So where to start? Well how about with something that has been of interest to me lately, iPad publishing. Its awesome. Everything about it. The more I use tablet computers, the more I get excited. The new capabilities that come with this groundbreaking technology is revolutionary. Not only is it a medium which users can access their favorite apps, but it is creating an entirely new realm of publishing.  Not only are publishers now concerned about the content that is on their pages like images and text, but interactivity is key! When preparing documents for iPads and other tablet computers, designers must be clever with not only what they put on their page, but how they do it. But only having awesome interactive elements is enough, as users must be able to understand where the interactivity exists. With ePub, designers must be prepared to ask questions like “how will a new user know how to interact with this document?”

I have had to ask these questions recently as I am currently learning to use QuarkXpress 9

While learning to use this software, I went through these mood changes of love and hate with the software. At first, I was pumped. I was like “THIS IS GOING TO BE AMAZING!” Having so many variables to work with, being able to be super creative, this was it! So as I started stumbling along my way of learning to use the software, I started having some hiccups in that I couldn’t find how to do certain things I really wanted. For example, my first instinct was to create a document that scrolled page to page horizontally when the iPad was horizontal, but then scrolled up and down for my vertical slides. I emailed a very helpful employee at Quark, who I had met a few weeks ago at R.I.T, about my problem and he told me this was the nature of the software and there was a roundabout way of doing it that involved creating a box that was the entire of the page and then creating the separate pages in that box that scroll up and down.

So this was a bit frustrating, but I see where they are coming from, its new stuff and they are trying to work out some kinks. As I continued using the software, I began encountering other problems. For example, I had some slideshows set up in my document. But how are users to know that its a slideshow if it looks just like a plain old picture? So I wanted to add little slightly transparent bubbles in the slideshow that showed you that not only it was a slideshow, but how many pictures were in the slideshow and which one you were on. Turns out this is not possible unless you have an automatic slideshow set up… Also, once you have created a digital print for the iPad, you can not just simply download it and view it. The user must also have Quark’s app on their machine before they can download the .zave file. This makes the functionality of the process even more complicated and the content less valuable there is no way the audience it will reach can be very great.

All in all, I still have a ways to go with learning the Quark software, but I definitely think there are some areas they must address before this can become a widely accepted platform for digital publishing. And also they must figure out a way so that content users create can be easily distributed to iPad owners all over.

In case any of you have forgotten or never bothered to find out what that additional $290 charge on this year’s tuition bill was this year, the U-Pass is a mandatory bus pass for all full-time students at the University of Ottawa as well as Carleton University. The additional charge to tuition was to cover the expenses of the U-Pass. The pass entitles you to the services provided by OC Transpo between September 2010 and April 2011. For students living in the suburbs of Ottawa, the bus pass is an advantage since the cost of a regular bus pass is $91.50 a month, or $732 for the 8 month span the U-Pass covers. For students who live within walking distance of the school, it is an unwanted financial burden. Effectively, everyone at the school is compelled to buy these passes but only a fraction of the students actually benefit; Socialism at its finest.

Jones decided that she wanted to try and get back some of the money that she was forced to pay to the University. She put her U-Pass up for sale online and received an offer to buy it for $250. She agreed to meet the buyer in front of the Sears at Rideau Mall to complete the transaction. Before she knew it, she was ambushed by two OC Transpo Bylaw Officers and slapped with a fat fine. The officers told her that selling the U-Pass was on a par with selling a drivers’ license.

The reality is that this student was innovative in conspiring to regain some of the capital she had lost paying tuition that included a U-Pass for which she had no need or want. She was not only reprimanded for her reaction, but she was also given a $610 ticket which now puts Jones $900 further in the hole because of the pass. On top of that, one can only ask, “where is all of the extra money that the OC Transpo is collecting going towards?” Is it to pay for these Bylaw Officers playing undercover cops? If so, that does not seem like a very appropriate use of the money. What difference does it make whether Joe Shmo or I use my bus pass? It seems like it only serves as a way to ensure that the OC Transpo collects all the additional profits of charging extra students to buy the U-Pass while not disrupting the sales of their other passes to other residents of the city.

If the students at the University of Ottawa and Carleton University are forced to purchase bus passes on top of paying for already steep tuition costs, then those students who reap no benefit from the passes should at least be given the opportunity to regain some of the financial loss they have suffered. But for right now, if you want to sell your U-Pass, just don’t say anything about it online; Big Brother is watching you!

Local filmmaker and University of Ottawa professor Lois Siegel had the recent honour of having her film Baseball Girls digitized by the National Film Board (NFB).

The film is a documentary about women in baseball and the struggle they have faced over the years for the inclusion of female participation in the sport. Siegel narrates and uses a wide variety of material in the film including interviews with owners and former players of various baseball teams, historical footage of old-time women’s baseball games, and more recent clips from tournaments and events.

“Baseball Girls isn’t timely, it’s a history of women in baseball,” Siegel explains. “The main message of the film is that if you want to do something you should be able to go out there and do it. The women in the film fought for what they believed in, despite the prejudice that they faced. Baseball Girls will not become extinct because it is pertinent at anytime to anybody that watches it. It’s the only film of its kind that goes through the entire history of women’s baseball. “

And Lois is correct; her film is far from becoming extinct. Debuting at the Montreal International Film Festival in 1995, her film has won various awards including the “Targa Citta’ Di Palmero” at the International Sports Film Festival in Palermo, Italy, a “Film Documentary” award at the 1996 Athens (Ohio) International Film and Video Festival, and a Bronze Apple Award from The National Education Media Network (California) in 1998. The film also played at the Athlete Village during the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta. This was particularly significant since that Olympiad was the first to include both baseball and softball.

Siegel played baseball and softball growing up, and her experiences gave her the inspiration for making the film. She remembers the love she had playing the game as a kid, but also the animosity she had to face trying to play the game she was so passionate for.

“I remember playing baseball at a sports camp when I was younger and being the only girl,” Siegel recalls. She was fine with the situation of playing with all boys, but when competitions occurred, the camp would ask the other teams if it would be O.K. with them having a girl playing. “The other teams were fine with it, because they thought it make it easier, but our team ended up doing really well (largely due to Siegel) and came in second overall.” A Little League coach in the United States later approached Siegel about joining their team, but the league would not allow it citing there was a problem with “safety concerns.”

Siegel’s university education was in Journalism and Comparative English Literature from Ohio University, but over the years, she has received copious amounts of education in film production by attending various classes, sessions, and workshops. As well, she has worked with multiple filmmakers and people with an extensive background in the field. She has been apart of hundreds of films, working in every aspect from directing her own films to camera operation to casting director; the list goes on. She previously taught film production at St. John Abbott CEGEP and Concordia University in Montreal before coming to the University of Ottawa to teach film as well.

Since the making of the film, Siegel’s interest in baseball has been pushed to the side to make room for her other passion: playing the violin/fiddle. Recent projects that she has worked include documentaries such as CBC’s Gambling Boys (teen male gambling addiction), Lip Gloss (female impersonators), Strangers in Town (albinism), and Stunt People.

The film can be found on the National Film Board’s website, and viewed at nfb.ca/film/baseball_girls

The game against the Lakers proved to be entertaining. Both teams had a quiet first half, with the score being 0-0 going into halftime. It was in the 69th minute that third-year Gee-Gees midfielder Tara Condos opened up the scoring after a beautiful setup by fifth-year veteran Élise Desjardins. The Gee-Gees didn’t stop there—rookie striker Elisabeth Wong and third-year defender Gillian Baggott each added a goal. The three goals were scored within an eight-minute span; clearly, the Gees’ offence had the ability to pull through when it mattered most.

“Terrible first half, terrific second half,” said Ottawa head coach Steve Johnson about the victory. “When we can create good opportunities for ourselves, we can be extremely dangerous.”

The Gee-Gees had a lot to prove to themselves and to the rest of the Ontario University Athletics (OUA) as they faced off against Laurentian on Oct. 17; the Lady Vees were the only team to defeat Ottawa this season. The Gee-Gees dominated ball possession throughout the first half, but were unable to score. After the break, the game was played more evenly as Laurentian started to attack with more liveliness, but in the end the two teams settled for a scoreless draw.

“We had a number of corners and set pieces today that we just couldn’t capitalize on, and that hurt us,” said Johnson.

Despite not scoring a goal, Wong was able to generate plenty of chances on offence. Wong’s incredible speed was on full display against the Lady Vees, as she was able to outrun defenders to the ball on multiple occasions. Even though the Gees were not able to put the ball into the back of the net, the stellar play of their young striker is something the team can definitely build on.

“She’s a very good player,” Baggott said of Wong. “With her speed—if she works on her touch a bit—she could become an amazing [striker].” With only two games left in the regular season, Baggott is confident of her team’s chances in the OUA post-season.

“We’re really excited for the playoffs. Last year, we didn’t make it to nationals, but this year, we are a [hungry] young team, and everybody can’t wait to play. We should do really well in the playoffs and make it back to competing at the national competition.”

The Gee-Gees have two road games remaining in their season: a match at Carleton (6-3-4) Oct. 20, then a match at Toronto (7-4-3) Oct. 24.

The sun was shining, the wind was strong, and an undefeated record was on the line for the Gee-Gees football team. On Sept. 18, in front of 2,119 screaming fans at Frank Clair Stadium, Ottawa faced the nationally eighth-ranked McMaster Marauders. In the end, the Gees’ hopes of a perfect season remained intact with a 43-35 victory. With the win, the Gee-Gees also redeemed themselves for their heartbreaking loss to the Marauders in last year’s Ontario University Athletics (OUA) quarter-finals.

Ottawa came out firing, as second-year receiver Ezra Millington started the scoring with a touchdown catch in the opening minutes of the game. The lead quickly dissipated, however, as Marauder quarterback Kyle Quinlan responded with a touchdown pass of his own, an instant before being leveled by a blitzing Gee-Gees defender. The first quarter of play ended with the Gees leading 10-7.

Ottawa had to overcome a tremendous number of penalties to win the game. By the end of the match, the Gees had racked up 242 penalty yards on 21 calls, including a critical flag for too many men on the field which hurt the team in the second quarter. The Gee-Gees entered the locker room trailing by a score of 21-17.

“We’ve got to look at the positives. Our guys did an amazing job on punt and kick returns not getting [penalized],” said Ottawa hea

d coach Jean-Philippe Asselin about the Gees’ discipline issues. “It’s not like we’re [being] rough or taking unnecessary penalties.”

After fourth-year quarterback Brad Sinopoli’s passes were intercepted in three consecutive drives to start the third quarter, McM

aster’s offence took advantage and jumped to a 35-17 lead. However, the resilient Gee-Gees refused to give up and were rewarded for their perseverance. First-year running back Adam Gourgon ran for a touchdown, Sinopoli threw a 20-yard score to fifth-year receiver Matthew Bolduc and the Marauders conceded a safety, all in the last six minutes of the third frame. Ottawa trailed by just two to star

t the final quarter, 35-33.

“The game is 60 minutes, so … whenever you do it, you just need to put points on the board. Our offence had a lot of adjustments to make, and in the end, we came through,” said Asselin of the offensive turnaround.

With just over five minutes r

emaining in the game, third-year kicker Matthew Falvo hit a 23-yard field goal to complete the comeback. The final nail in the coffin was provided by fifth-year receiver Cyril Adjeitey’s 106-yard touchdown reception, clinching the eight-point win for the Gees.

“It’s exciting for the fans, but we’d rather not do that every time,” said Adjeitey when asked about the fourth -quarter heroics. “We played really hard, and it doesn’t m

atter how we win, we just have to do it. This year, we have a number of talented receivers … We [all] have to step up and make big plays when we’re called upon.”

The Ottawa receiving corps—composed of Millington, Bolduc, Adjeitey, and other talents such as fourth-year Steven Hughes—was dominant once again. Sinopoli may have had four interceptions in the game, but he also found his receivers 27 times for 446 yards and added four touchdown passes to match his interception totals.

The Gee-Gees are now halfway through the OUA season and remain at the top of the conference with an unblemished 4-0 record.

“I feel like we’re getting better and improving every week,” Asselin said.

The nationally second-ranked Gees will now travel to Queen’s University to take on the Golden Gaels (1-2) on Sept. 25 at 1 p.m.

Born in Hong Kong, Suen immigrated to Canada at a young age. He began his swimming career with the Samak Swim Club, located just outside of Montreal. Suen’s talents were quickly identified by his coaches—he was a versatile swimmer who excelled at many events, including the backstroke, the butterfly, and the individual medley events.

Suen was part of the Gee-Gees recruiting class of 2007 and was the only member from that class to qualify for the Canadian Interuniversity Sport (CIS) swimming championships three years in a row. Most recently, he competed in four events at the 2010 CIS championships held in Toronto and posted a commendable 13th place finish in the 200-metre backstroke.

Though Suen was one of the smallest members of the Gees swim team, he was well-known for coming up huge in clutchsituations. His raw talents—he had a powerful underwater kick—combined with his competitive nature, made Suen a rising star in his sport of choice.

“[Suen’s] passion for swimming was immense and he was a true competitor,” said Gee-Gees head coach Derrick Schoof. Though Schoof only became Ottawa’s coach in July 2009, Suen had already made an exceptionally positive impression on his coach in the past year.

“His passing is a tremendous loss to the Gee-Gees varsity swim team. [Suen] was not only one of our top performers, but [he was] also a team leader,” Schoof said. “He was charismatic, supportive, kind-hearted, and well-liked by his teammates. He represented the Gee-Gees incredibly well and will be remembered fondly.”

Suen had many interests in his life aside from his main passion, swimming. Like many of his peers at the U of O, Suen loved playing video games, was a devoted fan of the Montreal Canadiens, and cherished the company of his friends.

“Peter was truly a one of a kind person. He loved to have fun and make people laugh. His loss is personally devastating, and my thoughts are with his family,” said Rob Irvine, Suen’s roommate at away competitions and one of his closest friends on the swim team.

Although Suen’s passing came as a shock to the entire Gee-Gees community, his memories at the university will live on forever. His charm, wit, and friendly personality touched everyone that knew him. As for the grieving swim team members, they will dedicate the 2010–11 CIS season to their former teammate, promised Schoof.

“He will be in our thoughts and we will compete hard this season in honour of his memory.”

 

“consumers find themselves frustrated by PCs at a time when a variety of information appliances are arising as substitutes for the activities they value most. Digital video recorders, mobile phones, BlackBerries, and videogame consoles will offer safer and more consistent experiences. Consumers will increasingly abandon the PC for these alternatives, or they will demand that the PC itself be appliancized” (Zittrain, 57).

There is no question of whether or not technology is changing; it is evolving all around us. For an example outside of the computer, cars are changing over from being purely fueled on oil to becoming hybrid. The question rather, is how big corporations, such as PC, can handle the changing market and demand. Will these changes be too drastic for them to meet or can companies adapt to meet the new demands?

            The belief that consumers choose products based on their own will and are independent of external influences is commonly known as “the myth of sovereign consumer choice” (Strangelove, 29). The myth originates from a conservative ideology that “the influence of the marketplace stops where the skin of the consumer starts” (29) or in other words that advertising does not affect us internally. Although this might sound good on paper, in reality this is simply not the case. Advertising plays an intricate part in consumers’ choice, regardless of whether they are aware of it or not. In the case of PC and Mac, the average consumer is bombarded by advertisements, mostly that of Mac. Over the past few years, they have launched a Mac vs. PC ad which preaches that the Mac user is unique and individualistic while the PC user is dull and boring. This campaign, not surprisingly, has been extremely effective. With Macs development of the IPod, alongside its new designs for the personal and laptop computers and its impressive advertising campaign, the day and age of the Personal PC appears to be disappearing more rapidly than ever.

            So how does PC battle this “uniqueness” war that Mac has waged upon them? Bill Gates, head of Windows, says “Computers will enable the kinds of goods that are mass-produced today to be custom made for particular customers … Often the customized item will cost no more than a mass-produced one would. In many product categories, mass customization will replace mass production, just as a few generations ago mass production largely replaced made – to – order” (Strangelove, 38). What does this mean? Well, instead of replicating Mac’s idea to battle over advertisements on who is more unique, Gates is saying that not only are they unique, but they customize their computers to your needs. Instead of just saying that they are different than Mac, they are saying that hardly any of their computers are the same. It is an idea known as the theory of mass customization (39). The same techniques have been used by McDonalds and Burger King in order to appear to have consumer uniqueness. As Burger King says “have it your way” (39). Have it your way; “ok, I would like a whopper with gumballs, fish sticks, and caviar on it please. Oh, you don’t have that? Then take the poster down.”

            “Consumers will increasingly abandon PC” (Zittrain, 57). Will the most successful company in human history, one which has dominated the computer industry since its original development in 1981really just be abandoned by their customers? Most likely, this will not be the case. Currently, millions of programs throughout the world can only be operated on a PC. My father is a PHD in Astronomy and now currently builds cameras for various telescopes being placed throughout our planet as well as our Earth’s orbit. Much of the work he does is completely reliant on the software which he runs for modeling his work and such. The software he runs only operates with Windows. Therefore, until the company which produces the software he uses decides to switch to Mac, on a professional level he will always be a PC user. This directly impacts his personal life, however, because he has a home office as well. It does not make sense for him to own a Mac if he is constantly having to be doing work on a PC. Also, for him the mere change of the lay-out from the one he is used to causes annoyance. The fact that he can only use Windows for his work has molded him, and in turn my family, into a solely PC user.

            “Microsoft’s business model for PC operating systems has remained unchanged from the founding days of DOS through the Windows of today: the company sells each copy of the operating system at a profit … As is typical for products that benefit from network externalities, having others write useful code associated with Windows, whether a new game, business application, or utility, makes Windows more valuable.” (Zittrain, 58). Windows values, in other words, are not necessarily in the software which they produce, but rather in the use value of being able to run certain programs and applications.

            This is different than Microsoft’s take with their video game system Xbox 360. They use a tactic that is also used in selling men’s razors. “Give them the razor, sell them the blades.” (Zittrain, 58). In other words, PC is making all of their money from the Xbox on the games that it runs as well as other applications for the computer. As a matter of fact “Microsoft loses money on every Xbox it sells” (58). Like a drug dealer, Microsoft is trying to get you hooked. Then, once you are hooked, they try and exploit you for every penny your worth. As an Xbox 360 user, it is clear that this is the case. The system is useless without the games, so you have to go out and buy them. Ah, but once you have the games you are still not done. The games, first of all, have online multiplayer capabilities, but that costs ten dollars a month. The only point of some of the games though, is to play online. So this basically is a necessity. Once you’ve paid this you are pretty much the clear to play; that is unless you want to play the most recently updated version of the game. In which case, you must pay once more for the update on the game. In total, you can be paying for up to five different things in order to play your video game. The applications on the Xbox are where the money is being made for windows.

            So why, if Windows utilizes these methods of applications on Xbox have they not been doing so with the PC? PC holds the beat to a different song. It is becoming clearer as the technology evolves that PC is different. Mac (creators of the Ipod, Iphone, etc..) has become a dominant force in the personal computer rivalry while windows target  business computer software and games. The capability to have your cell phone, MP3 player, and computer manufactured, with high quality, by the same company (Mac) really seems to appeal to people. In everyday life, people want to have gadgets that are compatible with other forms of technology as well as are easy to use. This is the exact message that Mac portrays in their advertisements and is the idea that the average person will associate with Mac.

            Technology is changing: how often do we hear this in our day and age? The reason why is because it is true. Zittrain’s claim, however, that “consumers will increasingly abandon the PC” (Zittrain, 57) is not the case. The Mac vs. PC battle has opened many eyes in the world of computers. Mac has resurrected one of the champions of the personal computer. PC, however, must now find its place in the world. Their development of video games (the Xbox 360) has not been matched. Although they do lose money on the systems that they sell, the profits they make off the games and applications has made them a frontrunner in the video game race. Along with this, PC will not vanish anytime soon because of its deep bound routes with businesses. Millions of business all over the world depend on PC to run the programs they need to keep their companies up and running. Will the consumer of the personal computer abandon the PC in the future? Yes, this could very well be the case. When an unmatched competitor like Mac exists, it would appear as though PC will lose the battle. However, each company will eventually become ever more experienced in their respective field, and eventually fill their own niches, or at least until another competitor arises.

I came across this video through a friend. He told me that his friend had showed him the video and that I had to watch it. Although I believe the video is making some severe over generalizations about certain aspects of human nature and society in general, I do believe that it is also very well made. It is a 5 minute video that makes you think about many different things: drug legalization, obesity, and our attitude toward the less fortunate. Whether you agree with the claims he makes or not, the fact that the user Arthim on Youtube, clearly an amature, was able to upload a video like this shows how powerful a communication device Youtube is.

Twitter is a cool website, pretty much a combo of facebook and myspace. I have been frustrated with my use of it, however, because it has had server problems. It seems as though the website right now is not capable of handling the amount of people registered. I changed my background to a pretty cool picture of water droplets, which was pretty cool since now its even more customized. I hope it gets easier to manage though as time passes, because right now I’m a little overwhelmed