One of the first things we noticed when our Toshiba Z930s arrived were their shockingly light weight. Everyone in our office took turns holding it, amazed that something could be insanely portable and functional. Next, we started comparing it to some of the other computers in the office and we couldn’t figure out how to communicate its extreme light weight. Thus, Jordan and Casey took on the challenge. This is what they came up with.
Lindsay Lohan is apparently thinking of dropping her last name, reports PopEater.com.
“Lindsay is dropping the Lohan and just going by Lindsay,” Dina, Lindsay’s mother, told PopEater. “Plus, me and [younger daughter] Ali will be officially changing our last names back to my maiden name, Sullivan.”
Apparently, the Lohan family wants nothing to do with crazy-media-seeker father Michael, so they are all changing there name. So will Lindsay be joining Oprah, Cher, and Jesus?
“So many of the greatest people in showbiz are known by just their first name. Look at Oprah and Beyonce. Now you can add Lindsay to that list,” a family friend told PopEater. “And it’s a way for them all to start over. No one in the family want anything to do with Lindsay’s father [Michael Lohan] anymore and that includes sharing a last name.”
Although I could see why they want to do this, not everyone thinks it’s a good idea. ”I don’t think it’s a smart move,” brand strategist Kaira Akita told E Online. ”She’s been in a position as a celebrity [where it has appeared as if] she’s kind of beat the system, so the idea of her going with a one-name moniker makes it appear as if she’s higher above us.”
I mean, I know the Lohan name doesn’t exactly embody a positive and joyous nature, but this is a little extreme. On one hand, I see why she wants to change it. She wants to start over and distance herself from this crazy Lohan stereotype. But at the same time, do you think you’ll ever bounce back as an actress with the name “Lindsay”? I see Lilo being a good one-namer, but not Lindsay.
But if it makes Lindsay happy, then so be it. All I want for her is to move on with her life and start over. No one can deny that she is a great actress, so we’ll just have to wait and see where this goes.
High costs and consumer perception that Blu-ray DVDs are not that much different from normal DVDs has created a dim outlook for the product, according to an article published in the New York Times’ Technology section.
The New York Times reports that a study released from ABI Research revealed consumers don’t really notice the better picture quality Blu-ray DVDs purport to have. The NDP Group (another research corporation) also released sales figures last week showing that the sales of Blu-ray players nosedived by 40 per cent from January to February. Sales managed to recover by 2 per cent from February to March, but this was accredited largely to Toshiba’s decision to discontinue its support for the HD DVD format, according to the New York Times article.
The sales of the Blu-ray DVDs are actually so low that the NDP group hasn’t released the actual numbers in fear that individual retailers would be indentified for low sales. The actual figures will be released later this year, according to the New York Times article.
Another factor in the low consumer interest in Blu-ray DVDs and players appears to be the hefty cost. The price of upgrading a normal DVD player to Blu-ray is around $70, and a brand-new Blu-ray player costs around $300. There also seems to be an inconsistency with the product, as not every player is equipped with Blu-ray all features such as Internet connectivity. The price of the Blu-ray DVD player is expected to drop to around $200 around Christmas time this year, at which time the future of Blu-ray will be more predictable, according to the NDP group.
ABI Research, however, gives Blu-Ray a slightly darker outlook. The research firm stated that Blu-ray won’t be a solid market contender until at least October 2009, according to the New York Times.