09.19.14 |
∞
Anthony Colangelo, writing for A List Apart:
When you hear the word “just” being thrown around, dig deep into that statement and find all of the assumptions made within it. Zoom out and think slow.
Your product lives and dies by the decisions discovered between ideation and creation, so don’t just put it up on a server somewhere.
09.18.14 |
∞
MacStories’ Federico Viticci:
There are hundreds of new features in iOS 8 and the ecosystem surrounding it that signal a far-reaching reimagination of what iOS apps should be capable of, the extent of user customization on an iPhone and iPad, or the amount of usage data that app developers can collect to craft better software.
Seven years into iOS, a new beginning is afoot for Apple’s mobile OS, and, months from now, there will still be plenty to discuss. But, today, I want to elaborate on my experience with iOS 8 in a story that can be summed up with:
iOS 8 has completely changed how I work on my iPhone and iPad.
I’d consider Federico a much more hard core power user than most, but his argument is pretty sound. For years I’ve been extremely envious of Android users and their custom widgets, keyboards, and third-party sharing capabilities. No more.
09.17.14 |
Work |
∞
Many tech and productivity blogs promote device convergence: with a single smartphone, tablet, or laptop, you’re ready for almost any activity, from gaming to video production. After years of experience with assorted tech gear, I’ve found convergence overrated. It’s the exact opposite – device specialization – that’s a lot more effective.
More concretely, the next time you unlock your phone or sit down in front of your laptop, ask yourself: “what works best here for my needs?” Isolate the apps that you use regularly and that feel natural in context; keep them on your home screen or otherwise easily accessible. Bury the rest in folders knowing full well you’ll probably be faster and more efficient if you wait to perform those activities on another device.
For me, multi-device specialization translates into a set workflow:
- My iPhone is used for quick reads of the news (NYTNow), short saved articles (Pocket), catching up on Twitter (Tweetbot) and the occasional quick puzzle game (Threes).
-
My iPad is for daily scans of news feeds (Mr. Reeder), long reads (again, Pocket) and classic strategy games (Hearthstone, Ticket to Ride) that don’t rely on awkwardly tacked-on control schemes.
-
My Macbook Air is mostly used for writing, development, and design.
-
The PS4 is optimized for most of my gaming needs. It’s essential for any game that plays better with traditional controller input. With the comfort and immersion factor of a large screen and sound system, it’s also ideal for play sessions longer than thirty minutes at a time.
There are exceptions to the above (e.g. occasional writing edits on Writer Pro with my iPhone when I’m in the subway), but I’m generally more productive if I delay work until I reach the right device. I also happen to be someone who actively uses all this gear; some may successfully embrace a simpler workflow around a single device. But that’s not for me, and I suspect it isn’t for many others.
Overall, if you’ve found yourself struggling with your device’s size, context, power, or input method for certain activities, try changing your workflow. Move away from convergence and toward multi-device specialization.
09.15.14 |
∞
Giant Bomb’s Patrick Klepek:
When Call of Duty: Modern Warfare multiplayer took off, the copycats were endless. It wasn’t just that every shooter started aping Infinity Ward’s leveling system, but games that never would have otherwise included multiplayer suddenly had new teams assigned to building it. The thinking was that single player brought people to the table but multiplayer kept them sitting down (read: not selling their copy).
Now, we may be seeing the rise of games that ditch single player entirely. It’s not a great PR message. Many are going to be reluctant to actually pull the trigger. But that may be a disservice to everyone involved. Players go into the game thinking they can get something they can’t, and developers are forced to compromise a gameplay experience, knowing it’s not what they’re truly building. That’s a lose-lose.
09.13.14 |
∞
One of my favorite films of the year gets the film study treatment in this informative video.
09.12.14 |
∞
Another few months, another Sublime Text icon replacement. This one, put together by designer Rafael Conde, is really gorgeous in its simplicity and subtle grid pattern. And Rafael mentions in the Dribbble comments, it flows especially well with stock icons in OS X Yosemite.
09.11.14 |
∞
Look over De Niro’s best work in that 70s to 80s period; staggering output. But my how the mighty have fallen in recent years.
09.10.14 |
∞
I’ve traditionally been a big fan of the Meslo web fonts for coding, a variant of Apple’s ultra-popular Menlo. But that all changed when I discovered Input, a new set of fonts optimized for programming by Font Bureau. The glyphs and overall layout is gorgeous.
They offer a sans, serif, and monospaced version (I run with the default Input Mono set) and best of all, it’s free for private use.
09.09.14 |
∞
In light of today’s annual big Apple media event, Quartz’s Dan Frommer crunched the numbers of how these events historically play out. Frommer examines average presentation time, video style, Steve Jobs’ stage time versus Tim Cook’s and other material. Very interesting.
09.05.14 |
∞
Sam Adams, writing for Indiewire:
In [Verge writer] Pierce’s rationale — or, more to the point, rationalization — downloading the movie in advance is like peeking at a band’s setlist before the concert…”The Expendables 3,” you see, “is meant not to be watched but to be experienced. As art becomes commoditized experience becomes the only thing worth paying for, and there’s evidence everywhere that we’ll pay for it when it’s worth it. We don’t want to pay for access, but we’ll gladly pay for experience.”
Of course, commodities are things you pay for. What Pierce really means by “commoditized” is “devalued,” and what he means by that is that since ‘The Expendables 3’ isn’t worth anything in the first place, there’s nothing wrong with taking a copy for yourself.
Working as a web developer/designer myself, I tend to support policies that push technology forward. But there’s no justification behind David Pierce flat out stealing a movie with the justification that it’s “access” over “experience”. Technology has limits; it’s worrisome to see Pierce, a senior writer at what’s normally a pretty solid tech news site, adopt this sort of blind “techno libertarianism” bent.