Ever have something you kinda keep up with for fun? It’s not really something you’re into nor does it affect you but it’s something you follow just for kicks? That’s sorta like my interest in the music group Van Halen. I’m hardly a huge fan, but the drama sure is interesting.

Van Halen was formed in the late 1970’s. The name came from the last name of the two brothers in the band, Eddie and Alex. Their lead singer was the eccentric David Lee Roth. They took the world by storm and became larger than life celebrities.

After their 1984 album, 1984, Roth left the group. Van Halen replaced him with solo artist Sammy Hagar and drove on. A number of people didn’t come along, and a number of others joined up for the first time. Hagar made the group sound different, and there’s pretty much an even split on whether or not it was for the best. Still, even though the band, to some degree, had to start over from scratch they topped their previous success by the mid ’90’s, the culmination of which was their 1991 album, For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge.

One of the band’s dynamics has always been to bicker and fight, and apparently they never stopped this. In 1996 the members of the band, sans Hagar, decided to come out with a greatest hits album with some new songs. Hagar disagreed, saying it was not good for the group at the time, and refused to play along. So the band members decided to call Roth back up. Roth came in and recorded two new songs. The band members decided that it was time to kick Hagar out of the group and did so via a phone call on Father’s Day. The album, The Best Of Van Halen Volume 1, sold truckloads, mostly on the premise that the old band was back.

Now, at this point I must interject – I’ve listened to all of the Van Halen albums and I must say: they’re much better with Hagar. Make no mistake, these are two separate groups, but the Hagar years are better. He’s got a better voice, the songs are better, etc. So why does everyone get excited when Roth rejoins the group. Well, besides the notion that most people just disagree with me, there’s also the fact that I think most people just really want their past back – their lives were probably much easier in the early 1980’s and they would love it if they could get even a little of that back.

So the culmination of all of this was the reunited Van Halen at the MTV Video Music Awards. Afterwards though the honeymoon was already over. The band started fighting again and it has been said that it all started coming back why they didn’t want Roth in the group to begin with (debate continues to this day as to whether or not Roth left to persue his bizarre solo career or whether he was kicked out). Roth was fired from the group. What tends to happen when a departed band member comes back they don’t get to rejoin the group, they’re intead “hired” as an employee to the band. KISS even goes so far as to “contract” its former members. The key difference is the much easier ability to fire them (or let their contracts expire) and of course they only recieve a fraction of the money they would get as a member. Roth was brought on as an employee of Van Halen and then fired.

So since they fired Roth and had fired Hagar they decided to go look for a third lead singer. They plucked Gary Cherone, fresh from the newly broken up band Extreme, and hired him. The resulting album, 1998’s Van Halen III, is widely regarded as the worst Van Halen album ever. Cherone is a poor power singer trying to sound too much like Hagar, and the songs themselves are just generally poor. After three years and tired of all the criticism he was recieving for “ruining” Van Halen (the second time VH’s been ruined, apparently) he left the group.

This is where the story gets odd and, to some degree, undocumented. Van Halen is in shambles. They have to either disband, hire a fourth lead singer, or hire one of their former lead singers back. Cherone is out, since he just left. Sammy Hagar has since gone on to a fantastic second solo career, while Roth’s has sputtered and died. The word is they went and hooked up with Roth to record new material – and then that went south again.

So for a long time nothing happened. Roth created a new group, The DLR Band, and dived further into eccentricity. Hagar remained friends with the Van Halen drummer Alex Van Halen, much to the chagrin of the other band members. Hagar and Roth then decided to tour together, titling the tour “Sans Halen”. They finished out the tour but Hagar vowed never to tour with Roth again, as he was difficult to get along with and apparently was oblivious as to his modern day relevance (or lack thereof). Even dedicated sites like the Van Halen News Desk decided to pack it in and call it a day.

For the longest time it looked like Van Halen was done for. But then earlier this year the rumors came down that they had decided to re-hook up with Hagar. The rumors were confirmed when a press release was issued – Van Halen was back together with Sammy Hagar and getting ready for a summer tour. A new 2-CD greatest hits compilation, The Best Of Both Worlds, is due to be released on July 19th. It will have three new songs, and none of the songs from the Charone era or the Roth reunion songs.

I’ve heard one of the three new songs, “It’s About Time”. It’s pretty good – classic, non-boat rocking Van Halen. The song title brings to light the “double meaning” of new songs. One of the two new Roth songs on Best Of Can Halen Volume 1 was “Can’t Get This Stuff No More”, alluding (I believe) to the older sound of Van Halen (a title which turned ironic when Roth was fired). The new song on the Billy Idol album was a cover of “Don’t You (Forget About Me)” – obviously a cry for a second chance. And you don’t have to even guess about the one new Michael Jackson song on Number Ones entitled “One More Chance” – another obvious cry for help even more ironic in the light of his recent round of litigation.

I’ve read they were experimenting with the Van Halen III album – the experiement failed. I’d usually say something about how bad it must be to be a group who can’t innovate – people (myself included) want them to sound the same way they always have (though in my case, I prefer their second incarnation), but hey – that’s life. There’s no law that says they have to continue at all, fired singers or no. They’ve tried the “we won’t do it” bit for six years now and apparently they’ve decided that their innovation or pride isn’t as important as continuing to do what they want to do.

Oh, and make piles upon piles of money off of now starved fans. Rock on.

It occurs to me that, if I have any dedicated readers other than my WIfe, I never updated with how my diet is going. Amazingly enough I’m still on it and have lost some 25 pounds. Had to buy new pants and everything. Still have some 20 or so to go but I’m still there.

More amazingly, I finally got used to Diet Coke. Diet Coke is something of an engineering marvel in that it has no carbs, calories or fat. It’s just that damned aspartamane you have to get used to. I couldn’t stand it for the longest time. I tried Diet Vanilla Coke and could tolerate it for a time but then I switched to Diet Dr. Pepper. I got sick of that but oddly enough by that time I could stand Diet Coke. Sometimes I even like it. The main reason I went through all of this at all (instead of, say, just drinking Crystal Light) is because these are the three non-water diet drinks my workplace supplies for free.

Now we have Coke C2. The unveiling of a new type of Coke usually has all the pomp and circumstance of a Rolling Stones release, but this rollout’s been sort of low key. Perhaps we’re just getting it here because we’re a big market. Anywho, the gimmick of Coke C2 is that it has half the sugar (corn syrup) of regular Coke, so it halves the carbs and calories. Neat – but at 19.5 carbs per can, it’s still too expensive for Atkins diets. I’ve tried it – it’s not bad. It’s kinda like hard liquor – you like it but you know if you’re smart you won’t drink too much.

I’ve noticed a lot of opposition to Atkins as a diet. I’m not strictly doing Atkins, I’m mostly just doing the low carb thing. The reasoning behind the backlash is simple enough (it flies in the face of conventional medical wisdom), but I think there’s something a bit deeper involved. Most people, like myself, wouldn’t diet previously because, besides not being obese (just overweight), diets are hard. But Atkins and low carb diets tell you lots of things you can eat.

You can eat A
But I don’t like A

You can eat B
I really don’t like B

Well you can eat C
Now that I can do! Hell, I’ll eat that morning noon and night!

C is of course something like a bacon cheeseburger with no bun, or a steak dinner without bread. As a result, if you like C and you don’t mind eating the same thing all the time, this sort of diet will work perfectly for you.

Of course to eat meat entirely is foolish, as is eating any one thing completely exclusively. I try to eat salads and chicken. I’ve yet to venture into too many vegetables.

But that’s not healthy eating
Well, was already eating really unhealthy – how can this be worse? Actually what I’ve found myself doing is consuming substitutes – and then much less of that. For example, the one “chip-like” thing that you can do without much carb consequence is pork rinds. So I ate the heck out of those things. Sure, it’s fried pork skins, but I figured if my weight loss stopped then so would I. Then I got to where I didn’t need to snack all the time. I never figured I was one of those “comfort eaters” since I never went home to eat while depressed – but turns out I was. I needed a Coke and some junk food to be happy. Now I can consume a little bit of food and a Diet Coke and be fine.

Plus being on a low carb diet is easier now than any time before. If anything out there is low carb, it’s very clearly marked. There’s low carb menus in most restaraunts and most things you like have a low carb equivalent. Quiznos does flatbread, Subway and Friday’s are actually on board with Atkins, and Frito Lay has a new soy-laced chip with fewer carbs. And some low carb items are pretty close to their equivalents – like the sugar-free Creme Savers and the low carb Russell Stover candies. Of course they feature the disclaimer:

Excess consumption may have a laxative effect

….

Well, there’s another way to lose weight I guess.

But as a result of all of this, low carb hysteria is at an all time high. So, people are resistant. I believe this is twofold. First, the natural reaction when overloaded with something is resistance. Do guys say they hate Jennifer Lopez and Brtiney Spears because they’re ugly? If anything their media overexposure should be a good thing. No, guys say they hate them because they’re so sick of them. But the other reason, I believe, is that as a result of all of the people on low carb diets, the number of people on diets has gone up exponentially. I’ve never been on a diet before (so lucky me that the first one worked), but now the odds of you knowing someone on a diet has gone up considerably. And if you’re someone who needs to be on a diet (as most people are – save for bodybuilders and the genetically lucky) then it’s easy to interpret the magnitude of people on these diets as a sign. And people really hate that.

But whatever. I’m one of like three people in my office on a diet, so I get cut out of certian things involving cake. And it’s somewhat asinine to have to limit yourself in a land of plenty. The one thing that concerns me about this diet is an “exit strategy” (obviously I can’t “go back”, so what then?) but in the meantime I’m going to go take a swig off of a Coke C2 and have thousand island on my salad.

Yeah, I’m naughty.

Okay, rant time. This one’s pretty minor in the scheme of things but I feel the need to vent.

One of my pet peeves is when people say something is “written in Visual Basic” or when something is referred to as being “all in Visual Basic” but then doesn’t go beyond that definition. Actually what really irks me is when people look at me like a space alien when I ask “Visual Basic what?”

So let’s clarify, shall we? Microsoft, as we’ve established, decided to kick start Windows development and go into Rapid Application Development with its Visual Basic programming tool/language. Visual Basic 1.0 was essentially a frontend for designing applications with a scripting language in the background. The language was based off of BASIC, but didn’t adhere to it strictly, mainly because BASIC had no standards bodies behind it (so you can’t say you’re ANSI compliant, like C++ compilers can).

Visual Basic was aimed at non-programmers and was fairly limited. Over the years it had six major version releases, with 1999’s Visual Basic 6.0 being the last. Each release added more power to the product, mostly through undocumented functionality (which had the interesting side effect of only the long-term programmers having access to them or the desire to use it). VB6 still retained the “only do what we thought of” mentality – it limited the users in ways that “to the metal” languages like C++ don’t. I’ve heard it referred to as the “glass cieling” of VB6 – at some point you’ll want it to do something that it simply cannot do. But in so far as being able to achieve a lot in a small amount of time, it couldn’t be beat.

But the language behind it was always kinda kludgey, and each release just grafted more onto it. What happened was – over time millions of people who weren’t considered programmers prior to VB’s release were now being considered programmers and these people demanded more from the product. Essentially Microsoft had created a beast – things they wanted to do with VB they couldn’t do without alienating their client base, and a number of things about VB never really worked, but the VB programmers worked around them anyway.

But then Microsoft hauled off and released Visual Basic .NET in 2002, as part of their .NET initiative. VB.NET changed a lot of things about the language, the environment, and the positioning of VB. Functions now had return types, VB could now power web pages, and everything written in VB to that point had to be redone. Additionally, while VB6 programmers were more or less standalone beasts, VB.NET programs ran in the .NET CLR meaning that the .NET Framework has to be loaded on the machine. Consequently, VB6 and VB.NET are considered two separate things, and a number of people have loudly decided that they will never move away from VB6 to VB.NET. Indeed, VB.NET is aimed at more advanced programmers and a number of VB6 programmers just don’t want to go there.

So that’s VB6 versus VB.NET. Then there’s VBScript. When Microsoft devised Active Server Pages, they conjured up a subset of VB functionality in scripting language (not compiled) format and called it VBScript.VBScript can run client side or servier side. Since ASP pages are server-based technology, the VBScript they use sprinkled within HTML is used to make the page more dynamic (for example, pulling things in from a database). ASP required an ASP-compatible platform, such as IIS running on Windows. Client-side, only Internet Explorer can do VBScript, which is why most web designers do VBScript on the server end and JavaScript on the client end. This practice of having pseudo-VB code running on web pages in the form of VBScript is the precursor to VB.NET’s running ASP.NET pages. VB.NET goes one step further, however, and can run the code in “code behind” – it’s in a separate file and is in fact compiled into a DLL tied to the individual ASPX page.

So that’s the three kinds of VB: VB6, VB.NET and VBScript. The part where it gets asinine is when the three get confused. Part of this is by design – Microsoft wanted the managerial staffs of the world to think VB.NET was a mere incremental upgrade on VB, which was only half right. If they knew the whole story they’d balk and not migrate, so the techies of the world played along since they wanted the upgrade. Same thing with ASP.NET and ADO.NET. But I’ve seen problems where people assume that VBScript is synonymous with all things VB and discount ASP.NET projects as “scripting”. This is nothing new – I hear of Java programmers being called to interviews where the person really needs a JavaScript programmer.

The rumor is that Microsoft secretly hates VB and would nothing more than to kill it off entirely – they’re rumored to be doing the majority of their future development in C#, including a complete rewrite of Office (though they have killed off previous efforts to do just that). Additionally, there’s word that with C# 2.0 (part of .NET 2.0), C# will get functionality that VB.NET will not – the two will fork off from each other. Why they would do that (since the MSIL would have to be updated and so therefore VB.NET could be upgraded as well) is puzzling (though for a C#-preferring language snob like myself it’s precious). The reason Microsoft came up with VB.NET to begin with is the fact that there’s some 3 million plus VB6 coders out there and they needed them to make their .NET push happen at all.

So that’s VB and the three faces of it. I don’t expect merely writing this to fix anything (since at least a few people who gave me the confused puppy look also happened to be seasoned programmers), but now at least anyone reading this knows another thing to be nitpicky over.

There’s this new concept in grocery stores. I think Albertson’s, oddly enough, innovated it. Just about every store around here now has “self checkout” lanes. The concept is simple – you scan in your own stuff, pay, then leave.

At first glance it’s a devilishly simple concept – just scan the things yourself and place it in the bags. Usually they’re arranged four in a “quad” formation, with one person at a desk to oversee them. I have mixed feelings on the one person thing – it could be that they’ve just eliminated the need for three workers, or it could be that that one worker is four times as effective.

Anywho, the first several times I saw these things I avoided them. Mostly it was because I was in a hurry and the last thing I needed to do was learn a new system. In fact, I saw these things deserted even though the lines for cashiers were quite long. Eventually though I decided to try one of these things out.

The first thing you have to do is scan whatever card you have to save money. This, ironically, is an advantage Wal-Mart has because they’re cheap to begin with. I don’t really mind the whole “savings card” idea at grocery stores (I have a keychain full of them), except for the fact that half the time these fuckers won’t scan. Anywho, you scan your card and then you scan your items. Once you scan your items, you place them in bags to the side. The bags and their dispensers are on a device which acts as a scale, which is how the machine figures out whether or not you have placed the item in the bag yet. Additionally, the system knows what the item would reasonably weigh, so it’s not enough to throw just any item in the bag. If you have produce, you place it on the scanner and either key in the code on the sticker or go through the interface to find the item in question. The scanner also acts as a scale and additionally has a camera so the overseer can make sure the item is what you say it is.

On the whole, this isn’t really a bad idea. It’s often times quicker than waiting in line, especially if you have just a few items. Sometimes though it just annoys the crap out of me. For starters, you have to do everything right. You have to scan each item individually and place them in the bag. If you get “off” from this rhythym then the system halts and the sixteen year old they hired yesterday gets to come over and place it in the bag for you. I think if you waited long enough (like ten seconds) then the problem would resolve itself, but in the meantime some kid gets to have a power trip. Occasionally the system gets confused on whether or not you placed the item in the bag already and then you have to “fake it out” – once I had to place an item in the bag along with a different item (so presumably the weight thing isn’t that precise).

And then there’s the payment method. Generally I use my check card by scanning it in the little scan thing. With a check card you can either do a debit transaction (which requires your PIN) or a credit card transaction (which requires your signature). Of all the places, Wal-Mart is the only one I’ve seen which lets you sign right on the scanning thing – even though some other stores use the exact same device to process your card. If you pick credit card at some other places then you have to go to the main cashier to sign and get your reciept. Not only does this negate the purpose (that you don’t want to interact with a cashier), but I always somehow seem to hit the one at Kroger while the main guy is taking a piss. Consequently, I go with the debit card option, even though my Wife doesn’t want me to – it’s just easier. Of course Wal-Mart’s little signing pad thingy has the resolution of an Atari 2600, so your signature never looks like your actual signature, so it’s kinda pointless to sign at all, especially since your handwriting is so botched by the unnatural angle you have to sign with in the fist place. And this is assuming the piece of shit holds still long enough to sign at all.

Now that people are starting to use these things it’s not uncommon to wait in line for them – and without fail I always get behind someone who doesn’t know how to use it. This isn’t awful – I didn’t know how to use them at one point either – but it never fails that the person has to pay in cash, feed bills into the machine (which, to its credit, has a much higher bill tolerance than a Coke machine), and then can never, ever figure out that the slot where the change bills come out is right below the scale. I guess it could be worse – it could give you your change in dollar coins like vending machines in post offices do.

The most amusing thing is the separate printer they have for coupons. You know, I’m never going to use these coupons (they’re never for anything you buy and hey, you don’t want to look cheap anyway) and I never wanted them when the human tellers would hand them to me and fill my wallet. At least now I can leave them there. Come to think of it, I would hate to see how these things redeem coupons, since it asks if you have any before you pay. This is of course right after they announce your total quite loudly – not sure if I want people in the back of Wal-Mart to know how much money I spentm but whatever.

Some stores at least have the plastic bags on a turnstyle, so you can get to more of them if you need – others just have two dispensers. Since at this point you’re too paranoid to move anything, lest the system dispatch someone to assist you and make you feel stupid, you tend to put everything into those two bags – consequently it’s only obvious when you’ve got too much when it’s too late. Fortunately there’s a “skip bagging” option for things like 12-packs of cans.

Ironically the other night I was willing to wait through a line of 2-3 people in each of the self-checkout lanes, just to glance over and see that the manned lane next to it had no one in it. I wonder if that means we secretly really don’t want to interact with the employees at a grocery store.

And all of this is really a new take that we are being trusted a lot more at the grocery store. I mean, unless they’re really being attentive and/or there’s something I’m missing, there’s nothing to keep you from just not scanning something in your cart. Now I see Albertson’s is introducing this new feature where you take a scanning gun with you and scan items as you go – then you put the scanning gun on a central station and pay there. This is crazy to me and would seem even more susecptible, except that you have to register to use this service so in theory they could hunt you down if needed.

But for all my complaints, if I have just a couple of things to check out with I’m still going to use this. But like those “voice recognition” services, I’m starting to get annoyed by the concept of “natural” human/machine interaction that requires you to act in a really unnatural way.