BASEMENT.ORG
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 29, 2006, 02:13PMInternet Explorer 7 Beta 3 Is Out
Internet Explorer 7 Beta 3 is out. The primary focus appears to be the RSS reader (though I'm sure many other bugs were fixed). The RSS changes are summarized at Microsoft's Team RSS blog.
According to the blog, the RSS functionality is "feature complete." I've mentioned this before. This may finally be the application that thrusts RSS into mainstream use. While there are other more full-featured installable apps out there (FeedDemon being the best of the bunch), we can't underestimate the power of not having to install anything for a huge portion of the user population. I'm still not entirely convinced that it'll catch fire like it should. The "real need" isn't that clearly visible just yet.
Sweetie : A Free Icon Set
Sweetie is a free and very nice icon set. Go get it.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 28, 2006, 09:52AMGoogle Reader Gets A Facelift
Google Reader has gotten a more-than-subtle facelift. Some worthwhile changes I think. For web-based feed readers, I think Feedlounge takes the cake (mmmm, cake).
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 27, 2006, 03:47PMGoogle Releases Gadget Desktop Designer
The gadget wars just keep getting hotter. Microsoft's Gadgets released an SDK a few weeks ago, Yahoo!'s got their whole gadget (sorry, widget) thing going on. Even Opera has widgets these days.
Google makes the latest push by releasing Google Desktop Gadget Designer. It looks like a graphical interface that simplifies building gadgets.
What's interesting about all this gadget/widget stuff is how each player is looking to better position themselves on the desktop ecosystem. It's all implicit acknowledgement that the Web browser, however powerful, will eventually give way to more discrete, umm, "widgets" of functionality that will live all over your desktop experience. Microsoft's Live Gadgets are advertised to run seamlessly in Vista's upcoming Sidebar. Google's Gadgets which run in their My Google interface can also be leveraged on their desktop download. Even Adobe is looking to re-introduce Flash and PDF as technologies that live away from the browser and on the desktop through their Apollo initiative.
It's an interesting trend that challenges both technologists and interaction designers to think about information and functionality in smaller, more independent forms.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 26, 2006, 09:31AMDigg For Designers : PixelGroovy
Digg For Designers : PixelGroovy.
Design Observer : The Power of Context
Based on the 25 comments, I guess I'm a bit late to this. Nevertheless, Design Observer talks about The Power of Context.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 23, 2006, 11:12AMDigg V3 Coming Monday While Beta.Netscape Seems To Languish
All the buzz today is around the upcoming upgrade of the mighty Digg.com. Basement.org has had the pleasure of being dugg four times over the past year and I can tell you first hand, there are few phenomenas on the Internet as powerful as the Digg Effect. The onslaught of traffic is downright scary. Digg is one of those rare sites that has found that sweet spot. It's oddly addictive and rarely disappoints.
About a week ago, the new Netscape beta debuted and there was a lot of buzz on the Internet about its potential. It's effectively a Digg clone with some social and editorial aspects sprinkled in. So how is the new Netscape doing? Well, a quick visit today as of this post and it doesn't look like a whole lot is going on. The top stories are have only a handful of diggs...I mean votes. Such is life in the Web 2.0 world. We get all excited for about 6 minutes and then we move on ("we" being the geeks that love plaiyng with apps).
In all fairness, I'm not sure how broadly Netscape has let it be known that this thing even exists. A quick visit to their main site (under www) doesn't show any links to the beta. So who knows.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 22, 2006, 11:47AMGoogle Heart Adobe
Similar to the deal with Dell, Google is partnering with Adobe to bundle the Google toolbar with Adobe's (formerly Macromedia's) Shockwave Player download.
Now let's be real. The Shockwave Player isn't exactly on any Top Downloads list these days. But of course, that's not what this is all about. It's about bundling Google wares with "various Adobe products." And of course, among the many various products is the mighty Flash runtime - arguably the most widely deployed platform in the world.
And why is this important to Google? Well, Google is going to need to fortify itself from the inevitable changes that will point users, by default to Microsoft properties. That's why they've paid Dell and now Adobe real money. As I've clamored about in the past, Google's primary entry point today is the browser and URL and to stay competitive they must establish alternative entry points. Toolbars. Google Desktop. Gadgets. Widgets. Extensions. You name it.
PDF & Flash are a great way to sneak Google into the experience because they're just about everywhere. People will download them - unlike that Google Backpack nonsense that was put out months ago. Flash is even more effective because the download is practically transparent these days. It just happens. And that's what Google wants to piggyback here.
These moves are all about Microsoft. Microsoft will get search to "good enough" and then use its leverage, i.e. it's ownership of the operating system we all play on, to make it far easier to end up on Windows Live or other Microsoft destinations.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 20, 2006, 09:28AMNew Study : Complex Products Are "Broken"
So Mr. Businessman, are you still trying to figure out if it's worth spending the money on some good interaction design? Arc90's Chris LoSacco rambled off a list of reasons why it's worthwhile a week ago. Now here's some hard evidence: a new study reports that half of all returned electronic items function perfectly well, people just don't know how to use them. If I'm not mistaken, when you go back to the store with a product and return it, you're refunded your money.
People spend millions of dollars for a measly 30 seconds of air time on the Superbowl. Why? Because it's known to reach a vastly larger audience than your typical TV programming. It's a wonder that many businesses fail to connect a poorly designed interface with a narrower customer base. You want the kids. You want the grandmas. You want the person who can't even speak English. It's simple math: make it easier to use, and your potential customer base grows larger.
Cool Flash Physics Demos
Levitated.net has an oh-so-sweet collection of Flash physics demos (via Passionate Users).
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 19, 2006, 03:12PMAn Alternative Desktop : BumpTop Prototype
Anand Agarawala and Ravin Balakrishnan of the University of Toronto have put a really interesting alternative approach to a virtual desktop. The BumpTop is a desktop where the information assets take on real-world characteristics. Users can pile, scrunch, fold and organize items just as they do physical objects on their desktop. Quicktime and Windows Media movie demos of the prototype are available. There's also a PDF white paper on the rationale behind the BumpTop prototype.
I think Anand and Ravin are onto something here. It is far easier to leverage our knowledge of the physical world and all it's characteristic when creating interfaces. While icons and actions like drag-and-drop surely help, the metaphor often breaks down. With this prototype, they're taking the metaphor to a new, far more realistic level.
Over a year ago, I gave a talk at the IA Summit around an alternative methodology for interface and information design called Information Objects. The driver behind that approach is similar to the rationale behind a prototype like BumpTop. In short, we are experts at manipulating the objects in the physical world. Why not leverage that expertise when creating interfaces? A PDF on Information Objects is available for download here.
It's also worth noting that, for a long time, there was a technology barrier to these types of interfaces that we're just now overcoming. Cheaper, more powerful processing power is now available to handle the graphics and physics demands of such interfaces.
Open source Templates
I'm not sure if this old news or not, but it's new to me. Free, nicely designed CSS/XHTML layouts under Creative Commons.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 15, 2006, 02:41PMCan Digg Sue Netscape And Win?
A quick glance of Netscape's new beta front page and one thing comes to mind: it looks and works a lot like Digg. The differences aren't even subtle. It's a blatant rip-off. And so, the question arises, can Digg protect it's creation in some way? Or more specifically, can you legally protect a user interface?
I can sort of speak to this issue because I have a law degree and my essay for my Copyright Law class was about the copyright-ability of user interfaces. I'm by no means an expert, but I'll try to sum up what I learned there as it would apply to Digg and Netscape.
The answer to the above question takes us into the world of copyrights and patents, the only two viable options for protecting the “look and feel” of an application.
Copyrighting Digg
From the U.S. government’s own copyright FAQ:
Copyright is a form of protection grounded in the U.S. Constitution and granted by law for original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Copyright covers both published and unpublished works.
Copyrights protect:
…original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, such as poetry, novels, movies, songs, computer software, and architecture. Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed.
Now don't get all giddy at the sight of “computer software” in the excerpt above. What they’re talking about there is the actual source or object code of a piece of software. That code is filed as a “literary work” (go figure) and is protected under copyright law.
But what if the code is entirely different but the result is clearly similar? It’s obviously the case that Netscape did not steal the Digg codebase but rather studied the end product and wrote their own code to create a similar end-user experience. Can Digg protect itself, under copyright law, from others copying the “look & feel” and general functionalty of Digg?
Under U.S. copyright laws, no, they pretty much can’t. While there is no perfectly concrete basis for this rule of law, the case precedents of previous years have made it pretty clear that you can’t copyright a user interface. From the same FAQ, under what cannot be copyrighted:
Ideas, procedures, methods, systems, processes, concepts, principles, discoveries, or devices, as distinguished from a description, explanation, or illustration.
Ouch. There are some seriously broad and general terms there. You can make a pretty strong argument that the “Digg experience” is a “system” or “concept” that is comprised of a set of functionality (i.e. “methods” or “procedures”). The Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. case that ended in 1994 seemed to primarily assert that you cannot copyright the “look & feel” of a software application. In that case, Apple went after Microsoft’s Windows product asserting copyright infringement of its Macintosh operating system, and lost. Wikipedia nicely summarizes it here.
There are public policy arguments against protecting user interfaces under copyright law. For one, a good user interface makes us all more productive and it’s a better thing for society if others can benefit from it. Another argument against copyrighting user interfaces is that they’re not really creative works – the primary domain of copyright law – but rather tools or devices in and of themselves. Which brings us to the patent option.
Patenting Digg
A patent is the grant of a property right to an inventor for an invention. An inventor can patent an invention under various criteria (listed here) but the one that best relates to Digg is the ability to patent “any new and useful process.”
Now unlike copyrightable works, where by simply completing the work and calling it yours it is copyrighted, the patent process requires the inventor to be a lot more proactive about filing a patent. In other words, even if you invented something, if you don’t patent it, it’s not protected.
As to whether user interfaces can be patented, that’s also debatable. Amazon successfully patented and has since defended it’s patent for 1–click shopping. The patent caused a pretty widespread backlash against patenting on the Web but the patent itself is still standing today. Apple, on the other hand, failed to patent the famous iPod interface (blocked due to a prior application).
As for Digg, well we can spare ourselves the discussion on patent protection because it doesn’t appear that Digg has attempted to even to try to patent it’s service. There is no mention of patents or patents pending on the site and a search of the patent database reveals no such filing.
And so, it seems that Digg will just have to bite it’s tongue and watch as the, umm *cough* “new Netscape” makes it out into the world. As they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
The JavaScript Library World Cup
A good summary of the major Javascript frameworks : The JavaScript Library World Cup.
All Sorts Of Drama In The Digg World
So AOL/Netscape put out their Digg clone (and you really can't call it anything but a "clone"). Techcrunch has a good summary. Meanwhile, Digg is upgrading (maybe to this?). I'm not sure. But as of this posting, Digg is down. In it's place are favorite links of the various Digg members. It's resulting in an absolute slamming of servers on the other end.
One observation about Netscape going this route: to the rest of the world - the legions of Internet users that are not 2.0-savvy, this very well will be perceived as a new, neat invention. However viral ideas may be within the realm of the tech savvy, it is a huge population outside of it. You think Netvibes is doing well? Let's compare it alongside live.com. Ouch.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 14, 2006, 02:26PMArc90 On Design
I've always considered myself a "designer." But what kind? At blog.arc90, I give some thoughts on what we mean by "design."
From Google With Love
Ever watch the old James Bond movies where 007 somehow gets kidnapped and wakes up in some elaborate lair that was built into the side of a mountain on some remote island? Just behind the natural landscape are these uniformed workers, toilling away to help some evil rich guy realize is sinister master plan to rule the world.
Well, reality seems to be following fiction. Google is quiety ("shshshsh!") building these massive data centers fit with massive cooling systems. These Googleplex's (I'm not sure if I'm using the word properly) will house...everything. Everything about what we do. What we want. What we seek. What we produce. What we write. Email. Photograph. Listen to. Watch. Buy...(insert generic maniacal plan-to-rule-the-world laugh here).
I've worn the hat of Paranoid Blogger before when I wrote about Google's Laser-Guided Missles. That article seemed to resonate with a lot of people. Well, you gotta put those missiles somewhere. I'll admit, I'll often find myself laughing at my own paranoia. But then again, Google's ambitions (along with Microsoft's and Yahoo's) are pretty scary. These big data centers are going to house all kinds of details about us. And will we always know what aspects of our behavior is being stored away?
O'Reilly recently pointed to a study where Google is looking into using your computer's built-in microphone to analyze ambient sounds. These sounds will be studied and analyzed (can you hear the big machines humming?) to determine which television show you're currently watching and promptly return Web content related to that show.
O'Reilly goes on to talk about the frightening, AI-run-amuck scenario. I'm not sure about all that, but the immediate feeling I get is: creepy. Who is that guy with the trenchcoat who keeps following me around?
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 12, 2006, 02:34PMNielsen Norman Group : RSS No Match For Email Newsletters
According to new research from the Nielsen Norman Group, RSS isfar less effective at keeping people's attention (and thus garnering business) from users than email newsletters.
This isn't very surprising. It's pretty widely known that RSS adoption by the masses has been slow going, but this study adds a new wrinkle: even those that use RSS spend very little time on those headlines. The study goes on to note that people have become very proficient in handling/sifting through email. Some observations:
- I'm not sure it's fair to compare RSS to email just yet. I can't imagine very many people are subscribing to ecommerce newsletters via RSS these days. The work habits around RSS as business marketing aren't fully baked...yet.
- A critical shortcoming of just about every RSS reader or aggregator is that all content looks the same. Why do I still visit CNN and techmeme on the web? Because the visual layout of the sites provide me with some context and cognitive guidance. Feed readers don't. After all, all feeds are not created equal.
- RSS is supposed to be a great push technology. But let's be realistic. Nothing gets in our faces better than email. We will iinevitably go to our Inboxes. It will take much broader and deeper adoption before RSS comes near the attention level of email.
- Related to the last point, we are so committed to email that we're rewiring ourselves to handle and manage SPAM better. So while RSS comes to us free of noise and junk, we're sticking by email...for now.
RSS is and continues to be the darling of technophiles who enjoy digesting large amounts of content. But we shouldn't delude ourselves. Email is at a whole other level of the Technology Collective Consciousness. It will take a lot more before RSS gets there. It's an incredibly promising technology but some tweaks are needed both in terms of how the technology is implemented and how we educate people about it.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 11, 2006, 09:49PMNeat CSS/Markup Renderer
Here's a nice implementation of a CSS/XHTML renderer. Ideal for trying out an idea before applying it to your own code.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 8, 2006, 01:36PMGoogle Firefox Browser Sync
Google has released a Firefox extension that maintains your Firefox settings across computers. Pretty useful. Just keep in mind it requires a Google account and syncs your saved passwords as well.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 7, 2006, 02:30PMGoogle's Design-Driven Enthusiasm
In regards to the irrational exuberance often associated with Google's offerings, Techcrunch's Michael Arrington asks: What drives this kind of blind enthusiasm?
Anyone who follows basement.org knows I'm not a Google fanboy. But sometimes you just have to call a spade a spade: Google has done an outstanding job of building a near rabid brand loyalty. By saying less (they have virtually no traditional advertising campaigns) and by masking some relatively impressive technical feats with a simple, dumbed-down design, they've created a mystique around their brand.
Stepping back, Google's name is synonymous with searching on the Web, but its goodwill is also a product of their commitment to simplicity. Google, like Apple, is a great case study in the importance of delivering technology in the context of a simple, intuitive experience. They are an experience design success story.
I would respond to Arrington's rant with the following question: why was it such a big deal when the iPod was released? Portable digital music players had been around for years. It was a big deal because it was better-designed. And that difference is not trivial. That's not to say that Google Spreadsheet or whatever else Google puts out will be better. It's just that, right now, Google has earned the benefit of the doubt. Gmail and their core search products have set the tone.
Now is this free ticket that Google's been handed an Unlimited Ride? I seriously doubt it. You still have to bring real, differentiating value to get noticed. Had Google Spreadsheet been their next offering after search, few would doubt that it's reception would've been huge. After 20 or so offerings, not so huge.
Speaking more broadly, the loyalty and enthusiasm Google is capable of conjuring speaks to the value of delivering a good product wrapped in a compelling end-user experience.
Massive List of Photoshop Stuff
Plugins. Filters. Brushes. Actions. You name it. Here's a massive list of Photoshop add-ons.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 6, 2006, 10:19AMThe ROI of Interaction Design
Arc90's Chris LoSacco discusses on the real, tangible returns of investing in interface design. Few things frustrate me more than key decision-makers not getting the value of good, thoughtful interface design. The post highlights some excellent points on the often-overlooked value of interaction design.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 5, 2006, 10:17AMThe Best Stuff In The World
A nicely designed, social Web 2.0 thingamajig: The Best Stuff In The World let's you find and vote on...umm...stuff. It's sort of like a Digg for everything else.
Posted by Richard Ziade on June 2, 2006, 10:22AM"Your Edges Are Our Edges"
Consder the following:
- You can search for and watch millions of video snippets on sites like Youtube and Google Video. Sitting down and watching a film for 90 minutes (or God forbid, two hours) is becoming less and less tolerable. Feasting on 10–60 second snippets of whatever is becoming the norm.
- For $0.99, you can own one of millions of songs of just about any album on Apple’s iTunes service. Mix. Reorder. Customize your own playlists. The notion of picking up a CD, heading to the park, and letting the tracks unfold in sequence seems almost archaic.
- The hot new basic currency for written text is the blog entry. The newspaper or magazine articles that…*gasp*…run for multiple pages are threatened. And books? Pfft. Forget books.
We don’t sit down for meals much anymore these days on the Web. Instead, we just snack a whole lot. The Web relentlessly slices, dices and serves up entertainment and knowledge. Some have heralded this trend as the True Web, a grand democratization of information. Whereas access to such riches were only available to a privileged few, the Web delivers all these pieces to the masses. Categorized. Searchable. Retrievable. Easy to digest. As the artifacts of our world are consumed and infinitely linked together in this web of snippets, few would doubt that we are all gaining something. I also think we’re losing something as well.
The major search engines of today, most notably Google, have come to realize the power of owning information and content. When I use the term “owning” in this context, I don’t mean “taking possession of” but rather the notion of learning, studying, scanning, copying and indexing. Once digested, the content is now searchable and retrievable by a search engine. We’re all being told that the digitization and indexing of the world’s information is a good thing and in many ways it is. We’re still reaping the rewards of the hyperlink. As more content, and more types of content come into the fold, the sum of all this content becomes that much more potent. Connecting all this stuff is wickedly powerful. There is no denying that.
And so, we are nearing an age where Google and its brethren are indexing everything, connecting it all together, and readying it for easy retrieval. Anyone can find anything at any time. Complete knowledge is no longer the exclusive domain of a priviliged few. By moving the world’s Library to the digital realm, the playing field is being leveled. In a recent New York Times article by Kevin Kelly (now only available under the Times’ subscription service), Mr. Kelly extolled the virtues of surfing from book to book, as the major search engines are on a relentless course to scan and index the world’s books. Beyond finding and riding links between books, we’ll be able to mash up books to create our own creative interpretations.
“I just love real books.”
In response to the supposed coming of the eBook revolution (a revolution which in fact never came), I’ve often heard friends talk about how they love their real books. They appreciate the actual physical object in their possession. They can’t pin down exactly why they prefer physical books. Their arguments most often default back to a sort of nostalgic, almost romantic view of books.
I’ve never heard a good, sound rationale as to why real books are better and shouldn’t go away. I think the slicing and dicing of creative works sheds some light on it. A book is, in many ways, a conversation. A direct link between reader and author that brings with it a certain tempo, atmosphere and intimacy. An emotional reaction will rarely occur in the first few minutes of reading. Instead, we’re slowly drawn in and if we’re enjoying it, a relationship ensues. That direct, unencumbered link is sacred. And that object – the physical book – symbolizes that relationship. A conversation over cocktails comes nowhere near the level of intimacy we can expereience with books.
Welcome To Short Attention Span Theater
Some of my favorite albums of all time are albums. The sequence of tracks give the whole a greater meaning than its parts. While the individual songs may be distinct, the album itself is often its own experience. It often conveys a mood or time and place. An album like Okkervil River’s Black Sheep Boy is more an opus than an album. Not only setting mood and setting but conveying a common thread throughout the songs. Should you be able to slice this album’s tracks to your liking? I wouldn’t make a judgment about that. I just think it would be a shame to not experience the album as a whole.
The tangible lines that separate these creative works are disappearing. Today, we struggle to conceptualize the physical counterpart to all these creative works. All this “stuff” is just floating out there. We see glimpses of it in search results and in samples here and there. As consumers, we’re not just consuming anymore. We’ve been handed tools. We’re now conditioned to participate. Remixing and collecting and compiling. We are not only consuming anymore. We carve to our liking, taking the pieces we want and regurgitating them with a hint of our own identity.
The casualty in all this is the original creative voice. Whereas it once had hundreds of pages to speak, it now has a blog entry. Or minutes of music. Or seconds of film. It has lost the benefits of that physical artifact. I imagine that Vietnam memorial wall. It is both a tribute and a fallacy. Each person drowned out in a sea of names. All perfectly spaced apart and alphabetized. Step back from it and you see nothing but a gray blur.
It isn’t just about how a book feels in your hand. It’s about how that book’s physical independence and integrity stands for the author’s voice. It is a manifestation of the creator’s soul. As the Digital Machine steamrolls across all of this content, that voice is lost. It is drowned out by the overwhelming shrill of the masses.
In a recent appearance at a booksellers convention, the author John Updike gave an impassioned response to the supposed virtues of digital books and libraries:
Books traditionally have edges. Some are rough cut. Some are smooth cut. And a few, at least in my extravagant publishing house, are even top-stained. In the electronic ant hill, where are the edges? The book revolution, from the Renaissance on, taught men and women to cherish and cultivate their individuality, threatens to end in a sparkling cloud of snippets. So booksellers, defend your lonely forts. Keep your edges dry. Your edges are our edges. For some of us, books are intrinsic to our human identity.Posted by Richard Ziade on June 1, 2006, 02:38PM
Umm...Hello Netvibes Users?
Looking at my Feedburner stats today, something pretty flippin' weird is going on. It's showing over 50,000 (yes 50,000) subscribers. The great majority of them, according to Feedburner, are coming from Netvibes?
Does anyone have any clue why this is? The Feedburner folks say the stats look real. Did basement.org's feed end up on some default page? Ah. So many questions.