The news
Posted on September 1st, 2010
A few gems of wisdom today from the morning news we wake up to:
- Tony Blair went to war but couldn’t have imagined it was going to be a nightmare.
- Some politician thinks No Child Left Behind is working because the curriculum kids have today is “much harder” than when he was a schoolchild.
- Rodney Clark, owner of an oyster poaching company, claims innocence because he “cannot control” the actions of other people just because he employs them.
NPR (or KUOW) by passed each of these along these as observations or sound bites without comment. Ira Glass is right about broadcast journalism.
Tags: media
Filed under: culture | View Comments
Pointing at the TV
Posted on August 29th, 2010
By now it’s generally agreed that iTV is coming on Wednesday and is likely to be iOS-based.
Many folks have assumed that “running iOS” means “running iPad apps” directly, or iPad-style apps via another App Store. This raises a lot of questions about the interaction model; how do you manipulate an app that’s beyond your reach? If we expect any new iOS device will run existing apps from smaller screens, we run into the “focus” problem: if you can’t touch directly, you have to have context for the “noun” you are about to “verb” with the next tap.
There are a few ways to address focus.
A directional controller (d-pad or gestural touch surface) can navigate a straightforward, rectilinear menu interface as most TV interfaces (including Apple TV) do today. Or that same controller could move focus between more arbitrary active regions, as with many DVD menus. Jon Bell and Dan Wineman are excited about gestural touch surfaces and their potential here. After all, the Remote app for controlling your Apple TV from an iPhone has a similar touch surface approach for navigating menus.
I’m not convinced. Even though it is common to confound gestural touch surfaces and direct touch UI, this is still an indirect focus controller. I cannot imagine Apple adopting a discretely-shifting-focus UI akin to DVD menus, and the best alternative seems to be introducing a cursor for arbitrary focus. Once you’re using a directional controller (gestural or not) to control a cursor on a screen (decoupled from the controller surface)… well, that’s a pointer. You might as well have a mouse.
The indirect nature of pointers is contrary to the “magic” of direct interaction Steve Jobs is excited about.
A more widget-like App Store isn’t out of the question, though, for very simple apps with simple interactions. My hopes, though, are for greater interaction between iOS devices.
It’s a common complaint that we cannot stream audio from our iPads to AirTunes; we could see that enabled along with a video streaming API. I imagine content owners are the only obstacle to the SDK enabling the Netflix app to send video to your AppleTV. Such an interface could mature into a very compelling platform for passive display, whether for displaying Keynote presentations or dashboards for multiplayer games.
Coordination from other direction would also be sensible. If any connected iOS “remote” could display interactive meta-content, we’d finally have a chance at the sorts of compelling cross-screen experiences I’ve seen mocked up to many times. Apple already has a format for that, which could let us browse through supplemental content on our personal screen while watching media on the big one.
With time, I imagine we’ll see this sort of coordination, even if it’s disabled for “professional” content. This week, maybe we just get a scroll wheel.
Tags: apple, media
Filed under: design | View Comments
More like growing
Posted on August 25th, 2010
The building metaphor has outlived its usefulness
Frederick P. Brooks, Jr., No Silver Bullet — Essence and Accidents of Software Engineering (1986)
Tags: programming
Filed under: quotes | View Comments
Art vs. Design
Posted on August 24th, 2010
Art challenges…design solves
Matt Conway, email, 19 August 2010
Tags: design
Filed under: quotes, work | View Comments
Hacker mind
Posted on August 12th, 2010
Paul Graham has posted his thoughts on what went wrong at Yahoo. As always, his thoughts are cogent and presented as a dense but accessible story. One of his statements, though, deserves some inspection:
At Yahoo, user-facing software was controlled by product managers and designers. The job of programmers was just to take the work of the product managers and designers the final step, by translating it into code.
One obvious result of this practice was that when Yahoo built things, they often weren’t very good.
I expect Paul meant this as a condemnation of the waterfall, specify-and-build process, but it sounds like an attack on product managers and designers. Perhaps it is, as he thinks very highly of programmers and I wouldn’t be surprised if the designers at Yahoo were… yahoos.
But I do wish he’d be more explicit, here, because in some places, everyone’s a hacker, even if they don’t write code.
Tags: code, design
Filed under: work | View Comments