The other day, I visited a Computer Museum in Kiel, Germany and had the chance to look at (and play with) the Cambridge Z88.
I have secretly lusted over this computer for quite a while and even contacted a seller in the UK who had the machine available. From the reviews and descriptions I found on the Internet it sounded like the perfect mobile word processor with a rubbery, but very usable, keyboard.
But boy, was I underwhelmed! Trying to write anything was like typing on a pocket calculator.
I have always like Clive Sinclair's machines, from my first ZX81 to the QL, despite all their quirks. And even though I would still like to own a Z88 I am quite happy that I don't have to produce text on those mushy keys.
Having said that: Is there any dedicated (and affordable) mobile word processing hardware out there? I already do own a Pomera DM100, a Japanese only note taking device, that is let down by its lackluster keyboard.
The digitization of our daily lives seems unstoppable. And, generally speaking, I don't have a problem with that. Being born without any sense of direction, GPS has made my trips to friends, restaurants, or holiday destinations much easier. Digital photos are a blessing (again, generally speaking) and I do prefer a word processor to a typewriter.
My only concern is that digitization reduces the half life of about any product to little more than two years.
I can live with buying a new mobile phone or a camera when the (built-in) battery dies or the file format becomes obsolete. But I'd rather not buy a new car on a semiannual basis. My last car was a mechanical beast that lasted almost 20 years. But what do I do when the CPU in my current model goes wonky after some seasons in the rain?
Sure, exchanging a chip is easier than replacing a drive train, but what about DRM and other digital protection schemes? If you think you we will be able to replace the main screen of your car with a better third-party equivalent try to install a cheap ink cartridge into your printer. You see where I'm going with this?
There's quite a few things that I would consider shocking.
A camel being able to play “Flight of the Bumblebee” with its hoofs tied behind its back for example.
Or a three year old inventing a cold fusion reactor the size of a Camembert.
YouTube videos, Facebook posts, and Twitter retweets on the other hand are hardly ever shocking. Neither are revelations about new dietary discoveries.
Youtubers apply the phrase “MUST WATCH” just as liberally (and inappropriately) as Aliexpress sellers use the term “genuine”.
Looks can be deceiving. This delicious little chocolate for example did not taste half as good as it looked.
And while we're at it: Can we please stop adding sea salt to sweets? If chocolate was supposed to be enjoyed with salt it would probably grow on the beach!
I disagree with Rob Bell, but if he was right (which I strongly believe he isn’t) would you still commit acts of altruism even though there was no extra reward? If you would not, what does that say about your motives?
