It Seems To Me

Thoughts and Rants on Technology, Business and Politics

On January 14, a new world record was set for solving the Rubik’s Cube. The previous record was 11.75 seconds which has now been shaved to 11.13 seconds! Can this be true? The SF Gate has a great write-up of the event. But to be truly amazed, watch this five minute video.

 But speed is not the only thing that is amazing about the new generation of speed cubers. The World Championships had 5 categories of competition:

• 3 x 3 x 3 Speedsolve
• 3 x 3 x 3 Blindfolded
• 3 x 3 x 3 One Handed
• 4 x 4 x 4 Speedsolve
• 5 x 5 x 5 Speedsolve

One handed cubing is a marvel of dexterity. But solving the cube blindfolded borders on magic. There are even a few people in the world who can solve three or more cubes blindfolded. According to Angela Hayden, blindfold cubing requires no more than the learning of 5 algorithms and the memorisation skills equivalent to remembering about 40 digits. I appreciate your modesty Angela, but solving the cube in less than 20 seconds, or while wearing a blindfold, is not just magic, it is downright awesome.

It was 25 years ago when I fell victim to my first Rubik’s Cube. I was a senior in college studying mathematics and physics. I felt an obligation to my academic disciplines to solve the little devil. A roommate and I spent three months obsessed with the puzzle. The Internet was not available yet and the tell-all books with step-by-step solutions had yet to be written. We would spend hours twisting and turning the coloured labels on the magic cube. We slowly figured out a number of moves (or “algorithms” as the cubers call them today) that would move a single cube from one face to another without disturbing other cubes. We wrote them down in our own cryptic code. By the time we had about a dozen unique algorithms we realized that we had enough moves to solve the damn thing. It was a glorious day when each face was monochromatic.

At my very best, I was able to solve the cube in 63 seconds. Try as I may, I was never able to get below 60 seconds. Perhaps if I had some optimised algorithms that I could have memorised . . . .

Watch the video again. Or take a look at the video clip of the 11.75 second world record. I caught the first wave of Rubik mania back in the early 80’s. It is a joy to see that the magic is still alive.

I opened Windows Media Player recently and immediately understood why the iPod is rocking the world. According to Steve's keynote address at the recent MacWorld, Apple has sold 42 million iPods so far. I have done my share.

I have owned 6 iPods and my partner is on her second. Two of my previous hard-drive based iPods died after hitting the hard floor one too many times, and one was stolen when our house was robbed. Now, according to my (distorted) calculations, 42 million iPods sold equates to a penetration of only about 6 - 10 million households. But lo, I digress.

Everyone marvels at the elegance of the iPod and the intuitive simplicity of the interface. I can't disagree. The Nano is an amazing device - perfect size and almost weightless. I carry mine everywhere.

But it is not the iPod's design (and it certainly isn't its price) that is driving iPod sales. No, the reason that Apple's iPod continues to trounce all of its competitors is because of the ultimate simplicity in loading the iPod with things you want to hear. Most other MP3 player makers rely on Windows Media Player, WinAmp or their own applications to enable you to transfer songs and audio files to your portable player. Unfortunately, these other media managers pale compared to the simplicity of synchronizing your iPod with iTunes. You install iTunes, you plug in an iPod, and you choose what music / playlists you want, and you take it with you. Of course, buying new music from the iTunes music store couldn't be much easier as well.

In contrast, I opened Windows Media Player the other day and it immediately started copying MP3 files to a USB thumb drive that I happened to have connected. This was going on in the background until, 250 MB of copied files later, I figured out what was happening. Navigating and organising your music in iTunes is much easier than in Windows Media Player. And iTunes only tries to add music to a connected iPod, not every portable storage device that might be attached.

Computers still have a long way to go towards being simple and easy to use but iTunes is the star player at the moment. No one will usurp iPod's market dominance by making a better, faster, cheaper, easier, more elegant, more stylish, or larger capacity player. The iPod's dominance can only be threatened by someone who can make it even easier to get what you want on your portable player when and where you want it.

All this is not to say that the iPod / iTunes combo is not without its shortcomings. But I shall leave such rants for another day.