#Windows10 Lets You Evaluate For 30 Days. I Rolled Back After 1 Hour.

First, some back history.

• I've been using Windows since 3.1.  Yes, that long.
• I can clearly recall installing Windows ME on my friend's computer.
• I received a free copy of Windows 2000 as part of a fly-by-night self paced school and mastered it from that.
• I can clearly recall buying the boxed Windows XP from Staples in Chula Vista, San Diego, and how extremely buggy it was at launch.
• Windows Vista wasn't actually a bad OS, it was just buggy prior to SP2.  Once SP2 was released, it was an amazing OS on the right hardware. (keyword: RIGHT HARDWARE).  But Vista SP2 made for an awesome VMWare guest OS.
• I was one of the first to touch Windows 7 before it was released, and was certified on it shortly after launch.  I attended the "Windows 7 Experience" in San Diego at my own expense and walked away with a free copy of the OS.  Used it ever since.
• I tested the earliest build of Windows 8 on an Asus Eee PC touch tablet (which was actually an amazing experience, frankly) long before Surface was even thought of.
• I own a Dell XPS13 (2015) that came with Windows 8.1 and a free upgrade to Windows 10.  Free.  Everyone loves free.

I'm not new to Windows.  I've used Mac OS since it was the Apple System.  I've used various flavors of Linux including "Lindows" (aka Linspire).  I've been working with computers for over 30 years and I touched my first computer when I was 6 years old.

I gave Windows 10 a fair chance because usually, this is when Microsoft "gets it right" after botching things so badly.  And honestly, Windows 10 is an OK OS for someone who isn't tech savvy.  If you're the kind of person who just wants to fire up their computer and type out the occasional email or browse the Web, you're not a developer or anything like that, Windows 10 is perfectly fine.

The problem is, so is every other OS.  Windows 10 doesn't add anything constructive.

For me, the key indicators that an OS is going to work for me...it has to pass two tests: Quantifiable Benefits, and Justifiable Compromises (if any).  For me, a person who works as a software developer/consultant/PM/BA type role, Windows 10 fails both of these tests.  8.1 fails the Quantifiable Benefits test, but passes the Justifiable Compromises (because on my laptop, it doesn't compromise much of the experience).  Let's talk about it though.

Quantifiable Benefits

1. Does the OS add features that I would find useful?
1. The only feature I saw added to Windows 10 that might be of any value was the virtual desktop feature.  For those that don't know what that is, it allows you to basically manage multiple "spaces" with different things going on.  So for example, you could have a work "space" with all of your work apps, then a school "space" with all of your school apps, and a personal "space" with everything else.  That way it's easier to keep track of what app has what open, and why.  The problem is, Windows 10 doesn't even call out this feature.  It's buried behind a poorly sized, redundant search bar.
2. Does the OS perform better than the OS before it?
1. While Windows 10 was certainly faster at certain tasks, I didn't find it booted or rebooted any faster than 8.1 on this machine.  Edge is lightning fast so long as the website is properly written, but Edge doesn't support LastPass (meaning no logins to websites) and doesn't support AdBlock (meaning you're blasted with ads all over the place).  Besides, Chrome performed admirably well anyway on both 8.1 and 10, so no real value add here.  Honestly, if your machine has a solid state drive, you likely won't see any improvement from 8.1 or 7.
3. Does the OS provide functionality that improves application support?
1. Not only did app support not improve, I was frequently hit with "not supported on Edge browser".  Even Dell's own website had this issue!  Months of having access to Windows 10 (since they had drivers available) and they didn't bother to rewrite their web app to support the Edge browser?  Really?  Other apps I had installed continued to work, but if web apps don't work it's a moot point.  Yes, I could just run Chrome and Firefox, but isn't Microsoft's point that I should be using Edge for a superior experience?
4. Does the OS provide enhanced driver support?
1. A funny story is that prior to release, Microsoft released a borked nVidia (graphics card) driver that caused Explorer (the heart and soul of your operating system, in a way) to crash.  No Explorer, no use.  So I put this as a fail.  They fixed it since, but the forced update issue (more on that later) negates that fix.
5. Is the OS easier to use or better from a usability perspective?
1. The big news is that Microsoft made the OS more intelligent.  If it detects you have a keyboard and mouse, it will send you to the Desktop, not the tiled "Start Screen".  If you have a Windows tablet, it will boot you into the Start Screen.  The regular Start Menu is back, with tiles.  But that's largely it.  Everything else is as it was with 8.1, except that certain critical settings (like Windows Update) have been dumbed down and buried in the "Metro" interface.  So, this is a fail.
6. Does the OS enhance core functionality and stability?
1. Microsoft would claim that their forcing updates will make the OS more stable and trustworthy.  I disagree.  At best, buggy updates will be deployed or even stable updates that break critical features will be deployed (this happened with an application I support, where a patch broke ActiveX in our application, causing a total rewrite of the code unexpectedly).  At worst, some plucky hacker manages to inject malware into the distribution engine and deploys it to botnets around the world.  Did you know there's a setting that basically allows internet PCs to share their updates with other PCs?  Yeah no.

In short, I saw nothing benefiting me as computer user.  I saw a lot of misguided attempts to dumb down the computer experience rather than leave power to those who know how to use it.  Microsoft's answer to this: "Buy the Enterprise Edition".  And of course, I'm not spending thousands of dollars to regain basic functionality I already have...in Windows 8.1.

Justifiable Compromises

This one is subjective, so I'll give you an example.

In Server 2008, you had to go through Server Manager and provision roles for the server.  There's a bug in that UI that, if you do certain roles out of order or if you do them at the same time rather than separately, it won't register certain files that are part of the role.  You have to then write a script to get it to "stick" properly.

Server 2012 corrected this by making one of the roles include all of the features necessary.  That way, it didn't matter which order you added the roles.  The trade-off is that the UI where you attach the roles was dumbed down severely; but they exposed PowerShell capability, so you could write a small script that attached the roles instead.  The result was that you could provision servers with defined roles much easier and faster in 2012, despite the UI being dumbed down, if you knew PowerShell scripting (which I do).

That's an example of a fair trade.  While functionality was taken out of one area, it was enhanced in another area, so productivity wasn't lost, it was improved.

The same is not the case with Windows 8.1 vs. 7, nor is it the case with Windows 10 versus either of the previous.  Windows 10 instead removes things (i.e. Windows Update advanced controls to refuse or delay updates regardless of version) and provides no other alternatives.  They're forcing their belief system upon the user, and it's wrong.  That's not justifiable, and I don't want to hear "but people would be exposed to all sorts of security problems!"  Wrong.  All this will do is cause underpowered, underspec'd machines to drag to a crawl or run out of storage prematurely.  People won't upgrade, they'll just reinstall the software, and the same thing happens again.  Geek Squad will make a killing on reimaging machines simply because some rogue update borked it, and others will complain that their metered satellite connection out in Hangem, Montana can't keep up and is dirt slow.  It's a problem.

I saw way too many compromises and not many benefits with Windows 10.  They didn't do enough to revert the damage done with Windows 8.  It's not close enough to Windows 7 in terms of usability and functionality to be a super success, and my guess is, we will see some updates that slowly revert some of the bad design decisions out of the OS.  Unfortunately, I won't be around to see any of it, and if this truly is the last full "Windows" we ever experience, I guess that means my personal machines will never see anything beyond 8.1.  At work, I'm curious if they'll update Windows 7 ever, or just stay on it to give the finger to Microsoft.

Why #DroughtShaming Is Misguided.

Hate mongering.

That's the first thing that comes to mind when I see tweets about this issue.  While it affects California presently, the reality is that the entire United States, if not North America at large, will at some point be impacted if global warming truly is a thing.

Drought shaming is the notion that by bullying someone who appears to be wasting water, you're making a difference by shaming them into changing.  Yes, I said bullying.  It amazes me that this is acceptable, but fat shaming isn't.  Makes one question where people's priorities lie, and the simple fact is that people who simply don't care about their lawn (or don't know how to properly take care of it) are using this as a free pass to say "neener neener neener!" at their neighbor who's outdoing them handily.  People jump on the bandwagon instead of appropriately saying, "it's not nice to tattle on people."  But the state (California) supports this bullying.

Below is one photo from this hashtag. 

 Now, I would call her a water waster, because she is blatantly watering the sidewalk with no care or empathy to the drought.  This woman should be instructed about the problem AND fined as her first offense.  If she keeps doing it, keep raising it.  There's intent here.


Here is another photo, this time of a fixed position spray nozzle irrigation system.  There is some sidewalk wetness.

This shouldn't be included in any drought shaming, and here's why.

1. The nozzle is aligned onto the lawn perfectly.  It's not intentionally spraying on the sidewalk or over it.
2. It's entirely possible that wind may have caused some of the sprinkler to mist back onto the sidewalk.  This is unavoidable; you can't control the wind.
3. The grass is very tall.  It's possible that what we're seeing is soil runoff due to over watering, but then we'd see a lot more water on the sidewalk.

Just that there's an irrigation system on a green lawn shouldn't be a free pass to bully someone.  Even if you watered with a hose you're still going to at least partially hit the sidewalk.  You can't prevent SOME water hitting the sidewalk, so we shouldn't be going around attacking people simply because the sidewalk's a little wet.

That said, there are instances where the sidewalk is clearly evidence of water wasting.  Take this photo for example:

Now, looking at the photo it's obvious what the problem is: slope.  It's just way too steep and the water is naturally running off.  His system is not designed to deal with this properly, to allow the soil to soak the water in before continuing to water.  Cycled light watering would help here, as would sideways cross watering instead of bottom-mounted spray heads.  A drip irrigation would probably be the best of both worlds since it would allow the soil to soak in the water over time.

Here's another example.

Here, it's clear that the problem is that the sprinkler heads are all wrong for this type of landscape.  It's sharply sloped upwards and the sprinkler heads are not adjusted for directed spray.  The result is significant misting, and in the case of the sprinkler on the bottom right, it's likely not aligned on the right stop.  There's also too much overlap in sprinkler heads, so there may be soil run off.

Then there are those who criticize green lawns in general.  People up in arms saying that homeowners should essentially turn their plots into Arizona deserts, like this:

Now, if you're the kind of person who doesn't want to maintain a lawn this is fine.  Although it will seriously tank the resale value.  Don't ever plan to sell?  Go for it, by all means.  It's not a solution to the problem.

A green lawn does not automatically equal water waste, and this is the point I'm trying to get across to people.  A family of 2+ will use more water in the bathroom every day than could possibly be used in an efficient irrigation system.  The lawn isn't a symptom of waste, it's a sign that the homeowner cares about the property.  That's it.  

The only way to prove waste is, as in the examples above, clear wasteful water spilling on sidewalks.  Otherwise, it's looking at the water meter results to determine if they are substantially higher than comparable homes in the neighborhood.  That's waste.  If that homeowner with a perfectly manicured lush lawn has a water bill of $40 where the neighbors with dead lawns are pushing $80, how can the lawn be evidence of water wasting?  It doesn't make sense.

1. That green lawn might be dwarf grass, which uses an extremely low amount of water and requires little maintenance.  This is used in some golf resorts because of its tolerance to foot traffic and abuse.
2. That green lawn might be artificial turf, which of course requires no water.  Some golf resorts have changed over to this now that techniques for manufacturing have yielded a more realistic look.  Some celebrity homes also use this - and no, stripes in the lawn aren't evidence that it's real grass.  Newer synthetic grass can actually stripe.
3. Some grass seed requires very little ongoing water.  Fescue, for example, is a resilient grass that doesn't require a lot of watering.  A person could water it once a week in the morning when it's cooler, and it will not only green nicely, but stay green.  Fescue also responds very well in shaded areas, so if the lawn is even partially shaded, it will retain green throughout the year with very minimal watering.
4. Some fertilizers are better at assisting grass growth and resilience, and minimize water needs.  That the lawn is super green compared to the neighbors might simply be the right balance of nutrients in the soil.
5. The majority of that lawn might be green moss, rather than actual grass.  This is especially true in the Pacific Northwest, because moss will largely stay green unless treated, and blends in with otherwise green grass.
6. Green lawns help cool the surrounding air with an evaporation effect.  Don't believe me?  Stand outside on a green lawn, then go stand on a completely dead lawn.  Do this in the middle of a heat wave.  You will feel a difference.  
7. Green lawns help deter fire spreading.  Dead lawns are kindling to fires.  In states such as California this is critical.  The moisture in watered lawns might be the difference between a quickly spreading fire and one that can be doused in time.
8. Hardscapes, gravel and asphalt increase heat emission.  Ever notice how much hotter it is in places that don't have many green lawns, or trees?  This is because of the absorption of heat by the hard materials that emits back upward.  

The answer isn't to bully people who happen to have a green lawn, and I'm not suggesting that there isn't blatant water waste.  But the drought shaming trend has gone way too far in the wrong direction with people pointing fingers at the wrong sources.  It's people who are knowingly and willfully wasteful (i.e. saturating sidewalks, and/or take 30+ minute showers, and/or run multiple laundry loads, etc.) that are deserving of the shame.  Don't just point fingers at people with green lawns when it very well may be that they're just really good at lawn maintenance.

Why $15 Minimum Wage Is The Wrong Answer

Hi.  My name is...well, call me ReV.  And I've got a story to tell.

1996.  I graduated high school and "at the behest of" (aka forced by) my father, went straight to work.  I didn't get the chance to go to college like I was planning to.  I've never worked a part-time job, ever.  That first job, I was making $8/hour at a time that minimum wage was under $6/hour.  I basically made about $1,000/month.  Back then you could rent an apartment for $500/month.  Wouldn't be anything fancy, and don't expect not to get robbed every so often, but the point is it was perfectly possible.

Rather than saving money or doing anything purposeful with it, I spent it on things I don't even remember.  Car stereos absolutely, clothes certainly.  Beyond that?  No clue.

Fast forward nearly 20 years, and I am still working full time and have been continuously for 11 years, though I have moved from job to job in search of "that right fit".  I'm convinced it doesn't exist.  But I digress; that's not what I'm here to talk about.  I'm here to rant about the minimum wage fight.  And let me clear: It's not that I don't think minimum wage should be raised.  On the contrary, it's long overdue and the law is broken.  I simply think that asking for $15 is out of whack.

About two years ago I did some number crunching and estimated that, according to the value of a minimum wage position to the economy, minimum wage should be around $10.  Last year (after I made that estimate) the certain economists stated that minimum wage, adjusted for inflation over the years, should be around $10.10.  You know what that tells me?  It tells me that I had the magic all along.  And I want to share  that magic with you, despite knowing that many people will simply react emotionally rather than process the information rationally.

The problem with higher wages?  Taxes.

Full time employees that  make a decent amount of money fully  understand how greedy our government is.  "The more you make, the more they take" was never true, and this is even worse if you live in a state with income tax separate from Federal.  In ways you're getting triple taxed, and this  is  all before you even see that money.  So the pundits say that raising minimum wage will spur the economy because people will spend more.  Here are the issues.  Let's put some metrics around this.

Say you're making $7/hour right now at some fast food joint, part time 6 hours a day/30 hours a week.  So your net income is going to be $210/week, $420/biweekly, $840/monthly.  

Under a $15 minimum wage at the same number of hours, you'd be looking at $450/week, $900/biweekly, $1800/monthly.

You with me so far?  Good.

1. Sales tax will destroy any potential benefits one might see from higher wages.  You know it's true.  It doesn't matter if you make $8/hour or $15/hour, you still won't buy that shiny new laptop knowing you're paying anywhere from 6%-12% in taxes.  Especially if said laptop is over $1,000 in the first place.  And don't give me garbage about Amazon, because even they're cracking down on that (reluctantly).  But say you start shopping.  You'd be thoroughly surprised how fast that $900 will disappear simply by renewing car tags, renewing bus passes, getting gas, getting food, renting a car, buying a plane ticket, getting OTC meds from the drug store, and taking care of one pet and one kid.  
2. Most that want minimum wage increased are smokers, drinkers, and/or both.  But the problem is that most in this minimum wage category are going to buy (more) cigarettes (or weed) and alcohol.  If they currently smoke, this just gives them ammunition to buy more of it.  Yes, they're paying hefty taxes on those (not hefty enough IMO), and that's the problem.  By the time it's done, they're back broke again and asking for another minimum wage hike.
3. The Feds are now able to come a-knockin'.  Did you know that, under the wage scenario in red above, you'd owe NOTHING in taxes?  That's right.  This is because, if you were so underpaid as the $7/hour scenario placed above, you'd make $10,080/year.  The minimum threshold for being taxable was (as of tax year 2014) $10,150.  What's this mean?  See, the minimum threshold was designed to ensure that if the government deems you simply insolvent and not financially in a position to pay taxes without putting yourself out, they just don't need to collect. 
   
   This is called EXEMPT and if you've filled out a W4, there's a line that asks you this very thing.  Many don't understand what it means, but it essentially says, "if you made so little that you ended up getting a full refund, and are still going to make so little that you would  get a full refund again, enter EXEMPT and keep your money, we won't take it."  That's right - more take home, instead of waiting for the scam known as a tax refund.  You don't owe it and it's a waste of time and taxpayer money to file a form requesting money back that never should have been taken from you.
   
   Now, if you bump minimum wage to $15/hour, you're now making $21,600 - well over the minimum threshold.  All of a sudden you must pay taxes, and legally, you must pay them via proper W4 exemptions.  Given that, and assuming you had 2 kids and filed single (since most  minimum wage harpers have at least 2 kids for some reason), your estimated tax is approximately $2600 every year.  So now, you're down to approx. $19,000/year.  
4. You're now paying a lot more into Social Security and Medicare like everyone else.  Federal was estimated at approx. $19,000/year.  So let's look at this a bit more.  Another $1,200 (approx.) for Social Security.  Another $300 (approx.) for Medicare.  So now you're down to $17,500/year.
5. Unless you live in one of 7 states, you're paying state income tax.  Let's take California - I mean that's where everyone wants to live, right? - so that's another $1,500  (approx.) for that sunshine.  So now you're down to $16,000/year.

Now, with those bullets, where's that leave you with your amazing minimum wage bump?  Approx. $1200/month take home.  Here's a funny fact: if you got a raise to $8/hour and worked full time,  you'd make slightly more than that.  That's right - an extra $1/hour would be the same from a financial standpoint vs. getting a $15 minimum wage if you're right now making $7/hour.  It just gets worse from there.

This is what is known as the Law of Diminishing Returns.  You're in a position where you are not required to pay as much tax, and end up making more money to where taxes nearly triple.  From a in-pocket perspective, you haven't benefited from the increase. The inevitable next step is to then ask for more money.  It becomes a domino effect from there - a slippery slope of failure and disappointment as those who don't understand the tax system start to feel that pain and realize that their "large wage increase" isn't as livable as what they had before.

Dear @BarackObama: Salary Exemption Is Broken

Mr. President:

    I realize that your presidency is fast coming to its end.  I also realize that during your presidency, you've attempted to make things right for Americans.  I haven't always agreed with some of the things you've proposed (I think Obamacare is radically overpriced, for example, and I don't feel that amnesty is the right answer for illegals), and I think other things have been deprioritized that should have been front and center (that we still have overreaching TSA, the tax code is still broken, and banks are still allowed to discriminate against people based on faulty credit agencies that are making billions in profit).

I do want to call to attention an issue that's always been there, and that's pay.  Not hourly pay.  Salaried pay.  For you see, employers have long been abusing this in order to minimize how much they need to pay employees.

The law was apparently written during a time when the idea of a "professional" position really involved someone in management.  Over the years companies have extended this with numerous sub-exemptions that pretty much label anyone not working data entry, customer service, mail room or retail, as an "exempt" employee.  This lets them avoid paying overtime, but with no penalty applied against the company when they abuse the employee's time.

As companies downsize due to the Recession, the changes in minimum wage, the rise of offshoring, etc., many companies figured out that they could simply stack double the work on an employee, but were not required to pay them any additional money for time above and beyond 40 hours.  Normally, this should work the other way: if an employee works at least an hour and gets their work done, that should be sufficient.  It's not.  Companies require employees to stay around for 40 hours minimum, even to the degree of requiring timesheets to back up that they put in a full 40 hours.

This goes against the very spirit of a "salaried" employee, which was intended to pay a person based on work being completed, not a duration of time being allotted.

But the complexity gets worse. An "Exempt" employee could be paid hourly (Computer professional exemption).  The requirements for this are even less logical: all a company has to do is agree to an hourly rate of at least $27.  If a person clocks one hour, they're paid $27.  They get no overtime, so if a company abuses their hours, they get paid flat for the extra time investment above 40 hours, which doesn't go a long way towards properly compensating the employee for "going above and beyond" - the true spirit of overtime time-and-a-half pay.

If a company hires an employee that does not do any of the "primary duty" work for that company, BUT is instead "lended" to another company as a consultant, some companies are abusing the exemption by saying that the work done for the other company qualifies.


This is all to the detriment of the employee, benefit of the employer, and has cost people millions of dollars in lost overtime pay.

Something should be done about this to ensure that people who go above and beyond are compensated, regardless of status, work type, or job type, so long as they are not management employees.  To me that's as simple as creating a single criteria for exemption: a person must have a direct report in order to be exempted from overtime pay OR your annual salary is at least 2x the median for the state, whichever happens to come first and must adjust with inflation.

This has four possible net effects.

One, companies will increase salaries so they don't need to pay overtime; a fixed annual investment in lieu of a variable hourly investment.

Two, a significant increase in the number of employees eligible for overtime, but a sharp decrease in the amount of overtime those employees are allowed (forced) to work.

Three, continuing re-evaluation of employee salaries to ensure they don't lose the exemption.  If a state's median is $40k and an employee makes $85k, they're exempt that year, but if the median rises the following year to $60k, the employee must now make at least $120k (a substantial raise that most companies won't do), or be now eligible to receive overtime pay at time-and-a-half (which lets the company constrain overtime accordingly).

Four, companies will hire more employees to do work rather than force existing employees to do overtime and pay more than they would pay additional staff.  This lightens workloads across the board - right now, employers are doing everything they can to minimize staff, which creates burden on existing employees who don't get fairly compensated for the extra work they're doing.


I am not sure if you're the right outlet to hear the plea, but I think the plea should be heard and considered.  It's a problem.  It's been a problem for far too long.  The fix is terribly easy; get rid of all of the complex, confusing exemptions that benefit only employers.  Put the power back in the hands of the employees by dumbing down the exemption: either they have at least one direct report (which they need to manage documentation for, of course), OR they make at least 2x the median, adjusted with inflation.  Otherwise, no exemption for that year.

Day 8: The @Casper Mattress Challenge

Night 8. The windows did make a difference. Not a major, earth shattering one, but a difference nonetheless.

Sleep Pattern

I laid down around 10, knocked out around 11.   Hit REM sleep, dreamed about something to do with engineering.  Got up at 6am.

Not as groggy as the night before. But unlike the first couple of nights, I felt like staying in bed.

Body And Positioning

I turned a few times. I get the sense that I will never be able to just sleep without turning, unlike when I was a teen.

Was wrong about 65 degrees as I was hot again.

Mattress Durability

Shape still intact.  Slightly soft, but not sagging.

Day 7: The @Casper Mattress Challenge

Night 7. Tomorrow I (hopefully) get to hear a lot less sound from my windows.

Sleep Pattern

I laid down around 11, knocked out around midnight.   Hit REM sleep, dreamed in the third person watching something going on.  Got up at 6am.

Slightly more groggy than expected, but that might have been the hours.

Body And Positioning

I turned only twice: once to the right and once onto my back, which is where I stayed for a bit. lower left side hurt.

65 degrees seems to be the nighttime sweet spot. I was hot but not unbearably so.

Mattress Durability

Shape still intact.  No noticeable softness, at least not like before the trip. Interesting.

Day 6: The 30-Day @Casper Mattress Challenge

Night 6 and really looking forward to that window install on Wednesday.

Sleep Pattern

I laid down around 8pm, knocked out around 10pm.   Hit REM sleep (don't recall the dreams, but I know I did because it took the alarm to wake me and at first I thought it was part of the dream).  Got up at 6am.

I felt a little groggy.  Definitely less than the day prior.  So my initial theory about my body getting "back used to" the mattress after travel is probably a sound theory.

Body And Positioning

I turned quite a few times. I also had some pain on my left side (which is why I kept turning, so as not to lay on that side, but I eventually felt uncomfortable on my right side and would turn).

Heat overcame, had to pull back the comforter again.

Mattress Durability

Shape still intact.  No noticeable softness.

Day 5: The 30-Day @Casper Mattress Challenge

Night 5 (officially), back from travel.  Having slept on a Spring Air mattress at Residence Inn, I now have a definite point of comparison from a "sink in" perspective.  (If you didn't know, Spring Air is quite possibly the most comfortable overall mattress possible.  But it IS a spring mattress.)

Sleep Pattern

Again, it's the weekend so noise was not as bad or as prevalent.  I was also dead tired due to extensive travel, medication and long working hours.

I laid down around 8pm, knocked out around 9pm, which is a record for me.   I don't exactly remember reaching REM sleep though; I assume I must have and don't remember, but I was out until 7:00am the next morning.  I got up groggy, which was strange.

To compare, the Spring Air mattress plus a waffle cone ice cream had me knocked out cold for a good 12 hours, but with no dreaming, even after reading rather vivid books. Without the waffle cone, I was about 6-7 hours sleep with mid-time wakeup.

Body And Positioning

I turned maybe twice.  To be fair, I was also tossing and turning on the Spring Air mattress, and quite a bit more, so maybe my body just doesn't like being stationary, I don't know.  It's also possible that my body was starting to get used to the Casper mattress and reacted to this totally different mattress.

No heat overcoming.  This is with the thermostat set to 70 and the exterior temperature in the high 30's/low 40's; that's WITH pajama bottoms.

No pain at all this time.

Mattress Durability

Shape still intact.  After my 5-day business trip I noticed the softness was gone, too.  So it will go back firm eventually as long as you don't sleep on it for a while.

Day 4: The 30-Day @Casper Mattress Challenge

Night 4, another difference.  As a side note this is the first mattress where I experienced a difference night-to-night as opposed to, say, week-to-week.

Sleep Pattern

I laid down around 8pm but didn't actually go to sleep until around 11:30pm.  Longer to go to sleep.  Did enter REM because I distinctly the dream having something to do with being called fat (which I'm not even close to, thus why I remember it), but I woke up twice, once at 1am, and again at 4:30am.  I'm not sure what the deal was with the 1am wakeup; it may simply have been too much on my mind in anticipation of my Tuesday travel.  I had to actually read myself back to sleep which took 30-ish minutes or so.  4:30am made sense because again, cars and traffic hitting the roads likely woke me.

Body And Positioning

Tossing and turning while awake, not so much when entering sleep and likely very little after going to full sleep.  Different position, once again feeling rested and not groggy.  I'm noticing a pattern at least with this - regardless of disrupted sleep I don't have a feeling of wanting to stay in bed like I usually would.

No heat overcoming.  This is with the thermostat set to 65 and the exterior temperature in the high 30's/low 40's.  One difference here is that unlike usual, I didn't wear pajama bottoms.  Interesting.

No pain at all this time.

Mattress Durability

The mattress continues to maintain its shape.  However it's significantly softer than when first unrolled, to the point that when lying in bed, you can now feel your "place" as it were.  It's not like you're stuck in that place though, if you move or roll you can still do so without being impeded.  What's not yet known is whether body heat is the strongest reason for this.

Day 3: The 30-Day @Casper Mattress Challenge

The third night I again experienced a difference.

Sleep Pattern

This time, as I was working a little late, I laid down around 10pm but didn't actually nod off until just after 11pm.  So it again took me a little longer to go to sleep than the previous day; two things were different (and one is likely because it's a weekend).  First, I didn't wake up midstream like I did before.  I actually slept through to around 7am-ish; I officially "woke" around 6:45am and was in a half-awake-half-asleep state for the rest.  Didn't take me as long to go to sleep and I woke up after a full night.   

Again, it's a weekend and specifically a Sunday morning, so even fewer cars on the road.  Tonight will be a good test of this theory, as it will be a Monday morning when I expect the worst of outside noise.  If it turns out I get woken up midstream, it means that it's noise disrupting me, and once the new windows are in (which have sound control properties), it should be a somewhat better experience.  The one window that I have in my home office which matches the forthcoming new ones performs so well that I get tempted to sleep in there every night.

Body And Positioning

 Definitely a lot of tossing and turning again, at least initially.  I assume that at some point I stopped and went to dead sleep because I know I hit REM; it was a rather lengthy dream. I woke up in the same position I'd left off, once again feeling rested and not groggy.

Heat overcame me on a few occasions where I had to pull the comforter.  In fact I fell asleep with just the sheet on because it was so hot.  I was almost tempted to grab a fan.  Mind, this is after the mattress sitting in a room not exceeding 65 degrees all day.

The only pain I experienced was on my right knee.  I sleep with a leg pillow to align my spine when I sleep on my side, and if I sleep on the right side (which is more comfortable than sleeping on the left, for some reason), depending on how I sink in, it will shift my kneecap, which is probably what happened here.  I can't confirm that - since I was asleep - but it's the only reason I can think of.  Means I sunk into the mattress more than the first two days.  Although it's rather intriguing that pain seems to only happen in spots.

Mattress Durability

Once again the mattress went down on a simple finger press, very easily, two inches this time.  Felt like a sponge rather than latex or memory foam, only in the area I slept in.  But it maintained its shape, for the most part.  I did observe what appeared to be some slight bowing downward; when I looked under the platform it didn't look uneven.  It might be my imagination.  I'll keep an eye on it.

Day 2: The 30-Day @Casper Mattress Challenge

The second night felt markedly different from the first, not just from my body but from the mattress.

Sleep Pattern

I again laid down around 8:30pm but this time didn't actually nod off until just after 10pm.  So it took me a little longer to go to sleep than the previous day; but I woke up (my usual wake up before the "official wakeup) around 4:30 am this time.  So while it took longer to go to sleep, I slept longer before being woken up.  I'm almost confident this is because of noise outside the window; because it's a Saturday, there are less cars flying by my window early morning than there would be on a weekday.  This may very well be skewing the experience.   

It will be interesting to see what my sleep pattern is like after getting the windows replaced; unfortunately the windows won't be replaced until likely after this 30-day period; so I may need to a follow up period afterwards.  I don't want to extend the period because there will a come a point that there won't be any significant change in results.

Body And Positioning

But what is not affected by the windows is my body and posture.  Again I woke up feeling rested and not groggy despite not getting a full undisturbed sleep.  However, unlike yesterday, I did have two occasions where the body heat overcame my position and I had to pull the comforter back to release it.  It didn't happen after that; the mattress didn't feel hot, but I certainly did, more so than the previous day.  So it seemed as though the mattress hit a point of not being able to absorb additional heat, but that point or threshold was significantly higher than other mattresses.

It felt like I did more tossing and turning than I did the previous night.  I simply could not get comfortable.  On the two occasions that I laid on my back and just turned my head, I was comfortable, but I hate sleeping in that position.  Goes back to what I said about back sleepers vs. side sleepers in terms of getting used to the mattress.  I think as a side sleeper there is just a longer break-in time, unfortunately.  

Unexpected was the presence of pain on my right hip area.  It wasn't on the bone, just above it.  This was just before rolling onto my back, where the pain seemed to move (meaning the mattress was contributing to it).  It wasn't unbearable pain, but pain regardless.  It felt like it was around my diaphragm area, which likely means the mattress didn't have enough "give" to allow my breathing to work properly (your diaphragm expects to move smoothly upwards to expand and contract your lungs.  Anything pressing against your front, side or back can impact this experience, resulting in pain or at least the perception of pain).  If that's the case it might contribute to snoring, something I don't do.  The abdomen/back pain continues as of the time of this writing, though a lot less subdued.  I have to actually focus on it and move around to sense it.  Hip pain is almost non-existent. 

Mattress Durability

I again noticed that the mattress again did not look like anyone had slept in it.  However, pressing down on the mattress revealed a clear softness in the place where I was sleeping vs. where I wasn't.  It still kept its shape nicely, but most certainly was not firm in that area.  It didn't go down more than an inch or so before again hitting resistance.  This is similar to the no-name memory foam mattress I mentioned after I first bought it; it would initially be firm, but as heat increased, would get soft and eventually not go back to original shape.  I will update tomorrow's results with tonight's "press test".  If it goes back to its original firmness every time then the softness isn't that big of a deal.

I will be able to sleep on the mattress three more days, then I'm off on business travel for four days, then I'll pick up where I left off.  Unfortunately sleeping in a different (likely spring) bed is going to throw off my body's adjustment.  Might be a good thing since it's closer to the reality of bed adjustment anyway.

Day 1: The 30-Day @Casper Mattress Challenge

Short and sweet: After setting up the Casper mattress yesterday, I of course slept on it.  Note, it's just me, there isn't a "couple debate" about the firmness or anything.  The feedback is 100% mine.

Bodies take a while to adjust to a new mattress.  It is this break-in period that makes people frustrated, because you can't account for it in a mattress store.  It's the reason I'm going to share feedback over a number of days, because the experience will most certainly be different day-to-day as my body adjusts.

I noticed two things immediately with the Casper mattress.  First, it kept its shape extremely well.  Second, it never sunk in beyond a certain point even when just directly sitting on it.  As a muscular 180-pound guy, this tells me that the mattress can definitely handle at least an "average" sized guy and lower.

My usual routine is to read and/or play mobile games until I get sleepy.  I'll often start at around 8pm and be sleepy by 10pm-ish, sometimes longer.  I didn't last that long with the Casper.  I was definitely out before 10pm.  My body was also its usual hotness, but despite being under a sheet and a comforter, it wasn't ever uncomfortable underneath me.  The mattress started cool like a gel pad, then warmed just enough to match my body temperature.  It never got softer.

I can only describe the experience as similar laying on a mattress pad at summer camp that has a topper on it (obviously, camp beds do not have toppers, I'm just saying).  It's firm, but not uncomfortably firm.  Although people who don't like firm mattresses may be up in arms at that statement, the mattress just did not cause any pain points with its level of firmness because it did give at the sharp points (hips, elbows, shoulders, etc) but stood fast at the dull points (side, abs, thighs, etc).  You have the distinct feeling of lying on top of something flat, in other words, but whatever that something is, isn't pressing against your body like a table might.

I have a tendency to shift position over night mostly because of the old mattresses and I did so also with the Casper, but it was more out of habit than discomfort.  I think my body was just expecting softness and didn't get it.  That's okay, because unlike with the older mattresses, I did reach REM sleep on at least three occasions, and even though I woke up during the night (around 2:30am) like I usually do, it was not difficult to go back to sleep.  I think I was woken up because of noise outside the window (my house is on an arterial, and the windows only cut noise down about 50%.  That's changing in the near future), not the mattress.

This morning, I wasn't groggy when I got up.  I wasn't as sharp as I might have been as a kid, but that could just be age.  What's important is that I didn't have any lower back pain (which was common with the older mattresses), or neck pain, and I felt truly awake and rested.  Had I not woken up in the middle of the night I might have felt even better, and hopefully that day will come.  The mattress, of course, looks like I haven't even slept in it.  Not a single dent, despite my shifting, sitting and turning over 12 hours.

It's safe to say that if you are a back sleeper this mattress will probably feel ultra comfortable.  Side sleepers may have a longer adjustment period simply because your body has gotten used to "sinking in" where it won't with this mattress.  Stomach sleepers (I still don't understand how this is even possible, but yeah) SHOULD be able to sleep soundly on this mattress with the right pillow.  I think the problem with stomach sleepers is that your head and back get arched too much if you use a pillow that's too thick or too firm; you really should go without a pillow or get a down pillow so that your spine remains in alignment.

Tune in tomorrow for the next sleep experience.

The 30-Day @Casper Mattress Challenge: Order Process

Image screenshot credit: http://www.casper.com

Casper, a young New York company, set out in 2014 to attempt to do for mattress shopping what Steve Jobs tried to do in 2007: reinvent the product.  Think of things from a different angle.  Change the market.  After raising venture capital, they launched a mattress brand by the same name.  As I was already on the hunt for the "perfect sleep experience", I figured I would give them a try.  I'll use Blogger (assuming Google doesn't delete my blog because I have a photo of a mattress, which is normally used in porn - long story), and I will track the experience over time.

Frontier Airlines. You're ALMOST There.

I had a recent opportunity to not only fly on Frontier Airlines for the very first time (including the precedent airlines, Midwest and Republic), but to sample their nonstop route between Seattle, WA and Cleveland, OH.  The creation of nonstop routes used to be a "meh" moment, since every airline was traveling nonstop between popular destinations.  But as larger airlines merged and bought each other out and/or filed bankruptcy, we see less and less nonstop flights.  I want to share the experience, as well as tell you a bit about Frontier Airlines from an infrequent flyer's perspective.

Dear Mr. President: You're Wrong About #Ebola

Has anyone noticed how oddly similar the Ebola strain looks to Michaelangelo's "Creation of Adam"?  Coincidence? I think not.

Anyway, that's not the point of this post, Mr. Obama.  The point of the post is to call you out on a few things where you have publicly criticized "hysteria and fear".  This is because you totally missed the boat on why people are afraid.  They have legitimate concerns that haven't been addressed by the government that is elected to look out for them.  Here's what you missed.

Like A Boss: How To Debate Effectively

A lot of people don't truly understand what debating means.  Some think it means arguing.  It doesn't.  Though you do present "arguments" in a debate, it doesn't mean you're "arguing".  Let's explore that.

Buying That First Home Round Two - Part 4

So now you have a sense of things.  The next thing to know seems obvious, but many people make a critical mistake when going hunting for a home:

Get Your Funding In Order.

Buying That First Home Round Two - Part 3

Now, let's talk about a somewhat controversial topic: short sales, and the #1 thing to know about them:

Banks Don't Really Like Short Sales.

Buying That First Home Round Two - Part 2

Hopefully you read the first article.  If not, you should.  There's a lot of good information there:

Do Your Own Research BEFORE Contacting a REALTOR

Assuming you've gotten this far, it's important you understand what you're up against in terms of what's out there.  Depending on your buying power, you may find lots of inventory or very little.  It really does depend on the metro, and in this current economy, a lot of homes are being taken by Chinese investors who are dropping 100% cash to buy the homes as an investment (and in some cases, to hide their income in another country).  What's left over is going to fit into a number of categories, and you should understand the differences.

Buying That First Home Round Two - Part 1

Many may recall years ago (around 2008) I attempted to purchase a home in Oceanside, CA.  That home was a quant device that seemed as though it just was mistreated by the previous owners.  I didn't understand the process, and I trusted way too much.  I learned a lot of lessons about what not to do and swore never to make those same mistakes the next time I was "ready".

Since coming to Washington State I've realized that, though I'm working harder than I ever have before, the opportunity and net cost of living are dramatically different.  This year, as a New Years Resolution, I resolved to do two things: (A) graduate college and (B) buy a home.  Both are in progress (I told you about Western Governors University), but let me talk about (B), and let's see if I can help you.