How I lost 43lbs

My bodyweight during 2008:
  • 04/15: 223lbs
  • 05/24: 210lbs
  • 07/07: 200lbs
  • 08/28: 190lbs
  • 12/05: 180lbs
That's 43lbs in less than 8 months (with a disproportionate 4 months spent on the last 10lbs). Was it the Atkins diet? South Beach diet? Zone diet? Broken bathroom scale? Did I just hack off a limb?

Hell no. It was physics. Nah, seriously - my weight loss is 100% attributable to the law of conservation of energy. I wouldn't say the weight loss was easy - those last 10lbs in particular seemed to take forever - but it was surprisingly effortless. I ate any food that I wanted, I never felt hungry, I had tons of energy and my diet became a seamless part of my daily routine. All it took was following two basic rules:

  1. Calories In < Calories Out. This is the only formula that really matters in weight management. Eat less than you burn and you are guaranteed to lose weight.
  2. Maintain Lean Body Mass. The weight you lose from following rule #1 will consist of not only fat, but muscle as well. Since the actual goal is to lower body fat percentage, it is essential to maintain as much of your lean body mass (LBM) as possible.
Let's discuss these one at a time.

Rule 1: Calories In < Calories Out

This is the formula for weight loss. You can try every crazy diet on the planet, but if you eat more calories than you burn, you will NOT lose any significant amount of weight. As I said, it's basic physics: the human body requires some amount of energy X, measured in calories, to do its basic functions. Moving, thinking, breathing, walking, and just about everything you do requires energy, with the exact amount depending on a person's genetics, age, health, activity level, etc. The only two sources of energy readily available for the human body are the food you eat and the muscle/fat you already have. In general, your body will use the energy from food before it starts digesting the muscles/fat in your body. So, lets assume you eat Y calories per day and look at the 3 possibilities:
  1. Y > X. Due to the law of conservation of energy, if you eat more calories than you burned, the calorie surplus (Y - X) has to go somewhere. In the human body, there are two main places for it to go: it gets turned into muscle or into fat. In either case, you gain weight.
  2. Y = X. If you ate and burned the same number of calories, there is no surplus or deficit to worry about, so you stay the same weight.
  3. Y < X. Once again, due to that pesky law of conservation of energy, if you ate less calories then you burned, that deficit must come from somewhere. In the human body, the two main sources are muscles and fat. In either case, you lose weight.
Eat less than you burn and you WILL lose weight. That's really all there is to it. Now, I know that I'm simplifying biology here, but on a large, week-to-week scale, this is a pretty accurate picture.

Ok, So How Do I Satisfy Rule #1?

The first step is to start tracking how many calories you take in and how many you burn. Don't just try to guess or approximate, as you are all but guaranteed to get it wrong: after all, that's how you got fat in the first place. Instead, I highly recommend using a website like thedailyplate.com or fitday.com. They are free, have massive databases of foods with all the nutritional information, have all sorts of useful tools (like calorie calculators, graphs, weight tracker, etc) and take most of the guess work out of it.

Log in, plug in your height, weight, age and activity level to get an approxmiation of your basal metabolic rate. This is how many calories you burn daily by just having a beating heart, eating, breathing, thinking - in short, existing. For the average 5'9", 175 pound male, merely being alive burns around 2000 calories per day. Any exercise or physical activity you do would add onto that.

Once you have this figured out, start recording every single item you put in your mouth. You'd be surprised how quickly those little snacks can add up. Now, remember that ALL calorie tracking is an approximation. You will never know exactly how many calories are in that pastry or exactly how many calories you burned during your jog. Don't worry about it too much and just put down your best guess, using the estimates on the websites above as a base. For one thing, if you're honest about it, your errors - an overestimate here, an underestimate there - will often cancel each other out. Secondly, use a scale to track your weight: if your weight is going in the right direction, you're doing a good job of estimating. If your weight is not going in the right direction, even if you think you've been on a caloric deficit, don't just give up and assume the laws of physics do not apply to you. It just means that your estimates have been inaccurate (or incomplete). Keep at it, tweak your numbers, and eventually you'll get pretty damn good at it. Oh, and don't bother weighing yourself more than about once a week: your weight can fluctuate daily due to a number of unrelated reasons (water retention, weighing yourself at different times, etc), but over the longer term, these fluctuations tend to average out.

Rule 2: Maintain Lean Body Mass

Rule #1 only ensures that you will lose weight, which includes both fat and muscle. As it turns out, muscles are metabolically more "expensive" to maintain than fat - that is, it takes a lot of calories just to keep them around. If you are on a caloric deficit, your body may be very tempted to burn the muscle up for energy both to make up the energy deficit in the short term and to reduce the possible deficit in the future. However, losing weight at the cost of losing a lot of muscle mass is a bad idea for a number of reasons, including:
  • Losing LBM lowers your basal metabolic rate, which is very counterproductive for dieting. If your basal metabolic rate is lower, you burn fewer calories per day. Therefore, to continue losing weight, you'd have to eat even less, which makes dieting even harder. If you continue losing muscle mass, you'll gradually see diminishing returns with your weight loss until your metabolism slows to a crawl, making weight loss virtually impossible.
  • Obviously, losing muscle mass typically means performing worse at sports, struggling to move that couch, less energy through out the day, and so on.
  • For the most part, a person's appearance - whether you have "toned" abs, firm thighs, cut shoulders, etc - is much more of a factor of body fat percentage than it is of total weight. You could lose a lot of weight, but if a large percentage of that weight loss is muscle, then your body fat percentage won't actually be that much lower. As a result, despite all your efforts, you won't necessarily look any better. Dieters who have had this happen have nicknamed it becoming "skinny fat" - you're much lighter, but still look just as flabby.
Therefore, the main goal of a diet for most people should be not to lose weight, but to lower body fat percentage.

Lowering Body Fat Percentage

There are only two ways to go about this: you either need to increase the amount of muscle in your body while keeping the amount of fat relatively constant ("bulking") or reduce the amount of fat in your body while keeping the amount of muscle relatively constant ("cutting"). To bulk, you must eat a caloric surplus and convince your body to turn the extra caloric energy into muscle mass. To cut, you must eat a caloric deficit and convince your body to get the missing caloric energy from your fat. Can you build muscle and lose fat at the same time? Not very effectively - see the FAQ below for more info.

Since this post is about weight loss, our goal is to cut weight while maintaining as much muscle mass as possible. To do this, you need to convince your body that your metabolically expensive muscles are worth keeping around. Here are several good ways to do this:

1. Eat lots of protein. This is absolutely essential. You need protein to build/maintain muscles, so make sure your body is never running short of it while on a caloric deficit. This is especially important if you are doing any sort of exercise. Try to eat around 1 gram of protein per pound of bodyweight: for example, if you weigh 175 lbs, try to eat 175 grams of protein per day. The same websites I mentioned for tracking calories automatically track protein intake as well. If this seems like a lot of protein, check out the FAQ section below for more info.

2. Weight training. Consistently using your muscles to lift heavy weights is pretty much the single most effective way to tell your body that it should NOT digest its own muscles. In fact, it's pretty much the only way to keep the weight loss as close to 100% fat as possible. The most effective routines are those that work the entire body and focus on compound, low rep, heavy weight movements with free weights (e.g. Starting Strength, Stronglifts 5x5, Bill Starr 5x5, Crossfit). Yes, even women should do weight training. NO, you will not get "big". Not only is it extremely difficult for the average woman to get "jacked", when you're on a calorie deficit, your primary concern will be trying not to lose muscle mass. Of course, doing weight training has many other benefits besides maintaining LBM, such as increased strength, increased sports performance, injury resistance, increased bone density, increased metabolism (helping accelerate future weight loss), improved balance and coordination, and so on. Despite the popular myth that weight training automatically makes you gain weight, I really can't stress enough how great of a tool it is when dieting.

3. Use a moderate caloric deficit. If your caloric deficit is too big, your body will go more and more into a "starvation mode" where it'll digest a LOT of your muscle mass and actually try to conserve your fat for the future - the exact opposite of what you want. Therefore, don't go overboard with the caloric deficit: a daily deficit of 250 - 750 calories is reasonable range for most people and will let you lose about 0.5 - 1.5 lbs per week. Any more than that and a larger percentage of it will be muscle.

FAQ

What about other diets, like low fat diets, Atkins, Zone, South Beach, etc?

If any of these fad diets works, it's simply because it tricks you into eating less calories than you burn. They all have various strategies for accomplishing this, but I personally prefer to skip to the heart of the issue and skip all the BS in between. In exchange, I get to decide what I eat, when I eat and how much, so long as I follow rules #1 and #2.

What foods should I avoid?

You can eat whatever you want, so long as you follow rules #1 and #2. From a purely weight loss perspective, it doesn't matter if all your calories come from eating nothing but candy dipped in melted butter. If you eat less calories than you burn, even if all the calories are from candy and butter, you WILL lose weight. Having said that, I'd take note of the following:
  1. Most people should be concerned with more than just their weight. For one thing, the need to keep your protein intake high (as in rule #2) will make it tough to live on a diet solely consisting of buttered candy. Secondly, your overall health relies not only on your weight or body fat percentage, but also on your diet's vitamin content, your blood cholesterol levels and many other diet-influenced factors. Each person should obviously consider these when deciding what to eat. So, while you could lose weight eating nothing but butter and candy, I wouldn't recommend it.
  2. Staying within your caloric limit can be difficult without feeling hungry. You will find that some foods are a much better "bang for the buck" - that is, you can eat more of them and feel fuller without eating too many calories. The "What does 200 calories look like?" webpage does a great job of illustrating this. If you're staying within your caloric limit, you'll naturally find yourself gravitating towards foods towards the top of this page rather than the bottom, quite simply because you can eat more of them. As it happens, these calorie-sparse foods also happen to be the ones we traditionally consider "healthy".
What about macronutrient breakdown? Glycemic Index (GI)?

From a weight loss perspective, both of these are relatively minor factors. As long as you're within your caloric limit, the body doesn't care all that much whether those calories came from carbs (whether high GI or low GI), fats or protein. The one exception is if your body fat percentage is already very low - below 10% for males - at which point losing more fat becomes much more challenging and every little detail must be monitored. However, the vast majority of people are nowhere near this level, so these are not particularly relevant.

Having said that, I must again point out that from an overall health standpoint, you may want to be aware of these issues. Picking foods with a lower Glycemic Index can have many health benefits, such as reducing hunger, cholesterol and the risk of heart disease. A proper macronutrient breakdown, such as the 40-30-30 (carbs-protein-fats) of the Zone Diet, may help with hormone balance in the body, which can impact every aspect of your life, from mood to weight management. But as far as just losing weight, they probably aren't terribly important.

I'd also note that, from personal experience, I have found that by picking foods that let me keep a caloric deficit and keeping my protein intake high (~1 gram per pound of bodyweight), both of these factors took care of themselves. I typically found that lower GI foods were also less calorie dense and I preferred them as I could eat them in larger quantities. Moreover, keeping my protein intake high naturally created a 40-30-30 macronutrient breakdown in my diet with no extra effort.

Should I eat many small meals per day?

If you keep caloric intake constant, eating multiple small meals a day versus several larger ones has no advantage as far as weight loss goes. In other words, the idea that eating more often raises your metabolism and somehow burns more calories is a myth. However, there are other benefits to eating more often that might make it worthwhile. The main one is that you can prevent yourself from getting hungry due to long breaks between meals, which can make it easier to stay within your caloric limits.

What about cardio? Should I exercise in the "fat burning zone"? What about HIIT?

From a weight loss perspective, cardio is primarily an efficient way to burn more calories - to increase the "calories out" portion of the equation in rule #1. Of course, cardio has many other benefits that make it a very worthwhile activity that have little to do with weight loss. These include improved endurance, stronger heart and lungs, and improved blood cholesterol levels. Cardio activities can also help with maintaining LBM, but not nearly as effectively as weight training.

As for the type of cardio, it's really up to you. There are studies that show that keeping your heart rate in the "fat burning zone" during cardio gives you the most favorable ratio of fat burned vs. muscle burned while exercising. Other people claim high intensity interval training (HIIT) is better. Whether or not they are right is, frankly, irrelevant. I really like this quote from Alan Aragon from an article about the "afterburn effect":

Caring how much fat is burned during training makes as much sense as caring how much muscle is built during training.

Perhaps you burn a slightly higher percentage of fat while in the "fat burning zone", but when you look at the big picture, this effect is pretty damn insignificant. All that really matters is how many calories you burned and from that perspective, you should just do whatever cardio you enjoy and can do consistently.

How do I get a 6 pack? Should I do crunches or sit-ups?

The first thing to understand is that having visible abs is, for all practical purposes, completely a factor of body fat percentage. If your body fat percentage is too high, it doesn't matter how many crunches you do, your abs will NOT be visible. You can buy the ab lounge, the bo-flex, and do crunches for days on end, but as long as there is a layer of fat over your abs, you won't be able to see them.

The second thing to understand is that, realistically, the concept of "spot reduction" is a myth. By spot reduction, I mean the idea that by doing exercises on some specific part of your body, you can lose fat from just that place. The classic example is people doing sit-ups or crunches in the hope that this will reduce fat around their midsection. It won't. Sit-ups and crunches may make your abs stronger and boost their endurance, but they WILL NOT decrease fat specifically around your stomach. You could do a thousand reps on those goddamn adductor machines at the gym and it won't magically burn fat off your ass or thighs.

To be more specific, you will only lose fat - from any part of your body - when on a caloric deficit. Where the fat is lost from is entirely up to your body. You really don't have any say in the matter. If your body decides to lose a ton of weight from your stomach, but none from your thighs, there is nothing you can do about it. However, as a general rule, when you lose weight, you lose weight fairly evenly from all over your body. Having said that, most people tend to have a body part or two that keeps an disproportionally large amount of fat. For men, this is usually the stomach and love handles. For women, it's usually the thighs and butt. These parts of the body are usually the first ones to gain fat and the last ones to lose it. The only solution is to just keep doing what you are doing: once your body fat percentage gets low enough, you WILL lose fat from even these troublesome areas.

Is it possible to build muscle and lose fat at the same time?

As I discussed before, muscle growth happens as a response to a caloric surplus while fat loss happens as a response to a caloric deficit. Although there are a few minor cases where both can happen, it should be obvious from the caloric formula alone that doing both at the same time isn't very feasible. It can be accomplished at a very slow rate by eating roughly "maintenance" calories (ie, calories in = calories out), but people typically have much better success (ie, achieve more muscle with less fat in a shorter time) by repeatedly alternating bulking and cutting cycles.

It's also true that beginners to weight training, for a short while, can burn off fat and build muscle at the same time. This typically happens with overweight and completely untrained individuals, as their bodies are primed to use fat as fuel and their muscles, in total shock from the foreign stimulus of weight training, adapt very quickly ("beginner gains"). The result is that, for a few months after beginning weight training, many guys will see their waist lines shrink while their shoulders and legs grow. It's yet another awesome incentive to do weight training, but of course, it doesn't last. After a while, to really effectively continue to add muscle mass or burn off fat, you need to gear your diet towards one or the other.

So how long do I need to do this for?

Well... forever. Or, at least as long as you want to have control over your body weight. A diet cannot be a temporary thing, because if you go back to your old eating habits, you'll undoubtedly also go back to your old weight.Worse yet, the more weight you lose, the harder it gets. For one thing, as your bodyweight gets lower, your basal metabolic rate drops as well. This means you burn less calories per day, so to maintain a caloric deficit, you have to eat even less (or exercise more). For a small amount of weight loss, this effect will be minimal, but if you're losing 20lbs or more, you'll need to take it into account - the calorie tracking websites I mentioned actually do this automatically for you. This is yet another reason maintaining/adding muscle mass is so beneficial for weight loss: for the same amount of mass, muscles take more calories to maintain, which means merely having them lets you burn more calories.

But don't worry, it's actually not that hard. After a few weeks, it becomes a part of your life and does not feel like a chore. Moreover, seeing results is an unbelievable motivation. Losing weight will make a significant daily impact in your life. Everything from getting up from the couch, to running up a flight of stairs, to how you perform at sports and exercise will improve. You'll boost your energy levels and your confidence. Of course, depending on how much weight you lose, your old clothes might not fit you any more, but I think you'll get over it. Also, when you finally reach your target weight and switch from a daily caloric deficit to eating maintenance calories, you'll find that you can feel totally stuffed every single meal and not gain an ounce.

Do I have to do Crossfit like you did to lose weight?

No, not at all. In fact, my first Crossfit workout was on July 7, by which point I had already lost 23lbs. Before that, my only real exercise was some weight training 3 times a week using the Bill Starr 5x5 routine. The main role of exercise in my weight loss was as a way to help maintain LBM and to increase how many calories I burned per day. Exercise has many other benefits as well, but it's definitely not a requirement for weight loss. You could just eat less to get to a caloric deficit and I guarantee that you'll lose weight.

How do I eat so much protein?

The typical daily recommendation is around 1.0 grams of protein per pound of body weight. This is a pretty hefty amount, but it definitely goes a long way towards helping maintain LBM. Of course, not everyone needs that much: if you don't do any exercise or are very heavy to begin with (over 300lbs), you can probably do just fine with closer to 0.5 grams of protein per pound of body weight. In any case, if you need to up your protein intake, you'll probably need to rework your diet around foods that are high in protein, but relatively low in calories. One gram of pure protein has about 4 calories in it. For any given food, you can divide the number of calories it has by the grams of protein. The closer this number is to 4 (which is the theoretical minimum), the "cleaner" a source of protein it is - that is, you can eat more of it to up your protein intake without increasing your caloric intake too much. Below is a list I've compiled of high protein foods and their calorie to protein ratio. Foods closer to the top give you a better protein "bang for the buck". These numbers are from thedailyplate.com and will obviously vary with different preparation, cuts, brands, etc.

Whey protein isolate: 100 cal, 23g, 4.34 cal/g
Spirulina: 26 cal, 5.92g, 4.39 cal/g
Turkey breast: 146 cal, 33g, 4.42 cal/g
Ostrich steak: 160 cal, 36g, 4.44 cal/g
Turkey breast (deli slices): 60 cal, 13g, 4.62 cal/g
Canned tuna: 70 cal, 15g, 4.66 cal/g
Chicken breast: 130 cal, 27g, 4.81 cal/g
Casein protein: 120 cal, 24g, 5.0 cal/g
Shrimp: 90 cal, 17g, 5.29 cal/g
Smoked salmon: 70 cal, 13g, 5.38 cal/g
Cottage cheese (0% fat): 70 cal, 13g, 5.38 cal/g
Clams: 50 cal, 9g, 5.56 cal/g
Cottage cheese (1% fat): 90 cal, 16g, 5.63 cal/g
Salmon filet: 130 cal, 22g, 5.91 cal/g
Greek strained yogurt (0% fat): 90 cal, 15g, 6.0 cal/g
Sirloin Steak: 260 cal, 43g, 6.05 cal/g
Chicken breast (deli slices): 70 cal, 11g, 6.36 cal/g
Buffalo burger: 280 cal, 43g, 6.51 cal/g
Button mushrooms: 15 cal, 2.2g, 6.28 cal/g
Shiitake mushrooms: 21 cal, 3g, 7.0 cal/g
Canned salmon: 90 cal, 12g, 7.5 cal/g
Mussels: 70 cal, 9g, 7.78 cal/g
Beef jerky: 130 cal, 16g, 8.13 cal/g
Hamburger (90/10): 200 cal, 23g, 8.70 cal/g
Oysters: 57 cal, 6g, 9.5 cal/g
Pork chops: 152 cal, 15.6g, 9.74 cal/g
Skim milk: 80 cal, 8g, 10.0 cal/g
Mozarella: 60 cal, 6g, 10.0 cal/g
Soybeans: 100 cal, 10g, 10.0 cal/g
Portabella Mushroom: 26 cal, 2.5g, 10.4 cal/g
Chicken wing: 98 cal, 9g, 10.7 cal/g
Egg: 70 cal, 6g, 11.66
Yogurt (0% fat): 70 cal, 6g, 11.66 cal/g
Lamb: 331 cal, 27.57g, 12.0 cal/g
Provolone cheese: 70 cal, 5g, 14.0 cal/g
Italian salami: 100 cal, 7g, 14.29 cal/g
Hamburger (80/20): 290 cal, 23g, 14.5 cal/g
Bacon: 103 cal, 7g, 14.71 cal/g
Muenster Cheese: 120 cal, 8g, 15.0 cal/g
Kashi Go Lean Protein Cereal: 200 cal, 13g, 15.38 cal/g
Cheddar cheese: 113 cal, 7g, 16.1 cal/g
Tofu: 610 cal, 35g, 17.43
American cheese: 70 cal, 4g, 17.5 cal/g
Black beans: 140 cal, 7g, 20.0 cal/g
Peanuts: 160 cal, 7g, 22.85 cal/g
Pumpkin seeds: 46 cal, 2g, 23 cal/g
Sunflower seeds: 262 cal, 10.48g, 25.0 cal/g
Peanut Butter: 190 cal, 7g, 27.14 cal/g
Almonds: 312 cal, 11g, 28.36 cal/g
Quinoa: 636 cal, 22g, 28.9 cal/g
Sesame Seeds: 158 cal, 5g, 31.6 cal/g
Cashews: 240 cal, 7g, 34.23 cal/g
Walnuts: 688 cal, 14.7g, 46.8 cal/g

A Tribute to Crossfit

July 7, 2008, was the day I got my ass kicked by Murph. It was the day that I experienced a 42 minute beat down that left me lying in a pool of my own sweat with the world spinning all around me. Yup, July 7th was a good day.

"Murph" is the name of the first Crossfit (CF) workout I had ever done. It consists of:

For time:
  • 1 mile Run
  • 100 Pull-ups
  • 200 Push-ups
  • 300 Squats
  • 1 mile Run
  • Partition the pull-ups, push-ups, and squats as needed. Start and finish with a mile run.
Although I did both of the mile runs that day, I could only get through 70% of the middle part: 70 pull-ups, 140 push-ups, and 210 squats. I was in agony the entire workout. The last mile felt like the longest mile of my entire life. In the end, I crumpled onto the ground, unable to do much of anything besides slowly creating a "sweat angel" on the floor below me. And yet, when I peeled myself off the floor some 10 minutes later, I found that I had a weird smile on my face. I was hooked.

What is Crossfit?

From the Crossfit website:

CrossFit is the principal strength and conditioning program for many police academies and tactical operations teams, military special operations units, champion martial artists, and hundreds of other elite and professional athletes worldwide.

Our program delivers a fitness that is, by design, broad, general, and inclusive. Our specialty is not specializing. Combat, survival, many sports, and life reward this kind of fitness and, on average, punish the specialist.

Crossfit is a program focused on developing "General Physical Preparedness" (GPP) - that is, it's tailored towards improving fitness across the board. Rather than developing just strength (from a strength training routine), or just endurance (from jogging), or just speed (from sprinting), Crossfit aims to improve everything at once. The goal is to build proficiency in each of the 10 fitness domains: cardiovascular/respiratory endurance, stamina, strength, flexibility, power, speed, agility, balance, coordination, and accuracy.

In this spirit, Crossfit workouts combine a little bit of everything: power lifting, olympic lifting, kettlebells, gymnastics, calisthenics, plyometrics, running, rowing, climbing, jumping and more. Each day, the Crossfit mainpage hosts a different Workout of the Day (WoD), and Crossfitters around the world do it, scaling the workout to their own abilities. It is the belief of Crossfit that following this routine produces the best all around athlete in the world, the motto being "Forging Elite Fitness". A Crossfitter might not beat a specialist in the specialist's particular field, but he'll do well nonetheless, and dominate the specialist in all other areas of fitness. For example, someone who only does long distance running might post a better 10K time than a Crossfitter, but not by a large margin. They will, however, perform far worse than the same Crossfitter when it comes to lifting heavy weights, sprinting, pull-ups and just about everything else.

Crossfit Workouts

Along with Murph, here are some other typical CF workouts:

"Elizabeth"
For time, 21-15-9 reps of:
Clean 135 pounds
Ring dips

"Fran"
For time, 21-15- and 9 reps of:
95 pound Thruster
Pull-ups

"Crossfit Total"
Back squat, 1 rep
Shoulder Press, 1 rep
Deadlift, 1 rep

"Griff"
For time:
Run 800 meters
Run 400 meters backwards
Run 800 meters
Run 400 meters backwards

June 12
Seven rounds for time of:
10 One legged squats, alternating
12 Ring dips
15 Pull-ups

Looking at the list above, it's important to understand that CF workouts consist of constantly varied, functional movements executed at high intensity. Every day is a different workout, and a given workout is unlikely to repeat more than once or twice per month. This is *not* the same old routine day in and day out at the gym and boredom is never an issue. I've been doing Crossfit for 5 months now, and just about every time I go to do a workout, I feel like I'm learning something new and fresh.

This might seem like a strange way to exercise, since repetition is typically needed for improvement, but you have to remember that while the workouts are constantly changing, the actual exercises used in the workouts are repeated quite often. From just the short list above, you can see, for example, that pull-ups are done both in Fran and in the June 12th workout. Running is done in both Murph and Griff. Squats are done in almost every workout: back squats in Crossfit Total, (squat) cleans in Elizabeth, the thrusters (front squat + push press) in Fran and the one legged squats on the June 12 workout. These movements are repeated again and again, but the actual workout changes the weight, reps, sets, etc. The result is that a Crossfitter gets damn good at doing just about any of these movements in almost any scenario.

Moreover, Crossfit exclusively focuses on functional movements - proficiency developed in these movements transfers extremely well to other applications. For example, the squat is so prevalent because it is the quintessential strength movement needed in the real world: a better squat helps you run faster, jump higher, lift heavy objects, and so on. Pull-ups appear very frequently because the ability to move your own body weight is essential in almost every sport and the grip strength developed is useful in almost any physical endevour. Moreover, proficiency at one functional movement often transfers to another: a good squat, for example, often produces a good deadlift. A good clean often helps produce a good box jump. The advantage here is that we can get better at a wide variety of exercises without having to spend a huge amount of time doing each individual one.

The movements done in Crossfit intentionally do NOT include a number of exercises seen in other workout routines: in particular, there are no isolation exercises (bicep curls, tricep extensions, etc) and no machines (leg press, smith rack, etc) of any kind. Why? For one thing, they are simply not as effective: compound exercises that involve multiple muscles & joints tend to produce much more rapid increases in strength than isolation exercises. Moreover, machines do not allow you to develop strength in the same way you'd use it in the real world. In particular, the balance and coordination needed to do a free weight exercise, such as the balance needed for squatting with a heavy weight on your back, is just as important as the actual strength. You can build some of that strength using a leg press machine, but it won't develop the same levels of balance & coordination, and therefore won't transfer to the real world or other exercises. Finally, machines and isolation exercises often lead to injuries. By separating the body into various parts, they make it possible to develop muscles in a very unbalanced manner. For example, the quadriceps and hamstrings pull on the knee joint in different directions and should be balanced in a healthy knee. If one gets much stronger than the other - which could happen from lots of leg press, which over-emphasizes the quads - the result is often knee injuries.

Finally, Crossfit is all about intensity. What most gym goers don't seem to understand is the concept of specific adaptation. Here's a great example from Starting Strength: imagine that every single day, you spend exactly 10 minutes outside in the sun. The question is, would you be more tan if you did this for two months than if you did it for just one month? Most people assume you would. The reality, however, is that your tan will basically be exactly the same. Tanning is your body adapting to the stress of the sun trying to damage your skin. The amount of tanning depends on - is specific to - the maximum stress your skin encounters. Since this amount is exactly 10 minutes each day, once the initial tan is established, which probably takes just a few days, your body will NOT tan any further - otherwise, wouldn't we all gradually end up extremely tan after a few years of life on earth? The only way to become more tan is to spend more than 10 minutes in the sun, which produces greater stress and consequently, a greater adaptation.

Well, the same principle applies to exercise. "Moderate exercise", by its very nature, can only produce moderate results. If you want to run faster, jump higher, lift more weight and see more abs, you have to dial up the intensity, which is exactly what Crossfit does. As you may have noticed, many CF workouts are "for time", which means the workout should be completed in as little time as possible. Next time the workout repeats, you should be trying to do it still faster. The result is that you waste no time waiting around, minimize rest periods and are pushing your body to its absolute limits. I cannot overstate how those two little words, "for time", can change a workout. Alternatively, some workouts set a fixed time but tell you to do "as many rounds as possible" of some workout during that time: e.g. as many rounds as possible of 5 pull-ups, 10 push-ups and 15 squats in 20 minutes.

Does the Average Person Really Need "Elite Fitness"?

Let me come out and say it immediately: Crossfit is not for everyone. It is physically and mentally far more gruelling than any exercise I have ever done, and as I have a long history of doing all sorts of exercise, that means a lot. Moreover, Crossfit is not without its dangers. As the "What is Crossfit" page explains:

In any case it must be understood that the CrossFit workouts are extremely demanding and will tax the capacities of even the world's best athletes. You would be well advised to take on the WOD carefully, cautiously, and work first towards completing the workouts comfortably and consistently before "throwing" yourself at them 100%. The best results have come for those who've "gone through the motions" of the WOD by reducing recommended loads, reps, and sets while not endeavoring towards impressive times for a month before turning up the heat. We counsel you to establish consistency with the WOD before maximizing intensity.

However, having said that, Crossfit has been the single most rewarding and effective exercise program I have ever done. Period. I have seen incredibly rapid improvements in my fitness across the board (see below) and I've accomplished things I never thought I'd be able to do. I cringe at the hours I wasted before I found Crossfit and can't imagine doing anything else now.

It's worth pointing out that while not everyone should do Crossfit, everyone can. Most people that see the workouts become intimidated and figure you need to already be an elite athlete just to start. This is not true, at all. Again, from "What is CrossFit?":

We’ve used our same routines for elderly individuals with heart disease and cage fighters one month out from televised bouts. We scale load and intensity; we don’t change programs. The needs of Olympic athletes and our grandparents differ by degree not kind.

Every single Crossfit workout, by design, can - and for beginners, should - be scaled to anyone's ability. In fact, the BrandX messageboard lists scaled versions of every single WoD. For example, consider this workout:

"Nasty Girls"
3 rounds for time of:
50 Squats
7 Muscle-ups
135 pound Hang power cleans, 10 reps

There are a number of scaled versions of this workout: for example, if you can't do a muscle-up, you could try jumping muscle-ups. Can't do those either? Do pull-ups and dips. Still no? Do assisted pull-ups and dips. Not ready for that? Try push-ups and body rows. In a similar manner, every part of this workout, and any workout, can be scaled down. As you do Crossfit and your fitness improves, you'll slowly be able to scale back up to the original workout until you finally reach the point where you can do them exactly as written, aka "as Rx'd".

Not sure how to do an exercise? You've got tons of options:
Not sure you have the time for it? Well, the first thing to consider is that most Crossfit workouts are under 20 minutes. Elite Crossfitters can do the infamous Fran in under two minutes. Time wise, Crossfit compares favorably with other routines, but believe me, the WoD will make every minutes count. Besides, exercise is not something you magically have time for. You make time for it, just like you would for a visit to the doctor or to watch your favorite TV show.

Need more inspiration? Just about every WoD in the archive comes with a video and some of them have to be seen to be believed. Some of my favorites include 14 year old Kallista competing with adults in the Crossfit Games, Fran in full firefighter gear, "Turkish Get-Up with Wife", the "Everyman's Gymnastics", the "one armed Grace", "King Kong", the burpee muscle-up, and bodyweight overhead squat for 15 reps by Nicole.

My Results

Since I started Crossfit back on July 7, I've seen enormous improvements in every aspect of my fitness. I've used the Anandtech message boards to keep a workout journal and am amazed at the progress I've made in just 5 months. For example, I've learned how to do a whole ton of new exercises:
  • Kipping pull-ups, clapping pull-ups, and L pull-ups
  • Muscle-ups on a pull-up bar and on rings
  • Handstand push-ups
  • L-sits on the floor and on rings
  • Tuck planche for ~15 seconds
  • Single-legged squats
  • Back lever on rings
  • Double-unders
  • Clean and Jerk
  • Snatch
I've also accomplished some feats I never thought I'd be able to do:
  • Ran a 10K and a 15K
  • Deadlifted 415lbs at a bodyweight of 185lbs (I've lost 43lbs since April, but that's a story for another post)
  • Cleaned 245lbs
  • Completed the "Filthy Fifty" in 28:00
  • Won a competition at work by posting the fastest time for the "300 workout" (it's one of the workouts done by the guys in the move "The 300") in 17:01
  • "Fran" in 5:58
  • Weighted pull-up with BW + 125lbs
Last but not least, on November 9th, I got my second chance at "Murph". I still ended up a sweaty mess on the floor, but this time around, I managed to finish the entire workout in less time (40:01). I've still got tons of room for improvement, but what I've seen already is nothing short of fantastic.

Of course, Crossfit itself is by no means perfect, but it's damn close. Let me put it this way: my endurance is through the roof, I'm stronger, faster, and feel more in shape than I've ever been in my life. Sweet.

Another "Gotcha", this time in HTML

I couldn't resist another dorky software engineering post. Non dorks may stop reading here.

At work the other day, while debugging my code, I noticed that one of my servlets was getting called twice for each page load. What was even more mysterious was that the second call would happen as the page was partially loaded. I scoured my code for iframes, accidental use of the servlet, rouge AJAX calls and so on, but couldn't find a thing. I resorted to just commenting out huge chunks of the page at a time to see which parts were causing the second page load. After a while, I narrowed it down to this:

<img src="$imgUrl" />

where $imgUrl is a variable who's value is filled in at runtime. So, you might be wondering how the heck an img tag can cause the entire page to reload? Well, it turns out (at least in Firefox 3) that if you have an img tag with a blank src attribute, the browsers tries to load an image at your base URL - that is, the URL of the page you're on. Therefore, every time $imgUrl turned out to be blank, my browser would re-request the page I was on. This, of course, caused a bad performance hit, was screwing up statistics and so on.

Moral of the story: make sure that your img tags never have an empty src attribute.

A Subtle Java 1.5 "Gotcha"

I couldn't resist creating this very short, dorky and entirely programming-focused entry today. If you are not a software engineer, read no further. You have been warned.

I recently ran across a subtle way a handy Java 1.5 feature can sneak up and cause issues. Perhaps if I had spent more time pouring over the specs & documentation, it would've been very obvious, but alas, it definitely caught me by surprise. The problem was a null Pointer Exception (NPE) which I tracked down to the following line of code:

int id = map.get(key)

The obvious culprit was that HashMap named map was null, but as I stepped through the code, I found to my surprise that it wasn't. Neither was key, for that matter. So how the hell was I getting an NPE? Take a look at the declaration of map:

Map<String,Integer> map = new HashMap<String,Integer>();

Note how the values in map are Integer objects, but I'm setting the result of the get call to a primitive int. In Java 1.5, this is allowed as Java will automatically unbox the Integer into an int. But what happens if the value returned by get is null? Well, the auto unboxing can't convert that to any int value - returning some default value like 0 or -1 would be very deceiving - so you get a big old NPE.

Moral of the story: auto boxing and unboxing are very handy features to keep your code clean and readable, but keep NPE's in mind every time you use them.

iPhone 3G

The original iPhone, released in 2007, was a "game-changing" phone and multimedia device. It didn't really bring anything new to the field, but as is typical of Apple, it showed up with an unprecedented level of style and polish. It was an attractive, slick device, with a beautiful screen and a great UI. It was a fantastic iPod with a great web browser, some cool applications and hell, even a decent phone. Since then, many other phone manufacturers have been trying to copy it. While many had it beat in terms of features, no one had been able to touch the iPhone's "cool factor" and match it's excellent UI (with the possible exception of the recently released HTC Touch Diamond, which comes pretty close).

On June 9, 2008, Apple announced the successor to the Iphone, the iPhone 3G. It is pretty evident that Apple has raised the bar. Not only does the phone look good, it now has the specs to back it up. In fact, it has just about everything I'd want in a PDA-phone:
  • Small form factor
  • Beautiful screen
  • Quad band phone (works worldwide)
  • 3G connectivity (fast Internet)
  • Tons of storage (8GB or 16GB)
  • Wi-Fi (free Internet at hot spots)
  • Bluetooth
  • GPS
  • Decent 2.0 megapixel camera
  • Supposedly great battery life
  • Same (or better?) slick UI and iPod features
  • Just $199 for the 8gb model
Just looking at the spec sheet, the phone is extremely tempting. However, if you read between the lines and take note of what's not on the spec sheet, there are a few serious issues:

  • Apple would have you believe that despite all the great features, they have reduced the price: the 8GB model is just $199. But don't be fooled: the phone can only be bought with a 2 year (or 3 year?) contract that must include a phone plan AND a data plan. Moreover, the plan which will be at least $10/month more than the previous iPhone contracts, which adds up to $240 over 2 years. And the AT&T contracts aren't cheap to begin with: it's minimum ~$40/month for the call plan and ~$40/month for the data connectivity. That's at least $80/month, or nearly $2000 over 2 years. But you didn't really think it would be cheap, did you?
  • The phone does not have a physical keyboard. The original iPhone used an on-screen (touch-sensitive) keyboard and in my opinion, it just didn't work very well. I would make a mistake every 4th letter while typing and had to go quite slow. I hope they've improved it in some way for the new phone or it'll seriously hamper usability.
  • It doesn't look like the phone will support copy & paste. Along with the keyboard issue, this is another huge gap in the UI. I imagine it's tough to do copy and paste on a touch screen (without a precision stylus), but I'm sure they could find a reasonable way to handle it. If these guys can hack up a crappy 3rd party solution, certainly Apple could improve on it?
  • No bluetooth profiles? The original iPhone, and possibly this new one, only let you use bluetooth for connecting a headset. However, stereo bluetooth and A2DP are not available, so you can't stream music wirelessly. Moreover, there is no bluetooth tethering, so you can't use your iPhone as a modem for your laptop. Finally, there is also no bluetooth file transfer.
  • Screen is not VGA. This is a relatively minor issue, especially given the iPhone's excellent UI and web browser, but it would've been really nice to have a 640x480 screen.
So, will the iPhone be worth the money? Is ~$2000 over 2 years worth the convenience of having access to your music, Internet and GPS everywhere you go? I'm not sure. I guess the first step is to wait for the reviews to start cropping up. The iPhone 3g will be out on July 11, so keep your eyes open.

Eten Glofiish M800 Review

For those that don't know, the Eten Glofiish m800 is a phone. And a PDA. With GPS. And keyboard. And it runs Windows. And...

OK, so it's more than a phone. It's a windows mobile smartphone that is as feature packed as it gets these days. The full specs:

  • Quad band world phone (850/900/1800/1900 MHz)
  • Tri-band data (GPRS/EDGE/UMTS/HSDPA 1.8 Mbit/s/HSDPA 3.6 Mbit/s)
  • 480x640 (vga) resolution
  • Full qwerty keyboard
  • Touch screen
  • Windows Mobile Professional 6.0
  • Wifi
  • GPS
  • Bluetooth
  • microSD slot
  • 2mp camera
  • Kitchen sink
  • Around $600 (unlocked)
In short, it has just about everything. The design isn't as pretty as an iPhone, but it's not terrible either. The size and weight are reasonable for a phone that does this much. It even comes with a carrying case and a headset. Overall, it looks wonderful - on paper.

So why did I end up sending this phone back?

Well, the phone falls just short of expectations in just about everything. No one flaw would have been enough to reject it, but the numerous small issues added up really quickly to a very frustrating experience.

The Screen


The VGA resolution is fantastic. It offers significantly more screen real estate than the average smart phone (which is qvga) and provides a great experience when web browsing, navigating via gps, writing notes, etc. Everything is crisp and the colors are solid. That is of course, until you step outside. In the sun, the screen is VERY difficult to read. As if you don't already look like a dork for carrying around such a gizmo in public, you have to bring this thing to within an inch of your face just to read the time.

The screen does a good job of interpreting the stylus and is even effective when you use your fingers. I was impressed with the recognition of light taps, holding down the stylus (for right click) and had a far better experience than I did with an expensive tablet PC I had used years ago. My only gripe would be the handwriting recognition - there are several different modes, each of which suck horribly. Their primary use is to entertain yourself by seeing them misinterpret your writing in unexpected and hilarious ways. However, it's not much of an issue given the presence of a physical keyboard and even an on-screen touch sensitive keyboard you can use that works very well with the stylus.

The Buttons


The keys on the keyboard aren't raised or particularly distinct feeling, but somehow, typing is still fairly easy and you don't make too many mistakes. It's a vast improvement over typing on any of the other phones I've tried, including those with a standard phone keypad (3 letters per button), blackberry style keypad (2 letters per button), and it's certainly better than touch screen "keyboards".

However, the buttons on the front of the phone, just below the screen, are abysmal. Instead of normal push buttons, as used on the rest of the phone, these are special touch sensitive buttons - they don't move, but just glow when they have detected a touch. These buttons are so ingeniously designed they they can interpret your desires: every time you want to push them, they cleverly pretend to be asleep and do nothing. And every time you brush them accidentally as you type, slide the phone open, put the phone in the carrying case, or admire some other phone, they delightfully glow and immediately open up whatever process is going to be most CPU intensive and inconvenient to run at that moment. These things are a travesty and largely useless anyway, so you end up using a key combo to lock them and hope to never use them again.

They keyboard also gave me an odd issue where the light indicating caps lock was activated would remain in the on position, even though caps lock wasn't actually on. When I did turn caps lock on, the light would shut off. This could have been more clever, counterintuitive Eten design... But more likely, just a silly bug.

Performance

The m800 has a 500Mhz processor, which is a pretty good work horse. However, as is clearly a trend with this phone, each good feature is handicapped in some way. In this case, it's by the paltry 64MB of RAM. Oh, and the total lack of any sort of video acceleration. The result is a slow experience that only gets slower.

Everything on screen is just not quite as zippy as you'd want it to be. Menus take a few seconds to open, switching to landscape mode takes anywhere from 2 to 10 seconds (depending on the application running), web pages are slow to render, and programs take a while to open and just as long to close. Scrolling and animations tend to be twitchy (probably due to the lack of graphics acceleration), there are no fancy effects on the phone (like the iPhone has) and nothing is pretty. Music files play just fine but every video I tried was twitchy and largely unwatchable.

And the more things you have open, the worse it gets. In fact, even when you think you've closed a program, it sometimes continues to run in the background, eating up RAM. See the Windows Mobile 6.0 section for more on this. Eventually, after you've opened and (thought you) closed enough programs, the RAM starts to run out and the system grinds to a halt. You can try to use the memory management software to kill all running programs, but for some reason, this rarely restores all memory and everything continues to crawl. Eventually, the only option is to completely reboot the phone.

This takes roughly 2-3 minutes, which is quite irritating. You don't have to do it often, but it's always at a bad time when you do. The good news is that during normal usage, you typically put the phone on standby, which shuts off the screen, saves lots of batteries and turns back on in a couple of seconds.

I can't help but to think that an extra 64MB of RAM would have significantly improved the speed of the phone and the entire user experience at relatively little cost. All the latest powerful smartphones (HTC TYTN II, I-Mate Ultimate 9502, etc) come with 128MB of RAM and it's a shame to handicap a phone in such a way.

Battery Life

I didn't expect battery life to be great for a device like this, and it definitely wasn't. From very moderate daily usage - for example, 10 minutes of phone calls, using the calendar for 10 minutes, connecting to wifi and checking my email and spending the rest of the day on standby - the phone would drop to ~50% battery life. That means you'd have to charge it every other day, at least. Things only got worse if you used the GPS, did any real web browsing, or used any other heavy-weight apps (e.g. google maps).

In short, I would typically leave the phone plugged in (via USB) to my computer every night so it could charge. The phone does come with a modular AC adapter which allows you to attach many types of plugs, which is great for traveling. Unfortunately, my phone only came with two plugs: a UK plug (which was useless to me) and a US plug that did not fit the adapter. It was a different color and definitely looked like it belong to a different phone. I don't know if this was the fault of E-ten or eXpansys (the store I ordered the phone from), but it made the AC adapter into a wired paperweight.

GPS

The GPS typically connected in under a minute, although occasionally I had to wait several minutes and once, it wouldn't connect at all. I used it with TomTom 6 and the results were fairly pleasant: the UI worked and looked good on the high res screen and the GPS seemed fairly accurate. It took a little while to set up TomTom the first time to recognize the built in GPS unit (the configuration is less than intuitive), but this has nothing to do with the phone itself. Calculating routes took ~10-20 seconds, which is not terrible, but not great. Including the time it takes to connect to the satellites, enter your destination info, calculate the route and start displaying the map, you can expect a ~2 minute overhead per trip. Not the end of the world, but again, just not quite as zippy and responsive as I wanted.

Windows Mobile 6.0

I had limited experience with Windows Mobile before using this phone and can say that the 6.0 version is less than impressive. For the most part, it's a crappy OS with an ugly UI that does a good job of supporting touch screens and is saved by the availability of lots of decent software.

There were two issues that drove me nuts and both were very un-windows-like. The first was the lack of a task bar, leaving you no obvious or easy way to see what programs are running or switch between them. Each program would typically take up the full screen and the only way to get back to a different one was to "run" it again from the start menu or programs folder. The second issue was that pushing the x button to close a program... didn't always close the program. Quite often, the program would disappear from view, but continue running in the background. Oddly enough, these are both issues present in OS X, but at least OS X offers some reasonable solutions, such as expose, apple + tab, and the dock (which is like an unintuitive task bar).

As I mentioned in the performance section, there are precious few system resources to work with as it is, so wasting them on programs you thought were closed is unacceptable. And with the lack of a task bar, you just don't know it's happening. Moreover, it's unclear just how you'd close these programs completely. The only solution I found was to use the memory manager, which is like a retarded half brother of Windows' task manager (which is the ugly cousin of OS X's Activity Monitor). This program would at least show you what is actively running and give you the option to close each program. Unfortunately, this menu option never worked for me. Instead, I'd have to use the "kill all" option, which would shut down every running program, which is not always desirable.

Windows Mobile also suffers from a crappy web browser (Internet Explorer Mobile), crappy media player (Windows Media Player) and the total lack of support for Flash. The latter means no youtube (or any other sites that depend on Flash), which when added to the twitchy video performance of Windows Media Player, is quite frustrating. Worse yet, if you visit youtube on your mobile phone, you are taken to a page that is designed for mobile phones and really looks like it's going to work. But don't hold your breath, it doesn't. Not only is there no support for Flash, but there is also no support for the RTSP protocol, which is what the mobile youtube site tries to use.

The big saving grace for Windows Mobile is the large amount of quality software available for it. It's easy to make the software (in .Net, for example) and many people have produced some good products. Not all are free, but if you're serious about using this kind of phone, they may be worth the money. Some of the key pieces of software I found:

  • Magic button: adds a proper close button to Windows Mobile that actually closes (most) programs. It also adds a taskbar! This is an absolute must have.
  • Opera mobile: a much better web browsing experience than IE.
  • Fring: multi-protocol chat.
  • Resco Explorer: much nicer file explorer than the default one in Windows Mobile.
  • tcpmp: Windows Media Player replacement.
  • Google Maps: self explanatory and highly useful.
I also like the ability to use remote desktop on Windows Mobile phones so that you can actually control your home computer from your mobile device. It's easy to find and install the software and most of it runs w/o too many issues. These can make Windows Mobile, for the most part, worth it.

Accessories

The headset that came with the phone got the job done, although there was an audible hiss coming from the headphone jack. Speaking of which, the headphone jack was 2.5mm, which is not the standard size. Not a big deal, but it would be nice to be able to use my normal headphones (such as my ipod headphones) without a converter.

The carrying case is not pretty, but well designed to securely hold and protect the phone. It doesn't get in the way when you wear it, which is nice. Unfortunately, it ripped after just several days of normal usage. Sigh.

Data plan

I use AT&T as my carrier and do not have a data plan - I just don't think it's worth paying $40/month to be able to check my email from the bathroom. Moreover, the phone has Wifi (more on that later) so I can still get Internet at hot spots, such as my house, at work, Starbucks, etc. Unfortunately, a couple times while using the phone, I did not notice that the Wifi was off (to save batteries) and I started to browse the web.

As it turns out, neither Windows Mobile, nor E-ten, nor AT&T provide any warning that you are suddenly using a data plan (or lack thereof) and as a result, you can get charged. A lot. I got lucky and "only" had to pay $5, but as there is no clear indication of which network connection you're using (wifi, data plan, bluetooth bridge), it would be very easy to run up quite the fee.

Wifi

The wifi is really useful to get free Internet access at hotspots and when it works, works reasonably well. I didn't benchmark it, but I'd say it was fast enough that most Internet performance was limited by the phone's CPU/RAM and not the bandwidth.

Unfortunately, the wifi really likes to lose wireless passwords. It seems like every time I would switch networks, I would have to reenter that network's password, even if I checked the box asking the phone to save the password. This got to be real annoying, as I would connect alternately to the wifi at home and the wifi at work and had to spend a lot of time entering the damn passwords.

Worse still, the wifi would sometimes refuse to connect all together. I would select a network, enter the password and see the status go to "connecting". Suddenly, the screen would refresh, and the network I was trying to connect to would be gone. I'd have to exit the wifi manager and come back a few seconds later to see it again. I'd click the network again, enter the password again, and quite often, see it vanish once more. This could go on for several iterations before an actual connection was established... or the phone was sailing through the air.

Call Quality

Call quality wasn't great, but it wasn't terrible. Occasionally, I'd be told that I sounded like I was very far away, but in general, it was reasonable. Oh, and the speakerphone worked pretty well too.

The only downside was the random day when the phone refused to allow any calls to connect. For about four hours one day, I could not place or receive calls properly. If someone called me, the phone would ring, but when I answered it, I would hear nothing on the other end. If I tried to place a call, I'd hear at most one ring, and then two quick beeps, followed by silence. The phone showed 3-4 bars of connectivity and did this at home and at work. My other phones (on the same AT&T network) never exhibited such behavior. Other people with AT&T in the same area also had no issues. And after the 4 hours, the phone worked just fine again.

I still don't know what caused it, and it only happened once, but it's worth mentioning.

Other

You can connect the phone to your computer using Microsoft ActiveSync, which worked reasonably well to let you sync your calendar, email, install software and transfer files. Unfortunately, every now and then, ActiveSync would fail to connect to the phone and the only solution was to reboot.

The m800 has 256MB of on board memory, which is plenty to install lots of good apps, and the microSD slot lets you add plenty of additional memory for music, pictures, etc. I used a 4gb microSD (HC) card in the phone without any issues.

The phone also has a camera and an FM radio. The camera is crappy, pretty much standard for mobile phone cameras. It's good enough for quick snapshots, or to take pictures of people's faces to add to their contact info, but that's about it. The FM radio works very well and is a nice, although not terribly useful, addition.

Conclusion

I hope you noticed a trend through out this whole review. Every good thing I had to say about the phone would end with an "unfortunately..." or "but..." or "%&$!D!!". No one of the issues above was a game breaker. But the plethora of problems added up damn quick and just became too much.

The E-Ten m800 is not a bad phone and it certainly has all the bells and whistles, but for $600 I expected more.

Why I probably won't be buying a mac any time soon...

I'll just jump right into it. Since the last blog entry about the Mac, here are:

The new things I like:

  • It boots up quickly
  • I really like the preview feature and desperately miss it on other OS's
The new things I DON'T like:

  • The pinwheel of death. For a computer with a dual core CPU and 3gb of RAM (yes, 3gb, not 2), the pinwheel appears an obscene number of times. When opening more than one webpage, when compiling, when opening NeoOffice, completely at random, when something crashes, and so on. Why does OS X suck so much at distributing processing time over the cores? Why do both cores get pegged down completely so damn often? The hourglass cursor is FAR less prevelant on my Windows computer at home which has similar specs (dual core CPU and 2gb of RAM).
  • Firefox runs like crap. It is noticeably slower on OS X. Pages take longer to load, it eats up a lot of CPU while rendering them, and yes, you get to see a whole lot more of that damn pinwheel. It's especially bad on certain pages (such as Facebook), possibly indicating some AJAX issue. It also eats up a lot of RAM, although that happens with Firefox on any OS. Hopefully version 3.0 will improve this.
  • Mail crashes more often than it should, and when it does, it has a way of taking the whole OS with it. I can rarely (if ever) recover from Mail locking up - force quit can't quite handle it - and usually need to reboot. Moreover, I've become slightly disillusioned with the built in search. It will quite often refuse to find emails that contain text exactly matching your search terms. Finally, its conversation view is inferior to gmail. Having said all that, it is still incomparably better than Outlook.
  • I got a Blackberry Pearl recently (I'll post more about my phone adventures later) and to put it simply, trying to sync a Blackberry with a Mac is damn near impossible. The Mac will find the phone and connect to it via bluetooth... I think you can even transfer files... But the sync will fail every time. Just google for it and you'll find legions of users frustrated by this. Even over a USB cable, the sync is extremely buggy: the sync program seems to hang, the status bar never reaching 100%, and you only get a partial sync. The events on the phone end up on the computer, but not vice-versa. I can't say this is the fault of Apple, but given the popularity of Blackberry devices, this is pretty disappointing.
  • The computer has some graphics driver issues that, according to an article one of our IT guys showed, Apple will not address. The symptoms vary a bit, but on my computer, I will get a complete lock up every now and then. The whole system will freeze and not respond to any kind of input. I have to hold down the power button and reboot. I've tried some manual fixes posted online (which involve booting off an OS X install disc and manually replacing graphic driver files), but they led to some graphics corruption, so I had to revert live with it. The crashes are rare, but very unpleasant. Again, I'm not sure it's Apple's fault - maybe nVidia or ATI are to blame - but Apple's big sell is that they control the hardware, and such problems are quite disappointing.
  • A less severe symptom of the driver issues is that the computer has issues with dual monitor support when booting (or, say, rebooting after a total lockup). If I leave my external monitor plugged in when I turn the computer on, the computer will seem to switch into an extended desktop mode (the desktop on the laptop screen will change appropriately), but the external monitor stays completely black. The ONLY solution I've found is to shut down the computer, unplug the monitor, boot back up and then plug the monitor back in once the OS is running.
  • The keyboard shortcuts are driving me nuts. I know I wrote about this in the previous post, but even after several months of use, they still feel wrong. For example, in many pop-up dialogs (such as an ok/cancel), you can't always switch between the buttons using the keyboard - I've tried arrow keys, tab, apple + arrow keys and several other combos, and none of them do anything. In some programs you can push the apple key plus the first letter of the option (ie apple + D for Don't save in TextWrangler) but this is not consistently available. The keyboard shortcuts themselves for various system operations are not always listed - for example, why are there no keyboard shortcuts next to sleep or logout in the Apple menu? Finally, the inconsistency of keyboard shortcuts can be maddening. In some programs, apple + B makes text bold. In others, it's ctrl + B. In some, switching tabs is done with apple + arrows (in which case, I have no idea how you get to the beginning/end of a line of text), in others, it's ctrl + tab (and apple + arrows instead have a totally different behavior, such as back & forward in a browser). The list goes on and on.
  • Finder sucks. I tried to like it, and I do appreciate the search feature, but it's just a dumb way to handle file management. Not being able to see the whole file structure (ie, anything above your home folder) is maddening. I understand the whole security/permissions setup of Unix can keep the system safer, but on a 1 (power) user system, it would be real nice to be able to just have full access to your own goddamn computer.
  • I hate the blinking, bouncing notifications in the dock. I understand that you want to install update #457 for the OS or give me some mundane, completely unimportant message, but every time a goddamn icon starts hopping incessantly at the periphery of my vision, I just want to put my fist through the screen.
  • I've never found expose useful. It looks gorgeous and is nice in theory, but it just doesn't seem efficient. I'm used to good keyboard shortcuts, so a more powerful alt+tab - as available on Vista - is significantly more useful.
Is Windows that much better?

No, not really. Windows has its own share of flaws and frustrations and as I said in the first post, neither OS is head & shoulders above the other. The point of this post was to vent a bit and challenge the conception that the Mac is some holy mecca of operating system salvation. Same shit, different smell.

However, for my purposes, Windows does get the job done just a little smoother and cheaper (esp. the hardware). If I can ween myself from gaming (or let the lack of quality games do the job for me), I may even switch to Ubuntu some day. Free definitely has it's advantages.

Weight lifting

I do a lot of things the majority of people really don't understand. For example, software engineering. The average person just doesn't know what it is, often confusing it with IT. If your first thought was "what's the difference?" or "what's IT?", then you are one of those people. You are probably that jerk that, upon learning what I do for a living, immediately asks me to fix your printer or make your "Internet" work. But software engineering is not IT. I do NOT sit around all day cleaning viruses off your computer and making your email work. I create software. If computers were like books, software engineers would be the authors and IT would be the guys that fix the printing press if it malfunctions.

But I didn't want to talk about software engineering today. Instead, I wanted to discuss another misunderstood hobby of mine: weight lifting (aka strength training, resistance training, "going to the gym", "pumping iron", etc). I've been lifting consistently for about 4 years now and my current routine is to workout 3 day a week, 1.5 hours a day. Many people seem to have the impression that I spend all 90 minutes standing in front of a mirror doing bicep curls and grunting. It's as if arms are the only parts of your body that get stronger. My mom has a wonderful habit of pulling up my shirt sleeve in front of her friends and asking me to flex as she makes weird grunt noises on my behalf.

The reality is that when it comes to strength training, my biceps could hardly concern me less. During the average week, I do at most 2 sets of bicep curls, amounting to 10 reps, or all of 2 minutes of grunting a week. So what the hell do I do the rest of the time?

Before I get to that, it's worth answering the following questions:

What is strength?

In the most basic sense, strength is a measurement of how much force your body can exert in a particular motion. It's worth noting that strength is made up of many components: muscle size, muscular endurance, tendon/ligament strength, skeletal strength, coordination, and much more.

What is strength training?

Strength training is the use of various forms of resistance to increase strength. Please do NOT confuse strength training with "body building", where the goal is not strength, but a particular appearance. To illustrate the difference, compare Arnold Schwarzenegger (world famous body builder) to Andy Bolton (strongest man alive). Body building has made Arnold strong, but his primary goal was a statue-esque physique and enormous muscles. While Bolton is nowhere near as god-like in appearance, he is significantly stronger than Arnold - Bolton has deadlifted over 1000lbs and squatted over 1200lbs, both world records.

Why do strength training?


To set the record straight, I am not trying to look like Andy Bolton (or Arnold, for that matter). But I do want to train like Andy Bolton, with the primary goal being strength. Here are a few reasons why:
  1. Increased muscular power and endurance: useful in sports (run faster, jump higher, etc) & life situations (opening mayonnaise jars, carrying luggage, fighting off assholes).
  2. Increased muscle mass: boosts metabolism, allowing for better weight management. Yup, you'll actually lose more fat with proper strength training than pretending to use that dusty treadmill in your basement.
  3. Improved balance and coordination.
  4. Increased bone density.
  5. Injury prevention: stronger muscles, bones and tendons help protect the body.
  6. Better sleep: after a hard workout, your body needs to heal, and you sleep like a baby.
  7. Better looks.
  8. Better overall health and more energy through out the day.
The list goes on and on. I don't want to turn this into an infomercial, but it's important to explain this stuff. Strength training is a lot more than big biceps.

So, if not bicep curls, what are you doing?

The first thing to understand is that there are many approaches to strength training. Unfortunately, most of them don't work very well. Here are some easy ways to identify bad strength training routines:
  • Anything your friends recommend to you is probably bad.
  • Anything the gym trainer recommends to you is probably bad.
  • Anything you found on the Internet is bad (including anything I write).
I'm only half joking, actually. Exercise and weight loss are a big business and the amount of misinformation out there is ridiculous. Your friends are in no better position to know it than you and are completely untrained to give you advice. Unfortunately, most gym trainers are also very poorly versed in strength training. They are often only taught how to use the machines on the floor (which you should avoid for strength training) and like to spread stupid rumors, like "squatting is bad for your knees".

Of course, as a beginner, you can can try almost anything and see results. Millions of years of evolution have allowed your body to react wonderfully to the shock of peeling your fat ass from the couch and picking up a dumbbell. However, after a very short time, crappy programs become less and less effective. It's not long before you see no progress at all and give up.

The single greatest thing you can do is to follow routines created and endorsed by strength training experts. Not machines advertised at 3am on tv, not fad diets, and not books published by body builders. The difference between something you scrap together by yourself and a proper strength training routine cannot be overstated. Think of taking up strength training like being sued: you could go to court and make up a defense based on the advice of your friends and something you read online... But wouldn't you rather follow the advice of an expert?

Starting Strength

The gold standard is Starting Strength by Mark Rippetoe and Lon Kilgore. This is the book, the weight lifting bible, and it should be required reading for ANYONE that sets foot in a gym. This book (make sure to get the 2nd edition) will teach you everything you need to know about proper strength training, including clearly written instructions on each exercise and excellent illustrations and photographs. It not only explains what to do, but also why, and the amount of research put into it is impressive.

If you know me, you know I would never recommend spending money on something you could get for free, but the information in this book is NOT available elsewhere. Your friends don't know it, the gym trainers will get it all wrong, and the morons online will only lead you astray. No, I am not in any way affiliated with the authors/publishers and I don't profit in any way from writing this. But if you do any form of strength training whatsoever, this is a resource that you need to know about.

And no, you don't have to do the Rippetoe Starting Strength routine itself. It's a fantastic routine, but there are other very effective alternatives available. However, they all focus on the same basic principles:

  • Working every part of the body (this includes legs!!) several times a week.
  • Repeat a relatively small number of exercises each time to become very proficient at them.
  • The most effective exercises are compound movements - those that involve multiple muscle groups and joints. This is in direct contrast to what most people do at the gym, which are isolation movements that focus on just one muscle/joint at a time. The bicep curl is an isolation exercise and as such, largely ignored in effective strength training programs.
  • Most exercises are done with barbells.
  • Most exercises are done with high weight and low reps (sets of 5, typically).
  • The main exercises are the squat, bench press, deadlift, overhead press, rows, clean & jerk, pull-ups and dips.
  • Most workouts are focused around the squat, as this is the best bang-for-the-buck exercise for total body development. It works something like 65% (if not more) of the muscles in your body and produces a massive hormonal response. Translation: your biceps will get much bigger if you do squats + curls than just curls alone, even though the squat doesn't directly work your biceps. As an added advantage, the squat will also give you strong legs, back, hips, butt, abs, balance, and so on.
The only differences between the various routines are exactly which exercises are done, for how many sets and for how many reps. As such, Starting Strength is a wonderful how-to guide for any of these routines.

Some of the most effective routines are:

  • Rippetoe Starting Strength (a partial writeup is available here, but definitely buy the book!!)
  • Stronglifts 5x5 - very similar to starting strength.
  • Bill Star 5x5 - a program focused on intermediate lifters
  • Crossfit - a program focused on not just strength, but also endurance, agility, coordination, power, etc.
Reservations

When I try to convince people to start strength training, I get a lot of stupid responses:

  • Oh, I've been meaning to go... but... (insert stupid excuse here)
  • I don't have time
  • I don't want to get "huge"
Yes, almost any excuse you give is bound to be dumb. Just about everyone out there, young and old, male or female, healthy or not, will see serious benefits from strength training. You can argue with me till you're blue in the face, but try a proper strength training routine for 10 weeks - and actually stick with it for more than 2 days this time - and report back to me. If you didn't see noticeable results, you did something wrong.

The time issue is a bunch of BS. Exercise is something you make time for. It's as important as making time for doctor's appointments, getting your car fixed and watching (insert your favorite show here).

As for the "getting huge" issue, I need to warn you: it's kind of insulting to say that to someone who has been working out for a long time. Getting huge is NOT EASY. It doesn't just happen. You don't walk into a gym, pick up a dumbbell, and suddenly swell to Arnold proportions. It takes years of hard work, a very specific routine, and proper dieting to get "huge". The vast majority of people that do strength training - even those who are pretty damn strong - will never get particularly huge. Strength training is NOT body building and muscle size is not the goal.

So when you nonchalantly use this excuse in front of someone who has spent hundreds of hours working their ass off at a gym, it's like a slap to the face. Either you're insulting them because they haven't gotten huge despite their efforts - where as you, in your grand arrogance, would grow like mario on mushrooms just from signing up for a gym membership... Or you're directly telling them you don't want to look anything like them. Way to go.

Moreover, if you are female, it's almost impossible for you to become huge without steroids or other extreme measures. There are dozens of articles online about this and suffice it to say that strength training will only make you look more attractive. Checkout some of the pictures of the women of crossfit (many of whom are incredibly strong) to see what I mean.

So, at last, my routine

Well, I promised I'd tell you what I spend all my time doing, so at last, here it is:



Tuesday: bicep curls, 90 minutes
Thursday: bicep curls, 90 minutes
Saturday: bicep curls, 80 minutes followed by 10 minutes of flexing in front of the mirror.






Ok, ok, my real routine


For the last half a year, I've been doing the Bill Star 5x5 routine - see the website for the full details. Just for the record, and also for the all important purpose of flexing the biceps of my ego, I will list my personal records for each lift:

Exercise: Weight (in lbs) x reps

Squat: 325x4
Bench: 315x4
Deadlift: 405x4
Rows: 225x5
Press: 165x4

Working on a Mac

Introduction

At my new job (at TripAdvisor), we were given the following choice for the work computer:
  • Linux workstation
  • Macbook Pro

The vast majority of my computing life has been spent on Windows, so either choice would present a significant change. I picked the Macbook Pro because I like the portability of a laptop: it lets me easily work from home, I can bring it with me to a meeting and also use it for non-work purposes. As I will be spending a lot of time on this thing, I will be posting my impressions of the transition here.

The Hardware

  • MacBook Pro
  • Intel Core 2 Duo 2.2 Ghz (dual core)
  • 2GB ddr2 800 RAM
  • 15" widescreen display, 1440*900
  • nVidia Geforce 8600GM GT
  • 120GB HD
  • OSX 10.5 Leopard

Since Macs and PCs use essentially the same hardware nowadays, there is nothing unusual here. It's a very solid system with enough horsepower to let me run Eclipse, a web server and half a dozen apps at the same time reasonably well. The only standout feature is the built in webcam, which has been largely useless to me, but is a neat toy with some fun software.

The only noticeable difference with Apple's hardware is the meticulous effort Apple takes in the look and feel. The whole notebook has a nice steel look with lots of rounded edges. The Apple logo on the back of the LCD lights up when you are using it and the tiny LED on the front of the laptop will slowly pulsate when you put it to sleep. Even the wires are made out of a nice white plastic and have simple very Apple-esque designs.

Overall, it's an attractive package, which is far more than I can say for my last laptop, the IBM ThinkPad T43. Apple takes real pride in its design and it's not shy about telling you that: when you open the box the laptop comes in, the first thing you see is a large piece of black cardboard, in the middle of which is proudly proclaimed, in elegant white text:

"Designed by Apple in California"




...of course, it doesn't say built by Chinese and Mexicans in sweat shops :)


The Software - The Good

There is one thing OS X has going for it that I desperately want in windows: the search box in the top right corner of almost every application window. You can see it in Finder, Spotlight, the Mail program, System Preferences, iCal, iTunes and tons of other programs. In each case, the program indexes its contents (the song names in iTunes, your email in Mail, etc) and as you type something into the search box, it instantly filters the results to just items that contain the search terms. It makes launching a program, finding files, finding emails, etc extremely quick and efficient. It's available to some extent on Windows with third party apps such as Launchy and Google Desktop, but system wide integration in OS X is incredibly nice.

OS X comes preloaded with a ton of software. Given that Microsoft was sued for including Internet Explorer with Windows, I don't know how Apple gets away with it, but OS X users should be happy. Some of the software I really like: iTunes is a very solid media manager. The Mail program and iCal blow away Outlook and its calendar, and you only get Outlook if you shell out extra money on MS Office. iMovie (from watching others use it) seems very impressive, especially when stacked up against Windows Movie faker.

iPhoto, iChat, and Safari I'm less thrilled with. They get the job done, but aren't anything out of the norm. Widgets (which are available for XP and Vista) I don't like on any OS. The Preview app, which is unique only for its "cover flow" ability is very pretty, but honestly, fairly useless. Thumbnail view, while not as pretty, is a much more efficient way to find something visually. Finally, spaces is a neat (although very old) idea, and the execution is decent, but as I have multiple monitors at work, I have no use for it. I also haven't tried GarageBand or Time Machine yet, although I hear good things.

OS X can also be fairly intelligent and well integrated. It does a lot for you (sometimes too much) that can be quiet useful. For example, as soon as you plug a monitor into the DVI port, it turns it on and extends your desktop onto it. In Windows, I'd have to dig through several annoying menus (which differ widely depending on your video card) to enable the second monitor. If you highlight a date or time in the Mail program it gives you the option to add an event for that time to iCal. If you have an icon for your user in OS X, Adium (a nice multi protocol chat client) will automatically use it as your buddy icon. Network computers are effortlessly visible in Finder which, as odd as it sounds, can sometimes make it easier to connect to even Windows networks on a Mac.

The Software - The Bad

Given the specs, OS X wasn't as responsive as I'd expect. It's by no means slow, but when launching apps and multitasking, there's a small amount of lag. I would guess that, like Windows Vista, all the extra graphical effects cause a bit of a slowdown.

Some small keyboard issues really irritate me on OS X. I understand the Apple button replacing the Windows button, but the changes are far deeper than that and oddly inconsistent. For example, if you push the Alt button in Windows, it highlights a menu at the top of the application. Alt + F often highlights the File menu. You can then use your arrow keys to browse the menu. OS X, as far as I can tell, doesn't have this. You either need to know the keyboard shortcut ahead of time or use the mouse.

The home and end buttons go to the beginning and end of a page, which is unlike every other OS on the planet, where they go to the beginning and end of a line. To emulate the proper behavior of home and end in OS X, you have to use apple button + arrow keys. This is an awkward combo to push and in Firefox, this actually will activate the back and forward buttons of the browser, which is a serious issue! Moreover, when using Firefox, instead of CTRL + T to open a new tab, you use Apple + T. But to switch between tabs, it's CTRL + Tab, same as in Windows. Obviously, some of this frustration is just the pain of switching between OS's, but a lot of it is inconsistent and illogical and could have been avoided.

Another odd thing is that when you close a program by clicking the red circle in the top left corner (the x)... it doesn't actually close. The window disappears and makes you think the program is closed, but secretly, the program keeps running. Your only clues are that the program still shows up when you Apple + Tab between programs. To actually close it, you have to use the menu or push Apple + Q. This seems like a very non user-friendly design, which is odd coming from Apple.

Browsing for files in Finder - largely because of the way user accounts are handled in Unix - is a bit unintuitive as well. It's often hard to see the proper file hiearchy, it's even more difficult to see files above your user's file hiearchy (this is somewhat by design) and the shortcuts in the left pane ("Macintosh HD", "Desktop", "Applications") only add to the confusion as you have no idea where in this hiearchy they fit. This is painful to someone coming from Windows, where I'm used to seeing every file and folder on the entire system. It is somewhat mitigated due to the wonderful aforementioned search feature but the file layout really should be cleaner.

Conclusion

Despite everything I say above, to be perfectly honest, during day-to-day usage, there is not much difference between OS X 10.5 and Windows XP. In the end, I'm still browsing the web with Firefox, coding in Eclipse, browsing files and folders, typing commands at a prompt and so on. Despite all the marketing hype, these two OS's are not polar opposites. They both do a few things very well and a few things very poorly. Everything in between - which is probably 98% of what you do with your computer anyway - is a matter of personal preference.

Personally, I would not buy a Mac for myself for a few of reasons:

* I build my own PC's, out of just the parts I want, which you can't really do with a Mac, although that's slowly starting to change as Macs use more and more standard hardware.
* Macs have far fewer games available.
* Actually, in general the amount of software available for the PC is greater than for the Mac. This is largely because the PC market is so much larger, but it's certainly worth considering.

Apple has come a long way from the original iMac and I'm relieved to say that OS X is a very solid OS. Given that the pre ~10.2 Mac OS's used to make me gag, this is pretty high praise. And who knows, maybe after using it for long enough at work, it'll start to grow on me. Or drive me nuts. We'll see.