...may well be to spur more development of networked devices.
While the idea of everything in the house being "on the Internet" was an impractical dream of the dotcom boom, I think that the realization that the computing devices of tomorrow (such as the iPhone, iPad, Android phones, Chrome OS tablets/netbooks) are going to be hostile to direct-attached peripherals but fully networked is going to drive device manufacturers to rethink how we interact with them. I'm pretty tired of the random USB-connected quirky junk that comes with drivers with some random operating system that was popular 5 years ago. I want to be able to drive the thing from whatever I'm using today.
I am really happy to see spiffy iPhone apps that drive networked hardware because their success will clue people into the usefulness of being network-driven. The web-centric nature of Chrome OS excites me because it may clue people in to the fact that you can build management user interfaces using web technologies and still not suck... I know that the lazy will still target the #1 device on the market at the time and leave things at that, but I am hopeful that -- give or take the incremental cost of networking hardware -- we're going to see a new generation of peripherals that are networked and usable from pretty much any modern client.
That's why I think that the "camera connection kit" for the iPad is a red herring: I don't want to plug my camera directly into my iPad. I want to plug it into my network -- so that I can do basic viewing and camera settings management with my iPad and full photo importing and management from my Mac without having to do a cable dance. We're a ways from doing this, but I think that the more people realize that applications can talk to our devices directly over the network and that the devices themselves can present their user interface in a network-friendly fashion, the closer we'll get.
If anything, the biggest hurdle today is that the management of wireless network settings is far too hard for the average person. My experience with recent consumer-level hardware like the Canon PIXMA MX860 all-in-one printer I purchased recently clearly demonstrates how far we still have to go before manufacturers make this easy and refrain from proprietary warts that mar the experience to the point of extreme frustration. Joe Sixpack doesn't understand networking and, frankly, never will. As long as we expect them to, we're doomed to fail. Sadly, this may well be another instance where it will take a dictator like Apple to come along and force the market's hand before we see any progress.
Joh Gruber used the analogy of automobile automatic transmissions for the iPhone/iPad operating system versus the Mac OS and Windows classic operating systems. Given my car purchasing experience recently, I really resent that analogy. The "old world" versus "new world" naming in Steven Frank's article, while still obfuscated to some extent, is a lot closer to the truth.
My main issue with using car transmissions as the analogy for computing experiences is that the automatic transmission in its current form is the pinnacle of marketing, not technology: it is the end of a long line of technological band-aids to make it possible to operate an inherently complex and dangerous apparatus (the automobile) with the minimum of skill possible. The average automatic transmission makes it possible to drive a car in some fashion with relative ease and efficiency -- it does not make it easy (or possible, in some cases) to drive it well. There are counter-examples to this, of course, and I would argue that they are more representative of what Apple is doing with the iPhone/iPad than the general "automatic transmission" category as a whole. For example, the BorgWagner DSG transmission used by VW and Audi (soon others like Porsche) removes the need to skillfully shift gears but it keeps the option for the driver to have as much (or little) control over gear selection as they want. Good automation removes drudgery without continually forcing inferior choices on the user.
Going back to Apple and these new devices, the thing to remember about the company is that, while secretive, evil, etc. they do understand that success comes from offering fewer, better choices. If it were a transmission, it would be automated -- yes -- but it would not be any "automatic transmission." The genius of Apple in these "new world" devices is that they offer few choices that generally excel at what they do -- and don't offer choices where they don't excel.
The automotive world has clearly proven that you don't need to be that good to succeed in the long run, but I don't think that mere success is Steve Jobs' dream here. I think it is all about setting the bar, defining what computing should be like for common users and, at least for the short term, owning this brand new market lock stock and barrel.
Of course, if they succeed, one thing will be exactly like the "automatic transmission" analogy: the general-purpose computer will become as marginalized as the manual transmission is on cars in the US these days (which, as a software developer, worries me: I don't like the idea that the tools of the trade could become once again major investments). However, the default choice is likely to suck a lot less than it does for cars.
Since everybody and their dog is speculating on the iPad right now, I think it is a good time to step back and remember that these devices are a lot better thought-out than we initially give them credit for. I bought an iPod Touch a while back as a way to evaluate the iPhone user experience without committing to the phone service and, while I liked it, did not have an amazing experience either... It really took buying and living with our iPhone 3GSes to really "get" the iPhone experience -- the pocket-sized, yet full-featured, computer in your pocket that is on the 'net anywhere (give or take AT&T's sucky service) experience is, without doubt, a revolution of the smartphone. From the outside, it is hard to "get" it, but we definitely do now...
So, what does that have to do with the iPad? Well, given how long Apple are rumored to have been working on this thing, I don't doubt that the experience is that good. I don't think that we're going to really understand it -- and it certainly does not measure in lists of features or marketing blurb in a pretty video -- until we actually live with one. Yes, it could still turn out to be a failure, but I have the firsthand experience with the iPhone to tell me that this thing is going to be good in ways we can't imagine. It will be limited of plenty of ways that we can imagine, of course... But, the goodness is something that will take experiencing to actually measure.
I'm not planning to be first in line to buy one, but given my love of ultraportable computing devices and how it overlaps with things I do every day with my MacBook and iPhone, I'm pretty sure that I'll be getting an iPad sooner rather than later. Actually, the challenge may be deciding who of me or Paula will be the guinea pig here: we both want an iPad for fairly different reasons (although overlapping on the core web/email activities that are at the core of the device) but getting two at the same time seems a little premature.
I am definitely sad to see it go, but this was definitely time to let my MINI go: it had started experiencing a string of various failures that kept it in the shop for most of December and cost us an arm and a leg. If there is one thing we've learned from Paula's MINI, it is that once they start needing repairs, they don't stop for quite a while. So, we embarked on a quest to find something relatively inexpensive yet decently appointed to replace it.My initial thought was to get a 1-series BMW -- which I am fairly confident I would have loved -- but two factors deterred me: first, I really feel bad rewarding the company that caused us all the reliability misery with our MINIs (I love BMWs but I don't think that gives them a free pass to screw up anything they want)... Second, I on such short notice, I'd like to spend a bit less money!
We both love the size and practicality of the MINI, so a small hatchback was our ideal car. Preferably one that is relatively well appointed (hint: where the interior trim doesn't look like it is made out of recycled garbage bags). Still, it is surprisingly hard to find such a thing in the US: hatchbacks are rare and small cars are mostly associated with cheap cars. Also, after the painful reliability experience with our MINIs, we were definitely attracted to the reputation of Japanese manufacturers and the trouble-free running that our friends with Japanese cars appear to be having. So, after a fair bit of research, I picked the Honda Civic Si as a first candidate and the Honda Fit as a backup choice.
It only took one visit to the Honda dealer to find out that the Civic just wasn't going to work for me (even with the seat on the lowest setting, I basically have the sun visor in my face all the time), plus it had rather unremarkable trim and ergonomics. The Fit was fine but pretty basic... Time to find some other candidates. So, the next round was the Mazda 3 in its multiple incarnations (from the sedan to the hatchback and MAZDASPEED 3). This time, we were far more successful and, while I think that the MAZDASPEED 3 would have been the most enjoyable to drive by far, we rapidly zeroed in on the hatchback in Grand Touring trim. Realistically, a highly-strung turbocharged performance engine (as in the 'speed 3) doesn't have "long-term reliability" written all over it. A quick test drive in a manual Grand Touring did give us an idea of what to expect (in short: comfortable, very competent but lacking the immediacy and agility of the MINI) and we set about actually getting one in the configuration we want.
As it turns out, finding a 5-door Mazda 3 Grand Touring with a manual transmission is somewhat of a challenge! The Mazda stock system only listed five of them in Texas, all in Austin. A bit of negotiating and a dealer trade later, the car was in Houston and we were on our way.
One thing we did learn here (from the stock levels of the cars we looked at and the trade-in valuation of my 6-speed MINI) is that a manual transmission is a colossal resale liability in this age. Since people apparently are looking for couches on wheels rather than actual cars, nobody wants to be in control of anything anymore. In the future (and in a slightly different cost bracket), I think that we'll carefully have to look carefully at semi-automatic gearbox options like the VW/Audi DSK 'box (a double-clutch hydraulically-actuated manual 'box that combines the responsiveness and control of a manual with the ability to be "automatic" for the proles). That's for the next car, though. Right now, we got out from under the reliability cloud with the MINI and have a car that, while not as much fun as the MINI, does meet our needs and is pleasant to drive.
An absolutely amazing completely (or nearly-completely) computer-generated film created by one man:
The Third & The Seventh
by Alex Roman
Watch it!
If there was any question about how far the technology and talent has come in the world of CG, this definitely resets my expectations when it comes to the rendering and cinematic qualities of virtual filmmaking.
[Via Daring Fireball]
The Third & The Seventh
by Alex Roman
Watch it!
If there was any question about how far the technology and talent has come in the world of CG, this definitely resets my expectations when it comes to the rendering and cinematic qualities of virtual filmmaking.
[Via Daring Fireball]
After spending an eye-watering amount of money in the shop this past month (my MINI needed a total clutch system replacement, thanks to the dealer's ham-handed work in the past, plus a harmonic damper failure disabled it while driving in the middle of the night -- yeah, that's the kind of dead car experience everybody wants!), I went and looked back at the last time I complained about the godawful unreliability and expense of these cars...
Funny, it was nearly exactly a year ago... Well, I guess that MINI is the grinch. There is no doubt that this has been the most frustrating pair of cars we have ever owned. For all the wonderful design features in the MINI, no amount of preventive service seems to be enough -- they just break at the most inopportune moment and, when they go, they go big! No little niggles here: my harmonic damper failure went from asymptomatic to total engine management failure in under a mile. I'm on the second clutch at under 50,000 miles... How can anybody drive one of these things for more than a couple of years and keep their sanity?
More importantly, how am I to ever trust BMW with any of their other cars? The logical car as a step up from the MINI would be the 1-series but do I really want to repeat this colossal fiasco, just adding 25% to the purchase price? I grew up in a BMW-driving family. One of the earliest family pictures of me as a baby is on the hood of the family 1600ti. I learned to drive in a 2800. I've owned a few BMWs of my own over the years. There is no other car brand whose products feel more familiar... But I really feel like the company has failed me big time.
Funny, it was nearly exactly a year ago... Well, I guess that MINI is the grinch. There is no doubt that this has been the most frustrating pair of cars we have ever owned. For all the wonderful design features in the MINI, no amount of preventive service seems to be enough -- they just break at the most inopportune moment and, when they go, they go big! No little niggles here: my harmonic damper failure went from asymptomatic to total engine management failure in under a mile. I'm on the second clutch at under 50,000 miles... How can anybody drive one of these things for more than a couple of years and keep their sanity?
More importantly, how am I to ever trust BMW with any of their other cars? The logical car as a step up from the MINI would be the 1-series but do I really want to repeat this colossal fiasco, just adding 25% to the purchase price? I grew up in a BMW-driving family. One of the earliest family pictures of me as a baby is on the hood of the family 1600ti. I learned to drive in a 2800. I've owned a few BMWs of my own over the years. There is no other car brand whose products feel more familiar... But I really feel like the company has failed me big time.
Interestingly, while looking up references to the expression "brand assassin," there are plenty of uses of the expression but nobody defines it (or, at least in the first couple of pages of search engine results). I'm not sure whether that means it is a well-understood term of a specific industry or if it just materialized spontaneously. References do go back a ways or are topical and recent... Anyway, I digress.
Being an user of Canon cameras and an avid blog reader, I'm always looking for interesting news sites. Failing that, technology gossip sites are always a guilty pleasure. Still, David Hobby at strobist.com recently linked to an interesting new phenomenon: the brand assassination blog. In this case, it is the Fake Chuck Westfall blog -- it is an interesting intersection between the snarky gossip sites like gawker.com, the Linux Hater's Blog or the now-defunct uncov.com (don't look for it, it is gone -- here is a pcmag.com tidbit about them) and brand-centric fan sites. While the "Fake" title leads the reader to believe that it is a bit of ironic humor at the expense of a tech celebrity (like the Fake Steve Jobs blog by Daniel Lyons), Chuck Westfall is only a celebrity to the initiated and the blog content is actually a colorful product-oriented venting of frustrations at Canon's shortcomings.
Being an user of Canon cameras and an avid blog reader, I'm always looking for interesting news sites. Failing that, technology gossip sites are always a guilty pleasure. Still, David Hobby at strobist.com recently linked to an interesting new phenomenon: the brand assassination blog. In this case, it is the Fake Chuck Westfall blog -- it is an interesting intersection between the snarky gossip sites like gawker.com, the Linux Hater's Blog or the now-defunct uncov.com (don't look for it, it is gone -- here is a pcmag.com tidbit about them) and brand-centric fan sites. While the "Fake" title leads the reader to believe that it is a bit of ironic humor at the expense of a tech celebrity (like the Fake Steve Jobs blog by Daniel Lyons), Chuck Westfall is only a celebrity to the initiated and the blog content is actually a colorful product-oriented venting of frustrations at Canon's shortcomings.
Continue reading Canon: please meet your brand assassin....
One of the things that makes it so hard to be involved with animal welfare in Houston and the Southern United States in general is that there is no "off season" -- cats and dogs are having kittens and puppies all year around. Just for illustration, I included a video of this little gal and her siblings after their early afternoon meal today. Kittens born in December... Yeah, that's crazy.
Continue reading One reason why animal welfare is so hard in Houston.
Hello. My name is Carl and I am an addict. I am addicted to Amazon.com. It is everywhere: on all my computers, on my iPhone, usually on my doorstep when I get home from work... Just when I think I'm getting to manage my addiction, they come out with a Gold Box deal that is so awesome, I can't turn it down. That Buffy the Vampire Slayer box set? That Stargate SG1 box set? All Amazon... All Gold Box deals. Amazon, you have made me watch more TV than ever before!Did I mention that it isn't just books and DVDs? That when I shop through the HOPE shopping page, I am donating affiliate fees to HOPE?
OK. I need to stop now. I have some shopping to do...
While I was out and about today, I had the chance to play with one of the nook demo units in a local store. I think that the obvious first comment is -- like everybody says -- that the nook isn't ready for prime-time yet. The user interface performance is pretty bad (which is may be the biggest challenge for this version of the hardware) but what struck me is the novel dual-screen interface and the underlying interaction model.
I'm pretty sure that I was not alone in thinking "That's brilliant! Why didn't I think of that?!" when I first saw the nook pictures and realized that they had married a color touch-screen to the main e-ink display. What I did not realize is how hard it is to develop an interaction model that works well for such a scheme. I wasn't expecting Apple-like levels of coherence and intuitiveness (unlike Apple, Barnes and Noble need a device now, not years in the future when technology catches up with the user experience quality Mr. Jobs and his minions demand) but I was taken by surprise by some of the UI quirks and counter-intuitive choices. While the hardware is very slick (give or take some buttons that don't have the greatest tactile feedback), the software experience is pretty rough.
That isn't to say that they have not done the right thing: they needed the device out as soon as possible and they appear to have done their homework on the underlying functionality. I'm far more willing to excuse a device that works but is rough around the edges than one that looks brilliant but doesn't actually work. It is just that they still have a long road ahead of them -- and I fear that they are going to have to be ruthless with the work done so far: there are some fundamental choices to the UI that they may need to revisit in order to make this an experience that is intuitive and flows nicely.
I guess that this is the test of what kind of software development organization they want to be? The Apple vs. Microsoft comparison is a little too easy but not entirely inaccurate: will they value making things Right over all else or will they take their users' expectations of continuity to heart? Think that they are still at a point where I would say that doing Right at the cost of consistency is the correct answer, but it is not a philosophy that sits well with the common customer satisfaction focus in industry. Their choices are going to be quite interesting, I am sure...
I'm pretty sure that I was not alone in thinking "That's brilliant! Why didn't I think of that?!" when I first saw the nook pictures and realized that they had married a color touch-screen to the main e-ink display. What I did not realize is how hard it is to develop an interaction model that works well for such a scheme. I wasn't expecting Apple-like levels of coherence and intuitiveness (unlike Apple, Barnes and Noble need a device now, not years in the future when technology catches up with the user experience quality Mr. Jobs and his minions demand) but I was taken by surprise by some of the UI quirks and counter-intuitive choices. While the hardware is very slick (give or take some buttons that don't have the greatest tactile feedback), the software experience is pretty rough.
That isn't to say that they have not done the right thing: they needed the device out as soon as possible and they appear to have done their homework on the underlying functionality. I'm far more willing to excuse a device that works but is rough around the edges than one that looks brilliant but doesn't actually work. It is just that they still have a long road ahead of them -- and I fear that they are going to have to be ruthless with the work done so far: there are some fundamental choices to the UI that they may need to revisit in order to make this an experience that is intuitive and flows nicely.
I guess that this is the test of what kind of software development organization they want to be? The Apple vs. Microsoft comparison is a little too easy but not entirely inaccurate: will they value making things Right over all else or will they take their users' expectations of continuity to heart? Think that they are still at a point where I would say that doing Right at the cost of consistency is the correct answer, but it is not a philosophy that sits well with the common customer satisfaction focus in industry. Their choices are going to be quite interesting, I am sure...
