Esquire is one of the three magazines at the top of the journalistic totem pole—you write a feature for it, and a book deal falls in your lap with an old-timey leatherbound thud. Hallowed as the brand is, its leadership is having a deuce of a time getting digital. There was last year's humiliating venture into E-Ink-based advertorial. And then there's the December 2009 issue.

It will feature, among other actors, Robert Downey Jr. squatting awkwardly and gesturing towards his manhood, a human frame for what looks like a very basic 2D bar code. Yep, it's augmented reality, like they've done with Star Trek and Best Buy. Hold it the image up to a webcam, and, according to the WSJ, you "trigger the video segments, which are similar to some video-conferencing technologies in their lifelike quality." Wow, a video segment as lifelike as video conferencing, springing forth from Downey's balls. So we end up with just one question: Who's the most shameless, Esquire's editors, its advertising department or Downey? [WSJ]

Oh TomTom, your comeback has come too late. While the record should show that TomTom's iPhone app certainly made up for many shortcomings of its portable navigators, the delayed iPhone dock with built-in redundant GPS isn't going to take things to the next level. Since it was announced, GPS apps have dropped to prices so low they are actually free in certain cases. There are enough decent cheap options—and then some—in the App Store to guarantee you won't be paying $100 for TomTom's app. Since the dock sells for an additional $120—with no bundle pricing in sight—TomTom's iPhone navigation experience is suddenly more expensive than any TomTom navigator currently selling to people who aren't idiots. Engadget's dock review highlighted these issues, pointing out that its only real benefit is bestowing GPS reception on 1st-gen iPhones and iPod Touches—even though TomTom doesn't support them with a compatible app. No matter what happens, this product seems doomed. [Engadget]

Sometime in early 2010, Amtrak will be giving highspeed wireless internet access to people who ride its highspeed Acela trains. Some remark that at the outset this will be "free," but I say nonsense: Just because you're not paying for it one way doesn't mean you're not paying for it another. I have fond memories of the year I spent riding the rails from NYC to DC and back again, but that's just because I've blocked out the overpriced tickets, the insulting frequent-rider program, the long lines for the snack bar, and the fact that, if the trains ran at all, they would be remarkably late. So you see the Wi-Fi won't be free, no matter how little money changes hands. [Wi-Fi Net News]

While the rest of the world is talking about how great a tablet would be for books, videos, comics and all other varieties of leisure, the French are building a tablet for cooking. Actually, if they built a tablet for cooking, we'd cover it. QOOQ (get it?) is just some gimped Linux box that happens to be programmed to receive and display food-related videos, recipes and articles and, apparently, not a lot else. Call me know when it's oleophobic, sink-rinse-able, knife-friendly and can grind pepper rough or fine. [Electronista]

It's technologically interesting since, with both the 3K and the 5K Red cameras, they're able to take video and strategically take out frames to use as stills. This makes it a lot easier on the photographer since he doesn't need to know, intuitively, when the best few seconds are to snap a stream of shots—he can just point the thing and tell Kate to be sexy.

It's too bad for Kate though, because in order to crown a new Sexiest Woman Alive next year, Esquire will have to have her put down. [Esquire]

The system itself will set you back $80,000, no pool table included. At the Esquire Ultimate Bachelor Pad, where it's currently set up, it's projecting on a $125,000 pool table. Bottom line: you can't afford it.

In addition to this setup, where the balls reveal an image hidden underneath, you can also set it up to have flames track behind the balls, or water that ripples as the balls pass over it. It's a pretty awesome trick, one that works surprisingly smoothly.

They're working on new software that will make it more useful than flashy, too. Imagine playing pool and having the lines where you should shoot projected down on the table, with a computer doing all the math necessary to show you just where to aim and how hard to hit. Pretty sweet.

[Esquire Soho]

Rather than click and endless series of stills, photographer Greg Williams shot the cover with the 4K Red ONE video camera. Fox essentially acted out a scene for 10 minutes, the best moment of which will appear on the June 2009 cover. (Not to be wasteful of Megan Fox footage, the video will also be uploaded to Esquire's site, of course.)

It's fascinating that as digital cameras evolve, so will the roles of photographers, models and publications. I can't see traditional photography ever dying, but whether photos will always be captured in photographs is another question. [Esquire]

As it turns out, E-Ink is ridiculously durable, standing up to bending, cuts, water, fire and even total punctures without ceasing to blink. The panel only died when microwaved for a few seconds, but that was just because all of its metal components (power connectors, mainly) vaporized in fantastic balls of lightning. [Phone Losers via Technabob]

The E-Ink panel is segmented (11 on top, 3 on bottom), which means you can't use the entire rectangle for display. While you can change the timing for each section's blinking, the potential for real customization seems limited. Instead you could only change when each section blinks or doesn't blink (not much fun, I know).

In any case, MAKE has the nitty-gritty details and plenty more beautiful photos, so be sure to check it out. I'm off to track down my own copy of this month's Esquire. [MAKE]

UPDATE: I still love AJ Jacobs writing.

This is really slick in some ways—as far as attention goes—but the bigger thing it shows is the terrible lack of understanding that most magazine editors have in dealing with the digital future of their publications. I mean, for Christ's sake, their website has categorized their first two links as "women" and THEN features. This is Esquire!

To me and many others, Esquire is a legendary publication best known for its features and covers, but they've seen better days. (This year they won no national magazine awards.) I remember when I was at Wired, we proudly did a Banksy feature, before he was easy to find and unmasked and all that. Esquire assigned a feature later on, and word is that the writer had the balls to ask the Wired writer for a contact. (He said no.) The Esquire feature ended up being 3000 words about the writer hunting for Banksy by going into a few bars and asking if anyone knew him. There wasn't enough meat to run a front of book piece, let alone a feature. I don't know how this happens. I stopped reading Esquire regularly shortly after that, and even though I flip through my subscription (I get a lot of magazines I end up skimming 'til I find great content), I can't remember the last piece that really blew my mind, nor has there been a cover that had the editorial weight of those from the past, like the one of Ali being shot by arrows after his draft dodging problems.

So, Esquire, I'm glad you're reaching for boldness again, but don't fucking waste your budget on shit like this, trying to get into the Smithsonian with a trick. If you're trying to create a relic, good job. But to make history again, you're going to have to have a clearer understanding of the future of publishing and what your under-30 readers really want from you digitally. In the mean time, enjoy the press.

[NYT]