04.10.12 |
∞
Tech writer Garnett Murray:
[Facebook’s] design sensibilities are minimalistic, but that doesn’t make them any less excellent. The problem is that while they do an excellent job of hitting their desired goals with design and products, they don’t set their goals high enough to begin with.
Exactly. My editorial today was more positive in terms of wins for design and development. Yet Garnett nails more eloquently (and with more force) reservations I touched on near the end of my piece.
04.10.12 |
∞
Designer Oliver Reichenstein on the redesign of Information Architects:
In the course of simplifying the site, we connected reading time to the scrollbar.
When you scroll down, "Reading Time x Minutes" turns into "Remaining x Minutes" At the end of the page it says "Thank you" and offers the choice to go to Home or to the Blog Article Overview.In order to not disturb the continuity of reading the reading time counter stays hidden if you scroll less than 1 1/2 pages.
This is exactly the kind of obsession the web industry needs. Not for every job or every site, granted, but you need an outlier to change the game.
04.10.12 |
Technology |
∞
I was initially as shocked as everyone else when I heard the news of Facebook spent $1 billion to pick up Instagram. But then it came together in my mind: Instagram’s purchase is major win for great mobile design, for online products with high engagement and fast code.
None of those things make sense at first glance. Instagram is a photo sharing app without a proven business model or positive revenue. A company of thirteen (!) employees who’s majority share of 30 million plus users are already Facebook members. A social network that at its core isn’t groundbreaking; sharing photos on a wide scale has been done with Flickr since 2004.
But the deal did happen, and there’s there’s several standout lessons here for designers and developers rooted in the reason why:
If you create a product with very high levels of engagement, you can be a threat to some of the largest tech companies out there. Facebook saw people shifting their mobile time away from Facebook to apps like Instagram and wanted in. Instagram just has a certain cache, or ‘stickiness’ with their app. For now at least, when influencers want a ‘cool’ way of sharing photos, Facebook and Flickr often aren’t their first choice. Instagram is.
Why? Great engagement derives from unique, emotionally driven design. Granted, part of Instagram’s engagement comes from marketing and sheer luck. Nevertheless, Instagram’s design is standout. For example, other apps use photo filters, but not with the same range, fun naming convention or ease of use to jump between them; Instagram makes post processing fun. It’s been one and a half years since Instagram’s debut, yet how many other apps can make that same claim?
High engagement levels can be retained with simple, straightforward design. Instagram was one of the first apps to make sharing to multiple social services so damn easy. It doesn’t take many more steps than your typical iPhone shot: capture, pick a filter, pick who to share to and you’re done in three taps.
High engagement is generally maintained only from a quick, responsive app or platform. This is where blazing performance at the development level comes in. Earlier in the year an in-house engineering blog post revealed some of Instagram’s tech under the hood. It’s straightforward, well thought out and was able to scale to 14 million in a year.
Nevertheless, a lot of positives about this deal can’t stop skepticism on my part. I don’t trust Zuckerberg’s claim that sharing with non-Facebook social networks will remain unaffected. Facebook has reneged on its promises repeatedly and likes a tightly controlled ecosystem. I’m thus also worried about the app’s “independent” future long term.
Overall, for a company of Facebook’s size, 1 billion isn’t crazy, “we’re in a bubble” cash. It’s a buy with stellar engagement levels and a mobile weapon to keep away from the other big tech players: Google, Amazon, and Apple. Given the stakes in this arms race between these four companies, don’t be surprised if the numbers only ramp up in upcoming years.
04.09.12 |
∞
Lori Houston, O’Reilly:
The last question touches on a bit of early O’Reilly history. Edie Freedman (now O’Reilly’s Creative Director) was hired to design the first book covers. She thought the books had the strangest titles–sed and awk?–that evoked images of the popular fantasy game, “Dungeons and Dragons.”
While looking for imagery, she came across the Dover Pictorial Archives, a series of books (and now CD-ROMs) containing copyright-free collections of 18th- and 19th-century wood and copperplate engravings of animals. She encountered a pair of slender lorises and had an epiphany. “That’s sed and awk!”
She scanned several animals from the archive and placed them on mock-up covers, which she then presented to everyone at O’Reilly. O’Reilly had ten or so employees at the time, and people wondered if the animals were appropriate. But Edie convinced them to follow her instincts. Customers wound up loving the covers, and a brand was born.
I’ve always been curious why O’Reilly books have always been synonymous with animals on the cover; now we know.
04.09.12 |
∞
Ian Grey, writing for Press Play:
To me, Rouge! Is a traditional musical, except with twice as many shots run at the speed of a trance remix. The Transporter is a Euro-trash version of a John Woo cartoon. And Friday Night Lights with graceful camera? Nope. Boring. We’d never be able to slink into those sizzling Texas mini-worlds on network time. And I’ve not yet mentioned Paul W.S. Anderson’s jaw-dropper of a surprise, Resident Evil: Afterlife, one of the greatest uses of multi-level geometry and spatiality in cinema I can recall seeing, where oneattack scene features twenty or so color-coded Milla Jovoviches attacking hundreds of color-coded bad guys, and it’s not even a high point.
Chaos, I think, has been evolving.
He’s got a point. Much maligned “chaos cinema” would technically embrace the Bourne films. And 28 Weeks Later. True, the ratio of bad to good films in the chaos canon is staggeringly high, but let’s not completely overlook what’s great.
04.09.12 |
∞
Laurie Segall, CNN:
Johnnie Manzari, a prominent user interface designer for more than a decade, says he gets weekly phone calls from people asking him to recommend good designers.
“There’s a huge demand for finding talent,” he says. “Just like with engineering, one of the reasons it’s been so difficult is there just aren’t many people that are that good. Not only are people looking for designers more than they used to, but the bar they’re willing to accept has gone up.”
Several of the industry’s power players have been on design-focused shopping sprees.
This whole article reeks of being about six months to a year behind coverage in tech news sites like Engadget and Hacker News. Many traditional “engineering heavy” companies, most notably Google and Dropbox, have seen their design focus ramp sharply upward as soon as early 2011. Around then or by that summer, there were a lot of websites and apps that saw a serious bump in usability and their aesthetic quality.
I’d argue a interesting issue, largely sidestepped by CNN, is why design salaries still don’t equalize that of developers, at least in more entry level positions. It’s a hard nut to crack, yet I find the disparity, given design’s (much deserved) increasing prominence in tech land, increasingly difficult to justify.
04.09.12 |
∞
I'm increasingly seeing placeholder label free forms proliferate online; it's inevitable given the Apple Store's heavy usage and the form style's compact, minimal approach. Yet in the process, developers shouldn't forget the basics; nice tip here by 456 Berea Street.
04.08.12 |
∞
A.O. Scott, The New York Times:
As she sprints through the forest, Katniss is carrying the burden of multiple symbolic identities. She’s an athlete, a media celebrity and a warrior as well as a sister, a daughter, a loyal friend and (potential) girlfriend. In genre terms she is a western hero, an action hero, a romantic heroine and a tween idol. She is Natty Bumppo, Diana the chaste huntress of classical myth, and also the synthesis of Harry Potter and Bella Swan — the Boy Who Lived and the Girl Who Must Choose.
As is clear from the above, A.O. Scott and Manohla Dargis go through some pretty deep analysis of why Katniss is such a hot character in this lengthy Times piece. To its credit, it touches on a lot of social and psychological issues from The Hunger Games I've generally dismissed up till now.
04.08.12 |
∞
Great small film websites can die, but that doesn't stop great writing from continuing on. Screened was one such site, with a wiki like interface and a lot of personality. But last week the site was sold off to new management with all the writing staff disbanded.
Nevertheless, Screened's head writer Matt Rorie is now setting up temporary residence over at his Tumblr blog. The guy is an excellent writer so check him out; not a lot there yet, but it shows a lot of promise with a kick ass review of The Raid and some commentary on Netflix.
04.07.12 |
∞
There’s taking notes at a typography lecture, and then there’s
drawing notes. Really cool looking work, along with some useful design pointers by designer Oliver Reichenstein (iAWriter)