Articles by mgedwards

The KTX brings back memories

Today I traveled by train with a colleague to Waiguan (왜관), a town to the west of Daegu.  We took the Korea Train eXpress (KTX) high-speed train from Seoul Station to Dongdaegu Station, then switched to a local train (열차) and backtracked to Waiguan.  The KTX was extremely comfortable (the local train wasn’t too bad either).  We visited an American in Waiguan, and then we went home.  It was an all-day trek for about an hour and a half of work.  At lunchtime, we stopped at a delicious mandu (만두, or Korean dumpling) restaurant not far from the train station.  For some reason, the restaurant’s name is "Pusan Kaya," (부산 가야) a combination of the City of Pusan and the name of a Korean Buddhist temple.  Waiguan is quite far from both places.  I ordered potato noodle soup (감자수쩨비).  The side dishes were fair, but the soup was delicious, a much-needed change from the run-of-the-mill bulgogi and bibimbap restaurant.
 
The entire trip conjured memories of times when I traveled around the world by train.  In my younger days, I traveled through Europe by train, and a few years ago, my wife and I visited Egypt for a couple of weeks.  The KTX portion of Seoul Station reminded me of the Hauptbahnhof in Hamburg, Germany.  I had fun figuring out our train platform on the big electronic board, reminding me of the old days when finding the correct train platform and departure time meant the difference between moving on or being stranded.   As I watched the Korean countryside pass by my window, I was reminded of when I took the bullet train from Tokyo to Narita Airport, Japan, watching the green rice fields and rolling hills fly past.  As the day grew hazy, the air ladened with moisture, I recalled one morning in December 2001 when my wife and I took the overnight train from Cairo to Luxor, Egypt.  The sun had not yet risen on the horizon, and the scene along the verdant Nile River was quite spectacular.  Palm trees intermingled with fields of cotton and other vegetation.  I caught glimpses of that memory from the window of the KTX train today.
 
The town of Waiguan reminded me a bit of Luxor, Egypt.  I’m not sure why, because the two towns really are very different.  As I stepped out of the main entrance of the Waiguan train station and surveyed the square and colorful, diverse buildings lining the main street that led away from the station, I recalled a similar scene in Luxor.  Luxor, ancient capital of the Egyptian Middle Kingdom, is famous for its temples and the Valley of the Kings, among other sites.  Yet Luxor is also a modern, mid-sized Egyptian city.  The scene from the Luxor train station is eerily similar to the one that greets you in Waiguan.  Beyond that, the similarities end.  I felt a bit out of place visiting a small Korean city as a Westerner garbed in a business suit.  I late learned that U.S. Forces Korea’s Camp Carroll is not far from Waiguan, and the residents of Waiguan are quite used to cohabitating with the 1,000 or so Americans who live in and around the camp.  Nevertheless, I’m pretty sure that not too many Americans dressed in business attire walk around Waiguan.  It definitely had a different feeling than Seoul–more casual and rural.
 
The KTX train was luxurious.  It’s the first time I’d ridden first class in a train.  As a youth, I bought a railpass and sat and slept wherever I could find space.  I didn’t even bother to rent a coachette, or bunk bed, when I traveled overnight.  Those days are long gone.  Later in life, I rarely rode trains apart from egalitarian subway trains.  Riding first class on the KTX was wonderful.  I sat back and caught some Korean television and laughed when Korail aired "Nightrider," an old NBC television program starring David Hasselhoff and an super-intelligent black Corvette named "Kitt."  Talk about remembering the old days.  The hostess, who served us twice, was very gracious and offered us drinks and freshening towels.  It was much more relaxing than traveling in Korea by car in stop-and-go traffic.  I think that when my family visits Pusan we will take the KTX train.  My son, the train aficionado, would be so excited.

A Rant against Major League Baseball

This is a blog entry I’ve wanted to write since I wrote about CNOOC earlier this month.  I love baseball.  It’s my favorite sport (or pasttime, depending on your point of view).  According to MLB Commissioner Bud Selig, baseball is one of the most competitive of the four major U.S. sports (the other three include the National Football League, National Basketball Association, and the National Hockey League).  Last season he said that baseball was competitive in recent years because there has been no dynasty since the New York Yankees won their fourth World Series Championship in five years back in 2000.  I was as breathless as any baseball fan when the Boston Red Sox came back last year from a 3-0 deficit to defeat the New York Yankees in the American League Championship Series (anyone who despises the Yankees is a Sox fan). 
 
Still, something is unsettling to me as a diehard baseball fan–Major League Baseball’s lack of competitiveness.  Some purists are annoyed when MLB meddles with a sacred game by introducing innovations such as interleague play, playoff wild cards, and the designated hitter.  Those don’t bother me one bit.  What annoys me is the fact that year in and year out the same teams seem to either compete for a playoff spot, or they fold early, cellar dwell, and wind up being division losers.  The Chicago Bulls, Michael Jordan & Co. notwithstanding, I am not really a fan of sports dynasties.  Of course, I have my own biases, and the baseball didn’t bounce my way this year.  I’m a big fan of the cellar-dwelling Seattle Mariners and Washington Nationals, two cellar dwellers.  I root for any team that play the New York Yankees or Atlanta Braves, and as usual they will likely make the playoffs.  But despite my biases, I still think I have a legitimate rant.
 
Here are the teams still in the 2005 Major League Baseball playoff race as we head into September:
  • Leading their division:  Boston Red Sox, Chicago White Sox, Los Angeles Angels, Atlanta Braves, St. Louis Cardinals, and San Diego Padres
  • Still in the wild card race:  New York Yankees, Cleveland Indians, Oakland Athletics, and Minnesota Twins

Here are the teams destined to lose their divisions this year:

  • Tampa Bay Devil Rays, Kansas City Royals, Seattle Mariners, New York Mets or Washington Nationals (formerly Montreal Expos), Pittsburgh Pirates, and Colorado Rockies
The 2005 division-leading teams have won their divisions or been a wild card a combined total of 15 times since 2000.  The wild card teams have won their divisions or been a wild card a combined total of 13 times since 2000.  10 teams have won a total of 28 division titles or wild card spots in the last five years.  During that time, 40 playoff spots were available.  Hence, ten teams, or one-third of all MLB teams, won 70% of all playoff spots since 2000.
 
Likewise, this year’s cellar dwellers have lost their divisions a total of 13 times since 2000, or about 45% of the time.  This figure does not even include perenniel losers such as the Detroit Tigers and Milwaukee Brewers who are nowhere near a playoff spot this year.
 
This isn’t to say that there aren’t surprises in Major League Baseball.  The New York Yankees are out of first place (for now).  The Chicago White Sox, Cleveland Indians, and San Diego Padres are surprises.  The Washington Nationals, formerly the Montreal Expos, have far exceeded expectations.  But it’s still disconcerting to see that virtually every year the same 10 teams are competitive, while another 10 or so are not.  Just 8-10 teams each year could go either way, creating a modicum of competition.  The MLB playoff race offers great odds if you like to bet on baseball in Las Vegas.  However, if you’re a sports fan who likes real competition, you can’t help but feel like the deck is stacked in favor of the same teams each year.  To me, it isn’t worth watching that one Cinderella like the Red Sox, White Sox, or the Cubs surprises everyone.  
 
The lack of competitiveness in Major League Baseball cannot be not totally explained by team budgets and outrageous player salaries.  Each year the low-budget Oakland Athletics are just as competitive as the big-budget New York Yankees.  The big-budget Mets and Dodgers perennielly disappoint.  The Braves keep on winning even though their days of dipping into Ted Turner’s deep pockets is over.  I don’t have a simple answer as to why Major League Baseball is so uncompetitive.  Maybe I’ll write about it a future blog entry.  For now, suffice it to say that I am growing less and less interested in baseball even though I still consider myself a diehard fan.  Maybe my interest will renew when I see the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, Detroit Tigers, Texas Rangers, New York Mets, Milwaukee Braves, and Colorado Rockies each win their divisions in the same year.  Then I’d be convinced professional baseball is truly competitive.
 
Here is the statistical breakdown of Major League Baseball’s winners and losers since 2000.
 
Division & Wild Card (WC) Winners (since 2000)
 
5 Times
Atlanta (2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004)
New York Yankees (2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004)
4 Times
Oakland (2000, 2001-WC, 2002, 2003)
St. Louis (2000, 2001-WC, 2002, 2004)
3 Times
Minnesota (2002, 2003, 2004)
San Francisco (2000, 2002-WC, 2003)
Anaheim/Los Angeles Angels (2002-WC, 2004)
Twice
Arizona (2001, 2002)
Boston (2003-WC, 2004-WC)
Houston (2001, 2004-WC)
Seattle (2000-WC, 2001)
Once
Cleveland (2001)
Chicago White Sox (2000)
Florida (2003-WC)
New York Mets (2000-WC)
Chicago Cubs (2003)
Los Angeles Dodgers (2004)
 
Division Losers (since 2000)
 
4 Times
Tampa Bay (2000, 2001, 2002, 2003)
Texas (2000, 2001, 2002, 2003)
3 Times
Milwaukee (2002, 2003, 2004)
San Diego (2000, 2002, 2003)
Twice
Detroit (2002, 2004)
Kansas City (2001, 2004)
Montreal (2001, 2004)
New York Mets (2002, 2003)
Once
Arizona (2004)
Chicago Cubs (2000)
Colorado (2001)

Houston (2004)

Minnesota (2000)

Seattle (2004)
Philadelphia (2000)
Pittsburgh (2001)
Toronto (2004)

One fire at a time

Work has kept me extremely busy over the past few days.  Ever since I sponsored a newly-arrived family last week, I have hardly stopped working.  The presentation in Cheongwon shortened my weekend by half a day, and on Monday I spent the entire day playing catch up.  Today was a quieter one, but it grew hectic again toward the end of the day.  At times work feels like a never-ending multitude of firefights.  Once I put out one fire, another one (or two or three) flares up.  One moment today was particularly humorous.  I was busy finishing up some paperwork when a colleague came into my office asking for assistance.  Just as she opened her mouth, the phone rang.  I politely told her, "Just a moment," and tried to answer my phone.  Just then my cell phone also rang.  Then my boss came in with something I wrote, giving me his approval to forward it to the "Powers that Be."  So I grabbed the document from my boss, picked up the phone and asked the person if I could call them back, answered my cell phone (wrong number), went back to help my colleague, and then called back the person who had just called me on my work phone.  I then e-mailed the document my boss approved to the "Powers that Be."  All this occurred within a span of about two minutes.  Ever had a day like that?  It’s not always busy at work, but lately the previous example occurs much too frequently.  Perhaps it’s because the lazy days of summer are over and the buzz of fall has arrived.  I have a Pocket PC personal digital assistant I use to help me manage my long, rolling to-do list, but right now updating it feels like yet another thing to do.  My e-list is so far out of date that it’s no help at all right now.  I just have to keep a mental tab of everything I need to do and hope that I don’t overlook something really important.
 
Sometimes work takes a lot of negotiating and persuasion.  Yesterday, someone came in with what seemed like an unachievable request.  They have helped a close relative stuck in Korea for many years and simply wanted our help in putting them in touch with someone about their situation.  I lent a sympathetic ear, and although they were pessimistic that I could do something, I made a phone call and referred the person to someone who could help them.  They were extremely grateful.  I could have blown them off, or told them, "Sorry, I can’t help you."  But I did my best and helped them achieve a happier result.  Today I had to make a very difficult call to someone who wants to run our cafeteria.  The cafeteria has been on hold pending the processing of his application.  The vendor is very frustrated because there is nothing they or I can do at this point.  I followed up with vendor’s application and told them that I would have an answer for them within two weeks.  The vendor was angry at first, but after I reasoned with them, they settled down and were resigned to let fate run its course.  Sometimes negotiated endings are happy, sometimes unfortunate, and sometimes unresolved.
 
Note to Wade3016:  Well, of course you don’t think Apple is a pioneer.  Why would you?  🙂  Sure, Apple did not invent the computer, or the mouse, or the monitor.  But think of all the cutting-edge technologies and designs Apple has developed over the years.  Apple was the first to eliminate the need for short, cryptic file names (nowhtimean.doc?).  Apple was the first to introduce a translucent, self-contained computer called the "iMac."  Apple pioneered the PDA with the Newton, and it was the first to cut a deal with major recording companies to legally sell MP3 downloads.  Apple pioneered many of the desktop icons and interfaces common in Windows-based today.  Apple has been a big technology pioneer since the 1980s.  Its problem has traditionally been twofold–Apple has failed to successfully market many of its innovations, and it too often insists on having strict control over its products.  That’s Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ fault.  It’s part of his persona.  Sometimes Jobs  is just what Apple needs; sometimes he dominates Apple’s culture too much and makes crazy decisions.  Case in point–Apple began licensing iPod technology to Hewlett Packard to make HP-branded iPods, then it suddenly pulled out of the deal.  Even though iPod now dominates the MP3 player market and is a tech darling, MP3 player competition is coming on strong.  iPod will eventually lose its dominance so long as Apple insists on selling MP3 downloads on iPod.com that only play on Apple-made iPods.  Don’t be too hard on Apple, though.  Its stock is up 200% since September 2004!  You can’t say that about Microsoft’s stock in recent years. 
 
As far as Google, I again have to emphasize that what is innovative about Google is its approach to content delivery, not its software.  Google is pushing content from the Web to the desktop through search and aggregation, while Microsoft is pushing applications and content from the desktop to the Web.  I know the Sidebar concept is not new, but there is no other technology company today that I know of extending the Web to the desktop and basing it on the concept of search and customizable content like Google is doing on a scale so grand as Google.  I don’t know what Windows Vista will look like, but I’m positive that it will not be a content-delivery program.  It’s an upcoming operating system.  Microsoft may bundle in a content-deliver feature, but based on Microsoft’s past ventures into content and media, I’m not convinced that Microsoft can out-Google Google.  Content delivery will be nothing more than a bundled feature in Windows.