Update: iPhone or Android? Which Smartphone is Best?

Back in January, I questioned everyone on which smartphone I should purchase next. My cellphone at the time was getting toward end of life and I couldn't decide between another Android-based phone or switching over to an iPhone. Over the past 8 or 9 years, my PDA/smartphone usage has run through all different types of phones and operating systems. First, I had a Palm Pilot, then a Blackberry, next another Blackberry, and then I purchased the HTC Evo (Android). In May, it was time make a final decision: Android or iPhone. Which did I purchase?  The iPhone.  

What made me choose the iPhone over the Android? It really boiled down to price. When I looked at my options, I could either get an iPhone 4S for $50 (quite frankly it's not worth the extra money to get the iPhone 5) or the Samsung Galaxy for $100. I'm all for saving money. Also, when I looked at the Samsung Galaxy, I found it too big and bulky for a "mobile" phone. Mobile phones should be small, sleek, and portable. The Galaxy feels more like a small tablet and less like a mobile phone. Blech!

Now that I've had the iPhone for a couple of months, I thought I'd give my two cents worth on which is best. Quite frankly, I don't see as one is much better than the other. Each device has their positive and negative aspects. For me, here's the important stuff - both phones need to provide all the features that I require: phone, email, text, internet access, and the very few apps that I use. I'm not a huge app user but both phones provide a multitude of apps - more than I could ever need or want. I do not use the phone to watch videos (I have a laptop and/or television for that), therefore the smaller screen isn't a factor. The Android is customizable, but the lack of customization with the iPhone is not an important enough feature for me to waste an additional $50. I have found that the battery life of the iPhone is superior to the Android. Ergo, I went with the least expensive option.

Yes, I truly like the iPhone, but I probably would have been equally happy with a smaller, sleeker Android-based phone. I would have hated the Galaxy for its over-sized clumsiness. What would I have gotten if the cost and design hadn't been eliminating factors ... hmmm.  I just don't know.

Fun fact:  According to a Nielson survey, women prefer iPhone while men prefer Android. 

Being Loved Despite Flaws and Foibles!

Today I was reading a New York Times OpEd piece from June 15, 2013, written by Tim Kreider and it had such wonderful wisdom that I thought I'd share some of the highlights in this posting. The funny thing about this column is that just minutes before reading this article I had been thinking some very similar thoughts. 

Mr. Kreider mentions about how he received an email which wasn't meant for him, but was about him. Ugh! We've all done something similarly stupid. You respond to an email, making humorous (to you), snarky, or hurtful comments and it accidentally includes the person about which you are writing. Mr. Kreider didn't exactly take offense to what was written...

"What was surprisingly wounding wasn’t that the e-mail was insulting but simply that it was unsympathetic. Hearing other people’s uncensored opinions of you is an unpleasant reminder that you’re just another person in the world, and everyone else does not always view you in the forgiving light that you hope they do, making all allowances, always on your side. There’s something existentially alarming about finding out how little room we occupy, and how little allegiance we command, in other people’s heads" [emphasis added] (Kreider).

That last sentence is unequivocally accurate. Despite my best efforts not to live in the past, I cannot get past a similar thought to Mr. Kreider's - about "what little allegiance we command" from those people for whom we consider friends and family. We'd all like to think that the love and affection from friends and family is absolute. But then he (accurately) points out that we are all guilty of doing the exact same thing:

"Needless to say, this makes us embarrassed and angry and damn our betrayers as vicious two-faced hypocrites. Which, in fact, we all are. We all make fun of one another behind one another’s backs, even the people we love. Of course we do — they’re ridiculous. Anyone worth knowing is inevitably also going to be exasperating: making the same obvious mistakes over and over, dating imbeciles, endlessly relapsing into their dumb addictions and self-defeating habits, blind to their own hilarious flaws and blatant contradictions and fiercely devoted to whatever keeps them miserable. (And those few people about whom there is nothing ridiculous are by far the most preposterous of all.)"  (Kreider)

But does that indicate that we truly don't care about the friend or family member for which we are maligning. Definitely not...

"The operative fallacy here is that we believe that unconditional love means not seeing anything negative about someone, when it really means pretty much the opposite: loving someone despite their infuriating flaws and essential absurdity...We don’t give other people credit for the same interior complexity we take for granted in ourselves, the same capacity for holding contradictory feelings in balance, for complexly alloyed affections, for bottomless generosity of heart and petty, capricious malice. We can’t believe that anyone could be unkind to us and still be genuinely fond of us, although we do it all the time" (Kreider).

Mr. Kreider makes the valid point that even though we may occasionally say things for which others might take offense, it does not mean that we do not care about these people. In fact the opposite is true, we care just as much about them because of their idiosyncrasies. I am struggling how to apply this knowledge to past friendships for which I feel I was intentionally slighted, but I know that there is a overall valid lesson in what Mr. Kreider writes.

You can read the entire text here: I Know What You Think of Me. It's well worth a few minutes out of your life to read.

Really Bad Uses of Facebook!

This morning, I was watching the local news which reported on this following item:

This story just shocks me! Not only does this man kill his wife but he posts about it on Facebook with a picture of her dead body!! What the...???

Then I came across these little tidbits:

• A couple of years ago, an Australian man admitted to killing his daughter after posting "bout 2 kill ma kid" on Facebook.
• Last month, a Florida woman got 21 years in prison for bragging on her Facebook page about stealing $20 million in a case of IRS tax fraud.
• In June 2013, during his trial for assault, a UK man posted the following Facebook status: "I think I got away with it" - gets 46 week sentence.
• Earlier this year, an Oklahoma mom tried to sell her kids for $4,000 on Facebook so she could pay for her boyfriend's bail.
• In 2011, a Philadelphia woman attempted to use Facebook to hire a hit-man for $1,000 to kill her ex-boyfriend and father of her child.

There are a ton of people who post their criminal activity on Facebook. HappyPlace.com has a list of the most idiotic confessions to criminal activity every posted on Facebook. Of course, one of the best postings on Facebook is courtesy of Wayne County Sheriff's Facebook page.

I'm sure we have all posted something on Facebook that we later regret. I know I have (and learned valuable lessons on what not to post), but I've certainly never posted anything of a criminal nature! Facebook is equally wonderful and awful. But some Facebook users take things to the extreme. Let me sum up for any dunderheads out there. 

Do not post your criminal activity on Facebook, morons!

What would you do if a Facebook friend posted about their criminal activity?? Would you turn them in? Ignore their crime? I sincerely hope I don't have friends this immoral and stupid!

"Harold Fry" Makes an "Unlikely Pilgrimage"

Let me ask you a question: Would you be willing to walk 600 miles if you believed that your pilgrimage would save the life of a terminal friend? I would think that most people would answer "no".  Last week, as I was leaving the library with a stack of books, I got to chatting with a fellow book lover. We talked about the books that we had recently read and she recommended a book she just finished reading. After giving me a brief summary of the book, I decided to add British author Rachel Joyce's debut novel, The Unlikely Pilgrimage of Harold Fry to my reading list.

Summary: "Meet Harold Fry, recently retired. He lives in a small English village with his wife, Maureen, who seems irritated by almost everything he does. Little differentiates one day from the next. Then one morning a letter arrives, addressed to Harold in a shaky scrawl, from a woman he hasn’t heard from in twenty years. Cancer patient, Queenie Hennessy is in hospice and is writing to say goodbye. But before Harold mails off a quick reply, a chance encounter convinces him that he absolutely must deliver his message to Queenie in person. In his yachting shoes and light coat, Harold Fry embarks on an urgent quest. Determined to walk six hundred miles to the hospice, Harold believes that as long as he walks, Queenie will live. A novel of charm, humor, and profound insight into the thoughts and feelings we all bury deep within our hearts, The Unlikely Pilgrimage of Harold Fry introduces Rachel Joyce as a wise – and utterly irresistible – storyteller." (Amazon.com)

Synopsis: In Walden, Henry David Thoreau observed, "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation," and I could not help but recall this quotation as I began Rachel Joyce's lovely debut novel. As the novel begins, our unlikely hero, Harold, is merely existing. The reader is not given many details, but it is clear that Harold's marriage to Maureen is an empty shell, and that there are problems in his relationship with his adult son, David. Then his carefully orchestrated charade of a life begins to come apart after Harold gets a farewell letter from a friend, Queenie Hennessy, who is dying of cancer and living in hospice 600 miles away. Queenie had "done something nice" for Harold twenty years previous, and he always regretted not thanking her. Whatever she did for Harold is shrouded in mystery, but if the reader is patient, all questions are resolved.

Harold writes a perfunctory response to Queenie's letter, but as he goes out to mail it, something prevents him from putting it in the first mailbox he finds. He passes postbox after postbox, and eventually makes an impulsive decision to walk from his hometown of Kingsbridge to Queenie's hospice in Berwick-upon-Tweed, about 600 miles, believing that she will live as long as he keeps walking. Thus begins his transformation from a kind of living death to fullness of life. He walks 5 to 10 miles per day and mulls over the events in his life: the good, the bad and the ugly.

Readers will recognize a familiar theme, found in such writings as The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Wall-E: the hero leaves his comfortable world in order to embark on a quest. Along the way he meets both helpers and tempters, and he eventually returns to the known world with a fullness of knowledge or with something to enrich his community and himself.  

Harold Fry fits this motif to a tee. He meets many people and even animals along the way, and he gains something of value from each of them, even those who would deter him from his quest. Meanwhile, back at home, Maureen is undergoing her own transformation as she worries and responds to Harold's calls, postcards, and gifts. Nothing is as Harold or Maureen expect it to be. And the end of the quest is rewarding, but not in the way Harold imagines.

One final observation: This is a beautifully written novel. Most readers will love Ms. Joyce's use of language, especially in descriptions of the natural world. I am stunned that this is the author's first novel, though she has written many screenplays for the BBC. I hope to read much more of her work.

Most readers will like and appreciate Harold Fry if they persevere through the ambiguity at the beginning. Everything falls together eventually, I promise! Highly recommended.

Rating:  5 out of 5

Harold's walk!

The Upside of Cancer/Cancer Treatment

In order to offset the looks of pity or sorrow when someone learns about my cancer diagnosis and treatment, I decided to come up with a list of positives to regale people with which helps them feel a little more comfortable. I find that making light of certain aspects of my disease makes the pity go away quicker. For anyone offended by this post, suck it! It's my cancer and I'll do what I want.  :-)

• Saving time and money on hair care: Seriously, I am totally all about embracing being bald. The time saved on not having to wash, condition, comb, and style a head of hair is worth the loss of said hair. Quite frankly, if it were socially acceptable, I'd remain bald for the rest of my life... however long that might be. I don't understand people who hate being bald.
• No need to shave armpits and legs: Another time and money saver is not having the annoying task of shaving of armpits and legs. While they are not the worse tasks the world, it's still a joy not having to worry about these chores. I shaved them both a couple of weeks ago and now I won't have to shave again for months!
• Strategic use of the cancer card: First off, let me say that I do not use the cancer card willy-nilly. In fact, I don't think I've used it at all except on myself when I wanted to avoid doing housework. But come the fall when I am back teaching, I fully plan on pulling out the cancer card every time one of my students comes in with a lame excuse as to why they didn't do their homework. "Seriously, you couldn't read a chapter in a book when I come to work, teach, grade papers, take a masters class, and do my homework - all while battling cancer?!" Let's see them argue against that statement!
• Getting occasional free stuff: I do not ask for any special treatment... EVER... but if my local Starbucks barista wants to treat me to the occasional free drink or snack, who am I to say "no". When I go there for my daily treat, I fully expect to pay. They refuse to take my money! Whether it's because of my cancer or because I'm one of their favorite customers (their words, not mine) or a combination of both, I'm not sure, but I'll take it.
• Not having to worry about retirement funds: A friend and I were chatting the other day and she said that I was lucky because one of the best perks of working in a public school is the great retirement plans. I gave her a look and she said that perhaps I wasn't exactly worried about that. I laughed. She's correct. Most people worry about whether they will have enough money to retire. Honestly, it's not my biggest concern.
• Not worrying about aging: One of the few positives in my life is that I have never looked my age, nor does anyone in my immediate family. We all look easily 10 years (or more) younger than we really are. It's nothing that we do - it's just good genes. But with my specific diagnosis, I probably will not have to deal with the aging process. No gray hair, no wrinkles, no age spots, no loss of hearing or teeth, no osteoporosis, no turkey neck, etc. Score!

I am sure that I'm missing a few other positive aspects to my current medical woes, but this list is a good start.  Also, it's important to remember the advice given by Monty Python - Legendary!!! Feel free to sing along - I did.

Sorry Seems to be the Hardest Word!

There's something that I have never understood - why is it so hard for people to apologize? It's two small, very simple, easy to pronounce words: I'm sorry. Nothing could be easier, wouldn't you say? Personally, I find methylchloroisothiazolinone to be a much more difficult word. <shrugs> Seriously, though I have never had issue with admitting fault when I know that I'm in the wrong. I've even been known to apologize even when I'm not in the wrong, just to make amends with another person and move on with my life and yet it seems that so many people have issues with apologizing.  

What is it about these two words that freaks people out? Is pride? Stubbornness? Being defensive? Is there a much deeper seeded problem? Most likely, it's a combination of many factors and, of course, depends on the person in question. Or is it possible that some people just don't recognize when they are in the wrong? That seems unlikely as no one is perfect in this world and everyone makes mistakes. But is it possible that they just truly do not recognize when they've hurt, injured, or insulted another person? Or is it that some people are just douche bags? In trying to answer these questions, I came across an article from Psychology Today which seems to have some interesting information! I'm not certain if this article is based on research or is merely the author's opinion but it does have some thought provoking content.

Sing it, Elton:

Okay, I had to post this video of Sheldon Cooper making a grand gesture of an apology to Amy Farrah Fowler - quite simply one of the funniest moments from The Big Bang Theory:

"The Beekeeper's Apprentice" is Buzzingly Good...

I admit it - I'm a Sherlock Holmes fan.  I love Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's novels and short stories, the British television series - Sherlock, the American television series - Elementary, and all the movies, especially the old Basil Rathbone and the new Robert Downey, Jr. movies. For well over 125 years, Sherlock Holmes has been battling foes with wit and intelligence and entertaining the masses. At the suggestion of a friend, I picked up The Beekeeper's Apprentice (1994) by American mystery writer Laurie R. King and found a delightful new Holmes story.

Synopsis: "Long retired, Sherlock Holmes quietly pursues his study of honeybee behavior on the Sussex Downs. He never imagines he would encounter anyone whose intellect matched his own, much less an audacious teenage girl with a penchant for detection. Miss Mary Russell becomes Holmes' pupil and quickly hones her talent for deduction, disguises and danger. But when an elusive villain enters the picture, their partnership is put to a real test." (Goodreads.com)

Review: What would happen if you teamed an older, semi-retired Sherlock Holmes with a brilliant, brassy, modern young woman? The Beekeeper's Apprentice! This novel, being the first of the Holmes/Russell novels (there are 12 books in the series as of this posting), establishes the world of Mary Russell and Sherlock Holmes which I assume is further developed in later novels. That being said, thus far I have fallen in love with King's Holmes as much as I love Doyle's. Mary Russell, the narrator and "author" of the novel, depicts Holmes in a very different way than Watson does in the Doyle books. Why? Because she sees him differently. Mentally, she is his equal. She is an audacious, modern woman, while Watson, a strict Victorian gentlemen, almost puts Holmes on a pedestal. It is unsurprising that their views on Holmes would be different. 

The narration is exquisitely charming and you can sense from how it is written that Mary Russell is a scholar, not a novelist. But Russell is much more than just another Holmes biographer. Dialogue between Holmes and Russell is edgy and intelligent, and the chemistry between the two is phenomenal. Holmes's character remains full and intact, and we see sides of him Watson never was able to explore. Character traits that were two-dimensional in Doyle's books are brought into three dimensions in King's, and we see precisely how human and real this genius of a man is. The entire novel contains such a reality and charm that one can swear that the characters actually existed. The only thing that I found to be strange was a trip to Jerusalem in the middle of the book, which seems to serve no purpose. Although I believe the Jerusalem trip is further covered in a future book, so it is perhaps that it acts as a mere introduction to a longer story.

Even grizzled Baker Street Irregulars will enjoy this book. It's sure to charm even the hardest Holmes purist, and give others a glimpse into the humanity of Holmes, whereas the Doyle books were mainly about the adventure and the mystery. It's a brilliant start to what I hope will be an even better series, and I recommend this first book in the series to those both familiar and unfamiliar with Sherlock Holmes. Although is there anyone really unfamiliar with Holmes? I am eagerly anticipating reading the next novel in the series.

Rating: 5 out 5 stars

Here are some of my favorite moments from Sherlock: