Auto auto...manual? :o

At the driving center today, I met Yvonne and Grace, two friends from two different time space from two different generations.

All the same, learning to drive.

And all the same, I seem to be the only one in this world driving Automatic.

And it seems like people of my age, loves automatic more than manual. The ones sitting with me waiting for the lesson to start are mostly (keyword: Mostly, thank god), tai tais or people in their late 20s/early 30s learning to drive.

I'm, almost, embarassed to be learning auto. Haha.

But why auto and not manual? Everytime I take a lesson, the instructor will ask about Hong Kong, after realising I'm not from Singapore, then, will ask why I didn't take manual. The usual response of "because my parents said so, and it's much easier" gets some pretty interesting response. No one comments on the "easier" part, which I've invented after lesson 5 because the instructor was raving on cars like Lexus don't have manual. (As if I can, or will, buy a damned Lexus. Go Skyline!)

But really, auto is so much easier. Press the accelerator, and the car moves. Brake, and the car stops. Simple as hell. No hassle.

Which is why I quite agree with Grace and Yvonne's saying that manual is more exciting. Imagine, you, in a test, and the damned engine stalls. What should you do? That old uncle in white is sitting beside you, his clipboard on his lap, his pen ready to tick "slow in restarting stalled engine". Also, there's moving off in wrong gear, wrong gear selection....

Yada yada.

And hell, I'm actually enjoying my lessons. Hopefully, I can book that damned test date soon. :o

---

Creative sues Apple.
Apple sues Creative

Lol.

Well, as I've said before, Apple > Creative.

However, what amused me was the patent which creative has.

The patent is for an invention that "provides an efficient user interface for a small portable music player.

:o

Since when was it ever efficient? Connecting a Zen Micro to the computer, and double clicking on My computer will ensure a 10 second lag as the computer detects the Zen Micro, and does some weird shit with it. The software in the Zen Micro itself is trash. It corrupts frequently, and the only way to solve it is to take out the battery, put it in again, and pray that it works this time.

On the other hand, Apple's Ipod Nano works fantastic so far. No problems. No complaints. The firmware also has no problem with the computer. No delays, no screw ups.

But really, what is Creative thinking when they are trying to sue Apple? The comic at the review session that day speaks it all: Creative is the dwarf with the club, while apple is the giant with the sword. Creative is losing millions, while Apple, on the other hand, is posting profits.

This lawsuit, if successful, won't do Creative much good as well. It's a one off payout which will hurt apple, but in the long run, Apple will win. I mean, by word of mouth, I've already told 2 friends that Creative sucks, and another few have agreed with me, after their players died after a year (outside the warranty period). On Sunday, someone wrote to the Sunday Times to complain about the Zen Micro (surprise surprise), noting that the staff recommends her to "replace".

Seriously, you expect someone to buy another new player, which would most likely, die again?

No.

They will go Apple.

Like me. LoL.

However, this is all assuming Creative wins.

What if...Creative...loses the suit?

:o

Then it will be teh funneh. Especially since Apple counter sued Creative. Lawsuits like this isn't going to end any time soon, and needless to say, won't be anywhere cheap.

Well, it better not backfire on Creative. Or, their claim to hold 40% of the world's stakes by the end of this year will definately be egg in their face.