Global Geek News Blog The home of more Global Geek News insight and opinions

23Dec/080

EA Has Major Problems That Must Be Fixed or Face Shutting Down

Share on Facebook

Greetings Readers!

I will admit that I haven't been a fan of Electronic Arts for a long time.  While I admit they make an occasional good game, most of their games are new versions of old games with small changes every year.  This is just the start of my large list of issues with EA.  It is time I address all of my concerns about EA in hopes that they might (although not likely) see this and turn things around.

Lets start with the biggest issue first.  Games that EA makes annually (Madden, NBA Live, and pretty much every other sports game on the market) need to change radically.  While games such as Madden have come a long way over the years and is still a fun game to play, it and other EA sports games are essentially the same game every year with a new roster, a visual improvement or two and maybe a new feature or two.  Minor changes such as this do not make games in and of themselves.  There are less changes in an EA sports game than an expansion for any other game I have ever played.  If you are making less changes than is made in a simple game expansion, you should not be charging $60 every year for a new version of the game.  Honestly, for the few changes that there are, anything above $30 is too much considering that is the price of most expansion packs for games.  If you insist on making these small changes instead of going for a new experience in a new edition of a game, sell them as digital downloads on things like Xbox Live and the PlayStation Store.  Doing this would not only save the consumer time and money, but it would cut out many of the production costs associated with a new game.

Next on my list of issues with EA is support, especially for older titles.  As most gamers know, the support that EA provides for its titles is often pathetic.  Sports games often have their online component shut down after only a couple years of being available and many pc based games never get the patches they desperately need.  When it comes to long term support, Blizzard beats every other gaming company by far.  To this day, Blizzard still releases patches to StarCraft which is 10 years old.  Most EA gamers are lucky to get a years worth of support from an EA game.  EA has numberous Command & Conquer games in need of a patch but don't find it worth their time and effort to fix the problems with the games, even after they re-release them in a giant pack and are constantly packaging them in bundles.  If you are going to continue to sell a game, you should continue to support the game, it is that simple.  If EA patches a game any later than a year after a game is released, it is surprising.  If EA wants to acquire loyal customers instead of drive more people to the 'Boycott EA' movement, this is something that it needs to start doing to gain a  better reputation amongst the gaming industry.

Now, lets talk about DRM, the crowd favorite of all of the points I am addressing.  If there is one thing gamers hate besides wasting money on a bad game, its having to deal with DRM on a likely bad game that they just wasted their money on.  Earlier this year, EA released Spore, which quickly became the most pirated game of all time largely because of the heavy handed DRM placed on the game.  The DRM issue sparked a huge backlash on various online sites such as Amazon which quickly had thousands of one star ratings in protest of the DRM.  Unfortunately, EA did not learn their lesson from this.  Instead, they just loosened the DRM restrictions on their next major game, Command & Conquer Red Alert 3.  While some of the consessions were better than nothing, EA clearly still does not understand th headache that DRM causes legitimate customers.  As Spore proved, DRM does little to prevent piracy and ends up hurting people who are willing to purchase the game.  Assuming that everybody is out to steal your game just because a few people steal your game is a bad idea.  I will admit that their move to Steam and not having DRM with it is a step in the right direction, but I think that has little to do with actually getting rid of DRM, which is what I will talk about next.

Until last week, it has seemed that EA has never really understood the digital download experience.  Since many game purchases happen in store, EA never put a big emphasis on their own digital download software other than to bundle it with store bought games.  Actually, it was probably a good thing that they never really pushed the product because never once, on any computer, could I ever get it to work.  As of last week, EA will now be releasing their games on Steam.  This is a move that I have dreamed they would do for a very long time.  Digital downloads are great, especially if you are like me and have been burned by scratched disks in the past.  I think if they put more emphasis on selling their products on Steam, it would greatly benefit them financially, especially since digital downloads cut out much of the production costs of selling a game at retail.

One of the biggest issues I have seen cause problems with EA lately is internal politics.  The particular case I am refering to with this is the now canceled game, Tiberium (the new Command & Conquer FPS).  Shortly after the game was canceled, team members started talking about issues with the team and why it was ultimately cancled (This is the announcement and the team members opinions are stated in the post comments).  If you read the stories, it is clear that EA has problems with staffing and internal politics.  When you have issues like this that kill much anticipated games and then have the team members air their grievences in the comments of news posts, you have a major issue that needs to be dealt with immediately.  If you are going to make a quality product and do so in a timely manner, these issues cannot exist.

Before I talk about my final point, I wan't to address the lack of creativity and willingness to try new things.  EA has a bigger problem with this than most in that once they have a franchise that is known to make a lot of money, such as Madden, they stick to making new versions of the same thing instead of getting creative and making new franchises.  While I will admit that not every game or franchise is going to be as popular as a Halo or Half Life, you never know what might be the next big thing if you aren't willing to at least give an idea a try.  I also find it kind of pathetic that some of the most unique gaming ideas are coming from one or two people that make homebrew games as a hobby.  Eventually, gaming franchises will typically become old and boring until they turn into just plain bad games, the Sonic franchise is probably the best illustration of this.  If you aren't on the look out for the next big thing, instead of growing, you will die a slow death when the franchises you have depended upon for years become stale and don't give consumers a reason to buy them.

While I may have a couple of other issues with EA, I have one last one that I really want to focus on, and that is EA's closing of gaming studios that it acquires.  EA has a history of purchasing game studio after game studio, only to shut the studios down not long after they are acquired.  While I will admit that if a gaming studio isn't profitable, it should be restructured or shut down, shutting studios down for virtually no reason other than to move teams to another location is just stupid.  The best case for this that quickly comes to mind is that of Westwood Studios, creators of the Command & Conquer series, Dune and many other games.  With projects in the works, EA decided to just shut down the wonderful studio for no apparent reason.  While many of the Westwood employees were moved to EALA, and a few continue to make good Command & Conquer games, this move alienated thousands of fans, crippled the Command & Conquer gaming community (it still hasn't recovered despite the new game releases) and basically allowed the Boycott EA movement to gain momentum.  I also have this issue with Microsoft over the closing of Ensemble Studios, but I will save that for another blog post.  While consolidation might be a good thing, it is not a good thing when it ends up hurting gamers and results in a reduction in game quality.  This really boils down to a single point, if you want people to be loyal to a franchise, don't kill the game studio that creates them , otherwise you are breaking that bond that consumers have with the game.

Those are just some of my issues with EA and how I think it can turn itself around into a major gaming company that few can compete with.  If EA takes some of these ideas to heart, they can turn around their company and change public opinion about them in as little as a year or two.

Follow me on Twitter!

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
16Dec/080

Apple Announces it is Leaving MacWorld, Shoots Itself in the Foot

Share on Facebook

Greetings Readers!

After feeding the animals at work I came back to my computer moments ago to discover, thanks to Twitter, that Apple is no longer going to be at MacWorld after this year.  Not only that, but Steve Jobs isn't even going to give the keynote for this years MacWord.

To say that this movement is shocking is an understatement.  I never thought I would see an announcement like this.  It has been clear for a while now that Jobs seems to be trying to get out of the spotlight, but to have Philip Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing, give the speech is rather surprising.  Having somebody other than Steve Jobs give the keynote is a huge hit to Apple fanboys everywhere (or at least the ones on Twitter who are crying about it).  A move like this really makes you wonder why Apple is doing this.  Is a product launching that Jobs doesn't like?  Are there no major products to be announced?  Is Steve sick?  Is he quitting the company?  I expect this speculation and many other rumors to run wild over the next month after this announcement.

Apple has been scaling back on trade shows for quite a while, but to leave their last major trade show has me asking myself one simple question, why?  If the press release is any indication, Apple seems to think that it is too big to be at trade shows.  With Apple successfully launching products at its own events, I don't think that it believes it needs to be at trade shows anymore.  Whether they believe they have become too big for trade shows (keep in mind that even Microsoft does trade shows) or they just don't want to share the attention with other vendors when they make announcements, such an elitist attitude can easily lead to their downfall.

Before this announcement, I thought Apple's future was rather bright.  Now, I am wondering if this is the beginning of the end.  One thing is for sure, with an announcement like this, the stock is certain to plunge tomorrow.  I also hate to see what this does for the other companies that are at MacWorld now that the spotlight won't be on the event like it has in the past.  This is only the beginning of this story and I believe it will get uglier before it gets better.  I will post again as this situation develops and my opinions change.

Follow me on Twitter!

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
16Dec/081

Would you want to be buried with your gadgets?

Share on Facebook

Greetings Readers!

Earlier today, a story was brought to my attention that according to funeral directors, it is becoming common for people to be burried with their favorite gadgets.  From iPods to bluetooth headsets to Blackberry phones, it seems people, especially tech-savvy ones are being buried with their gadgets.

Why would people want to be buried with their gadgets?  According to some, it is because they loved the device when they were alive and spent much of their time with them.  Families are even burying their loved ones with phones so that they can call them as a way to try to connect to them, even if they do only get voicemail.  One obviously lonely woman continues to pay the phone bill for her late husband who has his phone buried with him so that she can call it to leave voicemails.  Although the phone battery  has been dead for sometime, at least she can call the voicemail and feel like she is still connected with him.

I see this new trend as rather silly.  I can't use my gadgets when I am dead, so I don't think I should be burried with them.  I think it would be better to give them to somebody who doesn't have the gadgets and would like them.  A gadget being used is better than a gadget sitting six feet below ground doing nothing.  Most people think the ancient Egyptians were odd for being buried with all of their wealth, yet this is really no different.  If I could take my gadgets into the next life and still be able to use them, that might be a different story, but since I can't, somebody else should get to use them since I am not around to do so anymore.

While I can identify with the feeling of loss associated with a death, I can't see how people get the feeling of a connection with a deceased person just by being able to call their also dead phone.  If you want to hear their voice again, there are better ways to accomplish this than continuing to pay a cell phone bill years after a person has died.  If you are still longing for a person, you can't move on.  Not moving on has and will continue to destroy many lives merely because people don't want to face reality and would rather live in the past.

What do you think of this growing trend?  Would you want to be buried with your favorite gadget?  Would you want your family member to be buried with their gadgets?  I want to hear your opinion, so share it in the comments!

Follow me on Twitter!

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
15Dec/080

How Do You Pick Your Social Networking Friends?

Share on Facebook

Greetings Readers!

Last night, I was playing around with the cool new website, socialmedian, when I came across a post about the dangers of random friending.  This story got me to thinking about how I choose my friends on my various social networks.  After giving some thought to it, I thought it would make for an interesting blog post, so here it goes.

How do you decide who to friend on social networks?  Do you have have different rules for friending for the different social networks?  Personally, I have different rules for friending depending on the social network and what the use of the social network is.  For example, with only a couple of exceptions, if I friend somebody on a site such as Facebook, which I find to be a more personal social network as that is where I keep much of my contact information and various other things, it is because I personally know you or have had contact with you at some point.  This differs greatly from other networks that I am apart of.  On Twitter, I would say I am about as picky about the people I follow, but its based on different criteria.  When it comes to Twitter, I have two main criteria for me to follow you.  First, I will likely only follow you if you tweet about things that I find interesting or helpful.  Links to things showing me how I can do better with things such as blogging, podcast or others is probably the best way to have me follow you.  Second, you can't tweet too much.  I don't like it when people tweet excessively (20+ times a day).  If you are using your tweets to send great links and information, I usually overlook this, but I don't want my twitter stream to be flooded by a single person.  While I love Twitter, I don't want to spend all day staying up with my feeds because one or more of my twitter friends insist on Twittering until their fingers fall off.  Different yet again, is how I use FriendFeed.  If I friend somebody on FriendFeed, it is solely based on the content the produce and share.  If I like what you are posting, I will follow you to make my FriendFeed use more valuable.  It is kind of the fire hose approach, but I find its the best way to keep from missing out on great content.

One of the great things about social networking is that you can use the networks however you please.  It can be a great way to keep in touch with friends and family as well as a great promotional tool.  However you use your networks, I think the idea still remains that you are judged by the company you keep.  When I introduce somebody to a network such as Twitter, I will be showing them my profile and I want them to see that I can get value from Twitter by following people that are intelligent and willing to pass along information that I find helpful or informative in some way.  Being able to give myself a valuable experience based upon the people I friend on social networks is great, but it is also a great way to get new people on the service because they can see how such a service can provide value.

For many people, social networks can be about having great conversations.  I rarely use my social networks in such a manner, but that is based on some personal preferences that I might discuss at a later time, but it centers around having the option to respond but not feeling obligated to respond to what somebody has to say.  For people who use social networks for conversation, friending people largely becomes about who is an interesting person to have a conversation with.  I don't know about you, but I don't have much use for people that can't hold up their end of the conversation.  I'm not looking to have 'yes men' as friends (my ego isn't that big), but I do like to conversate with somebody who has an opinion about something and can support their position intelligently.  This is part of how I choose guests for my podcasts as well.

No matter how you choose to use the multitude of social networks, you likely have an opinion as to what makes a good social networking friend and how your choose your social networking friends.  How do you choose your social networking friends?  Do you take a cautious approach and friend only a few, or do you friend everybody and cut back on the people you don't think fit well with how you want to use a particular socail network?  Tell me how you handle freinding on social networks in the comments!

Follow me on Twitter!

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
11Dec/080

WordPress 2.7 First Impressions

Share on Facebook

Greetings Readers!

As many of you know, WordPress 2.7 launched yesterday.  I immediately updated from my 2.6 installation as I wanted to see what all the hype was about.  I decided it would be a good idea to blog my first impression of the new software with a more detailed post possibly coming later after I have had some time to enjoy the new version.  With that said, here are my thoughts about WordPress 2.7.

Lets start with the upgrade process.  While the upgrade process could have been painless, poor documentation made it a bigger hassle than it should have been.  Unlike previous documentation which told you to copy every file except a certain few such as the ones for plug-ins and stuff, the new documentation doesn't say that.  It merely says to delete the old WordPress files, not mentioning anything about plug-ins or files that should not be deleted.  This caused me some concern, so I decided to back up all the files from my Geek News Daily podcast before attempting to install.  Come to find out, deleting the old files wasn't even necessary.  All I had to do was copy everything except the wp-content folder and tell it to overwrite all of the older files.  Doing this allowed me to get all of the new stuff while not deleting any of my themes or plug-ins, something which in the past had been a more painful process.  Had the documentation stated this, the upload and install process would have been rather painless.  After uploading all the new files, upgrading was the same as in the past where you just went to the upgrade page and hit a button.

As soon as I got it upgraded, I started to explore the new UI.  For those unfamiliar with 2.7, the UI is completely changed.  Now you can do things such as make simple posts straight from the dashboard instead of having to go to a new posts page.  I will admit that having the navigation on the left instead of the top takes some getting used to, but the drop down menu system is nice.  There are a couple of things with the new UI that don't make much sense.  For example, under the Posts drop-down, Edit is placed higher than Add New.  I don't know about you, but when I go into WordPress, it is mainly to add a new post rather than edit an old one.  That said, I think adding a new post should be given priority in the order of items listed in the Posts tab.  The same goes for pages in the Pages tab.  There is also a new feature called Turbo which supposedly lets you cache all of the images on WordPress to make loading faster.  I haven't tried this feature yet, but it sounds like a nice one as the new interface doesn't feel as snappy as the old one.

There is one major feature that is my absolute favorite.  Like the WordPress one click upgrade for plug-ins, you can now do that for WordPress itself.  Doing this will update you to the newest nightly build of WordPress.  This is great compared to the old upgrading method which required you to download the latest version, unpack it, upload it, making sure to save your plug-ins and themes before going to the update page and then updating the install.  Now all of this is handled by WordPress with a single click.  This saves a ton of time and effort and was something that I thought strange it wasn't included with 2.6 since this functionality was given to upgrading plug-ins.

I have only found one bug so far, and that is that I cant seem to get the inserting of a photo to work properly. In Firefox, the uploading took me away from the blog page which made me lose progress, only to have it go to a blank page when I tried to insert the photo.  When I tried to do this in Opera, it gave the normal pop-up which gave me the interface to upload a photo with while not making me leave the page.  Unfortunately it still didn't work right.  While I got it to insert the photo into the post, it did not keep the formatting I told it (centered and medium size).  Not only that, but it didn't put the caption box around the image, instead it just put the caption as regular text next to the image.  To say the least, these bugs are very frustrating.

Those are my first impressions, but so far I really like the new Wordpress install outside of the bad upgrade documentation and very buggy picture uploader.  My only other complaint is that I think the UI could be a bit more colorful as it is rather bland compared to the old versions.  If my opinion of the new version changes, I will be sure to write up a full review of the software.

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
4Dec/080

Google brings some holiday spirit to Google Docs

Share on Facebook

Greetings readers!

While I know that there aren't very many Google Docs users out there (I do use it and like it for simple tasks), there is now even more reason to live Google Docs.  Google has released some holiday themed templates to bring you and those around you some holiday cheer.  With holiday postcards, mailing lables and gift tags, the new templates is a great excuse for anybody to use Google Docs!  What better way is there to tell your family and friends just how much you love cloud computing than to use it to send them some holiday greeting cards?

Here are some small (almost too small) pictures to show you just a taste of what holiday goodness that Google Docs has to offer:

A snowflake post card

A snowflake post card

Santa Mailing Lables

Santa Mailing Lables

Holiday gift tags

Holiday gift tags

Make sure you check these out in the holiday templates section of Google Docs.

Do you use Google Docs?  If so, what do you think of it?  If not, does something like this make you more interested in trying it out?

Follow me on Twitter!

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
3Dec/081

Twitter vs FriendFeed

Share on Facebook

Greetings Readers!

I have been using Twitter for close to a year and FriendFeed maybe half that time at best and I feel its finally time for me to declare which service is better.  Before I announce the better service, I should say that their overall function is similar but not exactly the same.

For those that don't know, Twitter is a great "micro-blogging" tool.  With Twitter, you are encouraged to tell people what you are doing.  You can also have conversations on Twitter and share the really cool things you find online with all of your friends.  The number of things that can be done with Twitter is practically limitless.  Twitter also has a huge community around it to the point that there are tons of programs that allow users to interact with the service, such as TweetDeck, something not common with other services.  FriendFeed on the other hand is this (minus the large community) and more.

FriendFeed allows you to do the same things as I mentioned above with Twitter, but you can do much more with it.  FriendFeed is about aggregating your online presence and sharing it with other people who can share it with their contacts if they choose.  With FriendFeed, whenever you write a blog post, put a picture on Flickr, Digg a story or do pretty much anything else, it will be put in your stream for all you contacts to see and comment.  When a friend likes or comments on your posts, the content is shared with their friends which allows for content to spread to many people very quickly who would likely have not known about the content otherwise.  With threaded comments that are essentially open to anybody assuming an item shows up in your feed to comment on, FriendFeed allows for much a much greater discussion with many people than can be done with Twitter.

Given this comparison, FriendFeed clearly seems to be superior to Twitter, but its not a perfect service.  With Twitter, you can follow many people, but the more people you follow, the less valuable the service becomes because you tend to miss tweets and don't always know what is going on.  Personally, I find the maximum number of people I can follow while not becoming completely overwhelmed with Tweets is around 200, but I would say that 150 is a more reasonable number.  This depends of course on how often the people you follow tweet, but it seems to be a good number for most people.  FriendFeed on the other hand, the more people you follow, the more valuable the service becomes.  Since the conversations are opened to everybody and not just to a friend or two, there isn't a real negitive impact for following a large number of people.  I find that the more people I am subscribed to on FriendFeed, the more cool items that I find interesting come across my FriendFeed.  Since many of the people I follow comment on similar things, while my feed is a little busier, it doesn't seem to become overwhelming.  Also, with the more people you follow, the more cool things you will find.  The only problem here is that FriendFeed only has a fraction of the users that Twitter does.

As I am sure you can tell, I prefer FriendFeed to Twitter for many reasons, but I still use Twitter (whos messages are aggregated into FriendFeed) because it has more users who I have a closer relationship with than my FriendFeed friends.  If my Twitter friends were on FriendFeed, I would be likely to leave Twitter.  I do think that this will change in the future as more people see that more value can be gained from FriendFeed than Twitter.  Until that time comes, its really about where the people are at, which at this time is Twitter.

While Twitter is a great service, one which I use many times of day, I think it is no where close to providing the value that can be offered by FriendFeed.  Not taking into account the community surrounding the service (various apps that use the service such as TweetDeck), the only thing that Twitter is better for is the larger number of users.   FriendFeed is better in most every aspect which is why I think it is the better service.

Winner:  FriendFeed!

What do you think about FriendFeed and Twitter?  Which do you think is a better service?

Follow me on Twitter!

Follow me on FriendFeed!

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
3Dec/081

Integrating Facebook Connect into your Wordpress site

Share on Facebook

Greetings Readers!

With all the excitement surrounding Facebook Connect this week, I thought I would help WordPress users like myself get it working on your site.

If you aren't sure what Facebook Connect can do for you and your WordPress site, I found a video showing off a Facebook Connect WordPress plugin.

If that is cool enough that you think you want to install it on your blog, you can download the Facebook Connect plugin here.

To see just how to get the plugin up and running so you can utilize Facebook Connect on your WordPress install, here is a how-to video.

That is all you need to integrate Facebook Connect into your WordPress site!

I will be integrating it with the Global Geek News Blog, Global Geek News and Geek News Daily in the next day or two.  Check back to play with it once its up and running!

Follow me on Twitter!

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
2Dec/080

Ads on School Tests?! Are you kidding me?

Share on Facebook

Greetings Readers!

Normally I try to stick strictly to technology topics for this blog, but today is a bit different.  In all of my podcasts and blogs, I typically cover all kinds of media, entertainment, and technology news, and while this blog mainly focuses on the tech end of that, today I want to rant about a media topic, in this particular case, advertising gone too far.  Earlier today, Slashdot pointed me to a story from the USA Today about a teacher by the name of Tom Farber at a San Diego high school who is selling advertising space on his tests.

Mr. Farber says that his annual copy budget is $316 (the district cut the teacher's supply budget by nearly 1/3) and yet he uses $500 worth of paper for the tests he gives out.  What does he decide to do to help feed his copy budget?  Sell advertising!  Mr. Farber sells advertising on his tests at the rates of $10 an ad for a quiz, $20 for a chapter test and $30 for advertising on a final.  He also says that 2/3 of the advertisers are the parents of the students, hoping to give their kids some encouragement while the rest is local businesses.

Maybe its just me, but this seems like a bad idea.  While I will admit this is some clever thinking by the teacher to help save him from trying to have to pay money to make test copies for his students, students shouldn't have to be bombarded with advertising while they are trying to focus on a test.  Personally, I don't want to start thinking about food in the middle of a test because I see an advertisement on the page for a local burger joint.  With U.S. students already lagging behind much of the rest of the civilized world in education, we don't need any help being distracted from getting an education.

While I don't mind advertising in schools, I think it should be on places such as the bulletin board in the hall or in student newspapers and even bathrooms, but not in tests.  There is a time and place for everything, and a test is not the place for advertising.  I don't even see how tests could be an effective form of marketing.  Do you really want you business to be associated with that test that little Johnny failed?  I know I wouldn't!

Mr. Farber and teachers all around the country need to think a little harder on this.  If you want to use advertising, do it in a more appropriate manner.  Better yet, if you don't want such a huge copy bill, try going paperless!  Many schools around the country are going paperless, many giving students a laptop on which they can do their work.  Whether you give students a laptop on which to work or take them to a computer lab to take their tests, there are better ways to keep from suffering the sting of a small copy budget than having to sell advertising on tests.  If nothing else, at least give the students a minute or two before each test to whiteout the advertisements if they think they will be distracted by them.  These are just a some ideas for ways to adjust to your budget.

I hope this idea doesn't catch on around the country as it would be a bad sign for the continued deterioration of our educational system.  I don't hate advertising (well, sometimes I do), but there are some things that just shouldn't be used as an advertising medium.

Follow me on Twitter!

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
2Dec/080

Google Brings Style to Gmail with Themes

Share on Facebook

Greetings Readers!

Have you ever found yourself wishing that your wonderful Gmail wasn't so plain?  Do you think it needs some color or some cool background images?  You are in luck!  Google has unveiled a new feature that allows users to add themes to Gmail.  Now you can spice up your gmail with all kinds of cool themes!

There are currently 31 themes to choose from, ranging from a ninja theme to a space theme.  Personally, I use the Mountains theme on one account and the Planets theme on another.  What is really cool about these themes is that they change several times a day, so they never get old.  I find that the Mountain theme changes to match the lighting for the particular time of day, which is really cool!

How do you get your hands on these wonderful themes?  Go into your Gmail Settings page and there is a tab called Themes and you can select whatever theme you want to use.  Like everything Google, it is as simple as can be!  While they don't add any major functionality to Gmail, its a nice change of scenery.  I will warn you, some of them make it a little harder to read the text because of the colors involved.  Below is just a sample of some of the new Gmail themes.

Some of the new Gmail Themes!

Some of the new Gmail Themes!

Are you using Gmail themes?  What theme is your favorite?  Tell me in the comments!

Follow me on Twitter!

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray