DonMoonsio

Recently, a friend asked for my recipe for cooking a good old fashion pot roast. After responding, I thought what's good for the goose is good for the gander so why not get my copy-n-paste on and share with my little slice of the Interwebz.

One disclaimer before proceeding - this recipe is totally improvised and not written down anywhere. The basic technique of the recipe follows that of Julia Child's boeuf bourguignon with influences from Ina Garten and Cook's Illustrated thrown in for good measure. As for the ingredients, particularly the beef selection, that comes from six years of restaurant kitchen work and two years of Publix meat department work during my high school and college years. Those 8 years taught me more about cutting and cooking techniques and how those two items contribute more to a meal's success or failure than any amount of cook book reading I have ever done.

First the beef - I almost always opt for a boneless top blade roast which is part of the chuck (which comes from the front shoulders of the moo-moo). Now you can get a plain old chuck roast and it will work just fine, but if you can find a top blade roast, then in my opinion, that is where its at. One thing to consider is size - a top blade roast only gets so big, so if you are feeding a proper number of mouths, say 6 or more, then a regular chuck roast may be the way to go.

I shoot for a 2-4 pound roast and that comfortably feeds 2-4; scale accordingly (and leftovers are toe-curling, so don't be afraid to get a big roast).

Before the steps, an important note - a 3 pound roast will have 3 hours of cooking time, a 4-5 pound roast will have 4 hours of cooking time, so keep that in mind and plan your cooking day accordingly.

Ingredients

• 1 Roast
• 1 large yellow onion, diced
• 3-4 cloves of garlic, minced
• 1 bag of carrots (typically 1 lb), peeled. You can leave whole or chopped into stew-size rustic chunks
• 4-5 stalks of celery cleaned. You can leave whole or chopped into stew-size rustic chunks
• Small can of tomato paste
• Dried thyme
• Bay leafs (two or three)
• Beef stock (~4 cups). Homemade, from a box, whatever you have.
• Bottle of good red wine. Anything drinkable will work, I tend to use Cabernet or Pinot Noir
• Worcestershire sauce
• Soy Sauce

Now the steps:

1. An hour before I start cooking, I take the roast out of the fridge and coat with a few dashes of Worcestershire sauce and a good coating of salt and pepper. Let the roast sit on the counter to lose some of it's chill.
2. Preheat your oven to 275-deg F
3. I put my indispensable Le Cruset dutch oven over medium-high heat and film the bottom with olive oil.
4. Once the oil is shimmering, plop the roast in and brown on both sides (even the skinny-sides if you are feeling adventurous).
5. Once browned, put the roast on a plate and set to the side
6. Lower the heat to medium-low, and chuck the onions into the pot
7. Sweat the onions until translucent, then toss the garlic in
8. Once the garlic is nice and fragrant, raise the heat back to medium-high and pour about 1/2 cup of the wine in. Let the wine reduce until the smell of alcohol is gone from the vapors wafting from the pot.
9. Put the roast back in the pot along with any drippings that accumulated on the plate while resting
10. Pour beef stock into the pot until it comes just to the top of the roast (if you have a really tall roast, add more stock, if you run out of stock use water and/or more wine)
11. Toss in about half the can of tomato paste and stir to dissolve it
12. Toss in a few shots of Worcestershire sauce
13. Toss in a few shots of Soy Sauce
14. At this point, continually taste the broth; if it lacks some punch or seems a bit bland, add more soy and Worcestershire. Note, the broth will not explode on your palette at this point, it will always taste a bit flat. What you are looking for is a 'this tastes good' threshold to be reached; the 'this tastes outstanding' explosion in taste will come later.
15. Once satisfied, drop the bay leafs in and sprinkle a decent amount of thyme (teaspoon perhaps), give one last stir and bring the liquid just to the boil.
16. Once boiling, slap the cover on the pot and toss that bad boy in your 275-degree oven
17. Set your timer for one hour LESS than total cooking time (i.e. 3 hour total cooking time = 2 hour timer)
18. Go play video games or stand in your garage oogling the gorgeous blue paint on your BMW.
19. Once the timer goes off, take the pot out of the oven, open the lid, toss the carrots and celery in, re-cover and put back in the oven
20. Set your timer for the final hour
21. Go watch an episode of The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills. I love how Camille Grammer shows off her 20,000 sq.foot mansion as being the 'fruits of her labor'. Sorry honey, but unless you count climbing on top of Kelsey every night as labor, I am pretty sure that eight-figure house was paid for by Frasier's 11-year run and subsequent syndication payouts.
22. Once the final timer goes off, remove the pot.
23. Place the carrots and celery on a plate and carefully remove the roast. Now at this point, the roast should be ridiculously tender and it will begin to fall apart as you are lifting it out. Just get it all on the plate and cover the plate with foil; set aside or in a warming oven.
24. I like the strain the cooking liquid out of the dutch oven and into a sauce pan over high heat and bring it to a rolling boil
25. As it is boiling I add flour to thicken it, I would say two tablespoons or so. You can sift the flour as you add it to the sauce, this will help avoid lumps but more importantly, as the flour is going in, you or your helper should be whisking like a mad man.
26. Once the flour is added, I lop in a tablespoon or two of butter...still whisking
27. Important - continually taste the gravy adding salt if needed (sometimes it needs it and other times it does not)
28. Using the spoon test (dip the spoon, draw your finger down the middle of the back, sauce should be thick enough to hold the line), reduce the gravy to desired thickness being careful not to over-salt - as you are boiling the water out of it, the flavors will intensify
29. Plate up everything (oh yeah, maybe you should have made mashed potatoes instead of watching the Housewives of Beverly Hills and ranting about some meaningless television show), pour the rest of the wine and get ready for some serious eats.

Hopefully you know how to make mashed potatoes, but in case you don't, it is pretty darn simple:

1. Peel and wash however many potatoes you want.
2. Cut the potatoes into 1-inch chunks, put into a saucepan, cover with water, add a dash of salt and bring the water to a boil
3. Boil the potatoes for 20 or 25 minutes until they are fork-tender
4. Drain the potatoes, add a tablespoon of melted butter for every two potatoes cooked
5. Mash with whatever tool you desire - masher, hand mixer, fork, spoon, etc.
6. As you are mashing add warmed milk until desired consistency is reached
7. Salt and Pepper to taste
8. Technically the potatoes are done, but if you like cheese, go ahead an stir in whatever cheese you like, Parmesan, cheddar, etc.
9. Remember to constantly taste as you add the salt, pepper and cheeses - no blind measurements or additions!

So that is it. The great thing about pot roast and mashed potatoes is just how open to improvisation each of them are. By all means, experiment, tweak, and alter adding your own flair to the dish, just remember to always taste as you go - your sense of taste is by far one of the greatest weapons you can yield in the kitchen.

Bon Appetit

What better way to celebrate Valentine's Day than to talk about BMW's gift to M-heads everywhere - the 2013 BMW ///M6:



The car will feature the same twin-turbocharged 4.4-liter V8 as the upcoming ///M5 and will output an identical 560 horsepower and 500 pound-feet of torque. Look for 0-60 MPH jaunts to take a tidy 4.2 seconds; quite impressive for a car whose curb weight will most likely flirt with 4,500 pounds.

Notable features include a luscious double-panel carbon fiber roof and carbon ceramic brakes which the latter will most certainly create plenty of 'WTF' moments in BMW service centers across the country when future owners are quoted $5,000 for routine brake jobs replacing the pads and rotors. Pricing has not been announced for North America, but expect the minimum cost of entry to be at least $115,000.

While the car is a visual stunner, I have to question who this car has in its sights. The primary appeal of the ///M6 is two-fold - first its design (read ///M6 badge) and second, its fully usable back seats, but therein lies the rub - the rear seats of any two door car are not particularly easy to access. This begs the question - if a proper back seat is important, why not just get the 4-door ///M5 whose rear seats require no contortion or excessive effort to access?

If you care less about the backseat and a two door car lights your fire, then I would still question the choice of the ///M6 as its purchase price is comparable to that of the new Porsche 991 Carrera S. Why if you opt for the P-car over the BMW, you may even have enough cash left over to tick an option box or two and get metallic paint or sports seats in full leather. For my money, the Porsche offers a far better sports car experience while the ///M6 offers a primo grand touring experience.

All that said, it will be interesting to see just who buys the new ///M6. I predict BMW will sell more convertible variants than coupes and that less than 1% of all ///M6s sold will ever see the fun side of a track wall. But hey, they sure will look pretty sweet cruising through the Cheesecake Factory parking lot after an epic day spent parked in the Neiman Marcus valet lot. At least those carbon ceramic brakes will not die a premature death tooting around the country club circuit.

In the wee hours of the morning, someone out in Interwebz land sent me some comments regarding my last journal entry. The comments were mostly complimentary and pointed out to me the fine performance turned in by Bruno Mars near the opening of the Grammys as proof that some of today's musicians do indeed 'get it'.

I was in complete agreement with the comments until I came across the final claim made by the anonymous poster: they went as far as to claim that Bruno's performance rivaled those of the one and only Mr. James Brown.

Not so fast my friend. While the Bruno Mars performance was indeed great, it was not even in the same galaxy of those turned in by James Brown. Just check this clip out to see the tip of the iceberg; and if James is not your cup of tea, please, please at least watch the 45 seconds contained in the 1:45 to 2:30 mark; that my friend will give you an idea of what it is all about:



There is a lot to love in that clip - the ridiculous horn section, the dual drummers, the bass player, but it is the front-man that sells the tickets as they say (translation - puts the asses in the seats).

So to whoever sent me those comments, thank you, and yes, I do agree that Bruno's performance was great, but I have to believe you most certainly meant 'paid homage to' rather than 'rivaled'. Oh and for my money, Bruno's performance was more of the Morris Day and The Time variety rather than James Brown, but thanks for giving me a reason to go YouTube fishing for a classic.

I am not a big awards show guy, but last night, as Matic and I were both preoccupied with our laptops, we did not bother to change the channel when 60 Minutes concluded and the Grammys began. Once the ceremony opened, I must admit I was personally very curious to see how the show would handle the sudden and recent death of Whitney Houston. There were tributes aplenty throughout the show which were all fitting, but somehow I was left a little underwhelmed with the effort.

Of course, most of my feelings regarding Whitney revolve around a sense of 'what if'. Certainly, she accomplished a tremendous amount in her short life, but one would be remiss not to contemplate what her career would have been had she not battled her obvious substance abuse problems for the majority of her life. It does not take a wide stretch of the imagination to see that Whitney could have easily climbed to the iconic status currently enjoyed by the likes of Aretha Franklin and Tina Turner and Celine Dion. Whitney certainly had the talent to be placed in that group, but ultimately the power of her addictions proved to be the strongest force in her life and as such we are now peppered with reports of a 48 year old legend dying in a hotel bathtub. Didn't we almost have it all indeed....

Watching the myriad of live performances featured last night, it was quite obvious that auto-tune technology is the absolute cornerstone of many performances. Rihanna for example didn't even bother to attempt to mask the fact that her entire performance was pre-recorded and lip synced. Often, her microphone was at her hip while her vocals magically blared through loud and clear and in perfect tune. It used to be controversial when backing tracks were used for instrumentals while vocals were live, but now we are at a point where very little of what we hear is unmodified and manipulation free.

I realize I sound like a crotchety old geezer but give the following two clips a play and see where the standard used to be:

Aretha Franklin on Soul Train circa 1973:



Marvin Gaye singing the National Anthem circa 1983:


Speaking of Soul Train, whoever is responsible for the Grammys should be completely ashamed for not memorializing Don Cornelius last night. The man's contributions to music are simply, and without exaggeration, beyond measure. Rest in Soul Don, you certainly deserved much more reflection than was shown last night.

Yes, I realize it has been quite some time since I last posted here. There are plenty of mundane reasons for my absence, most of which you don't want to read, and frankly I don't want to write. So with your indulgence, let's just leave the culprit of the absence at the collision of two circumstances - the lion's share of my recent free time has been spent outside of this journal and Twitter has provided a convenient outlet to satiate the need I feel to spew my thoughts out into the ether.

So yesterday's Super Bowl was yet another sensational installment in the ridiculously hyped series. There were moments, particularly in the fourth quarter, when I could feel my pulse rise and my eyes widen as the tension of the game became palpable. Without dissecting the minutia of the event, here is what stuck out for me from Super Bowl 46:

Eli Manning is indeed the real deal, perhaps even eclipsing his near-mythical brother in terms of quarterback prowess. This was the second Super Bowl where Eli calmly and coolly led a 4th quarter game-winning drive in what is without question the most pressure-packed environment a professional football player can be placed. Eli's throw to Mario Manningham in the 4th was simply pixel-perfect; if that ball is under-thrown by a foot it is intercepted; over-thrown by a foot and it is an incompletion out of bounds. Throwing the ball of course is only half the battle and Mario Manningham's catch can not be dismissed - it was extraordinary and he will be familiar to generations yet to come as the NFL will assuredly replay that catch ad nauseum.

The Patriots committed uncharacteristic mistakes throughout the game last night. Perhaps most egregious were the dropped passes, particularly in the game's final few possessions. That being said, the one dropped pass garnering the most attention - Wes Welker's - was damn near an un-catchable ball. Yes, both of Wes's hands touched the ball, but the guy had to leap, twist, and contort his body to get to a ball that was simply thrown to the wrong spot. Tom Brady is a better quarterback than that and he certainly deserves the majority of blame for that miscue.

The halftime show was the halftime show. Plenty of sparkle, some cool bits, some lame bits, and even a dash of controversy. Enough Said.

Tom Brady's wife defending her husband after the game was simultaneously awesome and inappropriate. Of course Gisele can feel that the dodgy consistency of her husband's receivers was to blame for the loss, but she should not mutter those feelings publicly - it is selfish, self-centered, and contradicts the very essence of team-based activities. Football games are won by teams or lost by teams, there is very little room for individual accomplishment or blame.

As for the commercials, they were fine this year I suppose, but there was one standout for me - Chevrolet's spots for their new Sonic. The car does not really interest me per se, but the marketing of the car is exactly what it should have been - beautifully filmed, tremendous production values, tons of energy, an over the top concept, and perhaps most importantly, a perfect soundtrack to frame the action:



Be sure to check out Chevy's site (http://letsdothis.com/stunts/) for the second ad featuring an equally wacky concept that is definitely worth the time to watch. As an added bonus, you can even download the songs featured in the spots for free - no registration, no email address, no FaceTube 'like' needed, just click and download. That is the way to promote your product Chevy, well done.

Well, not a bad way to break back into the journal and knock some of the dust off. There is one topic that I hope to explore here in the coming weeks and that is my current training regiment for a 10-mile run later this year. I literally started this endeavor as a plump and lumpy couch potato who was easily 30 pounds overweight. I will work to post my experiences through the journey as I am sure they will provide a good outlet for me and hopefully a few chuckles for those who read. More to come.

it was bound to happen eventually, so what better audience to spin Big Blue out in front of than the highfalutin Porsche club. The spin occurred at the exit of the turn in the top-right corner of the circuit:




I entered the turn at what I thought was the proper speed, but as I began to accelerate through the apex, I could feel the front wheels begin to slip. I added more throttle trying to will her around the corner but the back-end started to come around, so I took all my steering to the opposite lock and was soon in a full drift.

For some stupid reason I committed two boo-boo's next - I pushed the throttle harder and more fatally, began to turn the wheel away from the slide - within a blink of an eye, Big Blue did a complete 360; I was amazed at how quickly this happened, everything up to this point was happening in slow motion until that spin.

Happily that turn was intentionally designed with a huge runoff so the only thing that was bruised was my ego. The spectators in that corner showered me with a chorus of 'oohh's and ahhh's'  and a spattering of applause as the cloud of tire smoke and dust cleared revealing my stalled car, but even so, it was stupid-fun and I was laughing with joy as I got her back on track.

Each driver ripped off six runs and my progression after the spin-out was trending perfectly:
1) 47.407s
2) 59.607s (spin-out lap)
3) 49.834s (scared to spin-out lap)
4) 47.784s
5) 46.804s
6) 45.749s

It is always a good sign when you show trending improvement and when you finish the day with your best time, but I could not help but feel a tinge of disappointment - two of my laps were essentially lost to my mental errors and if I had a few more runs, I was confident I could shave an additional two seconds off my time. But alas the promise of that mythical 'one more lap' is far and away the number one agony of motorsports. Regardless, my best time put Big Blue in the same bracket as the 997 Carrera S's and 996 Turbos which on paper are two classes above Big Blue's prowess.

As for the best laps of the day, it came down to two cars - a new Boxster S and a Carrera GT3 RS - yes, a GT3 RS. The damn thing sounded like a beautifully wild animal as it sliced through the course. Each were trading laps in the 40 second range, but then the Boxster ripped off a 39.200s and the GT3 could not match the time, so the Boxster took the day.

Now it should be said that the Boxster in question is technically no match for a car like a GT3 RS, but on a autocross circuit, things are a little different. The single biggest factor in success at an autocross is driver precision; there is typically zero margin for error and unlike a traditional race circuit, time cannot be made-up further down the circuit if you botch the line somewhere. Working the course, I was amazed at how fast and consistent that Boxster's driver scooted his roadster around the circuit compared to all the other drivers.

The Sarasota Porsche dealership catered lunch and brought a lot of nice toys along as buffet centerpieces - a Boxster Spyder, a Carrera GTS, and a 911 Turbo S.

Along these lines, comparatively, the Porsche club seemed far more 'proud' of their cars than the BMW group. After each heat, the racing was stopped and there was an awards ceremony for the top 3 Porsche cars of the heat (non-Porsches with better times were excluded). All top 3 cars were positioned in dramatic fashion while the drivers posed in front of them with their trophies and were photographed by a professional photographer hired for the day. This spectacle took about 45 minutes, time enough to have easily provided at least 2 more runs for everyone, but alas, the Porsche owners seemingly like to pat each other on the back rather than getting a few extra laps in.

There were also subtle, but tongue-in-cheek jabs - for example, when recruiting corner workers, I volunteered and the coordinator asked if I had done corner work before - I sad yes, at the BMW autocrosses. The coordinator retorted "very well then, just be advised, our cars are going to be a lot faster than what you are accustomed to". He said it with a smile on his face and a laugh, so while he was mostly kidding around, you could tell there is definitely a rivalry between the two clubs.

Come this December, that rivalry will be in full-swing as there are back-to-back BMW vs. Porsche autocrosses alternating between each club's resident circuits. I can't wait to get back out there and represent the blue and white of Bavaria's finest.

Re-reading my post from last night, I just realized that my final few paragraphs were omitted as I obviously missed them when transferring from my word processor. Further proof that I am of little use to anyone or anything after 11 PM. If you have not read my Objective Remembrance post below, please do so first and then continue to my final thoughts on the Gawker article in this post.

So there you have it - three criticisms leveled against a great man. By my count, only one of three has enough meat to stick resulting in a final count of two balls and one strike.

It is unfair when discussing labor and human-rights inequality to single out Apple and Steve Jobs as sole culprits. The discrepancy in labor is a global problem of epidemic proportions with far too many variables and ecosystems chaotically whirling around to discuss in the narrow scope of any one single company. Still, Tim Cook has an opportunity here - at the moment Apple is the wealthiest corporation on Earth, what better entrance criteria to draw a line in the sand and send a message to the rest of the industrialized world that it is time to ignore the status quo and Think Different.

As for Steve being a tyrant - deal with it. Hell, I am convinced it is practically a job requirement for anyone aspiring for dominance in anything. History is again our teacher here, look at virtually any mogul and you will find skeletons that make you cringe: Henry Ford - antisemitism personified; Martin Luther King Jr - compulsive womanizer who had numerous extramarital affairs; Bill Gates - known for stretching the truth when selling you a bill of goods and for going out of his way to illegally crush his competition; Alfred Sloan - employed the use of organized crime to crush labor uprisings (and while we are on the subject - hats off to organized crime leaders for playing both sides of the fence here, but that is best saved for a future entry). You get the point - all great people are people first and great second which means they succumb to the same failings that us mere mortals also fall to.

In truth an article such as this is obvious as it counters the predictable and unrelenting wave of narrowly-scoped positive praise that always follows the shock when a person of prominence passes on. And while history should record the facts without political or personal bias, it should also present facts tempered against the scope of historical circumstances and social climate from which they were made.

Tonight, a friend and self-admitted iSheep forwarded me a Gawker.com article entitled What Everyone Is Too Polite to Say About Steve Jobs.

For those looking for the bullet-points of the article, the author praises and acknowledges Steve's numerous contributions to the world, but also reminds readers that when remembering Steve, to try to do so without the Barbara Walters filter applied. Specifically, the author levies three criticisms against Steve's career:

1) Censorship and Authoritarianism
"The internet allowed people around the world to express themselves more freely and more easily. With the App Store, Apple reversed that progress. The iPhone and iPad constitute the most popular platform for handheld computerizing in America, key venues for media and software. But to put anything on the devices, you need Apple's permission. And the company wields its power aggressively."

Well this one is right in my wheel-house. Believe it or not, I have never owned an iOS device and when asked why, the point raised above is far and away my #1 reason. For me, any device I purchase must be able to receive content from any source of my choosing, not someone else's.

To me, my list of requirements is simple - I want to connect my device to any computer and drag content to it without using some proprietary software other than that computer's operating system. Even better, my device should be able to connect via WiFi to a computer of my choosing and transfer content. Also, I do not want to re-encode any content from a industry-standard open container to a proprietary closed container in order for that content to play on my device.

2) Sweatshops, Child Labor and Human Rights
"Apple's factories in China have regularly employed young teenagers and people below the legal work age of 16, made people work grueling hours, and have tried to cover all this up."

This criticism is fair, but the notion of horrible working conditions for laborers is not isolated to Apple products nor consumer electronics. In fact, the problem described in this criticism is a sweeping problem across all consumer-goods industries. I am confident if you got up and went to your closet and inspected virtually any garment, you would find it was probably made by someone whose standard of living is mortifying to you. The same goes for your television and your alarm clock.

Still the point remains however - for a company that prided themselves on Being Different and Changing the World, why not take the lead and strive to improve the lives of everybody - not just the suburban soccer-parent looking to FaceTube that their little pride and joy just got an 'A' on their spelling quiz.

3) In Person and At Home
"Before he was deposed from Apple the first time around, Jobs already had a reputation internally for acting like a tyrant. Jobs regularly belittled people, swore at them, and pressured them until they reached their breaking point. In the pursuit of greatness he cast aside politeness and empathy. His verbal abuse never stopped."

I don't believe anyone who even remotely follows the technology sector is surprised by the notion that Steve Jobs had a reputation for at times being a a$$hole to work for. I would even argue that any successful entrepreneur or leader has to do two things - 1) work harder (and sacrifice more) than everyone else and 2) demand perfection from everyone working under them. When mixed with a dose of ego and smugness, those two traits usually equate to a pretty crappy boss on an interpersonal level. The salvation however comes if you are working on a truly revolutionary product that will in fact change the world.

I bet if you go talk to members of the original Mac or iPhone team, they will regale you with horror stories but also talk about how meaningful it was to work on such a revolutionary product. For some, the work and the end result will have been worth the sacrifice, but for others, I am not so sure.

A fantastic documentary series - "Moon Machines" - chronicles the design, creation, testing, and deployment of specific components of the Apollo Lunar missions. Many of the engineers involved in those projects are interviewed in the present day and each talked about the immense personal sacrifice made while they dedicated nearly 100% of their time to the mission at hand. When asked was it worth it? and would you do it all over again?, the answers surprised with some claiming that while the end result was incredibly satisfying, the personal sacrifice and price paid was too great and they would not have taken part in the project if given the choice all over again.

Steve Jobs has died. Believe it or not, this entry actually required a good deal of contemplation and soul searching on my part. Over the past few days, I scribbled a few thoughts down here and there - some melodramatic, some morose, some comical, some in good taste and others in bad. In many ways, this varied roster of thoughts and feelings was quite fitting as it perfectly mirrored the swings of emotion I felt towards the man through the years.

I will not drone on about my personal history with Apple beginning at the ripe age of 7 nor all the facets of my feelings regarding Steve. I think both are summarized nicely by the fact that my handle on each eBay and Yahoo, both of which were created in 1996, is jobs4apple. I created the handle as a sort of protest or simple cry to whoever would listen - ‘hey Apple, swallow some pride and re-hire Steve Jobs’.

A year after creating that handle, Steve Jobs did return to Apple and quickly stunned the Mac Zealots by proclaiming that Apple and it’s followers must stop believing that in order for Apple to win, Microsoft must lose. With that proclamation (and a $150 million bailout from Bill Gates), Apple set out to reinvent themselves and thus began one of the most historic recovery stories in corporate-America history.

Of course many things that led to Apple’s resurgence are things that I grew to detest. I will always have profound respect for Mac OS X devices and their near clairvoyant way of enabling success by getting out of the user’s way. iOS devices however are for me nearly the polar opposite as I have found them constantly trying to be one step ahead of me and in turn doing nothing but blocking and frustrating me.

Regardless, even after Apple dropped the ‘Computer’ from their name, Steve still had his cadre of designers, engineers, and marketers consistently churn out fantastic computers which in turn pushed the rest of the industry to keep pace. This for me is perhaps Steve’s greatest legacy - he pushed the world of computers and personal electronics forward.

The finality of Death is always an unnerving and frightening prospect. However, in Death, legacies tend to wake eternally as Donne so poignantly alluded to four hundred years ago. Death is all about legacy; legacy is really the only comforting aspect to Death as it is the only measure of significance and immortality us biological beings can ever hope to achieve.

Though she no longer drives for BMW's Ring Taxi service, Sabine Schmitz's Green Hell slaying services can still be secured by riding shotgun in her Porsche GT3 RS for a scorching lap around Nurburg's fabled circuit . Regardless of what she drives, I have been a fan of the Speedbee since watching her go toe to toe with not only Jeremy Clarkson's personality but outright destroying his driving capability while behind the wheel during her various appearances on Top Gear.

Below is a segment she did while still under the employ of BMW as their chief Ring Taxi driver; very cool stuff indeed and in case you are wondering, the slide seen at the 2:28 mark is really what it is all about.