Camo Beer Cans

Concept: 2 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: I Still Like It

The Long Version: When I'm working there are only a few ways to save money on beer--if there's a comp'ed bar tab for the band, free beers from fans, or buying that night's "Special", which could be anything.
A lifetime of this (28 years, actually) has made me anything but a beer snob. Any beer will do, so long as I can see through it and it's cold.
At home, I favor the same beer that I started with in the mid '70s--Miller High Life.
A 6-pack of 16oz cans is around $4, and after the first two swallows all beer tastes the same anyway.

The point of this post is the camouflage cans that my brew has started wearing.
As you can see, it's the "Limited Edition FALL SERIES".
Nice.
Is that why the price went up a little?

Obviously, the point of the camo is hunting season.
Nearly everything gets some camo in the fall here in South Texas.
Cans of beer, desperate to survive through the rut, hiding safely in plain sight?
If they were white!
There's no foliage inside my refrigerator or ice chest.
For the sportsmen in the woods, leaving the rest of the can bright shiny gold defeats the purpose, wouldn't you say?
And why are they drinking while still hunting instead of afterwards?
Is the camo a way to make littering less noticeable?

All kidding aside, they look okay, the printing is done well, and the beer still works just fine.
Right now I'm trying the big can of Foster's shown above and it's pretty good, too.

Seal Line Urban Shoulder Bag

Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: A good design is let down by a couple of material problems.

The Long Version: I bought the small size of the Seal Line 'Urban Shoulder Bag' in July as I was looking for a replacement for my too-small ninja-turtle-inspired mec Flux sling pack. I wanted something small enough to not be annoying, but big enough to carry my daily necessities to and from work, and there are bonus points if it's orange. I'm not an inherently colourful person, but I have an orange suitcase, orange sling pack, and orange umbrella. So when I found this shoulder bag from a reputable maker of outdoorsy-gear, I knew it was for me despite a fair bit of sticker-shock.

There are two unique features of this bag. One is the material, a waterproof coated fabric that's very lightweight. The other is the closure system. Instead of the ubiquitous velcro or plastic snaps, it uses broad metal hooks on elastic shock-cord under the lid that grip the plastic lugs on the body of the bag. It's an elegant system that's essentially silent, and became easy to use once I got used to it. Inside the bag is an organizer panel that holds pens and other small items, a slash pocket at the back that's good for slim books (but not even small laptops), and a good-sized main compartment with a soft elasticized bottle-holder on each end. One side holds my water bottle, the other holds my flashlight and orange umbrella. As much as anything else, these two holders was the reason I bought the bag. 

The back has a ventilated foam panel that provides good padding for the contents of the bag, and makes it comfortable to carry. The shoulder strap and its pad are also remarkably unannoying, with the pad staying in place on the strap without any fuss, and the times that I've been caught in the rain the bag has proven itself completely impervious to the elements.

It feels like there's a "but" coming, doesn't it?

Unlike some other bags, this one doesn't stretch or change shape to accommodate its contents. If I want to carry something that's just a little too big, it won't fit. As much as I like the quiet hooks that close the bag, those plastic snaps on long straps do a better job of holding oversized stuff. Day-to-day this isn't an issue, but it's a nuisance on those occasions when it is. It wouldn't be the best choice for someone who can't choose what they carry - maybe that's why Seal Line calls it a 'shoulder bag' instead of using the trendier 'messenger' word.

Since I bought it to carry a specific load and it does it perfectly, I really can't complain. My reason for only giving it an 'average' execution score is that after only four months of use is has already shown some flaws. The inner organizer pocket with a zipper - there's only one - is made of mesh, which has started to rip at the bottom. This is about the only place to put valuables without them sliding around when the bag is set down on its back, so naturally it gets all of my pocket change, wallet, and occasionally my 770SW camera. I suspect that it's the camera that did the damage, as it's fairly heavy, but I think it just accelerated the inevitable.

The other materials issue is that some of the fabric trim around the front flap has come unstitched, and the bag is showing some wear marks where it creases. I don't mind genuine wear and tear, and there are enough Timbuk2 bags out there proving that this can enhance a bags' appearance. The colour of the Seal Line bag has faded a bit to a more muted colour, and I like that it has its own personality now, but the flaw in the stitching speaks to a bag that's just not as well made as it should be.

I wouldn't say that it's particularly better than the various MEC-branded carryall bags that I've used but only cost half as much. I prefer the Seal Line's styling, closure, and trust its weatherproofing, but no longer expect that it will last me forever. I'd be kidding myself if I ever pretended that my quest for the perfect bag was over, but at least I've found a really good one for now.

McDonalds

Concept: 2 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: McDonalds is what the "solid average" rating was designed for.

The Long Version: Reviewing McDonalds for food quality is somewhat like running on a greasy floor: the results are likely to be unsurprising and possibly hazardous. Food-wise, McDonalds is about as unremarkable as it is consistent. In fact, it's consistency is about the only thing that's remarkable about it. It tastes the same across North America, and Australian McDonald's held no surprises for me except for the "McCafe" additions. It tastes about the same as what I got used to before I knew what I was eating, and I never expect to be pleasantly or unpleasantly surprised by what I'm served.

As people who have read my "Columbus in America" review will know, I often use Google to check what the rest of the world is thinking. For this review I did an exact-match search of the phrase "McDonalds food tastes great". Usually results are in the thousands or millions: this time I got FIVE. Not million, not thousand, just plain old five. And two separate results were doubled, including one which says that Burger King is better. So all over the world, I'm only the fourth person to write that "McDonalds food tastes great", despite 'great taste' being part of their advertising taglines between 1984 and 1990.

click for a larger image

So the food's not great, but that's probably not a big revelation, so that's the end of my attention to that particular low-hanging piñata. The fact is that the quality of the food really doesn't matter. It's a solid, dependably average performance from an organization that's never expected to do any better and rarely disappoints. And really, that's not so bad.


Postscript: From a McDonalds website: "Crew members represent virtually every age group, and almost every reason for working. ... Across the world, more than one million people choose to work at McDonald's every day." Is it just me, or does that sound a little defensive?