The Observer » Faceoff

‘8Track’ allows users to create, share mixes

jkracov — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 16:38:25 +0000

For most people, musical taste is as unique as their thumbprints. Internet radio sites such as Pandora tried to decipher a pattern in such musical preferences, but they failed to be very efficient or accurate. Now 8tracks.com has stepped up to the plate.

8tracks.com is the first Internet radio site to capture the sense of community that music can provide by allowing users to create and share mixes, 8tracks’ term for user-made playlists, online.

Like any other Internet radio site, 8tracks’ music license limits the number of songs that listeners can skip per hour to two. But, for anyone looking to be exposed to new music, listening to an entire song from beginning to end is the only way to fully appreciate it and gage whether you like it. Also, if the mix is not suited to a person’s taste, there are thousands of other mixes on the site to choose from.

There is a mix for quite nearly any mood, setting or event anyone could possibly dream of. For example, if it’s raining outside, one could simply type “rain” into the search bar to find over 450 different mixes that other people created especially for rainy days.

Pandora makes sharing music impersonal by matching songs with others based on musical similarities alone. 8tracks, on the other hand, displays mixes created by real people with a variety of musical tastes and the inclination to group songs together based on how they feel. In music, feel is more important than formula.

The site also has a certain culture around it that can be witnessed in the mixes’ creative titles, descriptions, and pictures. Mix titles can be descriptive“— Songs to lie on your bed and stare at the ceiling to,” “Songs that make you feel better,” “Songs with the most beautiful lyrics”— or a little more general, like “Hey man, it’ll be okay” or “Livin’ like it’s shark week” (whatever that means).

8tracks also combines the best features of social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter to further create a sense of community. The “like” feature enables people to keep track of the mixes they enjoy. Users can also “follow” others who make consistently good mixes.

With 8tracks, it’s pretty much guaranteed that anyone can find new artists to love because of the thought and personality put into each mix. It’s as simple as logging on and lending an ear.

FACE-OFF: Android vs. iPhone: King Apple reigns supreme

eplesset — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 15:33:23 +0000

Excuse me, may I have your attention please? An imposter, I repeat an imposter, of the Apple iPhone is dangerous and on the loose.

My name is Android, and I am infiltrating the minds of children and parents around the world with my sleek exterior and tempting apps. My crime? I’m tricking innocent people into settling for a cellular device that is less pleasurable than the miraculous Mac device, called the iPhone.

The iPhone and Android are neck and neck in the competition for the title of best smart phone. Both are multi-billion dollar operations, and Apple is slated for further growth in the mobile operating system market due to the upcoming launch of the ios 5 (and perhaps a new iPhone) this fall. The Android, on the other hand, has been confronted with developmental roadblocks this year and currently has no new products.

Critics point out that the Mac Company is brainwashing society to think that Apple is the most hip and popular technological company, but those same critics fail to mention the elaborate commercials, which include the appealing robot shaking its cute behind and dancing to music, as well as other advertisements the Android uses to swing people in Google’s direction.

There are many factors that can sway consumers towards the iPhone and away from Android.

According to a May 18 CNN article, a security hole was found in the Android software. The security hole enables attackers to gain access to android users’ personal information without their consent. This defect was discovered by three research assistants at Ulm University in southern Germany, and the flaw affected approximately 97 percent of Android users.

Furthermore, there are apps that are incompatible on the Android. Some examples include MLB at Bat 11, XX109 Radio, Groupon and Netflix. Sale representatives push the fact that Android is more tailored for a “media experience,” but with apps that are not able to work on this device it is less accustomed to entertainment.

Google is not a manufacturer. Google focuses solely on the Android software and lets its partner manufacturers worry about building the phones. While this allows Google to have a more focused effort on improvements, this also means Google has less control over its products as opposed to Apple’s complete control over the iPhone.

A great deal of time has been expended on the “hot competition” between Apple and Google. Apple associates have already made the assumption that Android phones will not be long-term competitors.

While only time can tell who will win the iPhone and Android debate, it’s clear that iPhone has the advantage because it is the thinnest intelligence mobile phone that is on the global market and is ultimately the undisputed king of smart phones.

Planned Parenthood defunding incites debate: Congressional actions hamper medical treatment

eplesset — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:15:53 +0000

Movie fans all over the nation are familiar with the scene: Juno, a rambunctious, outspoken and feministic teenager, waddles up to the entrance of her local Planned Parenthood. She rolls her eyes at a solitary Pro-Life protestor, but when the protester explains to her that her unborn child has developed fingernails, Juno immediately decides not to abort it. Perhaps this scene, universally adored by liberals and conservatives alike, was the beginning of Planned Parenthood’s ultimate doom–and this was the defining moment in the future of family planning in America.
Maybe, and more frighteningly, it was doomed from the moment the Republican representative from Indiana, Mike Pence, testified in front of Congress Feb. 11 and managed to falsely convince our government and nation that Planned Parenthood, one of the largest medical-care providers in the nation, provides government-subsidized abortions. His testimony helped push legislation in the House Feb. 18 that would slash funding from Planned Parenthood.
Perhaps our nation is too blinded by moving scenes in movies and passionate speeches on the house floor to look at the cold, hard facts: there has never been federal funding for abortions in any Planned Parenthood facility. According to Adrienne Schreiber, a spokesperson for the Planned Parenthood, funding comes either from the individual patients themselves, their insurance companies or nonprofit organizations.
Moreover, federal law specifically enumerates that Planned Parenthood must separate its abortion expenses from its other government subsidized expenses, such as contraceptive distribution and STD testing. Planned Parenthood has more than complied with this, as many of its facilities so much as provide abortions in separate buildings.
While it is undeniable that Planned Parenthood performs abortions, only three percent of its provided services are actually abortions. What the federal funding goes towards is purely prevention and disease treatment. According to a January study by the Guttmacher Institute, a sexuality studies research institute, contraception makes up 35 percent of Planned Parenthood’s total expenditures, STD testing makes 34 percent, and cancer screening and prevention make up 17 percent. If the federal government seeks to claim that it provides even minimal health care for its citizens, it must continue to fund these vital services.
Opponents of abortion rights believe that government funding of Planned Parenthood frees up capital to provide cheap abortions for the masses, but the simple fact remains that abortions are legal in America, and therefore Planned Parenthood has every legal right to perform them. If the government chooses to fund STD prevention and family planning, it cannot remove funding from an organization that provides these services solely because it finds one other, legal and privately-subsidized service that it provides to be immoral
The truth is that by cutting this funding, the federal government will more than make up for it in STD and cancer treatment through entitlements in later years. Before the Senate passes this bill, they must consider not only the social ramifications that it may have on society, but also the monetary drain it will have on our economy.
Abortions are legal in America, and they will remain legal unless the Supreme Court reverses its monumental decision. With that said, Congress must consider the effects it will have by slashing funding to an organization that prevents disease in America, solely because it does not believe a service it provides should be legal.

Planned Parenthood defunding incites debate: Program lacks support, should not have public funding

eplesset — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:11:16 +0000

It is nothing short of irresponsible to pour the American people’s money into a controversial and inefficient organization that performs procedures the public cannot agree on.
According to a 2010 Gallup poll, Americans are split right down the middle on the abortion issue, with 46 percent of Americans pro-life and 45 percent pro-choice. President Obama said on the campaign trail that determining when life begins is “above my pay grade,” yet he promised to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which would expand women’s abortion rights if it passed.
So why is the federal government funding an organization that performs services that neither the American people nor the president are consistent on? The House recently raised that question, and it resulted in a decision to defund Planned Parenthood, an abortion provider.
Planned Parenthood operates on a $317 million budget, funded by taxpayer money. Despite abortion being such a controversial issue, Planned Parenthood continues to be the nation’s leading abortion provider and runs 800 clinics across the country.
The house has approved a bill that cuts off funding for Planned Parenthood because it is not doing its job. Yes, it provides women with necessary health care, but it is also going a step further—a step Congress never intended the organization to take.
According to Title X of the Public Health Service Act, which helps fund Planned Parenthood, federal funds cannot be used to even advise an abortion. The bill prohibits the nation’s leading abortion provider from even mentioning abortions. We can only expect Planned Parenthood to break the law because it wants to continue providing abortions while simultaneously receiving federal funding.
These conflicting interests have landed the family planning organization into trouble. Leaked undercover videos reveal Planned Parenthood employees giving illegal advice to patients about having abortions. According to a March 8,2008 Los Angeles Times article, a lawsuit currently accuses Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles of overbilling state and federal governments for its own profit.
Still, defenders of Planned Parenthood insist that millions of poor women will go without basic health care if it is defunded. Although Planned Parenthood’s provision of contraceptives and screenings for diseases would reach fewer women, this would alternatively give rise to new federal or state programs to administer these needs—programs that will hopefully follow the law.
Whether one believes in the methods used by Planned Parenthood or not, Congress has consistently refused to use taxpayer money to fund abortions. As Planned Parenthood continues to advise and perform abortions in the US, it should lose federal funding and be replaced by a more responsible, law-abiding organization.

Faceoff- College has more excitement

jpostal — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 16:36:24 +0000

Back in 2006, The George Mason men’s basketball team won the Colonial Athletic Conference tournament and qualified for the NCAA Tournament. The Patriots, who were a 13 seed, won their first four games by upsetting top programs in the tournament, leading them into the Final Four. However, this year in the NBA there are no talks of giving the Nets a chance at the title, even if they go on a late winning streak.

This example demonstrates one of the reasons why college basketball is better than the NBA.
March Madness is possibly the greatest event in all of sports thanks to the crazy upsets. This is also the place where smaller schools get their shots at big name NCAA programs to show people how good their teams actually are.

However, the NBA has a 16-team playoff with each round containing a seven-game series. Usually I just want the season to be over by this point, but the NBA playoffs extend the season by two-and-a-half months.

March Madness is a perfect setup giving hot teams, who did not start off the season the strongest, a chance to go dancing in March with the conference tournaments. After that, 65 teams play in the NCAA Tournament. In addition, there are other postseason tournaments for teams who did not get one of those 65 spots.

This is the best format for the postseason for basketball and nothing in any other sport can match the intensity and excitement that the NCAA tournament brings.
Another factor that make the collegiate level of basketball much more entertaining than the NBA is the atmosphere around the college game.

There are no better fans than crazy college students in a section together cheering on their team, showing no love for the opposing team, jumping around to “Zombie Nation” while the team is trying to score a game winner, and charging the court after a major upset. No one sees any of this happen for an NBA team.

Many of the players interact with the fans, trying to get them more involved in the game and cheer louder. One of the best examples of this is Greivis Vasquez, who taunts opposing crowds and does fun celebrations to pump up the crowd.

In the NBA, many players want to focus on how much money they are getting and where they would rather play. The difference is that college players decided to play where they want and none of them are making money for playing, so their only motivation is to win.
The NBA gets boring since the games and seasons are too long, however watching college basketball stays exciting throughout since the games are the perfect length and the attitudes of players and fans bring more thrill to the game.

Faceoff- pros are superior athletes

jpostal — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 16:33:08 +0000

When you hear of players like Tyler Hansbrough, Adam Morrison, J.J. Redick and Christian Laettner you think of college superstars, but when these players jump to the NBA, you think of bench warmers.

These college players, turn into benchwarmers when they reach the NBA because NCAA players compared to NBA players, are less experienced, less athletic and less skilled. Therefore, the NBA is more entertaining than the NCAA.

The competition is just not as strong in the NCAA. For example, when North Carolina-Asheville played at Tennessee this season they lost horribly 124-49. Blowouts are not only boring to watch but they are frequent in the NCAA, while in the NBA, blowouts do not occur as often because the average game is higher scoring, closer and has more energy.

One reason the NBA has more energy than the NCAA is because the NBA has superstars like Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Dwayne Wade and Dwight Howard. These NBA high fliers make games more interesting as they have the ability to create unbelievable plays that college players would never be able to perform.

The NBA is also more balanced than the NCAA because the NCAA gives select teams unfair advantages. For example, each NBA team plays the same number of home and away games in a season; college teams do not.

This season, the Duke Blue Devils went 13-1 in their first 14 games, their only loss being the only away game in the 14-game stretch. Watching college basketball is less fun knowing teams like Duke, who are given unfair advantages, are favored over other teams.

Compared to college basketball, the NBA playoffs are done more fairly. A team makes the NBA playoffs based on its record. A team gets into the NCAA Tournament by winning a conference tournament or if the team is voted as one of the top teams in the nation.

The NCAA has a worse style for the playoffs because a team might have played a great season with a solid record, but not make the NCAA Tournament because they are not considered a top team.

Players in the NCAA are shorter and not as strong as NBA players, which is why the NBA has more exciting plays, better dunks and more alley oops. Not only are the players shorter, but the NCAA has shorter games, a shorter season, shorter playoffs and shorter fans. The NBA has a longer season with more action packed games and better playoffs, making the organization more entertaining.

Faceoff: Potbelly’s serves scrumptious subs

cbachrach — Thu, 28 May 2009 15:40:08 +0000

Rotten subs, terrible service and bread with knives in it are some of the complaints Subway customers have expressed over the years. Potbelly’s on the other hand, is a much better sub chain, serving delicious, hot sandwiches, tasty milkshakes, a warm welcoming atmosphere and knife-free subs; and not to mention, owner Bryant Keil is a CHS alumnus.

Potbelly’s has been providing these wonderful life essentials since 1977, when it started as an antique shop selling sandwiches to beloved customers. Unlike some other sandwich chains, Potbelly’s has maintained the same atmosphere and charm that it had when it first started, and the food is stellar.

Sandwich competitor Subway offers thin, processed slices of meat, terrible customer service and a lack of delicious milkshakes. Potbelly’s on the other hand, has quality meat, friendly employees and has a large supply of frozen treats.

Eating at Potbelly’s is a pleasurable experience, coupling delicious food with dessert and live music. At Subway you get a sub-par sandwich, wallpaper, and in my experience, unwelcoming employees.
A toasted sub at Subway consists of a roll of bread, meat and cheese going into a microwave on steroids and coming out seconds later stale and soggy. Potbelly’s toasts subs on a magical conveyer belt of deliciousness. Potbelly’s cares if your sandwich comes out the way you like it. Subway cares about throwing toppings on a piece of bread and collecting exact change.

Potbelly’s locations such as Rio, Rockville Town Center, and downtown Bethesda are all right next to movie theatres and entertainment attractions. The sandwiches, baked goods and frozen treats are a wonderful way to enjoy a night out with your best buds.
Subway relies on commercial pulls and catchy jingles to sway consumers rather than using their actual food. “Jared lost weight,” “Eat Fresh” or “5 dollar foot long” are all pathetic marketing pleas that a sandwich consumer should not be fooled by. Even Subway.com admits that Jared’s weight loss was due to exercise and his results are not typical.

Potbelly’s stays true to the one thing people love, food. The bottom line is people go out to enjoy food and have a good time, not lose weight or “Eat fresh.”

Faceoff: Subway offers great variety

cbachrach — Thu, 28 May 2009 15:38:35 +0000

All day long your teachers and parents tell you what to do, but at Subway, you are the boss.
Subway is an exceptional sub and sandwich shop, and hands down the best sandwich restaurant around in comparison with Quizno’s and Potbelly’s.

Subway is so great for two reasons. One is that, unlike its inferior opponent Potbelly’s, you get to watch the freshest and most nutritious ingredients being added to your food.

At Subway, a 6-inch marinara meatball sub, including cheese and various vegetables (lettuce, pickles, tomatoes, olives, onions and green peppers), only has 580 calories. At Potbelly’s, a meatball sub not including cheese or anything except the meat, sauce and bread is 618 calories.

When you enter Subway, you are directed to the start of the line where you can pick one of eight hearty and fresh baked breads.
Proceeding from there, you are offered the choice of 13 savory meats, six delectable cheeses, nine fresh vegetables and 11 different sandwich condiments. The possibilities are almost endless and are sure to satisfy even the pickiest of eaters.

In a world where obesity is at an all time high, Subway offers eight healthy sandwiches containing “6 grams or less” fat, meeting the dietary and nutrition needs of the healthiest of eaters.

Another plus about Subway is that it has a location in every state and in 90 countries ranging from Argentina to Zambia.

Due to the recent, economic downturn, money is scarce and people are reserved about eating out, but never fear, at Subway you always get your money’s worth.

While a six-inch sub at Potbelly’s is $4.77, Subway offers eight different foot-long subs for $5 each. Potbelly’s also offers a larger nine-inch sub for $5.77, which is smaller and more expensive than the average Subway sub.

Subway and Potbelly’s may be completely different, but they share one thing in common–they both live up to their names. Subway is named for its specialty subs and makes no claims to being anything more than its name. Potbelly’s is also appropriately named because a pot belly is exactly what you will get if you eat their fattening subs.