They make 'it' a bit thicker? I think you need to read the article again. Metals traditionally have been able to be strengthened via compression after cooling (forcing the atoms out of alignment) as in cold-pressed steel, or via cooling the metal quickly (as the article states, not allowing the crystalline matrix to form). This is new because the alloy inherently cools in a 'jumbled' state. Yes, it's thicker than before, but it's not the same alloy that is thicker, it's an entirely new alloy.
Google's image archive is fantastic, but it seems to only archive PNG and JPG files. Given Google's general trailblazing attitude on algorithms and technology, it would seem appropriate that more media would make it into the archive than just these legacy formats, like PNG files.
Google is crawling Word docs and PDF files nowadays...what other media types are in store for the future?
...is the usability concept not often understood by designers, that the Familiar design is usually a better choice than the Good design.
People like what they understand. They understand what they are used to. It feels comfortable, and they feel a power over something they know how to control. Conversely, things which a person haven't seen before are things they often don't understand, and hence don't like. Because of this, it's usually better to design interfaces the way other programs/previous versions worked, rather than trying to fix previous stupidness.
Case in point -- <select> boxes on Windows IE vs. Macintosh IE. On MacIE when you focus a select box and start typing, it chooses the closest match to what you have started to type. So if, for example, you have a pull down with state names in it and type "MISSO" it will choose "Missouri".
On WinIE each character you type starts you over at the first item starting with that letter. So typing "MISSO" will choose "Omaha"...which is ludicrous. You'd have to type "MMMM" on Windows to cycle from "Maine" to "Massachusetts" and so on, each time hoping the next one was correct.
So...WinIE is clearly the Dumb Way wrt keyboard access to selects.
BUT! BUT!
While it would be rather easy to do, it would NOT make sense to use a JS library to change the selects on your site to behave like MacIE. It would be a BETTER way to behave, but it it would be the WORSE choice. Because users of IEWin who use keyboard shortcuts are USED to this stupid behavior, and expect it to behave that way. A windows user attempting to select 'Massachusetts' will type "MM" and be baffled when it jumps to 'Montana' instead. Frustrated. Angry.
SO...to get back on topic...you have program designers revamping keyboard shortcuts so they make more sense...re-organizing menus to be more logical...re-grouping tools in a Better way...and in the process they piss off their loyal user base.
Repeat with me now -- Familiar is better than Better.
OK, but the article starts off "when elephants dance, get out of the way". That's an amusing phrase, but is it supposed to mean anything for us?
"Look out the elephants are dancing, hide behind the trees and see who comes out the winner!"
This is advocating the wrong solution, IMO. The real saying should be "when two elephants fight, and the outcome is important to you, get your ass in there and start pounding on the enemy elephant!"
In case it gets/.-ed, the 'solution' referred to is:
The solution is actually quite simple and requires only three steps:
Revert the term of copyright to 14 years, immediately and retroactive to all existing works.
Recognize moral rights in the works authors create, like every other civilized country on the planet. Make it immediate and retroactive to all existing works.
Prohibit any corporation from owning a copyright. Corporations create nothing; they're consensual hallucinations and exist at our pleasure. I don't know about you, but I'm not much pleased any more.
What I don't get, from reading the article, is: who is the second elephant? The technology companies like Philips or MS?
A great movie! I was the web designer who made the official website for the movie (hey, be nice, it was done a LONG time ago) and so got to see the movie before it came out. I watched it 3 times, and made others come watch it. It's so very random and disconnected, and then you start to just see it all coming together.
Very good movie, and Rodney Brooks is fun to watch. I highly suggest you rent it...just be prepared to be barraged with non-sequitor scene after non-sequitor scene, without a plot but four intermixed lives revealed.
Hrm, no...I tried deleting all the contacts from within it, but not the folder itself. Let's see what happens if I delete that folder...nope, no glory.
Several other people have asked why this bothers me, especially since previously it was just the 'About' option up there.
The reasons are that
1) The About menu item IS useful, for finding out your capacity, but more importantly the iPod name. When I'm around other people who have iPod's, it was nice to be able to turn on the iPod, go straight to About and see if it was mine or not.
2) Conceptually, it's sullying the purity of the iPod UI as a music player. Sure, it's cool that you can store contacts on it...if you're into that. I'm not. Adding 5 more menu options (calculator, alarm clock, stopwatch, etc.) off the bottom of the screen would be similarly gross, even though I could 'just ignore them' and maintain the same level of functionality. It takes the iPod from a pure, well-designed music player into the realm of PDA, and while that's more powerful, it also adds complexity and fuzziness of purpose. And I don't want that.
The new Contact storage mechanism is neat (albeit a bit clunk--you have to manually drag vCards you want on your iPod from the Address book or Entourage, rather than automatically syncing them), and it's rather pretty (a nice display of the information on the iPod) but it's not optional (AFAICT).
That kinda irks me: I bought my iPod as an MP3 player and harddrive, not as a PDA. I don't want Contacts taking up a top menu spot. (I'd far rather have an albums category, for all the compilation albums which are not by the same artist, but that's another issue.)
I'd try to go back to the older firmware, but I really like some of the new features in this firmware (like the ability to quickly jog forward and backwards through the song to find a specfic spot). Can anyone find a way to turn off the contacts 'feature'?
I probably won't be prioritizing government traffic on any of my routers.
Definitely his/her perogative. But it's such a common sentiment (not trusting the government) I wonder...at what point *would* you voluntarily help out the government to a good end?
What would it take for the government to gain the trust necessary for you to say "Hey, I trust you to really only use this in an emergency, and will implement the procedures necessary to allow you to prioritize your traffic in the case of an emergency"?
I actually look at the screen when I type and use the mouse. The little keyboard nipples are very important for me to ensure my hands are back in the correct position before typing away.
I also am rather certain that my fingers often find the right keys by touching various key boundaries to know where they are occasionally, but I can't be sure. (So odd to not know what one's muscle memory is doing!)
I think foldable keyboards like the one for the Palm are the solution, not projecting...but interesting research, keep it up!
I don't want to be served watered down sentence fragments by a corporate AOL/TimeWarner beheometh.
Sure you do, when you're trying to figure out the gist of the story in overview mode. The problem you mention with CNN HN is because TV is a non-interactive medium, and you can't find out/they can't provide you with more information about the story in question. With this, you can.
The summarizer has to get its information from somewhere, from the full news story...this is just a way of giving you the executive version (akin to browsing slashdot with a comment threshold to 5), so you can find out the basics before delving into the details.
Although many usability experts will tell you that information is key, and barebones, functional sites are godlike, this is not always true. There are at least two categories of websites, grossly simplified as "Business" vs. "Art".
If you site is information and function oriented (e.g. an intranet, extranet, or product information page) then usability, clarity of information, etc. are very important.
However, there are some sites (for example, sites for movies) where the experience on the site *is* the purpose. The site may be as much about dazzling you with effects as it is about letting you find out who is in the movie.
By and large, "Business" sites should be clean, clear, and designed to convey information and function like the majority of good sites out there. Don't make the user have to figure out what your section names mean--use "contact" for contact, 'search' for search, etc. No section names like "The Fish", "The Gun", "The Smoking Barrel".
But if your site is about the experience of being there, then go crazy. Get funky. Make the site explorative.
For over 1.5 years I've been wanting (and attempting to convince friends and others to make) a device almost like this. Here's my instant money-making idea for anyone who wants it, IF ONLY THEY'LL MAKE THE DEVICES AND SELL THEM TO ME!
Really, I'm rather desperate. Here are the specs:
Source/Receiver
4 RCA (stereo in/out)
1 RJ-45
1 ID selector (set unit's ID to 1-8) on back
1 Source selector on front (choose to listen from any unit
Uses 10BT chip and 2 $2 TI A/D chip to convert sound to/from PCM on the network
Cost: $US150
Receiver Unit
2 RCA (stereo in)
1 RJ-45
1 Source selector on front choose to listen from any unit
Cost: $US100
Computer Software
Encodes/decodes broadcast signal from the LAN, to let your computer be a source or receiver unit.
Cost: $US50
What I want is many-to-many sound setup in the house. Let the computer be playing MP3s and tune into it on the stereo. Let the A/V system be attached as a source so I can have any/all of the computers tuned in, re-broadcasting the sound around the house for parties. Cheap(~) receiving units can be placed in various locations (outside) with cat5 run to them.
Later improvements would include using software to set a friendly name for each source, a small cheap display to show the source names on the screen, and real-time MP3 encoding/decoding.
But at a minimum I just want a small hardware device which I can feed an RCA signal and have it use my existing ethernet infrastructure to broadcast that signal around the house! Anyone? Anyone?
I could even put up with a channel that was basically infomercials if they used it to occasionally broadcast and hype some tournaments.
Think about a good Q3TA CTF tourney, where the Gaming Channel put a few spectator cameramen into the game to follow the action, with a show director swapping between various views and a commentator or two discussing strategy and pointing out good moves. Interviews with some of the clans playing, discussing strategy on various terra maps and certain timed plays they hoped to execute.
Mail server is no longer just 'mail', it's now 'mail...home.com'
It was always mail.....home.com!
When you put in "mail" or "www" or "news" it resolves to the correct address ONLY if your computer is set to supply the assumed domain of...home.com (for example, *.wlgrv1.pa.home.com).
Maybe at some point in the near past, but NOT near the beginning of their service, they pulled some DNS tricks to map "mail" to the full name or IP, but at the beginning you had to supply this information in your local TCP/IP configuration.
(I know this because I set up my parent's computer years and years ago with comcast@home, and had to pull out their annoying assumed domain name from the TCP/IP control panel of their macs because with it typing in "google" into the address bar of IE attempted to contact "google.wlgrv1.pa.home.com" rather than the standard mac/IE behaviour of resolving to "www.google.com". Then I had to hunt down all the "mail" and "news" and "www" and such settings the installer had placed in various applications and expand it to the real name.)
I think you perhaps have screwed up your computer settings (but as above, perhaps there were automagic DNS tricks on their DNS servers which have broken).
The free service offers ten hours per month, which should be sufficient to get you through any short-term outages.
Are they insane?! 10 hours per month? "Sure, after having always-on internet, after realizing that it's easier and faster to just visit dictionary.com rather than break out the deadtree version, after discovering the wonderful mix of interactivity but on-your-own-schedule that trading emails with a friend throughout the day is...sure, 20 minutes a day out to be plenty, right?"
Incredible. 100% false statements like these framed as happy truths in a company's public communication just make me want to scream. They should say "We know this sucks for you; understand that it sucks for us, too. We're really trying hard to minimize the effects on you, and have come up with a plan where you at least can have a LITTLE bit of access to the internet for free."
This feature is only available from the 'Googlebar'.
This is not true. Or rather, while it *is* true that the happy/sad face voting feature is only available on the toolbar, which is only available on Win32, I gotten search results recently from Google which included at the bottom a questionaire about the accuracy of the search results, allowing me to rank various items. I don't know if it was a temporary thing or a random selection, but it was on the page itself, and I was on a Mac. No toolbar, but still soliciting user feedback.
Slashdot Mirror
They make 'it' a bit thicker? I think you need to read the article again. Metals traditionally have been able to be strengthened via compression after cooling (forcing the atoms out of alignment) as in cold-pressed steel, or via cooling the metal quickly (as the article states, not allowing the crystalline matrix to form). This is new because the alloy inherently cools in a 'jumbled' state. Yes, it's thicker than before, but it's not the same alloy that is thicker, it's an entirely new alloy.
Yeah...let's say you do get used to your nice Linux operating system. How long before you have to go use someone else's running Windows?
So your argument is that you should give into the majority, accept an inferior product?
Ack...of course I meant to write "...to only archive GIF and JPG files"
Please correct the question appropriately if it makes it high enough to be submitted.
PS - Hi Craig! :)
Google's image archive is fantastic, but it seems to only archive PNG and JPG files. Given Google's general trailblazing attitude on algorithms and technology, it would seem appropriate that more media would make it into the archive than just these legacy formats, like PNG files.
Google is crawling Word docs and PDF files nowadays...what other media types are in store for the future?
This deserves more than a 3. PNG really is the lossless image format of the future, and needs adoption on as many fronts as possible.
...is the usability concept not often understood by designers, that the Familiar design is usually a better choice than the Good design.
People like what they understand. They understand what they are used to. It feels comfortable, and they feel a power over something they know how to control. Conversely, things which a person haven't seen before are things they often don't understand, and hence don't like. Because of this, it's usually better to design interfaces the way other programs/previous versions worked, rather than trying to fix previous stupidness.
Case in point -- <select> boxes on Windows IE vs. Macintosh IE. On MacIE when you focus a select box and start typing, it chooses the closest match to what you have started to type. So if, for example, you have a pull down with state names in it and type "MISSO" it will choose "Missouri".
On WinIE each character you type starts you over at the first item starting with that letter. So typing "MISSO" will choose "Omaha"...which is ludicrous. You'd have to type "MMMM" on Windows to cycle from "Maine" to "Massachusetts" and so on, each time hoping the next one was correct.
So...WinIE is clearly the Dumb Way wrt keyboard access to selects.
BUT! BUT!
While it would be rather easy to do, it would NOT make sense to use a JS library to change the selects on your site to behave like MacIE. It would be a BETTER way to behave, but it it would be the WORSE choice. Because users of IEWin who use keyboard shortcuts are USED to this stupid behavior, and expect it to behave that way. A windows user attempting to select 'Massachusetts' will type "MM" and be baffled when it jumps to 'Montana' instead. Frustrated. Angry.
SO...to get back on topic...you have program designers revamping keyboard shortcuts so they make more sense...re-organizing menus to be more logical...re-grouping tools in a Better way...and in the process they piss off their loyal user base.
Repeat with me now -- Familiar is better than Better.
I mean come on...you know what they're really advertising you'll be able to do :)
OK, but the article starts off "when elephants dance, get out of the way". That's an amusing phrase, but is it supposed to mean anything for us?
"Look out the elephants are dancing, hide behind the trees and see who comes out the winner!"
This is advocating the wrong solution, IMO. The real saying should be "when two elephants fight, and the outcome is important to you, get your ass in there and start pounding on the enemy elephant!"
What I don't get, from reading the article, is: who is the second elephant? The technology companies like Philips or MS?
A great movie! I was the web designer who made the official website for the movie (hey, be nice, it was done a LONG time ago) and so got to see the movie before it came out. I watched it 3 times, and made others come watch it. It's so very random and disconnected, and then you start to just see it all coming together.
Very good movie, and Rodney Brooks is fun to watch. I highly suggest you rent it...just be prepared to be barraged with non-sequitor scene after non-sequitor scene, without a plot but four intermixed lives revealed.
Hrm, no...I tried deleting all the contacts from within it, but not the folder itself. Let's see what happens if I delete that folder...nope, no glory. Several other people have asked why this bothers me, especially since previously it was just the 'About' option up there. The reasons are that 1) The About menu item IS useful, for finding out your capacity, but more importantly the iPod name. When I'm around other people who have iPod's, it was nice to be able to turn on the iPod, go straight to About and see if it was mine or not. 2) Conceptually, it's sullying the purity of the iPod UI as a music player. Sure, it's cool that you can store contacts on it...if you're into that. I'm not. Adding 5 more menu options (calculator, alarm clock, stopwatch, etc.) off the bottom of the screen would be similarly gross, even though I could 'just ignore them' and maintain the same level of functionality. It takes the iPod from a pure, well-designed music player into the realm of PDA, and while that's more powerful, it also adds complexity and fuzziness of purpose. And I don't want that.
Ack! Pure genious! That's *exactly* what I wanted! Thank you so much...I feel like such a fool :)
The new Contact storage mechanism is neat (albeit a bit clunk--you have to manually drag vCards you want on your iPod from the Address book or Entourage, rather than automatically syncing them), and it's rather pretty (a nice display of the information on the iPod) but it's not optional (AFAICT).
That kinda irks me: I bought my iPod as an MP3 player and harddrive, not as a PDA. I don't want Contacts taking up a top menu spot. (I'd far rather have an albums category, for all the compilation albums which are not by the same artist, but that's another issue.)
I'd try to go back to the older firmware, but I really like some of the new features in this firmware (like the ability to quickly jog forward and backwards through the song to find a specfic spot). Can anyone find a way to turn off the contacts 'feature'?
Definitely his/her perogative. But it's such a common sentiment (not trusting the government) I wonder...at what point *would* you voluntarily help out the government to a good end?
What would it take for the government to gain the trust necessary for you to say "Hey, I trust you to really only use this in an emergency, and will implement the procedures necessary to allow you to prioritize your traffic in the case of an emergency"?
I actually look at the screen when I type and use the mouse. The little keyboard nipples are very important for me to ensure my hands are back in the correct position before typing away.
I also am rather certain that my fingers often find the right keys by touching various key boundaries to know where they are occasionally, but I can't be sure. (So odd to not know what one's muscle memory is doing!)
I think foldable keyboards like the one for the Palm are the solution, not projecting...but interesting research, keep it up!
Sure you do, when you're trying to figure out the gist of the story in overview mode. The problem you mention with CNN HN is because TV is a non-interactive medium, and you can't find out/they can't provide you with more information about the story in question. With this, you can.
The summarizer has to get its information from somewhere, from the full news story...this is just a way of giving you the executive version (akin to browsing slashdot with a comment threshold to 5), so you can find out the basics before delving into the details.
Although many usability experts will tell you that information is key, and barebones, functional sites are godlike, this is not always true. There are at least two categories of websites, grossly simplified as "Business" vs. "Art".
If you site is information and function oriented (e.g. an intranet, extranet, or product information page) then usability, clarity of information, etc. are very important.
However, there are some sites (for example, sites for movies) where the experience on the site *is* the purpose. The site may be as much about dazzling you with effects as it is about letting you find out who is in the movie.
By and large, "Business" sites should be clean, clear, and designed to convey information and function like the majority of good sites out there. Don't make the user have to figure out what your section names mean--use "contact" for contact, 'search' for search, etc. No section names like "The Fish", "The Gun", "The Smoking Barrel".
But if your site is about the experience of being there, then go crazy. Get funky. Make the site explorative.
What, you mean like Philip Johnson's 'Glass House' (1949, New Canaan, CT)?
Oh yeah, and: LOL. Potty humor...is there nothing funnier? :)
For over 1.5 years I've been wanting (and attempting to convince friends and others to make) a device almost like this. Here's my instant money-making idea for anyone who wants it, IF ONLY THEY'LL MAKE THE DEVICES AND SELL THEM TO ME!
Really, I'm rather desperate. Here are the specs:
Source/Receiver4 RCA (stereo in/out)
1 RJ-45
1 ID selector (set unit's ID to 1-8) on back
1 Source selector on front (choose to listen from any unit
Uses 10BT chip and 2 $2 TI A/D chip to convert sound to/from PCM on the network
Cost: $US150
Receiver Unit
2 RCA (stereo in)
1 RJ-45
1 Source selector on front choose to listen from any unit
Cost: $US100
Computer Software
Encodes/decodes broadcast signal from the LAN, to let your computer be a source or receiver unit.
Cost: $US50
What I want is many-to-many sound setup in the house. Let the computer be playing MP3s and tune into it on the stereo. Let the A/V system be attached as a source so I can have any/all of the computers tuned in, re-broadcasting the sound around the house for parties. Cheap(~) receiving units can be placed in various locations (outside) with cat5 run to them.
Later improvements would include using software to set a friendly name for each source, a small cheap display to show the source names on the screen, and real-time MP3 encoding/decoding.
But at a minimum I just want a small hardware device which I can feed an RCA signal and have it use my existing ethernet infrastructure to broadcast that signal around the house! Anyone? Anyone?
I could even put up with a channel that was basically infomercials if they used it to occasionally broadcast and hype some tournaments.
Think about a good Q3TA CTF tourney, where the Gaming Channel put a few spectator cameramen into the game to follow the action, with a show director swapping between various views and a commentator or two discussing strategy and pointing out good moves. Interviews with some of the clans playing, discussing strategy on various terra maps and certain timed plays they hoped to execute.
I could get INTO watching that!
It was always mail. ... .home.com!
When you put in "mail" or "www" or "news" it resolves to the correct address ONLY if your computer is set to supply the assumed domain of ...home.com (for example, *.wlgrv1.pa.home.com).
Maybe at some point in the near past, but NOT near the beginning of their service, they pulled some DNS tricks to map "mail" to the full name or IP, but at the beginning you had to supply this information in your local TCP/IP configuration.
(I know this because I set up my parent's computer years and years ago with comcast@home, and had to pull out their annoying assumed domain name from the TCP/IP control panel of their macs because with it typing in "google" into the address bar of IE attempted to contact "google.wlgrv1.pa.home.com" rather than the standard mac/IE behaviour of resolving to "www.google.com". Then I had to hunt down all the "mail" and "news" and "www" and such settings the installer had placed in various applications and expand it to the real name.)
I think you perhaps have screwed up your computer settings (but as above, perhaps there were automagic DNS tricks on their DNS servers which have broken).
How am I ... *halp* ... supposed to speak when ... *hulp* ... I can't ... *help* ... breathe?
Are they insane?! 10 hours per month? "Sure, after having always-on internet, after realizing that it's easier and faster to just visit dictionary.com rather than break out the deadtree version, after discovering the wonderful mix of interactivity but on-your-own-schedule that trading emails with a friend throughout the day is...sure, 20 minutes a day out to be plenty, right?"
Incredible. 100% false statements like these framed as happy truths in a company's public communication just make me want to scream. They should say "We know this sucks for you; understand that it sucks for us, too. We're really trying hard to minimize the effects on you, and have come up with a plan where you at least can have a LITTLE bit of access to the internet for free."
Phah!
This is not true. Or rather, while it *is* true that the happy/sad face voting feature is only available on the toolbar, which is only available on Win32, I gotten search results recently from Google which included at the bottom a questionaire about the accuracy of the search results, allowing me to rank various items. I don't know if it was a temporary thing or a random selection, but it was on the page itself, and I was on a Mac. No toolbar, but still soliciting user feedback.