Blog
Apple's New iPad: A Bigger iPod touch
Yesterday morning Apple Inc. went ahead and showed the world their newest gadget, the iPad. In pretty much every way, it is just an oversize iPod touch, but Apple hopes you will think it's much more than that.
Steve Jobs is quoted as saying that the iPad is "a revolutionary device" and is "magical". Where's the magic? Well, it's thin. A half inch thin with nicely tapered edges on the back to make it look even thinner. The back cover is a nicely-curved piece of aluminum and the front is a beautiful 9.7 piece of glass with an LCD screen behind it. The screen is bright has great viewing angles but they still pack 10 hours of battery usage (and weeks of standby) into the guts behind the screen. And, if you do go to the Apple Store and try one out in a couple months, you will most likely enjoy touching the screen and watching a video on it. But I don't think it's magical or that everyone need save up their pennies to get the $499 device.
On the stage that they presented it, Steve Jobs and Phil Schiller demoed the new Apple iPad while sitting in a cushy living-room style chair. And that's just what Apple hopes you'll think you need. I carry my iPhone when on the go. When I need to get serious work done, I go into my room and work on my laptop computer. But although my laptop is portable and I could bring it into the living room for hanging out or personal entertainment, Apple would rather see me keep this lying about the living room. I guess I wouldn't mind, but I'm actually plenty comfortable watching videos and doing pretty much everything on my MacBook Pro or iPhone, thank you. There will be the millions of Apple fans who will get one and maybe the rich who want another unique computer will get one, but it's not yet apparent why I'd want an iPad if I've got the rest of the Apple family covering my needs.
As per usual, Apple has taken their popular, built-in iPhone apps and made them even more impressive. With about 5x more screen real estate, the ability to browse through e-mail, contacts, calendar, photos and videos is even better looking and there's much more room for ancillary features and buttons all over the screen. And, of course, web browsing is really smooth and slick-looking. Apple has also re-built their iWork suite for the iPad, building entirely new and intuitive ways to enter text and manipulate documents. 
One of the standouts in this area is the input pads replacing the virtual keyboard: one that is a number pad, one that includes more of the common functions, and one that makes it really easy to input dates. Also, there's simple and beautiful interfaces for moving around slides in Keynote and text in Pages. While these iWork apps are not as full-featured as the Mac OS X counterparts, most of the features of its bigger brother are retained, as opposed to the iPhone and iPod touch, where users can currently only view these documents. The iPod functionality looks more like iTunes in its browsing and playback functionality as well, thanks to the bigger screen.
One of the main features of the iPod touch and iPhone is the myriads of apps that are available for free and for pay on the iTunes App Store, and the Apple iPad piggybacks on that very well. Any iPod touch/iPhone app will run in a fifth of the screen area just as it is on the iPad's smaller family members, but you can also quadruple the size to get a more full-screen feel to your old apps. Even more exciting, though, is the great new ideas that developers will be coming up with over the coming months for the iPad. At the event, The New York Times showed a beautiful app that displays the paper's content in a way that resembles paper really well but also gives much more control over to the user in that they can change the columns, text sizing, and easily flip through sections without ever losing that newspaper feel. No word of this yet, but I hope that an easy way to browse my favorite print magazines in full color comes out of this.
Gameloft and EA showed off games that use the bigger screen, touchscreen area and the new Apple A4 processor to show better graphics, but also to add more display bells and whistles such as maps and gauges as well as more controls, some of which can even be moved around the screen to wherever the user preferred to have them. Also, MLB.com showed an updated version of their popular app that got me excited for April's season opener: the Gameday screen on the Apple iPad has pretty much every statistic that MLB collects available on screen or with one swipe of the finger. Also, they showed full screen live games and the ability to pull up lots of those statistics right on top of the live video in transparent overlays. That will sell the iPad to those who want more than their transistor radios to follow baseball, I think.
The major problems with the Apple iPad are almost exactly the same as the iPhone: Apple is too controlling to make it a very useful device. Developers such as EA, The New York Times, and MLB.com have been able to create cool apps. But, as I said months ago, there are many ideas developers have for apps for iPad/iPhone, but they are not sure if Apple will let them sell it because it may compete with something Apple is building or one of Apple's partners has created. Also, especially with a more powerful machine such as the iPad, Apple needs to be allowing the iPad to run more than one program at once. Yeah, only allowing one program to run makes the iPad seem faster, but all we'd really like to do is play Pandora (or some similar live streaming audio) in the background while browsing a site or working on a document. Apple, in my opinion, needs to get these types of things fixed and figured out before real success will be seen among power users.
On the other hand, the reason Apple loves this closed platform they've built is because they control all of it and get a couple cents for every transaction made with their device. There are other downsides, as well. It's not a great movie device because the screen is square and not widescreen so over a third of the screen will be black bars when viewing movies and video podcasts. The base product has WiFi including the speedy 802.11n, but another $130 (and then $30/month) is required to get 3G cell phone data access and GPS capabilities, so it is not cheap to use this out of your house where you have the WiFi. Also, there are a number of features of the Apple iPad that require fairly regular syncing with iTunes in order to be useful. In a related note, there's no way to use the iPhone or iPad as a USB hard drive and it is unclear as to how you get your iWork documents on the iPad, especially now that the iPad has (up to) 64GB of storage.
Even though I see no need for an iPad in my living room and in the living room of most people, there are some applications that may be perfect for the iPad. One thing that Apple announced was the new iBook store. In the iBook store, users of the iPad can purchase bestselling books that include full-color photos and even videos and users can change the font size and even the typeface of the book on the fly. This may be a preferred view for those who currently enjoy the Amazon Kindle, and there's talk of the iBook store selling textbooks and therefore it may be popular to give to students instead of carrying around piles of textbooks. Persons who are on the road and manipulate geographic data will enjoy applications that use the big screen for maps and built-in GPS and compass data. Medical applications may find the iPad useful, although some expect that the lack of the ability to write on the iPad to be a downside. Another interesting application will likely be for artists, as some have been using the iPod touch and a program called "Brushes" to make professional artwork and the brilliant 9.7-inch display will no doubt bring in more creative opportunities.
Overall, the Apple iPad is a fairly impressive device looking for a market. Only time will tell what that market is and how successful it will be.
My Ideal Weekend
Recently I've been discussing with friends what I usually do on the weekend. My weekend isn't completely work and it isn't completely play, but I guess my favorites are the ones where I do a bit of both and just see where it goes.
First, I'll go over what's not my ideal weekend. I guess I'm not that outdoorsy of a person that I want to be outdoors the whole weekend. I do know people who almost need to be outdoors to relax and they seem to love to have a weekend away from everything at the cabin. But I definitely find that to be a waste of my weekend - there's just too much downtime with nothing to do, unless there's a good book to read, although I can't really read a good book for more than a couple hours at a time.
You see, to be in the web programming industry, you need to be constantly learning. I often spend an hour or two reading up on blogs from friends mixed with blogs about industry news and trends and occasionally pick up a heavier programming book. I also work a bit on a web programming project for myself or maybe another learning/improvement project related to administrating my server or getting things set up more robustly. (Maybe one of these weeks I'll get Git set up on my computer.)
Of course, the weekend needs a bit of fun. First of all, whenever projects are going on, there is plenty of great music to listen to at a reasonable (or loud) volume. If learning or working on a project is not going well, I'll take a break and watch a show on Hulu or from a podcast I subscribe to. Also, most Friday nights and at least a couple hours of Saturday and Sunday have to be some sort of activity hanging out with friends or family.
Of course, this type of weekend is not as fun as spending the weekend in Chicago, going to a MuteMath concert or a cookout at the parent's house, but it is definitely a favorite mode of a weekend. I feel like I have accomplished some of my personal projects and had fun in the process. Of course, I expect your weekend to be a bunch different. What's your favorite way to spend time out of the office?
MetroTransit's Target Field Station
Last weekend, before attending the Mute Math concert, I took a walk down the newest couple of blocks in MetroTransit's first light rail line, the Hiawatha Line. I snapped a couple photos and had some interesting observations that I wanted to mention.
First, here's the new sign that looks like it's on the back of the Target Field scoreboard:
To step back, here's the view from across the street on the corner. Here you can see more of the stadium building as well as the light rail going by below.
The stadium building is still under construction so most of it was blocked off, but there were a couple interesting parts visible on this, the northeast side of the building. First, in the middle of the northeast wall there's some windows with a really odd wooden paneling over them. It seems like an eyesore to me, although my guess is that the street-level windows are just boarded up until the construction is finished.
On the north end of the northeast wall there's an entrance to the stadium that gives a little glimpse of the inside:
Along the northeast side of Target Field is the new Target Field light rail station, which is pictured here and is shown looking in a southeasterly direction, about 120 degrees to the left of the above photo.
One thing to note about this setup of the southbound track is that, although the main platform is between the trains on the left side, the trains are also accessible from the right side. My expectation is that this feature will only be used after games to allow quick flow into the trains, although they would need to erect some temporary barriers and more ticketing machines to verify valid payment when loading on the stadium side of the station. Here's a more overall view of the station:
I do find it odd that the sign on the station says "Hiawatha Line", mostly because in four years this station (and all downtown Minneapolis stations) will serve both Hiawatha Line trains as well as Central Corridor trains to St. Paul. Will they take down that sign in four years or add another one? Or will they keep it up and it will confuse game attendees?
Here's a sign near the station platform:
This, the north end of the light rail station, brings us to the other station, the lower station. Here's the entrance:
I don't really know what's inside, but I am assuming that down the escalator inside is access to the Northstar Rail Target Field station, which opens in less than a month and allows commuters and game goers to take a full-size passenger change all the way from Big Lake, Elk River, and other northwest suburbs. I was able to cross the platform and the neighboring street and see the northeast end of the Northstar platform, pictured here:
As you can see in the detail photo below, the benches on the platform are enclosed in heated rooms and there look to be nice big status displays and information boxes already installed:
The Northstar Commuter Rail opens on November 16th, and the Target Field light rail station will open then if not before. Actually, while I was there, trains were driving through Target Field station and stopping like they would for riders, but the station platform had signs that said it was closed for construction even though it looked 100% ready to go. For more information about the new operations at Target Field, visit MetroTransit's official site at MetroTransit.org.
How Best Buy Makes Their Money
This weekend, I'm going on a trip to South Bend, Indiana. For the trip, I decided I should have an iTrip, the very helpful device that charges your iPod or iPhone while also transmitting the audio over the radio waves. It's a great product and I've had ones numerous times before, but I seemed to have misplaced mine over the last 6-8 months. I looked up the product on their site and found that the product I wanted was regularly priced at $69.99. (It seems that having an iPod connector and the stickers that say "Made for iPhone" and "Made for iPod" cost at least $20 per device, which is ridiculous.)
I am leaving on Friday night, so I was a bit short on time to get the product. So, I went to the most convenient location: the Best Buy in the Mall of America, which is close to work. Sure enough, they had the product there. But wait? Wasn't the MSRP at $69.99? Yeah, it is, but Best Buy is charging $72.99! Well, I need it pretty quick and I don't have time to order it online, so I went ahead and purchased it. With MN sales tax, my total expense was $78.30.
After the fact, I decided to do some online price comparison. Of course, I went to Amazon.com, where they verify that the MSRP is $69.99. But lo, they're selling it for $46.99! Just as a comparison, I priced out overnight shipping from Amazon.com for the same product, and Amazon.com will get it to my door tomorrow for $64.97.
Why the discrepancy? First, Best Buy knows that you came to their store to get this item. The Griffin ITrip is not like the DVD, CD, or even that Nintendo DS game where you just say, "Yeah, that's not too pricey, I'll get this too." You need the iTrip. Therefore, Best Buy is going to make sure they can get all the profit out of the iTrip that they can. Amazon.com, on the other hand, offers the iTrip at just a bit above their cost of getting the product, most likely. If we assume both Best Buy and Amazon.com have get these units for the same price from Griffin, Best Buy just got over 35% of my product's price as profit. On the other hand, Amazon.com didn't charge me the 33% and kept the couple percent as profit and operating costs.
Is this highway robbery? Not really. Best Buy has massive costs they have to cover, such as renting all that retail space and paying undereducated employees. The part I think is highway robbery is the extra $3 over the Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price (MSRP). I probably should have left and gone to the Apple Store, because if they have the product, I doubt they sell it for more than the MSRP.
The Elms Truth, Soul, Rock and Roll Shirt
OK, this shirt is one of my all time favorites. Well, that's mostly because it's bold and it proclaims one of my all-time favorite bands, The Elms. Plus, this is the only shirt I've purchased twice! Here's the old and busted one (which I'm not wearing today):
I got this shirt, I think, the first time I saw The Elms play at Club 3 Degrees in Minneapolis, MN. That must have been sometime in 2003, I think, but I'm not sure. It's been one of my favorite shirts ever since then and I wear it often, so it has gotten worn out pretty well. The graphic on the front (above) is faded and the edges of the shirt are getting a bit ratty.
But this summer, The Elms announced a sale on their site on old shirts. I took a look and found that this shirt was available for only $10! So, of course, I bought another one and am wearing the new hotness today:
This shirt was originally made to support their 2002 release, Truth, Soul, Rock & Roll, which is still one of my favorite albums from The Elms and where they solidified their classic rock sound. The back of the shirt, towards the top, also has one of the song titles off of that album, "All The While Having Fun!" printed on it too:
By the way, earlier this month The Elms released a brand new album, The Great American Midrange, which is easily the best album of their career. Check out my review of the album on inReview.net and visit the band's website for more information.
Marvel To Acquire Disney, Fan Worry Largely Unfounded
This morning it was announced that Marvel Entertainment is to be acquired by Walt Disney Corp. for $4 Billion. Many of my friends, as well as myself, seem to be a bit worried and skeptical about the future of their favorite Marvel characters. But, upon thinking about it more and more, I think this is a sound business decision and Disney will likely handle it well.
First, many Marvel fans seem to think that being associated with Disney means that Spider-Man and Wolverine will be portrayed as kids stuff just like Mickey and Hanna Montana. To many, that's all the Disney brand means. Remember that Disney is a multinational corporation that owns Disneyland, Disney World, Walt Disney Pictures and PIXAR, as well as other Hollywood studios such as Touchstone Pictures, Miramax, and Hollywood Pictures. Disney also owns The ABC Network, ESPN, as well as a couple music labels and a radio network. People don't think of Wes Anderson's first four films, most of Quentin Tarantino's films, as well as Scream, Spy Kids, and Farenheight 9/11, but that's because Disney doesn't stick the mouse ears right on the screen. Not everyone in the world is fans of Mickey and Donald, and Disney still does business that caters to them.
Second, Disney is always looking for some of the hottest properties out there. Marvel Entertainment, a leader in the comic book world, is definitely a great new business to get into when looking for more avenues to make profit. Marvel used to sell the movie rights to other studios for such things as X-Men, Spider-Man, and The Fantastic Four. But more recently Marvel Entertainment has been financing and producing the movies themselves. So far, with films such as Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk, the production quality and the reception by the fans has been even better than before Marvel Studios was formed. Marvel and Disney did say that the distribution agreements with Paramount, Sony, and Fox are going to be continued. I can see Disney wanting to buy back some of these rights, but it shows that Disney knows Marvel has done things right and they don't want to ruin that for the rather small distribution fees. Also, the news also cited that Disney has many hot properties for the female market such as Hanna Montana and The Jonas Brothers and are looking for more products to capitalize on the male teen and adult, and that's right where Marvel is at the top of the list.
Third, I think Marvel does stand to gain from the help of Disney. George Lucas may be known as the one who started "merchandising" for movies, but Disney definitely brought merchandising to a whole new level and does it in smart, intelligent ways that cater to their audience. Will we see cool Superman or X-Men rides at Disney World? That could be awesome! Will we see more Iron Man toys? Probably. One quote from Disney CEO Bob Iger, who brought Disney back from the brink of losing its magic touch four years ago, was that PIXAR Animation Studios is excited about working on Marvel properties. (Think the action of The Incredibles with some of the world's best-known comic book characters.) Also, Marvel has over 4,000 characters, but they don't really have the money to make movies for even a fraction of those characters. With the financial muscle of Disney, I think we can expect plenty more Marvel content in the future.
Don't get me wrong. Disney could screw this up really bad. However, for these reasons and others, I think it's too much in Disney's best interest to let Marvel do their thing and help them out. In that, I mean that Disney sees the dollars rolling in with the acquisition of Marvel, as long as they stay smart. The last four years since Bob Iger's takeover as CEO has been Disney's best in the last decade, and with smart business decisions like this, I think Disney may get even better.
My Chicago Shirt
Today's feature is a shirt that is seldom worn. It doesn't sport a cool band name or even some geeky phrase, but it does show the skyline of one of my favorite cities: Chicago.
In April 2003 the University of St. Thomas Liturgical Choir went to Chicago for an extended weekend and it was lots of fun. Actually, we had so much fun, this touristy shirt was an afterthought purchased while loading up the bus to leave. It was purchased from the hotel gift/convenience store of the Holiday Inn we stayed at.
Despite the last-minute purchase, I do enjoy the shirt. It's got a nice look at the Chicago skyline and looks great. I think the reason I don't wear it too often is because it's a bit small and the lettering is embroidered into the shirt and therefore the way the shirt bunches up around it feels odd while wearing it.
Although, speaking of Chicago, I'm planning on going to Chicago at least once this September. Over Labor Day weekend, my parents and I are going to hang out in the parks downtown and meet up with my sisters who live a couple hours away. Also, I'm seriously considering a September 16th trip to Chicago to catch one of the final U.S. tour dates of my all-time favorite band, delirious?.
During these trips, I hope to catch up with some of the things that I've yet to experience in Chicago or want to experience again. First, The R!OT and others have said that I have to get some authentic Chicago pizza, and most say Giordano's is the place, so hopefully we'll be able to do that. Last year, while in town for the Music Builds tour, we also found some fun Chicago places that we liked. My favorite was Epic Burger, a classy new burger joint that also had really good fries for a pretty good price. My sisters fell in love with Argo Tea, a very nice downtown tea shop as well, and although I don't really drink tea, it just smelled nice in there. Of course, my family loves walking down by the water and hanging out in the myriad of park spaces along the water, especially Millennium Park and more.
Apple Needs To Formulate an iPhone App Submission Policy
This week, Google released an iPhone web app for Google Latitude, their location-aware social networking tool. The weird part was this program was just a web app running in the iPhone's Safari browser and not even an app like Google has made for almost every other phone. Here's a snippet from the TUAW post about it:
As Google's Mat Balez notes in his blog post announcing the Latitude release, Google actually developed a native app for Latitude... only to have Apple, uh, suggest that the big G redo the concept as a web app to avoid user confusion with the Maps app. Really? Must have been an interesting phone call.
No kidding. Google spent all their sweet time, no doubt, making a really nice and powerful iPhone app to allow you to manage contacts and see where your friends are on a map. Then, while submitting it to the iTunes App Store, they're told that Apple will not accept this. Great, that's a couple months of programmer time down the drain for Google.
Hold on a second here, though. When Apple announced the App Store, they announced their venture capital friends were putting together a fund for new small businesses to make apps for the phone. One of the first companies that got in on that cash was Pelago Inc., which started a service call Whrrl. I've since then deleted that app and used one that a number of my friends are on called Loopt. All of these apps are already doing the same thing that the Google Latitude app wanted to do, but apparently because Google is a much bigger partner and competitor of Apple's they do not get the option to do an app like this. It doesn't make any sense, and it costs Google thousands of dollars down the drain just because Apple can axe anything they don't like for their phone.
It's even a bigger problem for Apple and third-party hardware makers. Apple does give an API to interface with hardware devices that a company develops and plugs into the iPhone. Companies have already made nice car mounts that will charge your phone and add a couple other features. Medical service providers have made adapters to hook up various types of medical equipment, and Apple has been fine with this. But add some cool thing that will let you do things with still or video cameras? A cool way to import video to your iPhone? The company will likely spend millions developing that hardware component and thousands creating a cool iPhone app to interface with the hardware. But, in the end, if Apple wants to say "no" to the app submission the company has a cool hardware gadget with no way to use it.
On one hand, Apple does all this controlling of applications in the iPhone App Store in the name of protecting the customer, and in some cases they are protecting us from crappy products. But, with situations like this (and some other things that they should have protected us from but got out) it's proving that not only are they doing a terrible job of protecting us, but Apple is too often blocking the cool stuff. Often Apple is even blocking the cool stuff because they want to release their own version a couple months later.
I think that Apple should keep the platform more open. We would get more crap, but the iPhone App Store ecosystem would be even more healthy and have even cooler solutions for iPhone users. Besides, without Apple protecting us from the crap, we would still mark it as crap and not use it. I'm not saying that Apple cannot host the app store, but let it run free and see it become even more useful and powerful.
Robin Parrish's Offworld
Although I'm sure I'm not much younger than Robin Parrish, I feel like I grew up with Robin Parrish's work. In the earlier days of the Internet, Robin Parrish was one of the leading journalists covering the Christian music scene on the Internet with his site on About.com. At a time when I was running my own, much less successful Christian music site, I read his insightful reviews and commentary constantly. When I graduated from high school, Robin was doing stuff that he was more interested in, covering movies, novels, and comic books with an even more undying fervor. It was during this time that Robin started publishing his own novels online, the last of which became a real, paperback novel this month. It's titled Offworld.
Like the Dominion Trilogy that Parrish released the last couple years, Offworld starts with a mysterious hook. Everyone is gone. Everyone. It's 2033 and the first manned mission to Mars has returned to earth successfully, but no one is there to greet them. Even the animals and bugs are mysteriously gone. After four years by themselves in space, this is hardly the welcome the team wanted.
Thus, the crew sets out to unravel this mystery. Along the way, the reader finds that these astronauts have their own personal secrets. Plus, there's an anti-social young woman who seems to have spent her whole life on the streets and is the only person to not have disappeared. Not to mention that it seems that nature itself is trying to stop them from finding the answers.
Within Offworld, Robin Parrish creates characters that are as flawed and realistic as they are NASA's biggest heroes. Throughout all his books so far, the characters have always had some mystery, such that just when you think you know them, they surprise you with a new wrinkle to their story. These are definitely no exception, and with less than a half-dozen main characters, there's plenty of time to get to know them well. Although the character development has very little action to it, this was probably my favorite part of the novel.
Speaking of action, I found this the hardest book yet to put down. Nearly every chapter ends on a total cliffhanger. As many have said before me, Parrish's books will someday do really well as summer blockbuster films, and Offworld is no exception. (That is, as long as Roland Emmerich doesn't direct it and make the climax happen in New York.) In fact, the book was so intense I finished it less than 24 hours after picking it up. Good thing it was a weekend, or else I would have suffered at work from either sleep deprivation or thinking of nothing but what might happen next.
So what about Parrish being a "Christian"? Does the book create some big allegory to our life in Christ? Do some of the main characters get "saved"? Thankfully, no, Parrish's books are not preachy. The heroes of the book exude characteristics that Christ teaches us like selflessness, hope, and sound morals. Some characters beg a higher power for help, but Parrish doesn't slow the story down with any theological lessons. In my opinion, it's great to see persons of faith writing positive, engaging stories that are for everyone, not just a church-going audience.
If you're looking for a fun, engaging read during the heat of summer, check out Offworld. I'm hoping it'll be hitting theaters in Summer 2013, but don't count on it; get the book now and you'll be ahead of everyone else.
P.S. - Going back to my old days with Robin Parrish publishing his early revisions of novels on the Internet, I hope something like that continues. I don't read many novels, but because Parrish's stories were released (at least partially) for free on the Internet, I was hooked. I'm not exactly sure if the first chapter will suffice for me as a hook to get me to buy the book - I'd like to see more to promote upcoming books online.
UP & Digital 3-D Technology
First of all, yesterday I went out and saw Pixar's latest film, Up, and it was a blast. As usual, the cartoony but more-and-more realistic-looking animation was superb. The plotline was very touching at points but still contained enough eye candy and silly jokes ot keep everyone on the edge of their seat and laughing. In short, it was another great Pixar film, although I'm not yet sure where it will go in my personal favorites; that can only be determined over time, I think.
This afternoon, though, I took the chance to rewatch the film in "Disney Digital 3D", which is just Disney's fancy branding to the RealD digital technology. Unlike old 3D glasses that used separate polarization or colors to each eye, RealD uses a more advanced polarization on alternating frames of the digital projection. This results in a much crisper picture than the older 3-D technologies, but it still suffers from a slightly dark look due to the polarization, although that might be due to the fact that I was sitting almost at the front of the theater.
My experience with seeing it in 3-D wasn't amazing, but I did find it interesting. Only at a couple points in the film did the characters or sets seem to jump out of the screen for me, but when they did, the effect was pretty cool. Most of the time, the 3-D effect was subtle or barely noticeable, or at least subtle enough that I couldn't decide if it looked much better than the regular 2-D projection. On the other hand, when the film was showing photos or artwork on a wall, it definitely felt more flat to me, so maybe it's just my imagination building last night's show into 3-D. I think, to Pixar's credit, they never stooped to the level of making shots just so they wow the audience in 3-D, but they only used it to full effect when it filled the story. (I've seen numerous previews for other movies where it just seems that all the characters are sticking their face right up to the camera, which might be overwhelming but at least seems gimmicky to me.)
My main disclaimer on this front is that I do have an eye condition that does make it hard for me to see things far away (I'm almost legally blind, but not quite), and it may be that part of this condition makes it less exciting to me. People often ask me what I can see compared to them, and I tell them that I've never seen like them so I cannot really compare.
I guess my point is that the 3-D technology in films these days is much better than it was even a couple years ago. If it sounds intriguing to you, check out the new world of 3-D films and see for yourself if you like the experience. And speaking of which, besides a bunch of new films coming out in 3-D over the next year, it seems that both Toy Story and Toy Story 2 are going to be released in Disney Digital 3D over the next year before Toy Story 3 is released in June 2010.