As a Motor Trend subscriber, I would read the ads from a company called The Tire Rack in the pages of their magazine.  Dozens of new tires, along with a couple pages of new wheels.  While I haven’t been able to afford new wheels yet, I’ve gone through many sets of tires, and all of them were purchased from Tire Rack, going back as far as the early 90s.  Even back then, it was cheaper to do so.  I was into Michelin tires back then, but around 1994-1995 or so, both of our Hondas needed new tires almost at the same time, and I discovered Yokohama tires.  The ones I bought were on clearance, an “OEM” type of replacement tire (A378, actually), and I was impressed by the nice ride and the grip these tires had on the road.

In the years since, I’ve been through many sets of Yokohama tires, and they have been getting better each time.  The last two sets I bought were the Avid TRZ tires.  On the Malibu, they are far quieter than the lousy FIrestone tires they replaced, and the ride is so much better.  Two years later, they still feel food, and have plenty of tread left.  The CR-V needed some suspension repairs and alignment work on and off, so mine did not last as long.  With the repairs out of the way, I’m getting lined up with a new set of TRZs ($12 more than last time, alas), and getting an alignment as well.  Cost:  $69 each, plus shipping.

One reason I like Tire Rack is due to the selection.  Local tire stores only have one or two Yokohama models, if any.  Even among other brands, if you want an affordable tire, you’re stuck with an off-brand.  Or you pay a king’s ransom for a decent well-known brand.  At Tire Rack, you can pick from a few dozen brands, and choose from just about any model made by that tire company.  They have all the major brands, plus a few specialist brands.

Tire shopping is easy: you can compare tires based on your vehicle’s requirements, or browse by size.  The more popular tires are rated by site visitors, and include comments about the tire’s performance over time.  They’re a helpful guide in choosing a tire, and you can avoid tires that have a common problem among different customers.

As mentioned above, another reason I like buying online is because the pricing is better.  Even with shipping, I’m saving a good amount of money buying my tires online.  Their warehouse is close enough that it’s an overnight shipment via UPS Ground, so it’s running me about $36 to get these shipped in.  Last time I compared tire prices two years ago, I got a quote from a couple of local chains.  Going with a comparable tire, my “out the door” price was well over $400 for a set.   The Avid TRZs were $57 each last time, and including shipping and mounting/balancing, I came in under $300.

If you don’t feel like wrestling the tires into your car, you can choose to have them ship to a recommended installer.  Tire Rack has several in most areas of the country.  Some installers have a “price pledge” guarantee, meaning that the prices they post online are what they charge in the shop.  Tire Rack will ship your new tires to the installer, who will call you to make an appointment.  The last installer we used for both sets of tires was up front and honest.  In fact, on the Malibu, we requested a 4-wheel alignment but only got charged for a 2-wheel, since the rears were in spec and did not need adjusting.  Installers are rated by customers on the Tire Rack website, so the public feedback really helps with the confidence level.

The final reason you may prefer shopping online better: you get to make your tire choice at your leisure.  No salesman trying to push the most profitable product to you.  And you’re not locked into just a handful of brands that your local store carries.  The choices may be too many for some, but they give you different options for choosing tires (shop by vehicle, tire size, or a tire chooser where you pick your driving style and road conditions) to make it easier.

Try it out once, like I did, and you might be hooked!

Basically, the music server just needs to run a hard drive or two–it’s not rocket science.  As disk speeds are usually the slowest thing in a computer (compared to memory, CPU cycles, etc.), I don’t need a bleeding edge computer to handle it.  This works out well, being on a budget.

The files will be stored as lossless FLAC files.  This not only preserves fidelity, it also allows me to burn backup CDs and compilations much easier by pulling the files off of the server.  They take about half the space of WAV files.

Hard drive?  I’m considering starting with a 500GB unit.  If I figure an album is about 40 minutes on average, this amounts to about 350-400MB of data if stored as a WAV file.  FLAC cuts this about in half, so each 40 minute album works out to around 200MB at the most.  Using that conservative estimate, I’d get at least 2,500 albums onto a single 500GB drive.

I already have some computer components on hand–I have a spare Abit motherboard and AMD CPU, and some memory sticks that, if memory servers (no pun intended), fit the Abit.  No need for audio, and I have a Hercules video card that I could probably pull out of the computer once it is set up, to save on power.  This leaves me with finding a case and power supply.  Given the “utility” aspect of this server, I would consider finding a less expensive rack mount case to put it in.

For playback devices on the network, the Squeezebox is one of the best out there.  I may search for others that might be more cost effective.  Music can also be played by any computer on the network, using any player that supports FLAC (like WInamp).

One really good NAS (network attached storage) option is FreeNAS.  It runs on FreeBSD, and with a few tweaks, can work well as a file server for your entire network, regardless of operating system.  If the FreeNAS will work with a Squeezebox, it’d be perfect.

The biggest hurdle would be ripping all those CDs…any volunteers??

In the GameCube installments, Super Monkey Ball is a set of games involving four different monkeys in clear balls that they roll around in. The main game is a series of platforms that you tilt to guide the monkey around an series of obstacles, ramps, jumps, and plenty of other hazards to get to the goal at the end. These are an excellent test of motor skills…and patience. The game looks simple at first, but levels get progressively harder, and many have a puzzle element, requiring you to approach the goal in a certain way, or during a series of timed events. In addition to the main game, there are various party games, which can host between one and four players.

The DS version has a handful of party games, and a series of levels just like its bigger cousins. So where does it fall short? Control. It is just too difficult to control the movements with a stylus. Small movements of the stylus are often not enough, and moving too far will cause a platform or level to tilt way too far. You can also use the “+” control, but it is too coarse to be of any use. One party game that works well is a challenging version of air hockey, where the paddles change sizes, or other events happen to make scoring easier, or more difficult. Monkey Bowling is a bitc clumsy on the DS, and the Monkey Race gives up the finer control you get with a joystick, making it harder to maneuver a race course.

For those who have the patience to make this game work, it’s may be a good choice. But the joystick control from the GameCube versions is still far better. I only grew frustrated with the lack of control I had over the courses. I give this one 2 out of 5 stars.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8VJVVF01&show_article=1

Apparently, the XM/Sirius merger deal is almost completed, just pending final FCC approval. I think this is one of the worst developments for satellite radio. Why?

Have you ever seen a merger of two large corporations where the combined new corporation does anything better? I haven’t. I like my XM the way it is now–dozens of commercial-free channels and lots of programming variety. Sirius has some decent music channels, but I’ve read user complaints that they’re not as good as what you find on XM. I don’t want to find out the hard way, seeing XM’s specialized channels being replaced by the more homogenized ones from Sirius. And beside that, who needs Stern on talk radio? That’s one reason I like XM.

This can only be a bad thing. One promise (or threat?) is so-called a la carte programming options. I prefer XM’s subscription model: one price, and you get the whole package. What will we get now…tiers? I bet on it. So if I like the Decades channels, and the Soul/R&B channels are part of another tier, then I’d be forced to upgrade to a higher tier just for the additional one or two channels I’d want.

I want to be proven wrong here. But until then, I’m going to be wary of every move. XM was good so far (except for dropping the Luna channel), and I’m going to enjoy every minute of it while it lasts.

With the DS, there are a few different modes of play.  To unlock new levels, you play by yourself against the CPU, racing in different “Cups” (50cc, 100cc, 150cc) and beating other players in order to unlock new courses to race on.  You also have time trials, where you can race against your own time and try to beat it, setting a new record.

Where the DS version really raises the bar is with its multiplayer options.  If you are playing against others within range of your DS, you can race against others who don’t own the game by using the Download Play mode.  Course choices are limited to eight, but that is plenty for a racing session.  The real excitement here is using the Nintendo WFC (wi-fi) abilities to connect with others around the world.   While you can’t chat in real time, nor know the person’s identity, you can race against random opponents.  But, if you know others who have WFC abilities and Mario Kart, you can exchange your Friends List codes and wait for your buddies, to race against them.  The various multiplayer abilities are what make this game shine, in my opinion–other DS games could learn from this one.

Given the limited controls of the DS (no joystick), the ability to control your kart is still very solid and reliable.  A few practice run will have you getting down the basics in no time. Using the “L” and “R” buttons on top, you can easily learn to drift through a corner and outmaneuver your opponents.   Getting a quick start off the line requires a bit of gut-instinct timing (hit the throttle somewhere between 2 and 1 in the countdown, and hold it), but it gives you a decided advantage.   Each different character has different cart abilities: some have a high top speed but slow acceleration, where others are heavier or have better handling.  Choosing your favorite is more an exercise in balancing your own control abilities with the character’s cart abilities.

While it isn’t my favorite type of game, it is solid and very enjoyable, as I’ve come to expect from Nintendo’s best games.  And the many different multiplayer modes are the icing on the cake.  I give it 4 out of 5 stars.

My own gut instinct was that Microsoft wants to be Google.  Think about it:  Google is the one getting all the attention these days.  Google has a lot of good, free services.  Google has Gmail, arguably the best free e-mail system out there.  But Google is also sitting on mountains of cash.  So is Microsoft…but MS wants more.  Google is basically in the advertising business now, a huge revenue generator.  MS wants in on this.  They do have their “Live” search, but do you honestly know anyone who really uses it regularly?  I don’t.   In fact, web searching has turned Google into a verb.  Can’t find it?  Google it.

MS wants in on the ad business.  And why revamp or refine Live Search when you can go buy Google’s closest competitor?  Enter Yahoo.  MS gets a better search engine, buys into existing revenue and IMHO, by their way of thinking, having Yahoo’s tech staff along with their own staff of programmers could only mean that MS could seriously contend with #2.  The only fly in the ointment?  People don’t like MS as much as they do Google.

MS mirroring Google could also mean something else: MS Office moves to the web.  Google has their own Google Apps, which include a spreadsheet, word processor and presentation program (like Powerpoint).  Granted, they are limited in function, but they probably provide 95% of the features most people use.  Collaboration is easier online–I’ve shared documents with others in more than a few instances.

Having MS Office online would be one place where MS could eclipse Google’s offerings.  In fact, I can see MS offering Office on a subscription basis.  Would you pay $5/month or $50/year to access Office online?  You might.  You would never have to install the Office package on your computer.  You could use it from any computer, and have access to your documents anywhere.  Software updates would be a thing of the past.  And if Office moved to a totally online environment…no more pirated copies of Office.

But, back to the deal.  It has already bombed, and yet MS is rumored to be attempting a hostile takeover by purchasing as much Yahoo common stock as it can.  MS wants Yahoo, but Yahoo doesn’t want MS.  Hmmm.

On today’s Cranky Geeks broadcast, Dvorak’s guest Adam Curry mentioned that MS bidding for Yahoo could just be an attempt to “mess with” Yahoo and, eventually, take them out of the running completely.   In other words, run them out of business.  I don’t really know what that would accomplish, but it’s another interesting theory that could play out.  Think of all the software companies that MS has acquired over the years, then “swallowed”, effectively buying out and killing their own competition.

Food for thought, and all guesswork, I know…but as big a deal as this is, any outcome is no doubt going to have some serious repercussions down the road a bit.

BluRay has a distinct advantage over standard DVD, but it is only visible over a high definition monitor. If you have standard definition TV, then it’s not worth getting BluRay at this point. As much as I like new technologies, and as impressive as BluRay looks, I don’t see it making a huge mass-market impact at any point in the immediate future. BluRay titles are only a small premium over DVD, but the players are still a bit pricey. Plus, you need the improved HD monitor to see the clarity. Looks nice, but will your average Joe Sixpack DVD buyer care? Probably not. Standard DVDs look fine to them. Some pundits claim that the format war existed to help prolong the battle, hold off sales, and then let streaming/downloadable HD content take over from physical formats. While this is a good delivery method in my opinion, not everyone has broadband yet, so even downloadable content will take awhile to establish a foothold. Heck, they can’t even deliver uncompressed music at iTunes, Napster and other online music shops, so why would I even bother with similarly compromised video at this point?

I give BluRay a “maybe” in eventual success. It could end up being a niche product like SACD and DVD-Audio, or it could eventually succeed as more people get HD capable monitors. But until then, don’t look for any $99 BluRay players soon…unless someone offers up a cheap player just to get market penetration. BluRay players do function well as DVD players, so at least they are backward compatible. Check back with me in a year to see how it has all played out. But at least the competition is over, and BluRay can grow unimpeded.

If you’re not familiar with the DS, it is a dual screen gaming system, which opens as a clamshell design.  The current model is known as the DS Lite (or DSL among fans).  The bottom screen is a touchscreen, which is something that other gaming systems do not have, giving it a unique and unprecedented amount of control over gameplay.  The best games make full use of the touchscreen, some of which I’ve already written about here.   It also offers two multiplayer options–you can either play with a group of DS players in the same room, or you can go online via WiFi (Nintendo calls it WFC) and play either against friends or random opponents around the world.  This all depends on the game, of course, some (like Mario Kart) offering all three options.

As I write this, the available colors are black (onyx), white, pink and crimson (which has a black interior).  Special editions this past holiday season were the metallic pink Nintendogs version with a pawprint logo on the lid (and including a limited edition Nintendogs game version not available separately), and a gold metallic Zelda version, familiar Triforce logo on the lid, that came packaged with the Phantom Hourglass game.

Sound on the DS is stereo, and many games take advantage of a “surround” mode that is actually a widened stereo made possible via a phasing effect, which works very well.  The screen brightness is fantastic, and one can’t help but remember that the original Game Boy system did not have a backlight at all.  Neither did the first Game Boy Advance, either.  Batteries are now rechargeable, so you no longer have to burn through AA batteries every couple of days.  (The bright screen and rechargeable batteries helped make the Game Boy Advance as popular as it was.)

Nintendo may not always have the cutting edge in graphics or technology, but they come out on top in terms of playability.  Like the new Wii system, the DS can easily be played by anyone, even non-gamers.  Pointing and tapping/dragging with a stylus is as easy as the Wii’s motion-sensitive remote, and non-gamers take to the system easily.  Depending on the game, of course.  Games like Big Brain Academy, the Brain Age games, and the mini games in New Super Mario Bros. are easy to manipulate.  Some games don’t translate as well to the stylus interface: Super Monkey Ball is nerve wracking at times, and I found Starfox to be counterintuitive…the tactical parts of the game are easy to work with, but the flight sections of the game are better handled with a traditional joystick.

Wireless play is fantastic.  Now having tried it with an opponent with another DS, it is nice to connect in the same room, or across the house, using only one game cartridge to send games to the other player’s DS.  Gameplay is limited in single-cartridge mode, but is still a lot of fun.  Mario Kart normally gives you 32 courses, but the download play version limits you to 8.  While in the minigames in New Super Mario Bros., the multiplayer mode  actually unlocks a handful of new games not available in single player mode.

With some games, like Mario Kart, you can play worldwide against opponents you  know nothing about, other than a screen name.  But many games let you enter the friend codes of other DS players, so you can actually match up online with people you know.  I’m still waiting to try the friend mode in Mario Kart, but I’ve had visitors to my town in Animal Crossing: Wild World, and have visited their towns as well.

One added bonus is the ability to play your Game Boy Advance cartridges in the DS.  And you can choose which screen to play your game on.

I came across my old Sega Game Gear a few days ago…it was nice looking for its day, the only color backlit system available.  It was quite a bit larger, and unless you used the AC adapter, it ate AA cells, six at a time, like candy.  Given its age, it was impressive in its day.  But the DS is of course leaps and bounds better.  It’s the first handheld game system I’ve really enjoyed fully.  The Advance was a good one also, and a few classic Super NES titles made it onto that system, but the games on the DS have progressed quite a bit further.  Memory capacity is obviously impressive in these tiny cartridges, as they are able to pack all of the Animal Crossing characters into it.  You never feel anything is lacking in these games, where the Advance always felt like a “second banana” (albeit a nice second banana).

The list price has dropped to $129 on the DS, so this is a good time to get one.  Supplies after the holiday are better now than they have been in recent weeks.  Keep reading here at the Corner, as I’ll be writing up my impressions of more of these DS games in the near future.

Office 2003 was your typical Windows application–menu bar at the top, a toolbar or two beneath it. You got used to working with it that way. Office 2007 introduces a new toolbar approach that puts commonly used styling and features in a large bar at the top of the screen, but with no menu bar. For common functions, you click on a large glass Office button in the upper left corner.

I have mixed feelings about this. I can see its advantage for someone who is overwhelmed with the array of menu choices and buttons to click in Office 2003. But for a normal user like me? It’s counter-intuitive. In short, this interface is a mess. There is no way to go back to a classic interface, where I could count on many features being available in well-known menu locations or toolbar buttons. Yeah, the glossy appearance looks cool, but in some cases it just slows me down having to hunt through all of that gloss to find the formatting feature I need.

So, why do we need all new file formats yet again? MS could easily have standardized and used an XML-based format that would have been compatible with other office applications out there. But no, they have yet again introduced another incompatible file format for all of their office apps. So, naturally, I had to go into all of the configuration options to make sure these programs all saved in their respective Office 97-2003 formats. I think few people out there will upgrade to 2007 right away, so at least I can still send files to them if needed.

Finally, this abomination is slow. You would think they could streamline the code and make it run snappy. But no–this is slower than Office 2003, which itself was no prize in the speed department. Not only is it slower in some operations, the File/Open dialog is slow enough to give you time to get up and make a pot of tea. We’ve had the same file dialogs since Win95 came out all those years ago, and it has worked fine. Now, when you open an Office document, you get a nag screen saying the app is “initializing the root folders for display”. What the hell is that supposed to mean? XP already knows how to display folders…now we just have a nag screen that sits there for a minute, green progress bar drifting back and forth, with no disk activity to be seen (or heard). I dread using it to browse for files. Instead, I’m opening an Explorer window and dragging the file into an empty Office application. Oh, and you can’t have anything else open, or the app will drop that file as an object into the middle of your document.

I am calling this Microsoft Office Vista, much like we had MS Office XP back in the day. Just like Vista, it’s glossier, flashier, slower, and offers no real reason to upgrade. Vista has really been getting panned in the computing press for offering very little improvement in features, but introducing so much code bloat that you need insane levels of CPU and memory to make it work anywhere near as good as XP. I am usually anxious to upgrade the OS, but Vista is widely considered to be a downgrade. Even MS knows they are faltering, as vendors are beginning to ask for XP over Vista for new machines, and MS is extending support for XP longer than they had planned. With that in mind, Office Vista…OK, 2007…is the perfect companion for the Vista OS.

As for me, I’m really tempted to dig out my old Office 2000 CD and reinstall it, from the days when Office actually ran halfway decent on one’s computer…