Long time, no post

Well, it may seem like I died or took a really long vacation but, alas, I have not. I am alive and well, having survived a few hellishly stressful days filled with lots of work and studying. (I tell you, if I didn't love computers so much, I'd really hate them.)

There have been a lot of thoughts that I've collected since my last post, some of which have been lingering in my brain so long they're starting to decompose and smell like my rancid kitchen sink. So anyway, here's a quick rundown of what's going on in that big ol' lump I like to call a head:

- I went to the NIU football game last Friday and it was a lot of fun. They started off looking pretty bad against Bowling Green but turned it around in a big way and just crushed them after the first quarter. Hopefully the worst of their season is behind them and they can come out and make it to a bowl. (Hey, better late than never, right NCAA?)

- Well the Bears had a near repeat performance of their Packers victory in Minnesota last Sunday. The only thing missing was the win. Both games featured the Bears playing better than I--and most everybody--expected. Both also, unfortunately, featured season-ending injuries to key players. Rex Grossman is gone, and we don't know if he'll be able to recover from this. Let's hope so, 'cuz I like what I've seen from that young QB.

- The Cubs are sure making it hard on themselves in their pursuit of the National League wild card spot. LaTroy blew another 1-run save today and they lost in 12 innings to lowly Cincinnati. Meanwhile, the Astros just finished sweeping the Cardinals and the Giants are on their way to beating the Padres again. It's certainly been an interesting season no matter how it ends. Let's just hope that if the Cubs miss the playoffs they can make the necessary adjustments for next season. (Armando Benitez, anyone?)

- Bill, Chad, and I are still watching 24 on DVD. We're on to season 2, and I have to say I love this show. I am surprised by how enjoyable it is the second time through, having watched both seasons over the span of a month in July and August. Every night when I get back from class or need a break from schoolwork I crave the next episode of 24 like an alcoholic craves just one more drop of that sweet, sweet booze.

- I finally hunkered down and finished Doom 3 last weekend. Being a huge fanboy of the classic Doom games, I have to say the third iteration met and surpassed my expectations. Is it for everybody? No, I wouldn't go that far. The gameplay is nothing new and I can see how it could get old for some people. I, on the other hand, love creepy, atmospheric games like Resident Evil and, as such, this one was right up my alley. I never really got bored at the game and didn't mind the cheap scares (i.e., when bad guys suddenly attack you from behind... or jump out a closet at you.) I'd give the game a solid 9/10.

- Bush and Kerry have their "debate" tomorrow. I'll be watching it but I doubt there'll be anything substantial coming out of it.

Alright, I think that just about covers it. I'll be back again as soon as my new-found laziness wears off.

-Mark

Takedown!

After succumbing to the great reviews, Bill finally rented Burnout 3: Takedown. Him, Dan, and me played it for a few hours this afternoon and I must say the reviews were dead on. This game is FUN! Racing games are kind of iffy for me, in that they are cool and a I love racing for the most part, but I quickly get bored with it. Not with Burnout. The races are fast, intense, and full of close-calls, and there are plenty of gameplay types to keep you interested.

I don't know if I'll pick this game up myself, but it's at least worth a rent. Give it a try!

-Mark

Let's go to the Rollerdome and play some indoor football!

Well, it's Bears-Vikings week. After the Packers, the Vikes are a close second in the Bears rivalry list, as well as the list of teams I (and most Bears fans) hate most. In fact, I've found that I actually have a deeper hatred for the Vikings' players than I do the Packers', as the Queenies do more showboating and have bigger mouths. (Of course that makes it twice as nice when they annually fail to back up their talk in the playoffs!)

The Bears and Packers rivalry is older and has a lot more history. The Bears have also fared much worse in it lately than in their rivalry with the Vikings. But just going up to that dome and playing amongst the fans dressed as Norseman, with that stupid horn that they blow... don't get me started!

I do think that the Metrodome can be a harder place to play in a given year than hallowed Lambeau Field, and usually when the Bears go up there something memorable happens. Here's a list of my top 3 recent Metrodome moments:

3. In 2001, the surging Bears met the struggling Vikings in a Sunday Night game that was dominated by defense. In the end, the Bears kept the powerful Vikes offense without a touchdown (which broke a long streak of consecutive games scoring at least 1 TD) and they won a nailbiter to complete the season sweep.

2. A week after a surprising come-from-behind victory against Mike Ditka's New Orleans Saints at Soldier Field, the Bears were due for a letdown against the defending NFC Central Champion Vikings but it never happend. They came in, got an early lead, and held on for a thrilling victory.

1. In 1994, the 9-7 Bears and 10-6 Vikings met in the Wild Card playoffs in a game favoring the high-powered Minnesotans. The Steve Walsh-led Bears, however, came in and punched Warren Moon's Vikings straight in the jaw en route to an easy win, the only playoff victory for the Bears in the 11 seasons since Ditka was fired.

I'd also throw in the Bears' thrilling come-from-behind victory in Minnesota in 1985, in which an injured Jim McMahon came in and threw three quick TD passes to take the lead, except (A) I've only seen it in highlights, and (B) it was almost two decades ago.

Anyway, that brings me to this week's game. Both teams are 1-1, so who has the advantage? Sadly, that would be the Vikings. This would be the case even if both teams were healthy, but without 3 starting defensive backs (Mike Brown, Jerry Azumah, and Charles Tillman) the Bears are going to be tested by the Vikings' powerfull passing game.

If the Bears are going to win, they MUST win the battles in the lines, both on offense and defense. On defense they must stop the Vikings running game and get pressure on Daunte "Fumbleitis" Culpepper without having to sneak a safety up to the box. On the other side of the ball, the offensive line must create running room for Thomas Jones and keep the Vikings defenders off Rex Grossman. If the Bears can do that—and that's a big if—then this will be a competitive game. Unfortunately, while I like what the Bears have been doing on both ends and think they are going places, this week will probably be too tough a challenge for this young, injured team.

Final score: Vikings 31, Bears 17

(Bears, please prove me wrong!)

-Mark

Firefox, anyone?

According to an article at CNET, Microsoft will not be releasing future patches for the chronically security-challenged Internet Explorer. As much bad press as Microsoft's gotten recently due to all the worms, viruses, and exploits that IE has introduced, you'd think Bill Gates' boys would be putting security at the forefront. (In fact, they've claimed that security is a new priority over there—emphasis on "claimed"...) Of course, as soon as they can find a way to force mass upgrades they will abandon this would-be noble goal.

See, Microsoft is running to actually improve their products, so they are forced to use this security situation—which they created with their buggy software—to provide some momentum for sales.

If Internet Explorer was a standalone product that comes bundled with the OS (and could be uninstalled), I wouldn't really have a problem with this. However, IE is integrated into Windows, meaning an IE security patch is basically an OS security patch. Depriving paying users of these patches is just poor decision-making at its finest. Now I will say that if you're using any version of Windows that derived from Windows 95 (98, Me), then you should probably upgrade anyway as long as your system has the necessary horsepower. If you're using Windows 2000 for whatever reason, however, an upgrade shouldn't be necessary. That's a good, solid operating system that provides advantages over XP, primarily in the speed and performance department.

So, what's the moral of the story? Well, if you choose to alienate your customers then don't be surprised when they start trying out alternative sofware options.

-Mark