivers.  Many, many years ago by my office a pedestrian decided to cross the street at one of the stupidest locations, at the stupidest time, and in a stupid fashion.  Luckily, he was untouched.  Not so lucky was the driver who was forced to a screeching stop, or the other two vehicles who crashed into him in sequence.  But hey, the pedestrian was fine, so who cares?

Lance Armstrong Statement

Armstrong's statement over charges

"There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, 'Enough is enough.' For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in winning my seven Tours since 1999. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a two-year federal criminal investigation followed by Travis Tygart's unconstitutional witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for our foundation and on me leads me to where I am today — finished with this nonsense.

I had hoped that a federal court would stop USADA's charade. Although the court was sympathetic to my concerns and recognized the many improprieties and deficiencies in USADA's motives, its conduct, and its process, the court ultimately decided that it could not intervene.

If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA's process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and — once and for all — put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance. But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair. Regardless of what Travis Tygart says, there is zero physical evidence to support his outlandish and heinous claims. The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colours. I made myself available around the clock and around the world. In competition. Out of competition. Blood. Urine. Whatever they asked for I provided. What is the point of all this testing if, in the end, USADA will not stand by it?

From the beginning, however, this investigation has not been about learning the truth or cleaning up cycling, but about punishing me at all costs. I am a retired cyclist, yet USADA has lodged charges over 17 years old despite its own eight-year limitation. As respected organizations such as UCI and USA Cycling have made clear, USADA lacks jurisdiction even to bring these charges. The international bodies governing cycling have ordered USADA to stop, have given notice that no one should participate in USADA's improper proceedings, and have made it clear the pronouncements by USADA that it has banned people for life or stripped them of their accomplishments are made without authority. And as many others, including USADA's own arbitrators, have found, there is nothing even remotely fair about its process. USADA has broken the law, turned its back on its own rules, and stiff-armed those who have tried to persuade USADA to honour its obligations. At every turn, USADA has played the role of a bully, threatening everyone in its way and challenging the good faith of anyone who questions its motives or its methods, all at U.S. taxpayers' expense. For the last two months, USADA has endlessly repeated the mantra that there should be a single set of rules, applicable to all, but they have arrogantly refused to practice what they preach. On top of all that, USADA has allegedly made deals with other riders that circumvent their own rules as long as they said I cheated. Many of those riders continue to race today.

The bottom line is I played by the rules that were put in place by the UCI, WADA and USADA when I raced. The idea that athletes can be convicted today without positive A and B samples, under the same rules and procedures that apply to athletes with positive tests, perverts the system and creates a process where any begrudged ex-teammate can open a USADA case out of spite or for personal gain or a cheating cyclist can cut a sweetheart deal for themselves. It's an unfair approach, applied selectively, in opposition to all the rules. It's just not right.

USADA cannot assert control of a professional international sport and attempt to strip my seven Tour de France titles. I know who won those seven Tours, my teammates know who won those seven Tours, and everyone I competed against knows who won those seven Tours. We all raced together. For three weeks over the same roads, the same mountains, and against all the weather and elements that we had to confront. There were no shortcuts, there was no special treatment. The same courses, the same rules. The toughest event in the world where the strongest man wins. Nobody can ever change that. Especially not Travis Tygart.

Today I turn the page. I will no longer address this issue, regardless of the circumstances. I will commit myself to the work I began before ever winning a single Tour de France title: serving people and families affected by cancer, especially those in underserved communities. This October, my Foundation will celebrate 15 years of service to cancer survivors and the milestone of raising nearly $500 million. We have a lot of work to do and I'm looking forward to an end to this pointless distraction. I have a responsibility to all those who have stepped forward to devote their time and energy to the cancer cause. I will not stop fighting for that mission. Going forward, I am going to devote myself to raising my five beautiful (and energetic) kids, fighting cancer, and attempting to be the fittest 40-year-old on the planet."

Would it be naive of me if I said I believe Armstrong is innocent of the USADA drug allegations?  Most people, myself included, paying attention to this story have probably already decided for themselves whether Armstrong is innocent or guilty of the allegations, regardless of the outcome of any USADA arbitration hearing, now moot, of course.  Why is that?  In my case, beyond the plethora of passed drug tests, it's because I lack faith in any altruistic motives behind Mr. Tygart/USADA's actions.  Am I just being influenced by good Armstrong PR?  Perhaps.  It doesn't matter.  I want Armstrong to be innocent.  So there you go.  Until Armstrong indisputably fails an official drug test, I'll be hanging on to my naivete for a while longer.

Can Being Too Nice Be Dangerous?

It might be counter-intuitive, but recently I came across another example where being too nice might not be such a good thing on the road.  It's ironic, because I'm always annoyed when drivers display a lack of respect or safety for others by failing to signal and such.

There was a car speeding on the curb lane that failed to beat the traffic before reaching some parked cars, and hence came to a stop and turned on his/her signals to merge.  The car directly in front of me, who was leading a line of five vehicles, came to a rapid stop to let the person merge.  I had room to stop, but my first response after hitting the brakes was to glance in my rear-view to see whether the big honking SUV behind me -- with a bumper worryingly much higher than mine -- was paying attention and would stop in time, and the vehicles further down the line.

Anywhoo, everyone stopped in time, but I couldn't help but wonder whether the driver ahead of me, who was just trying to be nice, was perhaps being too nice in this situation.

Thinking Too Much

The other day I was in the kitchenwares section looking at silicone funnels, trying to remember how well silicone stood up to organic solvents, and mildly annoyed at the absence of any glass funnels.  It must have been at least thirty seconds or so before I remembered I don't have organic solvents in my kitchen.

I need a vacation.

The Avengers

I went to see The Avengers today.  I stuck with regular old 2D instead of watching it in 3D.  I'm not a big fan of movies in 3D -- truthfully, if local cinemas only offered The Avengers in 3D I would have waited to watch it on BD.

When I first heard they were producing The Avengers I wasn't too keen on the idea.  Why?  Because it's been my experience that as the number of heroes/protagonists and villains increase the quality of the film decreases.  See Spiderman 3, Iron Man 2, Batman Returns....  I have no idea why sequels feel compelled to increase the number of villains.

Anywhoo, I was relieved to find The Avengers maintained a pretty good balance between all the characters.  There was no point in the film where I was thinking, "why are they wasting so much screen time on this character?"

I've only watched Iron Man and Iron Man 2, none of the Hulk movies, Captain America, or Thor, but several times I found myself thinking, instead, "huh, I wouldn't mind learning more about this character."  I'm not saying I'm going to rush out to rent them (problematic ever since Blockbuster went kaput), but I'm definitely more open to the idea of doing so.

I give The Avengers 4 out of 5 stars.  This is a film I'm definitely purchasing on BD.

Aside.  The trailer for the new Spiderman film actually looked interesting.  At least, it made me question my decision to not see it in the cinema.