Christiern

Babs used to live down the street from me. He was a frequent visitor who would show up in the middle of the night. After a while. my doormen knew not to buzz me. That said, he was a colorful character whom I actually enjoyed knowing. As for his autobiography, there were actually two--I have them both:

Not entirely. I am hard put to come up with positive Florida contributions when it comes to those things man has control over. At least in recent years. Well, there's the Adderley Brothers, but think of the political mess that Florida is. Dangling chads, Anita Bryant, fanatic Cuban exiles and a pandering governor come to mind, but that's only a start. We can come up with negatve things when discussing any state, but Florida seems overwhelmingly negative, to me.

So Florida was a shameful place, even then. Does anything good ever come out of that state?

Happy New Year

Is this the book? Publisher: Hanover Books, London (distributed in USA by Oak Publications) First Published: Autumn 1968 Guess I have a 1st Edition. If this is the bok you are talkingabout, Larry, I totally agree.

He developed a method for bottling squeaks. It's the old NYC tap water thing, redux.

I agree with Conrad.

I think Colbert is very funny, sometimes brilliant. I try not to miss his show. The Zorn bit was spot on.

Clem, I don't know what Valerie's problem is, but you addressed it well. Chris A (punk)

Looks are not everything, Clause. I agree that Apple's stylish design was very important, much as B&O's designs are and have been for decades. That said, a pretty face is less attractive if it does not come with a brain. Apple and B&O also have that in common, both companies backed up their good looks with technical innovation--their products are, simply put, superior. Other companies recognize this, which is why they emulate. A few years back, I saw a t-shirt with the message: Windows 98 = Mac 89 It was funny, but very true.

Having remained faithful to Apple since acquiring my first Apple ][ in 1980, I remember well when my PC friends walked around with triumphant pronouncements of the company's demise. Well, scrape the egg off these faces and you can give the population of a small country free breakfast.--CA When Apple Hit Bottom As you probably know, Apple's been in the news quite a bit lately. (That's "lately," as in, "pretty much every other month for the last five years.") Nowadays, Apple is a media darling. The critics like the company's direction, and so does Wall Street. But it wasn't always so. This summer marked the tenth anniversary of Apple's lowest point--a time in 1996 when the company's profits and products were hitting bottom. (Steve Jobs's return to the company he founded was still a year away.) Not only was Apple NOT a media darling, it was the dog the media loved to kick. The analysts and columnists were amazingly confident that Apple would not live out the year, let alone the decade. With a little help from the Lexis-Nexis database of all articles from all major publications, it's my pleasure to present, for your nostalgia pleasure, some of their predictions from ten years ago: Fortune, 2/19/1996: "By the time you read this story, the quirky cult company...will end its wild ride as an independent enterprise." Time Magazine, 2/5/96: "One day Apple was a major technology company with assets to make any self respecting techno-conglomerate salivate. The next day Apple was a chaotic mess without a strategic vision and certainly no future." BusinessWeek, 10/16/95: "Having underforecast demand, the company has a $1 billion-plus order backlog....The only alternative: to merge with a company with the marketing and financial clout to help Apple survive the switch to a software-based company. The most likely candidate, many think, is IBM Corp." A Forrester Research analyst, 1/25/96 (quoted in, of all places, The New York Times): "Whether they stand alone or are acquired, Apple as we know it is cooked. It's so classic. It's so sad." Nathan Myhrvold (Microsoft's chief technology officer, 6/97: "The NeXT purchase is too little too late. Apple is already dead." Wired, "101 Ways to Save Apple," 6/97: "1. Admit it. You're out of the hardware game." BusinessWeek, 2/5/96: "There was so much magic in Apple Computer in the early '80s that it is hard to believe that it may fade away. Apple went from hip to has-been in just 19 years." Fortune, 2/19/1996: "Apple's erratic performance has given it the reputation on Wall Street of a stock a long-term investor would probably avoid." The Economist, 2/23/95: "Apple could hang on for years, gamely trying to slow the decline, but few expect it to make such a mistake. Instead it seems to have two options. The first is to break itself up, selling the hardware side. The second is to sell the company outright." The Financial Times, 7/11/97: "Apple no longer plays a leading role in the $200 billion personal computer industry. 'The idea that they're going to go back to the past to hit a big home run...is delusional,' says Dave Winer, a software developer." Now, obviously, all of these commentators were wildly, hilariously, embarrassingly wrong. (Unless, of course, the iPod is in fact a mass delusion.) This is why, when anyone asks me what the future of technology holds, or what kids will be bringing to school in 2016, I politely decline to answer. In the end, this story really isn't about Apple--or any one company; they all have ups and downs. This story is about the journalists and commentators. It's one thing to report what's happening to a flailing company, and quite another to announce what's *going* to happen. In the technology business, that's a fool's game.

Okay, Brad--I disagree (in this case), but get your point.

Brad, if a thread bothers you that much, why not just skip it? If Scott can live with it, and he has demonstrated that in a commendable fashion, why can't you and an -e- cho?

Just thought I'd inject my complete concurrence with fellow Atheist Mailman's high praise for Marion Williams. I also heard her in person and it was always a memorable experience. BTW, Marion also made a jazz album, with Ray Brown and Milt Jackson (Verve). That said, since this is a peace-of-mind award that makes no demand on the recipient, there is no ground for most of the dismay expressed here. Regina Carter is keeping alive the art of jazz violin playing and making music that strokes many ears the right way, including mine. Innovative? No, but she is young and who knows what the inherent freedom of this prize might inspire her to do? Perhaps it is the term, "genius," that gets in the way here.

Well, if there's one thing Leonard never was, its unidentified. He saw to that!

Thank you, Twizzle, I was wondering why a photo of my fomer friend and roommate, Timme, got into this thread! ...and is that not Leonard Feather on the left?

I hope Scott's last post in this thread shuts up the thread police or, at least. makes them realize that threads not to one's liking are eminently skippable.

I absolutely agree that there is nothing in this thread that warrants it being deleted. Scott's e-mail to Allen was uncalled for and he deserves to have it brought into the light. I also think that deleting the other thread, as John Tapscott apparently did, was a mistake. Why are we being protective of Scott Yanow? Because he might write a bad review? I don't doubt that he would, but I do not praise him simply because he has reviewed my albums favorably--it works both ways. If Scott allows criticism of himself to dictate how he will view someone's work (and I am not saying that he does, just that it is implied by his protectors here), then, in my book, he does not deserve to be shielded from criticism. Jim expressed concern that Scott might allow what he reads here to determine how or if he reviews the Organissimo group. That, IMO, may well be a bigger slap in Scott's face than anything posted by the rest of us. Think about it, Jim.

Yes, Lena has retired, although perhaps not officially.

So, IMO, is sending one of that nature.

This is here because I don't see it as a political statement, just a non-political obsevation. Look at this man, does he not bear a striking resemblance to the late Stanley Dance? Judge Mohammed Oreibi al-Khalifa, the new chief judge in Saddam Hussein's genocide trial.

So does he, I'm sure. Think of the lists he could compile!

Allen I don't see anything wrong with your posting of that mean-spirited e-mail.

She never stopped working--people of her experience and good rep are not idle for long.