Uncategorized

GE Will Stop Making CFL Lightbulbs Because LEDs Are Better

This is good news for a few reasons. Figuring out exactly which one to buy can be a pain: Incandescent bulbs are cheap, but burn out easily. CFL bulbs, the weird curly things that’ve become popular in recent years, are brighter and last longer. However, they take long to warm up and use poisonous chemicals like mercury to generate light. LEDs last the longest and use the least amount of energy, but they’re also the most expensive. Now, thanks to General Electric, it will be a little easier to sort through the options.

Source: GE Will Stop Making CFL Lightbulbs Because LEDs Are Better

Advertisements

New Products

via xkcd: New Products.

9 Facts About Computer Security

What’s The Truth About These Digital Dangers?

9 Facts About Computer Security That Experts

Wish You Knew.

Auto-Tune: One Of The 50 Worst Inventions

Time Magazine called it one of the 50 worst inventions while others have compared it to body modifications and plastic surgery. Some artists have protested, too, like Jay Z, who released an “anti-Auto-Tune” album and a song called “D.O.A. (Death of Auto-Tune).”

But mostly, audiences have been happy to settle into ignorant bliss about how much our favorite songs, like women on magazine covers, are digitally enhanced. That’s why people acted shocked, outraged, and disdainful when unedited tracks of Britney Spears awful singing recently leaked to the internet…

But was any one really surprised that Britney sounded so bad? And will this actually hurt her career? Nah, lets just sit back and enjoy the wonders of Auto-Tune.

via Auto-Tune Developed By Oil Engineer – Business Insider.

Dystopian Books Have Trailers Too

 

Trailers for two dystopian views of the future.  The new Mad Max looks like it captures the look and feel of my favorite Mad Max: The Road Warrior. Looking forward to seeing it. Hopefully it won’t be another Thunder Dome.

The trailer for Air looks much more intriguing,

That said, if it came down to which one I would want to see on the big screen, Mad Max would get my popcorn money.

Brands In Publishing

Genre tells us nothing about the quality of the story, but does “Random House” and “Harper Collins” give us any idea as to the caliber of the writing? Are you aware of the “Brand” book you are buying?

The decades of invisibility have left publishers at a real and distinct disadvantage in the modern landscape. Nearly every other company—in every other industry—has spent those same decades working tirelessly to make sure every person on Earth was aware of their name, logo and products. The Nike swoosh “means” something: quality, fitness, health. The Apple logo “means” something: quality, beauty, power. The New York Times logo “means” something: quality, investigation, information. All of these companies have fought to make sure their brand was synonymous with quality… and a few other things.

To date, very few publishers have been able to successfully create a brand that “means” anything to readers. Most publishers have never spent much time on brand-building beyond stamping their logo on a book’s spine, and therefore their names and logos connote nothing to their products’ end users other than, perhaps, “book.” Right now—during this digital avalanche of self-published content that’s falling on our heads—is when readers most need to see established symbols of expert, edited, quality content. Readers are looking for clues that will help them to separate wheat from chaff—both online and on the shelves. Publishers have an opportunity, now, to build brands that fill that need.

via Does Your Publishing Brand Mean Anything to Anyone? : Book Business.