We celebrate our son’s first birthday today. He’s brought so much joy into our lives that I can hardly believe it has only been a single year.

My parents, aunt, family and friends have made this a very special day with gifts for Leo (I think he must think Christmas happened again today) cards and kind wishes. A very big thanks to you all!

Tomorrow we will host a birthday party for our son at Kenneth Hahn Park overlooking the city of Los Angeles. I can’t wait to see many of our close friends and Leo’s little buddies and families there.

We love ya lil’ Leo! Here’s to your first year!

After eight great years, it seems my ride with the big F is over. Well… that's such a final way to phrase it. Hopefully the ride isn't over, just halted temporarily.

There's still been no official word if our show has been canceled before an 8th season, but at this point… well, who knows. Also recently, the big F put their planned remake of a certain 1960's prehistoric animated sitcom on hold. No word on what may get produced in the brand new fifth floor studio that was all set up for that, and thus absolutely no word on what (if any) position yours truly may occupy in said fifth floor studio one of these days. (I loved working for the big F and I'll gladly return once other productions eventually get going and I'm hopefully asked back.)

In the meantime, I just got the official 'you're hired' call today from:

That's right! The Big M! *woot!*

As usual for this blog, no mentions by name or images of anything I'm working on both for strict NDA reasons (extremely strict in this case), and also for Google search reasons. But suffice it to say, I'm psyched to be working for The Big M on a fun show with a team of awesome people including my buddy Ed that I used to work with at the Big F. 

So as Stan the Man Lee himself likes to say… Excelsior!

And… 'nuff said.

April Fools Day used to be just a private affair, things like calling up your friends and family and telling them you won the $500,000,000 California Mega jackpot lottery- and then waiting until the gears spin and your mark realizes it's April 1st. Fun stuff.

But starting the past few years and escalating ever since, I've noticed that April Fools Day is big business, and a chance for big companies to score some style points for having a sense of humor. The pranks seem to be getting more elaborate, and bigger budget every year. The best of them really make you believe for about five seconds before you go "Wait a minute…!"

Being a technology geek, I usually get all the tech related ones. This year my favorites were:

Toshiba Shapes

Tiger Direct's Kube X15

This one really made me want to believe it was real!

Sony Unveils the World's Smallest Ultrabook

Microsoft Windows 8

(Oh, wait. They're actually serious about that one.)

I pretty much hate Windows 8 already.  

I installed the Developer Preview just after it was released back around September, 2011. My one word review at the time: Awful.

Not to worry though, this was just a developer preview, so there was hope that Microsoft would realize the sheer ridiculousness of this whole mess and scrap improve it.

Fast forward to a few weeks ago, and I've since installed the Consumer Preview. I've expanded my review to two words: Just awful.  The 'improvements' so far have shown that turd-polishing is not a lost art. 

My takeaway is basically this: if the main focus of your computer use involves staring at your operating system, admiring its colors, taking long, thoughtful minutes -perhaps hours- to decide which icon to click, and lastly, very lastly, using actual applications to accomplish any sort of real world task what-so-ever, then Windows 8 in its current form will likely be perfect for you. I predict it will be the star operating system for professional dilly-dalliers for years to come. 

For everyone else, my recommendations are (as they were with Windows Vista):

1. Stick with the current Microsoft operating system. (In this case, Windows 7 which is fantastic. In the dark ages of Vista, it was Windows XP.)

2. Bite the bullet and get a Mac.

3. Wait for Windows 9.

Behold, the sheer awfulness of Windows 8:

This is my artist's rendition of what this kludge will likely look like after about 10 days of use by the average computer user: (click for larger image)

This evening we had a great dinner with our friends Marcus, Jonathan and Kristi. 

After dinner, we all took a long walk around our neighborhood. 

It's a three day weekend thanks to Presidents' Day tomorrow. Since we're both off from work, Marcus and I plan to meet up and do some more writing on our ongoing novel project. We've been writing a book for two years now! 

We finally did what millions of others are doing: we pulled the plug on paid TV. Specifically, we got rid of our DirecTV satellite service. I'll admit it, I was a little anxious at first. We don't watch a whole lot of TV (and espeically not since Leo was born) but we do enjoy plopping down and watching something when we do get the chance.

We have a Home Theater PC as a DVR and it recorded everything we found interesting off of the satellite- so there was always a long pile up of recorded shows waiting for us. My faves are Discovery Channel, History, Military, Investigation Discovery, The Learning Channel, etc. 

But cable and satellite service is (IMHO) way too expensive.  In this day and age, there are alternatives. In droves, many people are ditching the paid services and turning to the great equalizer- (no, not firearms) …the Internet. 

Rather than a cable or dish, 300+ channels (out of which you end up watching only 6 or 7) and an inflated monthly bill, the new choice is a high speed internet connection, a PC or streaming media device hooked up to the TV, and whatever programming is online.

So far, I'm not missing the satellite. (Granted, we still have the softened-blow of several hundred programs recorded to the PC).

Below is my list of must-haves for jumping to Internet-only TV:

#1: Netflix streaming. 

One can argue their online service doesn't have the latest/greatest selection of content, and one would be right. However, thus far, it's the best game in town. The simple fact is, the powers that be (major studios, TV networks) don't want Internet-only delivery to be any better than it currently is, because it's the kiss of death to their dominance. They want you to pay $80+ a month for the shows they produce/broadcast. (That AND sit through their advertising- cake and eat it.) They want you buying discs, not streaming them- hence their fighting tooth and nail to prevent netflix from getting too much of the best content online before they've had a chance to gouge every nickel possible via traditional distribution. 

But netflix is huge, popular, profitable and it's not going away any time soon, so even though the content providers would love to squash it like a bug- they can't. But it IS the only game in town, and it will remain that way. If you're looking for a better source of online streaming with newer/better stuff that's just as cheap: keep dreaming. For the foreseeable future this is as good as it gets. 

And for Leila and me, it's pretty good. No, I can't watch the latest Hollywood blockbusters two days after they're released on DVD via online streaming, but they do have a modestly decent back catalog of movies and TV series- including a lot of the Discovery series that I like. 

And Netflix streaming is easy to access. Every other new TV, streaming media box, DVD or BluRay player sold these days has access to it built in. And of course any HTPC. Done deal.

#2. Home Theater PC

This relates directly to #1 on my list. If you're completely satisfied with Netflix as the pinnacle of Internet provided entertainment (which it pretty much is) then you'll be happy without #2. You can use any of the 1,000's of dirt-cheap devices (streaming media boxes, DVD/BluRay players, TV's etc) that  are 'Internet connected'. 

But here's the rub: most of these devices are only internet connected in that they connect to the internet to get Netflix and maybe one or two other (usually less-than-stellar) sources. So you're not actually getting "the Internet" on your TV. It's an important distinction to note.  If you were thinking you'd be watching from a choice of unlimited YouTube, Vimeo, Hulu, Network TV online content, endless streaming music, as well as Googling anything that just crosses your mind using a traditional web-browser, well… you won't be. 

And although Netflix IS the pinnacle of Internet-entertainment, keep in mind that all the other possible sources combined offer a lot of choices. It's easy to think: "Well hell, how much crap do you need? Isn't one source enough? I don't watch all that much!" But in reality- that's just it. I don't watch that much TV. Which translates to: I only watch what I like, not just any old thing that's on. Which then translates to: the stuff I like to watch is harder to find. No one provider is going to have the shows I like all in one neat stack just for me. I'm going to need a lot of options in order to find *anything* that interests me. 

This is where an HTPC fits the bill perfectly.

An HTPC is  just a PC (or Mac) that hooks up to an HDTV. With a few tweaks to make using it suitable from across the room, it's the do-it-all solution. You've of course got Netflix. You have access to anything on the web. Mountains of stuff on YouTube. Classic TV series on archive.org and other sources. Radio stations. Endless music from any artist that's ever recorded. And the list goes on. "Internet-connected" with a PC means just that, in exactly the sense you're used to.

It doesn't have to be a fancy-schmancy setup like the above image; it can be a crappy old beige box PC, a laptop, a nettop, or virtually any internet-connected PC with DVI orHDMI output that you can hook up to your HDTV and sound system. Even a modest PC with decent video and audio hardware can effectively replace every other set top device, and deliver any and everything found online to your TV.

You should also have a decent HTPC keyboard with a point device built in, and/or a decent HTPC remote. (IE: like a Windows Media Center remote).

#3. Software and Internet Sites

There's Netflix of course, but there's also Hulu (I personally don't find the paid Hulu Plus worth subscribing to. Browse their content selection, and if you can find more than 3 or 4 shows you’ve even heard of before, let alone want to pay to watch- then go for it. Otherwise, they’re clearly in the tank for the powers-that-be. Which makes sense, since they are a creation of the powers-that-be.) Boxee, Amazon Video, Xfinity, and Sidereel.  Most of these sites are aggregators for the content that's also available on the online streaming sites of most of the major broadcast and cable networks.

Our living room HTPC setup, using the Kylo web-browser which is built to aggregate much of the content online into an easy to use 10ft interface

#4. An HDTV Antenna 

Don't discount good ol' fashioned OTA broadcast TV. These days all the major broadcasters broadcast in full HD, and most modern HDTVs have a tuner built in. If you have an HTPC, you can get a cheap ATSC tuner to schedule and record broadcasts in DVR fashion. For best results, stick an antenna on your roof and (if directional) use antennaweb.org (along with Google Maps) to determine the exact best spot to aim it.  Otherwise you can use an indoor ATSC antenna, but your results may vary.

The Pros of going online-only:

1. Price. Much online content is free. Netflix's streaming service is $7.99 a month. 

2. Picture Quality. Provided you have a fairly speedy cable or DSL connection, content is in most cases HD-quality. For us, it's been mostly a step-up vs. the mostly standard-def content we watched via satellite. 

3. No storage requirements. Content is online, not stored on your computer or device.

4. Advertisements. If you're used to sitting through commercials anyway because you don't use a DVR to record programs and skip commercials, then this will be a plus for you. Online advertising (thus far) tends to be very short commercials at 10-15 seconds each, then back to the show. 

The Cons of going online-only:

1. Finding what you actually want to watch, when you want to watch it. That can be difficult. Most content providers are pushing their more traditional distribution methods first, and online content begrudgingly dead-last. So few are working terribly hard to make things as easy as they could be. Most first run episodes of popular series aren't posted online until at least a day or two after they've aired. The back catalog of a series isn't likely to stay online for long either, as that's prime syndication/DVD collection material for the providers. So you'll mostly be watching things later than their original air date. If you don't care about discussing some show the next day after it aired, then you won't care if you're waiting a few days to see it.

2. Advertisements. Even though significantly shorter than on-air commercials, if you're used to a DVR and skipping commercials altogether (raising my hand) you'll find it jarring to suddenly have to suffer through them. But the concept is clearly justified. When I'm paying a hefty monthly fee for service, I think it's fair to skip the commercials which paid cable was originally supposed to eliminate. (Ever notice how the concept quickly fell by the wayside? Heck, even premium cable and public TV is chock-full of commercials as the broadcasters have their cake and eat it too.) With online content, its the only source revenue, so having to suffer through ads is reasonable. You can skip through most online shows, in DVR-fashion, but each time you do, you'll likely be forced to watch at least 15 seconds or so of commercials that can't be skipped.

3. A decent experience totally depends on your Internet speed. Dial up? Forget about it. Entry-level DSL? You'll probably have a fairly good experience, with perhaps the occasional pause due to buffering. Highest-speed DSL or cable? Generally you won't have problems. Keep in mind if you're uploading/downloading a lot of stuff at the same time you're trying to stream live content, you may run into glitches. 

4. The future is unknown. The powers-that-be are deathly afraid of the Internet. Networks that love having a monopoly on content. Studios that want  higher profits from their traditional content distribution. Politicians that can't stand the idea of information counter to their state-approved spin being freely distributed. (Basically ALL politicians, and yes, in the first world every bit as much as the third).

Together, all of these forces are very happy to collaborate and present the Internet as a threat: to democracy, to profits, to 'the children' to job creation, to virtually every hot-button issue one can name. The 'solution' -as it always is among such unholy allies-  is regulation and restriction in the guise of anti-piracy (read: censorship).

There's also the pretense that the resource itself is in limited supply (the whole myth of 'bandwidth' being a limited commodity). These Zillion-dollar corporations are hurt desperately by you downloading unlimited amounts of data, so they must impose limits "for your own good".

And the biggest ploy of all: the Internet itself in current form is "dangerous", a wicked den of porn, piracy and propaganda that no one can possibly navigate without a state-approved/corporate-sponsored nanny. Witness the recent SOPA and PIPA bills in the US congress for examples. So the Internet and bandwidth freedom we know today could one day become as restricted as the airwaves are currently- where individuals are forbidden to broadcast their own unlicensed content "for their own good", and 'limited' bandwidth rationed so thoroughly that you won't be able to effectively replace the sky-high cable bill with it.

So enjoy streaming endless gobs of data while it lasts, just know that it may not last in its current unmolested state forever.

Well, we finally bit the bullet and got ourselves a more than decent camera. Ever since the birth of our son, we've been scheming/plotting/saving to get a DSLR. He's only going to be a baby once, so we figure we owe it to him to document his early days utilizing the best 21st century tech we can vaguely afford to get our hands on.

We had a very nice Leica camera my Dad lent us, but we've learned one very valuable lesson with cameras and kids: speed is everything. Most non-SLR cameras simply aren't fast enough for little tykes, and the older they get, the faster they get.

Meaning: he's doing something cute that you want to document,  so you grab the camera and press the shutter. It better fire off a picture that exact instant. A second on the shutter, two seconds, three seconds, six seconds… no picture and he's not only not doing the cute thing anymore, he's gone. Toddled onward to something else. You missed it.

For the past three months or so since Leo's been more mobile, for every one cool moment we've managed to capture of him, there were 4 or more we missed. As he gets more and more mobile, that ratio can only get worse. Life's too short, man!

A good DSLR with a fast lens not only won't take 7 crucial seconds to take a photo, it'll take more than 7 photos in a single second. Now that's more like it!

We looked at several models, narrowed it to a choice between Nikon (D5100?) and Canon, and finally decided we're more Canon folks than Nikon. (We've had a couple nice point and shoots from Canon that served us well.) So after a bit of research, we decided on the Canon T3i body. 

The body is important, and I love the T3i, but a good lens is everything. Put a crappy lens on a good body=crappy photos. Put a decent lens on even a crappy body: you can still get good results. Probably like every shutterbug that's ever lived, it soon hits you: it's all about the glass. And it's lifelong: there's always better glass.

And so off we go. Always on the lookout for something that meets every qualification: wide open f stop, quality optics, lots of blades, and perhaps the most important thing: we can actually afford it since if it's really all that, it'll cost five, six, seven times what the camera body did. Put it this way, if the camera body and a good lens were about to go over a cliff and you could only grab one: you'd grab the lens. That's the kind of lens I'd love to have. Of course, I likely never will. 

So for now, (and far into the  foreseeable future or so) the type of lens mere mortals can afford is what we'll be using. So far, I'm in love with the 50mm 1.8 prime we got. I don't care for zooms much. I can tell I like primes.

Another thing I was happy to discover is the M42 mount. This lets you screw-mount old film camera lenses on a DSLR body. I picked up a 1960's vintage Pentax 55m lens from the Pasadena camera show for $25. The same lens would have cost $400+ in Canon EOS form. Older lenses are not only solidly built, but the optics are often stellar (ditto the blades) and you can get extreme wide f-stops like 1/4 and even 1/2. Some friends of mine at work have camera lenses from the 1940's and 50's they use on their modern DSLR cameras. I've seen some amazing results with them.

There are even some people that use 100 year old lenses on modern cameras! Great optical technology is far older than I would have guessed. I'm intrigued by the whole concept. Of course, the main compromise with using all older lenses is it's strictly manual, no auto-focus. But then, as the pros chide us mere noobs: who in their right mind buys a decent SLR to use it in auto mode anyway?

We went with our son to a New Year's Eve party at the home of our friends Marcus, Kristi, and Jonathan. We only stayed up to see the New Year in the central time zone… we were home in bed by the time it was 2012 in California. 

Our New Year resolutions this year? The same as every year: don't make New Year resolutions!

Last year, Leila and I went for a Christmas trip to Long Barn, CA. This year, we went on a similar trip, this time in nearby Strawberry, CA. Just like last year, our friends Irene and Tofique -and their three kids Evelyn, Erik and Emil- invited us up to share a cabin they rented, along with our mutual friends Kristi and Kalmer. 

Leila went to grade school with Irene and Kristi- they've known each other over 30 years, since first grade! We all got together in Los Angeles back in June, 2005 when Irene and Tofique's daughter was very little.

Leila and I took Leo for a stroll around Pinecrest Lake- this time of year it was mostly empty and what little water remained was partially frozen over. 

Enjoying nature next to the Stanislaus River in Strawberry, CA. 

On a forest hike with Leo.

Pop and Leo relax back in the warm cabin. 

At the Strawberry Store, complete with a statue of Bigfoot. I was hoping we might catch a glimpse of the real thing. It's said there have been many sightings in this part of the Sierra Nevadas- but no such luck for us. Or could it be that not encountering Bigfoot is actually a good thing?

The kids got to enjoy a second Christmas during the evening as we were fortunate to find a small Christmas tree, and everyone put presents they had brought under it. Having had a blast opening his gifts that morning at our house, Leo was stoked to have a go at it again.

We all piled into our cars and struck out for the Sonoma Pass- the 2nd highest elevation of the Sierra Nevadas at 9600 ft above sea level. Here, Tofique, me and Kalmer pose at a look off beside the road at a mere 8900 ft.

Leo- in his winter gear- enjoys his very first meeting with snow.

Later, he got his very first experience on ice, at the edge of a frozen pond high in the mountains.

With Pop- venturing out onto the ice.

Everyone poses for a group photo: Leila, Leo, Me, Evelyn, Erik, Tofique, Emil, Irene, Karina, Liisa and Kalmer. Missing is Kristi, who took the photo. 

Leo, Leila and I are hitting the road bright and early tomorrow morning (Christmas Day). We plan to spend our Christmas holidays with good friends in a cabin way up in the Sierra Nevada Mountains in the small hamlet of Strawberry, California. 

Wishing all our family and friends a very Merry Christmas!