Random Babbly

[jianantonic]

Well, my Hokies are not a first half team.  But they pulled off a pretty exciting win this afternoon, and I am satisfied. 

My in-laws have a new kitten named Luke.  He's a Flamepoint Siamese, which basically means he's white, and he's very, very sweet.  I've been cuddling with him all afternoon.  And washing my hands every couple of minutes.

I think it's time to get a new computer.  I've had my laptop for two years, which isn't terrible for a computer that cost under $400, but it's all banged up now.  The USB ports don't really work anymore, the DVD drive is broken (still works, but not very well, and often won't eject a disc), and on top of all these problems, I accidentally dropped it last night.  It was in the back of our van in its case, which was not closed, and when I opened the door to get it out, it just fell out of its case and onto the driveway.  

And I'm just ready for a new computer, y'know?  This one is kind of large for a laptop, and I want one of those petite ones that would be really easy to travel with and not require a carryon of its own.  I think if I can find a good one for under $500, I'll get it.  I don't really feel like spending more than that, though, so I may just stick with this old thing until it totally kicks it -- though I'm not sure I'd have to wait much longer...

Z and I are going out with his aunt and uncle tonight, but maybe I can talk him into taking me shopping before we meet them.  I was thinking of getting new running shoes, but if I'm going to be getting a computer, maybe those should wait.

Speaking of running, I went to the gym this morning.  The cardio machines there have little screens where you program in your weight and age and then they tell you how many calories you're burning.  I'm sure they're not entirely precise, but it's a general idea.  So I've been working out pretty regularly for a while now, and I'm feeling like I'm in decent shape, so I decided to try some actual treadmill running today, instead of the ellipticals, bikes, and climbing machines.

Last week on the elliptical, I did over 3.5 "miles" in 40 minutes, and burned something like 500 calories in that time, according to the machine.  I don't count calories with Weight Watchers, just points, so the calories are sort of irrelevant, but it's still something I notice, as anyone who's trying to slim down would.  Anyway, today I ran.  Well, I tried.  I did my warm-up on an elliptical (1.00 miles, 140 calories in 10 minutes, allegedly), then did weights, then came back to the treadmill.  I am still not a real runner, which became painfully clear right away.  I was able to run for five minutes before I had to stop to die walk, but then I did two more 5-minute running intervals between walks, and when I walked, I had a steep incline and went fast.  It was the hardest cardio I've done in a long time.  Definitely more effort than the ellipticals.  But according to the stupid machine, I did only 2.2 miles in 30 minutes, burning just over 200 calories.  Sigh.  So I know they're different machines and all that, but I seriously doubt I burned fewer calories on the treadmill than I normally do on the elliptical.  But maybe that's just the way it is.  

Since I'm not counting calories, I'm not going to sweat it too much, I just found it weird.  I know I had a good workout, but it was frustrating to realize just how not a runner I still am.  I would like to enjoy running, and be good at it.  I guess if I were good at it, I would enjoy it as much as any other exercise.  I'm just not.  At all.  But I guess I could get there.  Like an acquired taste, just keep working at it until I'm comfortable.  Maybe.  I'll be at the beach in a little over a week.  That's a good place to run...

Peace.
 

Comments

[flamingophoenix.livejournal.com]

You could get a One Laptop Per Child laptop for $400 this fall! You can even charge it with a hand crank!

Or an Eee PC (http://www.amazon.com/Asus-7-inch-Celeron-Processor-Preloaded/dp/B0010QPX4G/ref=pd_bbs_3?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1221959921&sr=8-3). I mean, all you do is text processing, right? So you don't need a fancy-schmancy monitor and stuff?

I recommend getting a durable portable light laptop to take places and then a good solid desktop to leave at home. (Wherever home may be.) That's what I do. I was at a conference last week and people with fancy 17" monitors were actually speaking enviously of my 12" iBook (from 2001, no less) because it was so small I could just pop it in any shoulderbag (I actually used a DI one my dad got a while back)--it didn't require its own case. Somebody actually said "That's a blogger's computer, right there." Which amused me. :-)

So yes. Don't get a laptop to play games or watch DVDs on if you also want to optimize it for travel/writing. Minimalist woooo!

[skydiamonde.livejournal.com]

I would definitely agree with EEE PC for a cheap small laptop.

[jianantonic.livejournal.com]

Tell me more about these EEE thingies...I've never heard of them.

99% of my computer activity is websurfing and writing (on the internet, not in Word or anything). I also do watch lots of DVDs, but usually only at bedtime, when I'm not running any other programs. But at any given moment that I'm online, I have about 7 or 8 tabs open in Firefox, and maybe also a game of solitaire or something in Windows. I like having music on my computer, too, but I don't play it very often, because I need quiet to work efficiently.

I don't really need a desktop for home use, because A) I'm not at home very much anyway and B) the above is really all I do on my computer.

[flamingophoenix.livejournal.com]

I don't know if the Eee PC has a DVD drive. It might.

It's just a small simple computer, runs Linux (though I think you can put Windows on it if you so choose), probably doesn't have the best graphics but it's a laptop so who cares, etc.

See also this XKCD (http://xkcd.com/413/).

And read the entire Amazon page I linked. It seems to sum it up pretty well.

[jianantonic.livejournal.com]

I read the stats -- it doesn't have a DVD drive, but people seem pretty pleased with it. I just don't know dick about computers, really, so even seeing the stats doesn't help a whole lot. It seems like a convenient little machine, but I'm thinking I do want something with a DVD drive. Unfortunately, all the 12-inch screens and stuff like that that we've looked at are still several hundred dollars more than I'd really like to pay. But at least there's no sales tax in Oregon...

[flamingophoenix.livejournal.com]

It doesn't seem to have a DVD player, but you could just use your existing laptop for that. Unless you watch those DVDs when you're on the go, in which case that doesn't help you. Hrm.

[jianantonic.livejournal.com]

Well, part of what's wrong with my existing laptop is that the DVD player is on its last legs. And yeah, I watch them a lot on the road. So I'm not sure this thing is practical, though I am still thinking about it...

[kixeldorado.livejournal.com]

The Man got a Gateway a few months ago, with Vista on it. It's not bad. I think it might have been around $700. I think the EEEs mentioned above have linux loaded.
I'm not sure how familiar you are with it, but sure you could get windows to put on it, but it'd probably cost more. Just remember, if you want to run lots of things at the same time, or want to watch DVDs, make sure you get it with plenty of RAM installed.



With running, the common accepted "standard" is that you burn approximately 100 calories per mile. So I'm sure if it's a strenuous mile, you probably burn a little bit more, but at least 100.

High inclines are good. A while back at the gym, they had me do a mile, slow (for me) at like 15 % incline. I was dripping sweat worse than any run I've ever done....

[capriciousbee.livejournal.com]

kixeldorado is right, you burn around 100 calories per mile, but once you're actually used to running, it's more like 88. Lemme tell you how sucky that is when you've run 6 miles and you REALLY want a pizza...

Elliptical machines use a similar conversion, but add in the "resistance" you set. It takes a resistance of 1 as running on flat, and anything higher as increases in resistance (like sand or something, I think). Now, obviously, as resistance of seven is NOT that hard, unless you're really really out of shape. You'll sweat after a while, but it's not like running through liquid concrete. Also, you've got the extremely decreased impact. So what this results in is that the elliptical machine vastly overestimates the calories you are actually burning. The treadmills do, too, mostly because it's in the makers interest to do so, then you feel better about yourself and are more inclined to use their equipment. It's like downsizing jeans or something.

But don't worry! You're still working and you're still losing a truly impressive amount of weight. So I'd ignore the calorie stuff, unless you like the ego boost. (I still look at them, even though I know they lie).

[oobermeister.livejournal.com]

i don't see why you can't be a runner....running for 5 minutes nonstop is a good start. that's about all i could do when i started a regular exercise routine 4 years ago. now i can run for more than 30 minutes nonstop, but it has taken me more than 3 years go get here, so if you can start doing a 5-10 minute run on the treadmill every time you exercise (or every other time that you exercise), thats probably a good start. and as for the exercise induced athsma, i think that will get better with time. and unless you've been diagnosed with it, it could just be that you're getting winded...but either way, start running at the lowest intensity possible i.e. the slowest treadmill speed at which you achieve a running gait. i wouldn't run at an incline to start, that does make it harder. but yea, running is definitly one of the more intense cardiovascular workouts....i've tried other machines in the past, but none of them seem to give me the intensity of a good jog.