I'm in the middle of planning a trip to San Francisco. San Francisco, unlike Portland, has at least one of those lovely United Colors of Beneton shops. They have nice stuff. Anyway, poking around the Beneton Group website, I noticed they sort their clothes into "Man" and "Woman" rather than "Men's" and "Women's" as might be more typical.

As I considered the oddity for a moment, I thought back to Paris. The three Zara shops I visited in the City of Lights also divided clothing into "Man," "Woman," and, in the case of Zara, "Child." And, as I gave it more thought, I realized a whole lot of fashion enterprises forgo the plural possessive for the singular: Armani and Versace to name two more.

But why do this? I figure the fashion people have one of two reasons. On the one hand, given the global reach of some of these companies — the Beneton Group has stores in nearly every one of the world's 195 or so countries, including four in Iran — it would be a logistical nightmare to localize "Men's" and "Women's" in every tongue from Hindu to Portuguese. On the other, English is very much en vogue in other parts of the world, so perhaps this is not so much a supply chain story as it is one of trends.

In May 2007, Apple CEO Steven P. Jobs, in a open letter promised consumers and environmental watchdog groups alike that Apple would, when economically prudent and technically feasible, eliminate the CCFL (cold cathode fluorescent lamp) backlights from all of its LCD computer displays. CCFLs contain mercury and other toxic heavy metals, which, of course, harm the environment.

Naturally, environmental groups cheered. The CCFL's successor, the LED (light emitting diode) backlight contains fewer toxic chemicals and requires less energy to operate. Creative professionals also welcomed the transition: LED backlights, unlike their predecessors, reach their full brightness the minute they turn on. Anyone working in an environment where accurate color matters can appreciate the improvement.

Since May 2007, other manufacturers have also taken steps to transition their products' backlights to LEDs from CCFLs. The LED backlit display has become, for the digerati, the "it" item of the moment, to draw a somewhat unseemly comparison.

At the same time, however, many of the same environmental groups who chastised the consumer electronics industry for using CCFL backlights launched programs to help consumers reduce their environmental impact by switching to funny-looking CFLs (compact fluorescent lamps) from their old incandescent lamps.

This makes absolutely no sense.

That the consumer electronics industry has decided to abandon CCFL backlights indicates the LED represents — for its superior efficiency, less severe environmental impact and technical improvements — a superior technology. Also, given that consumer electronics manufacturers, as for-profit entities, would want to minimize costs, their switch to LED backlights signals the LED has some economic advantage over the CCFL as well.

Why, then, do environmental groups continue to push compact fluorescent bulbs rather than the arguably superior LED sort?

Some would argue — and argue correctly — that the price of one LED light bulb far exceeds that of one compact fluorescent. But, just as the compact fluorescent lamp lasts longer than an incandescent lamp, an LED lamp lasts far, far longer a compact fluorescent.

Environmental groups should stop extolling the compact fluorescent now. I can just imagine the headlines in five years: "Compact Fluorescents: Dangerous and Deadly." Or the latest initiative from Greenpeace: "Ditch Your Compact Fluorescents: Go LED!"

This will be brief. I just read the Times' latest article in its "Long Run" series, chronicling the lives of our two potential Presidents prior to their current positions. Knowing that Barack Obama taught at the University of Chicago's Law School, I have wondered what students exposed to Barack Obama the intellectual had to say.

I think the article's last paragraph sums it up nicely:

Fine. I will admit that constitutional law, especially as taught at U Chicago, is probably not something the average person could ever be expected to understand. But still I wonder, have we become so afraid or so reluctant to think that we have decided to so blindly follow others?

While it would be derisible to suggest Senator Obama has yet to earn my vote come November, it would make me much less worried, checking that box, as it were, to see Barack Obama the professor.

I have writer's block. A few weeks ago I learned that I had been nominated for some award or another and, as such, I needed to write an essay to cement my place as a recipient of said award. After staring at my computer screen for an hour and a half, unable to find the inspiration to write the essay's conclusion, I figured I would watch Sunday's edition of Meet the Press. And, as it happened, the lovely and talented Junior Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama had Tom Brokaw's ear for the duration of this Sunday's program.

Senator Obama did not choose Meet the Press as the venue for any exciting announcements. By and large, he took the opportunity to reiterate his past statements and clear up some lasting ambiguities. I thought the Senator could have handled his response to the Surge questions with a tad more directness and clarity, but, otherwise, Senator Obama continues to improve as an extemporaneous speaker.

About two-thirds of the way through the broadcast, however, Tom Brokaw switched gears turned his questioning toward the United States' economy. Most of what the Senator said made sense. But then Mr. Brokaw brought up this line of questioning:

I wish Senator Obama had agreed, as Tom Brokaw suggested in his question, that the high price of oil — while painful in the short run for the mythical Average American — will eventually serve to benefit not only the nation's well-to-do, but everyone on every rung of the economic ladder. For a professed supporter of the Free Market, Senator Obama seems hesitant to allow the market to work its magic.

The longer the United States takes measures to soften the blow of high gasoline prices — whether by sending taxpayers another stimulus check or by expanding the potential for offshore drilling — the longer it will take for the United States to kick its oil habit.

People who develop addictions to high-strength prescription pain medications must be very bored, very stupid or very depressed. At least, that's the conclusion I've come to.

This morning I had the third of five or six gingival grafts. The procedure itself, thanks to local anesthesia, causes little discomfort. The post-op portion, though, drives me crazy. Not only does the procedure restrict my diet to soup, mush and porridge, I also spend two or three days taking an extremely potent pain killer.

I would have no trouble tolerating the mild post-graft pain without the dose ketoprofen prescribed to me. It's really not that bad. But, from what I understand, ketoprofen also helps to reduce swelling, which apparently aids the body in recovering from a surgeon's well-intentioned brutality. Given that faster recovery means real food sooner, I take the medication.

Yet, as I sit here — hunched over my keyboard in a stupor, correcting more spelling and grammatical problems than I care to admit as I type this — I have difficulty understanding why anyone would take these super potent pain killers for fun.

I struggle to stay awake; to think critically; to quip. I feel as if I have become some kind of inert vegetable, incapable of doing no more than napping or staring blankly into the glossy pages of interior design magazines. It's debilitating.

It almost surprises me that the Rush Limbaugh radio program did not improve after the commentator finished his rehabilitation program. Almost.

Microsoft of late has received quite a beating, at least in the public perception and advertising department, from its rival-in-chief, Apple, Inc. of Cupertino. Those "Get a Mac" advertisements — featuring "Too Cool Mac " Justin Long and "Lovable Workaholic PC" John Hodgman — have wreaked havoc on Windows Vista's reputation, portraying it as more of a downgrade than an upgrade.

Today, two years after Apple launched its "Get a Mac" advertisements, Microsoft took the wraps off its own marketing push back. As of this writing, visitors to Microsoft's homepage see this teaser graphic:

On the one hand, I like the concept and the advertisement. I have never understood what people hated so much about Windows Vista. Sure, it has some problems. Sure, I would rather use my Mac. But Windows Vista really does not deserve its reputation as something to be avoided like the Bubonic Plague.

Part of me, though, objects to the ad, not because I don't think Windows Vista deserves a chance to dig itself out of the gutter, but rather because the advertisement reinforces the incorrect belief that not a soul in 15th century Europe thought the Earth was round. As a matter of fact, many, many people, prior to Dear Christopher believed the Earth was round. Those big thinkers in Ancient Greece, for one, developed reasonably accurate methods of estimating the size of this misshapen sphere we humans call home.

In my mind, the belief that everyone thought the world was flat represents just an egregious factual error as people believing the world was flat in the first place. Scholars have known the ancients knew of our planet's shape for many, many years. Yet, in our popular culture, we continue to reinforce this loony misconception that everyone thought the world was flat. And, those of us brave enough to point out the problem with that thinking usually face accusations of over thinking or being some kind of academic show-off.

The vulgarization of complicated ideas has a place. Not everyone needs to know how a submarine works down to the tinniest button or switch. In other matters, though, we owe it to ourselves to be faithful to the truth.

I have found the perfect pizza. And, even though I have never travelled to Italy, I doubt even those prodigious purveyors of pizza could best the ambrosial pies to be found at Ken's Artisan Pizza here in superlative meriting Portland, Oregon.

Before I go any further, however, I should note that I have atypical taste in pizza. The crust, in my mind, should be thin, crisp and golden. Neither soggy, nor pale nor puffy, like the inferior sort found on those peculiar pan pizzas. The sauce — should the pizza have any — ought be applied gently and with moderation. If I wanted my food to ooze I would eat an eclair. Finally, the prefect pizza has a minimal number of toppings. None of this "Supreme" lunacy with every animal, vegetable and mineral under the sun crammed onto the surface of the pie.

The craftspersons at Ken's Artisan Pizza manage to satisfy those tree criteria with almost frightening perfection.

I ordered a Pizza Margarita, the classic tomato, mozzarella and basil pie, which easily bested the now second best pizza I have ever consumed. Cooked in a wood burning brick oven, which — by the looks of the mammoth hearth — reaches dizzyingly high temperatures, the crust achieved a beautiful golden brown color and crunched generously — though not too much — when I parted it with my knife. And Kudos to Ken's for providing a steak knife, with some real teeth, as pizzerias do in Europe. Or at least France.

The toppings were minimal. My pie had a smattering of savory tomato sauce, and just enough basil that I felt a burst of its fresh aroma every now and again, but not so much as to overpower savor the preternaturally delicious crust. A harmonious balance, really.

Food aside, the legendary Wait was just that: a legend. The only time spent standing came as the charming hostesses attend to the dozen or so patrons ahead in the line.

The restaurant itself looked lovely enough. On a balmy summer evening, the wide open windows let in a pleasant breeze.

Ken's Artisan Pizza. It's pretty great.

Much to my surprise, Inspector Foyle returned to the airwaves on Sunday night, as a part of PBS's rechristened Masterpiece Mystery block. For those who missed the first four series of Foyle's War, the series features DCS Christopher Foyle, played by one Michael Kitchen, who unravels the assorted misdoings of criminals in World War II England. While I object ever so slightly to the soap opera-esque move to bring DCS Foyle out of retirement, I enjoyed watching the first episode of the latest series.

But, as the credits began to roll, I asked myself why all historical television series -- or at least all historical television series worth watching -- are dramas. Humor, to the best of my knowledge, existed in the 1940's. As I continued to think, an idea popped into my head, call it "The Bourgeois Next Door": one part "Desperate Housewives," one part "Rome," one part "Arrested Development."

The plot would center around some 18th century nobleman in Europe, say an Earl named Earl, who discovers one day that he has not a farthing to his name. Unable to extort enough money quickly enough from the serfs in his earldom to pay his creditors, Lord Earl sells the bulk of his land to the wealthy bourgeois on the adjoining estate.

Then, faced with the prospect of maintaing his and his family's lavish lifestyle and maintaing his standing at Court, Lord Earl uses his standing as a respectable gentleman to obtain a loan to start a highly profitable mercantile enterprise of some sort.

Of course, all that sounds rather dull and historical -- the perfect denouement for some sappy 17th century love story where the wealthy son of the Lord Earl can marry the beautiful girl from the village. But there is a twist.

As strange as it sounds, many people -- especially members of the titled aristocracy -- looked down upon the sort of "self-made man" or entrepreneur that most of the world, especially Americans love so much. To actually work for money was the ultimate faux pas for a 17th century noble.

So, "The Bourgeois Next Door" would be colored with the hilarious exploits of Lord Earl as he tries to hide his massive, wildly successful mercantile exchange enterprise from his family, his friends and the rest of the nation.

Just a thought. I highly doubt I will write the pilot script in the near future.

Thank goodness for Phil Gramm. Everyone and their mother was up in arms this morning when Mr. Gramm, an executive at Swiss bank UBS and economic adviser to Senator John McCain, said Americans were experiencing a "mental recession." But I'm not sure what people found so objectionable about the comment. I mean, it's true!

A recession, as those who have taken an introductory macroeconomics course know, is defined as two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. Some might claim the United States is "in the midst of recession," however, the numbers are not there to support such an erroneous claim. Yes, GDP growth in the United States has slowed as of late. But, as our GDP has grown every quarter for the last seven years, the United States is hardly in the midst of a recession.

As Mr. Gramm said to CNN, many politicians, "blame speculators and oil companies for our problems, instead of presenting concrete programs for using energy more efficiently."

It's almost unfortunate John McCain did not endorse Mr. Gramm's views. They make far more sense than Senator McCain's loony economic strategy.

Forget the new iPhone 3G. The new App Store, which allows iPhone and iPod touch users to download third-party application for their devices, is real coup de maître from Cupertino this week.

While the new iPhone 2.0 software has yet to formally go online, Apple put up a downloadable software restore package, which, unsurprisingly, the hoard of Apple-obsessed people online late last night managed to discover. As such, I downloaded the software and upgraded my iPhone to the version 2.0 firmware.

The third-party applications for the iPhone are nothing short of amazing. They add a tremendous amount of value to what was already, far and away, the best mobile platform. I've used the Palm OS, Symbian and Windows Mobile. Nothing on any of those platforms comes close to replicating the experience on the iPhone.

But rather than jabber on in vague generalities, I've written up a few short reviews of the iPhone applications I've had a chance to take for a spin.

The madness has begun. Reviews of Apple, Inc.'s new iPhone 3G have gone to press. Some lunatics in Manhattan have even decided to form a queue nearly week in advance of the new iPhone's launch date.

For my part, I do not plan to snap up the new iPhone. Given AT&T's spotty 3G coverage — especially in not-on-the-cutting-edge Lewiston, Maine where I go to school — I cannot justify spending $299 for what is essentially the same phone, on top of the $15 rate hike I would sustain on my already insane monthly AT&T tariff.

Nevertheless, I read some of the early reviews, which by and large echoed my thoughts: faster Internet, better location via GPS, way more expensive in the long run, not terribly different than the original iPhone. At least one reviewer, though, resurrected the MMS issue. Since the day Apple began peddling the original iPhone, many members of the digerati have bemoaned the iPhone's lack of multimedia message or MMS functionality.

But I cannot understand why. I have never sent an MMS in my life. Nor, for that matter has one of my friends ever remarked, "Oh, let me send you an MMS of that photo." As far as I can tell, no one actually uses multimedia messaging. The MMS is essentially an email, with the difference that most carriers charge some outrageous per-use fee for each one sent. Especially on the iPhone — with unlimited data and all — it makes far more sense to send a plain old email.

I see Apple's omission of MMS as a well-planned feature, not a glaring omission. By not even including the ability to send multimedia messages, Apple gently nudges people away from spending 40 cents to send a photo via MMS. Instead, people use the convenient "Email Photo" button integrated in the iPhone's Photos application. Anything that helps consumers escape from the nickel and dime lunacy of America's wireless carriers is good news — and good choice architecture — in my book.

When I signed up for facebook a little over a year ago, I had two complaints.

First, as a constant advocate for the active voice, I could hardly contain my rage to see facebook restricted my facebook Status to the verb, "to be." To be ranks, at least in my mind, as one of the most dull verbs in existence. A very useful verb, to be sure, but quite dull. I mean, "Bob is thinking the sky looks amazing," sound a lot more kludgey than, "Bob thinks the sky looks amazing." Fortunately for me, and for the ghosts of William Strunk and E. B. White, the facebook folks changed that. I can now list my status as, "Joseph bangs his head against the wall in frustration."

Second, facebook seems to have failed, at least in a grammatical sense, in its efforts to remove gender bias from certain elements of the site. Whenever a user changes some element his Profile, for example, facebook's magic feed-generator slips a little notice, such as, "Joseph added 'Alphabeat' to his favorite music," into my "News Feed."

Sometimes, this is not a grammatical problem. When users have specified their gender, facebook generates a grammatically correct sentence: "Sean added 'Casablanca' to his favorite movies" or "Gwen added 'L'Amant' to her favorite books." But, when the user, out of cowardice, laziness or indecision, leaves the gender box blank, facebook spits out a message such as: "Elizabeth removed 'skiing into trees' from their activities."

I suppose the previous sentence could be correct, if Elizabeth were a team, organization or some other multi-person group or organization. Suffice to say, however, "Elizabeth" usually refers to a single person. As such, it needs a singular pronoun! "Elizabeth removed 'skiing into trees' from his or her activities," would work, and it serves as a gentle reminder to users to step off the fence and declare a gender.

Services like instant messaging and text messaging have done a lot to degrade language, though mostly through their technical constraints. When a message must contain no more than 120 characters, people must make sacrifices. Facebook, however, has none of these technical constraints, and, more grating still, it actively reinforces an error many people already make — substituting "their" for "his or her" — as correct and acceptable. The facebook team, though, deserves kudos for changing the status options. It makes my life read as much less static.