Review: Netflix’s “Inside Bill’s Brain: Decoding Bill Gates”

I tend to enjoy documentary content quite a bit. 

My love of the genre started a little over a decade ago when I saw the graphic-design doc “Helvetica” by Gary Hustwit. 

Beyond that, I enjoy reading “business profile” books. For example, I’ve read nearly everything written about Apple co-founder Steve Jobs — along with numerous books on the tech industry. 

When I saw that Netflix had added three-part docuseries “Inside Bill’s Brain: Decoding Bill Gates,” I had to check it out. 

As ensconced in the cultural zeitgeist as Microsoft co-founder and former CEO Bill Gates is, I feel like I don’t know much about the tech icon. 

Quite honestly, my impressions of Gates are built on the voluminous content I’ve consumed about Apple Computer, along with Anthony Michael Hall’s portrayal of Gates in the 1999 movie “Pirates of Silicon Valley." 

Each of the three parts of “Inside Bill’s Brain: Decoding Bill Gates” runs just under an hour apiece. The series works methodically to delve into the biological operating system that powers one of the world’s most successful technocrats. 

It also spends considerable time on the work of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Each part weaves elements from Gates’s past with current work he is doing to solve global issues. 

“Part 1” of the series focuses on Gates’s work to provide clean drinking water to impoverished regions around the world (you’ll learn some interesting tidbits about toilets that can self-clean waste). “Part 2” focuses on the foundation’s work to eradicate a lingering polio threat in Third World nations. “Part 3” focuses on the hefty task of reinventing nuclear power (via his venture TerraPower) as a clean solution to the world’s energy problems. 

Over the years I’ve typically assumed the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation was primarily consumed with raising and distributing money for its pet projects. While that might occupy much of the foundation’s time, the documentary shows Gates nurturing technology he hopes can solve the problems presented. 

Gates says, “It’s not my goal to be inspiring.” Rather, he suggests the world’s limited resources spur him towards “optimization.” 

He is a technophile who believes technology will save everything. 

He is described as having “a giant Excel spreadsheet in his head and everything has a spot.”

One of the more enjoyable aspects of “Inside Bill’s Brain: Decoding Bill Gates” is the fact that it doesn’t shy away from presenting all the “wonkier” details of his thought process. 

More interesting is the biographic information about Gates strewn throughout the documentary’s three episodes. I’ll be honest, I wanted to see more of this content. 

We learn about Gates as an anti-social youngster who preferred to be holed up in his room reading books than out in the world (to this day he carries a tote full of books... and apparently reads 100 pages per hour). 

His mother pushed him out of the house to try things. We see the influence that family trips to “Camp Cheerio” had in cultivating his competitive nature. We also get insight into Gates’s early friendship with Paul Allen (co-founder of Microsoft) at the private school he attended after sixth grade. 

(The docuseries also talks about some of the tension that festered between Allen and Gates over Walter Isaacson’s book “The Innovators.”)

From a young age, Gates wanted to understand what made “super successful” people tick. 

“Inside Bill’s Brain: Decoding Bill Gates” also touches on Gates’s friendship with Omaha billionaire investor Warren Buffett — a key friendship formed as an adult. Gates’s mother suggested he meet Buffet. 

Despite his initial reluctance, the two have become fast friends and play bridge together. 

Buffett is leaving half his fortune to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. You’ll often see Gates visiting some of Buffett’s favorite Omaha haunts during the Berkshire Hathaway Annual Shareholders Meeting. 

The docuseries also features the relationship between Bill and his wife Melinda (although it doesn’t delve into it nearly as much as I had hoped). 

There is an interesting “motif” presented in “Inside Bill’s Brain: Decoding Bill Gates” involving the significance of the novel “The Great Gatsby” during the early stages of their courtship.

The series is directed and narrated by Davis Guggenheim. Guggenheim is best known for advocacy/documentary films “An Inconvenient Truth” and “Waiting for ‘Superman.’”

As a result, “Inside Bill’s Brain: Decoding Bill Gates” might pay a bit too much attention to the advocacy aspects of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. 

While the charitable work is a key part of Gates’s current zeal, I felt like certain aspects of “Gates the businessman” were given short shrift.

(The feud with Apple over the Windows GUI is basically skipped over in the series). 

“Gates Notes” (the blog of Bill Gates) features a post titled “From the cutting room floor” that includes three stories cut from the docuseries (available exclusively to “Gates Notes Insider” subscribers). 

As I am writing this post, I have Microsoft’s live Surface product reveal event streaming in the background. The company announced it is manufacturing a new smartphone built on Google’s Android operating system (a move that seems antithetical for a company whose fortunes are built on its desktop operating system). 

I’ve always been an Apple fanboy. 

My love of Apple’s products started when I took a summer school class after third grade (in 1982) that had us programming AppleSoft BASIC on Apple II computers to draw pictures line-by-line and dot-by-dot. 

The only time I’ve used MS-DOS or Windows was during my time as a UNO student in the 1990s. We had a News Writing & Reporting class that used archaic DOS terminals with amber monitors. There was also a Publication Design & Graphics course that taught Aldus PageMaker on Windows 3.1. 

Despite my lean experience with Windows, the Microsoft Office software has been an important part of the marketing communications business Bridget and I started in 1996. 

It has been interesting to watch Microsoft embrace the symbiosis of software and hardware in its offerings the past decade. Those moves — along with the emphasis on search and cloud services — has shifted the company from mere software manufacturer to something closer to Apple in terms form and function. 

I would’ve loved to hear more of Gates’s thoughts on the current direction of Microsoft in “Inside Bill’s Brain: Decoding Bill Gates” — including his insight into some of the missteps the company made in the early 2000s. 

Be that as it may, “Inside Bill’s Brain: Decoding Bill Gates” offers moments of clarity as it examines one of this generation’s iconic business figures. 

Some business tycoons have head-scratching second acts — Gates has stayed busy and taken full advantage of the latter years in his life. 

I hope Netflix continues producing “deep dive” content focusing on technology and business leaders. It’s content I’d readily consume...

Previous post: “Movie Review: ‘Downton Abbey’”

Tried Something New This Thanksgiving...

Our friends Arlen and Jill Robichaux (who live in our circle) offered to cook our turkey in their smoker this year for Thanksgiving. 

We had never had a smoked turkey for Thanksgiving. The most “adventurous” we had been before was prepping a turkey in a fryer in 2013.

Bridget took our 9 lb. turkey breast over to the Robichaux’s at 7:55 a.m. this morning. We rubbed it the night before with a blend of fresh basil and rosemary, ground pepper, sage, garlic powder, salt, and olive oil. 

Arlen has a digital smoker with a Bluetooth thermometer that connects to an app on his iPhone. Pretty cool deal...

Our turkey reached an internal temp of 165 degrees a little after 1 p.m.

My dad and Bridget’s mom really enjoyed the turkey — more than any turkey we’ve previously prepped. That is the best testament for smoking a turkey. 

Special thanks to Arlen and Jill for offering to smoke the turkey. Really appreciate their friendship and thankful that they helped make our Thanksgiving celebration a success!

Previous post: My Last Foray Into This Silly Trend: Pumpkin Spice Mini Wheats

“I Don’t Wanna Grow Up”: Toys ‘R’ Us and the Decline of Retail Icons

It’s kind of sad when bright, shiny, and iconic retail operations leave our landscape. 

Sure, we’ll all soldier on, but things will be different.

Stores like RadioShack, Sears, and Kmart have fallen by the wayside. We learned last week that Toys ‘R’ Us and teen jewelry chain Claire's will soon be joining the fold — forever relegated to a footnote in shopping history. 

Nostalgia buffs like me continue to lament the demise of brick-and-mortar stores, but we do little to stop the bleeding. 

Things like “one-click ordering” and various digital shopping cart options — decorated with a collage of optimized PNGs and JPEGs — prove far too alluring and handy to resist. 

Online giants like Amazon are convenient. That cannot be denied.

The great irony is that Amazon is now considering buying some Toys ‘R’ Us locations for retail operations. In 2015, they also discussed purchasing dormant RadioShack locations.

It’s like the victors at the end of a long war, trudging ahead to the vanquished castle, ready to take a seat on the empty throne. 

I remember how much fun it was to go to a toy store as a kid. 

There would be times when I’d get rewarded with a trip to the toy store for doing certain things — for example, reading a designated number of books was a benchmark that often resulted in a prize. 

There would be other times when I’d get to go to the toy store “just because.”

I remember in 1978 when my mom and dad bought me my first set of Kenner “Star Wars” action figures at the Brandeis toy department at Crossroads Mall (located in the basement of the store...facing Dodge Street). Those figures — along with a shiny new Landspeeder — were important to me as a kid. 

The C-3PO figure we purchased was one that the clerk at the register had been “limbering up” — because the hard-plastic joints were really stiff on the golden droid, and some customers had complained they broke easily. 

That experience happened 40 years ago, but I remember the kind lady who made the experience of buying the figures special. 

I recall moments when I’d be trying to decide between two Matchbox cars, and couldn’t make up my mind. My mom (God bless her heart) would often buy me both. 

(I was either indecisive, or a master manipulator...)

I even had the opportunity to witness the next generation become "incentivized" with toys when my niece and nephew needed an extra nudge to go off the diving board at the pool. 

There was something wonderful about perusing toy store aisles — like an explorer, you were curious to see what you’d discover around the next turn. 

I went to my first Toys ‘R’ Us store in Austin, Texas, back in 1983. My brother had moved down there for work. We didn’t have the retail toy giant in Omaha at that time. 

I was excited to check out the selection of “Star Wars” and “G.I. Joe” action figures and assorted vehicles. There is something soothing about gazing at row upon row of shiny action figures, trapped in plastic bubbles on flashy-cardboard backers. 

The toy chain has one of the catchiest jingles in advertising history:

I mean, who didn’t “wanna be a Toys ‘R’ Us kid”...?

The toys we played with as children helped create the fabric of who we are. A couple months ago I reviewed the Netflix series “The Toys That Made Us” (read my full review of that show). The show focuses on the stories behind some of the most famous toy brands. 

I can’t help but think that the rise and fall of Toys ‘R’ Us might one day be featured in a documentary of that sort. 

The YouTube channel “Retail Archaeology” takes a look at the demise of Toys ‘R’ Us, and tours one of the stores being liquidated:

Apparently, a deal with a private equity firm in 2005 led to the current fate of Toys ‘R’ Us. The debt was substantial, and kept the chain from making improvements to its stores...

Like the narrator in the video, I’ve heard suggestions that the world of “analog toys” will die with subsequent generations because today’s kids are more interested in playing with their iPads and iPhones. 

Maybe that’s true. Maybe it isn’t...

The tactile experience of playing with LEGOs and Lincoln Logs as a kid helped develop my creativity. I don’t know that I’d be doing the graphic design work I do today without moments putting together buildings and vehicles with those sorts of thoughtful toys. 

But the wheel turns...and the clock ticks onward.

The cynical minded will say these sorts of operations had their fate coming. They’ll argue that change is inevitable.

But at times, you wonder if all the change is good. 

“I don’t wanna grow up, cuz baby if I did, I wouldn’t be a Toys ‘R’ Us kid...” 

Previous post: Book Review: "The Enemy" By Lee Child 

Do Paywalls Thwart The Spread of Legit News?

There has been a considerable amount of talk about the rise of “fake news,” and various technological maneuvers to try and combat the spread of low-brow content on the Internet.

It begs the question whether consumers have shrugged off the more traditional news operations because of monetary hindrances like paywalls — a move that limits the content available to non-paying subscribers — and, if such revenue-generating strategies serve to thwart the influence of legitimate news. 

As time progresses, it develops like a slow leak. Drip, drip, drip. Turning future generations away from well-researched, responsible reporting, and soaking society with “citizen journalists” willing to put out a variety of content for free. 

Twenty-two years ago I graduated with a degree in journalism from the University of Nebraska at Omaha, and have owned and operated a media-related marketing communications business ever since. In the intervening years, I have watched the entire communications juggernaut undergo more change than it had the previous 40. 

People used to travel through life with the understanding that they would pay for news. Families had subscriptions to daily newspapers, and would also subscribe to “specialty” magazines with more targeted content. People watched television newscasts with the idea that “commercial breaks” were a way to pay for valuable information. 

But the paradigm has changed. We are creating an entire culture built on the idea that content is free — whether it be news, sports, or entertainment. 

It has happened before our eyes. We’ve seen a rise in consumers “cutting the cord” on traditional cable and satellite television subscriptions. They are dropping these things in favor of cheaper services like Netflix, and free offerings like YouTube. Many are using old-school technology like over-the-air TV antennas to bring free television into their homes. 

Newspapers have been trying to find a way to keep revenue positive. Some have found wealthy benefactors willing to prop up shaky foundations. For example, billionaire Warren Buffett owns the Omaha World-Herald (my city’s daily newspaper), and Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post. 

While these organizations try to fight off layoffs — as they continue to manage the amount of original content produced on a daily basis — they soldier on with the notion that people will continue paying for news.

The problem is that the gatekeeper function has radically changed. The entities controlling information have names like Facebook, Twitter, and Google. Those entities — through sophisticated analytic filters — determine the content you see. 

There are plenty of operations out there willing to produce content for free (often plastered with banner advertising and sponsored posts). I’m not altogether sure people prefer such “news sources,” but access is free, and free typically wins the day. 

One of my favorite documentaries is the 2011 film “Page One: Inside the New York Times.” The documentary focuses on the fall of daily newspapers, the collapse of automobile and classified advertising in those publications, and the erosion of subscribers to Internet-based outlets. It also focuses on the effort large news organizations undertake to bring consumers news.

This past week, the Omaha World-Herald unleashed a “revamped” paywall — its "Subscriber Plus" digital option ($9.95 per month) is the only way you can see online articles about the Nebraska Cornhuskers, Creighton Bluejays, and UNO Mavericks. In essence, the World-Herald has decided to restrict access to more of the local, home-grown news stories focused on our community (the stories not readily distributed across the globe via the Associated Press). The OWH also lists as a benefit that its web pages will load faster for digital subscribers (which I find to be an odd thing to mention).

We have a Sunday subscription to the Omaha World-Herald (and also have a digital subscription).

On the one hand, the desire to protect content is noble. 

On the other hand, it has a “limiting effect” on the impact and influence a news organization has within a community. It might not seem that way initially, but the long-term effect basically reduces the influence of a publication when people can’t easily read an article shared via Facebook, Twitter, or other social media outlets. You see the comments on articles shared on the Omaha World-Herald's Facebook Page.

It is a harsh reality, but a reality that news organizations share. The quest to keep dollars flowing is just as vital as keeping eyeballs reading. While paywalls might stir up cash in the short term — or at least give value to a print subscription — such efforts thwart readership. 

If I am a media relations professional trying to get coverage via local news outlets, I have to start asking myself how valuable it is to get an article about a business/organization in daily newspapers if the only people who see it are print/digital subscribers behind a paywall. 

Just follow some of the “influencers” on YouTube if you want to see how corporate communications strategies have changed. YouTubers like Casey Neistat regularly pimp products from companies like Samsung — essentially paid-for promotions that reach millions of viewers. 

It doesn’t matter if the content lacks polish or sophistication. Editorial purity isn’t the goal. For advertisers, eyeballs are king, and the kingdom is being run by common folk with clickbait content. 

When you get down to brass tacks, it is a sobering proposition for society...and for the future. 

It’s very possible the situation has no fix. It’s as if the playground teeter-totter has fallen too far to one side, with no capable partner on the elevated end to weight the apparatus back into balance.

Part of the reason I have this blog is because I feel an odd sense of responsibility to bring well written and thoughtful pieces to the endless sea of crowd-sourced content. My goal isn’t to change the world — nor is it to become some advocacy bulwark. I just figure information-hungry people could do a lot worse. Might as well put that journalism degree to use. 

As time moves on, we have to hope there are others who share this same sense of duty.

Previous post: Movie Review: "The Commuter" 

Still Rocking A Beeper?

Many of you know I have an unnatural obsession with retro technology. Whether it is the aging television antenna in my attic, my old Super Nintendo Entertainment System, or my vintage iMac collection, I have a fondness for "blast from the past" gadgets.

It is in that spirit that I ponder the pager...or as it was often referred to back in the day, the "beeper."

Bridget and I frequently drive by the ATS "The Beeper People" building at 29th and Harney (near Downtown Omaha). 

Before Americans were tied at the hip to cellphones, my wife had a pager. We were in college at the time. She had it so her family could get ahold of her... or, as was the case with pagers in that era, you'd basically "signal" her. 

It was kinda handy -- especially when she was at work. I could call Bridget's beeper and type in my home number or a special code (I sometimes used 007... it made me feel like a spy). 

After the connection was made, you'd have to wait until she called back (which required being near a phone).

(As I type this it sounds like the electronic equivalent of sending smoke signals).

I can't remember how long Bridget had her pager.

She obtained her first cellphone in 1996. It was one of those foot-long beige bricks that looked like something used to call in artillery fire during World War II. 

I remember when we picked up the phone. Her uncle had us drive out along a desolate stretch of gravel road in western Douglas County. The phone was waiting for Bridget on the front seat of a 1960-something Dodge Dart, parked next to a dreary farmhouse.

(I can only imagine the look on my face at that moment.) 

But enough about that phone... You will be happy to know that pagers are still in use.

According to a 2016 story on Slate, 85 percent of hospitals still use pagers. The devices (in various forms) have been around since the 1950s. In addition, paging networks are apparently more reliable than cellular networks, and have more broadcast power. 

While cellphones and smartphones have cut into sales of pagers, they continue to serve a role in medical, emergency services, and other assorted industries. 

I can't recall the last time I saw someone sporting a pager. 

This scene from Tron: Legacy (where Alan Bradley tells Sam Flynn about a page he received from Sam's father) reminds me of the days when Bridget had a pager, and illustrates how the devices have become something of a humorous footnote in tech history:

"Oh man... Still rocking the pager. Alan, good for you." 

Previous post: Two-Paragraph Tuesday: "Longmire" Arrived Today 

Two-Paragraph Tuesday: Apple Slices

Apple had a slew of new product announcements from the Steve Jobs Theater at the new Apple Campus. The Apple Watch 3 (with LTE), Apple TV 4K, iPhone 8/8+, and iPhone X (with Face ID) were all on the docket. My initial impression is that the new devices are impressive entries/updates to the Apple product lineup, and I think the ability to wirelessly charge the new Apple Watches, iPhones, and AirPods will prove to be very popular (the devices use the Qi wireless charging standard, and Apple will be releasing a new AirPower charging mat next year). 

I am interested in the Apple TV 4K because, as a cord cutter, those little hockey-puck-like devices are the lifeblood of our viewing experience. The ability to stream 4K is a long sought-after feature on the unit (and, as a courtesy, Apple will automatically upgrade the HD content you have with them to 4K when available), and the faster processor (an A10X) may mean game content will improve as well.

Stay tuned for more information on Apple's new products on this blog in the coming weeks! 

Previous post: "'The Wrath of Khan' Set to Screen at Aksarben Cinema" 

He Said I'd "Be Better Off Getting an 8-Track"

Yep, that's the 1960s-era antenna I found in my attic last summer…

I must have a message tatooed on my forehead that says, "come up and bother me."

Sometimes you just want to browse a store without a staff member bugging you. Know what I mean?

Bridge and I were at Sam's Club on the Fourth of July, picking up supplies for Robin Hill Pool (they had run out of cheese for the nachos, which is something akin to a pandemic at that place). 

While Bridget was at the cashier checking out, I decided to wander over to the electronics section and browse the televisions. 

A chatty staff member decided to come up and talk to me while I was looking around. He was in his twenties, and had a whole host of opinions on the state of television.

At one point during the conversation, he pointed at a Mohu TV antenna and said, "A customer came up to me the other day wondering about the antenna and I told them they'd be better off getting an 8-track. It's all streaming, man." 

While I enjoy my 4th Generation Apple TV unit, and enjoy streaming a variety of content on it, I also enjoy using over-the-air antennas on my TVs. I think it is a useful and critical component of "cord cutting."

Some of you read my previous post outlining how I hooked up a 1960s-era antenna I found in my attic to pull in all the local digital channels (the main channels offered in stunning, uncompressed HD). In addition, I use various "set top" antennas on other HDTVs in my home. 

I appreciate the ability to stream content via broadband internet. Love it. But the fact remains that there is a significant amount of content available for free, via antenna. 

For example, I was able to watch former UNO Hockey player Jake Guentzel hoist Lord Stanley's Cup with the Pittsburgh Penguins on June 11 of this year via my antenna on WOWT (our local NBC affiliate) -- for free. Since I hooked up the decades-old antenna, everything has been rock solid (even during tornadic weather in our area). 

I don't have to worry about bandwidth, buffering, or data caps -- all factors to consider when streaming content on a monthly basis. 

One other point I'd like to make...

It isn't like using an antenna is some sort of ugly, makeshift method for watching TV in our home. 

Look at our lovely setup: 

Our video cabinet is neat and clean. Every item has its place. We have our 40-inch LED HDTV, an Apple TV (with an Apple wireless keyboard), and Panasonic Blu-ray player. 

The thing that bugs me is that consumers are walking into places like Sam's Club looking for salient advice when they purchase an electronic device. 

I've had good luck the past two years with my over-the-air antennas, and appreciate the opportunity to watch live events like the Super Bowl, the Oscars, the Stanley Cup playoffs and a whole host of news, sports and entertainment programming throughout the year. 

To suggest that using an antenna is something akin to using an 8-track tape deck is ridiculous. 

According to The Denver Post, TV antenna use is expected to grow by 9 percent this year. While the numbers might not be earth shattering, the long-tread technology is enjoying something of a renaissance. 

Furthermore, I was alive when 8-track tapes were a thing. We had one in our 1970-something Toyota Corona, and I have many memories of my parents playing The Carpenters as we tooled down the road (that fact should help my retro street cred). 

The next generation television transmission standard is called ATSC 3.0, and it is already being tested around the U.S. It will bring signals that are more robust (and can be received on your mobile phone), 4K UHD picture and immersive sound, and other interactive features for a richer viewing experience. Here is a primer video on ATSC 3.0 from the consortium that has developed the standard:

It'll be a few years before TV stations around the country make the conversion, but the new standards promise to bring an even better experience to those who use an over-the-air antenna to receive broadcast television (Samsung and LG are already building sets with ATSC 3.0 tuners for sale in South Korea, where ATSC 3.0 is getting set to launch for next year's Olympic games). 

None of it seems like "put out to pasture" technology to me.  

What do you think? Feel free to leave me a comment below!

And be sure to read my previous post: Inflatable Tube Creatures in Kearney 

Give It New Life

We've been working to organize the basement. I work down there most of the day (Bridget mainly works upstairs). I have been trying to make it nicer so the space will be more conducive to productivity.

My goal is to try and make the dark, cool space more enjoyable.

The basement was finished in the 1970s -- and, as you can imagine, it is a mix of cinderblock walls and wood paneling (that we painted an off-white color when we moved in).

After 12 years, it is a process of organizing and removing accumulated "stuff."

I added a Bose radio a year or so ago, and my niece Julia helped me create this homage to a 1999 computer store. 

I've wanted to add a TV to the space, but would rather not invest in a new set until this whole 4K UHD thing is figured out.

My first LCD flat panel was a Vizio VX37L HDTV I purchased in 2007. We used it until 2012 -- when the digital tuner went bad.

It is a fairly common issue with Vizio's of that era. It wouldn't be an issue if we had cable, we could hook up a box to one of the HDMI ports.

But since we use antennas to pick up over-the-air digital broadcasts, I couldn't pick up anything with the TV.

We've discussed getting rid of the old Vizio for the last few years, but hadn't yet bid the TV farewell.

So, I decided to give the set some new life.

Various companies sell "digital tuner" boxes to pick up OTA signals. They are largely used with old analog sets, early HDTVs without digital tuners, and projectors. 

Some of the models offer the ability to output in HD via an HDMI port on the back.

I picked up a tuner at the store, along with a new HDMI cord. I have several antennas, and placed the TV on a table along the south wall of my work area so I could place the antenna in a small window in the foundation. 

I hooked up the antenna to the tuner, ran the HDMI to the appropriate port on the HDTV, and followed the onscreen instructions to scan the channels. 

I was able to pick up 21 digital channels (which is typical for our house with the small indoor antennas), and includes all the locals. 

By default, the box output to 1080i on my TV (the OTA signals are broadcast in 1080i), but allows you to set various resolutions including 1080p, 720p, and 480p. 

It has a program guide, and gives you DVR abilities if you hook up an external USB memory stick or hard drive. 

(I didn't have a drive available, but might try it at some point down the road). 

The picture looks nice (the TV had a good looking picture for its day), and I used an RCA cable to run the sound from the box to the Bose radio (the TV speakers are fine, but it sounds better via the stereo).

So there ya go. I have a "new" HDTV in my workspace and it cost me ~$50 in supplies.

A Wibbly Wobbly, Timey Wimey New Show

A couple days ago my brother-in-law texted me suggesting I might want to review the new NBC series "Timeless" for my blog.

I am fascinated by "time travel" movies, books and TV series. So I was happy to oblige, and watched the pilot that first aired on Oct. 3.

"Timeless" is the creation of Eric Kripke ("Supernatural") and Shawn Ryan ("The Shield"), both experienced creators in the television industry.

Kripke's "Supernatural" is a long-running sci-fi/fantasy hit for the CW. Ryan's "The Shield" was considered groundbreaking when it debuted on FX in 2012, and managed to give the fledgling cable outlet the "HBO vibe" it was looking for.

Considering the pedigree of both producers, it is interesting that the debut episode of "Timeless" felt a tad bit pedestrian, as if we'd been there before.

The episode felt like a throwback, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

The plot involves a businessman named Connor Mason, who has a "secret time machine" project (think an Elon Musk-type entrepreneur).

A time traveling criminal named Flynn ("ER's" Goran Visnjic) steals the time machine -- which looks oddly similar to the CBS "eye" logo -- and travels back to meddle with the Hindenburg airship in 1930s New Jersey.

In steps the Department of Homeland Security to recruit Lucy Preston (a history professor), Logan Wyatt (a Delta Force operative), and Rufus Carlin (a reluctant scientist/tech guy who works for Mason). The trio is tasked with using a "backup" time machine (thank goodness they had one of those) to track down Flynn and restore order to historical events.

Preston (Abigail Spencer) is a precocious historian with key knowledge of historical events.

Wyatt (Matt Lanter) is the roguishly-handsome-troubled-man-of-action.

Carlin (Malcolm Barrett) provides moments of levity as the "I don't want to be here" scientist who operates the time machine.

The problem is that none of the three leads is particularly memorable. They capably serve the roles, but none rises above the material.

Because time travel properties continue to be popular -- and have been done in a number of ways -- they each set up their own rules.

The unique hook in this show is that it is "not smart" to time travel to a place where you "are." The scientists apparently tested this, but only "parts" of the time traveler returned.

We also learn as the show progresses that even "slight" changes to history can have serious ramifications for the principal characters -- and this leads to a surprise ending in the first episode.

I did enjoy the show, but it didn't grab me the way other new fall shows like "This Is Us," "Pitch," and "Designated Survivor" did after their debut episodes.

As shows like "Doctor Who" and "Quantum Leap" have shown, time travel is fertile ground for intriguing stories and interesting characters. So the potential is there.

The show sports a handsome production value and appealing visual effects.

The main question is whether this show can rise above the routine.

Preview of "Timeless":

Where to watch?
- Wednesdays at 10/9c on NBC.
- Episodes also streaming on NBC.com, Hulu.com, and the NBC and Hulu apps (on mobile and streaming devices).

Read yesterday's blog post: Jack Bauer…President