Please note: This site's design is only visible in a graphical browser that supports Web standards, but its content is accessible to any browser or Internet device. To see this site as it was designed please upgrade to a Web standards compliant browser.
 
Signal vs. Noise

Our book:
Defensive Design for the Web: How To Improve Error Messages, Help, Forms, and Other Crisis Points
Available Now ($16.99)

Most Popular (last 15 days)
Looking for old posts?
37signals Mailing List

Subscribe to our free newsletter and receive updates on 37signals' latest projects, research, announcements, and more (about one email per month).

37signals Services
Syndicate
XML version (full posts)
Get Firefox!

Poor Jimmy

27 Feb 2003 by Matthew Linderman

Poor, poor Jimmy Kimmel. Steve-O? Jared from Subway!? Tom Arnold!!? Jeesh…why not just pick some schmo off the street to talk to for an hour? I actually think Jimmy’s got potential but how can any late night talk show host be expected to survive with a guest list like this?

Thursday, Feb. 27: Anna Nicole Smith, Lennox Lewis, Greg Proops
Friday, Feb. 28: Steve-O
Monday, Mar. 3: Actor Jeff Goldblum, Model Molly Sims, Rapper Fabulous
Tuesday, Mar. 4: Jared from Subway
Wednesday, Mar. 5: Model Rachel Hunter, Actor Eugene Levy, Hip Hop group Nappy Roots
Thursday, Mar. 6: TBD
Friday, Mar. 7: Actor Tom Arnold, Musical guest Bowling for Soup

16 comments so far (Post a Comment)

27 Feb 2003 | f5 said...

ML -- what exactly is your point? I'd tune in to watch Steve-O. He's funny. Eugene Levy is hilarious. I'd watch Lennox Lewis, I'd be enthraled to see if Jared from Subway is as boring as he comes accross in the comercials,...

27 Feb 2003 | Darrel said...

Jared gets the full hour, eh?

I do like the idea of just interviewing anyone off the street, though. Could be fun.

27 Feb 2003 | bill said...

I heard the rumor that NBC is not allowing any of it's stars to appear on Kimmel's show. It is reminiscence of when Leno took over the tonight show, and they were telling stars that if they appeared on Letterman they would never appear on Leno again...

I hope Kimmel lasts... He is funny as hell, and is just a normal guy, and that is what makes the show fun to watch.

27 Feb 2003 | asdf said...

I thought it was Jared " Butcher of Song"- now for OS X.

27 Feb 2003 | Erik said...

I most definitely agree that Kimmel is a fresh addition to talk show hosts (and TIVO allows me to watch it at a more reasonable time). I believe he has the ability to be a mainstay like Letterman or Leno. The only problem is the fact that neither of those two are going anywhere soon.

Hopefully he can last out being blackballed at NBC (I've heard the same rumor, and I believe it since I haven't seen an NBC star on yet). Three cheers for Jimmy, Hip hip...

27 Feb 2003 | ~bc said...

I don't see any difference between JK's guest line up and any other late night show's. Except for the Jared thing. That'll get boring quick. Any one catch Letterman last night? Well Dave didn't. He stayed home (with an eye problem) and planned guest Bruce Willis hosted. Entertaining just for the fact that he basically had no really prep and they just threw him out there. Interested in seeing what happens tonight

27 Feb 2003 | f5 said...

~BC: Right on. I agree with you -- dry as that lineup may seem, I couldn't count the number of times I've watched letterman with worse guests. And I also think it's realy more about the host than anything, you could argue it doesn't matter who they get for guests on those shows. I wouldn't care who they put on Leno, that guy simply is not funny. Does anyone really watch a late night talk show for the guests anyway?

27 Feb 2003 | mick said...

I only have eyes for conan

*swoon*

28 Feb 2003 | 8500 said...

Conan rocks. Comedy Central replaying the previous nights show is just brillant (and should of happened years ago).

01 Mar 2003 | Don Schenck said...

TV sucks.

02 Mar 2003 | Scott M. said...

I agree with Don.

20 Nov 2003 | classic auto insurance said...

abc can't compete

17 Jan 2004 | Isaac said...

For example, if you see an AIM window peeking out from behind your browser and you click on it, that window will come to the front, but the main application window will not. The Mail.app/Activity Viewer is another example. The Aqua system of layers works well in many instances, but not in all. Thank goodness that the Dock is always there to come to the rescue. I know that clicking on an application icon in the Dock will always result in not only the application coming to the front, but also any non-minimized windows associated with it. And if the application is active but no windows are open, clicking on the Dock icon should create a new window in that application.

17 Jan 2004 | Geoffrey said...

For example, if you see an AIM window peeking out from behind your browser and you click on it, that window will come to the front, but the main application window will not. The Mail.app/Activity Viewer is another example. The Aqua system of layers works well in many instances, but not in all. Thank goodness that the Dock is always there to come to the rescue. I know that clicking on an application icon in the Dock will always result in not only the application coming to the front, but also any non-minimized windows associated with it. And if the application is active but no windows are open, clicking on the Dock icon should create a new window in that application.

17 Jan 2004 | Pierce said...

This topic is one we will tackle later in this article, but it refers to making sure that your application and the dock aren't fighting it out for supremacy of the screen.

Comments on this post are closed

 
Back to Top ^