Skip to main content

apple captures the zeitgeist once again

“I think this is going to be a really exciting feature for our customers,” Jobs said. “And I’d love to show it to you now.”
Taking a sip from a bottled water, Jobs sat down at a keyboard and monitor and brought up .Mac.
“We’ve got some standard, pre-built lolcats text you can see here in this pull-down menu. Let’s say I want to add ‘I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?’ to this picture. First, I select the picture… then I select ‘I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?’ from the list of pre-defined lolcats texts… and then it’s just one click.
Clicking a button, Jobs created an image of a clearly uncomfortable-looking iPod product marketing manager Stan Ng dressed up in a crude cat suit with “I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?” emblazoned on it in sans serif text.
“Boom. It’s that easy.”
Apple Announces Lolcats Strategy
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tony diTerlizzi and classic D&D monsters

The sixth entry of his series on drawings of classic D&D monsters is up. He's one of my favorite fantasy artists. His work tends toward the charming and cozy, rather than others' focus on machismo or melodrama.
Post a Comment
Read more

sad fate

“Our legendary personalities are evergreen ‘brands’ with the benefit of worldwide recognition,” reads a message on the Richman agency’s website. Guardian UK Article *vomits* Where is the line drawn between “public figure” and “celebrity”? How can a dead person have an agent, particulary where there are no specific works concerned other than a sense of character? It’s one thing to insist that Duck Soup is a work that should be protected (which any more simply means controlled by whomever has the most buX0rs), but shouldn’t personalities and such pass into the public domain as well? ( boingboing : Bill Gates 0wns Einstein, Groucho , Freud, Asimov, Fuller, et al )
Post a Comment
Read more

on sheeps and androids

The movie Blade Runner is very dear to my heart. It is a treatise on the nature of existence expanding on, and perhaps exceeding the reach of the Phillip K. Dick work which inspired it, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Perhaps I have missed out on some greater subtlety of PKD's work, but the point of DADoES pursues the definition of fake, while Blade Runner instead focuses on what is real. Where the replicants in the novel are sociopathic monsters who emulate emotions solely to gain traction against humans who may hunt them, the humans there rely on machines to dictate their own emotions for them. They dial for "energetic determination" or "six-hour self-accusatory depression." As much as the replicants are machines incapable of real emotion, humans are similarly reliant on a machine to simulate emotion for them. In contrast, the movie's central them is spelled out for us in Deckard's apartment, when Rachel is playing the piano. She professe...
Post a Comment
Read more