In My Experience... | U and I (11037)

Category Archive » U and I

Ubiquity is a long way off.
[ May 27, 2003 | Permalink | 1 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

My daughter has an eye infection (her first ailment) that isn't serious, but bad enough to make us call the pediatrician for the first time. We had to leave a message and the on-call person called us back pretty quickly. She asked me what was wrong and asked that I describe the nature of the goop coming out of my daughter's eye.

Optimally, I could have used my digital camera to take a picture, and show it to the pediatrician over the good ol' Internet. Unfortunately, all of my gear requires physical connections to communicate, and compiled applications to pass files back and forth, and human intervention to route things appropriately. This is the first time that I have thought that the new breed of cell phones with crappy digital cameras in them would actually be useful.

Of course, the person on the other side of the equation needs to have the same carrier, or gear and/or level of comfort with the tech to receive the image and attempt to make something from it. Ubiquity is a long way off, and so are the systems/applications we need to allow folks like me to easily send useful info to particular individuals on demand.

"Written" English, not thumb typed.
[ March 03, 2003 | Permalink | 5 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

So, some kid submitted an essay in shorthand text massaging shorthand, and some wonk says...

a decline in grammar and written English was partly linked to the text massaging craze.

Duh. But really, it's the other way around, and only in that format. The text massaging craze leads to a decline in written english in that media transmission format due to the fact that the text entry interface, and the medium of reading it, is not conducive to prosaic dissertations. Paper written essays are not the place for l33tsp34k. Teach your students that.

The student was communicating effectively, but for a given media transmission format, and should be taught where that's appropriate. I'd give the kid a failing grade for being cheeky and for not effectively communicating (which is the point of excersize). Then I'd get right back to sending all of my IMs in lower case and sans punctuation. L4m3r.

Is RSS diet HTML?
[ January 28, 2003 | Permalink | 2 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

Dave Hyatt has been exploring RSS/HTML/Safari/NetNewsWire theory and posits...

One really good point several people brought up in response to my previous blog about RSS and Web browsers was that many feeds contain only article excerpts.

In other words RSS feeds seem to break down into two categories: feeds that contain only short excerpts of articles and feeds that contain entire articles. It does seem like integration makes less sense if the majority of feeds fall into the first category.

Then the RSS aggregator becomes useful as a filtering mechanism, with the Web browser being used only to view the articles that you ultimately decide to read.

So, my RSS feed contains both an excerpt AND the full length version of the blog entry (RSS 2.0 baby!) and I think that affords the user a choice (choice is good!). You can read just the excerpt, or the full post based on your... choice! You can format the post however you want in your own home made RSS news reader, or see it how I present it (on the actual website). NetNewsWire happens to show the entire post if available. Other aggregators only use the excerpt.

If NetNewsWire integrates WebCore sometime in the future (chances are that it will) will there be a way for the user to apply their own style sheet to my posting? Or will I put more robust formatting in my CDATA'd posting text?

Will I own the presentation of my postings in RSS or set it free?

I have HTML to present my junk one way, and offer it up in a dead clean format for you to see it your way. Web Browsers are these things that we use to see what others have put on the web to be viewed in a specific way. That's why we have standards and rail on about horrible (and inconsistent) box model implementations.

I regret dragging Dr. Martin Luther King down to the level of mark-up pedantry, but he said in his "I Have a Dream" speech that he hoped "that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." HTML/CSS shows the color of the skin and RSS reveals the content of its character.

For now anyway.

</rambling>

Dilbert stays on the UI theme.
[ September 24, 2002 | Permalink | 3 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

It's refreshing to see Dilbert explaining to everyone one else in the world that death by UI-designed-by-software-engineers is possible.

Dilbert does UI design.
[ September 23, 2002 | Permalink | 0 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

And apparently sucks at it.

UI debate gets another argument.
[ September 01, 2002 | Permalink | 0 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

I've seen the conversation about the next gen user interface ebb and flow for years. I think most of it is bullshit, including the argument saying the 'windows, menus and pointing' paradigm is over drawn, past its prime and about to die. The other end of the spectrum is cognitive and relational bliss, and is revolutionary, but what we need is evolutionary (imho).

Why do we need evolutionary progress instead of some bright new tomorrow? simple, millions of us use mice, type on keyboards, open windows and file things in folders. Millions of us are used to that, understand that and are productive with that. Throw it out? Boooolshit.

In spite of all that, Spring looks cool.

[via blackbeltjones]

People salivate for "www."
[ August 15, 2002 | Permalink | 8 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

Today hits to 'www.inmyexperience.com' passed the non-www version of the domain name. What's funny about that is I have never advertised the site with the 'www' prefix, ever. IMHO, that prefix is an anachronism (after all there is no ftp.inmyexperience or god forbid gopher.inmyexperience), and I find it pretty amusing that people depend on it so much (or perhaps it's Pavlovian).

The dependance on the 'www' prefix can lead to a certain problem I've seen at many sites. That is that the non-www version of the domain has no DNS record for the web site. So, if you hit the www version of the domain name with a browser, everything is cool, trash that prefix tho, and often, you'll get nothing. Pair.com (my host) is great for the simple reason that they anticipate the user's/customer's needs by adding records for the www and non-www version of your domain name (and they do a bunch of other cool stuff too).

Link: generating the next-generation gui
[ July 30, 2002 | Permalink | 0 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

Slashdot | GUIs for Everyone is a thread based on an article titled "generating the next-generation gui." Both the thread and article are worth a read...

We have "open source" development on Operating Systems in the attempt to utilize the minds of many super intelligent folks to develop the next-gen OS. The end-result is available for free (or close to it) and it takes advantage of the culimination of many great ideas into effect. While it's a little messy to install, it's faster and more robust than Windows and it's getting better every day. As a result, it has the opportunity to challenge the Windows Monopoly.

Unfortunately, something important is missing.

WarChalking, most likely an urban only phenomena.
[ July 16, 2002 | Permalink | 2 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

Early in this blog's (short) history, I posted a note about Hobo symbols which got deleted somehow. Anyway, I found it amazing that a loosely and not very well educated populace would be able to develop a robust system of glyphs that help the Hobo find food, work, shelter and other necessities of life. The bread glyph is perfect.

Well, not to be out done, geeks have their own version for their own uses; an über meme called WarChalking closely related to War Driving. It seems to me that in the 'burbs (which is where I live), not many people are going to be willing to walk around chalking wireless access points, and who would see it anyway? And doesn't chalk seem to be a little transient for this use? But who cares about that when there's these "i plus points" all over the place.

In my community, there is a movement to get a Wide Area Wireless Internet Access Provider (WAWISP) put together. I suppose WarChalking that would be helpful, but the car reigns supreme in this area, so don't be shy people, chalk the street signs too; or better yet, a Giant-esqe sticker campaign.

(ps, again, this would be a prime TrackBack opportunity, but this time the site I'm referencing uses MovableType, but doesn't have TrackBack installed/enabled, so I'm just going to ping the TrackBack dev page for the hell of it.)

TrackBack
[ July 06, 2002 | Permalink | 0 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

Well, I have TrackBack installed and implemented, and I need to play with it some more. For now, it seems like a neat idea, and I'm really hopeful that it will be widely implemented by MovableType users. Because, after all, the value of a network increases with the amount of nodes on that network. Ping!

Googlebombing Verisign.
[ June 12, 2002 | Permalink | 1 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

I've mentioned a certain distaste for Verisign in the past (even though a few of my friends work there) but this story is just keeps getting better. I'm simply posting this here to help googlebomb the issue. Thanks to peterme for the idea.

No, blogs won't replace CNN.
[ May 29, 2002 | Permalink | 0 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

For the people in the blogging community, articles about blogging are beyond passe, and chances are you are one of those people, so please excuse this short digression. OK, consider this quote taken from an MSNBC article...

Dave Winer (who probably would be saying this even if he didn�t run a company that sold blogging software), has formally wagered that by 2007, more readers will get news from blogs than from The New York Times.

Now, I do believe that eventually more people will read weblogs than the New York Times. However, more people will not get their news from weblogs for the simple reason that weblogs are not news sites in the traditional sense (and the traditional sense is a part of that quote by the simple fact that it mentions the Times as the benchmark). This blog that you are reading right now is not a news site, does not employ news gathering professionals, and does not attempt to be impartial (in fact, opinion and insight are at the core of this, and most other blogs). The idea that people would come here or go to Camworld for "news" (within the scope of the quote above that mentions the Time) is ridiculous. IMHO, that quote above is hype.

I would suggest that the sociologic effect of weblogs will be borne from sites like Blogdex that will become Conventional Wisdom barometers.

Taxing ESPP's is an IRS racket.
[ April 29, 2002 | Permalink | 0 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

There's an IRS proposal to tax employee stock purchase plans. Such a plan exists at my company, where I can contribute part of my salary to the plan which is used to purchase company stock at a discount rate (which is a small percentage, and is often nullified in a day by recent moves in the market). According to C|Net...

Under the new regulation, the IRS would tax that "discount" spread of 10 percent to 15 percent. Unless workers were to sell the stock the same day they exercised it, they would owe taxes on earnings they had yet to receive. And employers would be required to pay the IRS a matching amount.

I can sort of understand taxing the employee on the discounted rate, but only if it has provided a profit, and only when a trade has been executed between the employee and a third party. This proposed regulation clearly would disincentivize the employee (and in certain cases, would devalue the stock). The part about the employer having to pay a matching amount sounds like the terms of a loan shark.

If you are reading this blog, you are probably a tech worker like myself and are likely to be impacted by this IRS rule (in one way or another). So speak up and contact your congressional representative.

Will Verisign implode?
[ April 26, 2002 | Permalink | 1 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

On the WebDesign mailing list there has always been an anti-Verisign/Network solutions attitude. I understand that feeling because I've used them as a domain name registrar in the past and have had various problems. Also, their fee structure for transferring a domain to another entity is outrageous ($200 for a simple write to a database record!) and the process is a complete hassle. At the same time, they sell currently owned domains to other people and blame the victim. Amazing.

It's really no wonder then that Verisign announced horrible numbers yesterday. I can't imagine that people are going back to them for follow on business. I've worked with them before as a consultant (they were the client) and found an overly bureaucratic and scattered organization, and this seems to be the way the way they run their services. But, I now work for one of the largest corporations on earth right now, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

Micropayments are still not there yet.
[ March 19, 2002 | Permalink | 0 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

I find it pretty discouraging to hear the folks at Jupiter Media Metrix say that 'pay for content' is not going to be a huge success. I'd like the believe that the content would be compelling enough for a 'micropayment' of some sort. Ars Technica would be, in my opinion, a good example where the pay-for content is worth buying. And I think it's interesting to note that the stuff worth paying for online is generally far superior than the shwag we pay for at the grocery store counter (imho).

Clients like to own everything.
[ February 26, 2002 | Permalink | 1 Comments | 0 TrackBack | TB URL ]

They are paying for it after all, so they should want to own everything. But, in my experience, this can get in the way of the application's usability and the visual design. You are the web design expert, and they are the domain expert, which means you know how it should look and behave based on their desired results. Both need to learn from each other, but you don't control the money, the client does. So be prepared to be flexible.

Occasionally you get a hands off client that lets you do your thing. Unfortunately, a client who trusts you to make judgments and decisions without too much oversight is a double edged sword. You run the risk of making a bad decision and allowing it to become written in stone before the client sees it (who then freaks out). At the same time, being enabled to make decisions allows you to move towards completion on an accelerated schedule, which is great if it's a fixed price engagement.

More often you find clients that micromanage the project. They will make requests like 'bold that' and 'make this green' and 'put that at the top' when doing those things don't really make any sense. This sort of feedback can be great to have if it's on target, but is a time consuming (and expensive) process.

Mitigating the risk of responsibility against compromised visual design (and usability, functionality, et al) is a huge challenge. The balancing act is dependant on the people you work with and how you start the project. Be up front about the process of turning ideas into working solutions, and always include the client in the decision process along the way. Short but flexible processes for making collaborative decisions (like giving two, and only two, comps of a design) will keep things moving and let everyone feel like they are in control, which creates the 'buy in' you need to get a project completed (and paid for).

A new feature for a new year.
[ January 01, 2002 | Permalink | 0 Comments ]

2001 is finally over, and not a moment too soon. I should be driving a flying car and reading about humans orbiting Jupiter. Instead, my car is burning oil and Jupiter is still so very far away (in spite of being so close).

Fortunately, progress on the web continues in the form of Content Syndication. NewsIsFree is a content syndication and aggregation site and you might be familiar with Blogdex and MetaFilter, which are content aggregators too. For the most part, the aggregators are not doing things semantically. That is to say, I don't find syndicated content that I am interested in without tons of browsing. Weblogs have semantic value built in, so I'll be trying to exploit that by syndicating content that is relevant to my interests (and hopefully yours) by using the aggregators and the sites they aggregate.

To the right of the home page, I currently have link tables from IAslash, C|net News and Designtechnica that are brought to you thru the magic of Perl and RSS. In the future, more robust syndication will come along with more sources and hopefully a better way to sift thru it all. We'll see how that goes based on how well 2002 gets started.

Webtechniques is always interesting.
[ December 30, 2001 | Permalink | 0 Comments ]

Few magazines are as consistently interesting as Webtechniques. The January 2002 issue has some good stuff that will be of interest to webloggers. And Perl geeks might find this site interesting since it's run by the guy who writes all of the Perl articles for Webtechniques, and has a full archive of his articles.

Zoomable user interface (ZUI) technologies are percolating.
[ December 19, 2001 | Permalink | 1 Comments ]

The definition of what a zoomable interface is seems to change from person to person, but it definitely seems like the core concept is gaining some momentum. Here's an overview (let me know about any significant resources I might have missed)...

ZUI's have been developed in several different forms...

Apple's defunct HotSauce (MCF/browser plugin)
UMD's Jazz (Java)
Zomit: A Zoomable User Interface (Java)
Nautilus Screenshots 8/2/00 (Linux/open source)
WebMap Technologies Inc: What is WebMap™ Viewer? (Browser plugin and server/proprietary)
3D Zoom Menu, Customizable Flash Interface (Flash/ browser plugin)

...and have been studied in several ways...

...but I have yet to see a compelling use of the ZUI that was anything more than a demonstration of the concept. Wide spread adoption of metadata will hopefully make a difference and enable the 'semantic web' with zoomable interfaces as the delivery mechanism.

HTML in your email is to be avoided
[ December 08, 2001 | Permalink | 0 Comments ]

The Register has an article about a plugin (a DLL) for Outlook that will allow you to turn off HTML rendering in received email. The potential virus problem that is solved by this plugin is something I've never had to deal with. I'm primarily a Mac (OSX) user and the Outlook clone for the Mac (ie, Entourage) has a nice little feature that will let me see the rendered HTML, but won't make network calls for any included images or JavaScript files. And besides, there are so few Mac viruses out there to begin with. Here's a shot of the preferences item...

In spite of the continuing monopolistic business practices going on at MSFT, the Mac Business Unit there is producing some of the best software available for the platform that is actually user centric.

The Possibility of Idealism.
[ December 04, 2001 | Permalink | 0 Comments ]

I'm reading 'Next: The Future Just Happened' by Michael Lewis right now and have come across a few interesting one liners. This one I find to be particularly interesting...

Cynicism implies the possibility of idealism.

I'm wondering if this quote is something Lewis likes/wants to believe based on his own idealism, or something he's observed in the people and events he's studied. Within the context of this book, I just don't see it, and when I think of some of the most cynical people I can think of (Don and Mike on WJFK) there might be something there.

Cynicism could be a result of observing the world around us and seeing what 'is' as it relates to what we think it should or should not be. Taken this way, cynicism might not imply the possibility of idealism, but positively reveal it; this works as a mechanism of presenting the 'outsiders' described in his book as heros. I'd suggest Next is a series of examples of how people will use/abuse a given system to their own maximum benefit, which may be a cynical view ;)

Good UI is not a race.
[ November 18, 2001 | Permalink | 0 Comments ]

I've been reading Jef Raskin's _The Humane Interface_ and have been thoroughly enjoying it. Raskin write in lucid style which nicely compliments his theories and assertions. But the chapters about UI efficiency are, imho, a bit extreme in their faith in the GOMS model which is a purely quantitative measurement.

A UI that should do everything it can to merely reduce the amount of time it takes to do thing is a story without a plot. Ease of use != speed of use. But efficiency is still a concern, but probably more so for government forms than for websites where issues like marketing and branding are important.

The bottom line though is that this 'fundamentals' book is a must have if you are a UI developer or designer and want to produce successful web sites/applications.