Categories
Recommended

Apple’s Other Great OS: OS X Server

Most everyone’s well familiar with OS X by now, be it from daily use over the last five years, or from hatred or jealousy. Speaking as to the powers of OS X would be silly; they’re well advertised, well known, and would only act as filler.

But not everyone has used Apple’s other OS, the server version of OS X. This is largely due to price – for consumers, it can be up to over seven times more expensive with no real benefits for end users. As such, it is often only those of us in institutions that have already invested in it that get to enjoy its perks.

So this post goes out to all the geeks toiling away in IT departments but haven’t looked at Apple’s offerings yet. Below the fold, you’ll find the five reasons I heart OS X Server and its related products – and why you should integrate it into your deployments.

Categories
Recommended

Happy 1,000,000,000th Flop, PokerRoom

(There’s some irony in writing about Texas Hold’em – or poker in general – on a blog, when the overwhelming majority of comment and trackback spam I see these days is for poker sites. Nevertheless…)

I got my gaming addiction at a very early age, and despite the looks of it from my biography page, it’s never been limited to video games. Before the age of 10, most of my desires rested in board games of all shapes and sizes. When I was 7 or 8, I was grounded temporarily for spending the first day we had cable doing nothing but watching game shows on USA. My parents would be more than happy to show you pictures of me in a cabin in Maine pretending to host Press Your Luck.

Most of all, I have maintained a healthy level of interest in card games over the years. Sure, I played Uno, and I still have a huge pile of Magic: The Gathering cards kicking around my old bedroom – these are not terribly unique traits. But how many people do you know that would check out every book the library had about card games? (Hopefully, not many – we’re a frightening bunch.)

Poker, more than any other game, appeals to my sense of logic and analytical nature. I started off playing five-card draw; the constant tactical decisions on what to draw were, well, addictive. Sometime in the late 90’s I fell into Texas Hold’em, and while there weren’t a ton of opportunities to play in Ithaca, I did find somewhere online during college to let me partake in my poker needs: PokerRoom.

Now, there are a lot of poker sites online; I have a handful of criteria that must be met in order to satisfy me, and amazingly, this very first site I fell upon met all of them.

  • The site has to support OS X. Sorry, but if I can’t play, I can’t play. (Pokerroom uses a Java client, so not only will it run on Mac and PC, but also on Linux.)
  • It has to have play money games. I play to remove stress and have a good time, and the nagging sensation that I’m blowing all of my savings doesn’t help my sense of enjoyment. Pokerroom supports both real money and play money ring games and tournaments.
  • The interface has to be well thought out. Not only does pokerroom’s interface have a lot of well thought out nuances, but there’s also a light version, allowing me to decide how much fluff I want to deal with. I appreciate that. (Apparently, the downloadable client – Windows only, sadly – also shows you TV-style percentages for all-in calls. Very cool.)
  • It’d be nice to have more than just hold’em. Sure, I can play Poker all day long, but sometimes some variety is nice. Luckily, PokerRoom also has Omaha, 7 Card Stud, Chinese Poker, and a variety of casino games. It’s a good chance to branch out – I loved learning how to play Chinese Poker, even if I am terrible at it.
  • A community is good, too. I’m big on social software, and I want to be able to make connections to other players if I feel the need. PokerRoom has Pokah!, which integrates into the site well and has groups, articles, and forums.
  • Don’t bully me into real money play. PokerRoom has always been very low-pressure about playing for real cash, and I appreciate that the play-money players are treated the same way the company treats the real-money players. Additionally, there’s a whole set of preferences where you can limit your daily wagering or play time, or block yourself for lengths of time. Responsibility is a good thing.
  • Keep it fresh. If you look at the news page, you can see that the Pokerroom team has been really busy this year. To keep me coming back to a gaming site, there’s got to be progress, and PokerRoom keeps advancing along.
  • Keep it interesting. While I don’t play in pay-money tournaments, there are more than I can keep count of happening on a daily basis. Prize packages can be huge, and there’s lots of opportunities to make it to Vegas for the World Series of Poker.

Now, no one gaming site will ever be perfect – Pokerroom shares the problem of kids who jump into tournaments and push all-in every hand until someone knocks them out, often clearing half the table in the first five minutes. But outside of that and the always moronic chatters, it’s an excellent Poker site.

So why am I posting about it rather than, well, playing? As it turns out, Pokerroom will be dealing its one billionth hand sometime today. (For the purposes of handing out even more cash, play-money games are unavailable until 12 hours after the billionth hand – hence the time for the post!) Congratulations to the entire PokerRoom.com team – here’s to another billion!

Disclaimer: I do not work for or have any connection to Pokerroom.com, other than being a very satisfied player.

Categories
Recommended

Glengarry Glen Ross – A Broadway Review

This afternoon, Katie and I went to a matinee of the new version of David Mamet’s *Glengarry Glen Ross*. We sat in the Orchestra section. This review contains no spoilers.

For those not familiar with the Pultizer winning play, I’ll quote the [official site](http://glengarryglenross.biz/)’s synopsis:

> GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS is a riveting account of the competing personalities in a seedy Chicago real estate office, where it’s business as usual until a high-stakes sales contest takes a shocking turn. Welcome to the fast and furious world of American entrepreneurship, where lying, cheating and stealing are all in a day’s work… and where the salesman will stop at nothing to close a deal.

It was made into a [popular movie](http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0104348/) in 1992 with an amazing ensemble cast: Jack Lemmon, Al Pacino, Ed Harris, Alan Arkin, Kevin Spacey, Alec Baldwin, Jonathan Pryce, and Jude Ciccolella. The play includes all of these parts save Alec Baldwin’s. The three most notable cast members for the stage version are Alan Alda (playing Jack Lemmon’s character of Shelley Levene), Liev Schreiber (playing Pacino’s firey Ricky Roma), and Jeffrey Tambor (picking up Alan Arkin’s George Aaronow).

Over the past 6 years or so – I saw the movie first when I was in college, long after its release – I’ve grown a huge appreciation for the movie, with its classic roles, relentless dialog, and tense pacing. I had high hopes for the stage version, and it mostly met my expectations. I apologize in advance about what follows, as all my thoughts on the play largely revolve around comparisons to the film. A point by point breakdown in no particular order:

**+ Liev Schreiber and Jeffrey Tambor were excellent.**

I never got much of a handle on the character of George in the movie – I had always considered him the weakest of the bunch in the movie. But Tambor poured a hell of a lot into the character, giving him a real personality that was unique to the play, even despite what would seem like similarities in manner to Shelley. I was a big fan of Jeffrey coming into this from his work on *Arrested Development*, and this only cemented it further.

I was also pleasantly surprised by Liev Schreiber; I had my doubts at first at his ability to fill in the shoes of a character I have such a strong connotation with Al Pacino for, but he did it admirably. I’ve previously only seen Liev in *The Manchurian Candidate*, and my impression of him coming in was favorable – his take on the role was unique and powerful in its own way.

**= Alan Alda and Gordon Clapp were decent.**

I should preface this by saying I’ve never seen the play before today, only the film, and so perhaps Alda nailed the part – but compared to the Shelley Levine character I’ve known, it felt like Alda was forcing it a bit, rambling a bit too much and just going too broad. He didn’t ruin the play by any stretch – his acting was still good – but I just felt he was too overzealous at times. Perhaps it was because he was laying the accent on too thick.

Gordon Clapp, taking up Ed Harris’ role of Dave Moss, was great in his interactions with Jeffrey Tambor but lacked the punch needed when facing off against Liev. Not bad, just not great.

(Ironically, both of these men, along with Liev, are the ones nominated for Tony’s. I’m pulling for Liev.)

**- Fred Weller and Tom Wopat were forgettable.**

Fred Weller, picking up Kevin Spacey’s role, spent a lot of his time on stage not saying anything, and his body language didn’t convey anything. Spacey had a real edge in the role, and Mr. Weller was just lacking it.

Tom “Luke Duke” Wopat was showing the wrong sort of desperation as James Lingk; while Jonathan Pryce had nailed down a man who is backed into a corner by everyone he deals with, Wopat came across as wishy washy and didn’t leave much of an impression on me by the end of the play.

**+ The set design was amazing.**

If you go to see this play after reading my review, you may sit through Act I wondering what the hell I was thinking. But the second Act II starts, there is an audible gasp in the audience when you see the set. It’s one of the most detailed, functional sets I’ve seen yet, and it’s mighty impressive. I find myself crossing my fingers for Santo Loquasto – he deserves the set design Tony.

**= The first act was sort of blah.**

This is Mamet’s fault, not anyone in this cast; the structure of the first act requires too much piecing bits together through snippets of dialog, too much trying to connect people through disjoint scenes, and a real lack of flow. Luckily, it’s different enough from the film where people who have seen the movie aren’t going to be bored out of their skulls.

**+ The second act was electric.**

This also falls on Mamet’s shoulders, thankfully. There are no breaks in the second act, and it all flows beautifully. At the intermission, I was wondering if the play was worth seeing – the second act sealed the deal completely.

**? It’s very weird to be in the audience.**

The movie doesn’t come across as funny at all, just suspenseful and tense. While the play certainly has some intentional humor written into it, there were lots of instances where there’d be laughter just at swearing or cuts at other actors. The audience was also predominantly old, presumably because they all wanted to see Alan Alda. Not a good or bad thing, just strange.

—-

In conclusion: The cast is above average and works well together, and while the first act is a little weak, the second act is more than worth the cost of admission. I recommend catching this in matinee whether you’ve seen the movie a thousand times or not seen it at all.

Glengarry Glen Ross runs through August 28th at the Royale Theatre on West 45th St.