Archive for Internet
August 4, 2008 at 6:00 am · Filed under Internet
I’ve posted in the past about engaging in social networking. For some reason doing so has always rung hollow to me, and as such there was little lasting power. There have been a few which have tempted me initially, Facebook was briefly a blasty-blast, Plurk was a riot, and LinkedIn seemed like a good idea. Yet for each, the luster has faded and I am no longer engaged in the site.
Recently, I think I figured out why: I don’t like communicating with people I don’t know “in RL.” With all of the sites I’ve tried and initially enjoyed, there have been a group of people I know who used it first and drew me in. While there, I was just communicating with my friends via a new medium and it was a blast. Yet, with each there came a point where there would be strange voices in the conversation suddenly. Names I couldn’t place, and strangers I couldn’t put a face too. The sites which started out in good fun all became a place that was no longer “safe.” Of all the sites I’ve tried, Facebook is the only one I still visit occasionally, but it’s far easier to isolate myself among my friends on Facebook. There is a deep permissions system I can use to hide away where no one can see me. Facebook, for all of its privacy follies, is one of the safer places on the internet.
I’m not a overly private person. Google my name, or better still, my online identity, and you’ll find thousands of results. I’m definately out there - a lot more so than many people - but Google results aren’t engaging. They’re not a medium to communicate with me. To me it’s just a part of modern living. By and large, I am in control of the information that is available about me in those searches; it isn’t personally damning or embarassing. It doesn’t reflect who I am, or what I believe, and if it does, it’s because I’ve put it in this blog and I’m comfortable with people reading it. The rare exceptions are blog posts I wrote a long time ago and now shudder when I read them, but I leave them up, as a marker of who I used to be.
So with social networks, if I engage it’s because I feel safe to be myself. Once that safety is compromised, so too is my willingness to contribute. I wonder if I’m alone in this?
July 28, 2008 at 8:45 pm · Filed under Internet
I have long been in the “Firefox is okay, but no better than IE7″ camp. I’ve even blogged that Firefox Sucks Too. My claim has always been that Firefox is better at some things than IE, but not all of them, and in fact IE was better at some stuff than Firefox. Mostly I’ve stood my ground and claimed that there aren’t any good browsers yet. Since that time, Firefox 3 has been released and to give it a fair shake I’ve been using it as my main browser. The verdict: it is hands down the best browser available today (yes, I’ve tried Opera, and no I don’t like it).
What makes it so great?
- It is scary fast. Noticably faster without having to do any benchmarking, etc.
- I love built in spell checking. Yes, it was in Firefox 2, but Firefox 2 was terrible so I was never able to benefit from it.
- It doesn’t crap out when you have a few tabs open (my number one most hated anti-feature of FF2)
- I can scroll in Last.fm smoothly. IE and FF2 both yack when they try that.
- Add-ons. They were always great, but now them improve a decent browser.
I suppose now it’s IE’s turn to up the ante (though I’ve tried the IE8 beta and it’s yet to impress).
May 7, 2008 at 8:02 pm · Filed under Internet
I have had enough of seeing professional sites which break in IE. I do not care if you hate Microsoft, the people who use Microsoft products, coding for IE, etc. If a site you built does not work in IE, then you are a complete crap developer. Period.
Any solution which doesn’t work for 60-80% of your users isn’t a good solution - whether you like it or not.
The Google Docs widget for iGoogle cannot be logged into from IE7. That is bush league Google, get your act together.
Friend requests on Last.fm display scrollbar hell for IE users. That’s not even hard to fix, they’re just being lazy.
Countless sites can’t be bothered to optimize for IE because “IE sucks,” and you know what? They’re right, IE does suck. I waste loads of time optimizing HTML & CSS so that they will work in IE6 and IE7. I hate doing it, and I strongly Encourage Microsoft to get their acts together (which they claim to be doing with IE8 which passes the ACID test).
What I do not do is say that I can’t be bothered to code for a broken browser. That is lazy, ignorant, and inexcusable. Developers who take that stance are beneath my contempt. Grow up and get to work in the real world.
April 14, 2008 at 8:21 pm · Filed under Internet
I could honestly spend all day, every day, searching to find all of the insane stuff on the internet and still only discover half of it. That is why I’d like to personally thank co-worker Jeff Gordon (no, not that Jeff Gordon) for creating Totallies.com. It’s a wonderful place full of internet mystique and wonder. The “random page” link is a sure fire hit for good time. My personal favorite discovery thus far? Frowntains.
Awesome.
April 1, 2008 at 10:04 pm · Filed under Internet
Quick off topic note: I’ve updated to Wordpress 2.5, so if this appears horribly broken, you know why.
I’ve been kind of stuck on something lately. I’ve been working really hard to improve as a web developer. I’m reading books like a madman, I’m trying to build some pilot projects in my spare time, and my Google Reader is chock full of web development feeds. I’m filling my brain with thoughts of semantic xHTML (strict of course), CSS, JavaScript, OOA&D, design patterns, SEO, Flash/Flex/AIR, the Zend Framework, and anything else that feels “right.”
You see, the thing is, I want to be really good at what I do. I want to understand how everything work and how it all fits together. I want to do things the best way it is possible to do them. My problem then, is that I’m starting to doubt that it matters. Not to say that I think I should abandon the cause, revert to table based layouts and spacer gifs, just that I don’t necessarily think being better is, well, better.
Let’s look at Facebook vs. MySpace, the quintessential “how can that be” comparison for me. MySpace is a horrible site. I hate it with the red hot passion of a thousand burning suns. It continues to be an internet atrocity which exists solely to spite me. And it is hugely successful and continues to be so. Facebook is wonderfully built, by smart people, in an intelligent way, that creates goals for me to aspire to (I still don’t like using it, but I really appreciate how hard that must have been).
So what is the magic factor that trumps all of the things I care about? Why don’t semantics, design, architecting, or a flexible code base matter? My guess is: people using your site can’t see those things, they cannot interact with those things, and they’re used to terrible design on the internet. So what does matter? My guess: content and usability. If it’s worthwhile and relatively simple, the world will love it. If it’s an ugly, spaghetti code, ball of mud that wouldn’t know semantics from a kick in the face, the only people who will ever hate it are the ones who have to maintain it.
March 27, 2008 at 8:48 pm · Filed under Internet
I think the only phrase which drives me more insane than “Web 2.0″ is “Social Networking.” While Web 2.0 kills me because it means absolutely nothing, social networking kills me because it’s used to refer to absolutely everything. Do you have a blog? Oh, you’re social networking. Do you rate things, or take comments? Oh, you’re social networking. Are you building a new website? You totally need social networking, otherwise you’re still Web 1.0.
So, as a developer, what do you think every single client I talk to wants? A Web 2.0, social networking application. In order to build social networking applications, I need to understand how they work, so I need to try to engage in them. This explains why I’ve signed up to Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, LinkedIn, Twitter, Pownce, Flickr, StumbleUpon, Digg, and Reddit. I may be missing some, I can’t even remember. I think my impressive list of active social networks accounts for close to half of the “big ones” and I’ve spent a fair amount of time on all of them trying to figure things out. So which, of all the ones I’ve tried, is my favorite?
None of them. They’re all flawed, stupid, or boring. I treat them as a chore. I engage, I test, I make friends and I have absolutely no fun. I understand why people like them, why then enjoy them, and how they use them (except for Twitter and MySpace which remain relatively mysterious to me), but I’m just not really into them.
The potential upside for me is huge. Syndicating my content, growing my knowledge base, discovering new tricks, building relationships… all good things. Yet honestly, I’d be happier without them. A lot of it has to do with the fact that I don’t have an overly large circle of friends, and I could really care less about what happens to the people I don’t interact with “in RL.” What’s more, so many of these sites make me feel disconnected from the masses; so much of it is so incredibly stupid to me. I don’t understand the hook for a lot of these sites, and that causes me to doubt my ability to do my job well. In my opinion Facebook is infinitely better executed than MySpace, yet MySpace is still the more popular app, so, what is it that I’m missing?
It’s a topic for another day.
March 25, 2008 at 10:18 pm · Filed under Internet
I had an interesting internet day today. First, I discovered Muxtape, a super simple but completely wonderful website. Everything about it is simple, obvious and easy. I set up http://ironkeith.muxtape.com/ just to see how it all worked. It’s unusual to find such a simple idea which hasn’t been done (so far as I know) on the internet yet. It’s somewhat inspiring to find something new and think “I can’t believe no one has done this yet.” Maybe it’s possible that all of the good ideas aren’t already taken. Sadly I fear that Muxtape’s days must be numbered. There’s no way they aren’t going to get sued into oblivion.
I also signed up for Pownce. It’s part and parcel with this whole new “micro-blogging” phenomenom (because blogging itself is not phenomenal enough). So far so good with Pownce. The interface is really obvious, and I understand what it’s supposed to do. This is the exact opposite of the way I felt when I first signed up for Twitter. Twitter baffled - and continues to baffle - the hell out of me. While I understand what people are doing on Twitter, I don’t feel any need to do it myself; it feels more like a chore than anything else. When comparing Pownce and Twitter I feel the need to draw a parallel to MySpace and Facebook. MySpace is ugly, counter-intuitive, bastardized and hugely popular for reasons I can’t really grasp. Facebook is tight, well executed, obvious (except for pokes… what the hell are pokes?) and slightly less popular (for not anyways). The same is true for Twitter vs. Pownce. Pownce is the better app, but Twitter is more popular - for now.
This post is branching in two directions now:
- Why I feel the need to engage in social networking even though I don’t really enjoy it? [updated March 27, 2008]
- Do aesthetics hold any weight over functionality for web applications?
Neither of which I feel like driving into at this point. I’ll write them later on.
Ps. There was a third cool app I found today the dealt with streaming video live from your cell phone, but I’ll be damned if I can remember the URL. [http://www.qik.com/]
November 29, 2007 at 10:42 pm · Filed under Internet
On a super-fun/super-geeky note, I’ve decided that I want to learn Java. There seems to be a world of opportunity for Java programmers, and I’m already fairly comfortable with JavaScript, PHP, and ActionScript; syntactically, they’re all somewhat similar. My only real problem is that I - you know - have a job and stuff. It kind of gets in the way of my spending a great deal of time doing stuff non-work related.
I was starting to get a little worried that I would lose interest if I just read a book on Java, or just picked away at it every now and then. When I was discussing my problem with my friend/co-worker Cindy, she suggested that I work on a project instead of just learning the language. One step further, she suggested that I build an application to help her create tournaments for the statustrophy (the much coveted award for any statusfirm competition)!
Cindy and I have also been chatting about trying out some new development techniques around the old tech dept, and it occurred to us that this might be a wonderful opportunity to try some of them out. Cindy was on-board for that, so we’re now developing an application to dynamically generate tournaments.
We decided to make whatever we do open source so that it cannot, in any way, be deemed competitive with our work. After making the decision, Cindy said something to the effect of “now this whole thing is going to fall apart because we won’t be able to agree on a license.” Shortly thereafter we decided to add one more coder to the mix - Brent. Honest to God, his first question was “what license are we going to release it under” which sparked a brief hour long discussion. It’s amazing how something so seemingly minute can spark such debate. Do we want people to be able to monetize our application? Do we want to be able to monetize out application? I don’t know, I just want to learn Java, try out some development techniques, and hopefully end up with something really cool at the end of it all.
I sincerely hope that the wheels stay on this thing. I need a good challenge to keep myself motivated. I spend so much time thinking, planning, meeting, and discussing that I rarely get to delve in and do some real, gritty development. I really enjoy what I do, but I’m afraid that if I neglect my skills that I’ll end up rusty, or worse yet, obsolete. My first two years at statusfirm were marked by incredible personal growth. I’ve learned more in that condensed period of time than any other I can think of in my life. I know that I will have new opportunities to grow in new ways, I just don’t want to think that everything I’ve learned up until now was for nothing. Especially not when I was just starting to get good. 
(Every time I think I have it all figured out, I learn something new that proves what I thought I knew was bunk and what I thought was quality really could have been better).
October 27, 2007 at 6:58 pm · Filed under Internet
I am seriously tired of the rampant geek support for Firefox. I don’t really understand the basis for it either - does this geek loyalty exist solely as an outlet for the vigilant anit-Microsoft clan? Is it counter-cultural backlash to the IE norm? I honestly don’t know, but what I am certain of, is that Firefox fans are either blindly ignorant, or completely uninformed. It isn’t difficult to surf around on the internet for a while and discover legions of pro-Firefox, anti-IE missionaries, espousing the virtues of Firefox and the blatant evils of Microsoft. The problem is that none of these disciples see fit to admit that Firefox sucks too, just in different ways.
Firefox does do a few things better than IE - add-ons and page rendering come to mind - but does that make for a better browsing experience? I don’t really think so. Admittedly, my job would be a lot more difficult without the web developer toolbar and firebug. Even still IE has a reasonable alternative, and I was making websites and browsing the internet successfully before I’d ever even heard of add-ons.
Firefox claims to be faster and safer, but I’m yet to see any proof of either. IE7 and Firefox are both equally prone to user error and stupidity, so to blame the software is akin to blaming the car when a drunk driver wraps it around a post. What’s more, I’d say that the known exploits for IE are more a result of IE’s widespread use (85%+) than Firefox’s superior programming. Every application has bugs, if the bugs aren’t found because no one’s using the software I’m not certain that counts as “better”. Both display pages with very little difference in render time. If anything I’d say Firefox is usually a little slower to boot up - especially if you’ve installed add-ons. What’s more, Firefox updates more than any other software I’ve ever used. As much as I love opening a program, only to be told that I have to close it and open it again, they seriously can’t need to update that often.
Firefox absolutely craps the bed when it comes to displaying rich media - especially Windows Media Player. Now the conspiracy theorists among us will claim that Microsoft is obscuring Firefox user’s from using the player, but that doesn’t explain why it worked just fine in FF 1.5. More likely, Firefox is taking a obstinate stance and refusing to endorse some pathetically minor flaw in the way WMP write to the screen and a pissing contest in being pursued in the face of Firefox users.
I’d have to say though, the biggest flaw with Firefox is that it’s open add-on architecture is ripe with plug-ins which support piracy. As a professional I’m often on the protection side of content management, and Firefox make it almost impossible to successfully protect content - even on the most rudimentary of levels. This is a burden on the internet itself, as content owners aren’t willing to make their content available so that it can be stolen and redistributed. I’m not certain why so many people assume they have the right to anything they want for free, but by creating an environment where not only is blatant thievery possible, but encouraging it, Firefox automatically loses my support.
I believe that both Firefox and IE and a long ways to go before either is an acceptably capable browser, but it’s important to keep an open mind and encourage competition between the two. By unilaterally and unfailing supporting any one side of an argument in spite of fact or reason, the so called intellectually superior, geeks of the internet are opening themselves up to support the failure of a once promising product. I use IE and Firefox equally as each have their strengths and weaknesses. I’d encourage web developers everywhere to have an open mind and do the same.
July 30, 2007 at 7:30 pm · Filed under Internet
So Apple claims that a growing number of people are using the Mac platform each and every day. If you Google around for “Mac market penetration” (and manage to avoid the inevitable penetration porn) you’ll probably find numbers that vary between 5 and 10%. An anonymous Las Vegas news & entertainment site which had roughly 1.5 million page views so far this month claims 5.3% of its users favor the Mac platform, and I, judging that to be an adequately sized pool from which to draw a conclusion from, will assume that number to be relatively accurate.
So, 5.3% of all web traffic belongs to Mac users. Ideally, that would mean that 5.3% of your sites profit is dependent on Mac users, whether you make money with ads, memberships, sponsorships, or other. But, lest we forget, we are living, in a Windows world, and I am just a Window girl (or boy), so in order to support the Mac platform, I must first purchase a Mac. Now, I’m not here to debate the merits/cost of a PC vs a Mac, I don’t care. Let’s just say that, for argument’s sake that getting a Mac will cost you, at a minimum, $1000 - it’s a nice even number. This would imply that you’re site would need to be generating $20,000 in profit in order to justify supporting a Mac.
Remember though, owning a Mac doesn’t make your site Mac compliant. You must use your system, and test your site on said Mac before you realize any real value. Let’s assume that for every hour spent designing a web application, you have to spend 10 minutes testing, of which 5 will be spent testing for a Mac. That’s 3 hours and 20 minutes of Mac testing per week, or rounding up for simplicity, 2 work days per month. An average salary for a programmer here in Alberta is around $45,000/year, implying that testing for the Mac platform costs a company around $4,500/year per programmer. As you may be able to guess, the larger the application, the more programmers involved, the higher the cost of supporting the Mac platform. So far, our application needs to be profiting $110,000/year in order to justify a lone programmer supporting the Mac platform. (We have three… *sigh)
To be fair, you probably only need to buy a new Mac every five years or so in order to maintain your rigorous testing regiment, so, if you’re the financial forecasting type, you’re spending $14,500 every five years so that 5.3% of your users have a marginally improved web experience, and that assumes you only have one person testing for the platform. To justify this, in that same five year period you’re site will have to profit $275,000, and remember, that’s profit. You’re still on the hook for developer salaries, software, bandwidth, hosting, rent, and let’s not forget, PCs. When you take into account how skinny some sites are running, that $14,500 could really be better spent on sales and marketing to the 94% of users happily running Windows, software upgrades, new PCs, or improved facilities.
Here’s the rub though, all of the sites I build strive to support Macs. Why? I suppose it could be a number of reasons:
- I believe in web accessibility, regardless of platform or handicap.
- I like the Mac platform and fully intend to buy one in the near future.
- Sometimes, honest to God, it just works, and you don’t have to change anything.
I’d have to say though, the number one reason why I support the Mac platform is because Chris Sealy, President and MOB of Statusfirm, runs a Mac, and he gets downright pissy when a site that he’s paying for doesn’t work for him.
Next entries »
