?

Log in

No account? Create an account
In Our Day, We Didn't Teleport to Class . . . We Walked. AND I LIKED IT! - Sauce1977 [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Sauce1977

[ Userinfo | Sauce1977 Userinfo ]
[ Archive | Sauce1977 Archive ]

In Our Day, We Didn't Teleport to Class . . . We Walked. AND I LIKED IT! [Oct. 27th, 2007|07:00 am]
Sauce1977
[Tags|, , , , ]
[Current Location |Detroit, MI, USA]
[Special Music |Very Early Edison Recordings]



My grandfather never purchased cable television.

He grew up in an era where motion pictures were still sort of new. He was ten when The Jazz Singer was released. He was probably about 40 when he purchased his first television set. I don't think he owned compact music discs. I remember him talking about going to ballrooms to dance with my grandmother and their friends. His music era was probably a mix of jazz and big band.

My parents grew up without a television at first, and then they witnessed the advent of cable TV when they were in their 30s. They witnessed the birth of the home computer era along with me. They grew up with 50s pop stars and stay primarily in that musical era.

My first computer/console gaming system Atari 400. I also had a Coleco Gemini console which played Atari 2600 and Coleco carts. My first PC was an IBM PS/2 with a 486 processor that I remember being brought home from a department store like Sears, JC Penney, or Hudson's around 1991-1992. I am intimately familiar with the music of the 1980s, but I have an appreciation from all eras and genres minus country.

I've noticed in my family that generations stay stuck in eras. That includes certain eras of technology. As one grows older, one does not entirely embrace all of the new products and services. The level of adaptation varies from person to person, but one apparently does not embrace all new standards.

My mom and aunt can barely function on a PC. Video games? Forgetaboutit. My grandfather missed the home computer era, as he retired somewhere around 1982, which was long before workstations and offices were inseparable from PCs and networks. I'm still current with ability to handle games on the latest platforms, but I'm still using the Xbox-PS2 era until the prices drop for the current generation.

One sometimes wonders about companies like Microsoft. What are Apple and Microsoft for goals and time-tables? Is it just ever-expanding profit margins at this point? We shall see.

My OS remains Windows XP. Vista smells like one of those in-between junk OS's from Bill Gates. As far as I can tell, it requires a gargantuan amount of processing and memory to run, in comparison to an average XP. The aim appears to be eventual support for stunning graphics and sound beyond the multiple channels and pixels of today's average system. Functionality seems to have either stalled or taken a slight devolution.

I specifically wonder how I'm going to relate to my children or children of my closest cousins and friends in about a quarter of a century from now. I remember what life was like before the internet. I know I was able to place myself and rationalize what I'd be doing at 30 if I lived in 1930, based off my grandparents and their information. If need be, I wouldn't have difficulty with visualization of horse as the only town-to-town travel besides going on foot. Before electricity? No problem. Before the advent of recorded sound? Music concerts have been performed for ages, so there's no loss there.

What if a kid refuses to watch a 3-D optical disc of a baseball game from 1971 because it's too low-pixel of a master copy and there's no 3-D sound to hear the peanut vendor from 4 rows away . . . let alone ability to pick a virtual seat in that stadium from which to experience the POV? Will people, in general, lose that much imagination 50 years from now?

Will this younger person listen to stories about old work eras, sporting eras, music eras, and movie eras? Will they be able to imagine those eras and relate as a secondary ability? I suppose that's relative to the intelligence level of the future younger person in question.

By the way, I wish I had the VHS copy of this information around 1983. I spent hours playing Raiders of the Lost Ark and had absolutely no clue how to get to the conclusion.





There was no GameFAQs at the time. You usually had to think on your own with these games, and you LIKED it.

linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: trooper221
2007-11-05 10:41 pm (UTC)
my first was the Atari 800xl. Seven Cities of Gold vexes me still.

mind if I add you to the flist?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-11-06 01:57 am (UTC)

First Things First

I hate Bill Simmons.

And I absolutely loathe the Celtics.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: trooper221
2007-11-06 02:23 am (UTC)

Re: First Things First

I've been reading Simmons for a long time -- and I like the Celtics, but they ripped my heart out too many times. I'm cautiously optimistic about this season, and I'd like to see Banner 17, but when it comes to the NBA, I usually root for the Mavs, because Marc Cuban amuses me. I can't really watch regular season basketball, as I think defense is important part of any sport, hence I usually watch college bball.

To each his own, is my motto. What I don;t really understand, and what seems to run rampant on nflfans, is why people can;t root for their teams without trashing other teams fans. I must have been drunk when I posted my epic thread: "Hey, If You're Not A Pats Fan, You're a Douche Guzzling Touch Hole!" -- because it seems as though every time anyone says anything, there is nothing by vile ignorance.

So you can hate Bill Simmons, and I can like him, and I'll never force the Celtics on you, and you'll allow me to make jokes about Jon Kitna's halloween costume -- deal?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-11-06 02:32 am (UTC)

Re: First Things First

Sounds interesting.

I just made a 5000 dollar bet on nothing at all, so I have to get back to this pokerstars game, but I probably got more to say about the community mind than anyone else . . . just I can't get to it at the moment. This response took 10 minutes to write (screen keeps overriding all windows)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-11-06 03:23 am (UTC)

okay trying to decipher between hands - now have attention

What I don;t really understand, and what seems to run rampant on nflfans, is why people can;t root for their teams without trashing other teams fans. I must have been drunk when I posted my epic thread: "Hey, If You're Not A Pats Fan, You're a Douche Guzzling Touch Hole!" -- because it seems as though every time anyone says anything, there is nothing by vile ignorance.

I know this - I'm about perception vs. reality. If it smells like too much hype or junk, I toast it and I can get the ideas sorted out with someone who differs and that's about all that I care about other than the fact that I love american football and know a thing or two about everything.

I have no teams to really root for, save maybe the Pistons. Within that hatred for Celtics is a similar balance for that team because I realize they're good, but they aren't really as defensively tough as they used to be. Also - Flip Saunders. Bleh.

So when people go ape-rape in that gig, the first tendency for every newcomer, casual observer, or a number of people in random categories - they get really really offended or upset at the other or others, and hilarity ensues.

I get really pissed when someone is serious and they want to impress upon me or someone else a particular 'truth' that may not be the case. But that's another subject.

I may lay into someone who I know is a somewhat astute fan, but I expect the same from others when it comes to something that I may be wrong about . . . then it's just a question of colorful responses and other nonsense on where it'll go and if I have to do something to supercede. I usually don't.

There was mass hysteria last year on the subject of Devin Hester > LaDainian Tomlinson, in a nutshell - I got kinda irritated with that idea, but it was mostly due to the fact that more than a handful of people were serious about it.

We had serious trouble with overestimation of Mike Vick's ability over the years. That's kinda been put to rest now.

I whiffed on Joey Harrington, but it was fun ramming people with the idea that Harrington could actually be a better QB than Mike was . . . and have that start a storm of piss and fire.

We tear into each other because we should enjoy each other's company, I suppose. With the NFL, that kind of aggression fits the controlled rage of the sport, more or less. It ain't a par 5 county public course as flat as a board. I know this, and I don't even play golf or care squat one about that sport.

Also, there's more than a few friends on my list who probably don't like or would disagree with each other heartily and somewhat seriously and aggressively in that community. I haven't met too many people who stick around there long enough who weren't of redeeming quality there in some way, of any kind of way. I wouldn't be too worried about those guys.

So long as everyone keeps coming correct and whatnot and all that jazz, it's all good.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: trooper221
2007-11-06 03:42 am (UTC)

I tend to avoid wank --

There's no point in arguing on the Internet, but I'm not going to lie and say that I don't get frustrated by people whose response to a statement of fact is a homophobic slur or other insult. Debate however ,is a different matter. If someone has FACTS, and not just, as I call it "knee-jerk fanboy react", then I may actually change my mind.

I agree that NFL filters a kind of aggression, but at the end of the day, it's a business that's meant to entertain. And like any business, it needs quality control -- whether that's the officiating, or rule changes, or whatever.

I almost wish it were more like another form of entertainment, wrestling, in that you have distinct levels of fandom -- smart, mark, etc. and therefore can determine how much consideration to give someone when they bring something dubious to the table.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-11-06 03:48 am (UTC)

Re: I tend to avoid wank --

I try to keep that kind of "I HAYT GAYZ" and other bullshit down to a minimum. If you're a fresh one and you hit that button it tends to get sent into your bunker and blow'd up all over ya.

The kind of jury's out approach to sports in general is how these arguments get started and heated.

I don't know about other people, but I have no main rooting NFL interest. I wish more people were like that - or, if! - IF! - they were able to look beyond their team's patch and have a working knowledge of more than just their personal team.

Personally I think all team histories are the same regardless of success. It's all junk when they make that much money and they don't rep their people at all. NCAA's just a buncha kids holding serve there until they get their $$$ shot too.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: trooper221
2007-11-06 03:59 am (UTC)

With the NCAA

do you mean football, basketball, or both? And while I don't disagree with your statement, I tend to take the University's point of view, and see it as a way of exploiting young people in order to rake in revenue through alumni, television and bowl appearances.

I don't know about other people, but I have no main rooting NFL interest. I wish more people were like that - or, if! - IF! - they were able to look beyond their team's patch and have a working knowledge of more than just their personal team.

I couldn't agree more. I'm a Pats fan, but I watch every game I can, because I love the sport. And as the title of my sports blog implies (even though it's a Howard Cosell homage), it's not from any glory days nostalgia --I love it from the overhead view. My dream NFL job wouldn't be as a player but as a Defense Coordinator, because of the amount of strategy and planning that goes into it. I'm able to say, "Tony Romo is a very talented athlete, but here's where he needs to work on things" -- not, "Fuck Romo, he sucks." There's no question that Brady and Manning are going into the Hall of Fame. When you add Favre in there, that's three active quarterbacks that are HOF locks, and we get to watch them every Sunday.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-11-06 07:55 pm (UTC)

Re: With the NCAA

Sometimes, the "Fuck Romo he sucks" pertains to something a million years ago that is kind of an inside joke or a running argument between a couple people.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sauce1977
2007-11-06 01:59 am (UTC)
I am a human being and can listen to reason despite mad loathing of certain particulars, so at least I attempt to rise above humanity.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)